KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Amid mounting opposition, Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft’s office has received more than 10,000 public comments on its proposed rule that would threaten public libraries’ state funding for making “age-inappropriate materials” available to minors.
Thursday was the last day residents could submit comments on the proposed rule, which would bar public library employees from granting minors access to materials without first receiving parental permission. JoDonn Chaney, a spokesman for the secretary of state, said the number of comments, both for and against the proposal, continued to climb.
Under the rule, libraries would be prohibited from using state funds to purchase materials that appeal to the “prurient interest of a minor.” Parents would be emboldened to challenge materials, displays or events if they think they’re not age appropriate. And the result of any challenge must be displayed on the library’s website.
Libraries would risk losing state funding by violating the proposed rule.
With 30 days of public comment period wrapping up, Chaney said that next, the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules will review the proposal. The rule could be approved, revised or rescinded altogether. The earliest it would take effect, Chaney said, is in the spring.
“When state dollars are involved, we want to bring back local control and parental involvement in determining what children are exposed to,” Ashcroft said in a statement. “Foremost, we want to protect our children.”
Librarians and free speech advocates have strongly opposed the proposal, arguing it is an attack on intellectual freedom.
“The proposed rule facilitates removal or suppression of constitutionally protected library materials based on the opinion of one person, who may not even be a resident of Missouri,” the American Library Association said in a letter to Ashcroft’s office.
The American Library Association argued that the proposed rule’s vague language — leaving it unclear what would be considered “age-inappropriate” materials — “invite arbitrary and discriminatory application of the rule that will lead to violations of readers’ First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
“This places both libraries and the state at risk for ongoing litigation over application of the rule, with the accompanying costs of time, money, and resources for the government entities responsible for application or enforcement of this rule.”
New rules for Missouri libraries
The proposal comes after months of attempts across the state to ban children’s books — most of which have LGBTQ characters or themes about race.
Several Kansas City area schools this fall pulled books off of library shelves, in response to a new Missouri law banning sexually explicit material from schools. Librarians or other school employees who violate the law could be charged with a misdemeanor, risking up to a year in jail or a $2,000 fine.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri said that the proposal for public libraries, “is purely political censorship intending to silence ideas, stifle diversity, and to raise doubt in our public institutions while pandering to a small but radical group of book banners.”
The Missouri Library Association argued the rule is an “infringement on the professional judgment of librarians, and an effort to further stoke division in the communities that libraries serve.”
Chaney said the issue has been “blown out of proportion.”
“Especially when it’s been called book bans and attempts to censor. We just want parents to have the ability to be in charge of what their kids are able to read,” he said.
Jim Staley, with the Mid-Continent Public Library, said librarians “agree that parents and families should make decisions about what’s available and what their children do.”
Libraries, he said, already have policies in place to ensure that “parents and families can make the right choices for themselves. So I’m just not sure why an additional rule that creates a lot of uncertainty is necessary to basically do something that libraries already do.”
Under the rule, libraries would be required to adopt written policies determining what material is age appropriate, and make those accessible to parents. Children would need parental permission before checking out materials. The rule says that, “no person employed by or acting on behalf of the library shall knowingly grant access to any minor any material in any form not approved by the minor’s parent or guardian.”
Libraries would not be allowed to display “age-inappropriate materials” in children’s sections.
Kansas City area libraries already have policies for determining what materials go into their children’s sections. And they already have processes for allowing residents to challenge materials. Kansas City Public Library, for example, has those policies already available on its website.
In a statement, the Kansas City Public Library said, “We remain sensitive to any specter of censorship and restriction of equitable access to books and other vital Library materials. Yes, parents and guardians should be arbiters on what is suitable for their children. They shouldn’t impose those choices on others. Nor should the state of Missouri.”
Library funding at stake
While libraries would risk state funding for not complying with the rule, Chaney argued that those state dollars are “generally a small portion” of a library’s budget.
“A library could say that they don’t want to respond to this or comply with this rule. What that could result in is a small portion of library funds being directed elsewhere other than to that library,” Chaney said.
Mid-Continent Public Library, Staley said, received roughly $500,000 in state funding last year, less than 1% of its budget. That money is used partly for grants to purchase technology, he said, such as early literacy technology.
“We don’t know exactly how much of that money could be at risk, but it would be felt in a lot of ways,” Staley said. “And the smaller the library — and there are lots and lots of smaller libraries around the state — the larger that percentage of state funding tends to be. So there’s a disproportionate impact on smaller, more rural libraries.”
The American Library Association argued that the cost to libraries to comply with the rule would be greater than the state funding it receives.
“Requirements to rate programs for undefined and arbitrary ‘age-appropriateness,’ develop systems and tools for parental permission, increase staffing to check the age of participants at programs regardless of content, and manage challenges from beyond the library’s service area will cost libraries money and time that will be diverted away from fulfillment of their mission to serve their communities’ information needs,” the organization said.
Ashcroft said in a previous statement that, “Supporting the efforts of libraries across our state has been a priority of mine since day one.”
“Yes, we want to make sure libraries have the resources and materials they need for their constituents, but we also want our children to be ‘children’ a little longer than a pervasive culture many often dictate,” he said.
