Former Henderson library director asks federal court for job back pending lawsuit outcome

HENDERSON, Ky. — A former library director is asking a federal court to give him his job back — even if it's just temporary.

Meanwhile, the Henderson County Public Library Board has filed its own paperwork laying out for a federal judge the reasons why he shouldn't have it.

Caleb May, 38, has filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court in Owensboro asking to be reinstated as director of the Henderson County Public Library pending the outcome of a $2 million lawsuit he filed after the library board voted not to renew his contract, which expired Aug. 31.

The board also voted to put May on administrative leave until his contract expired. The decision came after May and the library became embroiled in a controversy regarding social media posts he made in late May about the Black Lives Matter movement.

More:Henderson library director files $2 million federal lawsuit against library, board

May, who had been the library's director since 2015, called the BLM movement "hypocritical" and "racist" and called the abortion of Black children a "liberal holocaust." The comments were made amid national protests related to incidents of police brutality, specifically toward Black men.

While many in the community called for May's resignation, others petitioned the library board asking he be retained.

Shortly after the board's decision on June 9, May filed the federal lawsuit alleging the library board put him on administrative leave and did not renew his contract as "retaliation against (May) for the exercise of his freedom of expression as a private citizen and for his religious and political commentary on social media regarding matters of public concern."

However, the board of trustees said May's contract wasn't renewed due to concerns they had after interviewing library staff.

The injunction

In mid-August, May and his attorney, Brian Schuette of Bowling Green, filed a motion for a preliminary injunction which would require "the Library to reinstate him to his position pending final resolution of the case."

As part of the information documented in the motion, May — who is married and has six children — said that "since July 9, 2020, (he) has applied for more than 30 jobs. He has only been granted three interviews and received no offers. After one of the three interviews, the Plaintiff (May) was advised that he was not being considered for the position because of the circumstances giving rise to this civil action."

More:Henderson library director apologizes for Facebook remarks about Black Lives Matter

The injunction cites several legal cases as precedent for May's argument: "When a government actor takes adverse action against an employee in response to conduct that is protected by the First Amendment, the employee has an actionable claim under 42 U.S.C. 1983 ...

And, "A public employee alleging First Amendment retaliation must satisfy three requirements 1) The employee must speak on 'matters of public concern.' 2) The employee must speak as a private citizen, and not as an employee pursuant to his official duties. 3) The employee must show that his speech interest outweighs 'the interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees ..."

The motion further argues the United States Supreme Court has stated that "the inappropriate or controversial character of a statement is irrelevant to the question whether it deals with a matter of public concern."

May alleges the Facebook posts centered around matters of public concern.

The preliminary injunction motion also observes that "Even if an employee could have been discharged for any reason or no reason at all, he/she may nonetheless be entitled to reinstatement if he/she was discharged for exercising his/her constitutional right to freedom of expression.

"Ultimately, the Defendant (the library board) must show that the Plaintiff's termination would have taken place absent the protected conduct."

The motion concludes with this statement: "This case presents the Court with an opportunity to use its equitable powers to right a serious wrong. While there is no way to turn back the clock, reinstating May to his position as director of the Henderson County Public Library would begin to repair his reputation. It would also send an important message that First Amendment rights are to be taken seriously — even when doing so requires courage."

The library's response

While May's motion alleges infringement of personal freedoms, the library board's response — filed in federal court on Sept. 8 — lays out a series of infractions he allegedly committed against employees and patrons. The board's response says May's removal as director is due to these incidents and not the personal opinions or beliefs he posted on Facebook.

However, the library's response does point out that trustees were unaware of staff grievances until after the controversy regarding May's social media posts.

More:Henderson County Library board looking at professional firm in search for new director

In court documents obtained by The Gleaner, the library's response says, "(May) only draws this Court's attention to four Facebook posts ... and ignores the fact that (the library board) considered several instances wherein (May) demonstrated racist, sexist, unprofessional and unbecoming conduct prior to the vote not to renew his employment agreement.

"The Plaintiff's (May) social media posts merely triggered a discussion with staff which revealed several events that caused Defendants (the library board) to lose confidence in the Plaintiff's ability to lead the Library and supervise employees."

