OPRA Request for Minutes, Forms, and Training

Dear Westfield Memorial Library Board of Directors (via Director Philip Israel):

OPRA Request:

This is a request for public records made under common law and the Open Public Records Act [OPRA] seeking the following information:

1)  Minutes of the 28 April 2016 Board of Trustees Meeting.

In short, please provide the minutes from the immediate past board meeting.

2)  Records of planning to file and filing forms entitled, “Request and Authorization for Records Disposal.”  Include related correspondence, notes, telephonic recordings, etc.  Here is an example blank form: http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/revenue/rms/pdf/DisposalForm11.pdf Include responses from the State of New Jersey.

In short, please provide the documents evidencing permission from the State of New Jersey to dispose of various public records, for example, permission to destroy an audio recording of the 28 May 2015 executive session.

3)  Records of planning to file and online filing of forms filed with Artemis (Records Retention and Disposition Management System): http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/revenue/rms/artemis.shtml  Include related correspondence, notes, telephonic recordings, etc.  Include responses from the State of New Jersey.

In short, please provide the online evidence showing permission from the State of New Jersey to dispose of various public records, for example, permission to destroy an audio recording of the 28 May 2015 executive session.

4)  Records of all conferences and all training provided over the past two years for librarians, library employees, library board trustees, and the library director where that conference/training was provided directly or indirectly by the American Library Association, the New Jersey Library Association, the New Jersey State Library, or other library conference/training providers, including correspondence/email, notes taken in handwriting or electronically by individuals, telephonic recordings, handouts, conference/training manuals, online training sources, permission slips, travel accommodations paid, fees and costs paid, airfare, car reimbursements, hotel stays, conference/training admission, meals, and other expenses involved in attending the conferences, etc.  Include presentations or reports written by librarians, library employees, library board trustees, and the library director after returning from the conferences/trainings where they recorded or shared their learnings at the conferences/trainings.  Exclude any conferences/training devoted solely to the workings of various machinery or software within the library, unless that conference/training includes legal aspects of software usage.  For example, training on how to use Internet filters may be excluded unless that training includes legal aspects pertaining to the use of Internet filters.

In short, please provide the who, what, when, where, subject matter, and complete training provided and notes taken of all training provided to librarians, library employees, library board trustees, and the library director by several leading library conference/training sources.  Include reports written by attendees to present to others that summarize what was learned.

Detailed Reasoning for OPRA Request:

Now I will go into detailed reasoning for this request.  

As you know an audio recording was made of the 28 May 2015 executive session meeting by the library board.  It was converted to minutes that were provided to the Union County Prosecutor’s Office [UCPO].  The next day I was informed by UCPO that, based on the minutes, no Open Public Meetings Act violation occurred.  Having previously told UCPO that a recording was made, I asked it to reconsider and to listen to the recording instead of just considering the minutes.  UCPO refused, responding only that it could not do that as the library board had destroyed the tape.

At the 28 April 2016 library board meeting I confirmed with the library that the UCPO claim that the recording was destroyed was accurate.

New Jersey law regarding the destruction of public records comprises audio recordings of executive sessions made by municipal bodies.  The law requires that audio recordings may not be destroyed until “80 days or until either summary or verbatim transcript have been approved as minutes, whichever is longer.”  Further, “to legally dispose of records, agencies must fill out and submit a Request and Authorization for Records Disposal form. County and local officials may submit requests on-line.”  Hyperlinks omitted.

Therefore, I am seeking evidence that such written or online forms were completed in compliance with the law.  I am seeking evidence that the State of New Jersey replied to such completed forms.

I am also seeking evidence of any training provided to librarians, library employees, library board trustees, and the library director by major library training providers at conferences or at dedicated trainings.  Said training would reveal if anyone received training on New Jersey’s records retention policies or such policies in general.  I am seeking all training information, not just training information pertaining only to the records retention policies, but I’m not interested in training solely about machinery or software usage, unless such training contains information about the legal usage of Internet filters.

