Mary, thank you for your thoughtful message, and I apologize for the most recent IRTF meeting being on just a few days notice. Some of us realized too late that ALA Council was coming up very soon, and we needed to have a meeting right away to discuss resolutions. The second half of the agenda was to plan new activities, and we did make a bit of a start on that, with a decision to explore possibilities for online programming and also reading/resource lists on various topics.
I will post a poll for a February meeting soon on IRTF Connect. I agree regular meetings would be a good thing, but I'm not sure it will be any easier to find a date/time that works for everyone every month or two than it is to find one that works on an ad hoc basis. The February meeting will be a good time to discuss how often people want to meet and the best regular date/time for that. And of course the IRTF Connect group is always available for task force members to propose new ideas and discuss anything members are concerned about.
(Do other SRRT task forces have any experience with regular as opposed to ad hoc meetings between conferences? If so, it would be helpful to know what has worked for them.)
As for the question of resolutions and book lists versus more direct kinds of action, and this is just my two or three cents: IRTF is an organization of librarians, an ALA subunit with about a dozen members. Mark R. has eloquently defended the importance of resolutions to the work SRRT has done and should be continuing to do, and I agree with him on that. I also think reading/resource lists are something that draw on our particular skills as librarians and that can actually help people make sense of the international issues IRTF cares about. I'm sure there are many other things we could be doing, but I don't want to dismiss the importance of the kinds of things we're already doing. ALA Council has always (i.e. for decades) been less than friendly to resolutions coming from SRRT members concerned with international issues and especially US foreign policy, so this is nothing new. What's new is the unwillingness of SRRT Action Council to support (or sometimes even engage with) these resolutions, along with the relentless personal attacks IRTF members have had to endure from certain quarters inside SRRT.
So while "getting out in the streets, taking action, educating and empowering people to resist an authoritarian takeover" is of course the most important thing any of us can be doing right now, as an ALA subunit of about a dozen members, I would suggest that the latter two (educating and empowering people to resist) are probably the parts IRTF and SRRT need to be most focused on. There are other, larger, better resourced organizations mobilizing people to get out in the streets and protest, and I think our job as librarians should be support them any way we can. Last year IRTF proposed two resolutions defending the free speech rights of peaceful protesters, although to our great disappointment, those resolutions were blocked and never even made to Council. Reading/resource lists are also a way of indirectly supporting protest activities, I think. But I'm sure we can find other ways to educate and empower people to resist if we put our minds to it. Maybe we can learn something from the experiences of Radical Reference and the Library Freedom Project? Let's think about new ways to educate and empower protest, but without necessarily dismissing things IRTF has done in the past, however 'unpopular' those things may be with people more powerful than ourselves.
-- Mark
------------------------------
Mark Hudson
Co-chair, SRRT International Responsibilities Task Force (IRTF)
Pittsburgh, PA, US
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Jan 29, 2026 10:24 AM
From: Mary Moser
Subject: Today's Action Council meeting
Thanks, Al! I'm sorry this work is taking such a toll on you. Your voice, perspective, and institutional history are so valuable and I've learned so much from you, so thank you for your SRRT service!
In terms of "organizing," it's probably not what you're thinking of to meet this current moment, but I would think we'd need to start with getting some infrastructure in place to help IRTF function more cohesively. By that I mean:
- Setting up regularly scheduled recurring meetings (last-minute meetings, such as the one that was recently scheduled, are incredibly difficult to fit into my schedule - much easier to have them on my calendar in advance and be able to plan around them);
- Establishing/reviewing the group charter, mission statement, and values on an annual basis to help us inform how we prioritize our work;
- An annual process of establishing goals to work toward as a group, then assigning project leaders to take those goals forward, using our regularly scheduled meetings as check-ins on those goals;
- Using a shared workspace such as OneDrive or Google Drive to work collaboratively (perhaps ALA provides such a space?) so that everyone can see the most updated versions of working documents in the same place at the same time.
For me, it's hard to envision how this work can move forward in a sustainable way without a strong organizational foundation in place to support and guide the work. (Can you tell how many rounds of strategic planning I've been through? LOL) But this type of infrastructure would help the group be more proactive, rather than reactive, and acting from a place of proactivity, rather than reactivity, is the central source of power of most advocacy groups.
Again, grateful for your presence and your wisdom, and your willingness to engage about the things that matter to us!
Warmly,
Mary
------------------------------
Mary Moser
Associate University Librarian for Academic Engagement
University of Massachusetts Boston
She/Her/Hers
Original Message:
Sent: Jan 29, 2026 10:07 AM
From: Al Kagan
Subject: Today's Action Council meeting
Hi Mary,
Thank you for your thoughtful message. We used to be able to make important statements, at least inform an important group of librarians in the ALA Council, and even sometimes put ALA on record that received notice in the library press through coverage at Council meetings and ALA press releases. So we were having some national impact, although certainly not at the level that we desired. A couple of times we even made national news. This is obviously not the case anymore, and I agree with you that this endless in-fighting is exhausting, and it is even affecting my health. So I am at the end of my rope, and I have lots of other local organizing that I could and should devote more of my time to. My term on the SRRT Action Council is almost over, and I will be glad to be done with it. I am trying to stick with it until my term ends at the end of June, and as long as I am there, I feel an obligation to try to make some impact. In my view the Action Council has become the Inaction Council.
