Library Internet Issues "Fact
Sheet".
Re: Hudsonville, Michigan library filtering debate.
Date: December 9, 1999.
Source: Melissa Huisman, Director of Gary Byker Memorial Library, Hudsonville,
Michigan.
Editor's Notes.
• Melissa Huisman, Director of the Gary Byker Memorial Library, kindly
faxed a copy of the original document to Tech Law Journal.
• This page was created by scanning a fax copy, and converting to HTML.
• Copyright Tech Law Journal 1999. All rights reserved.
LIBRARY INTERNET ISSUES "FACT SHEET"
When the Gary Byker Memorial Library of Hudsonville was expanded and modernized earlier this year, the City added capability for utilizing advancing technologies, including access to the Internet (World Wide Web).
Some months ago, recognizing that our youth might access sites harmf ul to minors, and that library staff could not always monitor their use of the Internet, the City decided to install a filtering system. A specific law allows filtering material deemed "harmful to minors". We spent $24,000 to purchase the SmartGuardian filtering system, recognized as the most technologically advanced filtering system available today. We would have been only the second public library in the nation to use this superior technology.
The SmartGuardian system provides each patron with a plastic SmartCard (like an ATM card). It includes your photograph and a computer microchip which allows adults to make their own choice of five filtering levels. SmartCards for minors (those under 18) could be obtained only by a parent or guardian and, unlike adult SmartCards, minors would automatically be excluded from accessing certain sites which were deemed harmful (the City would require that filtering level). Parents or guardians could also choose higher filtering levels to the point where only a 15,000 site "Safe Harbour" level was accessible to their children. The City was also committed to making physical changes to protect our library users -- recessing computer terminals or installing security panels between terminals as necessary to provide privacy.
The SmartGuardian system has other advantages. The SmartCard could eventually be used to access a variety of library services, including the many special programs we offer. It could also identify city residents (who pay the property taxes needed to support our library) and provide them special advantages.
A few days before SmartGuardian was to become operational, the American Family Association and some local citizens distributed an initiatory petition which would require that all computer terminals, except one, be filtered, not only to minors but to adults! The single remaining "open" terminal would require a sign (with half-inch letters) limiting its use to those over 18 and referencing words such as "obscene", "sexually explicit matter", and "harmful to minors".
The City attempted to meet and discuss concerns with American Family Association officials and local petition circulators, but were denied such a meeting. Petitions requiring a city ordinance to implement these requirements were filed with the City on November 29. By City Charter provision, the City had only two options -- pass the ordinance or refer the question to a public vote.
The American Family Association gained local support for its efforts by engaging in very questionable tactics. They aroused public emotion with sensationalism, innuendoes and half-truths. They publicly accused the City of withholding or destroying public Internet records they had demanded under the Freedom of Information Act and distributed such claims nationwide. In addition to area media, we even were contacted by United Press International and National Public Radio! In fact, the City had made every attempt to provide information requested, even hiring a computer technician to bypass computer security controls to gather information.
[begin page 2]
On December 6, with extreme reluctance, the City Commission passed the ordinance. At the same time, it suspended public Internet use (except for the several educational uses described above) at the library. The reasons were:
We believe the filtering process required is inferior and
unconstitutional in that it violates First Amendment Rights (the Bill of
Rights) assured under the U.S. Constitution. There will undoubtedly be legal
challenges, perhaps in Holland (where a similar issue is pending) or
elsewhere. Many groups, on both sides of this issue, have indicated intent
to challenge. We have already spent about $20,000 in legal costs, in
addition to the $24,000 for the Smart Guardian system, and do not wish to
face a lawsuit. We will wait for that issue to be resolved elsewhere and
then determine our future actions.
This issue has divided the community. Continuing this debacle will only
serve to further that division.
We will not lower our standards to those practiced by the American Family
Association. We deplore its actions and its tactics and hope the community
will recognize how it has harmed this community.
We will not place a 12" x 18" sign (the size needed to meet the requirements of the initiative petition) on the single unfiltered computer because it would "brand" users, regardless of what they might be accessing on the Internet. We might as well hang a sign with the letter "P" on them (for "PERVERT"). That's how they would be viewed by others!
In the interim, we are sorry that you have been denied access to the world around you. We hope that reason will eventually prevail. We want very much to resolve this matter. We are committed to eventually using the SmartGuardian filtering system
GARY BYKER MEMORIAL LIBRARY OF HUDSONVILLE
December 9, 1999