« Backstory on California school libraries' line item on the state income tax form, and an update on current funding from InfoSherpa Richard Moore | Main | New legislation to make libraries and schools block MySpace - House bill introduced Feb. 16th »

Comments

Why for 6 months? Because the patron has been told multiple times, been banned for shorter terms for the same or similar offenses, becomes hostile and combative when confronted by library staff, flouts shorter periods of banishment.

A better question: how can a library impose a 6-month ban in the first place? Pretty heavy overkill isn't it? If we're talking about simple disruptive behaviors, isn't a week sufficient cooling time? A month at the outside?

A better question: how can a library impose a 6-month ban in the first place? Pretty heavy overkill isn't it? If we're talking about simple disruptive behaviors, isn't a week sufficient cooling time? A month at the outside?

I don't recall seeing this addressed by the courts. I know many places just put it in the form given to patrons at the time of banning. If any readers have comments, please add to the discussion.

Mary, do the courts say if we have to put a statement about the appeals process in the behavior policy that we post for the public or can we just put the appeals process in a form we would give to patrons that have been banned?

The comments to this entry are closed.