Reactions

An unofficial statement regarding Clearview Library social media comments

Romey

Hello, I am a member of the Clearview Library Board of Trustees, BUT DO NOT SPEAK FOR THE BOARD. However, I would like to provide context regarding some of the points raised in this post and invite you or any member of our community to dialog with board members through direct contact. Please keep in mind that the Library Board of Trustees does not have input into program content or subjects.

Regarding the GLOW program, the library district’s partnership with SPLASH has been suspended for the time being while it is re-evaluated and reassessed. The G.L.O.W program will continue under the direction of the library district’s teen librarian.

As you have spent a copious amount of time reviewing board and staff emails, I would encourage you to also apply that level of diligence to read the Library’s “Financial Spending” section on its website, along with the budget, and financial statements found in the Board packets. I’d also invite you to review the “Future Projects” section and read “A Plan for the Future,” the short-and long-range facilities plan that begins to address the current needs of the district over the next 10 years. In the plan, you’ll find that through multiple surveys, community meetings, and listening sessions, more than 3,500 comments were received, with 1 of every 4 comments focused on space and facilities. In 2017 and 2018, the voters sent a clear message to the library district that any facility expansion would have to be done utilizing current funds, and through the fiduciary stewardship of recent library boards, they found a way to expand facilities and accommodate growth, all while living within the means of current funding sources.

As for the program policy, it is currently being evaluated and revised to account for the great feedback we’ve received. As I have previously stated, I have suggested that the policy explicitly states that parents/guardians are permitted to accompany their children to any programs. However, their child must be attending that event to enable parent/guardian accompaniment.

It is not my place to respond to criticisms of past or present library employees or contractors, except to say that Attorney Garcia is upholding compliance with Colorado Library Law, specifically the library user’s right to privacy regarding materials and services.

I’ve seen people ask “what can we do?” – please directly engage your Library Board members. Over the last few weeks, we have received numerous and heartfelt emails, phone calls, and I’ve had productive personal discussions surrounding these matters. I appreciate everyone’s perspective, especially those who would like to approach this conversation with a willingness for fruitful dialog. You can reach me at 970.372.0738 or jeromey.balderrama@clearviewlibrary.org
I do not respond to Facebook comment threads, but welcome any direct engagement or personal conversations.

An Unofficial Statement Re: Clearview Library Program Policy Changes

An Unofficial Statement Re: Clearview Library Program Policy Changes

Romey

Hello, I am a member of the Clearview Library Board of Trustees, BUT DO NOT SPEAK FOR THE BOARD. However, I would like to provide some context regarding the proposed Program Policy changes that are being considered.

First off, I encourage you to separate this policy from this or any particular program, and as with any policy, is a general principle that applies to ALL programs, regardless of their content or intention. Also, please keep in mind that the Library Board of Trustees does not have input into program content or subjects.

As a parent of two children under 10, we all want to keep our children safe and ensure that the Clearview Library is a safe place for them. As a parent, I do care about programming and make my personal choices on which programs they can attend. At the same time, I would be extremely concerned to know that any unattached adult could walk off the street, join a program meant for minors, photograph, and record videos of them for their purposes. For every parent with good intentions (e.g. preemptively observing a program), there are unfortunately adults in our community that have nefarious or predatory intentions. This policy change addresses that particular loophole, ensuring that contact with outside adults is limited in a program designated for minors.

Update 25 Apr 6:30pm: After conferring with community members and receiving excellent feedback, two points should be clarified:
1) The version included in the Library Board’s Packet for the April meeting, is a draft version, that has been provided to the Board for initial feedback.
2) The draft Program Policy Document could better clarify the attendance of parents in their child’s programs. I plan to suggest to the board a clarification that parents/guardians are permitted to accompany their children to any programs. However, their child must be in attendance at that event to enable parent/guardian attendance.

The Clearview Library employees undergo criminal background checks, as well as any volunteers that work with minors. When working with kids, the volunteers are supervised by the library’s excellent staff members. This mirrors similar policies found at schools. Performing such diligence against adults who drop into events is not feasible, therefore this policy change was drafted to ensure our library remains a safe place for our community’s children.

While I hope you come to Thursday’s meeting and make your voice heard, the structure of these meetings isn’t conducive to a dialog, where questions can be asked and constructive conversations can take place. As such, I would invite you to reach out to me or any other Library Trustee directly. I’m more than happy to answer questions, hear your viewpoint, and work together to improve our community. I can be reached at jeromey.balderrama@clearviewlibrary.org or by phone at 970.372.0738. Like you, I am a hard-working American, as well as a newly single parent, so my phone time before Thursday may be limited, but will try to return as many messages as I can. If you would like to discuss this face-to-face, contact me to make arrangements.

Libraries: Palaces for the People

Romey

I realize that some may roll their eyes when I pontificate about the importance of libraries and its transforming role in our society, but I was pleasantly surprised and pleased to discover the “Palaces for the People” episode in the 99% Invisible podcast.

