An Act To Amend Titles 9, 14, And 29 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Libraries.
The bill significantly impacts the operational framework of libraries in Delaware, specifying that libraries must adopt a written collection development policy. This policy must include a procedure for patrons to submit objections to library materials, with the requirement that contested materials remain available until the review process is complete. Consequently, this measure aims to safeguard public access to a wide range of materials and protect library employees from retaliation when adhering to the state’s standards for collection policies.
House Bill 119, known as the Freedom to Read Act, amends several titles of the Delaware Code relating to libraries. The bill aims to establish clear guidelines for public libraries and school libraries regarding the development of collection policies. It mandates that library materials should be provided to serve the interests and enlightenment of all patrons, ensuring they are not excluded or removed due to the creator's background or for partisan reasons. This legislation intends to create a robust framework for maintaining diverse library materials, reflecting Delaware's commitment to intellectual freedom.
The sentiment surrounding HB119 has been largely supportive among library advocates and stakeholders who view it as a progressive step towards safeguarding intellectual freedom in public spaces. Proponents believe it establishes necessary protections for libraries against censorship and fosters transparency in the objection process. However, some critics might express concerns over the potential for an influx of objections that could complicate library management and burden staff, though such views may be in the minority.
The main point of contention revolves around the potential challenges in implementing the required objection processes and maintaining a balance of diverse materials against community expectations. While the bill sets up an organized method for handling objections, some stakeholders could argue that it opens the door to unnecessary disputes over library content, which could lead to heated debates regarding the appropriateness of certain materials in school libraries and public libraries alike. Furthermore, the requirement for transparency in objection records raises questions about privacy and the implications of public records laws.