As someone (no doubt like many others out there!) who had to rethink how our library served our patrons during the COVID-19 pandemic, I was interested to hear about the different ways other public law libraries approached this problem. The “Bringing the Law Library to the Community: Access to Justice with Remote Services” session on Sunday gave a great look at creative ways of expanding services beyond library walls.
The speakers were Cat Bowie of the State of Oregon Law Library and Karen Westwood of the Anne W. Grande Law Library (Hennepin County, Minnesota). Catherine McGuire from the Thurgood Marshall State Law Library in Maryland moderated and guided the speakers through a discussion of their projects. Cat and Karen’s projects showed the great range of potential for remote library services – state vs. county, large scale vs. targeted and local, and those inspired by a long-term need vs. an immediate crisis.
Cat’s project with the State of Oregon Law Library was put into place before the COVID-19 pandemic. She had found that her library had an inefficient and time-consuming system for handling reference requests from people incarcerated in Oregon’s prison system (referred to as “adults in custody”). The adults in custody weren’t getting the information they needed in a timely manner, plus the staff at her library were overwhelmed with the work the requests required. To address these problems on both sides of the library walls, Cat approached the Oregon Department of Corrections (DOC) with the idea of building an intranet with legal resources for adults in custody. Inspired by Scandinavian models of rehabilitative incarceration, the goal was to empower the adults in custody to research for themselves. The intranet idea was crucial – DOC would not allow adults in custody to access the internet, which of course precluded them from using many of the research tools we take for granted at the library. Through careful discussions with various stakeholders and the adults in custody themselves, they implemented a system that built on the library’s expertise and leverage-scale in procurement contracts to allow the adults in custody to conduct their own research. As someone whose own library confronts similar issues of inefficiency with our inmate reference service, hearing about this program was amazing!
In Minnesota’s Hennepin County, Karen was presented with the opportunity to put a kiosk in her library during the COVID-19 pandemic to help patrons attend either remote court hearings or meetings with legal aid attorneys. Karen was the first to admit that she was skeptical of the project at first. She didn’t think that people would have the technological savvy to use the kiosks efficiently and that it just plain wasn’t a productive idea. However, she decided to “suppress her inner skeptic” and give it a chance. As the kiosk project has both succeeded and evolved with time, Karen has been impressed at how much it’s been used by people in her community. Karen’s story highlighted a valuable lesson – sometimes you need to be open to new ideas and seize opportunities when they arise. While Karen’s project was on a smaller scale than Cat’s, it showed the very real impact that even small changes can have on the people that we serve. A new system or idea doesn’t necessarily have to be huge to be valuable!
After the speakers talked about how they have introduced remote services, attendees were given the chance to talk in small groups about how we might do something similar. It was fun to hear the different ideas that the presentation sparked and to see how different aspects of Cat’s and Karen’s projects spoke to us in different ways.
I thought this session was a terrific encapsulation of the conference’s theme of “Advancing Justice for All.” The push towards remote services brought on by COVID-19 has made accessing justice more possible for populations who may have been formerly left out: those who are incarcerated, those who live in rural areas, and those without access to technology. The variety of the projects discussed was inspiring – no matter the library or situation it finds itself in, there may be new and creative ways to better serve our patrons. All it takes is identifying a problem, finding the opportunity to address it, and maybe just suppressing your inner skeptic a little bit!
The rate of housing loss is unfortunately increasing throughout Arizona. Rising rents, stagnant wages and job insecurity are driving a looming crisis. Exacerbated by the pandemic, the issue can be expected to increase at a record rate. The moratorium on evictions in Arizona ended at the end of September, leaving many questions unanswered for tenants and anxieties high.
Although these processes are often hard to navigate, there is assistance for tenants facing eviction. Connecting with these resources and asking for help is a huge step in the right direction. Having these resources on hand can be invaluable, even if your institution does not serve the public. Below is a select compilation of resources in Arizona that patrons can utilize for their housing issues.
Legal Aid
Southern Arizona Legal Aid. Southern Arizona Legal Aid (SALA) offers services to those with limited financial means. These services include assisting tenants with evictions, substandard housing conditions, lockouts, and utility shut offs. They can provide assistance to tenants facing eviction and for homeowners facing foreclosure. A short survey on the site will direct those seeking legal assistance to an application on the SALA site or to reduced-cost legal services such as the Modest Means Project based on income.
https://www.azlawhelp.org/ AZ Law Help is a collaborative project of multiple Arizona-based legal services and legal aid organizations. On the AZ Law Help website, you can read the answers to other people’s legal questions, as well as submit your own. In addition to these posted questions and answers, there is a short interview in English or Spanish which helps identify if you qualify for free or reduced-cost aid and which Arizona organization to contact. Other resources on the site include the websites and contact information for state and county bar associations, legal help hotlines, and an exhaustive database of links to legal information.
Modest Means Project. This program offers low cost legal assistance for individuals who don’t qualify for free legal services but are unable to afford an attorney at a standard rate. The project provides a one-hour meeting with an attorney at a rate of $75/hour in order to obtain legal advice. If full representation is needed beyond the one hour consultation, the attorney will charge a rate of $75/hour. Both landlord/tenant and foreclosure issues are available, and appointments are made via an automated phone line.