Further, there is a book that makes clear library record retention is a serious matter not to be taken lightly by library boards and library directors and warning that violations are serious violations of state laws.  Since it is evident the library community has been aware of the seriousness of library record retention policies for decades since the book was published, there can be no legitimate excuse for not following state record retention laws.

I provide this detailed reasoning for the requested public records to make it clear the records I seek are public records, are legally required, are available to the public upon request, this request is not made frivolously or with any self-interest, and there is the potential for uncovering serious illegality if records were destroyed in violation of the law, particularly if that illegality was performed in furtherance of a violation of the Open Public Meetings Act and an effort to cover up such a violation.

Legal Guideposts If Needed:

There should be no need to seek legal counsel for compliance with this OPRA request.  I am hoping to get the requested public records without significant cost to the municipality and without your having to sink time and taxpayer money into seeking permission from an attorney, a costly intermediary that is not needed for this OPRA request.  Yes, redact out home phone numbers, home addresses, account numbers, personal email addresses if not used for library business, etc.  I am only seeking public information,  It is easy to redact or block any personal portions of such records.  It is a simple matter to look in various files and produce the simple information I request under the law.  It is public information.  If an insistence is made on draining taxpayer resources by engaging the services of an attorney to provide the public with public documents under the law that the library can provide without legal intervention, a step that is superfluous to obtaining the requested public records, then the following legal guideposts might help minimize the damage by providing a head start:

• N.J.S.A 47:3-15 et seq.:  http://www.nj.gov/state/dos_statutes-archives.shtml
• N.J.A.C. Title 15:3 et seq.:  http://www.lexisnexis.com/njoal/
• Records Retention and Disposition Schedule, Agency # M100000, Schedule # 009, 33pp, 28 September 2015:  http://www.nj.gov/treasury/revenue/rms/pdf/M100000_009.pdf
• New Jersey Records Manual:  http://www.nj.gov/treasury/revenue/rms/RecordsManual.shtml
• State of New Jersey, Department of the Treasury, Division of Revenue and Enterprise Services, Records Management Services (RMS):  http://www.nj.gov/treasury/revenue/rms/
• Artemis (Records Retention and Disposition Management System):  http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/revenue/rms/artemis.shtml
• Request and Authorization for Records Disposal form:  http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/revenue/rms/pdf/DisposalForm11.pdf
• Library Records: A Retention and Confidentiality Guide, by Shirley A. Wiegand, Libraries Unlimited, 1994, 243pp.
• And possibly N.J.S.A. 47:3-29:  Removal, Alteration or Destruction of Public Records with Malicious Intent

Information About the OPRA Requester and the OPRA Request:

I am a member of the news media and I will be reporting on the materials produced in response to this records request as part of my investigative reporting on public libraries locally and nationwide.  I have already published my first report on the Westfield Memorial Library: “Library Approves Unfiltered Computers in Children's Section” (http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2015/11/wml.html ).  For about fifteen years I regularly publish about library crimes including violations of open government laws.  I may make public any OPRA response as it may be in the public interest, both locally and nationally.  Therefore, please waive any fees that might otherwise pertain to OPRA requests.

I request the OPRA response be in electronic format and emailed directly or via attachment to me ( SafeLibraries@gmail.com ). 

To make things really easy, here is the OPRA statute:  http://www.state.nj.us/grc/act.html

OPRA requires a response time of seven business days.  If access to the records I am requesting will take longer, please contact me with information about when I might expect copies.

If you deny any or all of this request, please cite each specific exemption alleged to justify the refusal to release the public records and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.  Also, please provide all segregable portions of otherwise exempt material.

Suggestion/Offer:

I am a member of the American Library Association.  I recently became a member of the New Jersey Foundation for Open Government ( http://njfog.org ).  NJFOG provides training that has significantly enhanced my knowledge of open government rights.  Further, I am now a part of community of open government advocates who are now watching what I’m doing to expose open government violations and defend open government rights.  I highly suggest people at Westfield Memorial Library join NJFOG as it will help them learn about open government rights and regulations.  

