Presenter: Name: Ellen Paul

Title: Executive Director
Organization/School: Connecticut Library Consortium

Program Description
In Connecticut, a transformative shift has occurred in the realm of school libraries, thanks to a powerful and strategic coalition among three leading organizations: the Connecticut Library Association (CLA), the Connecticut Library Consortium (CLC), and the Connecticut Association of School Librarians (CASL). This coalition, which began as a loose association driven by a shared commitment to advancing positive legislation for school libraries, worked relentlessly for two years to navigate the Connecticut General Assembly and the legislative process to advance a Freedom to Read bill.

While not as highly reported in the national media, the Connecticut bill protects intellectual freedom in school libraries by requiring Board of Educations to adopt several key policies that protect students' constitutional rights while preserving the integrity of library services.

The initiative to advance this crucial legislation arose from a shared concern among the leaders of CLA, CLC, and CASL that libraries in Connecticut were increasingly vulnerable to external pressures, including book bans and challenges to materials that reflect diverse viewpoints. Recognizing the need for proactive, legislative action, these leaders set out to craft a bill that would ensure libraries across the state could continue to serve as spaces for learning and intellectual exploration—spaces where all individuals, regardless of background, could access information freely and without fear of censorship.

The coalition has been intentional about building trust and fostering collaboration not only among its core members—CLA, CLC, and CASL—but also with legislators, local library professionals, national library organizations and a wide range of stakeholders including teachers unions and LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations.

The coalition’s collaboration with outside groups has not been without challenges, however, as non-library organizations have at times sought to advance their own agendas which have at times been contrary to the goals of the library community. Recognizing that legislative advocacy requires a united front, however, the coalition leaders have worked lockstep together to align their efforts and speak with a clear, consistent message and demonstrate the widespread need for this bill while keeping libraries central to messaging.

The path to advancing this bill has not been easy. For the past two years, the coalition has faced significant opposition, particularly from conservative members of the General Assembly and organizations such as the Family Institute of Connecticut. These groups have actively lobbied against the bill, arguing that the proposed policies are unnecessary and a threat to parental rights, and accused librarians of promoting pornography and grooming children. Further, in-fighting within supportive legislators added yet an additional layer of complexity as the coalition navigated the politics of politics.

This program will provide an in-depth look at the coalition’s journey over the past two years, how they have learned to trust and depend on one another, the challenges they have faced, and the strategies they have employed to advocate for this critical legislation. Participants will learn about the importance of building strong coalitions, navigating opposition, and engaging in effective legislative advocacy to protect libraries and intellectual freedom.

Learning Objectives
Understand the Importance of Coalition Building: Participants will learn how a strong and coordinated coalition of library groups can effectively influence legislation, mitigate opposition, and address challenges like external pressure and internal political conflicts.

Recognize Effective Advocacy Strategies in Legislative Processes: Participants will gain insight into successful advocacy tactics, such as the role of communication, coalition unity, and strategic messaging in navigating complex legislative environments and opposing interest groups.

Develop Skills for Collaborative Problem-Solving in Advocacy Efforts: Participants will be able to identify methods for overcoming organizational and personal challenges, such as maintaining unity and balance when facing political conflicts, external scrutiny, or internal exhaustion.

