First review set for new borough library panel tasked with examining challenged books

What you need to know:

• A new Mat-Su Borough citizens’ library advisory committee will examine its first book at a public meeting set for Aug. 12. The panel will first consider "Identical" by Ellen Hopkins, one of three books currently slated for review, according to a borough website.
• Both books were previously recommended for removal from school library shelves by a separate yet similar school district panel. The titles were ultimately cleared for return to school shelves by district administrators.
• The borough committee will use a 17-question Library Material Review Score Card to evaluate material challenged by borough residents and selected by the committee for review. Questions on the scorecard consider factors ranging from frequency of use to potential criminal obscenity. The committee will then vote on whether to recommend removing, relocating, or retaining the material. A final decision on the book will be made by the borough’s community development director.

PALMER – A new citizens’ advisory committee tasked with examining challenged books in Matanuska-Susitna Borough public libraries selected its first title for consideration during a meeting Monday and scheduled the review date for early next month.

The committee is the first government-ordered citizens’ advisory group empaneled to review books in the region's public libraries. A similar committee was created by the Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District last year to review questioned books only in school district libraries.

The panelists voted during Monday's meeting to consider "Identical" by Ellen Hopkins at their first review session, scheduled for Aug. 12. It is one of three books listed on a borough website as awaiting review.

The second pending title, "Red Hood" by Elana K. Arnold, will be scheduled for review at a later date, committee members said during Monday's meeting.

A third book, "Damsel," also by Elana K. Arnold, was listed on the citizens’ committee agenda Monday. At the time of the meeting it was incorrectly included in the library reconsideration portal as awaiting review, borough Community Development Director Jillian Morrisey said this month.

That title was first flagged by a borough resident last year, then later withdrawn from the review process, Morrisey said. The title has since been changed on the borough website to indicate it is awaiting panel review.

The new panel replaces the borough's previous book reconsideration board, which consisted of librarians and library advisory board members. That board was disbanded by district officials earlier this year after a meeting ended in chaos.

The new committee was ordered by the Assembly early this year to give community members control over whether children have access to books that some members of the public consider obscene, borough assembly members said in April. It is the latest change sparked by an ongoing series of debates over materials on library shelves across Mat-Su.

Alaska state law prohibits the distribution of "indecent material" to children younger than 16. A letter sent last year by Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor to school and public library officials warned against distributing such material to minors.

The new borough committee is charged with reviewing books based on a 17-question borough-issued Library Material Review Score Card and voting to recommend whether a title should be removed from circulation, moved to another section, or left as is.

The assigned scoring questions are wide-ranging, with several addressing whether the material has been used frequently by patrons or is a priority for the library collection, according to the scorecard, which was distributed at Monday's meeting.

A series of four other questions examine whether the material is criminally obscene, borough officials said. For example, one such scoring question asks, "Does the material depict the following actual or simulated conduct?" and then lists six types of sexual contact that are also listed in the state statute.

The upcoming borough committee review is not the first time "Red Hood" and "Identical" have been considered for removal from libraries in the region. Both titles were among 16 books pulled from school district shelves and ultimately returned to school collections by district administrators following an internal review ordered by the school board. Both titles had been recommended for permanent removal by the district's citizens’ committee, which was tasked with making recommendations on 56 challenged books.

Of the books examined by the district committee, the school board has so far voted to permanently remove seven from school library shelves, while 30 have been returned to the collection either by a school board vote or after district review. Fifteen of the original 56 titles were ultimately not reviewed by the committee because they are no longer available on district shelves; four reviewed titles are still awaiting school board consideration.

The school district citizens’ committee disbanded last month. An ongoing lawsuit filed by two civil rights organizations on behalf of eight Mat-Su students contends the district violated their constitutional rights by removing questioned books from school library shelves.

Unlike the school citizens’ committee, which was given its list of books to review by the school board, all books selected for review by the borough panel should follow a multistep process that begins with a meeting between the patron requesting the review and the librarian at the branch where the material is shelved, borough officials said Monday.

If the patron isn't satisfied with the outcome of that meeting, they can submit the book to the borough panel through an online portal, a borough library policy states. Those requests will be received by borough staff, paired with notes from the librarian who held the initial meeting, and forwarded to the citizens’ committee, borough officials said at Monday's meeting. The committee can then choose whether to accept the material for review and a recommendation vote, according to the policy.

The final decision on whether material is retained, reshelved, or removed following committee review is up to the borough's community development director, the policy states.

Books can be questioned only by borough residents who have a library card, according to the policy.

While members of the citizen advisory board may individually submit their own material reconsideration requests, they must recuse themselves from any committee process that reviews that title, said Borough Attorney Nicholas Spiropoulos. The panel cannot vote to add books to their review list, he said.

Panelists are provided copies of the book under consideration and are required to "perform a review" of the material based on the scorecard, according to the ordinance. The ordinance does not explicitly require panelists to read the material selected for review.

The scorecard must be completed during the public meeting, the ordinance states. All scorecards and panel votes are public record.

Members selected for the committee are required to have "expertise and knowledge of the community," according to the ordinance. The ordinance does not require them to have any other expertise. Current members were nominated by Borough Mayor Edna DeVries earlier this year and confirmed by a vote of the assembly in May.

The borough board's first book review meeting is scheduled for Aug.12 at 5 p.m. and will be held in the Borough Assembly chambers at the borough administration building in Palmer.

Public comment is permitted during the borough book reconsideration meetings and is limited to two minutes per person.

Meetings will be held on the second Monday of each month as long as there is material to review, board chairman Chad Scott said Monday.

-- Amy Bushatz can be contacted at abushatz@matsusentinel.com

This story was updated July 11 to reflect a change in the review status of the book "Damsel" by Elana K. Arnold. A change to the book listing in the borough review portal made after the panel's meeting notes that it is currently pending review.