Wednesday, June 12, 2019

City of Leander Texas—No Drag Queen Story Hour

From: Arthur Schaper
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 1:02 PM
Cc: Tracy Shannon;;;;;;;;
Subject: Re: City of Leander Texas -- No Drag Queen Story Hour

Dear Leander, Texas, City Council:

I am saddened, dismayed, and disgusted by the lack of courage taken up on this council to put a stop to the Drag Queen Story Hour program at the city library.

Two of the city council members had contacted me last month, and they assured me that they had nothing to do with this program, and they cancelled it.

Now it's being promoted by this so-called "Open Cathedral" church in Leander. You have a duty to put an end to this travesty. Drag Queen programs across this country are part of a perverse agenda to normalize sexual confusion and deviance. This is not about openness or acceptance at all.

Ironically, this church is not very open about who the Drag Queens are who are reading to these children on June 15th, I contacted the library, as well, and the staffers cannot tell me who is going to be reading to the children! The church has not responded at all.


Our Houston MassResistance leader Tracy Shannon exposed that not one but TWO sex offenders were intermingling with the children at the Freed-Montrose branch of Houston Public Library earlier this year. And now the Leander Library does not even have the common decency to inform the public—in a public library paid with public money—which drag queens (their stage names as well as real names) who will be reading to impressionable children.

This whole thing just reeks. This program must be suspended immediately. The lack of transparency, the insistence on hiding from the public what is happening at this library—it's just terrible!

I demand an answer on this right away.

My cell is (973) 610-8296.

PS. — Do not give me this excuse that the library is run by a third-party contractor, therefore the city council has no authority to stop the program. The funds are the city funds, and the contract was initiatied by the city. You as city council members have full power and responsibility to put an end to this perversion.


Arthur Schaper, Organization Director

Email: arthur at

[NOTE: Graphics and minor changes added by SafeLibraries; I'm a recipient of this email.]

URL of this page:

On Twitter: 
@CAMassResistanc @CityofLeander @Eventbrite @MassResistance @MyOpenCathedral

Monday, June 10, 2019

Drag Queen Story Hour Leaves 'Kids In The Cold,' Is Just 'Cute and Fun and Trendy,' Says School Librarian Ingrid Conley-Abrams

Drag Queen Story Hour in public libraries leaves "kids in the cold" and is just "cute and fun and trendy" for libraries that otherwise could not care less about "queer kids and families."  So says "Bi-Furious" social justice warrior and New York City school librarian "Magpie Librarian" Ingrid Conley-Abrams, pictured at right (photo source).

Knowing who she is politically is important since even someone like her thinks drag queens reading to kids in libraries may be inappropriate.  She's just honest enough to admit it publicly.  That said, in the past she has been dishonest about me so she could defend homophobia by American Library Association that persists to this day, but I agree with her about how ALA is using the LGBT community since that's consistent with how ALA uses the same community to promote its annual "Banned Books Week" hoax.

For those not in the know, DQSH is where drag queens read to children in public libraries due to American Library Association political activity unrelated to libraries.

Here is the first in a string of tweets from Ingrid Abrams, followed by the entire string in text:

I've been thinking a lot about Drag Queen storytime+my concerns about next steps, or steps before DQST. Basically, if the only non-gender conforming rep you have at your school/library are drag queens, what message are your students getting about gender?

Gender identity and presentation are multi-faceted and complex, and I'm concerned that students/patrons are getting the message that the only way to be gender non-conforming is to spend 3 hours on your makeup+hundreds of dollars on a dress.

Certainly better representation than NO representation, which is what kids get anyway, but it leaves a lot of other kids in the cold.

If a person performs drag, it doesn't dictate their sexual orientation or gender identity. Performers may gay or bi or straight or cis or trans. Are kids getting that message? Are they getting other kinds of non-binary/gender non-conforming representation?

Are these patrons/students getting support outside of DQSH? Non gendered bathrooms? When they sign up a library card, are they asked if they are male or female, or is the sign up more inclusive?

Is the library/school welcoming to queer kids and families with queer members? Or are we just hosting Drag Queens for an hour a month because it's cute and fun and trendy and then calling it a day?

Are queer people at your library only welcome for an hour a month and only if they're super visually appealing and entertaining? Are queer ppl only welcome to be gawked at? Can queer ppl exist at yr library outside of DQSH?

This being said, I love drag performance, I love that drag performers care about kids and care about libraries and are reaching out to kids who deeply need the representation.

End of conversation
Lastly, for bringing this to my attention, hat tip to "Underground Educator," one of a number of whistleblowers who oppose how ALA harms communities, including "Activist Mommy - Elizabeth Johnston":

By the way, I ask if little kids should be giving money to drag queens dancing in public libraries:

URL of this page:

On Twitter: 
@ALALibrary @MagpieLibrarian

Monday, May 20, 2019

Facebook Censorship is a Public Relations Nightmare for Libraries

The silicon censors are so bad at Facebook that some public relations managers in public libraries, universities, and governments have taken notice and are considering whether or not to eject the censorship platform.  They even echo Tim Cook of Apple.

