Letters to the Editor

To the editor,

In the past two weeks I have had conversations, seen, and heard comments and have been in discussions regarding the library meeting of February 27. I believe clarity is more important than agreement and that sometimes clarity leads to agreement. One comment "It is too bad that we would lose state money if we banned books" is an unfounded concern. First, there is no state money in our library budget. Second most books are 'banned' every time an order is made to purchase materials. There is only so much money and so much room, therefore, books and other library materials must be limited. In the process of choosing books, some are arbitrarily 'banned.' I heard from two people who requested "The Real Anthony Fauci" by Robert Kennedy Jr. However, the book was not purchased.

I read the comment that the book, "What's the T" had been moved after concerned citizens at an earlier meeting seemed to agree it was the best plan. However, the book was only moved several feet and remained in the lower children/youth level. I believe that the expectation was it would be moved upstairs to the adult library area.

It was pointed out that not one person speaking against the book at the February 27 meeting had read the book. Of course, I had to read it to appeal. If the question had been "How many had read the book's chapter in question or portions of that chapter" most of the hands would have gone up. Portions were published in the newspaper and passed throughout the community by other means.

Those who wish the book to be removed from our library have been accused of being 'hateful' toward 'those not like us.' That is a very broad brush and could assume that the LGBTQ+ community approves of pornography for children. In fact, on Zoom at the February meeting was a listener who identified as 'Gays against pornography.' It is my opinion that it does not represent transgenders in the best light. Certainly not all transgenders are drag queens. The author of the book, Joy Dawson, stated that she works as a drag queen impersonating both Melania Trump and the Angel Gabriel. The later mocking God, an afront to Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike.

I have been asked "How did the library get such a large budget." The 2023 library budget of $490,000 is funded from a county/city levy netting roughly $472,600. The remainder is from miscellaneous income. To reach this budget amount, a rural library district was formed in 2005 by a favorable vote of a majority of those living in the county.

In 2008 the Dayton City council voted to place a proposal on the ballot to annex the city into the rural library district which would result in turning the deed to the library building over to the rural district and taxing the city residents at the same rate as those living in the county. The city citizens voted in favor in 2009. Thus, at this point almost $100,000 of the tax money dedicated to the library comes from city residents and $372,700 from county taxpayers.

At the Feb 27 meeting, prior to the decision regarding the book appeal, we listened to a board training program led by Dr. Tamara Meredith on "Intellectual Freedom in Public Libraries". Her presentation included the fact that just moving a book to a section of the library when the author suggested it was for a different age group is a form of censorship. We learned that the book author determines the age group. Must we heed the author's opinion? Dr. Meredith 'taught' us that there is "No right nor wrong; only your right and my right". That is a recent teaching and upends thousands of years when The Ten Commandments seemed to work. I will agree my clarity and your clarity may not be the same but with discussion we may agree or decide we cannot agree. We won't BOTH be right. She also mentioned that libraries of 15 to 20 years ago purchased books that represented their communities. However, the trend now is that it is no longer necessary to be concerned about the community standards. It is more important to promote 'equity.' This is a teaching that upends almost 250 years of 'equality'. Equity targets those most in need and dedicates resources heavily to that group. Equity works well in families, churches, and small communities where we can SEE who needs our help. When someone 'at the top' determines who is in need, it does not work. For example, those who do not even know all 'red heads' in the nation may determine that they are in the minority and need some type of assistance when in fact, most may not. Meredith pointed out that there are certain people in the community that typically complain. Among them are 'parents' who protest materials. That leads me to the reason I spoke up in the first place. . . the children. Children are curious. They should be curious, that is how they learn. But that curiosity often leads them to 'the edge.' They need to be guided away from things that may harm them.

Dr. Meredith's final words to the Library Board of Directors were that the 'most important role of the board is to be a trusted organization.' In fact, that is also the mission of the Dayton Library Board "To develop the trust of the community." It is not entirely clear how we got where we are at this point. However, one thing that is very clear, "a house divided against itself will not stand."

Marcene Hendrickson

Dayton, Wash.

To the editor,

Thanks for the laugh. In a recent letter, a reader related some of the happenings at the February 29 (sic), 2023 Library Board meeting. Specifically, what apparently amused the letter-writer was when the chairperson allowed comments but only from those who had "actually read the book;" and there was no reply. The inference was apparently that no one who expressed concerns about the book in question had actually, read it. That may not be the case. It is possible that some had read the book and already, "said their piece." It may also be that others had read portions of the book, including excerpts such as the one referenced by Board member Chuck Beleny. Many portions of "What's the T?" can be found on line. Is it possible that one could come to a very well-informed opinion by considering a representative sampling of the book along with the observations of others such as children's' mental health experts who warn against the harm such graphic materials can do to the developing mind. By analogy: does a person need to ingest the entire gallon of antifreeze to realize it's harmful?

If the only persons allowed to express an opinion are those who have a complete, first-hand knowledge of the subject matter, life would be different in so many ways. Consider how quiet the public conversation would be if people could comment on government or political issues only if they had actually, read our Nation's founding documents including the Constitution. And when it comes to the topic of "trans-ideology," the only people we should be listening to are those who have gone through the "trans" process, including de-transitioning! After all, they are the only ones who have lived through the complete process. From cover-to-cover, as it were. To limit comments only to those who have "read the book" could be seen as a form of censorship (of thought and expression). And I thought "we" are called to oppose such restrictions.

Thomas Utt

Dayton, Wash.