Check out the “Palaces for the People” episode of 99% Invisible

Sociologist Eric Klinenberg discusses the diminishing amount of truly public spaces, available for all, and the need for communities to invest in their Social Infrastructure the same way we’d invest in other types of infrastructure. He goes on to illustrate the way libraries are changing their role and need such changes in their architecture to accommodate the shift.

I would challenge those that are skeptical about the importance or relevancy of libraries to listen to this episode and take it into consideration when talking about the need for communities to invest in Palaces for the People.


Colorado state Democrats are destroying the Electoral College

Romey

Colorado lawmakers are sparring over a plan to bypass the Electoral College. Here’s what’s at stake.

I don’t know what’s more appalling: that this is being done at the state legislature, or that no one really seems to be covering it all that much. I’m not a fan of knee-jerk, reactive legislation to begin with, but no amount of state laws that you pass will put Hillary in the White House. To make the Electoral College a petty partisan issue betrays the republic and displays a level of partisan toxicity that further erodes our societal foundation.

The irony is that proponents are pushing for making every vote count, but the reality is that laws like this will all but nullify the constituency of anyone not living in an urban setting. All you have to do is look at a population density map to see the disparity between the major cities in our country, and everywhere else.

Any area that starts to look green can simply be ignored by any presidential candidate. For every 1 person you reach in the 20-to-88 zone, you can reach 200x the amount of people by just staying in the cities. Why would you go there to campaign? What would stop a presidential candidate from pandering only to those people? Does your vote even count anymore?

Go look at this list of states by population density, and you’ll find that electoral power would be concentrated into 14 states, with Colorado falling to #21 on that list. Our ballots would now become blank checks to these populous states.

What’s worse is that voters aren’t even getting a voice. This isn’t being part of some national dialog, but rather is being rammed through, state by state, at the legislature level. If our state representatives really cared about voters rights, they’d let the voters actually make the decision.

To those who aren’t fans of President Trump (and I’m one of them), the lesson from 2016 should not be to abolish the Electoral College, but rather that we should avoid elevating the office of the Presidency as a de-facto king of our country. Rather than using our state legislatures to cry “sour grapes”, we should be pushing for our national legislatures to take back their constitutional power. Instead, we seem content to do irreperable harm to our state and country.

Reflections on attending the DQSH Protest

Reflections on attending the DQSH Protest

Romey

Last Saturday I attended the Clearview Library Drag Queen Story Hour as a counter-protester. This was my first time ever making a political sign and exercising my First Amendment rights in this way, and was quite an interesting experience.

The story hour itself was a registration-required event, and had filled up in the prior week. Apparently there was a 200 person waiting list (the largest room in the library had a max occupancy of 80). Outside were about 100 people in the designated “free speech zone” – an area 30 feet from the entrance to permit library patrons and story hour participants to arrive. Of the 100, it was about a 1/3 to 2/3 split between protesters against the event and supporters/counter-protesters.

Protesters seemed to fall into two large camps: people protesting on religious/moral grounds, with signs citing biblical verses and various religious and moral messages about corrupting children, as well as conservatives there that were “fighting the Left”. It was questionable as to whether some of the protesters were part of the Alt-Right, but some of the protesters seemed to be part of some larger conservative-based movement.

As for the supporters, there were also 2 segments: those drawing attention to the LGBTQ issues, counter-protesting the intolerance, as well as those generally supporting the library, freedom of speech, and general opposition to the protesters. I would count myself among the latter group, but my nuanced position seemed to confuse people on both sides at some point.

When I got there at 9:45, it wasn’t clear where people were standing, so I just stood on the corner and held up my signs. A lot of people who would later stand with the “against” protesters told me they liked my signs and were conversing with me. Apparently, some event supporters yelled obscenities at me as well, but I didn’t hear them. Then when the lines became apparent and I saw someone I knew, I went and stood next to her, at which point I had a bunch of supporters come up and apologize to me. A lot of the protesters suddenly had problems with my signs. As the morning progressed, a few supporters from the back came up to me and said they liked my signs.

The protests were mostly civil, both sides chanting back and forth. There were a few minor confrontations, but the police did an excellent job making their presence known without interfering or infringing the free speech rights of everyone. Truth be told, I think both sides had some chants and actions that were bad looks. Protests are a blunt instrument, and when you remove nuance, you give way to stereotypes to take hold. You could see the protesters demonize the supporters as religious heretics that were enabling child endangerment, while the supporters generalized the protesters as religious nuts and Alt-Right hate groups.

I didn’t take part in any of the chants and mainly stood silently unless someone directly yelled at me about my sign, at which point I would engage back with them. One of the protesters that engaged with me finally said he couldn’t disagree with my points, so that was kinda cool. At the end of the event when the supporters disbanded, I walked back to my car past the police chief who shook my hand, then by a few of the “Don’t tread on me” protesters. I told them to have a good day and they said: “you too”.

In the end, I think this was a worthwhile event for our community. Diverse programming was offered at the library unimpeded, and there was a lively conversation about culture, morals, and freedom outside of the library. I realize that people may feel uncomfortable about social disruption, but protests (and counter protests) and demonstration are integral parts of our American heritage. Just because conversations don’t happen in the public square doesn’t mean that they’re not taking place, these events just enable communities to bring these views into the light for all to see.