“Books can look dangerous or precious, depending on which side you’re looking from, from office or from the streets.”
― Abhijit Naskar, Tierra Carta: Naskar Charter of Earth
Book banning, and book challenges, can happen anywhere, as we have seen from our previous blog posts. In our state alone, we have run the gamut from coast to mountains, from red areas to blue, and everything in between.
Yet, we continue going back to the western part of our state for situations currently unfolding in disturbing ways.
Today, we return to Fontana Regional Library (FRL), located in Macon, Swain and Jackson Counties.
Our previous blog posts on the subject can be found here and here.
As a quick reminder: representatives from both Macon and Jackson Counties brought forth complaints about LGBTQ+ displays in the libraries. When this happened, they began looking into the Collection Development Policy for FRL and determined they did not like the language that allowed for materials to be purchased representing a broad range of interests and topics. Macon threatened to leave the system, but it was actually Jackson County that followed through and will be separating from FRL on July 1, 2026.
Many residents brought forth their concerns and were upset due to this decision as Jackson County will not be able to provide the amount of services they were previously able to when attached to the FRL.
Amidst the upset of Jackson County leaving the system, other changes have come to Fontana Regional that have angered residents.
As of February this year, Tracy Fitzmaurice is no longer with FRL. At this time, there is an Interim Director, the current Chair of the Board of Trustees. Macon County has expressed plans to leave FRL in the next year or two and the current Interim Director has stated concerns that no one will accept the role of Director with such a short timeline (Perroti, 2026).
The Governing Board of FRL has taken this time of tumult and confusion, to draft new Collection Development and Circulation Policies that will greatly change how residents of their counties will be able to access, or more accurately not access, materials.
We here at ReadFree, NC have obtained draft copies of these policies and added them to this post if you would like to read them in their entirety. However, I have taken the liberty of reading them and will add what I consider to be the most salient points from them, as well as my own viewpoint on these proposed changes.
Let’s start with the Circulation Policy.
The Circulation Policy will now require that Juvenile and Teen cards be “Limited” cards that will only allow Juveniles and Teens to check out materials from their sections. Meaning, if a child wanted to check out materials from the Teen or Adult sections, their parent would have to check out that material on their Adult card.
Likewise, if a teen wanted to check out Adult material, their parent would have to check out that material on their Adult card.
In the previous policy, the Juvenile and Teen cards were considered “Full Service”, meaning they could check out any materials or use any computers in the library. With these changes, Juveniles would also be restricted to use of the children’s computers only.
What upsets me most about this is the blatant disregard for the First Amendment rights of children and teens who wish to access the materials at their library.
As many of you are no doubt aware from working in libraries, we deal with many situations with our families and patrons. For instance, I am willing to bet that many of us have either personally dealt with, or know someone who has dealt with, a family where the children come into the library, but the parent is unable to for some reason. That child would be unable to check out materials that they may wish to access, simply because their parent is not able to come in with them and check out the material they want.
This is supposedly a way to “safeguard the children”, but it does not take into account that every family and situation is different. It greatly limits the ability of everyone to access materials they have rights to under the Constitution.
However, that is just the Circulation Policy.
Let’s take a look now at the Collection Development Policy.
The proposed Collection Development Policy will now feature a soliloquy at the beginning to say that the policy is completely neutral and objective…
It will shock no one to learn that this is completely untrue…
It is then followed up by definitions for “Banned Books”, “Harmful to Minors”, and “Obscene”, to name a few…
It will again shock no one to learn that these definitions are either incorrect, distorted, or vague…
For instance, when explaining more on “Harmful to Minors”, the policy lists out that it includes material inappropriate for a “minor’s developmental stage, including irreversible gender transition procedures”.
While earlier in the document, it lists “Minors” as anyone under the age of 18.
Meaning they would not allow materials in their Juvenile or Teen sections that discuss gender transitioning, because as stated in the Perroti article, those materials do not discuss the regret that individuals have after receiving the surgeries (Perroti, 2026). So, therefore, those materials are not neutral…
What is interesting to me is that the word “neutral” only goes in one direction.
