Library media specialist details inventory, circulation and collection work as board discusses contested 80-book list

The district’s library media specialist told the school board that the libraries completed a full inventory this year and migrated to a single catalog that links seven branches, enabling inter-branch searches and improved reporting. She said the inventory (conducted between November and the end of January) and a move to the new system allow staff to target weeding and purchases so collections are more current and accessible.

“We migrated to a new software program that is way more user friendly for students and staff,” the presenter said, describing how teachers can now search holdings across schools, request multiple copies and track circulation.

She presented circulation numbers and budget context: “Here are the total books circulated as of 3:30 today. Okay, so over 20,000 print books,” and about 2,700 e-audio and ebook circulations, adding that the library budget is “about half a million dollars.” She also described unit costs (print average about $25; audio/ebook average about $40) and said the system’s reporting helps prioritize purchases and removals.

The presenter said the libraries are conducting systematic weeding to replace worn or outdated non‑fiction (some items dated to the 1940s–1960s) and to improve accessibility, including rearranging high shelves at one elementary site and planning grant-funded space upgrades.

She argued for additional staffing: after being asked whether the district needs another certified library media specialist, she said yes and outlined that librarians now act as instructional partners who teach media literacy, information literacy and support classroom teachers.

During questions, board members asked about donations and selection standards. The presenter said donations are accepted if in good condition and that older non‑fiction (pre‑2015) is less useful; donated items are often used for summer reading distributions when appropriate.

A board member raised concerns about a list of 80 books compiled by a parent group and read a passage citing the National Center on Sexual Exploitation describing harms connected with pornography. The speaker urged that the district remove or tightly restrict books they deemed “pornographic” or “sexually explicit” from school stacks and from donations.

Responding, the presenter and other board members cautioned that unilateral removal can trigger legal challenges. “If we remove books without a thorough going through the challenge process…that could be violating someone’s First Amendment rights and districts have been getting themselves into lawsuits over that and they’re not winning those lawsuits,” one board member said. Other board members recommended obtaining a legal primer on obscenity law and First Amendment limits before pursuing removals and suggested handling the list through the curriculum committee using established challenge procedures.

The board asked the presenter to share the link to the parent-group list; members affirmed they would review it in committee rather than ordering immediate removal. No formal action to remove books was taken at the meeting; the board discussed next steps for committee review and potential legal consultation.

The board’s consent agenda — taken earlier in the meeting — was approved with one recorded abstention and no recorded 'no' votes.