By Kevin Gosztola, Editor-in-Chief
When the library director unveiled his proposal to force the Elmwood Park Advocate to pay $100 for meeting room use, it was a slap in the face. But unfortunately, I was not present. I had to stay home with my two-year-old and be a dad.
I attended August’s Elmwood Park Public Library Board meeting and the Bylaws, Goals, Policy & Personnel (BGPP) Committee meeting that followed.
During that committee meeting, I offered my viewpoint on Library Board President Chris Pesko and a group of unspecified “residents” or “patrons,” who unfairly complained about the newsletter’s use of the room for monthly “Community Conversations.” They demanded that the library “enforce” the meeting room policy in an unduly burdensome manner against the Elmwood Park Advocate by charging us $100 per hour.
I also shared my perspective with trustees on why Library Board Trustee Mike Monahan had a proposal to change the meeting room policy and make it clear that a not-for-profit community publication, like the Elmwood Park Advocate, should not have to pay to use the Ferrentino Meeting Room.
This policy change was encouraged by Consiglio. However, the proposal was tabled until next month’s meeting.
On September 8, after I ate some spaghetti with my daughter, I sat down to my laptop to watch a stream of the BGPP Committee meeting (you know, what most Elmwood Park residents typically do after they eat dinner). The committee responded first to a letter that I submitted since I could not attend, however, I missed what Pesko said because the audio was seemingly disconnected for the first few minutes.
At one point, Consiglio told trustees that he had written up an “analysis” on the “whole situation” with the Advocate that he would share. It would supposedly clarify everything. I thought, wow, I have never been part of a “whole situation” before.
Consiglio handed out a packet to the trustees, and it did not take long to notice that he was enraged. “These people should like to pay a fee of $100, anybody that wants to use it,” and, “We’re not a conference center.”
The proposed change from last month’s meeting was missing from Consiglio’s presentation, even though that was what the committee had tabled.
Some of what Consiglio said was rather silly. “What does community group mean? We’ve got to define that. Is a community group organized? Is it a group of people?” It made me wonder if the library director believes that the Elmwood Park Advocate has no right to describe itself as a community newsletter—or to refer to our discussions with residents as “Community Conversations.”
Additionally, the remarks called into question the sincerity of the library director and his communications with the newsletter.
Consiglio claimed on July 23 that he appreciated our “continued interest in using the Elmwood Park Public Library as a space for public dialogue.” He claimed on July 24 that he appreciated my “commitment to civic engagement.” In our meeting on July 28, he again voiced his support. But then at the committee meeting, Consiglio complained that “any six people” could reserve the room and “have a meeting, and we have no control about it.”
I suppose upon further reflection Consiglio had not been entirely consistent up to this point. He suddenly tried to collect $100 in August before our “Community Conversation” on traffic safety. I immediately objected because he had promised that we would not have to pay. Then he reversed and reassured the newsletter that there would be no cost to use the room.
When Consiglio first threatened to collect a $100 fee from us, we were informed that the library was simply “enforcing” the meeting room policy. But the push to change the policy suggests that was never true and the library had no authority to charge us.
We suspect that there’s more behind the decision to impose this excessive fee. And though the library director claims to be acting in a neutral manner, he is actually crafting a partisan meeting room policy that will fuel the very problems that First Amendment organizations rightfully oppose.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) has warned, “If [a library] decides to fill its meeting rooms up with library programming on a certain day or to adopt new restrictions on the use of meeting rooms for the specific purpose of making them unavailable to politically disfavored individuals, it will run into First Amendment problems.”
Fortunately, Library Board Trustee Pete Fosco moved to table the proposal. He asked for more time to “digest” the proposal and seek clarification from the library’s attorney Tom Melody because the attorney had not reviewed the proposal.
The committee approved Fosco’s motion, delaying further consideration until October—one of the more rational and appropriate decisions made during the meeting.
***
Our next “Community Conversation” is September 20, at 1 p.m. in the Ferrentino Meeting Room of the Elmwood Park Public Library. Silvia Rogel, a Salvadoran immigrant and Elmwood Park resident, will lead a discussion about migration and what it means to belong to this community. (RSVP here.)
The Elmwood Park Advocate will continue to hold “Community Conversations,” especially because we are under no obligation to submit to this misguided and ill-conceived policy change. It undermines the right that all residents have to access the library’s meeting rooms and exercise our First Amendment rights.
We did not inject partisanship into this ordeal. We also did not start this fight, but we will fight for this community newsletter and all of the people who have read, subscribed, attended our gatherings at the library, and provided feedback on our reports.
The newsletter will reserve the Ferrentino Meeting Room for “Community Conversations” in October and November, and we ask you to help us urge the library director to abandon this unnecessary proposal by emailing the director: mconsiglio@elmwoodparklibrary.org
Let the library director know that you believe the Elmwood Park Advocate should never have to pay a fee to meet, hear perspectives that inform the newsletter, and discuss matters that are crucial to our everyday lives.
The village needs more spaces, not fewer spaces for speech and dialogue between residents. Ask Consiglio to uphold the First Amendment and pursue meeting room policy changes that are in line with freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of the press.
Now, I have a two-year-old pulling on my pant leg, begging me to quit sitting at my computer and take her to the park.
See you at the next “Community Conversation.”
*Below is video from the Elmwood Park Public Library Board’s BGPP Committee stream
This community newsletter has no partisan agenda, and imposing excessive fees to use the public library meeting room for open community discussions (non-political, I might add) is a fundamental restriction of our first amendment rights as tax paying citizens of Elmwood Park.