If you actually believe it has nothing to do with controlling the content and taking that decision away from thoughtful board members and putting it in the hands of meddling partisan politicians you are the one being bamboozled, Chuck.
My name is Sam Helmick and I am the Government Affairs chair for the Iowa Library Association.
If you would like to read the ILA Executive Board statement about the three library board-adverse bills filed this week for yourself please visit: IowaLibraryAssociation.org
Like many Iowans, Iowa Library Association respects the local governance structure established through engaged, politically appointed library boards in partnership with their city councils.
We want to #KeepLibrariesLocal!
If you would like to connect to a primary source on this topic, I would be delighted to speak with you at samhelmick.library@gmail.com.
It's unfortunate that no quotes or details from the ILA statement regarding this bill, which are easily accessed, were included in this piece and no ILA leaders were asked for input. I sat in on the initial hearings, read 100s of comments from library supporters about the initial bill SSB3131 and these iterations, and logged in online for the hearing on HSB678 and heard dozens of comments against the proposed legislation and not one in favor. Comments from ILA leadership and others were about retaining board authority and the amount of work city councils will face without any training. There are already measures in place for city councils to take this to a referendum as they did in Pella (in favor of the library board) so that voters are deciding on these important matters rather than disenfranchising voters and introducing additional first amendment liabilities to cities.
Republican efforts to undermine and control our public libraries hits a nerve with me, Chuck. As the daughter of a public school librarian -- and as an English major -- I believe access to information is crucial. I also believe that reducing citizen oversight of our libraries is wrong.
With all due respect, I don't know why we would take the word of legislators who have voted for school book bans and teaching restrictions that a federal judge enjoined because their "staggeringly broad" provisions were inconsistent with the First Amendment.
Carter Nordman in particular is no friend of pluralism or intellectual freedom. He co-sponsored a bill that would shut down most DEI programs at state universities and install Republican legislators on the Iowa Board of Regents in an "ex officio" role:
If the intent with this library bill was not to give elected officials direct control over content available in libraries, the text should have made that clear. And if city administrators have genuine concerns over library management, they should have come to the subcommittee meetings or posted public comments on the legislature's website. Librarians were right to sound the alarm.
Laura Belin, no friend of intellectual honesty, is attempting to prevent students from having representation on the Board of Regents: A bill stating "The ninth member shall be a student enrolled on a full-time basis in good standing at either the graduate or undergraduate level" she finds fault with. With all due respect, she seems a very sarcastic person. Not to be mean, but to be funny. Fortunately most people see it that way.
To clarify further: when a bill includes part of a statute, the existing language is in plain text. Any underlined part is the language the bill would add to what Iowa Code already says.
Whether legislators representing voters, who want to oversee book selection in public libraries, should be called "book banners" is an easy answer. Consider various perspectives and avoid simplistic labels.
• Not all individuals advocating for oversight want books banned: Some might seek age-appropriate restrictions, diverse viewpoints, or educational value, not necessarily removal.
• General oversight doesn't automatically equate to banning: They might propose adding books alongside perceived controversial ones to ensure balanced representation.
• Labeling can be dismissive and shut down dialogue: It might hinder productive discussions about library collection development and community needs.
• Oversight can lead to censorship and restricting access: Even if not the initial intent, it can have a silencing effect on certain voices and perspectives.
• Focus on specific groups' discomfort can marginalize minority voices: Removing books based on discomfort with topics can disproportionately affect marginalized communities.
The appropriateness of the term "book banner" depends on the specific context, individual motivations, and potential impacts of their actions. Engaging in nuanced and respectful dialogue, focusing on specific concerns, and seeking common ground is crucial when addressing library collection development and community representation.
It's worth noting that most voters (71%) oppose book bans in libraries, according to the American Library Association. So, while some may seek oversight, outright bans do not represent the majority view.
Instead of resorting to labels, focusing on open communication, clear guidelines, and inclusive collection development practices can help ensure libraries serve the diverse needs of their communities while upholding principles of intellectual freedom and access to information.
Iowa has more than 500 public libraries, most of which serve very small populations. Typically, they struggle to find board members and often settle for less than the best. Even larger municipalities sometimes find themselves settling on some odd creatures for board members. Their performance is typically poor. It's time to consolidate library services. Take advantage advances in technology, and provide Iowans with the library services to which they are entitled.
Seriously, most of the 3000+ library board members have little expertise in librarianship, human relations, or financial management. Let's take a hard look at what happening (and NOT happening) in the Iowa library environment and take the time for some thoughtful upgrades.
And, while I'm at it, do we really need 900+ municipalities? Nearly one hundred counties? More than 300 school districts? Iowans love governments. However, it's expensive and often ignores the efficiencies of scale.
So, Michael, on what research have you based your statement, "Typically, they struggle to find board members and often settle for less than the best."? 🤔
I'm sure all of the towns that relish their own library service, not to mention the convenience of their own library, might feel differently than what looks like your plan for consolidation of the whole library system. Not the least of which, choosing through their boards, books that suit their town and not the taste of the staid and pious legislature and governor. I suggest, perhaps, your idea of poorly spent dollars and theirs and, for sure mine, are at great odds. Expense is not the biggest priority concern when providing library services and education in the 2024's & efficiencies of scales are much more important to accountants than librarians and educators (or the governor - who is passing on public school money to private/religious institutions). I think you (and the governor) have your priorities out of order.
If you actually believe it has nothing to do with controlling the content and taking that decision away from thoughtful board members and putting it in the hands of meddling partisan politicians you are the one being bamboozled, Chuck.
Hello, Chuck.
My name is Sam Helmick and I am the Government Affairs chair for the Iowa Library Association.