Below is exactly what librarians are saying on a public relations listserv for the American Library Association.  Here is the most telling quote:
For the past several months, our popular suburban Chicago public library has been moving away from Facebook and all social media channels.  Polling patrons, we've learned that occasional content-rich emails are far more effective, likely because they are ... not subject to algorithms.... 
More importantly, there are serious ethical questions about actively using Facebook (or Instagram): How can libraries, in good conscience, use social media platforms that are a) eroding democratic ideals and b) violating user privacy without remorse or consequence? In local library marketing round tables, we've begun asking these important questions and some of our colleagues are thinking about them. We urge all public libraries to at least consider the social cost of these communication channels. -Becky
Notice Becky speaks about "algorithms" and implies Facebook uses them to censor content from certain viewers.  She's not alone in this feeling.  Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, said to the 18 May 2019 graduating class of Tulane University, "Today, certain algorithms pull toward you things that you already know, believe or like. And they push away everything else. Push back! It shouldn’t be this way."
Well, it looks like librarians and public relations managers at state, school, and public libraries are pushing back!  Way to go American Library Association!


Mon, May 20, 2019 at 7:39 AM

Hi, I’ve received some comments lately that we should not use Facebook anymore, that it’s a dying social media platform. However, I argue the people using Facebook are those who are using the library most – young moms age 25 to 40. I want to continue using it.

Is everyone still using Facebook? Are you advertising on Facebook? What are you thoughts about continuing using this platform? What other social media outlets are you having success with?

Thanks for your consideration. Theresa


Mon, May 20, 2019 at 7:44 AM

I'm in an academic library and while Facebook demographics are aging, the platform remains important to us as it's the major (likely only) social media platform our donors and board members engage with. True for older alumni as well. While it's aging, it's still the gorilla in the living room and our largest platform. Sue


Mon, May 20, 2019 at 7:49 AM

I absolutely think it’s still an important  communications outlet. Around seven-in-ten U.S. adults (69%) use Facebook, according to a survey conducted in early 2019. That’s unchanged since April 2016, but up from 54% of adults in August 2012.

If you are looking at young adults or teens, yes, many of them have left Facebook for other platforms (Instagram for example), which is why a multi-prong approach to social media is best.



Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:56 AM

For the past several months, our popular suburban Chicago public library has been moving away from Facebook and all social media channels. Polling patrons, we've learned that occasional content-rich emails are far more effective, likely because they are thoughtful, targeted, and not subject to algorithms; recipients at least see the subject line of an email in their inbox (whereas they may miss social media posts altogether). Open and engagement rates are consistently high compared with average (nonprofit) industry statistics for email campaigns. As we add more cardholders to our segmented email subscriber lists, we're using social media less and less, and will, within the next few months, stop feeding it. (We'll keep our fb page, for hours, location, and direct messaging.) For our library, email has proven a solidly better use of marketing resources.

More importantly, there are serious ethical questions about actively using Facebook (or Instagram): How can libraries, in good conscience, use social media platforms that are a) eroding democratic ideals and b) violating user privacy without remorse or consequence? In local library marketing round tables, we've begun asking these important questions and some of our colleagues are thinking about them. We urge all public libraries to at least consider the social cost of these communication channels.



Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:06 AM

Yes, we're still using Facebook - in fact, just this year we've started boosting some of our posts and creating Events for most of our programs, and have a seen an uptick in attendance and resource usage! We also see a lot of activity on our posts (likes, shares, comments, etc.), so people are still using it. I have seen similar demographic stats to those Tami shared, and for that reason agree with her completely about using demographics to target specific social media. Also, while there were calls for people to leave Facebook due to the privacy scandals, I read an article a few months back that suggested that while some users had left, there was by no means a mass exodus.  In short, I believe that comments that Facebook is dying are like comments that libraries are no longer necessary - it's true for people who don't use them, but since they don't, they don't see how many people ARE using them.



Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:14 AM

We still use it, and we have more engagement there than on our other platforms (Twitter and Instagram). We are an academic library and we added Instagram recently in order to reach our students. But overall we have the largest number of followers and more interactions with patrons via Facebook. I wouldn’t give up on it yet, especially at a public library.



Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:24 AM

Yes, we still use it.  We do periodic surveys of our patrons and it’s the most popular place for people to hear about our events by quite a large margin.  We use free posts, boosted posts, and ads, depending on the event type and budget. Paid or organic, we get more engagement there than any other social media, paper flyers, or email newsletters.

If it works for you, use it.  If it doesn’t, don’t.  Trends are never as important as your actual experience.



Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:39 AM

Well said!

Our experience is similar.  We know we won’t reach teens via Facebook, but we are reaching adults and are getting more and more engagement.

