Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
09/19/2002 - Packet
AGENDA TIGARD LIBRARY BOARD THURSDAY, SEP'T'EMBER 19, 2002 - 7:00 P.M. TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY— PUETT ROOM 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 1. CALL TO ORDER Braun 2. ROLL CALL: BRAUN CHAPMAN DIAMOND KASSON LAWTON SMITH THENELL TURLEY 3. Approve Minutes of July 11, 2002. Braun 4. Agenda Additions and Deletions. Braun 5. Call to the Public. Braun 6. Monthly Report for July and August 2002. Barnes 7. WCCLS Local Option Levy. Barnes S. CLAB/LDB Report. Bames 9. Library Bill of Rights. Barnes 10. Patriot Act. Barnes 11. New Library. Chapman 12. Library Foundation. Diamond I Board Communications. All (Reports from Board members on community and citizen actin ities) 14. Other Business. 15. Adjournment. TO ENSURE A QUORUM TO CONDUCT BUSINESS, PLEASE CALL CONNIE MARTIN OR MARGARET BARNES AT THE LIBRARY (503-6S4-6537), IF YOU ARE LINABLE TO ATTEND. Agenda items for future meetings: i II i TIGARD LIBRARY BOARD MINUTES July 11, 2002 Meeting was held in Red Rock Creek Conference Room, City Hall. Call to Order at 7:04 PM by Chair Braun. Roll Call: Present: Anne Braun, David Chapman, Marvin Diamond, Sue Kasson, Jeff Lawton, and Suzan Turley (alternate). Absent: Jane Smith and Jan Thenell. Staff: Margaret Barnes and Amy Emery. Minutes: Diamond moved to approve the minutes of June 13 as submitted. Chapman seconded. Motion approved unanimously. Agenda Additions and Deletions: The group welcomed Suzan Turley as the new Library Board Alternate. Call to the Public: None. Election of Officers: Following discussion, Diamond nominated Braun for Chairperson and Lawton for Vice-Chairperson. Kasson seconded. The nominations were approved by a unanimous vote. Monthly Report for June 2002: Chapman requested five minutes to read the June minutes prior to discussion. The group agreed. Barnes reported that the Friends-sponsored Cultural Pass program continues to increase in the number of registered users and in actual usage. Timing software will be installed on the Internet machines in July/August. Phone notification for holds and overdues is now fully implemented. The Youth Summer Reading Program is in full swing with over 1000 participants. Activities have been well attended. The Teen Program is also going strong. The number of teen volunteers in the Library has increased for the summer. The Library may see an increase in youth community service workers as the Tigard Municipal Court begins a new Youth Court program (separate from the established Peer Court program). CLAB/LDB Report: LDB discussed the timing software on Internet stations and the WCCLS Local Option Levy. A consultant will be brought in to assist with discussions regarding the funding formula. The formula is currently in an extension year. The funding formula must be established for Fiscal Year 2003-04 to run for three years. The CLAB meeting will be held next week. c WCCLS Local Option Levy: Barnes distributed a-Library Levy Questions and Answers handout, a Summary Report, and two Riley Research Associates reports. The Q&A handout contains factual details on the levy. The Summary Report was prepared by WCCLS as the final levy proposal for the Washington County Board of Commissioners. The Riley reports were the results of the phone survey that was conducted on a representative cross-section of the County. The results of the survey appear to be supportive of the levy. The County Commissioners authorized the placement of the levy on the ballot, with the support of the cities. The November election does not require a double majority for passage of the levy. In September, additional informational items will be distributed to raise awareness about the levy and the mission of WCCLS in general. Informational presentations can be arranged for interested groups. Eva Calcagno will present an overview at the August 13 Tigard City Council meeting. Library Bill of Rights: The Board reviewed and discussed the ALA Library Bill of Rights, as well as the Freedom to Read, the Freedom to View, and the Free Access to Libraries for Minors statements. Braun noted it was important to review these documents especially in light of the recent Multnomah County Library court case. Lawton expressed concern regarding a specific book in the collection. Barnes reminded the group that there is a process in place to reconsider specific library materials. She noted that these statements are general overriding principles of libraries which are separate from the collection development policies established at the library level, specific to the community served by the library. Discussion followed as to whether endorsement meant approval of all types of library materials. Chapman requested information on the new Patriot Bill that allows the FBI access to patron records, as well as specifics on the retention and archival backup policy of WCCLS. The group agreed to table the discussion for continuance at the September meeting with a possible vote at that time on whether or not to endorse the statements. New Library Update: Chapman announced that the New Library Construction Committee will be thanked at the July 23 City Council meeting. At that time, the existing committee will be dissolved, and the New Library Resource Team will be formed. Construction Committee members can choose to continue service as part of the new Team. The Library bond will fund a portion of the construction of Wall Street. Any other Wall Street construction will be part of a separate LID (Local Improvement District). The RFP (Request for Proposal) has gone out for the architectural design. Submissions are due back by the end of July. Interviews will be conducted in August with a recommendation going to Council by the end of August. The Library project will use the CM/GC (Construction Manager/General Contractor) process, rather than a Design/Bid/Build. With Design/Bid/Build, there is the risk of having a design, which comes in over budget at the bid phase. With the CM/GC model, another firm is brought in (second RFP) earlier in the process to work with the architectural firm to manage costs and stay within budget. A third RFP will be issued for an Owner's representative. This person will function as the City's rep on the site in dealing with issues and contractors. The target date for groundbreaking is spring 2003. The City is looking into working with the Oregon Economic Commission Development Department for sale of the bonds. Once bonds are sold, the City can initiate the option for the property. TAHPA is interested in the white house on the property depending on its condition for an office and educational program space. Library Foundation: Diamond announced the Foundation members would meet as a group again in August. Several people have expressed an interest in joining the Foundation since the successful passage of the bond measure. Two fundraising events are in process. The Michael Allen Harrison concert is scheduled for Friday, April 4, 2003. No date has been set for the Mark Hatfield event. Board Communications: Kasson congratulated the new Library Board officers. Other Business: Barnes noted that an issue regarding the use of the Puett Room had arisen. The Puett Room is reserved for a quiet reading space or for Library- sponsored programs. An individual requested to use the space for a program that was determined to not meet the necessary criteria. It was suggested that the individual contact the City to schedule a different room. The individual addressed the City Council about this issue during the Visitor's Agenda at the July 9 meeting. Adjournment: It was moved by Diamond and seconded by Kasson to adjourn the meeting at 8:29 PM. Motion passed unanimously. No meeting will be held in August. The September meeting has been moved to the third Thursday of the month and will be held on September 19, 2002. w r 'MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Margaret Barnes, Director of Library Services DATE: August 22, 2002 SUBJECT: Library Monthly Report for July 2002 Personnel: Library-wide we currently have four vacant positions. Three of these positions are in Readers' Services and one is in Circulation. We currently are using temporary people in two of the positions. The Managers have developed creative solutions using existing staff to provide coverage for the other current vacancies. Adult Services: The Reference Desk has been busy, busy, busy this month. Total service interactions for this month were 5,922. Total reference questions for July were 5,702. That is an