Lastly, I have ordered a copy of the Shirley A. Wiegand book on library records.  I am hereby offering to lend it to anyone at the library, including library counsel.  It may guide the library board to stop the deleting of public records such as Internet browser histories that may help police solve crimes, including child p0rn0graphy viewing, until coming into compliance with New Jersey law.

Thank you for your consideration.

Dan Kleinman, Library Watchdog

SafeLibraries

1 May 2016

CC:  Professor Shirley A. Wiegand

        NJ Foundation for Open Government

URL of this page:  safelibraries.blogspot.com/2016/05/opra-request.html

On Twitter:  @ALALibrary @NewJerseyFOG @WMLNJ

Follow @SafeLibraries

Courtesy, Professionalism, Respect

Courtesy, professionalism, respect.  It's the motto of the New York Police Department.  It is good for public servants to observe those values.

Sometimes public servants have neither courtesy, professionalism, nor respect.  When such a public servant is a member of a public library board of trustees, it can be all the more shocking.

Interestingly, while a library board member exhibited none of those values to me, his library director exhibited all of them, and in such a case the contrast is particularly striking.

So I wrote a letter to the library director asking him to see if he could guide the library's board into being more professional.  I did not do this to be obnoxious in any way.  Rather, I am trying to find any means short of continuing litigation to get the library board to comply with the law, something it has not done for almost a year, and to do so as quickly as possible to minimize the financial pain to the community.

In that light, I bring to you my attempt to stop a library board from defying the law for almost a year, including continual new violations of the law, because so far there have been absolutely no consequences for breaking the law.  One of the laws involved is a civil rights law; these are not frivolous concerns.  And this is a library that broke the law so as to ensure children retain access to the unfiltered Internet in the children's section of the library, even while knowing children have accessed hardcore pornography.  I'm not sure my attempt will work, but at least I am making an effort to gently advise the board that if it continues to defy the law, consequences will continue to mount and perhaps grow so large that the municipality itself will face liability for failure to stop the lawlessness.

---

Dear Westfield Memorial Library Director Philip Israel,

I attended the Westfield Memorial Library Board of Trustees [the board] meeting yesterday on 25 February 2016.  At that meeting there were numerous possible violations of the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act [OPMA].  I am currently suing the board and its 2015 members individually for what I believe to be other violations of OPMA.  So now it is possible the board and its individual members are serial violators of OPMA.  It is possible a Court might consider ongoing violations as an aggravating factor when determining what remedies to apply.

Further, as the board has many new members, and as OPMA violations appear to me to be continuing unabated despite the present litigation, it is possible I may decide to amend the existing litigation to advise the Court of the possible ongoing violations and possible new defendants, namely, the new members of the board.

However, the real interest here is that the board complies with the law, not that I add new counts to an existing lawsuit with each new violation and each new board member.  The board’s complying with the law is in the interest of everyone, me, the board, the municipality, the Court, everyone.  So at this moment I’ll not add new counts and new defendants nor file any new cause of action.  But in exchange, the board needs to make an effort to comply with the law.

Here are violations I saw tonight.  First, the agenda did not list the executive session.  By law, the agenda must be provided “to the extent known,” and certainly the board knew it was going to have an executive session this evening, just like it knew it would discuss everything else on the agenda.  See NJS 10:4-8(d). Second, the public announcement of the executive session listed two reasons for the meeting, namely, personnel matters and litigation.  That violates the law.  For example, it may not just say litigation.  It must specify what litigation is being discussed.  See: http://ogtf.lpcnj.org/2012/2012213OK/rutgersMc.pdf

So the agenda listed “PUBLIC PARTICIPATION” then “ADJOURNMENT.”  I spoke at the public participation portion of the meeting, for example, warning a new library trustee that simply because a person challenged books does not automatically equate to censorship, as she had reflexively labelled it, portending a library trustee beholden to the American Library Association instead of acting in the public trust.  I also suggested that the dates and times of board meetings should be on the library’s electronic/online calendar as they used to be and on the web page dedicated to the board, not just hung on a sign in the library.  People look online for things these days.  Both suggestions seemed to be welcomed.  I sat down and everything appeared okay.

