Intellectual Freedom Stories from a Shifting Landscape

Valerie Nye

• Publisher: ALA Editions
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN:
  9780838947265
• eBook ISBN:
  9780838947357
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Library & Information Science
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

Intellectual freedom is a complex concept that democracies and free societies around the world define in different ways but always strive to uphold. And ALA has long recognized the crucial role that libraries play in protecting this right. But what does it mean in practice? How do library workers handle the ethical conundrums that often accompany the commitment to defending it? Rather than merely laying out abstract policies and best practices, this important new collection gathers real-world stories of intellectual freedom in action to illuminate the difficulties, triumphs, and occasional setbacks of advocating for free and equal access to information for all people in a shifting landscape. Offering insight to LIS students and current practitioners on how we can advance the profession of librarianship while fighting censorship and other challenges, these personal narratives explore such formidable situations as

• presenting drag queen story times in rural America;
• a Black Lives Matter "die-in" at the undergraduate library of the University of Wisconsin-Madison;
• combating censorship at a prison library;
• hosting a moderated talk about threats to modern democracy that included a neo-Nazi spokesman;
• a provocative exhibition that triggered intimidating phone calls, emails, and a threat to burn down an art library;  
• calls to eliminate non-Indigenous children's literature from the collection of a tribal college library; and
• preserving patrons' right to privacy in the face of an FBI subpoena.

PART I

PROTECTED BY POLICY

1

Give Them Library Cards!

CARRIE VALDES

Grand County is a small rural community located in the heart of southeastern Utah’s canyon country. Despite Grand County’s geographically remote location, the unique landscape of canyons, mountains, and rivers attract approximately three million tourists each year. The area serves as a gateway to Arches and Canyonlands National Parks, the Colorado and Green Rivers, and the La Sal Mountains. The regular influx of visitors drives a booming tourist industry.

The United States Census Bureau estimates that Grand County’s population was 9,764 in 2018. At the end of March 2017, the Utah Department of Workforce Services reported that the trade, leisure, and hospitality sectors accounted for approximately 56 percent of Grand County’s employment, while the government sector accounted for 18 percent.1 Higher-paying professional and technical services account for only 15 percent of local jobs. The economy is heavily focused on tourism-related industries. A significant portion of the service sector is furloughed during the quiet winter months—Grand County’s unemployment rate in December 2018 was 8.2 percent.2

The average wage in Grand County is 30 percent lower than the statewide average. The average monthly wage for Grand County’s leisure and hospitality workers—the largest employment sector—is $1,690. A continuing tourism boom in Grand County has led to an affordable housing crisis and the current lack of public transit in the community does nothing to help low-income residents. Within this local landscape, the public library—with its main location in the county seat, the City of Moab, and a very small branch in the town of Castle Valley—is uniquely positioned to serve all community members to meet information, education, technology, and entertainment needs.

In 2017, the Grand County Public Library board conducted a strategic planning initiative to determine new priorities for the Grand County Public Library. During the process, the board conducted a community survey, examined Utah State Library and historical Grand County Public Library data, conducted a SWOT (strengths, weakness, opportunities, and threats) analysis, and worked with state and local library staff to brainstorm ideas. Based on the planning initiative activities, the library board identified the following mission statement: “The Grand County Public Library is a freely accessible resource that connects people, information, and ideas to inspire, empower, and enrich all members of the community.”

The problem? Institutional policies and historical practices were preventing the library from achieving its new mission and serving those community members that most needed library services. As the library director, I was intimately involved in the creation of the new mission statement. I believe wholeheartedly in the idea of serving the whole community, but that belief wasn’t fully reflected in existing policy and practice. We provided certain library services to all community members, but full library service only to those that were willing (and able) to jump through the hoops. For example, in order to issue a library card, an applicant had to have a dollar’s worth of cash, a government-issued picture ID, and proof of residency within Grand County (a utility bill, a tax statement, or rental agreement). Essentially, we were providing full library services to property owners within Grand County, but not providing full services to seasonal employees, residents without a permanent address, or visitors.

I was fortunate enough to attend the 2018 Public Library Association conference in Philadelphia. Two different speakers shared personal stories that resulted in a lightbulb moment for me. That moment has dramatically changed the way we do things in the Grand County Library. At the conference, I heard Steve Pemberton, author of A Chance in the World: An Orphan Boy, A Mysterious Past, and How He Found a Place Called Home, talk about how the public library literally saved his life. He spoke of his childhood in an abusive foster family and explained that an illiterate foster father would beat him if he caught him reading. Mr. Pemberton shared with the audience that his safe space was the library, which he would visit alone at a young age, checking out materials that sparked his imagination. He described how it offered solace during a very abusive childhood. Using the library’s microfilm collection, he was able to identify his biological father and make connections with his “real” family.