Among the issues raised by staff and patrons, according to the library's response:

• The Plaintiff (May) allegedly discussed inappropriate sexual matters with library staff and patrons which included a conversation about a groin issue and reciting love poems to female employees against their wishes while they performed their duties.
• A female patron brought her child to story hour. She stepped away to a quiet, private area to breastfeed her infant. The Plaintiff allegedly followed her, engaged in conversation with her, stared at her and made her feel uncomfortable.
• When a patron asked about a sculpture of two great horned owls that had been removed for maintenance, the Plaintiff allegedly said to the patron, "You mean the horny hooters — we call them the horny hooters."
• The Plaintiff allegedly told a racist joke in the presence of a female employee.
• Prior to an NAACP meeting held at the library, the Plaintiff allegedly asked a Black coworker, "What do y'all like to be called: Black, Negroes or African American?"
• The Plaintiff allegedly brought his children to the library and expected the staff to babysit. On one occasion, the Plaintiff and his spouse allegedly left the library for the day without realizing they had forgotten one of their children at the library.
• The Plaintiff allegedly gave a key fob to his wife who used it to come into the staff-only entrance. The Plaintiff's spouse would allegedly come to the library, monitor the staff and recommend the Plaintiff discipline staff for failing to perform their job duties. On multiple occasions, the Plaintiff allegedly disciplined staff at the request of his spouse.
• Staff said the Plaintiff did not know how to use the Library catalog system, run the circulation desk or perform jobs of other employees.

The library's response goes on to say May's motion for a preliminary injunction has no merit due to the fact that, "The Plaintiff was not terminated for his Facebook posts, but rather due to the Defendants' loss in confidence in Plaintiff's ability to lead the library and supervise employees ... Moreover, issuing an injunction would cause substantial harm to the Library such that the public interest would be served by denying, not granting the injunction."

More:Library lawsuit prompts review of how personnel issues, grievances are handled

May's reply to allegations

When The Gleaner contacted May's attorney Brian Schuette regarding staff allegations, he provided a lengthy rejoinder:

"First, the Library’s response is pretty standard fare for an employment law case," Schuette said. "The Library has apparently canvassed its employees and other sources to dredge up as many negative statements about Caleb as it can find. No surprise there.

"Second, by the Library’s account, Caleb is a racist, bigoted, sexually-harassing, incompetent boor. The picture that it has painted is of a man so vile that it strains credulity. If he was so horrible, why did they keep him for five years? The law refers to such alleged reasons as 'pretext' meaning that the stated reasons for termination are not the actual reasons for termination. We believe that the Library’s response is wholly built upon pretext.

"Third, Caleb’s demonstrated history utterly refutes the narrative that the Library is attempting to advance. Caleb’s history includes the following:

• Caleb came to HCPL with 5 years of experience as director of the Meade Public Library in Meade, Kansas. His tenure there was very successful.
• May received his certification as a Library Professional in under five years. This is a prestigious credential.
• May received the “New Professional Award” from the Kansas Library Association in recognition of his achievements at the MPL.
• While serving as director of MPL, Caleb hired its first African American employee.

"Fourth, after coming to Henderson and under May’s leadership," Schuette said, "the HCPL undertook the following:

• Installation of access controls for library staff entrances (for enhanced employee safety)
• Sponsored the performance of an African Drums Troop

• Jazz Night, led by E.J. Simmons, a local African American worship pastor.
• The ‘42420 Event,’ in which patrons' overdue charges were forgiven as a way of generating good news in the early days of the COVID-19 Pandemic.
• Replacement of a plaque commemorating the work of Mariah Powell Carr, an African American woman who led the library for African Americans during segregation.

"Fifth, May also worked to foster relationships with other organizations in the community, including the following:

• 'Food for Fines,' in which patrons who owed fines were allowed to pay with donations to local food banks.
• Working to re-engage the local NAACP chapter by making library facilities available for meetings, something that had stopped under previous leadership because the participants felt unwelcome.

"Sixth, prior to Caleb’s private Facebook posts expressing opinions at odds with prevailing Progressive orthodoxy, he was consistently lauded for his job performance. None of the issues raised by the library in its response to his motion seeking reinstatement were known or under consideration. It has all been contrived as a defensive tactic.

"Seventh, perhaps the most sensitive indicator of Caleb’s performance is his employee evaluations. All were highly favorable. In addition, May received large merit raises each year — in excess of the usual budgeted amounts. These raises were always at the hands of the trustees who are now attempting to portray Caleb as an incompetent bigot."

The eighth point raised was Caleb’s responses to some of the specific allegations the library’s recent filing included: 

Allegation:

“…Plaintiff did not know how to use the Library catalog system, run the circulation desk, or perform jobs of Library employees.”

Response:

"This statement is false as I do know how to run the catalog system, the circulation desk and perform duties of library employees — even though none of these tasks are a part of my regular duties as library director and I only performed these tasks infrequently. It is also quite bizarre that these 'concerns' were not brought to the board years ago if true." 