About the authors:Hannah Plotkin is a Library Services Associate and Francesco Fasano is a Law Library Fellow at the University of Arizona’s Cracchiolo Law Library.
Reported by Pauline Afuso, Ramsey County Law Library, Sarah Bates, Second Judicial District Court Library (Reno, NV), Sarah Larsen, Minnesota State Law Library, Catherine McGuire, Thurgood Marshall State Law Library, Jenny Silbiger, Hawai‘i Supreme Court Law Library, Karen Westwood, Hennepin County Law Library
Last fall and winter, the LISP/SR blog featured posts from law librarians who shared how their libraries were reopening to the public after months of closure due to the pandemic. As expected, there were similarities – extra cleaning, masks, social distancing. There were some differences, too, such as requiring appointments, imposing limits on visitors, and providing remote services for patrons.
Months later, we are still in a pandemic, but now with new considerations: vaccines, virus mutations, evolving executive orders relating to masks and indoor gatherings, new surges, and more. We checked back in with some of these librarians to see what changed, what stayed the same, and what they are preparing for as we move forward in 2021.
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
So many things have happened in the past year that there were bound to be some changes to policies and procedures. As Catherine McGuire from the Thurgood Marshall State Law Library in Maryland said,
“I think all our procedures have undergone changes, from tiny tweaks to significant shifts. We reopened on June 8, 2020, so quite a lot of time has passed, restrictions have been reimposed, and are now lifting again. We learn more about the science of transmission. And of course, the vaccine has been introduced. The basics have stayed the same – we’re asking that visitors schedule with us ahead of time. And the spacing of our public computers hasn’t changed, as they are set in a piece of furniture that can’t be broken up. Until the distancing requirement is removed, I think we’re going to have to continue to schedule public computer time, since we can’t use all of the seats simultaneously.”
Pictures of the computer carrels at the Thurgood Marshall State Law Library with only three open workspaces.
Meanwhile, in Honolulu, Jenny Silbiger reported a positive change: After an inspection by the Department of Health, the Hawai‘i Supreme Court Library was allowed to double its capacity, as long as the patrons maintained their social distancing. They have also added two more appointment slots to allow for even more visitors to the library. Jenny’s main concern is for the safety, health, and well-being of her staff and visitors. She very much appreciates the judiciary’s leadership with their support of flexible teleworking schedules and building access policies appropriate for the library. She feels
“very fortunate that our case numbers are low in the islands, but because of our limited healthcare facilities (we are an island chain, after all), weʻre always keeping our eye out, and Iʻm glad we were closed for a bit during the second surge in the late summer into the fall of 2020.”
A view of the circulation desk at Hawaii Supreme Court Library with a blue tape line to remind patrons to maintain their social distance from library staff.
At the Ramsey County Law Library (St. Paul, MN) and at the Second Judicial District Court Library (Reno, NV), much of the policies are tied to the orders from the Court. In Minnesota, the Chief Justice issued several orders over the last year, ordering the courts to hold hearings remotely where possible to minimize the number of people who physically had to come to the Courthouse. The library adjusted its policies to follow the Chief Justice’s mandate to limit exposure at court facilities: the library has reduced the number of people who can come into the library at any one time (from 10 down to 5) and are limiting visits to an hour at a time.
Similarly, in Reno, Sarah Bates reports that in November when COVID cases surged, the State of Nevada relocked down the courts. Despite that, the Washoe County Law Library continues to assist patrons via phone and email. They plan to open in-person research appointments, but that will depend on the Court’s approval. They have converted their in-person Lawyer in the Library program to a virtual format using Zoom. Sarah reports:
“I do not know if our Lawyer in the Library program will ever be an in-person program again. Not only does keeping it online mitigate the risk of having a group of 25+ people gathering in the library, but it is much more convenient for our volunteer attorneys and many of our patrons. At the very least, it will remain virtual for the foreseeable future.”
Sarah Larsen, Outreach Librarian for the Minnesota State Law Library, also reported on some changes that have occurred in St. Paul. The main change is that staff will have the option to work from home one or two days a week. They plan to continue to offer remote access for their clinics. They have gotten feedback from both attendees and the volunteer attorneys that the convenience of the remote clinics is working well. She added,
“We also changed how we provide the documents to our attorneys, and I think we’ll keep that as well. We used to print court documents on the day of the clinic and run them in to the attorneys. Now, we upload the documents into a shared folder ahead of time. This cuts down so much on paper usage, and the attorneys seem to like to have this kind of access. I think we’ll probably continue doing this sort of thing as much as possible.”
The Hawai‘i State Law Library’s Lawyer in the Library program also successfully transitioned to remote conferences, and they also plan to continue to keep that format after restrictions are relaxed. They might compromise and offer both in-person and remote clinics, but it is too early to say for sure.
