Books wonít be restricted
Posted on Friday, September 16, 2005
A restricted access shelf for certain library books is not an option, the Fayetteville School Board decided at a special meeting Thursday evening. The meeting, held in the Fayetteville High School Bates Annex, lasted about two hours and least 70 people attended.
School board members were told not to place restrictions on student access to existing books by school attorney Rudy Moore Jr.
Courts have ruled that "requiring parental permission has a stigmatizing effect on a student,"Moore said. Many rulings have stated schools may not require students to seek parental permission to check out certain library books.
As a result of Moore's advice, the board voted 4-3 to reverse a decision it made in May to place three books in the schools' parent library section. Resident Laurie Taylor had filed complaints on the books. The board voted Thursday to implement a review committee's original decision on how to handle the books.
Board members Howard Hamilton, Laura Underwood and Chris Bell voted against the reversal, saying the decision was too sudden. Board president Steve Percival, Tim Kring, Susan Heil and Tim Hudson voted to reverse the decision and accept the committee's original recommendation on how to place the books.
Heil was the swing vote, as she voted in May to overrule the review committee's recommendation.
Taylor, who has campaigned to restrict student access to books she charges are sexually explicit, filed formal requests for reconsideration last school year on the books "It's So Amazing," "It's Perfectly Normal"and "The Teenage Guy's Survival Guide."
In May, the board voted 4-3 to place the books in the schools' parent libraries, with restrictions on student access. An appointed committee that reviewed the books earlier had recommended that two of the books could be placed in general circulation and "It's Perfectly Normal"should stay in the parent library section at elementary and middle school libraries.
The board's decision Thursday to accept the committee's recommendation was preceded by a discussion in which members clarified that parent libraries are not a restricted section. The "parent libraries"are sections in school libraries that contain reading materials for parents, but those parent sections can be accessed by students.
Moore said parent libraries were never intended to be a restricted section. FHS librarians Sarah Roberson and Cassandra Barnett, who addressed the board on the library book selection and review process, seemed to agree with Moore's assessment.
In June, Taylor announced her plan to seek restrictions and reviews of 70 books in the school libraries. So far, she has released 54 titles to the media.
As a compromise to removing objectionable books, Taylor suggested placing them on a restricted shelf where students could not check them out without parental consent.
Taylor had suggested the books could be placed in the parent libraries.
To back up his arguments against restricting access, Moore cited a case in Cedarville where the school board required students to have special permission to check out "Harry Potter"books. Those actions were overturned by a federal court.
If a case regarding the Fayetteville libraries were to go to court, the same judge who decided the Cedarville case would likely be ruling on it, Moore added.
Furthermore, when an existing library book is removed from a school library's circulation, the district has to show it has a sound reason to do so, he said. A magazine like "Playboy"would pass that litmus test because it has no educational value, he said.
After the meeting, board president Steve Percival said it appears the Cedarville case has effectively settled the concept of a restricted shelf.
The board and Moore rejected a claim made last month that it went outside the review policy when making its May decision. There was a vague clause allowing patrons to appeal the review committee's decision, though it wasn't specific on how to do so, Moore said.
The board briefly addressed a claim Taylor made that some of the questioned books violate state obscenity laws. Moore said the district cannot investigate itself, and such findings are up to a judge or jury.
Board members also briefly discussed a complaint Taylor made against Superintendent Bobby New for failing to process a request to review the book "Deal With It."Since June, the only other formal complaint Taylor has filed is against the book "Push."
New said he didn't process the "Deal With It"request because of logistics and limited resources at the time, and "Push"is under review.
Kring said that was probably a proper use of resources on New's part. "(But) any time we divert from policy, it's important that we communicate that we do that,"he said.
Also at the meeting, the board directed New to form an appointed committee to review library selection process.
The board recommended the committee review procedures for selecting materials, develop a process where parents can notify librarians of books they don't want their own child to check out, and modify the request for reconsideration policy so patrons can appeal "a group of books based on their subject matter."
Heil expressed optimism that the committee could review most of those requests without making major changes.
Taylor appeared frustrated after the meeting and had little to say. Regarding the board's decision to reverse its earlier ruling on the three books, she said," I find that frustrating.... I will consult my attorney."
The board's decision to review the materials selection process, though, did seem "genuine,"she said. "I'm glad they're making an effort to empower parents,"Taylor said.
Percival said he hopes Taylor takes away from the meeting that the board listened to her and is responding by reviewing the district's library book policies.
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
