Funding decision for Fairhope Public Library postponed by APLS
The Fairhope Public Library is currently without state aid, as the Alabama Public Library Service (APLS) board has tabled a decision on whether to restore or permanently revoke funding for the library. This decision comes amidst a heated debate over what constitutes censorship in the library near me.
At the heart of the dispute is the definition of 'sexually explicit' material. According to APLS, this definition includes even brief descriptions of nudity. However, Fairhope Library Board Chair Randal Wright argues that local government institutions, such as library boards or municipal authorities, typically have the authority to define such material according to legal standards and community norms.
John Wahl, APLS Chairman, expressed a preference for not making a 'knee-jerk reaction' regarding the library's funding. He argued that deciding whether a book is obscene is not censorship, but making it illegal would be. However, board member Ron Snider disagreed, stating that deciding which books are obscene in Fairhope, Birmingham, or Ashland, Alabama, by the APLS board is censorship. Snider also criticized his fellow board members for potentially becoming a 'board of censorship.'
The Fairhope Library Board's review of challenged books considered whether they 'appeal to the prurient interest' and found none of the books met that standard. Seven of the 14 challenged books were still moved by the library board, according to Wright.
Elizabeth Williams, leader of Read Freely Baldwin County, supported the Fairhope Library Board's stance, stating that the APLS board's definition of 'sexually explicit' material is not binding on libraries. Williams also mentioned that every legal expert they've consulted says the memo sent out by APLS in May is non-binding.
Minton argued that librarians deciding whether to include a book in their library is a form of censorship. John Wahl countered this by asserting that the Fairhope Library board has the right to set its own definition of sexually explicit material. Randal Wright further argued that moving books from their intended audience is a form of censorship.
The discussion between the boards involved passionate arguments, with no clear resolution in sight. Board member Ron Snider made a motion to restore Fairhope's funding, but no one seconded it. The future of the Fairhope Public Library hangs in the balance, with the potential for state aid violation looming due to the ongoing debate.
