I am writing to express my concern about the proposed rules change for 15 CSR 3-200.010, and the negative impact it will have on our public libraries. As a regular library customer, I enjoy and have come to expect a wide variety of materials at my library, representing all types of people, ideals, and interests. The proposed rules change will severely limit the types of materials at my library, and may even impact the funding of my library so heavily that they would be forced to close their doors. These are unacceptable, but inevitable, outcomes should this rule take effect. I urge you to consider the importance of libraries in our community and the services they provide. A cut in funding means a cut in all services, not just books and movies, but wifi and computer access for those who can’t afford it, early literacy opportunities, technology classes for job seekers, and safe spaces for all. These services cannot be replicated at other institutions and are too important to our community to lose.

As a person who values libraries, the expertise of librarians, and access to a variety of viewpoints in my public library, I’d like to make sure you are aware of why your proposed rule 15 CSR 3-200.010 is a problem for me and others like me. First, we trust librarians, and know that they spend a lot of time already being thoughtful about their collections to make sure everyone is represented. Second, even if we personally decide a certain book might not be right for our kids, we strongly feel that one parent or group should not be able to determine what is available to other peoples’ children. No one else should be able to choose what my child can, or cannot access. The proposed rule would also put an undue burden on library employees, who already are making do with fewer resources than they need to do their jobs. Small libraries who benefit from the funding you control will be the most impacted, with unnecessary restriction imposed that libraries may not have the time or staff to complete. Rural communities will suffer the most from this proposal, and your constituents with smaller libraries will find themselves with even fewer resources. Rather than demonizing those working every day to provide access to everyone in their communities, we ask you to reconsider your proposed rule.

I am writing to you as a Missouri resident to express concern over the latest legal changes to Missouri rules and laws that undermine public libraries. Library spaces, collections, and programs are meant to be broadly diverse. The program you want to attend, or book you want to read might not be what I appreciate, but that’s okay because other programs and books will be. What’s right for myself and my family is something that I should be able to personally decide. It’s important that libraries remain a space where everyone in the community can find something for them, that represents them. This proposed rule would require significant censorship, would turn a community resource meant for everyone into a much more limited and exclusionary space, and would infringe on the rights of individuals and parents to decide what resources are right for them. This is not what your constituents want, and I urge you to withdraw this proposed rule.

I am deeply concerned about the proposed rule 15 CSR 3-200.010 and the impact it will have on library collections. There has been an alarming trend in recent months of using libraries as a political talking point, which I believe is worrisome. A rule like this will enforce censorship in order to appeal to a very small minority, or risk loss of funds that will decrease access to resources even further. This is not what Missouri residents want. Library staff should also not be put in a position to decide who gets to access materials, as this rule suggests, particularly where minors are concerned. This right should remain with parents and guardians, allowing them to determine what is right for their child and their family. No one person or group should be able to extend this to making decisions about access for everyone, as this would be an infringement on the rights of other parents and families. Please reconsider this rule.