Some of the changes regarding staffing that were implemented during the shutdown will continue even after the libraries are fully opened. In Maryland, Catherine said that even with service restricted to phone, email, and limited in-person appointments, they have had a usage increase of 25% over non-pandemic times. She’s not sure if the increase in workload was caused because people can’t visit, or because they just managed to find the library while in lockdown by cruising around the internet. They are looking to keep the increased reference staffing because they don’t see the workload decreasing once they are fully open, currently planned for the end of April.
In Hawai‘i, the Supreme Court Law Library was able to hire and onboard a new staff member. It was a little difficult, as she was hired while half of the staff were teleworking from home, but Jenny reports that she is settling into her new position. One of her responsibilities is to manage the laptop access station used for district court remote hearings.
A view of the workstation used to attend court hearings remotely for Hawai‘i District Court.
But the prize for the biggest change since the start of the pandemic goes to the Hennepin County Law Library, located in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Karen describes how the law library has adapted since her article came out last December.
“Greetings from Hennepin County Law Library in Exile! As you may recall from my past writing on the pandemic experience here, we never did open to the public but have had staff in the building since last June. This allowed us to access our print collection for reference, offer curbside circulation, and manage the print collection (checking in materials and filing loose-leaf pages). A countywide email came out in January indicating in-person services would fully open September 7, at the earliest. But, if I’m honest, as the vaccination numbers began to improve, I harbored hopes of reopening during the summer.
And then it became apparent that there was another elephant in the room jockeying for space with the pandemic. The Derek Chauvin trial would begin in our building in early March, and an administrative decision was made to move all services not related to the trial to alternative locations. We chose to move to another county building because the county will forward mail to this temporary location. This way we can still receive titles and check them in (although we are unable to file loose-leaf services).
Our patrons have been understanding, and (as we all learned last spring) we can continue to provide a high level of service via phone and email. But I worry that after more than a year of being closed, we’ll have enormous challenges getting folks to return to our physical space. In addition, the defensive measures we see downtown and the extensive reporting on the trial feel like an additional weight during an already heavy time.
But here’s what I can also say – my local Minnesota colleagues have been more than generous, whether it’s providing materials that we can’t get to or offering us space if we want to work in their libraries. They’ve reached out as the trial has gotten underway to offer help but also just to check in. And my colleagues across the country have done the same. It’s been heartening to be the recipient of such compassion and understanding. We’re looking forward to getting back into our space and eventually reopening, but for now we carry on as best we can.”
Hennepin County Law librarian, Rich Harrington, stands near part of the reference collection we moved to our temporary space in March 2021. These titles help us answer phone and email questions effectively.
The temporary home of the Hennepin County Law Library, in the shadow of U.S. Bank stadium. These are some of the books and filings that have arrived since our move. Note all the monitor “arms” – we are on a floor that previously provided shared workspace for social workers and other employees who came downtown only on occasion and would work at any open carrel or desk.
So stay tuned – we have a ways to go before we get past the challenges caused by the pandemic. Until then, as Karen put it so nicely, we’ll carry on as best we can.
Last March, Marcelo Rodriguez (Foreign, Comparative and International Law Librarian at the University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law) invited me to be a part of a small group of librarians monitoring the legal responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Latin America and the Caribbean. Despite trying to balance work and homelife as well as settle into the new work-from-home routine, I was enthusiastic to join the project for several reasons.
It was therapeutic for me to track the responses of governments in the region and absorb as much information as I could. I still have family and friends in my native Jamaica, so I was eager to find information on policies, statistics or regulations, and any progress in containing the pandemic.
The economies of this region are heavily dependent on tourism and foreign direct investments and there are other challenges related to capacity to manage the pandemic, so I was curious about immediate steps being taken by governments to mitigate these challenges.
As a member of the Latin American Interest Group, I was familiar with the main sources of information, and the work of regional, non-governmental and international organizations operating in Latin America and the Caribbean. This made the information-gathering process easier.
The project was an opportunity to bridge the information gap and to disseminate widely the emerging COVID-19 policies and legal responses.
This global pandemic meant that no region was spared, and therefore the information collated had the potential to provide best practices and new knowledge for institutions and governments grappling to understand this new epidemiological threat.
My first report in April looked at my reason for joining the project and a summary of the CARICOM/OECS response at that point. In the second report, I focused on the role of Caribbean Disaster Agencies, and their impact on COVID-19 management.
One year later, I am proud of what this project has achieved, and how I personally have benefitted. More librarians have come onboard since last March and have shared valuable reports on their respective countries. In addition to their legal skills, some librarians bring language skills, so our reports reflect the multi-lingual nature of the region. From our meetings, I have had the opportunity to meet these amazing librarians, some of whom have been working in challenging situations. I have gained a greater understanding of the legal systems, institutions, policies, and challenges facing the governments and people in Latin America and the Caribbean. However, I am also hopeful of some of the best practices and improvements in COVID-19 management that have been highlighted. I am also very proud of the recognition that the project has received from AALL, and that HeinOnline has included the project under Librarian-Curated Content in its COVID-19: Pandemics Past and Present library.
About this author: Yasmin Morais is the Reference and Cataloging Librarian for the University of the District of Columbia David A. Clarke School of Law.