After I spoke, instead of adjourning per the agenda, the unlisted executive session was announced.  As I was leaving due to the closing of the meeting to the public, because I was aware the library likely should have listed the executive session on the agenda, I so stated that, to which one of the board members and a defendant in my existing lawsuit said to me, “public participation is closed,” meaning shut up and go away.  This is an aggravating factor to me of this latest OPMA violation and of previous ones as it evidences an atmosphere completely at odds with OPMA and no remorse for past violations of civil rights.  The board just violated OPMA again, I said the executive session likely should have been on the agenda in accordance with OPMA, and I was told to shut up, don’t tell us to follow the law.  That’s how I understood it.  I responded that it was unfriendly to say that as I was just advising them in respect of the law.  Then I left.  I was forced to make that comment after public participation had closed because the possible illegalities involving the agenda and the lack of specificity had occurred only after public participation had closed.  Was I to remain silent on yet more violations of civil rights under OPMA simply so I would not offend a bully board member?  Does OPMA require silence from the public when they witness lawlessness and it is not during the public participation portion of the meeting?  What goes on in the minds of board members who clearly show disdain for public participation and the law even in the face of litigation over that very law?

So here are issues for the board to address, and they should be addressed in public in compliance with OPMA. 1) The board needs to reverse its string of OPMA violations and begin to comply with the law.  Any negative consequences of OPMA litigation is the board’s fault for repeatedly failing to follow the law, not my fault for seeking to have the law enforced. If I do not see immediate improvement, I may consider amending my complaint to ask the Court to force compliance and include the new board members who are now possibly responsible for new OPMA violations, or I may bring a new action.  2) The board needs to be respectful of the public’s right to speak and not make snide remarks intended to tell someone to shut up and go away and don’t tell us to follow the law. Common courtesy should be enough to make that call.  But if that is too difficult for the various bullies on the board, at least consider that such actions might be considered as aggravating factors by any Court reviewing various possible and serial OPMA violations.  3) The board needs to correct past violations of the law, including those in my lawsuit: http://tinyurl.com/LibraryOPMA

I am going to continue attending board meetings at that library.  I am going to continue to expect compliance with the law and speak up at any time if I see violations of the law.  I am going to continue to write about noncompliance with the law.  Eventually the board will follow the law.  It would be best for everyone that it did so immediately on its own volition instead of having to be forced into it by application of the various remedies afforded in OPMA.  To the extent the board remains recalcitrant and drives up costs like legal fees that taxpayers ultimately pay, that will be the board’s doing, not mine.  I know American Library Association strategy is to fight tooth and nail to keep the public in the dark about how libraries break the law, even to the point of advising libraries to destroy evidence in violation of the law, and I know the board is already beholden to the American Library Association.  I know the American Library Association holds training sessions to teach librarians to use ad hominem argument to distract the public from a library’s own malfeasance.  If the board goes down the path of using lawyers to pound the public into submission while maintaining the illegality, that will be the board’s doing, not mine.  It would be best for the board to simply follow New Jersey’s law instead of Chicago’s American Library Association.  It’s going to end up doing that eventually anyway, so the sooner the better for everyone.

You may have noticed when the issue came up of the removal of the dozen or so drug and alcohol books from the youth section in respect of a mom’s challenge, I suggested applying the library’s book selection policy then advising the mom such books are within that policy.  So I am not there to complain about everything the board does and support every complainant.  Rather, the board in my view is now on a nearly year-long string of defying OPMA, and I have every right to seek enforcement of civil rights in such a case, in fact I have a First Amendment right to do so.

I thought you should know this and please forward to the board.

And while I am at it, I’m very impressed with your own professionalism as library director.  You are consistently excellent, even as board members make flip or rash statements about censorship or tell the public to shut up and go away, both exemplified by the American Library Association. Please try to help the board to come into compliance with the law, especially OPMA, and to act professionally as you do.  I’m not sure what it hopes to gain by its continuing defiance of the law that is about to span an entire year.

