Pine-Richland Superintendent Brian Miller called language proposed for a controversial library book policy that has been in the works for months “unnecessary and potentially harmful” during a nearly five-hour board meeting that once again turned heated and also included the school board rejecting a book for ninth graders.
Mr. Miller’s remarks came as the board prepares to do a first read next month on major changes to Policy 109.1, which lays out how library books are selected as well as the process to challenge books.
“I believe the language in this redline policy is unnecessary and potentially harmful,” Mr. Miller said. “I respect the authority of the board and the responsibility of the board to set policy. I believe there are simpler ways to make minor modifications to the existing policy, to clarify and improve language, to expand parental rights and protections and even to shift final authority of new or challenged materials to the school board.”
Monday’s meeting came just days after a contentious seven-hour meeting last week where school directors went section-by-section detailing changes they would like to see in the policy.
But it was part of an ongoing conversation that started in October 2023 when a group of residents pleaded with school directors to remove books from school libraries they deemed to be sexually explicit and obscene.
At the time, 14 books in the middle and high school library were challenged, launching a review of the novels as laid out in the policy. A 10-person committee of community members and district staff was compiled, which read the books in their entirety. Following the review, Mr. Miller in April said the books could remain in libraries.
Afterward, directors said they planned to tweak language in the policy. But last week, directors took steps in possibly implementing major changes to the document.
Changes largely focused on book challenges, acquisitions and parental rights.
Under the proposed changes, if a book is challenged it will be reviewed by the superintendent or designee who will decide if the material can remain in the school library. The complainant would have 21 days to challenge the decision. A final determination would be made by the school board. New materials coming into the library would also be placed on a 30-day public review before purchase with final approval coming from the superintendent.
And a new section details parental review, which states that “the ultimate determination of appropriateness for a minor lies with the parent/guardian.” It continues, saying families can direct librarians to have certain “materials not be assigned to or checked out or otherwise made available to their child.”
In addition to those changes, the policy also lays out definitions for classic art and literature, defined as having enduring value over multiple generations. Under the changes, classic art and literature that have pervasive vulgarity or explicit sexual content can remain in the library.
But Mr. Miller pushed back against that idea, suggesting it could exclude contemporary works of literature such as “The Nickel Boys” by Colson Whitehead because of its 2019 publication year.
Others, deemed to be classics, would remain.
“This policy could have two books with identical content, identical value, treated differently when the only meaningful difference is the publication date,” Mr. Miller said.
He added: “The library is not the classroom. Library books are optional. Windows and mirrors are important.”
Board members voted to not open the policy back up for discussion Monday. Instead, it will move on to first read where directors can propose additional changes.
Curriculum changes
In addition to discussing the library book policy the board also nixed the novel “Angel of Greenwood” as a core text in ninth grade. The novel, by Randi Pink, follows Isaiah Wilson and Angel Hill, whose lives change when a white mob storms the Black community of Greenwood, leaving the town destroyed and thousands of residents displaced.
The vote brings to the end months of pushback regarding use of the novel.
“Read the book, great story. … I don’t think it’s a very challenging book but I think it’s a great story,” board President Philip Morrissette said. “I’m really supportive of the book for the younger grades.”
Mr. Morrissette was joined by Directors Lisa Hillman, Marc Casciani, Christina Brussalis and Michael Wiethorn in voting against use of the book. Directors Joseph Cassidy, Ashley Fortier and Amy Terchick voted for it.
Mr. Miller asked that the board now “pause and step back and reflect before we determine what it is that needs to happen next” in regards to choosing another core text for ninth graders.
But the discussions caused pushback from several residents and students.
“I enjoy the freedom I have to read or not read any book in the library,” freshman Mark Corbin told the board. “Books are a form of art and art will always be at its very core political or controversial. If we removed every book somebody disagreed with, there would be no library. It seems to me the board is more focused on books than any other topic.”
He continued, saying that “almost no student in the school” wants to see books banned; rather the majority of students are more focused on their education and school safety.
The conversations, he said, are condescending “toward teenagers” because of the idea “that we somehow must protect them … that’s, of course, ludicrous.”
Elise Duckworth, a 17-year-old junior, said that following last week’s meeting she created a petition on change.org calling on the school board to respect librarians’ expertise in book selection. By Tuesday morning, the petition garnered more than 1,500 signatures.
Others, including Emily Robbibaro suggested that board members were taking on the policy for their own political gain. Ms. Robbibaro started her comments by detailing scenes from “Romeo and Juliet,” a core text in ninth grade English.
“The fact that you are using the children of Pine-Richland, my children, as political pawns is unconscionable,” Ms. Robbibaro said. “Pad your resume, build your political career, in a way that is not on the backs of my children.”
Erin Donahoe echoed those thoughts while also suggesting that board members were targeting books with LGBTQ+ themes.
“Whether you like it or not, your job is to enact policies that are in the interest of the student body as a whole,” Ms. Donahoe said. “Not just the kids who look or think or act like you.”
The board will consider the first reading of the policy during its February meeting.
First Published: January 14, 2025, 4:45 p.m.
Updated: January 15, 2025, 6:08 p.m.