Library bill more palatable, but still not necessary

(Editor’s note: Laramie County Library System Executive Director Antonia Gaona, who is a member of the Wyoming Tribune Eagle Editorial Board, offered her perspective on the current bill draft, but recused herself from discussions related to the content of this editorial.)

Back in June, we said we didn’t see the need for state lawmakers to get involved in the debate over keeping sexually explicit materials out of the children’s sections of public and school libraries.

Most of us still agree with that perspective, preferring that local communities address local concerns. After all, what’s best for Jackson likely isn’t going to be what’s best for Gillette or Rawlins.

But if lawmakers are going to pass legislation related to this issue, we’re encouraged by some of the changes made by members of the Wyoming Legislature’s Joint Judiciary Committee at their Oct. 13 meeting. Chief among them was the elimination of a $50,000 fine per violation of the statute, which could have severely impacted the financial viability of most county library systems in the state and had serious impacts on public K-12 school districts. (The fine was first reduced to $500 per offense, then eliminated entirely.)

That doesn’t mean we support the bill in its current form, however. As it will be introduced during next year’s budget session, it still needs to undergo several amendments to achieve the goals of proponents without negatively impacting the ability of parents to govern which materials they allow their kids to access.

For example, in the section related to school districts, it says district employees “shall ensure that no sexually explicit materials are accessible by any student in any library of the school district.” This removes local control from districts like Laramie County School District 1, which passed an “opt-in” material checkout policy last year and defined the types of materials that are appropriate at certain grade levels.

It also doesn’t take into account materials that could be used by home-school families for sex education. Since the public library is often the main free asset available to these and many other parents in our state, limiting access to age-appropriate material is concerning.

More concerning, though, is the adversarial approach some legislators continue to take during these conversations. Several times during the course of the Oct. 13 meeting, lawmakers referred to librarians as “the other side” and people looking for a loophole in the legislation.

Just as the vast majority of teachers aren’t groomers looking to sexualize the children in their care, most librarians want what’s best for Wyoming’s young people. Many of them are parents themselves, but they’re all trained professionals, and they believe in providing age-appropriate materials while allowing parents to decide for themselves what’s best for their children. To imply otherwise does nothing but deter professional librarians from wanting to stay in or come to Wyoming.

Rather than treating librarians as the enemy, lawmakers would be better off engaging in dialogue with them, working to understand the processes they use to decide which materials are acquired, where library materials are located inside each facility and how challenges are handled. We believe librarians across the state are open to such discussions, as well as suggestions for improvement, and, in fact, welcome them.

Overall, though, our opposition to the bill centers around the foundational principles that our country was built on: individual liberty, personal responsibility and intellectual freedom.

Public libraries serve a wide variety of purposes — from offering free educational resources to maintaining history to providing gathering spaces to build communities within our community. They also serve a wide variety of people. People with deeply held religious beliefs, as well as atheists. Low-income, middle-class and upper-crust people. Children, teens, young adults, parents, single people and senior citizens. To be all things to all people is a balancing act understood by few (except maybe newspaper editors), and a tremendous challenge that should be appreciated by all.

While we understand and support the desire to keep objectionable material out of the hands of young people, efforts to do so must be balanced against the freedom to choose what’s best for your child — not have that choice made for you.

Unless this bill achieves that balance, it shouldn’t become law.