By the time this is posted, the U.S. will have been living with COVID for an entire year. To say that this last year has challenged the way we think about libraries and librarianship would be an understatement. For those of us who work in Outreach Services roles, this shift has been especially pronounced. I’ve joked many times during the pandemic that my job used to be trying to bring patrons in to the library, but now it’s to keep them out. Bad jokes aside, the pandemic has forced us to reimagine how we connect with and serve our patrons – especially our public patrons.
Before the pandemic, much of our outreach work focused on going into the community and meeting potential patrons where they are. This included a wide variety of initiatives, ranging from offering legal reference help at the local public library to presenting training to attorneys and public librarians to helping staff a booth at the Minnesota State Fair to educate the public on Minnesota’s justice system. Obviously, these types of projects are not possible currently, so we have had to get creative to reach those who need our help finding legal information. For the vast majority of our patrons, this has simply meant expanding the remote services we already offered – emailing documents, handling reference by phone, expanding our remote CLE offerings, or holding consults by Skype or Zoom.
Most patrons are grateful that we are able to save them a trip to the library (and potential exposure to COVID-19). But electronic services do not serve all of our patrons: those who lack technology skills or who do not have access to the internet at home are left behind. I suspect I am not alone in taking for granted the fact that I can easily access the internet at home, but there is still a large share of the population that cannot. According to the Pew Research Center, 73% of Americans have access to broadband internet at home (meaning 27% of Americans do not) and nearly one in five Americans only have access to the internet through a smart phone. With the public libraries these Americans usually rely on for computer access largely closed, simple tasks like attending a remote court hearing or accessing court forms become nearly impossible.
I certainly cannot solve the problem of the digital divide in one blog post, but I can share some of the ways that we at the State Law Library and the legal community in Minnesota have been approaching this problem.
At the Minnesota State Law Library, one of the first changes we made was to move our Appeals Clinic and our Unemployment Appeals Clinic to be remote only. Getting the word out about this change was challenging at first, but we’ve had about 150 people attend the clinics since the pandemic started. We also began mailing court forms upon request to individuals who do not have access to a computer or printer. To date, we have mailed packets of court forms to 670 people. Most people who call asking for these forms contacted their local courts or the statewide court self-help center, who then referred them to us. Not only are we able to introduce our library to new users, but we have also strengthened our relationship with other frontline court workers.
On a larger scale, the Minnesota Legal Services Coalition launched the Legal Kiosk Project last fall with funds received under the CARES Act. The Kiosk Project offers two models: one providing access to legal information resources from LawHelpMN and intake for legal aid and the other offering a secure terminal for patrons to meet with a lawyer or attend a Zoom court hearing. Community partners and organizations were able to request kiosks to be placed in locations around the state where people may have trouble accessing the internet. Some of the locations chosen include community centers, public libraries, and domestic violence and homeless shelters. The project is still in its very early days, so there is not information available about its impact yet, but it is a good step in helping bring access to those who need it most.
About the author: Sarah Larsen is the Outreach Librarian at the Minnesota State Law Library. She is also the Vice Chair of LISP-SIS.
As Barbara Engstrom (Executive Director, King County Library – Seattle) and Karen Westwood (Director, Hennepin County Law Library – Minneapolis) watched law libraries reopening over the summer and early fall, they started an email correspondence about their own decisions regarding reopening and other matters. As happens, they were both busy and the correspondence stretched out over many weeks. But that’s par for the course for 2020, isn’t it? Here’s the exchange, lightly edited for clarity. (Please note: Both libraries are membership law libraries – references to “subscribers” refer to patrons who hold memberships.)
October 22, 2020
KW: Barbara, the Hennepin County Law Library in Minneapolis, MN has remained closed to the public since we were sent home in March. We’ve had uninterrupted service via email and phone since then, and since June we’ve have skeletal staffing in so we can access the physical collection, but I’m reluctant to open service to the public. We always pay attention to King County as a metro area of similar size to us and I see that you also remain closed to the public. What is your thinking about reopening your physical space? I have my own reasons here for keeping the doors closed, but am curious about your thought process. Are you getting any pressure to open up?
October 23, 2020
BE: We have been closed since March as well, Karen. Until recently, the decision on whether to reopen was really out of our hands. Governor Inslee mandated that all public libraries remain closed until the county reaches Phase 3 of our reopening plan. King County has been in Phase 2 since the spring. The Governor issued updated guidance on October 6th allowing very limited public access but with stringent requirements for social distancing, symptom monitoring, and disinfecting. For a library of our size this just isn’t feasible in terms of cost or staffing. We haven’t had any pressure to open. King County, as a whole, has directed all non-essential employees to work from home until January, so there is an expectation that most county operations will be remote until January at the very least. We are currently experiencing an uptick in COVID cases in King County which also diminishes any expectation of reopening soon. The real challenge for us has been trying to provide access to our treatise collection and subscription based resources remotely. Karen, the last time that we talked you mentioned the possibility of using CARES Act funds to pay for remote access databases for patrons. What ever came of that?
