Board snubs Library Director
For
the third time in three meetings the Nippersink Library board rejected a
motion to give Director Kathryn Hausman a $1,000 for the fiscal year
2004-2005. The vote was 3-3 with one abstention: Don McCurry Greg Cryns and
Robert Johnson voted “yes”. Carol Hanson, Sandra Alldredge and Linda Geng
voted “no”. Adam Metz abstained.
The
board did vote to give all other staff members a raise at a previous meeting.
Resident
Sue Rekenthaler said, “I have attended most board meetings this year. Ever
since the board tried to oust Kathryn last year and failed, it has been very
hostile toward her. Don McCurry was very unprofessional and rude to Kathryn at
a public meeting earlier this year. Carol Hanson and Sandra Alldredge always
nitpick and criticize Kathryn’s director reports at the board meetings. It
is time to drop whatever grudge they have against her and get on with
business. Kathryn is a wonderful resource for our community and we should work
with her.”
In
other business, an attempt was made to resurrect the removal of the
“Happiness” DVD from the library shelves. Dave Ramsland of Spring Grove
made a long statement from the audience. Her read from the library policy
manual that says one of the library’s primary functions is to protect the
“freedom to view and read materials.”
“If
we ban the movie we will have a lot of problems,” said Ramsey. “Any movie
that deals with abortion or birth control, for example, will be challenged.
Parents have the responsibility to teach right and wrong to their own
children. I am glad we do not live in a totalitarian regime that limits our
freedom. We want to be free to make decisions for ourselves.” Ramsey said
that churches and other private organizations have the right to censor, but
that public libraries do not.
Another resident, Luke DiSilvestro, brought a review of the
movie from the internet. He said that the movie had a number of complaints
after it was released in 1998 regarding its sexual content. “The First
Amendment does not require a library to carry such movies,” said DiSilvestro.
“We should have the freedom to censor what comes into the blirary. There is
evidence that pornography is addictive and could be harmful.” DiSilvestro
said that there are other videos in the library he would like to see removed.
Donna
Dufer of Richmond spoke against censoring the video. “The ALA (American
Library Assocation) supports our freedom to view videos,” said Dufer. “If
you approve the ban of this video, the first book people will ask to be
removed will be the Bible.” Dufer said the movie rating system should not be
used by libraries to eliminate choices of videos. “As a parent it is my job
to take care of my children,” said Dufer.
Geng,
who brought the complaint about the video to the board just before she was
appointed as a trustee said, “The NC17 rating took the place of an “X”
rating.”
In
her report, Hausman said that 25 libraries in the Chicago Suburban area own
and lend out the “Happiness” movie. Hausman also emphasized that she is
not purchasing NC17 rated movies. “This movie is unrated,” said Hausman.
In
a very strong statement to the board, President Don McCurry expressed his
opinion about the banning issue. He said that the board’s job is to set
library policy; hire the director; and to watch the money. McCurry said the
day-to-day handling of materials is the director’s job. He encouraged the
creation of a Collection and Development policy. This was established to
create guidelines for all library materials including DVDs. Johnston is the
chairman.
Hausman
said, “At last night's meeting the trustees made some good decisions.
They voted to write a Collection Development Policy which will define our
community's needs and ensure that our collections meets those needs; they
discussed but chose not to ban a popular DVD that some people dislike; and
they affirmed the language in the Internet Access Policy that allows patrons
to have unfiltered access for legitimate research purposes. I was disappointed
that the trustees felt that the work of their director does not warrant a pay
increase of less than 2%. It would have suggested a willingness of the
board to work more closely with the director so that we can accomplish a great
deal during the next year. A raise in pay would signal a positive spirit
and a desire to move on."