The next day, I listened as author Elizabeth Gilbert imparted words of wisdom from her mentor. She asked, “What are you willing to give up to be the library you keep pretending you are?” Steve Pemberton spoke about what libraries could offer—diversity, inclusion, access, opportunity, new beginnings, breaking cycles, and building community. Elizabeth Gilbert asked why libraries aren’t actually doing what they say they are doing.

I went home and made a list of everything I was willing to give up in order to provide services to all members of our community: preserving circulating materials, fairness, teaching responsibility, and being the guardian of information. We claim we want people to use the library. We market our services, our programs, our collections, then we throw barriers into people’s way. We kick kids out if they are too young to be in the library unattended. We only issue library cards to those who can document that they are members of our community. We refuse children library cards if their parents or guardians aren’t able to accept legal responsibility for overdue fines and lost items. I decided two principle rules would govern our policies and procedures moving forward: 1) the public library is for the public and 2) keep people in the center.

We started slowly. First, we eliminated overdue fines on children’s materials. Then we eliminated all overdue fines. There have been numerous studies that show overdue fines are a regressive method of raising revenue—they penalize the families most who can least afford to pay. We have a large donation jar at the front desk so that someone who feels guilty about returning items late or damaged can contribute a donation.

As a matter of procedure, all students are entitled to a freebie. This means we simply write off the item and clear their library card. We still charge adults for damaged and lost items, but these fees are on a sliding scale based on the age of the item. If the item is over ten years old, we don’t charge at all. For example, if a book on women’s health from the nineties is lost or missing, we won’t replace it. Grand County has a fee ordinance and, as a county department, we are legally required to follow the fee schedule. The library board reviews and recommends changes to that fee schedule yearly. In 2018, they recommended that the “fee” for lost and damaged items be changed from “cost of item” to “replacement cost.” If we’re not going to replace the item, we don’t charge the patron. If the lost or damaged item was already replaced, there’s no reason to replace it again. Our new mission recognizes that materials have a shelf life and people make mistakes.

The most immediate change we made was the cessation of legal recourse to recover overdue items. Early in my career at the library, we had a patron with ten lost and long overdue items on her card. Per procedure at that time, I filled out a police report. The Moab City Police Department processed the report and turned the case over to the Grand County attorney. The Grand County attorney’s office filed charges. At the arraignment, the patron pleaded not guilty and asked for a trial in front of the judge. I testified about the steps we had taken in searching for the items, the numerous attempts to contact the patron, and how our check-in process worked. The patron insisted she put the items on the check-in counter and claimed someone else must have picked them up prior to check-in. The judge agreed this was a possibility and determined the library hadn’t proven our case. She was found not guilty by the court. By the time everyone’s time was added up, the Grand County taxpayer would have been better served if the library had just replaced the items. The cost-benefit analysis clearly showed that it was more expensive for the taxpayer to pursue legal action. Now, we do not file charges, nor do we turn the account over to a collection’s agency. We simply restrict the card from checkouts until the situation is addressed and we replace any needed item.

The next issue we looked at was the unattended children’s policy. As with most libraries, our rule changed over the years. Prior to May 2018, a child had to be twelve years old to be in the library unattended. However, Utah became the first state to pass a “Free Range” parenting law in 2018. The law changed the state’s definition of neglect to allow children of “sufficient age and maturity” to “engage in independent activities” such as walking to and from school, going to nearby stores, playing outside, or visiting the local library. We now have a policy that addresses behaviors instead of age. Of course, there is a common-sense interpretation of “sufficient age and maturity” but our policy does not reference a minimum age. Our policy dictates consequences for unacceptable behavior, for example, asking a patron to leave the library for the day. Our policy simply states that if children are too young to be asked to leave unaccompanied, then they can’t be in the library unattended. We have not experienced any increase in unacceptable patron behaviors since removing the minimum age for unattended children.

