Is this what Library Trustees should be doing?

• June 4, 2025 Parental Guidance: A new front emerges in battle between far-right, LGBTQ+ themed books • Michigan Advance 

• July 2, 2025  Politicized pastor seeks library limits to ‘protect children’ – Baptist News Global 

• August 4, 2025 ACLU lawyer weighs in on library policy regarding LGBTQ books  

• August 26, 2025  WHMI 93.5 Local News : Community Forum To Defend "Right To Read" 

• September 26, 2025  34 books removed, labeled or relocated at Cromaine Library 

• October 22, 2025  Michigan library board to read more than 200 book opposed by community members - CBS Detroit 

• Dec 1, 2025 Book Banning Is Back - ACLU of Michigan 

• May 7, 2026 GUEST COLUMN: Cromaine board’s ideological war punishes library staff – The Livingston Post.com 

• June 2, 2026 GUEST COLUMN: Cromaine’s mass relocation of LGBTQ books raises Constitutional concerns – The Livingston Post.com 

• June 27, 2026 ACLU raises First Amendment concerns over Hartland library board's decision to reshelve LGBTQ+ books • Michigan Advance 

• July 13, 2026  Free Expression Under Threat as Michigan Public Library Board Moves Hundreds of Children’s Books to the Adult Section  - PEN America 

Trustee Bill Bolin assisted a coordinated book challenge in which twelve people affiliated with his church network submitted challenges to 218 books.  The forms stated they objected to the "LGBTQ lifestyle" and that they wanted the books removed from the library. These books are all LGBTQ+ related and involve parenting guides, civil rights history, autobiographies, fictional stories, and constitutional rights.  The challengers did not read the books nor did they cite pages or references to support their claims that the books were "exploitive to children". They also stated their religious beliefs on these topics should take precedence over the constitutional rights of others to read the books.

When the Director responded she couldn't remove books based on viewpoint, the Board changed the request to check for "sexually explicit content" in the books.  The Director reviewed the challenged books and provided detailed professional replies back to the challengers.  All her decisions were rejected by the challengers and appealed to the Board who then granted appeals for all the challenged books, voiding all the time and effort of the staff reviewing them. 

The Board majority then created a book review procedure that required them to read each of the appealed books, evaluate for sexually explicit content, fill out a form citing the pages where that content was found, and then vote on retaining, labeling or relocating the books to the adult section. After 58 books (only one was voted for relocation), the board majority abandoned the review process and voted to relocate the remaining youth books to the adult section without any review.  This action directly contradicted their own procedure and the criteria they had required staff to follow.   

The relocation decision was not based on age appropriateness or sexual content.  Many members of the public have checked out the books and reviewed them and have found no justification for their relocation.  These books were simply relocated because our opponents believe that any book on gender identity shouldn't be made available to anyone under 18.  They believe gender identity books are a form of political ideology and influence and want to hide and restrict access to them.

The Board received warnings from the library's legal counsel and the ACLU that relocating books without review or justification to a different age section constitutes viewpoint censorship, constitutional violations of minors' First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights, and failure to comply with the library's reconsideration procedures. (Board of Education v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982)), (Sund v. City of Wichita Falls, N.D. Tex. (2025))

Our opponents ignored both the library's legal counsel and the ACLU.   When Trustee Naylor requested the book challenge be added to the August agenda for re-discussion, President Gogoleski refused and said the decision was final.

Below are examples of some of the books that were relocated to the adult section.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is a nonprofit civil rights organization, founded in 1920, dedicated to defending the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.   The ACLU works to protect freedom of expression, freedom of religion, privacy, due process, and equality under the law for all people in the United States. It intervenes when government actions threaten civil liberties — whether through censorship, discrimination, surveillance, or abuse of power.  Their letters to the Board are in the following articles.

• June 4, 2025 Parental Guidance: A new front emerges in battle between far-right, LGBTQ+ themed books • Michigan Advance 

• June 27, 2026 ACLU raises First Amendment concerns over Hartland library board's decision to reshelve LGBTQ+ books • Michigan Advance

For decades, public libraries across the United States have relied on two foundational documents to guide ethical, constitutional, and professional practice: the Library Bill of Rights and the Intellectual Freedom Statement, both developed by the American Library Association (ALA). These statements articulate core principles such as patron privacy, equitable access to materials, and protection from censorship or discrimination.

Our opponents removed both of these from library policy last year hoping the public wouldn’t care or notice. These standards are rooted in the First and Fourteenth Amendments of our constitution:

Patrons have the right to read, explore, and learn without government interference:

• Collections must be built without discrimination based on race, age, religion, sex, sexual orientation, or viewpoint.

• The library must uphold the rights of library users to read, seek information, and speak freely as guaranteed by the First Amendment. 

• Libraries must protect patron privacy, including what individuals choose to read or borrow.

• Materials cannot be removed or restricted because of partisan, ideological, or viewpoint disagreement.
  
  

Without these standards, a library board has far more latitude to limit access, remove materials based on ideology, or insert personal beliefs into collection decisions.  Which is exactly what the Board majority did after removing them.  Deleting the Library Bill of Rights doesn’t ‘restore neutrality’, it simply means our opponents have no intention of following these constitutional principles -  and they haven't.   That should concern any patron who values their rights as an individual and a parent to privacy and equality at the library.

Library Bill of Rights | ALA 

Intellectual Freedom | ALA 

The Board majority’s decision to end staff memberships in the American Library Association (ALA) and Michigan Library Association (MLA) negatively affects the library's finances, workforce, and community programming.

1. Fiscal Mismanagement & Waste

• Higher Costs for Taxpayers: Canceling these memberships does not save money. Library staff still require ongoing professional development and certifications to maintain operations. Paying non-member rates for the same mandatory training effectively doubles the cost to taxpayers.