We recently starting creating more of our programs as “events” on Facebook and have seen an uptick in the number of people following and liking our page, as well as overall engagement.

We also boost selected library programs and get decent results – our budget for that is very modest, but it does seem to help.




Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:41 AM

For us, it is a vital tool. We do advertise, but often times, people discover us through Facebook or Google. They are searching for "blind products" or "audiobooks blind" and our website pops up and our facebook page pops up. It also gives me direct access to the caregivers of our clients. Example: Parents of Blind Children; Blind Parents, Caregiver's Anonymous. I use the boards to not only share information but look for ways for us to expand services or fine-tune our services if needed.
We don't use Insta or Snapchat - mostly because I'm one person running social media an agency and half, but also because accessibility is questionable.

We are moving away from Newsletters because we use Word/PDF and our patrons have difficulty opening them on their phones. Instead, we are moving towards a blog.




Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:54 AM

We continue to use Facebook, Insta, and Twitter (primarily to feed our local reporters- they check Twitter often for news leads).In our annual customer survey, we find that community members find out about our programs and services through email (49%), social media (31%), and posters in the library (27%), along with other channels.

I always think of our social media platforms as tools to help remind/reinforce the messages we're sending. They see something on Facebook that they also see on a poster, or in an email. Knowing that it can take several times for information to "stick," I feel like it's still a very valuable tool.


Graphics sources:
  2. Drudge Report
  3. South Carolina State Library
See also:

Wednesday, April 17, 2019

Librarians Hate White People; Make Social Justice Racism Top Goal Nationwide, Remove Literacy

Librarians hate white people and use that racism to encourage other librarians to spread that hate into communities nationwide, and naturally Library Journal promotes this racism:

If you look at any United States library’s collection, especially those in higher education institutions, most of the collections (books, journals, archival papers, other media, etc.) are written by white dudes writing about white ideas, white things, or ideas, people, and things they stole from POC and then claimed as white property with all of the “rights to use and enjoyment of” that Harris describes in her article. When most of our collections filled with this so-called “knowledge,” it continues to validate only white voices and perspectives and erases the voices of people of color. Collections are representations of what librarians (or faculty) deem to be authoritative knowledge and as we know, this field and educational institutions, historically, and currently, have been sites of whiteness.
Library collections continue to promote and proliferate whiteness with their very existence and the fact that they are physically taking up space in our libraries. They are paid for using money that was usually ill-gotten and at the cost of black and brown lives via the prison industrial complex, the spoils of war, etc. Libraries filled with mostly white collections indicates that we don’t care about what POC think, we don’t care to hear from POC themselves, we don’t consider POC to be scholars, we don’t think POC are as valuable, knowledgeable, or as important as white people. To return to the Harris quote from above, library collections and spaces have historically kept out Black, Indigenous, People of Color as they were meant to do and continue to do. One only has to look at the most recent incident at the library of my alma mater, Barnard College, where several security guards tried to kick out a Black Columbia student for being Black.
  • Source: "Whiteness As Collections," by Sofia Leung, "Libraries. Social Justice. Critical Race Theory," 15 April 2019, emphasis added, hyperlink in original.
Graphic of original tweet, since deleted.

The hate is so great that it has expressly become the American Library Association's [ALA] top goal, even to the point where literacy is expressly set aside by ALA's Public Library Association [PLA]:
At the September 2017 Board meeting, members reviewed the strategic plan and discussed critical issues facing public libraries today and the changing library landscape. Through these discussions, a need to update PLA’s vision to reflect the evolution of  collective thinking by the association’s board, leaders and members and the state of the library field emerged along with three recommended changes to the strategic plan goals: 1) add Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion as a goal; 2) separate Leadership & Transformation into two individual goals; and 3) remove Literate Nation as a goal.
Look below at the goal statement and its objectives from the "PLA Strategic Plan 2018–2022":
  1. force "social justice" or "EDISJ" into all aspects of the library association, 
  2. force the useful librarians to "advocate and apply EDISJ principles in their libraries and communities"—whether or not the communities want to be indoctrinated, and 
  3. force out librarians who do not go along by applying ideological tests "that demonstrate progress in key EDISJ areas."

Source: "PLA Strategic Plan 2018–2022"

For example, inherently unsafe Drag Queen Story Hour, where libraries invite unvetted drag queens to read to children in libraries, is all about "social justice" masquerading as advancing literacy.  But literacy was explicitly removed as an ALA goal, as shown above.  Well, if children aren't of concern to ALA anymore, at least ALA will defend illegal aliens in the US Supreme Court—but do we citizens just sit back and let them do as they wish to and in our communities?

