Central Ohio libraries are asking Gov. Mike DeWine to veto a budget proposal that would require public libraries to cordon off materials related to sexual orientation or gender identity in adult sections.
The proposal is part of House Bill 96, the state’s two-year budget that lawmakers approved on June 25. The budget passed with support from most Republicans and no Democrats. It now heads to DeWine, who must sign it before July 1. However, DeWine can veto individual items he doesn’t support.
To re-pass the legislation, the Ohio Constitution requires a three-fifths supporting vote in each of the chambers (two-thirds in some cases, though it is not clear this is one of them) to override a governor’s veto. Since the bill originated in the House, it would have to pass there first.
The proposed state budget also changes the way Ohio libraries get funding. The Ohio Library Council says the budget threatens “both the financial stability and mission of Ohio’s public libraries.”
For years, Ohio has paid for public libraries with a percentage of its total revenue put into the Public Library Fund. DeWine wanted to increase that percentage to give libraries $1.08 billion over the next two years.
Instead, lawmakers set aside $990 million for libraries over two years as a budget line item. While this is less money than DeWine wished to give them, there is debate over whether that is a cut from current funding.
That’s because the budget also includes a provision that would require public libraries to segregate materials related to sexual orientation or gender identity or expression, and guarantee that said materials are not visible to minors.
“This is a direct hit to Ohio’s libraries and the communities they serve,” Michelle Francis, executive director of the Ohio Library Council, said in a prepared release. “We’re already facing increased demand for services, and now we’re expected to do more with significantly less.”
Francis said the provision’s language is “dangerously vague, overly broad, and ultimately unworkable.”
“It opens the door to unconstitutional censorship and undermines the core mission of libraries — to provide free and open access to information,” she said.
Francis said the state’s public libraries already have policies and processes for things like “public input, parental controls, and age-appropriate library card options.”
“Libraries are not substitutes for parents,” said Francis. “We support families by providing access and options, but ultimately, it’s up to parents and guardians to decide what their children read.”
The Columbus Metropolitan Library system, which has 23 libraries in Franklin County, called the state provision “a harmful, expensive and unnecessary requirement” in an email to members. Library CEO Lauren Hagan said in a release that the library system is “deeply concerned” about the provision and the budget.
“This shift creates uncertainty for libraries across the state and burdens smaller systems that depend more heavily on the state for support. Columbus Metropolitan Library will do everything we can to ensure these state funding cuts do not affect our library customers’ experience,” Hagan said. “But we are troubled by the long-term implications this new funding approach may have on our ability to meet the needs of our community. Strong communities depend on strong libraries, and strong libraries need basic, stable funding from the state.”
One of the main concerns of Ohio’s libraries is the potential cost of implementing the segregated materials requirement. Francis said the provision could have a big price tag.
“This provision has no financial impact on the state’s balance sheet, but it would force local libraries to spend millions of dollars and years of staff time complying with an unfunded, unconstitutional mandate,” said Francis.
Francis said some library systems estimate compliance would take up to six years of staff time and millions of dollars to audit and relocate materials. One large system projects that the provision would cost more than $3.1 million to implement, she said.
“For smaller libraries with limited square footage, complying would be physically impossible,” she said. “In some cases, this law could result in entire library branches becoming adult-only spaces, depriving families of vital access to learning, literature and community programs.”
The Licking County Library said in an email to members that the provision’s vague language could cause other problems.
“Views on what materials fall under these categories will differ from individual to individual, and result in varying interpretations,” the email read. “Because of this, the ask to segregate these items is not only unrealistic and costly to apply, it’s also a form of censorship.”
Francis said the provision is “a dangerous overreach that undermines intellectual freedom and punishes the very institutions that provide safe and open spaces for Ohioans of all ages.”
OLC represents Ohio’s 251 public library systems, some of which are also calling on patrons to call on DeWine to veto the provision, but to do so thoughtfully.
“We are thankful that Governor DeWine has been a great, long-time advocate of public libraries,” the Licking County Library said in its email. “Please be respectful, yet timely, in your message.”
(This story was updated because an earlier version included an inaccuracy.)
Higher education reporter Sheridan Hendrix can be reached at shendrix@dispatch.com and on Signal at @sheridan.120. You can follow her on Instagram at @sheridanwrites.
This story was updated to add a gallery.
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Ohio libraries call on DeWine to veto budget provision to move books on gender, identity
Reporting by Sheridan Hendrix, Columbus Dispatch / The Columbus Dispatch
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
