Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Book Removal First Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents decry book removals, quote board remarks and urge First Amendment protections
Summary
During open public forum, residents criticized an apparent push to remove library books, quoted a board member's comments about prioritizing 'safety' over litigation, named a challenged title (Perks of Being a Wallflower) and urged the board to preserve diverse library access.
Several residents used the public-comment period to criticize the board’s approach to book challenges and to press for First Amendment protections.
Kathy Chernak said she was quoting board member Richard Pierros from a Dec. 26, 2025 article and read his words into the record: "I think you would tend to say that having safety for our children and what they read is more important than being afraid of litigation." Chernak said the phrase "First Amendment people" should not be treated as a special interest group and said removing books "doesn't make children safer" but instead limits exposure to diverse ideas.
Another resident who identified as a 20-year Bennington Township resident urged keeping diverse materials available, noting the role books can play in helping children understand difficult situations and mental-health challenges.
Catherine DeLuca (District 6) told the board she sees a divergence between the district’s successful programs and what she described as dysfunction among board members, citing a lack of public discussion around the book-challenge nomination process and urging more collaborative governance.
During remarks, Chernak named the title she said is being challenged: Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky. Board officers asked commenters to finish their remarks and said some responses to personal questions would not be disclosed.
The board took no immediate policy action at the meeting on book challenges; the public comments were recorded for the public record.
