Pine-Richland School Board took the next step in eventually implementing its controversial library policy at its meeting Feb. 10 in the latest of a series of contentious and sometimes rowdy meetings.
Board members offered numerous amendments to the proposed policy and even some supposed attempts at “compromise,” which were met with varying reactions.
The four-hour meeting followed a nearly seven-hour meeting in January in which the library resources policy was last discussed.
The new policy would place the final power to add or remove district library books in the hands of the school board rather than the Pine-Richland superintendent.
Previously, the district formed a committee for the review of 14 books challenged by parents in 2023, many of which focused on LGBTQ characters.
The committee offered recommendations to Superintendent Brian Miller, who ultimately recommended that the titles remain. Last year, board members started to revise the library policy to give themselves the final say on school books. The Feb. 10 meeting was the most recent stage of that revision process.
Although normally a more reserved member of the board, Joe Cassidy opened discussions with a request to table the policy because of potentially costly litigation that could emerge from its implementation.
“We need to step back and consider all the ramifications of the policy and look to a policy that will not be a financial burden to the district,” Cassidy said.
After Cassidy’s motion to table discussions failed 5-4, several other amendments were discussed before board member Christina Brussalis introduced a new section to the proposed policy.
She said her interlibrary loan amendment was an attempt at a “compromise” with members who have pushed back on the board’s library policy.
The amendment would allow students — with written permission from a parent or guardian — to request books from a network of libraries in the event a book didn’t meet the board’s library guidelines or was never carried at all.
Michael Wiethorn noted interlibrary loan also could be used for books removed by potential parental challenges.
“This is a compromise that would allow everyone to have something,” Brussalis said.
But board members such as Ashley Fortier and Amy Terchick pushed back on the amendment, saying it still represented a “barrier” to student book access. Miller asked the board to consult librarians before it approved the measure. Still, the amendment passed 6-2-1.
Next, Fortier took her shot at amending the policy. She introduced a motion that would have removed a 30-day period between a book’s approval by the superintendent and its introduction to the library.
She also said her amendment was an effort to “compromise.” Though Fortier said the waiting period was “too cumbersome,” board members such as Wiethorn said it gave community members time to potentially “raise issues” with library titles.
“I just feel like this is excessive. I feel like we’re putting the will of these unknown community members ahead of the needs of our students,” Fortier said.
Order briefly broke down soon after as board members disagreed about the fundamental purpose of amending the school’s current library policy, and board member Lisa Hillman asserted that Pine-Richland librarians had not been implementing that policy. That was all while the sometimes unruly crowd cried out at various board members.
Though he previously has said he will follow future board directives, Miller quickly jumped to the defense of the school librarians.
“I believe very much that the librarians were implementing the policy. I believe they were using their training and background to do it,” he said.
Fortier’s amendment and another attempt to table discussions were defeated 5-4.
The board then voted, again 5-4, to approve the first reading of the proposed policy. Brussalis, Hillman, Leslie Miller, Phillip Morrissette and Wiethorn voted to approve the first reading while Marc Casciani, Cassidy, Fortier and Terchick voted not to approve the reading.
The policy will have final confirmation if it is approved and does not see substantial changes during its second reading. If the policy does, however, see changes during its second reading, it will revert back to a first reading.
While those in the room seemed to stalwartly oppose the board majority, several online callers, such as Eli Santiago, expressed approval and gratitude for the majority and its work on the library policy.
Featured Local Businesses
Santiago thanked the board for its “focus on academics” and said he felt campaign promises were “being realized.”
Ben Ward, a Pine-Richland junior, said books featuring LGBTQ characters helped to show him he matters, and without them, students would deprived of some “fundamental human experiences.”
“These books, stories of people who lived and loved like I do, made me feel less alone. They gave me a roadmap for understanding myself,” he said.
The school board will next discuss its library policy at its Feb. 24 meeting.