increase of 51% over July of 2001 for total Reference Questions and a 40% in total service interactions from July 2001. This increase in part was due to the increase in activities associated with the Summer Reading Program. Technical Services: In July, 1014 items were added to the collection. There were 369 bibliographic records of which 10 were original records added to the Polaris database. The average number of days for items to be cataloged and processed was 24. Circulation: Circulation was up by 7.4% when compared with July of 2001. Total checkouts for July were 63,614. This month the library established a new record for circulation activity surpassing the record of 62,404 set in March of 2002. Self-check out averaged 7.4% of daily checkouts. Several days this month self-check usage was around 11%. The average number of intralibrary crates processed per week for July was 96. This is a 10% increase in activity from July of 2001. The total number of items loaned this month by Tigard through intralibrary loan to other WCCLS libraries was 9,038. The total number borrowed by Tigard from other libraries was 6,797. Friday Hours: Another item of interest is the continued popularity of Friday night hours. On average for the past fiscal year 2001/02 the library averaged about 250 visitors each Friday evening from 5:00-9:00 p.m. It is also interesting to note that'on the Friday evenings the library hosted a musical or cultural event the average number of visitors was 282. Clearly, the Friday evening hours have responded to a public need. y Cultural Passes: This month the passes were used 33 times. The Chinese Classical Gardens were the most popular destination point. The, total lifetime use for all the passes is 771. There were 29 new registrations this month for the pass program. Timing Software: The SAM timing software has been installed on several workstations. We are still testing it and working with WCCLS to resolve a couple of issues. We are planning to have the software fully implemented by the end of September. Youth Services: This year Summer Reading was an incredible event. Through the efforts of the Youth Services staff in promoting this program over 1100 young people registered for Summer Reading. Of the registered participants, approximately 560 completed the Summer Reading program. These numbers represent the highest level of participation and completion in the program in recent years. The popular program this month was Reptile Man, which was held at the outdoor program structure at Fanno Creek. Many families brought blankets and lawn chairs and enjoyed the evening presentation. Next year, we will plan to hold additional Summer Reading programs in the evening at the program structure. This summer, the teens participating in the Teen Summer Reading program are also actively engaged in reading. About 480 reviews of books have been submitted by 84 reviewers. A variety of activities were planned for the teens this month. Two of the really popular programs this month were Papermaking and Outdoor Survival. Volunteers: The total volunteer hours this month is a 2.6% increase in donated hours when compared to the total volunteer hours for July 2001. A second Information Desk training was held on July 23rd and was a success. Three new volunteers have signed up in addition to June's group. Nine trainings were held this month for new shelvers and check-in volunteers. With the assistance of youth volunteers, shelving and the check-in of materials have been current all month. Thirteen new teenagers signed up this month and it is likely more young people will sign up to volunteer next month. Volunteer Type Number Hours Regular Volunteers 78 708.50 Youth Services 48 453.50 Local History 0 0.00 Adopt-a-Shelf 3 13.00 Library Board 6 9.00 Community Service 6 62.50 Friendly Visitors 5 12.00 New Library Resource Team 0 0.00 Total 146 1,258.5 = 7.3 FTE 1 WORK INDICATORS JULY 2002 JULY 2001 JULY 2000 Circulation Total (from WCCLS) 63,614 59,189 50,344 (4,705 self-check) n/a n/a Days of Service 30 27.5# 27.5# Average Daily Circulation 2,120 2,152# 1 ,831# Hours of Service 299 292.5 271 .5 Materials Circulated per Hour 213 202 185 Increase in Circulation +7.5% +17.6% +5.6% Materials Added 1,649 1,645 1,100 Materials Withdrawn 1,801 943 1,519 Borrowers Registered 273 351 371 Cultural Passes Program 33(YTD***) 241(YTD) N/A 33(Month) 40(Month) Adult Programs 21 62 27 (Number of sessions) (7) (19) (7) Story Time 478 102 127 (Number of Sessions) (16) (8) (7) Toddler Time (Number of Sessions) (0) (0) (0) Special Programs 603 841 1 ,797 (Number of Sessions) (3) (19) (30) Children's Computer 210 157 115 Word Processors 238 251 284 Internet Users 6,183 4,102 3,184 Typewriter Users 59 30 N/A Visitors (Gate count divided by 2) 26,087 22,554 19,292 Increase in Visitors +15.7% +16.91/% -.030/o Fines/Fees Collected $5,180.23 S4,727.42 S4,065.51 Gifts Received $ 0.00 S 0.00 S 0.00 No statistical report from WCCLS was generated. N/A Statistics weren't kept then 9 Used different days of Service formula " Different period of time was used previously (last day of month to last day of next month) Fiscal Year 2002-2003 • We have determined that the 3M gate counter is not providing accurate traffic counts. The malfunction appears to have started in 1995. Back calculations will be made to determine approximate counts using the WILI generated "checkout sessions" statistics times 1.5 (to reflect users who do not check out materials). MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Margaret Barnes, Director of Library Servicesl�e_ DATE: September 18, 2002 SUBJECT: Library Monthly Report for August 2002 Personnel: Library-wide, we currently have four vacant positions. Three of these positions are in Readers' Services and one is in Circulation. We currently are using temporary people in two of the positions. The Managers have developed creative solutions using existing staff to provide coverage for the other current vacancies. Adult Services: The Reference Desk continues to be a very busy place. Total service interactions for this month were 5,009 with 4,869 or 97% as reference questions. Kathy Smith and Linda Parker worked with Louis Sears to implement the SAM time-out software for the public workstations. Technical Services: In August, 1,314 items were added to the collection. There were 386 bibliographic records added to the Polaris database. The average number of days for items to be cataloged and processed was 19. This is a dramatic decrease in the amount of-time required for an item to be cataloged and processed when compared with September of 2000 when the average number of days was 67.9! Circulation: There was a slight increase in circulation this month when compared to August of 2001. The total circulation for August was 59,711. Besides the monthly checkout activity, 284 new patrons were registered and 569 web-based renewals were completed. Once again, Sundays and Mondays were the busiest days of the week in August. Average number of patrons per hour on Sunday was 94 and on Monday the average was 91. This month self-check use accounted for about 6% of total circulation. The average number of intralibrary crates processed per week for August of 2002 was 116. This is about a 20% increase in activity from August of 2001. Staff In-Service Day: All staff enjoyed a successful Staff Development Day on Friday, August 16. The morning was devoted to a panel discussion on building/renovating your library. The panel shared tips for a successful project from planning for increase demands for service, to moving strategies to the importance of keeping the public informed, involved and enthused throughout the life of the project. The morning also provided time for discussion of public access to the Internet and a review of Tigard's specific policy. In the afternoon, the staff divided into groups to learn about new ways to search the online catalog, shelf-read the collection and visit the new library site. Visiting the site made the whole project seem more real for the majority of the staff. Cheryl Silverblatt chaired the staff committee that organized this informative fun-filled day for the staff. The panel participation was excellent. The staff evaluations of the day were overall very positive. Cultural Passes: This month the passes were used 90 times. The Chinese Classical Gardens were the most popular destination point. The total lifetime use for all the passes is 771. There were 29 new registration's this month for the pass program. Timing Software: The SAM timing software has been installed on several workstations. We are still testing it and working with WCCLS to resolve a couple of issues. We are planning to have the software fully implemented by the end of September. Youth Services: This year Summer Reading was an incredible event. Through the efforts of the Youth Services staff in promoting this program, over 1,100 young people registered for Summer Reading. Of the registered participants, approximately 700 completed the Summer Reading program. The Youth Services staff, led by Louise Meyers, is to be congratulated for an exciting summer program for the youth of Tigard. The Summer Reading finale on August 3 enjoyed over 270 people in attendance. Pink Puppet Theater entertained the crowd. Both children and parents enjoyed the second annual TVF&R program held this month with fire trucks in the parking lot and real firemen reading stories. 