MY TURN: A response to Tim Plass

In a recent My Turn column, Community Library Network Trustee Plass responded to my email requesting information about the 140 titles sequestered from the Community Library Network (CLN) collection for review since December 2024.

He said three policies can address my questions: the Material Withdrawal and Reconsideration Policy, the Materials Selection and Acquisition Policy, and the Mature Content Collection Policy.

I read all three. None answered my questions.

They were straightforward: 

• What triggered this review? 

• Who requested it? 

• What policy governs the process? 

• What criteria determined which titles were selected — specifically, was the presence of LGBTQ+ characters grounds for review? 

• What is the timeline? The books have been removed for roughly 18 months. 

• Will they remain available while under review? 

• How are patrons being informed about the review’s status?

Trustee Plass cited policy stating that CLN “shall not promote, give, or make available material harmful to minors.” The policy states that the library will take reasonable steps to restrict minors’ access and to relocate harmful materials to the Mature Content Collection.

But that does not address my question.

There are more than 133,000 books in the CLN collection. I asked about a specific set — the 140 removed from circulation.

Plass argues that staff have a duty to relocate harmful material. However, Idaho’s HB 710 leaves identifying potentially harmful materials to parents or guardians. Trustee Plass appears to suggest staff should proactively search the shelves. If so, the public deserves to know how that process works.

If the board directed such a review, when did that occur? I attend nearly every board meeting. I do not recall it as an action item, nor does it appear in the minutes.

Why these 140 titles?

When I asked about the criteria, Plass cited Idaho Code 18-1517B(a) and (b), defining sexually explicit material. If staff are searching for such material, a reasonable question follows: why has "Fifty Shades of Grey" not been pulled?

I have never read it — it is not a genre I enjoy — but it remains available, and minors with full-access cards can check them out. According to CLN data, the parents of 89% of minors choose that level of access.

Meanwhile, "The Firekeeper’s Daughter," a young adult novel, has been removed and locked away. I have read it. In a 494-page book, there is one brief, non-graphic scene of consensual sex between adults. It also addresses drug use, but within a story in which the protagonist works with the FBI to stop drug trafficking on her reservation.

Why is this book under review while Fifty Shades of Grey remains available?

Then there is the Mature Content Room. In January 2025, the Post Falls Library created a locked room. It sits dark and empty. The 140 titles have been sequestered for well over a year, yet none are there.

When I asked again about the selection criteria, Trustee Plass referred me to the Idaho Code. But the law requires a book to be evaluated as a whole, not judged by isolated pages. To be harmful, a work must appeal to prurient interest in its entirety.

A single brief, non-graphic scene in a 494-page novel does not meet that standard.

Public libraries belong to the communities that fund them. The public deserves a clear explanation of the decision to remove books and the standards applied.

Right now, 140 titles remain off the shelves, and the community still has no clear answers. In a public library system, decisions about access should never happen in the dark.

• • •

Michelle Lippert is a Post Falls resident.