Fremont County library conflict comes to a head

RIVERTON — A student project about banned books prompted Lander School Board Chair Jared Kail to label some of the selections “woke” last April.

In the fall, activist Karen Wetzel approached Fremont County commissioners and delivered an “R-rated” appeal featuring excerpts from books on teen shelves in local libraries she said represented an effort to “indoctrinate” children into “weird sex cults.”

Some of the passages she read prompted concern.

“We can be less graphic,” commission chair Larry Allen said.

“We have an innate responsibility to protect [children],” Wetzel replied.

Initially, county commissioners found the book quotes read by Wetzel to be so foul, they censored that part of their October 3 meeting video online. The video has since been restored.

Should libraries censor materials that some believe can be beneficial for kids, but others consider pornography? It’s a question that’s raised hairs across the state and nation, and in Fremont County, it’s been at the heart of an ongoing debate about how libraries should be managed and how books for kids should be curated.

On Tuesday, commissioners issued a letter to the Fremont County Library Board with a list of concerns, most aimed at how kids’ books that are challenged as inappropriate ought to be reviewed, and how kids’ and teens’ materials should be labeled and shelved.

It also demands that filters be placed on computers in the children’s section and threatens that if the list of demands isn’t addressed by May 1, the commission “will be forced to remove the [library board] chair and place commissioner Mike Jones on the library board for a few months to ensure these policies and concerns are addressed.”

The commissioners discussed the policy demands letter during an executive session – a meeting closed to members of the public.

State law requires government meetings to be open to the public, save for a few narrow exceptions.

Commissioners cited an exception that allows them to discuss personnel matters privately in order to remove the public from the policy discussion.

Review policy

In response to a similar list of concerns from the commission issued last August, the library board updated its policy on how materials would be reviewed when challenged by a community member.

Last week’s new list of commissioner concerns called for changes to that policy, including asking that both a patron challenging a book and the library board ought to read the entire piece of material.

Under the current policy, the library director first reviews a challenged book and makes a determination; if the complaining patron is not satisfied with the outcome, it can be further challenged at the library board level.

Two books in the teen section, “Tricks” and “Smoke,” were recently challenged, and only two of the library board members read them in entirety.

“Deferring to the director should not be the only option,” commissioners wrote. “This should be corrected in the policy.”

Commissioners also noted they were “not interested in seeing a downloaded list of materials from national organizations to be reviewed. Each book should be reviewed by local people within Fremont County. The materials review process should represent local values.”

Commissioners further instructed the board to develop criteria that should be used to evaluate challenged materials.

“Something needs to be in the policy to address age appropriateness of materials as well. The catch-all phrase of ‘pornography’ does not cut it,” they wrote, adding challenged books should be pulled from the shelves while being reviewed.

Teen section, kid computers, ‘inappropriate behaviors’

Commissioners also questioned how the library systems’ “teen section” works, asking whether the section was truly meant for kids age 13-18.

“In the question of ‘age-appropriate material,’ is a 13-year old the same as an 18-year old? While the commission is not passing judgment whether these materials are pornography or not, we do question age appropriateness and where the materials belong within the library system,” they wrote. “We would like you to review age brackets when determining where materials belong.”

The letter also references “inappropriate behaviors” from members of the library board, and questions whether the board had “issued any formal communication to the director about her use of labeling.”

Last August, a string of emails came to light that outlined behind-the-scenes discussions among library leaders during the application period for filling seats on the library board.

Fremont County Library Director Anita Marple wrote to board member Dr. Perry Cook on June 9 that, at the time, there were three applicants for board seats, “two of which are ultra conservative activist people.”

Cook replied that she could stay on the board, if reappointed, “until we find some non-agenda applicants.”

Marple later apologized.

“Using that term should not imply that I don’t support their right to freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. Something I live by and regularly emphasize to the [Fremont County Library System] staff is the duty of the library, 1) to not have a political agenda and, 2) to treat every single person who comes into our libraries with respect,” she wrote in response to criticisms.

In February, during a heated exchange about using American Library Association (ALA) guidance for the library’s internet policy, board secretary Marta Mossburg objected to using the ALA.

Chairwoman Carrie Johnson responded: “There’s the door. Why are you on this board?”

Library board responds

Unlike much of the public comment concerning the library and library board the county commissioners have received over the past six months or so, the crowd at Wednesday’s library board meeting in Lander was overwhelmingly supportive of the library board.

Wetzel critiqued the library board, and one commenter, Jan Francisco, described her children bringing home books she felt were age-inappropriate and suggested the library could add stickers to books with some kind of rating system; the other 10 people who stood up to speak all touched on similar themes of support for Marple and not wanting to see books removed from the library.

“This isn’t about books … This is about taking away the institutions of our democracy,” remarked Lander resident Jane Lynn. “This is about taking away our rights.”

“I’m here to support Anita Marple in her role and express my just disbelief in her treatment yesterday in the county commission meeting – and my disappointment in the county commissioners in their attempts to micromanage the library board,” said Landerite Amy Andersen, who has at previous points been heavily involved in the Lander Library.

At the heart of the issue, the library board members seemed to conclude over the course of the meeting, are actually multiple separate pieces of how the library functions: What the library has in its collection, where those things are shelved, who makes those decisions and what the challenge and appeals processes look like, and also who can check out what, or circulation policy.

The board briefly discussed the possibility of an age-based circulation policy that would allow parents to place restrictions on which sections of the library their kids under the age of 18 may check books out from; Marple noted that this would be difficult to enforce with the library’s current check-out system, and the conversation was ultimately tabled for the meantime.

Although the letter the county commissioners sent the library board expresses the commission’s preference for the board members all reading the entirety of a book that comes before them when a challenge is appealed, several board members appeared to favor a different approach.

Based on Marple’s research into the way this is handled in other library systems in the state as well as a few suggestions from assistant county attorney Nathan Maxon, the board discussed whether a more appropriate way for it to handle an appealed challenge would be to review the process by which the library director arrived at a conclusion. If it was felt that the director had handled the challenge procedures poorly or had misinterpreted policy, then the board would direct a re-review of the book challenge.

Board Secretary Marta Mossburg objected to this approach, saying it felt as though it would be taking away the voice of board members.

Library Board Vice Chair Perry Cook pointed out that policy changes require public comment periods, which will make accomplishing the items outlined in the county commission’s letter by its May 1 deadline difficult.

It was also noted by the board and by Marple that the online restrictions for computers in the children’s sections of Fremont County libraries are currently in a public comment period; Marple said that she and other library staff have a plan to implement these restrictions quickly, but as the library doesn’t have its own information technology (IT) staff, it will need to rely on the county’s staff to get those in place by the county’s deadline.

“I really resent the county commissioners hamstringing our work here,” commented Board Chair Carrie Johnson. “Our usual business has been pushed off the agenda for months now.”

Typically, the library board meets once a month; in order to make the necessary progress on the items in the county commissioners’ letter, the board decided to hold a special meeting regarding these items on April 17 at 1 p.m. at the Lander Library.

This story was published on April 6, 2024.