School board finalizes change to book removal process

Removing a book or other resource from a library within the Gale-Ettrick-Trempealeau School District will now require a different process than the one that was used in recent months.

The G-E-T school board last Monday approved changing the policy for removing library media resources with a 7-0 vote. Board members Larry Moore and Todd Roessler were not at the meeting.

There was little board discussion on the policy changes prior to Monday’s vote, which take effect immediately.

After blowback and concerns over how an assembled committee first handled the proposed removal of “Queer Ducks”, a new policy on removal would push such a committee to the last step in the process.

Complaints over library materials will be forwarded to the principal of the building that hosts the resource of concern. The principal will need to make an initial decision on whether to remove the material unless the district administrator appoints someone else to make the decision or the district administrator decides on a different resolution procedure due to legal requirements such as Title IX.

The initial decision maker will need to dismiss the complaint, refer the complaint to a materials review committee or respond to the complaint, either granting or denying the request to remove the material.

The district administrator would need to approve the permanent removal of a resource if the initial decision maker chooses this option. 

A complainant will have 14 days after the decision to submit to the district office an appeal of the decision to dismiss or deny a removal request, and the district administrator will make a decision to affirm or reverse the dismissal of the complaint.

The district administrator can also choose to refer the material to a materials review committee as was done with the “Queer Ducks” book. This committee would be composed of a library media specialist, an administrator, two teachers and a parent or community member.

This is a different setup than the previous rule, which saw the materials resource committee as the first step in the process.

Malone previously told the Times that she agrees with moving the committee to later in the process.

“It makes it clear that if it gets to the point of that committee that it’s an open, public meeting that has to follow open meeting laws. They improved the form that people use to submit a concern, and one of the things I really like about that is it says if you have an issue, go to the person you have an issue with, whether it’s the librarian or building principal. Doesn’t it make sense to go to that person you have a concern or issue with and if you don’t like the result you move up the line,” Malone told the Times last month.

“That just makes so much sense to me. … I think it really improves the policy, and we didn’t dawdle. We got right on it.”