CC to Westfield Mayor and Town Council as two of the Council are involved in this matter and it might be time for the municipality to finally stop the board from acting outside the law, which the municipality was every right and duty to do, before potential liability grows to subsume the municipality as well.

CC to media and good government groups.

Dan

URL of this page: safelibraries.blogspot.com/2016/02/courtesy-professionalism-respect.html

On Twitter: @ALALibrary @NYPDnews @WMLNJ

Follow @SafeLibraries

Library Approves Unfiltered Computers in Children's Section

[UPDATED 22 MARCH 2016; SEE BELOW] In what may be a national first, a public library has approved the use of unfiltered computers in the children's section of the library.

The library policy is to allow unfiltered computers in the library section designed and designated for children.

I present the information released to the public as to the stated reasoning for allowing unfiltered computers in the children's section of the library.

The wording of this document and the manner in which is was created and adopted as policy may be used as a model by library associations nationwide for other public libraries to begin to remove Internet filtering from computers in the children sections of libraries.  Hence this local issue is of national interest.

Below are the words of and a graphic of the document I received from the library's director the day after I attended its board meeting on 19 November 2015; the document was read to the public in attendance:

Westfield Memorial Library

550 East Broad Street

Westfield, NJ 07090-2197

T: (908) 789-4090

F: (908) 789-0921

www.wmlnj.org

Recommendation of the Special Ad-Hoc Committee to

Examine the Use of Filtering Computers in the Children’s Section of the

Westfield Memorial Library

The protection of minors is taken very seriously by the library’s Board of Trustees and the staff of the Westfield Memorial Library.  When the complaint that a child was accessing inappropriate websites in the Children’s Section of the library was first reported the staff and board acted promptly and responsibly.  Within 60 days, filtering software was identified, purchased, staff trained in its use and it was installed on 50% of the computers in the Children’s Section.

Additionally, the library’s Internet Use Policy was updated.  The updated policy was posted at all computers in the Children’s Section, clearly indicating which computers are filtered.  Procedures were created so that parents now receive the policy when registering their children for library cards, or updating existing cards.

The library began compiling statistical data that recorded the number of searches on the filtered computers as well as the number of “hits” that were blocked.  From May — September, 2015 almost 56,000 searches were conducted.  20 of the 56,000 searches were blocked.  The 20 blocked searches were generated from only 13 different websites.  During the months of August and September no sites were blocked.

During this period the library received no additional requests from the Westfield community to filter additional computers.

The Special Ad-Hoc Committee to Examine the use of Filtering Computers in the Children’s Section of the Westfield Memorial Library recommends no additional changes at this time.  The committee further recommends that if additional Internet accessible computers are added to the Children’s Section that a 50% ratio of filtered and non-filtered computers be maintained.

Finally, the Committee recommends that this issue be reviewed annually.

Additionally the library will look into conducting a program for the public on Internet safety.

- - - End of Recommendation - - -

Graphic of
Special Ad-Hoc Committee Recommendation

For context, below is a computer in the children's section of the library, the computer is one of the 50% that are filtered, the notice provided by the library is seen on the bookcase over the top left of the computer screen (you'll have to click on the picture to get a larger view because the writing is too small and too wordy to be effective as signage), and a simple search for the word "playboy" resulted in the display of a number of naked women (I did this to test and report on the efficacy of the filter and it clearly failed; there were no children present or I would not have conducted the test):

Picture of filtered computer in children's section of library,
and the display of the Internet Access Policy.