October 28, 2020
KW: I kind of wish that the decision was out of my hands. As you well know, County Law Libraries have a variety of relationships and reporting structures. In my case, I have a hands off board, but try to consider interests of the court, county administration, and the local public library with whom I have a close working relationship. At the end of the day, though, I try to picture who we are not serving by not reopening. To my mind attorneys and court and county personnel have the wherewithal to make use of our services even with our doors closed. The main population we miss by staying closed is lay patrons who seek our guidance in learning and understanding the law and legal process – they often used to find us while they were in our building transacting court business. To compensate a bit for this, we are partnering with district court to provide scheduling and technical assistance for people contesting citations. The Hearing Office offers a Zoom option and we have made our law library conference room available for citizens who don’t have (or don’t understand) the technology for using Zoom. We are averaging 15-20 people a week in our conference room now, and we feel good about assisting an underserved population.
But back to your question – I finally got a contract with Wolters Kluwer over the finish line. Because I am entering an agreement for ebooks, pushed primarily because we remain closed to the public, my county budget colleague tells me that CARES Act funding will be available to help with this. I had hoped to use CARES dollars for the full year’s subscription, but am told that I can only use it for services rendered in 2020. But two months of help is better than nothing! This is an unusual circumstance in which remaining closed actually got me some cash. We had also discussed how you have purchased some ebooks from Lexis. Was that primarily due to your remaining closed, or do you think you would have gone down that road either way?
November 4, 2020
BE: I guess the theme for 2020 is change is the only constant. In the time that we’ve been writing back and forth Karen, I received word that the mandatory work from home order for non-essential King County employees has been extended until July 5, 2021. This directive includes all public service counters for the county. While we have a bit of an amorphous relationship with the county, their mandates definitely impact our decision-making. We plan to remain closed for the foreseeable future, but have just started curbside subscriber borrowing and have made conference rooms available for reservations on a very limited basis. It’s interesting to hear that you are assisting with technology for Zoom hearings. We are partnering with civil legal aid groups to provide space in the law library assist with access to online hearings. It is currently limited to eviction and domestic violence protection orders but may expand if there is capacity. We are still in the planning stages so I will definitely be reaching out to hear what you’ve learned about the process.
Great news the you were able to get CARES Act funding for at least a few months of your Cheetah subscription! I’ll be interested to hear about the usage you get. Yes, we did recently add the Lexis Digital eBook collection. I’ve been trying to get remote access to our database subscriptions for years but to no avail. I guess it’s a COVID silver lining that we are now able to offer eBooks to our subscribers. In addition to Lexis Digital — which is limited to our subscribers, we now also have remote patron access to the National Consumer Law Center database, HeinOnline, and the Nolo Press collection from Ebsco. I’m currently working with the Washington County Law Libraries Association to secure grant funding for statewide access to the Nolo Press database.
Karen, I’m curious as to whether you have any concerns about remaining closed being used as a justification for taking space currently allocated to your library. King County is undergoing a massive shift in space allocation. Many employees have been told that they will be working from home permanently and the King County Administration building, which historically contained essential public service counters, is being mothballed. So far, I haven’t heard of any impacts on the Courthouse, where we are located, but I imagine they are coming– especially once the lease runs out on the off-site space that the county is renting to facilitate socially distant trials.
November 16, 2020
KW: Barbara, you raise a good question about space – similar to questions many law firms are raising about how much space and what type of space they’ll need going forward. For social distancing we would seem to need MORE space, but for other services (more database access, etc.) less space is needed. This question is just academic for me, though. Our library footprint was shrunk to less than half its former space several years ago so I’m certain that the county (our landlord) will look elsewhere for more square footage before they approach us.
December 16, 2020
BE: Remember at the beginning of this whole thing we all thought we’d be closed for two weeks, Karen? It’s laughable to imagine now. My husband recently described time being like taffy, and as I look back on the dates of this conversation, I’m both surprised and completely nonplussed to see that we started this two months ago! It’s also looking very likely that we won’t resume full walk-in services until July of 2021 – so the needle hasn’t moved to far on the main topic of this conversation either. I can say that I finally understand why the phrase; “May you live in interesting times” is considered a curse. I hope you all the best in 2021, Karen and may your new year be plain vanilla!
December 17, 2020
KW: Indeed, Barbara! Wishing you and everyone at King County Law Library a magnificent year in 2021, full of nothing interesting! One day we’ll meet again at the AALL Annual Meeting and visit each other’s libraries in person. Until then, be well!
About the authors: Barbara Engstrom is the Executive Director of the King County Library in Seattle, WA and Karen Westwood is the Director of the Hennepin County Law Library in Minneapolis, MN.
For over 20 years, the Washoe County Law Library, located inside the Second Judicial District Court of Washoe County, Nevada, has offered a weekly program called Lawyer in the Library. It is a free program in which self-represented litigants can meet with a volunteer lawyer for about 10-15 minutes to ask legal questions. As the need for legal assistance is high and cost prohibitive to many people in our community, this program has always been very popular and well-attended.
