Letters to the Editor

To the editor,

One does not admire the person who attends the Community Picnic and spits in the spaghetti sauce. It reminds us of the pesky kid we all knew who would play Monopoly until it was clear that winning was not a possibility for him, and who would violently upend the board sending the game pieces tumbling to the ground and run home, crying.

The Dayton Library opened in October of 1937, the same year as San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge and Mount Hood's Timberline Lodge For 86 years, thousands of Columbia County men and women and boys and girls have made active use of the information stored within, objective information offered freely; Citizens discovered needed information, found new worlds to explore, and had a safe place where each could pursue the right every American citizen is guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: the right to choose what one reads in a non-judgmental space, a special place unlike any other. A public library is not a place for covert agendas, personal or political: it is a place for personal exploration.

There was a reason millionaire Andrew Carnegie spent millions of his fortunes on 2,500 public libraries, believing that working people could acquire knowledge to improve themselves. To this day, many of his libraries exist across the country, places individuals can seek essential information about the people they want to be, the careers they want to pursue, the authors they want to experience. No one tells them what they can or cannot read.

What arrogance, what unmitigated nerve to think that one person, particularly someone lacking educational or literary credentials, has the right to shut down our beloved library, to set the rules by which we must abide, to seed discord by using the shabby, bugaboo phrase "protect the children" in an attempt to tear down a community resource that for decades has actually served children, that freely offering more local resources of all kinds than any agency in Dayton. Shame!

In all my years as an educator, I suspect most children want to read about elephants or pink ponies, about steamboats or Disney heroines and I laugh at the vision of a kid dashing into the library looking for a sex book! How silly an image that is! And any teenager who wants graphic knowledge about the way the body works, has such information resting in hand, a device that for good or bad controls so much of our lives.

To cut to the chase: please take your tawdry and trivial political complaints elsewhere (perhaps the moon!) and leave our library to function as it has for 86 years. We have more important issues which deserve our focus: a community pool, for instance--and what a waste of our community resources having to spend time, money and energy dealing with the division sewn for your cheap and personal agenda.

Dave Campbell

Dayton,Wash.

To the editor,

I was a CCRLD librarian for seven years, and a Trustee for two before I moved. I adore books, I love them so much I have a Bachelor's degree in Literature, moonlighted as a writer for several small press fiction publishers for well over five years, and am now almost done with my Master's degree in Humanities Education. Libraries have always been a part of my personal and professional life, and I owe much to upstanding librarians who helped me find books in all sectors of the library when I wanted them.

I share this because I want what I say to be understood as coming from someone who wholeheartedly believes libraries can be beautiful, wonderful institutions that serve their communities with integrity and honor.

So, understand the gravity of this when I say that in the last nine years I have yet to see the CCRLD and the Board of Trustees treat their community with honor and behave with the integrity and good character their profession implies. They were given multiple opportunities by various community members to rectify the situation--and completely, utterly failed to do so. These questionable books are only the latest in a long string of issues and gross failures I have witnessed since I resigned my position as YA services librarian in 2014. In the furor over the books, people have forgotten the concerns with hiring practices, surveillance footage, public records issues, professional conduct of employees (or lack thereof), and the budget.

As such, this is not merely about banning or not banning books. (For everyone looking at the books, I encourage you to read into obscenity laws before getting your knickers in a twist. Obscene material--which is undoubtedly being published for ALL ages--is not, nor has ever been implied to be protected under the First Amendment, and especially not for minors. Cornell University's Legal Information Institute has an exceptional resource on this issue.)

This argument is about how best to address the big picture issue of a tone-deaf Board who repeatedly disrespects their constituents when the respectful option of moving the books would have taken a mere two hours to do, a library that is grossly overfunded for the size of community and in violation of all financial promises they made to the community in 2008, and endemic hiring and professional conduct issues that have never been adequately resolved.

When we stop getting hung up on the surface-level symptoms and focus on the roots, the question then becomes, how do we resolve the issues? And furthermore, how do we resolve them knowing full well that all the half-baked attempts of the past have only resulted in more mess?