NOTE ADDED 22 MARCH 2016:

I have filed a lawsuit against the library for its violation of civil rights as comprised in the New Jersey Open Public Meeting Act [OPMA].  Here are the legal documents so far:

• My Complaint: http://tinyurl.com/LibraryOPMA (84 pages)
• Defendants' Answer:  http://tinyurl.com/LibraryOPMAAnswerByWML (19 pages)
• My Reply:  http://tinyurl.com/LibraryOPMAReply (42 pages)

URL of this page:  safelibraries.blogspot.com/2015/11/wml.html

On Twitter:  @wmlnj

Follow @SafeLibraries

Westfield Mom Calls for Filters on All Children's Computers at Library

Westfield Mom Calls for Filters on 

All Children's Computers at Library

By JILL D'AMBROSIO

TAP into Westfield

August 25, 2015 at 9:27 PM

WESTFIELD, NJ – Colby Sheppard, a Westfield mom who said her 11 year-old son stumbled upon pornography on a computer in the children's section of the Westfield Memorial Library in January, plans to create an online petition this fall and drum up local support to install filters on all computers with internet access in the library’s children’s section.

Sheppard has lobbied the library board of trustees and the town council on the matter. In April, the library installed filters on two of the four computers in the children’s section, but Sheppard wants to have all children’s computers equipped with filters.

She hoped the board would revisit the issue at its meeting on Aug. 20, but the meeting was canceled, she said. The next board meeting is scheduled for Sept. 24 at 7:30 p.m. in the library’s meeting room.

Sheppard says she has met with resistance from library officials on the question of filters.

“They’ve got their heels really dug into this one,” she said.

....

Enough Is Enough, a non-partisan organization dedicated to internet safety for kids, recommends “a layered approach of monitoring, filtering, time limiting, safe search settings among other tools to protect children," according to its website, www.enough.org, "but remember that these tools are no substitute for parental and adult supervision and guidance online."

....

Dan Kleinman, who co-founded SafeLibraries, a New Jesrey [sic] watchdog group, said that the Westfield library “is acting outside the law by allowing in porn and child porn despite the law.”

“Library law creates libraries for educational and recreational purposes for the use and benefit of the citizens. In other words, there are actual limits on what libraries can do,” Kleinman said. “They cannot do anything outside the law that created them. Porn is neither for the use nor benefit of the citizens, actually it harms the citizens, so it falls outside the law that created libraries. Municipal governments have the right and duty to stop libraries from acting outside the law, and they can do so without violating a library's veil of autonomy.”

....

Source of above excerpts: TAP into Westfield (link) ©TAPinto.net 2015; hyperlinks in original, emphasis mine, original graphic omitted.

URL of this page: http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2015/08/westfield-mom.html

On Twitter: @ALALibrary @BarbStripling @EIETweets @OIF @TownOfWestfield @WestfieldTAP @WMLNJ

Follow @SafeLibraries

Dear Clergy

Dear Clergy:

The town local library allows children access to Internet pornography in the children's section of the library despite the law and the government is doing nothing to stop it.  As one of the houses of worship in or near town,  please get involved in stopping the library from violating the law or getting the government to stop the lawlessness.  Library boards may legally do anything necessary and proper for libraries under the law, but Internet pornography is neither.  Nor is there any use and benefit of Internet porn in public libraries.  Municipalities should not allow lawlessness to fester.  An eleven year old child already saw porn in the children's section and the library's response was to filter only two of the four computers then blame the child when the mom asked why only two.

The best way I know to get involved is to speak up.  To get educated on the issues before speaking up, contact me for private discussion or for a public talk on the issue.  I've been studying this issue for about fifteen years.  The library trustees are well trained in misleading the community so getting a primer from me before they try to mislead you that there's a First Amendment right to porn in public libraries and Internet filters don't work would really help people be more effective in demanding an end to the lawlessness.

Contact me, Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries@gmail.com.  I'm with SafeLibraries in Chatham, NJ, and would be really happy to speak with anyone or give talks on the topics to congregants.  I know it's a topic no one really wants to discuss but if we don't, more children will see more Internet porn in the children's section of the town's public library.  Can you believe I even have to say this?

I got your names and emails from [local media].

Your involvement may help to protect children from Internet pornography being made available by the [Town] Public Library despite the law.  Many people are needed to bring pressure on the library and on the government to end the lawlessness.  I'm making you aware of the situation and offering to provide an education.  No charge.