In previous years, we held this event as a “walk-in only” program in the Law Library. Patrons drew numbers for spots in line, and patiently waited for their turn to speak with a lawyer about their legal situation. Then, COVID-19 hit. The Washoe County Law Library, like so many others, was forced to close suddenly, with very little warning or plan. Thinking this would be temporary, we posted signs saying the Lawyer in the Library program was canceled for two weeks. However, it quickly became apparent that the closure would not be as short-term as we hoped. Without the Law Library doors being open, how would we serve the needs of the community?
With staff working remotely from home, we were accessible by phone and email. We quickly developed a live chat option on our website, but how would we deliver one of our most crucial services – the Lawyer in the Library program? So many members of the public that we serve regularly need legal advice. As Court employees, we are not allowed to provide legal advice. This restriction has always been relieved by referring litigants to our Lawyer in the Library program. Where could we send people now? We realized that we needed to come up with a way to offer the program in a different format.
With the instant popularity of Zoom, we started brainstorming how we could transition Lawyer in the Library to a virtual platform. We started recruiting our existing volunteers to test this new version of the program, and fortunately we were able to find some brave souls to take this journey with us. It was a little rocky in the beginning and took some time to get the word out to the public about how to find us, but almost five months later, our virtual program is thriving.
We offer Family Law, General Law, and Probate Law programs on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Patrons are required to sign-up in advance, which is a big change for us after offering a walk-in only program for two decades. However, we must require advance registration for preparation and planning purposes. We provide volunteers with a conflict list ahead of time and ensure that everyone has the Zoom meeting information the day before.
Staff handles all technical aspects of the program so the volunteers only need to worry about logging in and providing their legal expertise. We make sure the patrons are able to connect; the technology skills and access definitely run the gamut. It is certainly a challenge, week-to-week, making sure the programs go off without a hitch, but it has been both successful and fun. The volunteers and participants have raved about how convenient this new format is for them; they can attend from the safety and comfort of their own home or office. Even as the world starts to normalize, and we eventually re-open our doors, transitioning to a virtual format of our Lawyer in the Library program may be a positive and permanent outcome of the COVID-19 pandemic.
About the author: Sarah Bates is the Law Librarian at the Washoe County Law Library in Reno, NV.
Maryland’s Thurgood Marshall State Law Library has been reopened since June 8, 2020. As part of the State court system, we follow the Phases set forth by the Judiciary – Phase I was full lockdown; Phase II, which began June 8th, opened the Courts of Appeal Building in Annapolis (most if not all other Maryland state court buildings remained closed during Phase II). As the Library is the first floor of the building, Phase II included the Library’s reopening. Initially, we had restricted hours, open only from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (our “normal” hours included Tuesday and Thursday to 9:00 p.m. and Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.). Judiciary personnel and persons with active appellate cases were permitted to walk in with no prior notice; all other people were asked to make appointments. This continues to be how we operate, though we opened to our usual extended hours when Phase III began on July 20th.
The mechanics of possible plans are addressed in many places by many other libraries. Ours are similar to, and sometimes informed by, our colleagues.
Physical Adjustments
Reopening has included physical space and material precautions, including:
Distanced seating, which we created by simply removing chairs and stashing them in the back stacks;
Tape arrows to indicate traffic flow;
Signs for required masking and physical distancing, posted at every entrance and exit, seat, and low bookcase;
Plexiglass at the reference desk, hung from the ceiling and attached to the desk (there are gaps on the rounded sides, so we taped off a six-foot distance and parked some potted plants on the floor to keep people back – see photo);
Cleaning supplies, including wipes and hand-sanitizer;
Masks for anyone who forgets one – the building guards make them available, and we do as well, just in case.
Tape and potted plants are used as a reminder
Regarding masks, these have been a matter of much discussion, both from a staff and a patron perspective.
Staff Masking
On our original return, the Judiciary policy was masks at all times except for staff when seated at their personal workspaces, as long as there was six feet of space (shared cubicle residents had to remain masked). As we learned more and had to address many questions about mask requirements, the policy shifted.. Now, the Judiciary mandates masks at all times except staff who have individual offices with closed doors. Unfortunately, since most of us are in cubicles, this means wearing a mask for eight hours almost straight (there is an exception for sipping drinks or eating at one’s desk). The staff makes sure to take quick breaks every hour or two, to run outside and release our faces from the heavy layers and get a breath of fresh air. This would, of course, be far more refreshing if we weren’t in the throes of a Maryland summer (90s and humid, with regular thunderstorms). As a personal tip – I carry daily with me facial astringent and wipes, and use them a few times a day, which helps reduce the oily feeling of my lower face under the mask.
Patron Masking
The Judiciary policy requires masks of all persons present in the building, meaning all library patrons must wear them. We have not yet been obligated to address a situation in which someone’s health concerns allow for no mask. We make many of our services available remotely (document provision, with fees waived; free Westlaw passwords for some access to database searching) and believe we can provide mostly equitable service without someone needing to come in person. Visitors for the most part have been compliant. There have only been a few instances where staff needed to provide reminders to pull up a mask, and with one exception, everyone has done so. The one exception needed multiple reminders, but once aware that every staff member was watching them all the time, kept the mask in place without a squabble.