Program Outline
1) Introduction to Panelists
2) Review of what we will talk about over the course of the presentation.
3) Overview of the last two years in the legislature
a. 2024 Legislative Session
i. Legislative Session and Bill
1. What was the bill, what did it say, what would it have done?
2. How far did we get.
3. Why we didn’t get further.
ii. Outside Group Involvement
1. Limited to a small group of legislators.
2. No external partners.
iii. Coalition
1. Loose association. Three library groups working together and apart. Talking but not coordinating. Cordial.
2. Mostly CLC working with CASL.
b. 2024 Summer and Fall Prepping for 2025 Legislative Session
i. CASL - Regrouping and writing new legislation for 2025. CLC and CLA aware but not directly involved.
c. 2025
i. Legislative Session and Bill
1. What was the bill, what did it say, what would it have done.
2. Running our preferred bill.
3. 2024 Bill comes back out of nowhere. Now we have two different freedom to read bills.
4. Reconciling the two bills
ii. Outside Group Involvement
1. More legislators interested. Lead to greater support but greater scrutiny and eventually in fighting between legislators.
2. Outside (non-library) groups wanted to help like authors, teachers unions and LGBTQ+ organizations – sometimes these groups wanted to advance their own agendas.
3. Much more opposition to the bill by outside groups and conservative legislators.
iii. Coalition
1. Need for a much stronger coalition of the three library groups to not only protect library interests but keep them front and center.
2. A distinct shared commitment that the three groups were aligned in priorities and were going to coordinate everything together.
3. No group acted without coordination and input from the other two. This was especially important as legislators introduced two different freedom to read bills.
4. The coalition continuously examined outside influences to ensure that library priorities stayed front and center.
5. The coalition worked in lockstep to ensure that communications to legislators, at public hearings and to the media were consistent. All library groups were speaking with the same voice and saying the same thing.

4) Benefits of the Coalition / Problems that were made better because we worked together.
a. LGBTQ Organization Prioritizing their needs over Library needs
i. They wanted specific language stripping away local control from libraries and presented a bill to legislators saying such.
ii. As a united front, the coalition pushed back on the LGBTQ orgs and stated one policy for the entire state was not library best practice.
iii. Coalition rewrote the bill, got buy in from LGBTQ, got it to legislators and successfully squashed the other bill that would not have been as good for libraries.
b. Legislator In Fighting
i. Democrats in the Senate wanted the bill to go through the Children’s Committee. Democrats in the House wanted a different bill to go through the Education Committee. Lot’s of legislators were mad at each other – we were caught in the middle of an epic power struggle.
ii. Coalition stepped back and asked ourselves: what is best for libraries in this situation?
iii. Coalition worked with all legislators, giving them what they needed and didn’t pick a side. Coalition maintained good standing with all legislators.
c. Strong Opposition
i. Some conservative members of the general assembly were very opposed to this bill and asked pointed and uncomfortable conversations about pornography during public hearings that we were not prepared to answer.
ii. Coalition quickly rounded the wagons to decide on a common answer and pushed that messaging out to all who were testifying. Also provided supportive legislators with that messaging.
iii. Although we were not able to overcome the opposition we mitigated the damage they were able to do and prevented them from gaining more momentum.
d. Exhaustion and Depression
i. We were exhausted and beaten down by this process. One of us was doxed by a MAGA group.
ii. We tag teamed when one person needed a break. We were there to support one another. We always held each other up. We always put the needs of our coalition and of libraries first.
5) What happened in the End
a. We don’t know. The CT General Assembly ends in June. By the time we get to AASL we will know our next steps.
6) Recommendations on How to work together
a. Be ready to put aside your ego.
b. Be ready to be fully honest and transparent.
c. Be ready to put aside the needs of your organization for the needs of the community as a whole.
d. We only get through this together.
7) Questions.
Legislative Leadership: A Coalition for School Libraries

Grade Level: Not grade specific

Session Strand: Leadership & Advocacy

Description: Discover how a unified coalition of Connecticut's leading library organizations worked together to advance legislative efforts to protect intellectual freedom and support school libraries. Led by three key leaders from the Connecticut library community—representing the Connecticut Association of School Librarians, the Connecticut Library Association, and the Connecticut Library Consortium—this presentation will dive into the legislation introduced in the Connecticut General Assembly, the challenges faced in advancing library-related bills. Attendees will learn how these organizations worked in lock-step together to overcome opposition, maintain a unified voice, and ensure the protection of intellectual freedom in school libraries. This session will also offer practical strategies for successful advocacy, coalition-building, and navigating legislative processes. Whether you're a library professional, educator, or community advocate, this program provides valuable insights into effective advocacy and the power of collaboration in defending library interests.