More Bad Decisions on Books from the ImagineIF Library Board
Last week’s ImagineIF Libraries board meeting was a doozy. Not only did library trustees violate two of the library policies that they approved a few months ago, they decided to segregate a book on antiracism by placing it on a separate shelf during Banned Books Week.
Let us say that again. If you want to access the book Not My Idea: A Book About Whiteness, which helps children understand the problem of racism in America, you will need to look for it on a separate shelf which currently has no other books on it.
This decision is another example of interference, overreach, and incompetence by pro-censorship library trustees who are appointed by the Flathead County Commissioners.
What can you do?
This situation is alarming because the trustees are attempting to control access to books, which is not under their authority (see details below). They are also using their positions to spread misinformation about racism in America and efforts to end it.
We are asking you to push back against this situation with two simple actions:
1. Write a letter to the editor at the Flathead Beacon or the Daily Inter Lake. Local officials need to see that community members reject censorship and the trustees’ actions. See information below that can help you write your email.
2. Send an email to the library trustees at librarytrustees@imagineiflibraries.org.
For more information on the decision, you can read articles by the Flathead Beacon and the Daily Inter Lake. Keep reading for our reaction to this situation.
Book challenge for Not My Idea: A Book About Whiteness
The book Not My Idea: A Book About Whiteness by Anastasia Higginbotham was challenged by a parent in the Flathead Valley who felt that the book was “overtly racist” and “creates shame and condemnation in children.” (You can read the book for free right here.)
Library staff members unanimously recommended keeping the book in the collection for many reasons, including “customer demand and interest, critical reviews, presentation and readability, and provid[ing] an alternative or opposing perspective on a topic or issue.” Their conclusion is that the book does not meet any of the criteria used to remove a book, and it seems to be in demand by patrons.
Reviews of this book make it clear that it was written by a parent who is trying to explain difficult topics like divorce, death, racism, and sex to children. You can read praise and criticism of this book on the author’s website.
Public comments
If you’d like to listen to the entire meeting, a recording is available here, at the end of the list of meeting documents. We have provided timestamps at the end of this post so you can jump to the parts of the meeting that discuss the book challenge.
Only one person spoke in favor of removing the book from the collection, which was Trish Pandina, who has been associated with the local pro-militia group Flathead Liberty Coalition and ran for the Kalispell Public Schools board of trustees as an anti-mask advocate. All other public comments were in favor of keeping the book in the collection, and many expressed shock that trustees were considering censorship.
“What I see in all of you wanting to ban this book is that you are afraid,” said Christina Larsen. “I am not afraid. My child is not afraid. We are brave enough to read this book. We have no problem with this.”
Trustee comments
It is important to recognize that none of the current trustees were placed on the library board for their experience with libraries, because they have none. Knowing that, it is still a surprise that their comments do not support best practices for libraries, the First Amendment freedom to access information, or the ImagineIF Library policies that they approved.
This book was intended for parents to help children understand some of the frightening messages that are in the media around racism, racial profiling by police, and shootings of unarmed Black people. The book provides important context and information about racism in America.
David Ingram, who has no background with libraries or child development, started the discussion on the book challenge by falsely claiming that Not My Idea was “totally inappropriate for the intended audience,” “indoctrinational material,” “a potential threat to the safety and tranquility of our patrons and staff,” and “borders on hate speech.” Based on this opinion of the book material, he suggested hiding the book and making it available only upon request. He even went so far as recommending that the book should be placed under video surveillance, dubiously claiming that this would be a “deterrent from damage or theft.” In reality, this would be an invasion of library patrons’ privacy.
Director Ashley Cummins’ immediate response was, “If we are going to sequester materials that someone finds inappropriate, we do not have a desk or shelf large enough... I think this opens up a can of worms that you are not prepared to deal with.”
Government interference
Heidi Roedel and Carmen Cuthbertson mentioned several times during the discussion that they believed children should be able to roam the library without supervision from adults and never encounter materials that their parents found objectionable. This misunderstanding of the library mission directly violates library policy. The policy reads, “ImagineIF Libraries does not act In Loco Parentis [in the place of a parent], and as such, responsibility for materials selected and read by children and adolescents rests with their parent or legal guardians.”
It is very interesting to see trustees who have supported versions of the Covid denial motto “I do not coparent with the government” literally try to parent other adults and their children as government officials. Library officials do not have the right or responsibility to try to control what materials adults or children can access in the library. No amount of explanation from library staff made a difference to the trustees during the discussion.
Misunderstanding “whiteness”
Trustees Ingram, Cuthbertson, and Doug Adams also had misunderstandings about the content of Not My Idea. Criticism of antiracism material often centers on the idea that discussions about racism in the past or present create shame and guilt for white children.
This is a false narrative created to stifle conversations about the existence of racism in our nation and the deep and lasting harm it causes. “Whiteness” does not refer to the color of someone’s skin. It is another term for the insidious and pervasive concept of White supremacy, which claims that people who have a lighter skin color are superior to people who have darker skin tones. Recognizing the problems with White supremacy is something we should all strive for.
Whatever the trustees’ intention, their attempt to censor a book on “whiteness" is an attempt to stop families from having important discussions about racism, racial profiling, discrimination, the intergenerational impact of slavery, genocide, and other very real and toxic chapters in American history. The result is a denial of the daily experience of many people who live in Flathead County and America.
Conversations on these difficult topics are crucial and watching government officials try to shut them down is definitely a form of censorship. Addressing these issues is not easy, but it is up to parents, not library trustees, to choose how people can access information on these topics as they use public libraries.
As Christina Larsen said during public comments, “As parents, we are absolutely able to make judgements as to what is appropriate for our children. That is not your job. You are never going to be on the right side of history in banning books because you are not comfortable with them.”
If you would like to listen to the recording of the meeting, timestamps for the material related to the book challenge are below. You can use the bingo card we have provided to keep track of the misleading and harmful statements the library trustees made during the board meeting on September 22.
Timestamps for ImagineIF Library trustee meeting on September 22, 2022
Recording here, at the end of the list of meeting documents
Beginning of meeting to 13 minutes and 11 seconds - public comment from community members
Trustee comments start at the 1 hour, 18 minute mark.