Here's another racist tweet, this one right from ALA itself about "Whiteness in Children's Literature":

It's been boiling for years, but now it's so out in the open that @Twitter @verified blue checkmark accounts are noticing and mocking ALA, including Wall Street Journal's Book Critic and author of "The Enchanted Hour: The Miraculous Power of Reading Aloud in the Age of Distraction" (Harper), Meghan Cox Gurdon:

Mocking this is not the right attitude.  What needs to happen is the racist, anti-White, anti-American "social justice" warriors need to be removed from America's libraries and replaced with librarians, real librarians, really serving their communities, not indoctrinating them with racism and hate conveniently called "social justice" or "equity" or "diversity."  Ditto for the social justice warriors serving on board of trustees.  I encourage people to run or apply for those board positions and replace the haters who answer only to ALA, not their own communities.

And stop funding libraries until the ALA influence has been exorcised:

Removing ghost of Judith Krug and her ACLU/ALA/porn legacy.
Photo Credit:  Kevin DuJan; Used with permission.

Here's PLA training the troops for insertion into our communities:

Lastly, racist librarian Sofia Y Leung has "protected" or "locked" her Twitter account:

Racist librarian Sofia Y. Leung "protected"
her Twitter account.


Library Journal has deleted its tweet that was the subject of this story:

The tweet had about 400 likes and retweets when it was deleted, I can't be sure of the exact number.  I liked and retweeted it when I was the first or second person to do so.  It also had about 10,000 comments, almost all comments mocking the tweet and librarians for their blatant racist hate.  That's likely why it was deleted, although it had to be one of the most "popular" @LibraryJournal tweets ever.  My guess is the tweet was removed since it gave the impression Library Journal supported the tweet, as opposed to merely tweeting what some racist MIT university librarian wrote.  While I have seen regular racist hate at the American Library Association on which it thrives, I have never observed it at Library Journal, so I'm giving LJ the benefit of the doubt.


Added graphic of original tweet since original tweet has been deleted.

URL of this page:

On Twitter: 
@ALA_PLA @ALALibrary @dangainor @Harry1T6 @LibraryJournal @iowahawkblog @jccpalmer @MeghanGurdon @RonColeman @sofiayleung @thealexvanness @yannispappas

Thursday, April 11, 2019

Drag Queen Story Hour Funding FOIA—ALA Uses National Library Week to Call It Censorship

Dear Houston Public Library Foundation [HPLF] TPIA Officer:

This is a noncommercial FOIA request from a member of the news media for electronic production of documentation per the Texas Public Information Act, §6252-17a et seq. [TPIA], to this email address, to my attention, using the above-referenced research project code.  TPIA requires that you "promptly produce" the requested records unless, within 10 days, you have sought an Attorney General's Opinion.  If you deny any or all of this request, please cite each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.  All documentation should be produced as PDFs, with the exception of photographs (which should be JPEG), audio files (which should be MP3), and video (which should be MP4 or MOV).  If documentation files are too large to transmit in an email, transmit them to me either using a free file sharing service (such as Dropbox) or by sending multiple emails (as many as needed).  I seek the following numbered categories of documentation for my research pursuant to news articles and a book I am writing that has interest and value to the public:

Copy of the following:

WHERE DOES HPLF GETS ITS MONEY:  ( 1 ) Please provide documentation, written or recorded, of financial gifts, grants, loans, donations, or any other monies offered to and actually received by HPLF from the American Library Association [ALA], the Freedom to Read Foundation [FTRF], the Public Library Association, the Texas Library Association, the National Coalition Against Censorship, Open Society Foundations, or Drag Queen Story Hour, from 1 July 2018 to present.  I expect FTRF to be the main source since it has an established pattern of quietly funding its acolytes, as discussed below.  Further, ALA has in the past given HPLF anywhere from $250-$999.  See: page 15 of “2017 Impact Report”  I anticipate responding to this request will take 5 minutes.

WHAT’S BEING FUNDED AT HPL BY HLPF:  ( 2 ) Please provide documentation, written or recorded, of financial gifts, grants, loans, donations, or any other monies offered and/or actually funded/disbursed by HPLF to Houston Public Library [HPL], from 1 July 2018 to present, including an itemization of each instance, for whom or what it was provided—including the drag queens or drag queen business(es), when, and the exact dollar amount.  I anticipate responding to this request will take 5 minutes.

IS HOUSTON CITY CODE 24-5 TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION:  ( 3 ) Please provide documentation, written or recorded, of discussion of Houston City Code 24-5, specifically, “Without limitation, the director is authorized to include provisions that govern the use of library premises by the public, including the use of the property around the library, in order to promote an environment that is protective of the health and well-being of patrons and children while at the library facility,” from 1 July 2018 to present.  See:  I anticipate responding to this request will take 10 minutes.

IS DRAG QUEEN STORYTIME ACCEPTABLE UNDER HOUSTON CITY CODE 24-5:  ( 4 ) Please provide documentation, written or recorded, of discussion of how Drag Queen StoryTime relates to “understanding and celebrating all Houstonians’ similarities and differences, building positive relationships, and promoting a dialogue of acceptance, respect, and trust,” and any counterarguments thereto, from 1 July 2018 to present.  See:  I anticipate responding to this request will take 10 minutes.

