FINALLY! Rescuing the Livingston Parish Library

For the first time, the new conservative library board took decisive action, moving inappropriate books from the children’s section, despite fierce opposition orchestrated by a few agitators. The opposition unleashed chaos at the Livingston Parish Library Board meeting, but the board’s determination prevailed this time. Five explicit books were unanimously voted to be removed from the children’s section, marking a victory for parental concerns and community standards. This meeting underscores the growing tension between community values and the autonomy of library professionals—a debate unlikely to end here.

The Livingston Library Board meeting on December 17th was the first full meeting in which the new conservative members were finally in complete control. How can you tell? Because the Livingston Parish School System summoned their Kraken again. Their star government bureaucrat, Amanda Jones, was called back from her endless vacations to create mischief. Considering how much on-the-clock time she must spend on her astroturf front group, the school system should just claim it as a work product.

Jones has a track record of using a witch’s brew of victimology, doublespeak, and outright fabrication to trick people into showing up angry. She did it two years ago when we discovered erotic books in the library children’s section. Her repeat performance at the December 17th Library Board Meeting couldn’t have disappointed her government employer. Maybe they’ll fund another American Library Association (ALA) excursion to Alaska or even Hawaii this time.

Good news first

Although it happened at the end of the December 17th library board meeting, five books shelved in the children’s section were unanimously determined to violate Louisiana Revised Statute 25:225. That section of the law forbids some very specific sexually explicit materials from being in the children’s section.

For some reason, the board members were tasked with individually reviewing these materials before the meeting so that they could make an intelligent vote. Although doing their own research is a good idea, the fact that this had to get to the board in a public meeting seems unnecessary. It would appear to be an admission that the paid, professional library staff, including director Michelle Parrish, cannot properly curate their own collection without bothering the board.

That they’re doing this goes directly against Amanda Jones‘s narrative that we should just “trust librarians” to do their jobs. By shifting the curation responsibility to the library board, these librarians say they don’t even trust themselves! How’s that for irony? But I know why they’re doing it. Despite the community outcry, some librarians don’t want active board oversight focused on protecting children. This blame-shifting is intended to overload the volunteer board’s limited time on trivial matters the staff should handle. A side benefit is forcing the board to read erotic children’s books can be a very uncomfortable experience. Perhaps even uncomfortable enough for some of them to resign.

Unanimous!

The unanimous vote on all five books also shows this is a huge and ongoing problem. The director and staff are perfectly content to leave books (legally defined as vulgar) in the children’s section until a child stumbles upon them.  What a slap in the face to the public! If you want to know just how vulgar these “children’s” books are, here are the five that were moved. Clicking the title will lead you to the content of these books. Consider yourself warned: the content is quite graphic. The website has a rating system of 1 to 5 of how terrible the book is, with five being the worst. I’ve included that score in the list as well.

1. “Damsel” by Elana Arnold (4/5)
2. “Thirteen Reasons Why” by Jay Asher (3/5)
3. “The Haters” by Jesse Andrews (4/5)
4. “Fade” by Lisa McMann (3/5)
5. “Tricks” by Ellen Hopkins (5/5)

These five books were collectively so bad that the board didn’t even take them up one at a time. They voted en globo to move this smut to the adult section where it belongs. Perhaps it’s because reviewing this blush-worthy content in private was terrible enough. Having to articulate what you read out loud in a crowded room of your fellow citizens is something else entirely.

Even more telling is what’s happened since the meeting. After yelling and otherwise disrupting the meeting, Livingston School System’s astroturf brigade, being run by Amanda Jones, has taken to social media to deride the board. None of them are talking about the five raunchy books that were moved during the meeting, though. No, they’re just saying the generic “there are no vulgar books in the library” immediately after the meeting, where a vote was taken to move vulgar books!

We finally have a budget!

After months of unsuccessful attempts, the library board finally passed its annual budget. It’s taken this long for various reasons stemming from the same cause. The board comprises two distinct factions with fundamental political disagreements on book content. The parish council has slowly put the new, conservative board in place over the last few years. The gradual change is directly related to area residents (aka voters) desire for the library children’s section to be a safe space where kids can wander freely. Under the direction of the library director and Livingston Parish School System’s Amanda Jones, the previous board members had vehemently resisted any efforts to identify and move vulgar books.