150 people attended and children had their pictures taken sitting on the fire trucks and with the firemen. Louise Meyers and Terri Smith organized a parade entry for the Tigard Blast. Volunteers walked in the parade with the "Bookworm" and Louise and Terri tossed treats to the crowd. They heard many "We love the Library" shouts from on-lookers. Community Service Volunteers: This month eight individuals provided 109 hours of court-ordered hours of service to the library. The majority of these hours were served in Circulation. Readers Services had one peer court individual provide eight hours of service. Three peer court individuals provided 12 hours to Circulation. Four individuals from other courts served an additional 89 hours in Circulation. Volunteers: This month 49 incredible youth donated 413 hours to the library. A team of four teenage girls are working together as Children's Room Specialist. This seems to be working very well. A new group of volunteers were trained for the Information Desk. With school starting the library will experience a shelving crunch. Trish has begun the process of recruiting new shelvers. Volunteer Type Number Hours Regular Volunteers 78 669.50 Youth Services 49 413.00 Local History 0 0.00 Adopt-a-Shelf 6 12.50 Library Board 0 0.00 Community Service 7 91.00 Friendly Visitors 5 13.00 New Library Resource Team 0 0.00 Poster Hanging (ladder work)* 0 0.00 Total 145 1,199.0 = 6.9 FTE * Poster hanging on ladders by a volunteer is reported separately for insurance purposes. WORK INDICATORS UGUST 2002 AUGUST 20 AUGUST 2000 v Circulation (open 30 days/In-Service day) Total (from WCCLS 59,711 59,293 50,010 (3,794 self-check) (3,259 self-check) n/a Days of Service 30 31 # 29 # Average Daily Circulation 1 ,990 1 ,913 # 1 ,725 # Hours of Service 295 310.5 295 Materials Circulated per Hour 202 191 170 Increase in Circulation +4 %**** +19 % # +2 % # Materials Added 1,314 1,546 1,736 Materials Withdrawn 1 ,393 924 3,640 Borrowers Registered 284 327 341 Cultural Passes Program 123(YTD***) 295(YTD) N/A 90(Month) 52(Month) Adult Programs 5 34 97 (Number of sessions) (4) (15) (9) Story Time 140 29 25 (Number of Sessions) (2) (3) (2) Toddler Time (Number of Sessions) (0) (0) (0) Special Programs 888 1,118 1,192 (Number of Sessions) (9) (14) (1 1) Children's Computer 132 188 125 Word Processors 148 286 . 323 Internet Users 5,424 4,020 3,458 Typewriter Users 27 42 N/A Visitors (Gate count = by 2) 24,321(30 days) 24,514 20,976 Increase in Visitors +3 %**** +17 % + 9 % Fines/Fees Collected $4,365.82 $5,160.79 $4,110.14 Gifts Received $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 ' No statistical report from WCCLS was generated. N/A Statistics weren't kept then Used different days of Service formula Different period of time was used previously (last day of month to last day of next month) Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Increase was tabulated by using daily avg. not total count, as library was closed one day, for Staff In-Service. * We have determined that the 3M gate counter is not providing accurate traffic counts. The malfunction appears to have started in 1995. Back calculations will be made to determine approximate counts using the WILI generated "checkout sessions" statistics times 1.5 (to reflect users who do not check out materials). LIBRARY BOARD ORIGINAL APPT. DATE / CURRENT TERM EXPIRES ANNE BRAUN - CHAIR 07-13-99 / 06-30-03 10920 SW North Dakota Street -Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 503-670-1543 - E-Mail: anneb40540@aol.com DAVID CHAPMAN 06-09-98 / 06-30-04 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223-1016 Res: 503-246-3118 E-Mail: chapmans@easystreet.com MARVIN DIAMOND 07-11-00 / 06-30-03 9270 SW Maplewood Drive, #T-212 Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 503-620-4282 Bus: 503-241-4784 E-Mail: resipse@aol.com SUE KASSON 05-27-97 / 06-30-05 16570 SW 93' Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 503-620-9771 Bus: 503-670-0440 E-Mail: suekasson@hotmail.com JEFF LAWTON - CHAIR PRO TEM 01-22-02 / 06-30-03 15237 SW 98`h Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 503-684-4136 Bus: 503-213-2260 E-Mail: jeffl@wsi-or.com JANE SMITH 04-11-00 / 06-30-06 9200 SW Elrose Court Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 503-639-4622 E-Mail: jasmithpdx@aol.com JAN THENELL 07-01-01 / 06-30-05 17015 SW Versailles Lane Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 503-598-8472 E-Mail: jthenell@yahoo.com SUZAN TURLEY - ALTERNATE 06-25-02 / 06-30-04 11285 SW Meadowbrook Drive, #7 Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 503-620-1919 Bus: 503-229-5725, x259 E-Mail: suzant@juno.com Margaret Barnes, Library Director - margaret@ci.tigard.or.us Connie Martin, Sr. Admin. Specialist - connie@ci.tigard.or.us Revised 9/4/02 Library Bill of Rights The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services. I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background or views of those contributing to their creation. II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval. III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment. IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas. V. A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background or views. VI. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use. Adopted June 18, 1948. Amended February 2, 1961, and January 23, 1980, inclusion of "age" reaffirmed January 23, 1996, by the ALA Council. The Freedom to Read The freedom to read is essential to our democracy. It is continuously under attack. Private groups and public authorities in various parts of the country are working to remove or limit access to reading materials, to censor content in schools, to label "controversial" views, to distribute lists of "objectionable" books or authors and to purge libraries. These actions apparently rise from a view that our national tradition of free expression is no longer valid; that censorship and suppression are needed to avoid the subversion of politics and the corruption of morals. We, as citizens devoted to reading and as librarians and publishers responsible for disseminating ideas, wish to assert the public interest in the preservation of the freedom to read. Most attempts at suppression rest on a denial of the fundamental premise of democracy: that the ordinary citizen, by exercising critical judgment, will accept the good and reject the bad. The censors, public and private, assume that they should determine what is good and what is bad for their fellow citizens. We trust Americans to recognize propaganda and misinformation, and to make their own decisions about what they read and believe. We do not believe they need the help of censors to assist them in this task. We do not believe they are prepared to sacrifice their heritage of a free press in order to be "protected" against what others think may be bad for them. We believe they still favor free enterprise in ideas and expression. These efforts at suppression are related to a larger pattern of pressures being brought against education, the press, art and images, films, broadcast media and the Internet. The problem is not only one of actual censorship. The shadow of fear cast by these pressures leads, we suspect, to an even larger voluntary curtailment of expression by those who seek to avoid controversy. Such pressure toward conformity is perhaps natural to a time of accelerated change. Any yet suppression is never more dangerous than in such a time of social tension. Freedom has given the United States the elasticity to endure strain. Freedom keeps open the path of novel and creative solutions, and enables change to come by choice. Every silencing of a heresy, every enforcement of an