SEE DRAG QUEEN STORYTIME IN ACTION:  ( 5 ) Please provide all photographs and videos taken during Drag Queen StoryTime events.  Upon information and belief, HPL and HPLF employees/staff/appointed office holders/commissioners took photos and video at these events, using both library, foundation, or library consortia owned equipment and their personal cellphones.  Time period is limited to 1 July 2018 to present.  Be clear personal cellphones are covered by TPIA as long as the recordings do not “constitute an invasion of privacy” of the individual.  Recording public Drag Queen StoryTime shows does not constitute an invasion of privacy of the individual making the recording.  It is not believable people did not use their personal devices to make recordings, so they must be produced pursuant to TPIA as well.  See Texas Government Code § 552.109: or  I anticipate responding to this request will take 10 minutes.

HEAR DRAG QUEEN STORYTIME BEING DISCUSSED:  ( 6 ) Please provide all voice mail recordings about Drag Queen StoryTime or the funding thereof.  Such recordings are likely MP3 audio files organized by your voice mail system.  Such recordings are likely to be in the voice mailboxes belonging to any chief executive/director/commissioner, any assistant executive/director/commissioner, any youth services director, and any public relations director.  I anticipate responding to this request will take 15 minutes.

That completes this documentation request.  The expected time for completion of the above requests by an experienced TPIA/FOIA officer is 55 minutes.

This is an attempt to determine if and to what extent outside influence is influencing local policy in Houston, TX, and whether local policy as reflected in Houston City Code 24-5 has been considered and applied or simply tossed aside intentionally or out of sheer ignorance of the law.

ALA makes a habit of influencing local communities with quiet money.  In Highland Park, TX, for example, FTRF, an ALA entity, gave $5,000 dollars to local advocates of ALA’s political positions.  See page 10:

ALA later saw to it that its local favorite in Highland Park was awarded with a “Robert B. Downs Intellectual Freedom Award” for doing what ALA wanted.  See:  It is worthy to note that ALA arranged to have the same “Intellectual Freedom” award given to a library that facilitated then covered up the crime of child pornography viewing. See

In West Bend, WI, ALA quietly slipped $1000 grant to a local acolyte, the existence of which was never made public until it was uncovered by a FOIA request, necessitating the need for the filing of this present TPIA request.  See what was uncovered and the cozy financial relationship one local acolyte had with ALA and the library it supported to defeat a local whistleblower:

In the Houston matter, there may be more quiet money being used to promote interests of outside groups instead of local interests.  There are definitely indications that this is so.  For example, your HPLF stated, “Drag Queen Storytime has been volunteer-led and offered at no cost to the Houston Public Library, and no private or public funds were used to directly fund the program.” See:

Notice the word “directly.”  “[N]o private or public funds were used to directly fund the program.”  That means funds were used indirectly.  The public has a right to know.

ALA’s quiet money is always done indirectly.  ALA is an organization that defends child pornography viewing ( ) and the sexual harassment of librarians, calling it “dubious,” ( ) among other serious problems including homophobia ( ) and antisemitism ( ).  Such an organization giving quiet money to local acolytes to defeat local whistleblowers and local law is a serious concern.  People should be fully informed so as not to be misled into doing what ALA would have them do if ALA only had the direct power to do so.

This TPIA hopes to expose the extent of ALA’s financial involvement in Houston as it may explain why those in power may be ignoring Houston City Code 24-5 about “promot[ing] an environment that is protective of the health and well-being of patrons and children while at the library facility,” and exposing the community to seriously risk of liability.  ALA’s former de facto leader and creator of FTRF, also a former board member of the Illinois ACLU, actually said, as quoted in the Chicago Tribune, “I get very concerned when we start hearing people who want to convert this country into a safe place for children. …. I am adult. I want available what I need to see.”  See:

I have to wonder if the people of Houston agree with that statement enough to toss aside Houston City Code 24-5, that is explicitly “protective” of children, and is directly opposed to the anything-goes views of ALA.  As Governor Greg Abbott stated in an analogous case, “Don’t Mess With Texas. We don’t want out-of-staters rigging our elections.”  See:  Do citizens want out-of-staters at ALA rigging the libraries instead of complying with local law designed to “protect” children?  Governor Abbott raises an excellent point, and the response to this TPIA may help educate him and the Houston community.

Even Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner is in on the action.  He stated, “The Fact is: Storytime is funded by the Houston Library Foundation. No tax dollars are involved. The program was requested by patrons of the Library.”  See:  So the present TPIA request is to determine the extent of that funding, who are the sources of that funding, and where specifically is that funding going.

The responses to this TPIA request are a matter of great public concern.  So great that even Texas Governor Greg Abbott raises the issue, “How much are you paying for a library where a registered sex offender participated in Drag Queen Storytime? The Fact is, Houston spends plenty of taxpayer dollars for services that are not essential. Houston, just like other cities, can handle property tax reform. #txlege”  See:  Well, Governor, it is likely there will be more news about the harm the library has done by ignoring its duties.  The present TPIA request is to determine how much money is funding Drag Queen StoryTime where a registered sex offender participated.  I hope to present the Governor with my findings.