Operational Adjustments
Reopening has also included operational adjustments, some of them quite complex. These include:
Quarantine of Print Materials
Materials used by patrons in the library, as well as those circulated to Judiciary staff (we are a non-circulating library to the public). We quarantine for 72 hours, on a cart with shelves designated as Day 1, 2, and 3 to keep them from overlapping and contaminating each other;
Scheduling of Visitors
We request that all visitors pre-schedule, but if we do not have a full house, the guards know they can let in walk-ins.
When patrons call to schedule, we ask them a set of questions, including what materials they plan to use (print, microform, databases), and how long they plan to be in the library. We explain that we ask these questions to keep within appropriate numbers, and to ensure that the resources needed are available when they visit. Resources like the MDEC kiosk (electronic courts access), microform machines (legislative history, mainly), and public computers are limited in number and are frequently requested.
As an example – our public computers are set up in carrels that are built as a single unit (see photo), so with safe spacing, our computer availability is severely limited. We therefore schedule computer usage in one-hour blocks. If there is nobody scheduled to use a computer at the end of an hour block, the person can stay. Fortunately, we’ve not had more than three simultaneous computer users so far. We actively inform and encourage all visitors who express interest in computer use to bring a laptop, as all of our databases can be accessed via our wi-fi.
Carrels built as a single unit
Scheduling of Reference Desk Coverage
In the pre-pandemic world, we had two reference staff at the reference desk in shifts. Unfortunately, the space is too small to allow for the required six-foot distance between persons. And we are concerned about the use of the phone, keyboard, mouse, etc. by rotating numbers of staff. To address these concerns, we have adjusted how we staff the desk.
Two persons are still scheduled simultaneously. However, only one person sits at the front reference desk at a time, scheduled in two four-hour shifts (three on our extended days). This minimizes the number of times the space must be cleaned. The person rotating in cleans the space before starting the shift. The second scheduled person remains at their usual workspace and completes reference work from there. This solves the seated distance problem.
It also solves a secondary problem – the telephone, and concerns about the ability to adequately clean the handset with its tiny little speaker holes. The person at the front desk manages any in-person needs and completes email reference; the person at their own desk manages any incoming telephone calls and completes email reference in tandem with the front desk. In this manner, there is no need for the front desk person to pick up the phone.
On our extended hours – evenings and Saturdays – there is a solo staff person. For now, the evening librarian uses the single handset of a cordless phone we’ve attached to the main desk. The Saturday librarian, who is new to our staff (day one – July 1st – lovely to start a new job in a pandemic!), has had training partners on Saturdays, so the phone has been answered at individual desks. We have ordered a multi-handset cordless phone to replace the current single handset. We will then be able to assign a handset to each person needing access, with no fear of contamination.
We have also assigned our Reference Assistant to provide the bulk of our document delivery requests. Prior to the pandemic, whoever was “on the desk” generally managed document duplication. Now, all document requests are forwarded to the RA for full completion. This minimizes the number of staff needing to use the equipment. The overall goal is to minimize the possibility of cross-contamination.
The adjusted reference schedule has been working well. In a quick review of reference statistics, we have seen that our FY2020 numbers (from July 1 to June 30) were just about exactly even with our FY2019 numbers – even with a three-month building closure. During the closure, while we operated in email-reference-only mode, we completed about 75% of our normal reference numbers. Since returning, our numbers have climbed higher than pre-pandemic levels – we are now running about 8% higher than our pre-pandemic statistics. Interestingly, the move to all email may have convinced many patrons of the value of email reference, as pre-pandemic, about 63% of reference was conducted via email; post, it’s at 74%.
I’m certain I’ve missed a few details – new ones certainly crop up regularly. We continue to watch what our colleagues are doing elsewhere, to learn from their efforts and innovations. We appreciate the sharing community of law librarians!
About the author: Catherine McGuire is the Head of Reference and Outreach at the Thurgood Marshall State Law Library.
The Hawaii Supreme Court Law Library’s colorful history dates back to the Kingdom of Hawaii, when in 1840 King Kamehameha III promulgated the Kingdom’s first constitution. The king created the three branches of government, including the Judiciary and the Supreme Court, and by extension the Supreme Court Law Library (SCLL). We’re not sure just when SCLL opened its front doors, but in 1851, the legislature set aside $1000 to fund the library.
Fast-forward 180 years later, SCLL now faces the challenge of operating and delivering public services in the context of a global pandemic, alongside libraries throughout the Pacific and across the mainland. For us, this meant an abrupt transition to a telework schedule effective March 20, 2020, and when cases decreased—oh how I miss the days of 0 or single digit case numbers–returning physically to the building on July 1, 2020.
Back in March, we didn’t know what to expect, so we put a temporary hold on the mail, contacted our vendors that we’d be in touch with billing/payment at the end of April/early May, naively thinking we’d be in a somewhat ‘business as usual’ place after a month. (Oh the wishful hopes!) Unfortunately, library staff had a hodge podge of home devices to use to connect from home, including a daughter’s laptop, a phone, a tablet, and personal computers. Working with our IT department, I was able to get all staff VPN access via their Judiciary computers, and staff went into the office to pick up and bring home their equipment. We held weekly zoom meetings to stay connected and once we were settled with the right equipment in our respective homes, we became much more effective to complete our work. This first phase of our work-at-home/stay-at-home order was fully focused on the health and safety of my staff.