orthodoxy, diminishes the toughness and resilience of our society and leaves it the less able to deal with controversy and difference. Now as always in our history, reading is among our greatest freedoms. The freedom to read and write is almost the only means for making generally available ideas or manners of expression that can initially command only a small audience. The written word is the natural medium for the new idea and the untried voice from which come the original contributions to social growth. It is essential to the extended discussion that serious thought requires, and to the accumulation of knowledge and ideas into organized collections. J We believe that free communication is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture. We believe that these pressures toward conformity present the danger of limiting the range and variety of inquiry and expression on which our democracy and our culture depend. We believe that every American community must jealously guard the freedom to publish and to circulate, in order to preserve its own freedom to read. We believe that publishers and librarians have a profound responsibility to give validity to that freedom to read by making it possible for the readers to choose freely from a variety of offerings. The freedom to read is guaranteed by the Constitution. Those with faith in free people will stand firm on these constitutional guarantees of essential rights and will exercise the responsibilities that accompany these rights. We therefore affirm these propositions: 1. It is in the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those that are unorthodox or unpopular with the majority. Creative thought is by definition new, and what is new is different. The bearer of every new thought is a rebel until that idea is refined and tested. Totalitarian systems attempt to maintain themselves in power by the ruthless suppression of any concept that challenges the established orthodoxy. The power of a democratic system to adapt to change is vastly strengthened by the freedom of its citizens to choose widely from among conflicting opinions offered freely to them. To stifle every nonconformist idea at birth would mark the end of the democratic process. Furthermore, only through the constant activity of weighing and selecting can the democratic mind attain the strength demanded by times like these. We need to know not only what we believe but why we believe it. 2. Publishers, librarians and booksellers do not need to endorse every idea or presentation they make available. It would conflict with the public interest for them to establish their own political, moral or aesthetic views as a standard for determining what should be published or circulated. Publishers and librarians serve the educational process by helping to make available knowledge and ideas required for the growth of the mind and the increase of learning. They do not foster education by imposing as mentors the patterns of their own thought. The people should have the freedom to read and consider a broader range of ideas than those that may be held by any single librarian or publisher or government or church. It is wrong that what one can read should be confined to what another thinks proper. 3. It is contrary to the public interest for publishers or librarians to bar access to writings on the basis of the personal history or political affiliations of the author. No art or literature can flourish if it is to be measured by the political views or private lives of its creators. No society of free people can flourish that draws up lists of writers to whom it will not listen, whatever they may have to say. 4. There is no place in our society for efforts to coerce the taste of others, to confine adults to the reading matter deemed suitable for adolescents, or to inhibit the efforts of writers to achieve artistic expression. To some, much of modern expression is shocking. But is not much of life itself shocking? We cut off literature at the source if we prevent writers from dealing with the stuff of life. Parents and teachers have a responsibility to prepare the young to meet the diversity of experiences in life to which they will be exposed, as they have a responsibility to help them learn to think critically for themselves. These are affirmative responsibilities, not to be discharged simply by preventing them from reading works for which they are not yet prepared. In these matters values differ, and values cannot be legislated; nor can machinery be devised that will suit the demands of one group without limiting the freedom of others. 5. It is not in the public interest to force a reader to accept with any expression the prejudgment of a label characterizing it or its author as subversive or dangerous. The ideal of labeling presupposes the existence of individuals or groups with wisdom to determine by authority what is good or bad for the citizen. It presupposes that individuals must be directed in making up their minds about the ideas they examine. But Americans do not need others to do their thinking for them. 6. It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians, as guardians of the people's freedom to read, to contest encroachments upon that freedom by individuals or groups seeking to impose their own standards or tastes upon the community at large. It is inevitable in the give and take of the democratic process that the political, the moral or the aesthetic concepts of an individual or group will occasionally collide with those of another individual or group. In a free society individuals are free to determine for themselves what they wish to read, and each group is free to determine what it will recommend to its freely associated members. But no group has the right to take the law into its own hands, and to impose its own concept of politics or morality upon other members of a democratic society. Freedom is no freedom if it is accorded only to the accepted and the inoffensive. 7. It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians to give full meaning to the freedom to read by providing books that enrich the quality and diversity of thought and expression. By the exercise of this affirmative responsibility, they can demonstrate that the answer to a "bad"book is a good one, the answer to a "bad"idea is a good one. The freedom to read is of little consequence when the reader cannot obtain matter fit for that reader's purpose. What is needed is not only the absence of restraint, but the positive provision of opportunity for the people to read the best that has been thought and said. Books are the major channel by which the intellectual inheritance is handed down, and the principle means of its testing and growth. The defense of the freedom to read requires of all publishers and librarians the utmost of their faculties, and deserves of all citizens that fullest of their support. We state these propositions neither lightly nor as easy generalizations. We here stake out a lofty claim for the value of the written word. We do so because we believe that it is possessed of enormous variety and usefulness, worthy of cherishing and keeping free. We realize that the application of these propositions may mean the dissemination of ideas and manners of expression that are repugnant to many persons. We do not state these propositions in the comfortable belief that what people read is unimportant. We believe rather that what people read is deeply important; that ideas can be dangerous; but that the suppression of ideas is fatal to a democratic society. Freedom itself is a dangerous way of life, but it is ours. This statement was originally issued in May of 1953 by the Westchester Conference of the American Library Association and the American Book Publishers Council, which in 1970 consolidated with the American Educational Publishers Institute to become the Association of American Publishers. Adopted June 25, 1953; revised January 28, 1972, January 16, 1991, July 12, 2000, by the ALA Council and the AAP Freedom to Read Committee. A Joint Statement by: American Library Association Association of American Publishers Subsequently Endorsed by: American Association of University Professors American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression American Society of Journalists and Authors The American Society of Newspaper Editors Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith Association of American University Presses Center for Democracy & Technology The Children's Book Council The Electronic Frontier Foundation Feminists for Free Expression Freedom to Read