I am an artist, and I will leave you with this: we all love it when a work comes together seamlessly the first time. However, that's the rarity--most artworks are works in progress, or worse...and there is a point, when the flaws begin to overtake the progress, that the work becomes a mere salvage operation. At that moment, the artist can choose to keep working, hoping that with all their might and skill the art may yet turn out. And, they may be lucky; a pretty or mediocre work MAY be born out of the mess. But far more often? The work must be scrapped in entirety, canvas bogged down with too many layers of paint, and the ideas must be repositioned on the drawing board to be later forged anew with fresh materials, vision, and intent.... And a higher chance of success, at that.

Heather Stearns

Dixie, Wash.

To the editor,

I agree with the argument made by members of Congress to The Honorable Roslynn R. Mauskopf advocating that the cases being brought against Donald Trump be broadcast for all citizens to witness.

Generally criminal cases are not broadcast to the public, but the outcome of most criminal cases don't usually affect all citizens as this case will. And it is legal to override the current laws regarding broadcast restrictions if the Congress votes to do so.

Here is the pertinent part of the argument in that letter that I hope all Americans support: "Given the historic nature of the charges brought forth in these cases, it is hard to imagine a more powerful circumstance for televised proceedings. If the public is to fully accept the outcome, it will be vitally important for it to witness, as directly as possible, how the trials are conducted, the strength of the evidence adduced and the credibility of witnesses."

Please contact government officials and advocate for full coverage of all the trials.

Jeremy Street

Cheney, Wash.

To the editor,

Whatever your feelings on the library, the current situation provides a good lesson in basic civics. First, the library is a service that operates primarily through the coerced benevolence of the local taxpayers. It is not the obligation of any branch of government to supply the public with reading material. When the aforementioned taxpayers find that an institution is failing them, it is their civic duty to voice concern through the appropriate avenues, and to take further action if they're only met with abject unresponsiveness or outright defiance. To simply abandon your concern when it falls on deaf ears is a destructive act. Values are important–find yours, stake a claim, and get busy defending it.

I'm not offended that anyone thinks differently than me about the dissolution of the library. I just want them to think something, and not something anecdotal or nostalgic, but something that shows they've done a little soulful grappling with an idea that is more nuanced than "it's been there for 100 years" or "she's a horrible person" or "I need a printer". Maybe some sign of an inner scale that is capable of measuring good and evil, and the clarity to acknowledge the presence of both.

I find reprehensible the library's purchase and display of books that actively seek to inject sexuality, sexual deviance, and sexual mutilation into the minds of children. Their defense was even worse, short-roping a heavy anchor on a light boat with the absurdity of rereading the 1st Amendment as a positive right– a tangible obligation of the government. I'll vote "yes" to dissolve the library in November, not that you care, or should. But if you want to make an argument opposite, consider doing just that–making an argument. Baseless character attacks are only a sign that you don't have one.

Seth Murdock

Dayton, Wash.

To the editor,

I read with interest the articles in The, Seattle Times, and your newspaper, regarding the proposal to close the Dayton library due to its collection of books. I have worked for several decades for the King County Library System (among our nation's largest) as an attorney, foundation board member, and an interim Director. Rarely have I seen a proposal that has disturbed me so greatly concerning libraries.

Countless academic studies show that libraries give preschool and school-age children a tremendous advantage in their educational progress. They also provide your older users with entertainment, copying and Internet services, and educational resources.

There is a little question that not all library materials are appropriate for the youngest readers, but the selection depends not on the whims of dictators, but on the good judgment of their parents. Closing a library to all citizens because a few oppose the library materials selected by professionals is reprehensible.

I trust your citizens will recognize the harm that your library closure will do to your community. I also note that the proponent of the closure is attempting to market religious–oriented clothing from her own business to support of her cause. What a sad comment on our freedom of expression.

Stephen Smith

Mercer Island, Wash.