That said, I think we would all be interested in any organizing ideas that you may have, and of course all SRRT members are welcome at Action Council meetings now quarterly online, and I think still encouraged to speak up there. At a time of national crisis, I find it almost unbelievable that yesterday SRRT addressed almost nothing related to what is going on in our country that is fast descending into fascism. It is deeply distressing to me that SRRT is becoming irrelevant.
Al
Original Message:
Sent: 1/29/2026 10:33:00 AM
From: Mary Moser
Subject: RE: Today's Action Council meeting
Hi, Al -
I wanted to respond specifically to your last paragraph: "And let me say a word about Mark's resolutions. I sent a message probably about 10 days ago asking folks to weigh in, and suggest specific amendments. Elaine responded with a 3rd resolution, and good for her in doing so. Nobody else proposed anything specific. Why not?"
I can only speak for myself here, but personally, I do not see resolutions as a valuable way for us to be spending our time given the crisis point we are at for the Association, our country, and our own individual lives and communities. Other scholarly associations are tearing themselves apart over ideological differences and whether or not to make statements. At this point - statements don't matter to me. What matters is getting out in the streets, taking action, educating and empowering people to resist an authoritarian takeover. Starting a list of resources is great, but I would love to see IRTF take the lead in showing what this type of decisive action can look like. This is a group that can write powerfully and eloquently - now let's take those words and do something with them.
The other reason for my not wanting to engage with resolutions is that I've seen, time and time again in my short time with SRRT, every single attempt at passing a resolution turn into some kind of knock-down, drag-out, he-said, she-said, and I have no appetite for that. ALA AC has shown that passing these resolutions is not something they see as valuable to the Association at this point in time. Whether that's the correct stance to take or not, the reality is - I have limited time and energy and I'm going to invest that time and energy toward activities that aren't tilting at figurative windmills.
I'm in non-stop meetings during the day at work. When I get home, I'm parenting two young neurodivergent children who need a lot of extra support. I don't have any room in my life for this kind of fighting, and I don't have the time or mental energy to devote to endlessly wordsmithing documents that are, ultimately, not going to do anything other than sow strife within this group of people.
I was excited to see IRTF as an option when I joined SRRT a couple of years ago - but during that time, we have had no regularly scheduled meetings, no group goals or projects to work on. I joined this group to be helpful, to be a part of a community likeminded librarians who are committed to using our profession as a platform for good. I did not join this group to read endless fights on ALA Connect. It is exhausting.
That's maybe a longer answer than you were looking for, but at this point, you are owed a clear explanation, at least from my own experience, as to why I did not personally chime in on the proposed resolutions.
These are tender times for everyone. We all have things we're passionate about and that we care about, and that care shows up in different ways and sometimes with different priorities. Let's all give each other the benefit of the doubt and grace in how we interpret each other's actions - and trust that we are all of us, even if we have different opinions about how to get there, doing our best to make the right choices for our profession and the communities we support. I haven't seen that trust or grace within this community, and it's disheartening.
Warmly,
Mary
------------------------------
Mary Moser
Associate University Librarian for Academic Engagement
University of Massachusetts Boston
She/Her/Hers
Original Message:
Sent: Jan 28, 2026 05:21 PM
From: Al Kagan
Subject: Today's Action Council meeting
I think we need to discuss what happened at the SRRT Action Council meeting today. For those who were not there at the end, we ran out of time before we got to the 3 resolutions on the agenda. As I said at the meeting, SRRT adopted a rule many years ago to put resolutions at the front of the agendas, precisely to avoid what happened today.
First I should apologize for letting my emotions get the best of me at the end of the meeting. I have to say that the last two years or so have been the most frustrating period in my long involvement in SRRT. As I have said before and as Pat Schuman reaffirmed not so long ago, SRRT is supposed to be a non-hierarchical organization. It does not have a president, and as Pat has said, it does not even have a chair. Rather it has a coordinator, currently 2 co-coordinators. The role of the coordinators is to facilitate actions that the members bring forward. This usually means the members of the Action Council, but it also applies to the membership at-large, and especially those members who take the time to attend the meetings (including several long-time active members who were there today.) If several members of the Action Council and other members want to discuss something, it is the coordinator's role to make that happen. Robert's Rules can be used to facilitate discussion or to stifle discussion. As an ALA Parliamentarian once said, it is best practice to use the rules to make meetings flow more smoothly. This is certainly not happening. Whether the current coordinators are in support of or in opposition to agenda items should not prelude discussion. They are entitled to voice their opinions in the discussion just like any other Action Council members, and indeed any SRRT members who want to take part in the discussion, which has long been our practice.
Don's motion to call another meeting to discuss elections should have been in addition to discussing the 3 resolutions, and I think most of us thought there would be such a meeting as was even voiced by 1 or 2 people before Don's motion. But parliamentary procedure was used to block that discussion. That manipulation was against the long-standing ethos of SRRT. I now call on the SRRT co-coordinators to seriously rethink how they are running these meetings. And I would like to have some serious discussion for a change between meetings by more members of the Action Council.
And let me say a word about Mark's resolutions. I sent a message probably about 10 days ago asking folks to weigh in, and suggest specific amendments. Elaine responded with a 3rd resolution, and good for her in doing so. Nobody else proposed anything specific. Why not?
Al