But I digress…
A new addition has been added to the Collection Development Policy that encourages librarians to use various sources when making their selections for purchase. This list, which includes reputable sources such as School Library Journal and Kirkus, also includes nonreputable sources, such as RatedBooks and BraveBooks, both of which are right-wing sources that are known for taking content out of context when crafting their ratings.
As this list will be on the Collection Development Policy for a library, which generally are accessible to the public, I think it is interesting that they included the word “neutral” in multiple places, yet are encouraging librarians to use non-neutral sources when purchasing materials for the libraries. That leads me to believe that they are not aware that people can easily look up these sources themselves and see the non-neutrality, or that they do not care if people see because they covered themselves by using the word “neutral”.
The document goes on to a section covering Juvenile and Teen collections. This section discusses why the term “Young Adult” will not be used for patrons 12-17, as they are not Adults under the law.
It goes on to describe that the collection is curated for content that will appeal to a wide range of interests to “encourage a passion for reading”, but then clearly states that any material the Board deems inappropriate will be removed, after having already stated that they would not include items that discuss gender ideology.
So, a wide range of interests unless it goes against what they, individuals who largely have no training or education in collection curation, think or believe.
It also again specifically encourages librarians to use RatedBooks when making their selections and says they are not required to use the publishers recommended age for shelving.
The document then goes on to a section for displays and not only says that all materials for every display in the library have to be considered appropriate for “all ages”, meaning no materials that discuss anything “harmful to minors”, but that each display must be made to provide balanced information on all subjects to remain neutral…
This, according to every definition and unwritten, but nonetheless, explicit policy item in this document, would mean that there will be no more displays for Pride Month allowed in these libraries.
The last thing I want to highlight here, though this document has so much in it that I could fill 20 pages of analysis alone, is the section on Intellectual Freedom and Policy Neutrality.
Yes, once you scroll through the full document of clearly biased and discriminatory language, you find a section on Intellectual Freedom and Policy Neutrality. Have no fear though, because this section has absolutely nothing to do with Intellectual Freedom or Policy Neutrality…
Instead, it simply states that the policy will follow all the policies…
I wish I were kidding…
But it does end with the following: “Material removals, relocations, cancellations, or restrictions will be in accordance with this Collection Development Policy and based on permissible reasons as detailed
in this Policy and not on disagreement with a viewpoint.”
So have no fear everyone! There should be absolutely no concerns that people who drafted a document that goes against every conceivable route for equal access and the First Amendment rights of its citizens, will in any way let their own biases and prejudices interfere in serving a diverse community…
There has been outcry and backlash from these drafts which have landed in the hands of some residents. A group calling themselves “Card Carrying Supporters of the Jackson, Macon, and Swain County Libraries” on Facebook, has posted the draft of the proposed Circulation Policy, and is doing its best to spread the word and get residents to appear at Board meetings to share their concerns.
Multiple citizens have reached out to Macon County leaders to express their concerns about where FRL is headed, and it has led to county leadership beginning talks of pulling out of FRL and what that would look like (“Macon votes to provide notice of withdrawal to Fontana Regional Library System: Move may hamper FRL’s director search”).
The current Interim Director Bill McGaha has asked that a vote to adopt the new policies be halted until Macon makes its decision regarding leaving FRL (“Macon votes to provide notice of withdrawal to Fontana Regional Library System: Move may hamper FRL’s director search”).
As of the writing of this post, these articles and movements are only a few days old so no more information is currently available on the situation. However, as things unfold, we will keep you abreast of any movements or changes.
As always, thank you for all you do for your community. We must continue to stay strong and keep fighting for the rights of our patrons.
Resources:
Perrotti, K. (2026, June 17). “FRL board moves to make big changes ahead of Jackson withdrawal”. Smoky Mountain News. https://smokymountainnews.com/news/item/41496-frl-board-moves-to-make-big-changes-ahead-of-jackson-withdrawal
Perrotti, K. (2026, June 17). “Macon votes to provide notice of withdrawal to Fontana Regional Library System: Move may hamper FRL’s director search”. Smoky Mountain News. https://smokymountainnews.com/news/item/41492-macon-votes-to-provide-notice-of-withdrawal-to-fontana-regional-library-system-move-may-hamper-frl-s-director-search