While library services for Judiciary personnel remained mostly uninterrupted in our new telework environment, we realized we needed to develop better methods to provide services to the public. Working with our vendors (Lexis, Westlaw, and Lexis Digital Library), SCLL began offering remote access to online legal resources to our legal community and the general public. Our public services librarian developed our Virtual Reference Desk (VRD) and launched it on April 3, 2020 (modeled after the wonderful Harris County Law Library). Our VRD is optimized for mobile devices, provides access to the aforementioned resources as well as community and legal COVID-19 specific resources, and the public can contact the library with a single click. Within the initial four days of launching our VRD, our public services librarian and I fielded 100+ reference email interactions, which totally energized us. We also put a moratorium on any library service fees related to document delivery and legislative history research, pulling on our digital archives when legislative history requests came in. And finally, rounding out our virtual resources, on June 1st, following the lead of our colleagues at the Texas State Law Library, we began offering Live Chat, Monday- Friday, 1pm – 3pm.
Due to a decrease in COVID-19 numbers (some days we had 0 new cases), our Governor lifted our Stay At Home order, moved to the “Safer at Home” and then to the “Act with Care” restrictions. This meant that SCLL staff returned to the building on July 1st, 2020, holding our first in-person staff meeting. We were physically open to Judiciary staff only, offering curbside checkout to members of the community as needed, and continued to leverage our virtual services to the public.
First in person staff meeting on July 1, 2020
Our first priority upon return in July was finishing our Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) needs analysis in our workspace, something that I had begun doing with our Judiciary planning analyst, prior to the start of our teleworking in March. However, due to stringent state budget restrictions, there were no funds to do much purchasing. Using cardboard, plastic sheeting, and a can-do attitude, we came up with safety measures that helped staff feel more comfortable. One of our favorite PPE is from our Judiciary History Center’s exhibit detailing the timeline of western presence in the Hawaiian islands. We’re using some of the exhibit pieces in the staff office area and some stand in our law library, providing PPE barriers at the reference desk.
Also, remember how we stopped the mail in March? About mid-May, some of our staff began going into the office to manage the deliveries (the initial one amounted to half a USPS postal truck), and then once staff was fully back on July 1st, we could really tackle catching up with deliveries. July was then finished off by putting our office and library space back together, so we could organize it and physically make it ready for visitors.
On August 1st, SCLL “opened” to the public, by appointment only. With social distancing guidelines in place, requiring masks and hand sanitizer, we currently allow members of the public to come into the library, one hour at a time. We have a limit of five public patron appointments a day, so as to be able to service our Judiciary staff and keep to no more than six people in the library in any given time (including staff). As a further precaution to protect both staff and the public, the Judiciary has contracted with the National Guard, which conducts initial screening and temperature checks before anyone can enter the building. The first week we were open, nearly all library appointment slots were filled, with some folks calling in ahead of time, others calling the day of.
COVID check in at the Reference Desk
We are so happy we’re able to work toward fulfilling our mission of providing law library services to the Judiciary and community as best as we can, even in the midst of our global pandemic. At the same time, we remain vigilant and careful moving forward, as unfortunately, cases are currently spiking in Hawaii, and we expect more stringent measures to be put in place.
One of the things that keeps me going is that I know we are not alone, and looking around at our fellow amazing colleagues across AALL, I’m inspired by how we continue to learn from each other and share ideas. Like Greg Lambert says in his _In Seclusion_ podcast, we may be in (various states of) seclusion, but we’re all in this together.
Sending love and aloha to our fellow colleagues here in Hawaii and across the sea, dreaming of the day when it’s safer for everyone to be out and about in the world, and wishing you a safe and healthy rest of your day.
Post Script: Due to the Governor’s and Mayor’s (City and County of Honolulu) orders that were just released on Tuesday, August 25, 2020, which is resulting in a two week stay at home/work at home order, the Hawaii Supreme Court Law Library has temporarily ceased our in person appointments starting Thursday, August 26th. Appointments are planned to resume on Monday, September 14th, pending further state and county guidance.
Something that has helped me and that I’ve also shared with my staff–in terms of coping with all the changes–is to “be like water.” While I’m not an expert Tao Te Ching philosopher, I resonated with the idea that water shifts and bends, flows and changes forms as it moves about in the world, facing different obstacles or sometimes no obstacles at all. Water can carve paths into canyons, carry us in its waves, astonish us with its strength (and sometimes destruction), or can calmly reflect the sky. What would water do in the face of barriers and challenges? So as we respond to the pandemic, I’m doing my best to be like water, and every day I’m thankful to my staff who have been flexible and are being like water even at this writing.
About the author: Jenny Silbiger is the State Law Librarian of the Hawaii State Judiciary.
LISP/SR Blog 