If you would like to read the ILA Executive Board statement about the three library board-adverse bills filed this week for yourself please visit: IowaLibraryAssociation.org
Like many Iowans, Iowa Library Association respects the local governance structure established through engaged, politically appointed library boards in partnership with their city councils.
We want to #KeepLibrariesLocal!
If you would like to connect to a primary source on this topic, I would be delighted to speak with you at samhelmick.library@gmail.com.
It's unfortunate that no quotes or details from the ILA statement regarding this bill, which are easily accessed, were included in this piece and no ILA leaders were asked for input. I sat in on the initial hearings, read 100s of comments from library supporters about the initial bill SSB3131 and these iterations, and logged in online for the hearing on HSB678 and heard dozens of comments against the proposed legislation and not one in favor. Comments from ILA leadership and others were about retaining board authority and the amount of work city councils will face without any training. There are already measures in place for city councils to take this to a referendum as they did in Pella (in favor of the library board) so that voters are deciding on these important matters rather than disenfranchising voters and introducing additional first amendment liabilities to cities.
Republican efforts to undermine and control our public libraries hits a nerve with me, Chuck. As the daughter of a public school librarian -- and as an English major -- I believe access to information is crucial. I also believe that reducing citizen oversight of our libraries is wrong.
Seems like a hollow complaint coming from a person who supports their party. You bought it, you own it.
Our state senator emailed my husband that the issue was indeed about the books.
With all due respect, I don't know why we would take the word of legislators who have voted for school book bans and teaching restrictions that a federal judge enjoined because their "staggeringly broad" provisions were inconsistent with the First Amendment.
Carter Nordman in particular is no friend of pluralism or intellectual freedom. He co-sponsored a bill that would shut down most DEI programs at state universities and install Republican legislators on the Iowa Board of Regents in an "ex officio" role:
https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ga=90&ba=hf2327
If the intent with this library bill was not to give elected officials direct control over content available in libraries, the text should have made that clear. And if city administrators have genuine concerns over library management, they should have come to the subcommittee meetings or posted public comments on the legislature's website. Librarians were right to sound the alarm.
Laura Belin, no friend of intellectual honesty, is attempting to prevent students from having representation on the Board of Regents: A bill stating "The ninth member shall be a student enrolled on a full-time basis in good standing at either the graduate or undergraduate level" she finds fault with. With all due respect, she seems a very sarcastic person. Not to be mean, but to be funny. Fortunately most people see it that way.
To clarify further: when a bill includes part of a statute, the existing language is in plain text. Any underlined part is the language the bill would add to what Iowa Code already says.
https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ga=90&ba=hf2327
Whether legislators representing voters, who want to oversee book selection in public libraries, should be called "book banners" is an easy answer. Consider various perspectives and avoid simplistic labels.
• Not all individuals advocating for oversight want books banned: Some might seek age-appropriate restrictions, diverse viewpoints, or educational value, not necessarily removal.
• General oversight doesn't automatically equate to banning: They might propose adding books alongside perceived controversial ones to ensure balanced representation.
• Labeling can be dismissive and shut down dialogue: It might hinder productive discussions about library collection development and community needs.
• Oversight can lead to censorship and restricting access: Even if not the initial intent, it can have a silencing effect on certain voices and perspectives.
• Focus on specific groups' discomfort can marginalize minority voices: Removing books based on discomfort with topics can disproportionately affect marginalized communities.
The appropriateness of the term "book banner" depends on the specific context, individual motivations, and potential impacts of their actions. Engaging in nuanced and respectful dialogue, focusing on specific concerns, and seeking common ground is crucial when addressing library collection development and community representation.
It's worth noting that most voters (71%) oppose book bans in libraries, according to the American Library Association. So, while some may seek oversight, outright bans do not represent the majority view.
Instead of resorting to labels, focusing on open communication, clear guidelines, and inclusive collection development practices can help ensure libraries serve the diverse needs of their communities while upholding principles of intellectual freedom and access to information.
Fortunately, all people see it that way.
The Board of Regents have had a student member for decades.
https://www.iowaregents.edu/news/newsletter/board-of-regents-newsletter/june-2019-newsletter/the-student-regent
Nice try, though.
Finish this sentence: __________, she missed the point and must be as ______ as a brick.
Iowa has more than 500 public libraries, most of which serve very small populations. Typically, they struggle to find board members and often settle for less than the best. Even larger municipalities sometimes find themselves settling on some odd creatures for board members. Their performance is typically poor. It's time to consolidate library services. Take advantage advances in technology, and provide Iowans with the library services to which they are entitled.
Seriously, most of the 3000+ library board members have little expertise in librarianship, human relations, or financial management. Let's take a hard look at what happening (and NOT happening) in the Iowa library environment and take the time for some thoughtful upgrades.
And, while I'm at it, do we really need 900+ municipalities? Nearly one hundred counties? More than 300 school districts? Iowans love governments. However, it's expensive and often ignores the efficiencies of scale.
So, Michael, on what research have you based your statement, "Typically, they struggle to find board members and often settle for less than the best."? 🤔
I'm sure all of the towns that relish their own library service, not to mention the convenience of their own library, might feel differently than what looks like your plan for consolidation of the whole library system. Not the least of which, choosing through their boards, books that suit their town and not the taste of the staid and pious legislature and governor. I suggest, perhaps, your idea of poorly spent dollars and theirs and, for sure mine, are at great odds. Expense is not the biggest priority concern when providing library services and education in the 2024's & efficiencies of scales are much more important to accountants than librarians and educators (or the governor - who is passing on public school money to private/religious institutions). I think you (and the governor) have your priorities out of order.