Foundation International Reading Association The Media Institute National Coalition Against Censorship National PTA Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays People for the American Way Student Press Law Center The Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression l ' THE USA PATRIOT ACT INFORMATION Prepared by Cheryl Silverblatt and Erik Carter September, 2002 Background. The USA-PATRIOT act was introduced less than a week after the 9/11 tragedy in response to the terrorists' attacks and signed into law on October 26th, 2001 . It amends more than 15 different statutes, including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) , the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) , and the Federal wiretap laws . Please see the attached "The USA Patriot Act : A Sketch" for a summary of the provisions of the Act . Functional effects of the Act . By design, the USA-PATRIOT Act expands the information- gathering powers of the FBI in several ways . First, it overrides Federal and State privacy laws and allows the FBI to compel the production of any business records on the grounds that they are relevant to an investigation. This would include library patron information, Internet sign-up records, and possibly records of the actual Internet usage (searches made and Web sites visited) . Such subpoena requests would be considered by the FISA court . Subpoena requests to the FISA court are rarely denied although a recent news story indicates that the court refused at least 75 FBI requests (post 9/11) ,_because of material errors by the FBI and/or sharing of search results with unauthorized personnel . Second, it allows the FBI to install monitoring software in any system that might have been used by a suspect in any investigation. This can be accomplished without a judicial order and without notifying the suspect (s) that he/she is being monitored. Further, under the "computer trespasser" exemption, an internet service provider may be asked to grant access to the FBI for surveillance . The Act states that there may be no time limits, no judicial review, and no restrictions on whose usage may be examined. Third, these searches or surveillance are subject to an automatic "gag order" . Libraries may not tell patrons that the Internet they are using is monitored, has been monitored, or will continue to be monitored, under penalty of law (fines and jail) . Order Code RS21203 April 18, 2002 CRS Rew-%oft for Congreao Received through the CRS Web The USA PATRIOT Act: A Sketch Charles Doyle Senior Specialist American Law Division Summary Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act (the Act) in response to the terrorists' attacks of September 11,2001. The Act gives federal officials greater authority to track and intercept communications, both for law enforcement and foreign intelligence gathering purposes. It vests the Secretary of the Treasury with regulatory powers to combat corruption of U.S.financial institutions for foreign money laundering purposes. It seeks to further close our borders to foreign terrorists and to detain and remove those within our borders. It creates new crimes, new penalties, and new procedural efficiencies for use against domestic and international terrorists. Although it is not without safeguards,critics contend some of its provisions go too far. Although it grants many of the enhancements sought by the Department of Justice, others are concerned that it does not go far enough. The Act originated as H.R.2975 (the PATRIOT Act) in the House and S.1510 in the Senate (the USA Act). S.1510 passed the Senate on October 11, 2001, 147 Cong. Rec. S 10604 (daily ed.). The House Judiciary Committee reported out an amended version of H.R. 2975 on the same day,H.R.Rep.No. 107-236. The House passed H.R. 2975 the following day after substituting the text of H.R.3108, 147 Cong.Rec. H6775- 776 (daily ed. Oct. 12, 2001). The House version incorporated most of the money laundering provisions found in an earlier House bill, H.R. 3004, many of which had counterparts in S.1510 as approved by the Senate. The House subsequently passed a clean bill, H.R. 3162 (under suspension of the rules), which fesblved the differences between H.R. 2975 and S.1510, 147 Cong.Rec. H7224 (daily ed. Oct. 24, 2001). The Senate agreed to the changes, 147 Cong.Rec. S10969(daily ed.Oct.24,2001),and H.R. 3162 was sent to the President who signed it on October 26, 2001. This is an abbreviated versions of The USA PATRIOTAct:A Legal Analysis,CRS Report RL31377, stripped of its citations and footnotes. Congressional Research Service •:* The Library of Congress t CRS-2 Criminal Investigations: Tracking and Gathering Communications Federal communications privacy law features a three tiered system, erected for the dual purpose of protecting the confidentiality of private telephone, face-to-face, and computer communications while enabling authorities to identify and intercept criminal communications. Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 supplies the first level. It prohibits electronic eavesdropping on telephone conversations, face-to-face conversations,or computer and other forms of electronic communications in most instances. It does, however, give authorities a narrowly defined process for electronic surveillance to be used as a last resort in serious criminal cases. When approved by senior Justice Department officials, law enforcement officers may seek a court order authorizing them to secretly capture conversations concerning any of a statutory list of offenses (predicate offenses). Title III court orders come replete with instructions describing the permissible duration and scope of the surveillance as well as the conversations which may be seized and the efforts to be taken to minimize the seizure of innocent conversations. The court notifies the parties to any conversations seized under the order after the order expires. Below Title III, the next tier of privacy protection covers telephone records, e-mail held in third party storage, and the like, 18 U.S.C. 2701-2709 (Chapter 121). Here, the law permits law enforcement access, ordinarily pursuant to a warrant or court order or under a subpoena in some cases, but in connection with any criminal investigation and without the extraordinary levels of approval or constraint that mark a Title III interception. Least demanding and perhaps least intrusive of all is the procedure that governs court orders approving the government's use of trap and trace devices and pen registers,a kind of secret"caller id.", which identify the source and destination of calls made to and from a particular telephone, 18 U.S.C. 3121-3127 (Chapter 206). The orders are available based on the government's certification, rather than a finding of a court, that use of the device is likely to produce information relevant to the investigation of a crime,any crime. The devices record no more than identity of the participants in a telephone conversation, but neither the orders nor the results they produce need ever be revealed to the participants. The Act modifies the procedures at each of the three levels. It: • permits pen register and trap and trace orders for electronic communications (e.g., e-mail); • authorizes nationwide execution of court orders for pen registers, trap and trace devices,and access to stored e-mail or communication records; • treats stored voice mail like stored e-mail (rather than like telephone conversations); • permits authorities to intercept communications to and from a trespasser within a computer system (with the permission of the system's owner); • adds terrorist and computer crimes to Title II1's predicate offense list; • reenforces protection for those who help execute Title 111, ch. 121, and ch. 206 orders; CRS-3 • encourages cooperation between law enforcement and foreign intelligence investigators; • establishes a claim against the U.S. for certain communications privacy violations by government personnel; and • terminates the authority found in many of these provisions and several of the foreign intelligence amendments with a sunset provision (Dec. 31, 2005). Foreign Intelligence Investigations The Act eases some of the restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States,and affords the U.S. intelligence community greater access to information unearthed during a criminal investigation,but it also establishes and expands safeguards against official abuse. More specifically, it: • permits"roving"surveillance(court orders omitting the identification of the particular instrument, facilities,or