Therefore, in respect of the above, and given the eyes of Houston and the Governor of Texas are upon you, please respond to my TPIA request without any of the usual open government gamesmanship, such as what HPL has done to prevent the public from learning the facts.  I still have not received any documents even after the Texas Attorney General had to force compliance.  See Ken Paxton’s decision here:  Only yesterday was I informed by HPL the documents would be made available to me, but only for a $145 fee.  So I still don’t have the documents.  I’m a reporter and HPL is charging fees despite the law and dragging out the process.  This will result in my requesting relief from the Texas Attorney General, running up further legal costs—to defend despite open government laws unforced errors that allowed a convicted pedophile to read to children.  No doubt I will be blamed as legal fees rise due to HLP’s defense of Drag Queen StoryTime despite city law and state law.  I say this in the hope HLPF will not go down the path of HPL and will simply turn over the documentation as requested and as required by law.

Additional notes:

TPIA gives the public the right to request access to government information. The same applies to HPLF, an organization whose members are appointed by the Mayor and approved by City Council. Therefore, please respond to the above noncommercial TPIA request in accordance with the law.  See: City of Houston Code of Ordinances, Chapter 24, Article II, Sections 24-25 through 24-35.

Also, constructive criticism, consider adding HPLF to “Public Information Act Requests” that has already been updated once as a direct result of my first FOIA request to HPL.  Not being listed on that page gives the false impression that HLPF is not subject to TPIA. See:

I am a reporter on library matters where I publish on both SafeLibraries® and on Sexual Harassment of Librarians. As such I may publish anything you send me.  Thus, I ask that all fees for the production of TPIA responses be waived: "If a governmental body determines that producing the information requested is in the 'public interest' because it will primarily benefit the general public, the governmental body shall waive or reduce the charges." "Shall," not "may."  Source: 194; Gov’t Code § 552.267(a). That this is a matter of public interest is evident by the international media attention the library has received as a result of the library's admitted "oversight" in allowing a registered child sex offender to read to children at Drag Queen StoryTime, and in Governor Abbott’s message quoted above.

Further exposure of more drag queens is likely, given the complete dereliction of duty of the library.  See   So this issue is of current interest.

There are even indications that this is a matter beyond mere dereliction of duty bordering on intentional refusal to protect children when comments like this one from eleven weeks ago appear in a public Facebook group called ALA Think Tank, as seen in the URL, but later renamed to hide the connection to ALA, “Someone referred to it as ‘pedophile storytime’ to my coworker and she was really confused until I said ‘They mean drag queen story hour’ and she's like ‘But drag queens and pedophiles are completely unrelated?’ YEP.”  So librarians, likely including some at HPL, were aware of the concerns and still ignored them.  That is bad.  See:

Where emails are involved, also provide the BCC as well as the CC and the TO. As you know, BCC is for the convenience of the sender, not for circumventing public information laws. If senders/recipients include distribution lists HLPF created, then please provide the document that lists the individual recipient email addresses in any distribution list; again, distribution lists are for the convenience of the sender, not for circumventing the law. Further, if HPLF business has been conducted via the use of personal emails, then please provide those emails as well. Conducting HLPF business on personal emails is not a valid means for circumventing TPIA.

Any document written or recorded is included as well. That includes voice mails, audio recordings, video recordings, transcripts or minutes of any public meetings. HLPF board executive session recordings or minutes are not included in my request if they have not already been made public.

Written or recorded documents also include those made in any telephonic, electronic, or physical meeting with anyone acting on behalf of any library association such as the ALA. ALA trains librarians that written or recorded documents from ALA-provided trainings, meetings, conferences, etc., are ALA proprietary and may not be released publicly. That ALA claim is false. TPIA controls, not ALA. If a public employee attended anything at public expense, then anything learned/recorded at such an event or as a result thereof has been made public and is discoverable under TPIA no matter what ALA claims. The public has a right to know what business has been conducted at public expense, especially where the library goofed, allowed a pedophile to read stories to children, and is now seeking to expand the drag queen story hour program further with the help of HLPF.

Be clear ALA top leadership uses personal email to direct librarians to destroy public documents precisely to prevent production under state sunshine laws like TPIA. Example from the private email of the current Interim Director and Deputy Director Deborah Caldwell-Stone, Esq., of the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom: “Subject: URGENT -­ must delete all documents related to 17 Dec crisis communications workshop .… Remove these from your servers today and destroy hard copies. This is an attempt by two individuals to obtain privileged information …. we cannot allow anything from 17 Dec to be produced in response to FOIA.” See: “Librarians Ordered to Destroy Public Documents Revealing Homophobia at American Library Association and Crime in Libraries,” by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries®, 26 April 2018,

Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.

