From: Fikes, Cathy
To: Agenda Alerts
Subject: FW: 4/2/2024 Agenda Item No. 7: 24-219 Ordinance No. 4318 Date: Thursday, March 28, 2024 11:14:08 AM
From:
Paula Schaefer <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2024 8:39 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]>; Gates, Michael <[email protected]>; Parra, Eric (CM) <[email protected]> Subject: 4/2/2024 Agenda Item No. 7: 24-219 Ordinance No. 4318 Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, Council Members, City Attorney, Acting City Manager:
Have you read the draft minutes from the March 19, 2024 City Council meeting?
If you have,
your duty is to VOTE NO on this proposed Ordinance.
There are many definitional problems in the Ordinance that were discussed by Council Members Moser, Bolton, and Kalmick.
Not one of the proposed improvements or suggested
revisions, have been incorporated into this Ordinance,
nor have any of the questions raised
on March
19 been answered. As included here, it includes the bulk of the unenforceable vague and ridiculously overbroad language.
I can only suggest that the City Council rescind its decision to form this Board.
In the likelihood that you did not read my email sent prior to the March 19 meeting, due to the extraordinary number of emails that were sent regarding the proposed
RFP for privatising
the HB library, I am including portions of it here for your convenience.
I raise the following questions:
2.66.020 Definitions
The definition of “Children” is limited solely to age and librarians would consider there to be at least several groups included within all persons under the age of 18 years old.
The definitions
of “Sexual Content” and “Sexual Reference” should be limited to humans. If not, these definitions will include sexual content that discusses behavior of animals, insects, and plants. Surely, you do not want the Board to review all books contained within those subject areas, do you?
There is no definition of parent or guardian.
2.66.030 Purpose
Regarding the second paragraph here, isn’t the “recataloging” process for current circulation already complete?
2.66.040 Composition
This does not explain who can be appointed. Can a stepparent be appointed? What about a grandparent? What about parents of adult children? Or is this only to be parents of school-age 4/2/2024
7 (24-219)
children? Do the parents have to be HB residents? Do the children have to be HB residents? What about a parent with shared custody but the children go to school in a different city?
2.66.100 Funding
Why would the non-approved Children’s Books be sold or given away? Why wouldn’t these books simply be “recataloged” to the Adult section of the library? If these non-approved books are given away, wouldn’t that be a gift of public funds?
2.66.110 Duties
A. The last sentence of Section A is confusing and seems to contradict Section G, which says that the decisions of the Board are final and non-appealable. Which is it? B. Section B states a book can be considered approved for purchase if it is NOT nominated for review or reviewed within one year of nomination. Doesn’t this contradict Sections D and E below?
C. Section C states that a book currently in circulation can be reviewed and if not approved, this book can be placed in the Adult Section. Hasn’t the “recataloging” process been completed already? So, is this Board authorized to re-do that process? Also, doesn’t this contradict paragraph 2.66.100?
D. Section D contradicts the last sentence in Section B discussing the process whereby books can be considered for purchase.
E. Section E contradicts the last sentence in Section B discussing the process whereby books can be considered for purchase.
G. Section G states that the Board’s decisions are final and are non-appealable? Really? Is there any other Board or Commission under the City Council’s authority whose decisions cannot be appealed? If so, why are you willing to give away this authority? Approval of this Ordinance will prove to be legally indefensible, administratively unworkable, and above all a waste of taxpayer funds.
Paula Schaefer, HB resident, library patron, and consistent voter From: Levin, Shannon
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Privatization
Date: Friday, March 29, 2024 7:29:37 AM
Get Outlook for iOS
From: JEFF HEATH <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2024 9:46:23 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Privatization
Just thought I would drop a line to Xpress my reaction to the absurdity of trying to make Huntington Beach public library privatized.
If I were cynical or suspicious, I might think that it seems for a similar result is censorship and removing books directed at teenagers
Please leave the public libraries public, and keep your ideas of what is appropriate reading material to yourself. Please feel free to read whatever you like and the rest of us will do the same.
Sent from my iPhone
From: adrienne low
To: [email protected]
Subject: Oppose Ordinance 4318: Community Parent-guardian Review Board Date: Friday, March 29, 2024 3:16:36 PM
I am writing in support of the HBPL and against the idea that there is a need for a Parent- Community Review Board. This ongoing assault on our public library is infuriating and insulting to the residents of Huntington Beach. The idea that the parents who live in our community are unable to make decisions about what books they deem appropriate for their own children is insulting. There is no need for an arbitrary group of people making decisions for the rest of us as to which books we should be allowed to check out from the library. If a person does not want to read a book then don’t check it out. However, the city council nor some committee has the right to make that decision for myself or my family Leave the public library alone and allow the professionals, who have been doing an outstanding job, to do their job.
Sincerely,
Adrienne Low