Iowa Public Libraries: Sex Offender Ban

The latest legal change for Iowa's libraries asks us to balance the civil right of information access with the protective duty of our criminal justice system. In short, the new Iowa sex offender bill bans certain registered sex offenders from public library property. After reading this new amendment to Iowa law (called Senate Bill 340 - available to the public at www.iowasexoffender.com) I ask - what is the purpose of this law, and to whom exactly does it apply? In order to provide high quality service to our citizens and communities, public librarians must interpret the law in an empowering way.

Public libraries are now an exclusion zone for sex offenders convicted of offenses against minors. Thus, this law compares public libraries to public schools and child care centers. As institutions that are supported by taxpayers and serve children, public libraries do have some obligation to protect minors who use the library. However, public libraries are also vital information resources for all citizens in a democratic community, including those with criminal backgrounds. So does restricting library access truly prevent crime, or is the restricted access simply an infringement of civil rights without due case?

ACLU activist Dave Muller observes that sex offenses against minors vary widely. Some legal offenses may not be entirely morally reprehensible. For example, Muller puts forth the scenario of a 17-year old boy transmitting nude photos of his 17-year old girlfriend. While not particularly admirable, this behavior is at least understandable. In the age of Web 2.0, such social activity may even be relatively common. Anyone who has surfed the internet without safety settings knows that an unbelievable amount of smut circulates digitally. However common, when such actions involve persons under the age of 18, they are classified as "Tier I" sex offenses. Criminal law defines the age of minority to protect, but Muller's practical (and definitely realistic) example illustrates how the term "sex offender" encompasses a wide variety of citizens. Offenders' past actions may not predict future behavior, especially if properly rehabilitated. If they are not likely recidivists, is limiting library access justifiable?

Dave Muller suggested erroneously that the library board chose to enact an optional ban on sex offenders - a misuse of a new government-granted power. Actually, the law's text indicates that Senate File 340 compels libraries to enact such a ban, with the possibility of procedural discretion. While Iowa librarians theoretically could have lobbied against this law, but the possible payoff for user access would have likely drowned with voter disapproval. Additionally, a detailed view of public library policy in Iowa City demonstrates, high-quality service is still possible without direct access to library property. For instance, online resources are still available; additionally, sex offenders can hold a library card and have a proxy select and check out materials for them. Alternatively, these sex offenders are also likely eligible for at-home services (e.g. book delivery for the homebound).

ICPL's Board President Thomas Dean wrote a well-reasoned response, which explained the compulsion of the law and the Board's decision to offer permission upon written appeal. The criteria for approving such an appeal currently remains in subcommittee. My question to information professionals and citizens alike is - what is valuable in a written appeal? For instance, I think a detailed plan for his/her time spend at the library is important. I want to know how and why the offender wants to use the library. Also, some indication of personal responsibility for his/her prior actions would be welcome.

My only disappointment is that there is no obvious confidentiality clause about the appeal process. Having to apply for using a civic institution is disempowering enough. Without an explicit commitment to maintaining confidentiality, he/she may think: "The risk of being further 'outed' in my community is not worth the potential benefit of library resources. I won't even try." However, I believe that confidentiality is a given value for the library profession. I look forward to reading the subcommittee's conclusions of criteria.