[NOTE: If anyone wishes to contact me privately/confidentially, perhaps to provide some of this documentation, use]


Dan Kleinman


27 March 2019 (Wednesday early AM)

Houston Public Library Foundation
550 McKinney St
Houston, TX 77002

     Re:  FOIA Research Project #2019-03-27 = Houston Public Library Foundation - Drag Queen Funding - 1

Above is my 27 March 2019 FOIA request.  I would love to think of it as a model FOIA request for others to follow.  It's specific, anticipates some of the gamesmanship recalcitrant libraries play because they are hiding something, and it looks at the law of the state or municipality that libraries must follow and sees if those rules are being followed or have even been considered.  Get a head start in your own state here:
The library has already responded to the above FOIA request.  Below is a discussion of and a link to the library's response dated 10 April 2019.

The response to the above FOIA request is that the City of Houston has written to the Texas Attorney General asking to be relieved from having to respond to requests made under open government laws:
It has used some or all of these excuses to block FOIA responses to anyone, for well over half a year now, I believe.  No one has gotten anything yet, while the bills keep piling up to defend pedophiles reading to children at library programs.  The problem with keeping what the library is doing opaque is that the library can continue to act in a manner that may be harming the community either directly or financially.

In this case we have a library that has allowed two registered sex offenders to read to children.  The FOIA requests are to shed light on how and why this happened, with an eye toward preventing it from happening in the future.  But not only is the library blocking public disclosure of this, it is also actively seeking to ramp up more and more of the inherently dangerous activity.  Such activity can go on and further harm the community precisely because the library is blocking access to public documents that might disclose what's going on so as to allow the public to decide how best to proceed or to persuade their government to do so.

In other words, the library is defying the law or playing FOIA games to further expose the community to harm.

What's a FOIA game?  I asked for who are the donors to the library foundation.  The City says it will not supply that under Boeing Co v. Paxton, a case that allowed a private company that contracts with a public entity to block disclosure by that public entity because it might hurt business.  There is no private company involved in this matter, only the foundation itself that argues giving away its donor list would harm its own ability to raise funds—it doesn't do any business.  And none of the private donors contract with the library foundation, they simply donate money.  The Boeing case doesn't even apply, but the City raises it anyway.  That's a FOIA game.

Besides, we all know not a single donor would stop donating because people knew who else was donating.  Rather, that would be a feather in the donor's cap, one freely broadcast because of the goodwill that brings.  Ever seen a stadium plastered with the name of its major donor?  It's likely already broadcast by the various donors.  The excuse is a false one.  Again, the reasoning of Boeing doesn't apply.

How do we know Boeing is a problem?  Is it used by public entities to block disclosure of public information?  Yes.  Texas legislators are working to get around the effect of the case that has taken a formerly transparent state and turned it into the exact opposite.  So much so that even a library that allows registered sex offenders to read to kids gets to claim Boeing applies so it can block the public from learning about how that debacle happened.  Is Boeing supposed to protect a library as it allows pedophiles to read to children?  Read what legislators are doing to reverse this:
In the Boeing decision, the court granted private companies that contract with governmental entities enormous latitude to claim that documents and information should be kept secret, including in some cases the contract itself and the amount of taxpayer money involved.
In its decision to allow the University of Houston to keep the contracts hidden, Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office cited a 2015 Texas Supreme Court case known as Boeing Co. v. Paxton, which expanded what is considered a trade secret, or proprietary information of private companies that government agencies can withhold from the public.
“As a citizen, you just feel bullied,” Terrell said. “They hold all the cards. Boeing gives them the right to withhold the entire contract. It’s [a way] to just shut down everything.”

And the Houston Public Library Foundation has played this game before, using Boeing Co. v Paxton to block past FOIA requests.  See:
You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the Public Information Act (the "Act"), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID # 733956 (GC 25439). 
The City of Houston (the "city") received a request for information pertaining to funding and donor information of the Houston Public Library Foundation.  You claim the submitted information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101 and 552.104 of the Government Code.  We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted information.
Section 552.104 excepts from disclosure "information that, if released, would give advantage to a competitor or bidder."  Gov't Code § 552.104.  The "test under section 552.104 is whether knowing another bidder's [or competitor's information] would be an advantage, not whether it would be a decisive advantage."  Boeing Co. v. Paxton, 466 S.W.3d 831, 841 (Tex. 2015).  You state the city competes with other entities to obtain donations for funding. The city states it has specific marketplace interests in the submitted information and relies on donations to fund several library programs.  Further, you assert disclosure of the information at issue would provide other entities access to a list of all the donors with whom the city has cultivated relationships.  You claim release of the information at issue would be detrimental to the city's competitive advantage in seeking donations.  After review of the information at issue and consideration of the arguments, we find the city has established the release of the information we indicated would give advantage to a competitor or bidder.  Accordingly, the city may withhold the information we indicated under section 552.104(a) of the Government Code.  However, we find the city failed to establish the release of the remaining information at issue would give advantage to a competitor or bidder.  Thus, we conclude the remaining information at issue may not be withheld under section 552.104(a) of the Government Code.  The city must release the remaining information.
The Texas Attorney General sure got fooled.

