Library sued over borrowing limits, Homeless patrons limited to 2 items

July 07, 2006 

 

Worcester Telegram & Gazette (MA)

By Lee Hammel TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF

lhammel@telegram.com

 

WORCESTER— The city”s public library is being sued in U.S. District Court because of its policy of limiting homeless people and people living in shelters to borrowing no more than two items from the library at a time.

 

The class action suit — filed yesterday on behalf of three homeless people, the Central Massachusetts Housing Alliance, and the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless — alleges violation of due process, equal protection, and free speech rights under the state and federal constitutions. It also says the library violates the American Library Association”s code of ethics and the association”s bill of rights.

 

The suit seeks an injunction preventing the library policy from being enforced and declaring it illegal. It also seeks to have the city pay for plaintiffs” costs and fees.

 

It was filed by the Legal Assistance Corporation of Central Massachusetts and the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts.

 

One plaintiff is a victim of spousal abuse identified as Jane Doe and living in a shelter with her child. She said that she had to enroll her child in public school because she was unable to continue home schooling her child when she was unable to obtain the necessary educational materials from the library.

 

Two other plaintiffs, Suzette Lindgren and Andrew Moyer, are married and live with their 8-year-old daughter at The Village at Cambridge Street, a shelter operated by CMHA at 510 Cambridge St. Avid readers, they have to visit the library numerous times per week to satisfy their reading appetites, according to the suit, which alleges that Ms. Lindgren was embarrassed when a library staffer called attention to her homelessness in the presence of other library patrons.

 

The suit comes at a time when the city is under fire from social services advocates for a proposal to suggest voluntary limits on how residential social services are sited in the city, a proposal to amend state law to allow restrictions on the siting of services for sex offenders, and a campaign against panhandling. And neighborhood advocates are opposing the placement of social services in their areas or even placing any more social services anywhere in the city.

 

But City Solicitor David M. Moore said, “Legally, this is a reasonable policy to address non-returned books. “He said library research shows” people without addresses or addresses at shelters accounted for a substantial percentage of books not returned,” although the library yesterday had no figures available to quantify that.

 

Worcester library officials said other libraries have similar policies, and Mr. Moore said there are “no courts that have found this practice legally objectionable or unconstitutional.” He said that he knows of no cases that have gone to court.

 

Jonathan Mannina, Legal Assistance Corp. executive director, said that other libraries, including Porter County, Ind., have dropped similar policies in the face of opposition without going to court over it. He said the Worcester library has not shared figures on non-returns it attributes to people living in shelters, but he said he is not aware of city policies that discriminate against others who might have a higher rate of no-returns, such as college students, people who live in apartments, or people who live out of town and are allowed to take up to 40 items at a time from the library.

 

He said some people living in shelters are there for as long as two years, while some borrowers with no restriction have lived in the city for less time.

 

Ronal C. Madnick, Worcester County Chapter director of the ACLU, said there have been numerous meetings with library officials and trustees in a fruitless attempt to settle the matter.

 

“The bottom line is, we think people should be judged by what they do and not by the group that they belong to,” he said.

 

Mr. Mannina said the policy “reflects poorly on the city”s commitment to families and children, including those who grapple daily with challenges of homelessness.”

 

“We are hopeful of working with the city to resolve the case, which will be in the best interests of the city of Worcester and allow the city to avoid significant costs they will necessarily incur to defend the lawsuit if it continues,” he said.

 

Mr. Moore, who was provided with an advance copy of the suit, said, “We will defend the policy of the library board.” He has not consulted with the library directors yet, but said, “Obviously, once a suit is filed, we defend it, and compromising or resolving it in some form or fashion is always a possibility.”

 

Grace K. Carmark, CMHA executive director, said, “The public library is a community treasure that can positively impact so many, especially children. It is wrong to treat some children by virtue of their address differently than others.”