Here is what the mother of the victim had to say in the local paper, reprinted by me for your convenience: "Pornography Versus Library Bill of Rights" http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2015/04/library-bill-of-rights.html

Here is a survey flyer I distributed during the town fair and posted throughout the downtown area that summarizes the issues and please consider posting this at your own location: http://www.pinterest.com/pin/162622236521532399/ [Contact me for help adapting this to your own community.  It is also pictured top right.  Click to see a larger version.  And I have more suggested flyers.]

Thank you so much for considering this.  I hope to hear from you as soon as possible.  The sooner the better for the children, literally.

Thanks again.

Dan Kleinman
SafeLibraries
SafeLibraries@gmail.com

CC: Local media.

URL of this sample letter to send to clergy in your own communities:
tinyurl.com/DearClergy

On Social Media: +SafeLibraries

Follow @SafeLibraries

Pornography Versus Library Bill of Rights, by Colby Sheppard, Westfield Leader, 9 April 2015

Pornography Versus Library Bill of Rights

Imagine the shock to learn the children’s computers in the Westfield Memorial Library have no pornography filters.  Upon speaking to other parents they had the same reaction, “I thought there were filters!”  No, not the case.

The Westfield Memorial Library is one of the only area libraries to not have filters on the computers with Internet access in the children’s department.

In February, the library begrudgingly agreed to put filters on only two of the four computers in the children’s section.  Allowing pornography on any public library computer is illegal in accordance to New Jersey state law.  Also, the U.S. Supreme Court says blocking pornography from public libraries does not violate the First Amendment.  Why then should the citizens of Westfield settle for filtering only two of four children’s computers instead of filtering all computers in accordance with the law?

I learned the library eschews N.J. law and the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, by choosing to follow the “Library Bill of Rights” of the American Library Association.  (www.wmlnj.org/About/Internet%20Use%20Policy.asp)  Result?  Your child has access to hard-core pornography.

Westfield Memorial Library; Internet Use Policy
wmlnj.org/About/Internet%20Use%20Policy.asp

Is this what we want for the children of Westfield?  It should be Westfield’s duty to ensure the library complies with the law, not the American Library Association.  Is Westfield living up to that duty?

The library’s “mission statement” defines the library as “the community’s destination for discovery and ideas – engages minds, entertains spirits, and facilitates lifelong learning for people of all ages.”  What part of pornography does any of that?  What “ideas” should we be getting from watching sex trafficking victims having the worst days of their lives broadcast on library computers?  Pornography goes against the very mission of the library, it’s about time the library starts complying with its own mission statement.  It’s time we get involved and restore common sense and the law.

I’ll be attending city and library meetings to push for compliance with the law that makes pornography illegal in all N.J. libraries.

United States v. American Library Association, 539 US 194 (2003)
laws.findlaw.com/us/539/194.html

I do not want any kid to see hard-core pornography in the library, and I’m asking those who agree to come out to the meetings as well and speak up.  Also, speak up by writing a letter to the library board and let them know your views.  The library should listen to the citizens of Westfield, N.J. law, and the U.S. Supreme Court, not to the American Library Association.  We just need to let our town and our library know we’re awake now and we’re going to speak up for our community.  It might take time, but we’ll get there.

Please join me in advocating for this positive change.

Colby Sheppard

Westfield

NJ law (NJS 40:54-12 [link]) permits library boards to
"do all things necessary and proper" to run libraries.
US v. ALA says, "public libraries have traditionally
excluded pornographic material...." Clearly, Internet
porn is not "necessary and proper." So allowing
Internet porn is acting outside the law. NJ library
boards have no power to exceed the law; municipal
bodies must act to stop the lawlessness.

Source:

• "Pornography Versus Library Bill of Rights," by Colby Sheppard, Westfield Leader (NJ), 9 April 2015, hyperlink added.
• Reprinted with permission.  All graphics/captions were created by SafeLibraries and are not part of the original publication.

URL of this page: safelibraries.blogspot.com/2015/04/library-bill-of-rights.html

On Social Media: @ALALibrary +TownOfWestfield @TownOfWestfield @wmlnj

Follow @SafeLibraries