Skip to main content

Library Board: Miller Doubles Down on Confidentiality Claims, Public Comments Remain Critical

The Goshen News - Staff Photo - Create Article
By
Staff Writer

12/18/24

Five months after Town Attorney Chip Roraback issued his opinion letter stating that the Reconsideration Request forms for the book Gender Queer were public documents subject to Freedom of Information disclosure, Library Board member Lynette Miller issued a stinging rebuttal.

In the course of her presentation to the Board, she was dismissive of Roraback’s expertise, challenged former Library Director Tabitha Guarnieri’s integrity, and accused the Goshen News of inaccurate reporting and manipulation of the State’s Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC). While other board members expressed reluctance to rehash what they see as having been a settled issue for some time, Miller insisted that rehashing was necessary, in the interest of future protections of library users’ confidentiality.

She began her presentation by reading a portion of an email from the FOIC Director of Education & Communications (DOEC), who had previously advised both The Goshen News and Director Guarnieri that the forms were public documents and subject to disclosure under FOIA, the CT Freedom of Information Act. In the portion of his 12/18/24 email that Miller read, he stated: “Yes, I would agree that if the documents were not reviewed and discussed during the public meeting that does change things. I was under the understanding that the board was weighing in on the individual reconsideration requests rather than just briefly mentioning they had been received.” She conjectured that perhaps Attorney Roraback was under the same misunderstanding and questioned his expertise on library law. She then accused The Goshen News of not having given the Director complete information.

Working with the FOIC Director, Goshen News found Miller withheld information from the Library Board. In her presentation, she omitted the very next sentence in the Director’s email, which stated: “They are still public records,”.  He further explained that some information, such as complainants’ identities might possibly be determined to be subject to the library confidentiality statute, stating “perhaps the decision [of the Commission] would be to release them with identifying information redacted.” Unaddressed was the question of whether or not the discussions of the reconsideration forms and their contents occurred  during the Public Comments portion of various Library Board meetings, making Miller’s  statement that the forms were just briefly identified as being received was accurate.  A number of people who submitted reconsideration forms also spoke openly at those meetings, identifying themselves and the opinions they had expressed in the forms. In addition,  The Goshen News never published copies of the forms or the names of the people who submitted them.

Part of Miller’s argument revolved around the definition of who is a “user” of the library, as “users” are the beneficiaries of confidentiality protections under CT statutes. She made a case that since the American Library Association uses the term “user” and “patron” loosely, and all Goshen taxpayers are patrons because their tax dollars support the library.   The DOEC however, stated that “you can define library user broadly, certainly, but I don’t know if someone who is a taxpayer who has never set foot in the library is considered a “user”. The term is not defined in the statute. Our statute uses “user” not “patron”.”

Miller again attacked the integrity of departing Library Director Guarnieri, who had already tendered her resignation, blaming a toxic work environment that she attributed, in part, to Miller’s harassment. In spite of her resignation, Ms. Guarnieri voluntarily remained in her position until December 31st to assist the Town with training of her replacement. Miller challenged Guarnieri’s releasing of the forms to CT Mirror, an online non-profit, non-partisan newspaper, on April 23rd, 2 days prior to receiving an April 25th email from FOIC’s Director stating that she should do so. But Guarnieri had in fact been provided earlier with a copy of a March 4th email sent to The Goshen News by the Director confirming the public nature of the documents and their FOIA discoverability. She obtained her own confirmational email from the DOEC when it became clear to her that Miller was attacking her.

Miller also spoke at some length about a case in Colorado, involving a challenge similar to Goshen’s, in which copies of reconsideration forms targeting the same book were being requested under that state’s Open Records Act.  In a handout to board members, she included copies of an email from CT FOIC attorney Nicholas A. Smarra, from which she selectively read. Mr. Smarra discussed a Colorado Appeals Court ruling that confidentiality laws do apply to reconsideration forms created by the library. But Miller’s narrative again omitted the fact that even in the Colorado case, the only question was whether the identities of the petitioners were to be held in confidence. The forms and the rest of their content were considered public documents and were subject to disclosure, as the court ruled that “the requestor was entitled to the reconsideration forms but that the identities of the individuals who submitted those forms must be redacted”.

In a follow-up discussion between The Goshen News and FOIC’s Director, he stated that the Colorado case has no bearing in Connecticut and that no such case has ever been brought in the State, and therefore no decision has ever been rendered on this issue.

Public Comments

Goshen resident and library aide Thy Ho expressed appreciation for Guarnieri and “for her perseverance over the past year. It’s been difficult in the conditions she has to work.” She also advised the Library Board that “When I’m here and I’m not working, I am here as a resident, a concerned parent, a patron of the library.” Ho had faced disciplinary action, now rescinded, over speaking at a Library Board meeting, which she properly claims as a First Amendment Constitutional right.

Goshen resident Chiva Sandage’s comments included: “I was shocked to witness our Library Director belittled, disrespected and harassed over and over again about all manner of subjects in public board meetings”. Having watched several zoom recordings of past meetings, she said she understood that the library is “a toxic workplace”. (Note: All but the most recent meeting recordings have been removed from the Town website. Request to obtain them by Goshen News have to date gone unfulfilled.)

Goshen resident and retired attorney Harry Leonard spoke about “prior restraint and taking books out of circulation based on content.”

There is no concept in our Constitution for removing books based on people’s thinking that the content is troublesome, like the Gender Queer book”, Leonard said. “It’s not for the Library Board or any individual to use prior restraint, and our community is getting a reputation…that this is a place that is for the restraint of the Freedom of Speech and the freedom of taking books out of a public library. If you want that reputation to grow, you’ll go down that road, but I urge you not to ever restrain books based on their content, because it’s unconstitutional and it’s inappropriate.”