Now, as we discuss Drag Queen Story Hour funding and how to FOIA libraries for information, and how libraries are letting pedophiles read to children, keep in mind that not only does the American Library Association actively support libraries in spreading Drag Queen Story Time throughout America (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, etc.), but at the same time it actively attacks any and all watchdogs, an ALA trait, calling them "censors"—and it makes no difference if your library allows registered sex offender pedophiles to read to children like at the Houston Public Library that's blocking FOIA requests—and ALA's "Office for Intellectual Freedom" even used "National Library Week" to launch this attack as well:

And don't think people aren't noticing:

See also:


Today I sent a letter to the Texas Attorney General to attempt to counteract the library's latest effort to continue to hide its malfeasance from the public.  Here it is:

URL of this page:

On Twitter: 
@ALALibrary @HouLibraryFdn @HoustonLibrary @NFOIC @OIF @TXAG @_YvonneBurton

Friday, April 5, 2019

The Un-American Library Association Shills For Illegal Aliens

The antisemitic leader Loida Garcia-Febo of the so-called 'American' Library Association has announced ALA will now support illegal aliens being counted in the US Census.

Yes, libraries should and will help Americans comply with the US Census; they call it #CountOnLibraries.

But ALA has gone further to directly support illegal aliens being counted in the US Census:

Counting illegal aliens in the US Census has absolutely nothing to do with libraries nor librarianship.  Zero.  Immigration experts have even noted this, for example, Mark Krikorian, Center for Immigration Studies, asks, "What's this have to do with libraries?":

Here from the amicus brief is the entirety of anything having to do with libraries, but it's just positioning, it's not even legal argument, it's just speculative, and it pertains to what services libraries should and do provide citizens and has absolutely nothing to do with libraries specifically:
Libraries nationwide similarly provide access to census data through activities such as data-user trainings and by referring researchers, students, businesses, government agencies, and community organizations to census products. Librarians can feel confident in the integrity and quality of census data in large part because of the layers of constitutional, statutory, and regulatory protections that safeguard the accuracy and integrity of that data. But the addition of the citizenship question violates those critical protections, and thus threatens to undermine professional confidence in the continued reliability and utility of that data—public confidence that, once lost, would be very difficult to regain.
That's the entirety of the library-related argument in the amicus brief.

Similarly, watch the antisemitic President of ALA, Loida Garcia-Febo, read a prepared speech about ALA's involvement in ensuring illegal aliens get counted in the US Census, a massive form of voter fraud at a minimum, and she even does it in Spanish!  It's an advertisement for librarianship, for what libraries do and should do, and for her own "Strong Libraries = Strong Communities" presidential initiative.  She wants a "complete count" or an "inclusive count" because, she says, "libraries serve everyone," need funding, and promote "equity," a destructive ideology.  Even if libraries are useful for illegal aliens, even if a "complete count" is a euphemism for counting illegal aliens in the US Census, similar to "all votes count," she never explains what about counting illegal aliens in the census of US citizens has anything to do with libraries, other than cute generalities that libraries serve everyone, nor why ALA should file an amicus brief with the US Supreme Court on this issue.  Remember, a former leader of ALA, Judith Krug, told the New York Times she wished a Florida librarian would have followed library patron privacy laws instead of turning in to the police one of the 9/11 terrorists.  And here's ALA back at it again defending more illegal aliens who include terrorists:

Librarians, members of ALA, why is your library association spending money on something completely unrelated to libraries?  Is it using you to raise funds for causes supporting illegal aliens over Americans?  Is it the "American" Library Association?

It appears individuals use ALA resources to promote their own personal, political goals—again.

I want to know how much ALA spent on this latest political activism having nothing to do with libraries.  ALA talks about the "digital divide" then charges librarians to read or view its resources.  How much money was spent instead on filing an amicus brief in the US Supreme Court?  Could it have paid for free access to online training for librarians?

I hereby call on ALA to release that information.  Since we all know it will not, I am asking ALA insiders to collect the data then send it to me privately and confidentially at SafeLibraries @ so that I may publish it for everyone's benefit.  ALA believes in transparency, right?

The Un-American Library Association is now the Illegal Alien Library Association.

By the way, I signed up for a newsletter about ALA's involvement in the 2020 Census—for the sixth time ALA will attend this antisemitic event.  After signing up, I was brought to a page announcing ALA will again attend the antisemitic event.  The hate never dies at ALA, and this antisemitic group is the organization seeking to force illegal aliens to be counted in the US Census.


This publication is already getting a positive reception, including:

URL of this page:

On Twitter: 
@ALAlibrary @LoidaGarciaFebo @MarkSKrikorian @USCensusBureau