place where the surveillance is to occur when the court finds the target is likely to thwart identification with particularity); • increases the number of judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act(FISA) court from 7 to 11; • allows application for a FISA surveillance or search order when gathering foreign intelligence is a significant reason for the application rather than the reason; • authorizes pen register and trap&trace device orders for e-mail as well as telephone conversations; • sanctions court ordered access to any tangible item rather than only business records held by lodging,car rental,and locker rental businesses; • carries a sunset provision; • establishes a claim against the U.S. for certain communications privacy violations by government personnel; and • expands the prohibition against FISA orders based solely on an American's exercise of his or her First Amendment rights. Money Laundering In federal law,money laundering is the flow of cash or other valuables derived from, or intended to facilitate,the commission of a criminal offense. It is the movement of the fruits and instruments of crime. Federal authorities attack money laundering through regulations, criminal sanctions, and forfeiture. The Act bolsters federal efforts in each area. Regulation: The Act expands the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to regulate the activities of U.S. financial institutions, particularly their relations with foreign individuals and entities. He is to promulgate regulations: • under which securities brokers and dealers as well as commodity merchants, advisors and pool operators must file suspicious activity reports (SARs); CRS-4 • requiring businesses, which were only to report cash transactions involving more than $10,000 to the IRS, to,file SARs as well; • imposing additional "special measures" and "due diligence" requirements to combat foreign money laundering; • prohibiting U.S. financial institutions from maintaining correspondent accounts for foreign shell banks; • preventing financial institutions from allowing their customers to conceal their financial activities by taking advantage of the institutions' concentration account practices; • establishing minimum new customer identification standards and record- keeping and recommending an effective means to verify the identity of foreign customers; • encouraging financial institutions and law enforcement agencies to share information concerning suspected money laundering and terrorist activities; and • requiring financial institutions to maintain anti-money laundering programs which must include at least a compliance officer; an employee training program; the development of internal policies, procedures and controls; and an independent audit feature. Crimes: The Act contains a number of new money laundering crimes, as well as amendments and increased penalties for earlier crimes. It: • outlaws laundering(in the U.S.)any of the proceeds from foreign crimes of violence or political corruption; • prohibits laundering the proceeds from cybercrime or supporting a terrorist organization; • increases the penalties for counterfeiting; • seeks to overcome a Supreme Court decision finding that the confiscation of over$300,000(for attempt to leave the country without reporting it to customs) constituted an unconstitutionally excessive fine; • provides explicit authority to prosecute overseas fraud involving American credit cards; and • endeavors to permit prosecution of money laundering in the place where the predicate offense occurs. Forfeiture: The Act creates two types of forfeitures and modifies Several confiscation- related procedures. It allows confiscation of all of the property of any individual or entity that participates in or plans an act of domestic or international terrorism; it also permits confiscation of any property derived from or used to facilitate domestic or international terrorism. The Constitution's due process,double jeopardy,and ex post facto clauses may limit the anticipated breath of these provisions. Procedurally, the Act: • establishes a mechanism to acquire long arm jurisdiction,for purposes of forfeiture proceedings, over individuals and entities; • allows confiscation of property located in this country for a wider range of crimes committed in violation of foreign law; • permits U.S. enforcement of foreign forfeiture orders; CRS-5 • calls for the seizure of correspondent accounts held in U.S. financial institutions for foreign banks who are in turn holding forfeitable assets overseas; and • denies corporate entities the right to contest a confiscation if their principal shareholder is a fugitive. Alien Terrorists and Victims The Act contains a number of provisions designed to prevent alien terrorists from entering the United States,particularly from Canada; to enable authorities to detain and deport alien terrorists and those who support them; and to provide humanitarian immigration relief for foreign victims of the attacks on September 11. Other Crimes, Penalties, & Procedures New crimes: The Act creates new federal crimes for terrorist attacks on mass transportation facilities, for biological weapons offenses, for harboring terrorists, for affording terrorists material support, for misconduct associated with money laundering already mentioned, for conducting the affairs of an enterprise which affects interstate or foreign commerce through the patterned commission of terrorist offenses, and for fraudulent charitable solicitation. Although strictly speaking these are new federal crimes, they generally supplement existing law by filling gaps and increasing penalties. New Penalties: The Act increases the penalties for acts of terrorism and for crimes which terrorists might commit. More specifically it establishes an alternative maximum penalty for acts of terrorism,raises the penalties for conspiracy to commit certain terrorist offenses, envisions sentencing some terrorists to life-long parole, and increases the penalties for counterfeiting, cybercrime, and charity fraud. Other Procedural Adjustments: In other procedural adjustments designed to facilitate criminal investigations, the Act: • increases the rewards for information in terrorism cases; • expands the Posse Comitatus Act exceptions; • authorizes"sneak and peek" search warrants; • permits nationwide and perhaps worldwide execution of warrants in terrorism cases; • eases government access to confidential information; • allows the Attorney General to collect DNA samples from prisoners convicted of any federal crime of violence or terrorism; • lengthens the statute of limitations applicable to crimes of terrorism; • clarifies the application of federal criminal law on American installations and in residences of U.S. government personnel overseas; and • adjust federal victims' compensation and assistance programs. A section, found in the Senate bill but ultimately dropped,would have changed the provision of federal law which requires Justice Department prosecutors to adhere to the ethical standards of the legal profession where they conduct their activities(the McDade- Murtha Amendment), 28 U.S.C. 530B. ' LLRX.Corn - The USA PATRIOT Act and Patron Privacy on Library Internet Terminals Page lof5 ED com INavigation SEARCH Features The USA PATRIOT Act and Patron Privacy onLibrary Internet Terminals By MarvMinow Mary Ming iaalibrary law consultant with libraoaw.com. She iscurrently writing a book on library law for the American Library Association with Tomas Lipinski. This |ibnarylaw.00m column is not intended to replace legal advice. Fora particular fact situation, consult anattorney. Published Fobrua(yY5. 