Working on the unattended children’s policy brought to the forefront another underserved population—children who wanted to utilize library services but were denied because a parent or guardian was unwilling or unable to sign as a guarantor. Our solution was a student card. We issue a student card to any children under the age of eighteen who can show us that they are a student at the local school district. We do not ask for a guarantor on the account. The card is limited to two checkout items and if students lose something, they are only allowed to check out one item at a time. We reset students’ account at the start of each school year, which means that they start every school year with a clean slate. Because these cards can be issued without a guardian’s permission, we do not allow students to check out R-rated movies or music CDs with explicit lyrics. We comply with the Child Internet Protection Act (CIPA) because the school district requires guardians to sign acceptable-use policies each school year and the library uses the same internet provider as the school district, Utah Education Network (UEN). We send a letter home with each child who is issued a student card that explains how it works and offers the parent or guardian the option of closing the student card or changing the card to a regular juvenile card.

The next issue we tackled was residency for adults. The traditional requirement of proof of residency doesn’t work in Grand County. Many residents don’t have utility bills in their names. Some of them are couch surfers who lack a physical mailing address. There is also a large outdoor contingency that camps and therefore lacks an actual address. We have a yearly influx of seasonal workers who reside within Grand County but often live in campers, on friends’ couches, or in a room in a shared house. We now offer an “introductory card” that limits checkouts to two items (the resident card limit is twenty) but allows for the patron to utilize all other library services. Upon presentation of proof of residency, we change the patron type to resident. Our residency requirements remain the same: a utility bill, a tax statement, or a rental agreement. Some people bring in proof of residency; others are content with a checkout limit of two. What matters the most is that library staff can now issue a library card immediately without proof of residency.

We are still working on identifying and eliminating institutional barriers. Oftentimes it’s a matter of questioning why we do something the way we do. If the answer is, “because that’s how we’ve always done it,” it’s time to reconsider. We maintain a “no” log. I often refer to the log to see what situations result in staff answering in the negative. Those situations are then addressed to the best of our ability. Most of my staff are excited to do things differently and I rely heavily upon them to identify barriers that prevent them from serving the public. I have an open-door policy and allow staff to question any changes prior to implementation. My only rule is that they limit “what-if” questions. Most of these questions are scenarios that may or may not occur, and I prefer to address known issues, not imaginary concerns.

Most of our identified institutional barriers are procedural in nature and we’ve simply changed the procedures. There has been little resistance from the community, especially library users. I also follow the maxim that it is sometimes easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission. With a supportive staff and library board, I’m empowered to try things differently and attempt to move our public library from being a book warehouse to become a true community center.

NOTES

1. United States Census Bureau, Quick Facts, 2019, https://​www.census.gov/​quickfacts.

2. Department of Workforce Services, Utah, Department of Workforce Services. https://​jobs.utah.gov/​index.html.

2

The Vitruvian Man and a Threat to Burn Down the Art Library

MEGAN LOTTS

In twenty years of curating exhibitions in college and university libraries, I never had a work of art challenged or exhibition censored until April of 2016, when a patron challenged an artwork on display at the Rutgers University Art Library. The Rutgers University Libraries (RUL) were unprepared for a situation that led to the removal of two artworks following the receipt of intimidating phone calls, e-mails, and a threat to burn down the art library.

Although the Rutgers University Art Library has hosted over fifty-five exhibitions since June of 2012, everything changed when the work of Joseph Ursulo was exhibited for a two-month viewing in the spring of 2016. Many patrons commented on the rawness of his work, adding that it was among the most interesting exhibits ever hosted by the art library. For me, some of the work was challenging and took me out of my comfort zone. That is what art does, and where better to have dialog of this nature but in a safe space such as a university library? But on that fateful day, because one student didn’t like the subject matter of the work, and the libraries weren’t able to respond quickly, two pieces of art by Joseph Ursulo were removed.

The Rutgers University Art Library Exhibition Spaces

The Rutgers University Art Library Exhibit Spaces (RALES) were created because of a lack of exhibition spaces available on the Rutgers campuses. This space is a teaching gallery, and artists and organizations who exhibit work in the space are responsible for installation, publicity, and the cost of a reception (if they choose to have one). The art librarian is available to help with any aspects of the process. For many student artists, having a piece in RALES may be the first time they have ever shown work in a public space. In general, RALES is open to exhibiting any works as long as they don’t damage the physical library spaces or create a fire hazard.1

What Happened

On April 19, 2016, I woke up to a beautiful sunny morning in Berlin, Germany. I was thinking about the adventure...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Foreword: Storytelling for Advocacy, by Janice Del Negro
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction: Advocating for Intellectual Freedom through Storytelling
• Part I. Protected by Policy
• Part II. Public Events
• Part III. DIFFICULT CONVERSATIONS
• Part IV. Institutional Decisions
• Part V. Patrons Challenging Material
• Part VI. Cultural Sensitivity
• Conclusion: The Work Continues
• About the Contributors
• Index