• Loss of Shared Resources: MLA and ALA memberships grant access to statewide resource-sharing platforms, grants and scholarships, group-purchasing discounts, and legal guidance that keep operational costs lower.
  
  

2. Workforce Retention & Credentialing Risk

• Threat to Recruitment: The ALA is the sole accrediting body for a Master of Library Science (MLS and MLIS) degree programs nationwide. Cutting ties with standard industry associations signals to qualified candidates that Cromaine does not support professional standards, placing the library at a severe competitive disadvantage in recruiting skilled staff.

• Loss of Quality Programming: Staff that are not supported for accredited certifications degrade the quality of services and programming delivered to Hartland residents.
  
  

3. Governance and Accountability

• Isolation from Best Practices: Membership in state organizations ensures Hartland’s specific local needs and perspectives are represented in broader library policy discussions.

• Refusal to Engage in Board Education: The Board majority has simultaneously opted out of board-specific governance training offered by these organizations.  This means the Board is governing without ongoing education or tools to ensure compliance, manage operational risk, and implement best practices.
  
  

Cutting industry-standard professional memberships increases costs, undermines staff retention, and isolates our library from essential statewide resources.  We believe in supporting the Director's decisions regarding staff memberships and that it is essential for Trustees to continue education for themselves as well!  

Our opponents continue to claim that Cromaine’s book collection has been “unbalanced for years.”   There is no evidence supporting this.  The only legitimate way to determine collection balance is through a professional collection assessment conducted by trained staff or an independent evaluator, using actual circulation data, subject distribution reports, and comparisons to peer libraries. No such assessment has been done showing Cromaine’s collection to be unbalanced.

This narrative is being used to undermine professional librarianship. By inventing a problem, they position themselves to impose their own viewpoints as the “solution.”

Trustee Smith has repeatedly alleged that Cromaine’s staff are “radical leftists” indoctrinated by the American Library Association and Michigan Library Association and therefore only select liberal books. There is no factual basis for this claim. Librarians use dozens of professional review sources, publishing lists, and evaluation tools — not political ideology — to select materials.

Opponents also claim the library lacks Christian and conservative books. Again, no collection analysis or evidence to support this claim.

⭐ How Library Materials Are Actually Selected

Library materials are not categorized, labeled, or purchased by political ideology. Materials are organized by subject, discipline, format, and author.

Cromaine’s staff select materials according to the Material Selection and Readers’ Guidance Policy, which includes criteria such as:

• Community needs, interests, relevance, and demand

• Literary, artistic, historical, scientific, or intellectual merit

• Reviews from professional journals and nationally recognized publications

• Diversity of viewpoint and availability of other information

• Factual accuracy and reliability
  
  

These criteria are standard across public libraries nationwide.

⭐ Cromaine’s Access Is Far Broader Than Its Shelves

Cromaine provides access to hundreds of thousands of books, magazines, and media through its catalog and statewide interlibrary loan system.

If a book or series is not available, the most common reasons are:

• Insufficient professional reviews

• Lack of demonstrated community demand

• Failure to meet factual or reputational standards

• Space or budget constraints
  
  

None of these reasons relate to political ideology.

⭐ The “New Balance” Claim Is False

Opponents claim they are “changing the balance” of the collection to appeal to Christian and conservative families. In reality:

• Cromaine has always offered extensive materials for Christian and conservative readers.

• Cromaine serves a majority‑conservative district, and its collection reflects those community interests.

• Community surveys do not show dissatisfaction with Cromaine’s materials or programs.

• Patrons have always been able to request any book directly to the Library Director for consideration to add to the collection. This is a long‑standing practice, not a new policy our opponents are trying to take credit for.
  
  

The truth is that these trustees simply don't understand how libraries work and their refusal to participate in board training has left them unaware of basic tools and procedures that have existed for decades. Their idea of "balancing" a collection is to put books that have their preferred viewpoint front and center on the shelves and to hide or censor everything else they don't agree with.

Over the past year, false claims have been made by Board trustees suggesting that Cromaine Library provides pornographic or sexually explicit materials to children. These allegations are baseless. Public libraries follow strict state guidelines and internal policies to ensure that such content is not placed in children’s areas.

Despite knowing this, Trustees Gogoleski and Smith appeared on a political podcast and displayed an excerpt from the book Gender Queer, implying it was accessible to children. In truth, that book is, and has always been, in the adult section. Presenting an adult book with sexual content as evidence of “pornography in the children’s area” is lying and misinforming the public to spread manufactured outrage and propaganda.

Trustees are not supposed to create confusion, distrust, and unnecessary hostility toward library staff through lies and misinformation to further their personal agendas.

Our opponents have used their positions to actively discriminate against the LGBTQ+ staff and patrons at Cromaine:

• They removed all the book displays and pride month

• Proposed "criminal prosecution" labeling on gender identity books 

• Ordered the labeling of LGBTQ+ picture books with "social issues" labels

• Relocated 100+ gender identity books to the adult section to hide them from view and deter teens from finding them 

• Made false comments claiming gender identity and transgenderism is being forced on kids by the library 

• Removed the Library Bill of Rights which safeguards patrons against discrimination and censorship  

Our opponents have repeatedly demonstrated they are willing to lie to the public and smear the reputation of our library and its staff to manufacture outrage against LGBTQ+ materials and patrons. Trustees—and the public institutions they represent—are obligated to uphold constitutional rights, follow established policy, and make decisions based on evidence rather than ideology. When officials abandon those obligations, they don’t just fail the library; they undermine the rule of law and the community’s trust.