2002 Within hours after the September 11 attacks, the FBI began serving search warrants to major Internet Service Providers tnget information about suspected electronic communications *2 Within a week, police and FBI agents received tips that some suspects used libraries in Hollywood Beach and Delray Beach, Florida. FBI agents have since requested computer sign-in lists from other libraries. President Bush signed the USA PATRIOT Act into law on October 26, 2001. This law is expected to greatly increase the number of requests for sign-in lists at libraries. What iathe USA PATRIOT Act? ` The USA PATRIOT Act stands for the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001. The legislation is broad and changes immigration laws, tightens controls on money laundering, and greatly expands the legal use ofelectronic surveillance. The Act greatly expands the use of"roving wiretaps."This means that a wiretap order targeted to a person is no longer confined to o particular computer ortelephone. |noteod, itmay^rove^ wherever the target goes, which may include library computers. The new law allows a court to issue an order that is valid anywhere in the U.S. This greatly increases a library's exposure to court orders. Further, the use of pen/trap orders is now"technology neutral" and applies to the Internet as well as telephones. Whereas incoming and outgoing phone numbers have long been available upon the mere showing that they are relevant tnonongoing investigation, now email headers and URLs visited are available under the same low standard. Civil liberties advocates argued that such information is not analogous to phone numbers, but far more revealing (ino|uding. for example, the keywords used inGoogle searches such uu blip-://www.ggogle.com/search?hI=en&q=m—ary±m�inow). _ Much of the Act expands the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act(FISA), in which the standards for courts to approve surveillance of foreign intelligence gathering are far less demanding than those required for approval of criminal wiretap, which requires a showing ofprobable cause. http://wvvm.l|cx.com/feaU/rcs/usuputrintact.btno 9/12/02 LLRX.com - The USA PATRIOT Act and Patron Privacy on Library Internet Terminals Page 2 of Librarians can get a good sense of the legal requirements by reading the guidance just issued to federal agents by the Department of Justice.3 . What does the USA PATRIOT Act mean for libraries? The upshot is that there will be a great many more surveillance orders, everywhere in the country, and in turn there will be more requests for library records, including Internet use records. Think of law enforcement as needing to enter two doors to apprehend a suspect. Door One leads to the computer server. La.:en orcement can find electronic tracks through email or Internet history logs. They may have intercepted messages through surveillance or other means. This leads to a particular computer terminal, date and time. Door Two leads to the individual. This person could be someone using the Internet in a library, particularly someone who wishes to remain anonymous. The FBI (or others)will want to see a library record of who was using the library's terminal(s)at a particular date and time. If the library keeps sign-up records, law enforcement will want to see those records. Will the FBI (or other law enforcement) ask to put surveillance technology on library computers? In many cases, the surveillance technology will be placed elsewhere, and lead law enforcement directly to Door Two. However, it is possible that the FBI will approach the library and ask to place software (such as the controversial DCS1000 (also known as Carnivore) on library servers.4 Libraries should be sure to insist on a court order before complying. Note that libraries that share servers with cities or others may not be directly approached. Should a library cooperate with the FBI (or other law enforcement) in giving library Internet sign up lists? Yes, but advisedly with a court order. This is where the library's individual policies and procedures will become increasingly important. Does the library require sign-ups? If there are no sign-up lists, the inquiry essentially halts. Does the library allow first names only, or made-up names? Does it require identification? Library cards with addresses? Does it keep sign-up records, and if so, for how long? Does it use an automated system that ties library card numbers (tied to registration information)to Internet use? Is such information electronically disengaged after use and electronically shredded? Is it backed up on computer tapes? How long are backup tapes kept? Search warrants are court orders, signed by a magistrate or a judge. Libraries are explicitly barred under Calif. Gov't. Code §6267 from disclosing patron registration or circulation records, excepting staff administrative use, written consent by the patron, or an order from the appropriate superior court.5 Whether or not the law protects Internet use records from disclosure without a court order(this includes search warrants) is not entirely clear. Many libraries consider these records as an extension of registration/circulation records, in that personally identifying information linking patron names with content is involved. Additionally, another section of the law known as the "personal privacy" exemption, provides that certain types of information may be kept confidential by a public agency where the disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.6 Finally, library policies that protect such records, if well drafted, might protect Internet use records. For an argument that the state law should be updated to reflect the use of Internet in California libraries, see my article in California Libraries April 4, 1999.7 Should my library use sign-ups for Internet terminals? If we use sign-up records, are they subject to the California Public Records Act, making us at risk if we destroy them? Libraries generally decide on whether and how to use sign-up procedures based on the supply http://www.11rx.com/features/usapatriotact.htni 9/12/02 LLRX.com - The USA PATRIOT Act and Patron Privacy on Library Internet Terminals Page 3 of 5 and demand of Internet terminals. Sometimes libraries want identification to afford a measure of accountability i.e. prevent hacking. Libraries should be aware, however, that the sign-up procedure has considerable privacy implications. If records are kept, it is best if precise information can be extracted (e.g. user at Terminal#2 on November 13, 2001 at 1 p.m.)without giving out other patron's data. Under the California Public Records Act, the library is not required to create or maintain Internet use records, any more than numerous other temporary records libraries may keep, such as reference query logs. Once records are created and kept, however, they are subject to court orders, and possibly to open records requests. (Remember that it's possible these records have the same privacy safeguards as circulation and registration records described above.) Although libraries are not required to create or maintain such records, it is definitely not advisable to destroy the records after a law enforcement or public request for disclosure. In a case in New Hampshire, a father requested a school's computer internet logs (in this case, the electronic records of sites visited). He was concerned that the school library's acceptable use policy was inadequate. When the school did not turn over the logs, the father sued under the state's Right- To-Know law. The county superior court ordered the school to turn over the logs, with the user names and passwords omitted. In January 2001, however, the Court found that the school had intentionally deleted the logs after the father filed suit. It found the school to be in contempt of court, and ordered it to produce the remaining records and pay the father his costs and attorney's fees.$ In addition, local ordinances may apply. Check with the library's attorney. I read that the USA PATRIOT Act allows federal agents to get court orders for the production of"business records." Does that include library records? The Act states that the FBI may apply for an order requiring the "production of any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents and other items)for an investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities, provided that such investigation of a United States person is not conducted solely upon the basis of activities protected by the first amendment..."9 This provision is designed to get ISP records of user billing information. Library patrons who are merely accessing information on Internet terminals should have strong First Amendment arguments. Nevertheless, it's not clear whether they would win. Senator Russ Feingold tried to get an amendment to clarify that the Act would not preempt existing federal and state privacy laws, by maintaining existing criteria for records, such as library records. This amendment failed. Also, it should be noted that this "business records" provision is an amendment of the FISA law, which means that court proceedings are not open and are sealed. I read that a research librarian tipped off the police in Florida. Can l do that, or must I wait for them to come to me? If you recognize a picture in the newspaper as one of your patrons, that is not divulging a library record. If, on the other hand, you recognize a suspect's names from library records, you should definitely check in with