Allegation:

“…Plaintiff brought his children to the library and expected Library staff to babysit them.”

Response:

"This is not the case. In every instance where there was a library program that involved one or more of our children we followed the same practice of all parents — the only difference being that since I am a library employee and present in the building when programs occur, at times my wife would drop a child off for a program and run an errand knowing that if there were any issues the library staff knew that I was the parent in the building to be notified." 

Allegation:

“On one occasion, Plaintiff and his spouse left the library for the day without realizing that they had forgotten one of their children at the Library.”

Response:

"On the occasion in question, one of our six children had not followed as we were walking out of the library. This was quickly discovered as we were loading our van and the missing child was retrieved before we 'left' the library."

Allegation:

“…Plaintiff allowed his spouse to use his key fob to gain access to the Library through the staff-only entrance.”

Response:

"My wife never accessed the staff-only entrance to the library with my key fob without my knowledge and presence." 

Allegation:

“Plaintiff’s spouse would come to the Library, monitor the staff, and then recommend to Plaintiff that he discipline them for failing to perform their job duties.” 

Response:

"My wife is a library patron and on occasion she did mention to me both positive and negative feedback regarding her user experience. Never once did I 'discipline' a staff member based upon any of these comments. It is possible that I may have mentioned positive and negative feedback to a staff member based upon my wife’s input as I would with feedback from any library patron. "

Allegation:

“On one occasion, plaintiff discussed a groin issue with a female employee…[s]he  perceived this discussion to concern Plaintiff’s penis.”

Response:

" In August of 2019 I had a testicular infection that required medical attention. In a confidential conversation with (the assistant director/acting HR person) I mentioned in general terms that I had a painful issue in my groin area. If any terms were used, they would have been medical ones, and I am absolutely certain that my 'penis' was never mentioned. If (the assistant director) felt that this was inappropriate, he/she should have indicated that at the time and should have reported it to the board. (The assistant director) was present at my annual job performance meeting before the board less than two months after this event and did not mention anything to the trustees." 

Allegation:

“Against the desire of Library staff, Plaintiff also recited love poems to female employees while they performed their duties and responsibilities …"

Response:

"I am a fan of poetry and have committed several passages to memory. Occasionally, in the spirit of spontaneity and camaraderie I have recited poetry in the presence of employees. While some of these poems may be considered 'love poems' nothing was meant in a romantic way and no employees ever complained to me."

Allegation:

When a patron asked about a sculpture of two great horned owls that had been removed for maintenance, the Plaintiff allegedly said to the patron, "You mean the horny hooters — we call them the horny hooters."

Response:

"I have previously commented on the allegation that I frequently referred to the Audubon Owl Statue as the 'horny hooters.' This was an inside joke amongst staff and was actually begun many years prior to my time at the library by another employee who is still on staff. I never used the comment with members of the public." 

Allegation:

“Prior to one meeting [of the NAACP at the Library], Plaintiff (an African American employee) asked her ‘What do y’all like to be called: Black, Negros, or African American.’”

Response:

"This conversation was several years ago when I was asked for the first time to speak to the NAACP. Having never addressed an African American audience in this type of setting before, I wanted to be prepared. I am not originally from the south and don’t use the phrase 'y’all' and certainly would not have used it in this instance. I simply asked (the employee) if she preferred the terminology of 'Black' or 'African American,' I mentioned to her that when I was in grade school I was told that 'Negro' was the proper word, but that I knew that had fallen out of favor long ago. If (the employee) felt that this conversation was inappropriate, she should have reported it back then as I have had several job evaluations since." 

Allegation:

"The Plaintiff allegedly told a racist joke in the presence of a female employee."

Response:

May maintains in his response that he did not tell the version of the joke in question, but says that his grandfather told a different joke that contained the same offending phrase. 

"...I mentioned this joke to (the assistant director) in a confidential conversation while I was grieving the recent death of my grandfather and how much things had changed regarding race relations since he was young. My grandfather passed in August of 2018. If this conversation was inappropriate, (the assistant director) should have reported it then. I have had two job evaluations with the trustees since then." 

Allegation:

A female patron brought her child to story hour. She stepped away to a quiet, private area to breastfeed her infant. The Plaintiff followed her, engaged in conversation with her, stared at her and made her feel uncomfortable.

Response:

"The other allegations, such as the breastfeeding mother, I have refuted previously."

PDF:Read Caleb May's motion for injunction

PDF:Read the HCPL Board's response to May's motion

PDF:Read Caleb May's responses to allegations