The agitators demanded detailed explanations of every item amended in the budget. Someone coordinating with Amanda Jones‘s astroturf group had printed flyers with the information they received from their public records request. Most audience members referenced that information to make their impassionate plea not to cut anything from the library budget. One particularly telling segment was a complaint that the board had “cut” $2,000 from some line items. The agitator quieted down when it was explained that the $2,000 wasn’t in the previous year’s budget but an increase.

Let’s think about that line again. “The agitators demanded detailed explanations of every item.” This is important because this question is precisely what the new board members had been asking of the library director for months leading up to the budget votes. This even came up during the meeting. The director kept all the budget details “under lock and key” and never provided them to the board. This bears repeating: the library agitators demanded the board provide them with details on the director’s budget, which the director had refused to provide to the board!

Procedural morass.

During the dramatic public comment period, Steve Bernard suggested that the board reconsider the failed budget from a previous meeting. However, neither he nor Ronnie Bencaz made any motion to amend the budget or agenda or introduce a different budget. Based on their later vote, it would appear that Ronnie Bencaz and Steve Bernard were under orders not to approve any budget. If successful, Amanda Jones could mock the new conservative majority and have an excuse to demand the parish council remove them (after just one meeting).

During the meeting, Megan Maher, who appears to be one of Amanda Jones‘s astroturf brigade members, attempted to get a “sick burn” on the library board. (A “sick burn” is the millennials’ gauge of success). She demanded, “What is the board’s strategic goal for the surplus money?” Abby Crosby tried to explain that the strategic plan was presented to the board by the director (not the other way around). Maher’s response to the part-time volunteer board shows she wasn’t listening or didn’t care.

“I can’t believe you’re in charge of something, and you don’t strategically plan. If I go to my place of business where I work and tell them I don’t have a plan, that’s a pretty big problem. I’d get a red mark on my yearly review. So, when you say you don’t have a strategic plan, maybe you should check out some library books about strategic planning and learn about it. That’s ridiculous.”

These anti-board comments were met with thunderous applause. In a wild twist, though, Megan Maher (and her oblivious audience) insulted her friend, Director Michelle Parrish, while providing ammunition to her enemy, the conservative board. She re-stated the same problem the board has been complaining about. Why hasn’t the library (director) presented a strategic plan (or a detailed budget) to her boss (the board)? According to Megan Maher, that’s an offense worthy of a write-up.

Speaking of ridiculous, another permanent record-worthy offense was when the audience-emboldened Director Michelle Parrish started yelling at her boss (the board) during this public meeting. Megan Maher would probably have been fired if she had yelled at her boss like that. And yet Michelle Parrish remains the library director.

They’re really mad now!

In an attempt to disarm the agitators, new board member Tori Hymel explained that the motion was to approve the budget as presented by the director. The process had dragged on for some time due to the lack of a clear board majority. However, it’s the board’s duty to approve a budget—which was already late. She also echoed what Lary Davis and Abby Crosby had said previously. With an approved budget, the board could revisit and amend it at future meetings.

During the vote, Ronnie Bencaz and Steve Bernard voted to defund the library, effectively shutting down operations. For reference, their cohort board member Kathy DeGeneres walked out of the meeting immediately after Larry Davis was elected board president, and she hasn’t been seen since. Summer Smith, Tori Hymel, Abby Crosby, and Larry Davis were the four members who voted to keep the library doors open. The budget finally passed.

At this point, the supposedly “pro library” crowd began yelling and calling out board members who voted to fund the library for 2025!

What’s odd about this whole scenario is why they are so angry. All across social media, their false claim has become almost a mantra. “Conservatives want to defund the library.” They were so committed to this false narrative that they convinced Ronnie Bencaz and Steve Bernard to vote “no” to keep the library funded. They hoped the budget would fail, allowing them to blame the new Conservative leadership for shutting down the library. That didn’t happen – and they’re hair-on-fire angry about it.

This victory is a first step, but the fight for a library that respects community standards is far from over.

###