your attorney before deciding whether to call the police. In Broward County, Florida, the library was issued an order by a federal grand jury to collect library records when a patron fitting the description of Mohamed Atta, an alleged terrorist leader, was seen using computers with Internet access.10 The order was given with specific instructions not to release information to anyone other than federal authorities. Recall that the vast majority of library patrons are not terrorists, and libraries should make all efforts to protect patron privacy. Wasn't there an FBI program years ago that sent FBI agents into libraries asking for reading habits of suspicious looking people? http://www.11rx.com/features/usapatriotact.htm 9/12/02 LLRX.com - The USA PATRIOT Act and Patron Privacy on Library Internet Terminals Page 4 of 5 Yes. The FBI Library Awareness Program was a program that ran for about 25 years, in which FBI agents tried to enlist the assistance of librarians in monitoring the reading habits of "suspicious" individuals. Such individuals were variously defined as people with Eastern European or Russian-soundinq names or acccnts, or cominn frn r rum hostile to the U.S.12 During the Library Awareness Program, some FBI-agents wrongly claimed that they were not subject to statutes protecting library records.13 The efforts were largely unsuccessful, due to the tremendous outrage and resistance from those in the library profession. The most important lesson that libraries learned was the importance of training the "friendly front desk clerk" and even volunteers not to hand over the information, but to refer all inquiries, even by badged FBI agents, to the library director. How is the library community responding to the anti-terrorism legislation? The American Library Association joined with the Association of Research Libraries and the Association of American Law Libraries in issuing a statement on the proposed anti-terrorism measures. It says that libraries do not monitor information sought or read by library users. To the extent that libraries "capture" usage information of computer logs, libraries comply with court orders for law enforcement. The statement is also concerned that the legislation, which makes it easier to access business records, may in some cases apply to library circulation records. It recommends that legislators keep high standard for court order regarding release of library records.l4 Where should libraries go to get guidance on FBI search warrants? The Freedom to Read Foundation is making some legal assistance available to librarians. Librarians are advised to call the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom and request legal advice from Jenner& Block without disclosing the existence of a warrant. For more details, see the ALA's recently issued Alert: USA PATRIOT Act.1' Footnotes 1. This "bottom line" is dedicated to Thad Phillips,who said, "Mary, I know you're smart, but when I read your articles, I just want to get to the bottom line." 2. "FBI turns to Internet for terrorism clues," http://www,cnn,com/2001/TECH/internet/09/13/fbi.isr)s/ (visited November 15, 2001). 3. See United States. Department of Justice. Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section. Field Guidance on New Authorities that Relate to Computer Crime and Electronic Evidence Enacted in the USA Patriot Act of 2001, http_//www_usdoi.gov__/criminal/cvbercrime/PatriotAct.htm (visited November 13, 2001). 4. For more on current software/hardware surveillance technology, see Jack Karp, Chewing on Carnivore, TechTV, October 16, 2001 (visited November 13, 2001). 5. See Calif. Gov't. Code §6254 and §6267 (2001). The library may not disclose these records except to a) staff within the scope of administrative duties, b)with written consent from the patron, or c) by order of the appropriate superior court. Although California law refers to the "appropriate superior court,"the USA PATRIOT Act still requires court orders, but allows courts in any jurisdiction to issue orders. Federal law will supersede state law in this case (unless the Act is later found unconstitutional). 6. Calif. Gov't. Code, § 6.254(c) (2001). 7. See Mary Minow, "Library patron internet records and freedom of information laws," California http://www.11rx.com/features/usapatriotact.htm 9/12/02 LLRX.com - The USA PATRIOT Act and Patron Privacy on Library Internet Terminals Page 5 of 5 Libraries, April 4, 1999, pp. 8-9, reprinted at http://www.lib[arylaw.com/publicrecords.htmi (visited October 3, 2001). 8. James M. Knight v. School Administrative Unit#16 Docket No. 00-E-307, Rockingham, SS. Superior Court, New Hampshire.-See"Exeter Internet Ruling, Complete Ruling," Portsmouth Herald, January 8, 2001 at http://www.seacoaston!ine.com/news/1_8special.htm (visited November 15, 2001). 9. USA PATRIOT Act H.R. 3162, Title II Section 215, amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act(FISA), Title V, Section 501(a)(1) http://Ieahy.senate.ciov/press/200110/USA.pdf (visited November 13, 2001) 10. Florida Statute 257.261 The Florida Statute is very similar to the Calif. Gov't Code §6254 and §6267. 11. John Holland, Paula McMahon, Fred Schulte and Jonathon King, "Library computers targeted in terrorism investigation, "Sun-Sentinel, September 18, 2001 at http://www.sun- sentinel.com/news/southflorida/sfl-culpr!ts918.story (visited October 3, 2001). 12. See Herbert N. Foerstel, Surveillance in the Stacks: The FBI's Library Awareness Program, (Greenwood Press 1991); Ulrika Ekman Ault, "Note: The FBI's Library Awareness Program: Is Big Brother Reading Over Your Shoulder?" 65 N.Y.U.L. Rev. 1532 (December, 1990); 13. Senator Simon, Academic Libraries Must Oppose Federal Surveillance of Their Users, 100th Cong. 2nd Sess., 134 Cong Rec. S 4806 (1988)(republishing an article by Gerald R. Shields, Chronicle of Higher Education)cited in Mark Paley, The Library Awareness Program: The FBI in the Bookshelves at http://hometown.aol.com/palevmark/library.htm (visited October 1, 2001). 14. Library Community Statement on Proposed Anti-Terrorism Measures and Library Community Letter to Congress on Anti-Terrorism Legislation (pdf file) at http://www.ala.org/washoff/ (visited October 4, 2001). 15. American Library Association. Office for Intellectual Freedom Alert: USA Patriot Act hftp://www.ala.org/alaorg/oif/alertusapatriotact.html (visited November 12, 2001). Copyright©2001-2002 Mary Minow. A BACK TO TOP OF PAGE [LLRX Front Pa i Bookstore i Archives i About LLRX i Subscribe i I Comments i Privac Policy] Copyright© 1996- it 11 D IV 0 Law Library Resource 0 Xchange, LLC. 2002 COM All rights reserved. littp://www.11rx.com/features/usapatriotact.htm 9/12/02 Monthly Report September 2002 for Tigard Library Board 1. Meeting was held on September 19, 2002. 2. Current activities: The Board did not meet in August. Margaret reviewed with the Board library activities for August and September. The Board continues to receive updates on the progress of the WCCLS Local Option Levy. Board reviewed an informational brochure about the Ballot measure that was published by WCCLS. There was also discussion about the WCCLS funding formula and the steps the CLAB and LDB are taking to reach a decision with the disbursement of funds. The Board is in the process of reviewing Library policies and procedures. This month, they reaffirmed and endorsed the Library Bill of Rights and the Freedom to Read Act. The Board discussed the Patriot Act which was enacted in response to the terrorist acts of September 11, 2001. The Board concluded that there needs to be future discussion and understanding of the Act. The Board continues to participate in the building process of the new Tigard Library. Board members will be involved in several meetings including the community meeting scheduled for October 16. Some Board members recently toured the property. One of the Board members is president of the Library Foundation and there is a fundraising event planned for Friday, April 4, 2003. 3. Status of long-term projects: Due to the passage of the Bond Measure for the new Tigard Library, Board members will continue to play an important role in the building process for the new Library. 4. Number of volunteer hours contributed this month: The Library Board donated 9 hours for the meeting. 5. Attachments (include notifications, sign-in sheets, minutes, reports,press releases, proposals, etc.) - List: 1. Agenda for September 19 meeting 2. Draft copy of the September Board minutes 3. Copy of the July and August 2002 Monthly Reports (September 2002 report not yet available)