this is a page for

Daily Archives: August 21, 2025

Cameron R-1 schools email indicates refusal to permit inspection of books by concerned residents

The Cameron R-1 school district has been fully embroiled in a book controversy with concerned parents and taxpayers over library books with content described as “adult” and “sexually explicit” since February 2023. During all these months since the first books were found, the Cameron R-1 school district has honored Missouri Sunshine Law requests and allowed inspection of library books and curriculum materials on school property. The school district now appears to refuse to allow further inspections and has provided instructions to instead go to a public library.

Recently, I was forwarded an email dated August 14 that originated from the Cameron school district. This email was in response to a verbal request to inspect books inside the Cameron High School library. Originally, a high school administrator had agreed to allow Landi access to the library on a day when no staff or students would be present. As you can see in this screenshot, the district seems to have indicated it will no longer comply with Missouri law and allow the inspection of books.

What laws allow inspections of these books?

First, the Missouri Sunshine Law, Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 610, allows for the inspection of public records. Every one of our previous requests to inspect books required the Cameron school district to insist we submit a Sunshine Law request as a condition of being able to inspect those books. They complied with each records request and allowed us to inspect those books—until now.

Additionally, Missouri Revised Statute Section 170.231 specifically allows for inspection of curriculum materials. Arguably, any book that was used as part of classroom instruction and was required reading could be classified as “curriculum material.” Failure to allow the inspection of one of these books could potentially be a violation of this statute.

Consequences for failure to allow inspection of curriculum materials

Missouri Revised Statute Section 162.091 indicates that failure to comply with the inspection of curriculum materials could be considered a misdemeanor and punishable by a $500 fine OR imprisonment in county jail for up to one year.

This statute states: “Any county clerk, county treasurer, school board member, officer or employee, or other officer, who willfully neglects or refuses to perform any duty imposed upon him by chapters 160 to 168, 170, 171, 177 and 178, or who willfully violates any provision of these chapters, is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars or by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed one year.”

Since the right to inspect curriculum materials is established under RSMo 170.231 (which falls under Chapter 170), any school official who “willfully neglects or refuses” to allow public inspection of curriculum materials as required by law would be committing a misdemeanor under Section 162.091.

What Cameron school district policies address sunshine law requests

According to Policy C-145-P: District Information and Records, the Cameron school district is obligated to comply with and fulfill Missouri Sunshine Law requests. The policy commits the district to ensuring public access to meetings, records, and votes as required by Missouri’s Sunshine Law, while recognizing that some records may be legally closed to the public.

This policy directly implements the district’s obligations under Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 610 (the Missouri Sunshine Law) by establishing the framework for public records access and designating the responsible officials.

Considering the Cameron school district has treated all previous requests to inspect books and curriculum materials as Sunshine Law requests, refusal to allow additional requests to inspect books would appear to be a deliberate and willful act to ignore the law.

Policy C-105-P: District Rules and Guides

This policy broadly requires all staff to follow district rules, which include legal compliance:

  • “All Board members, employees, students and patrons are required to follow the District’s rules and regulations.”
  • “The Superintendent, administrators and District supervisors are required to implement and enforce District policies, the Administrative Manual, the Employee Manual, and the Student/Parent Handbook.”

Refusal to comply with policy or law is potentially a violation of the employment contract

In previous records requests, we had the opportunity to inspect a Cameron school district employee’s employment contract with the district. That contract required the then-school district employee to comply with all school district policy and laws. For a school district employee to knowingly not comply with board-approved policy or the law could be a violation of their contract and grounds for possible termination of their employment.

A superintendent instructing staff to not comply with Missouri law and district policy is problematic

As a general rule, the school superintendent is responsible for ensuring the law and district rules are both followed and enforced. He serves both the district and the community—their bosses—and should lead by example as he carries out that responsibility. To instruct staff to intentionally ignore school policy and state law is in itself a violation of policy.

The employees who are instructed to ignore requests to inspect books and curriculum are being set up for failure. They are caught between risking reprimand for ignoring the instructions of the superintendent or potentially violating the law. Regardless of which action the employee takes, they are risking possible job termination.

The school superintendent is supposed to lead by example.  By instructing staff to violate law and policy he is creating a toxic work environment.   It also undermines both respect and confidence of staff in the ability of their chief executive officer to be fair, impartial and unbiased.  

Is it possible the intent of the district was misunderstood?

It’s possible, but I am highly skeptical.  We have reached out for comment from the district and those details will follow.  Reviewing the email, the text is quite specific.

After speaking with Dr. Robinson to verify up-to-date procedures, I was informed that we are no longer accommodating requests to come into the building to review books.  If there are specific books that you have concerns with, please provide the list of titles to the district for the review committee to review.  You are always welcome to visit the public library that is located at 312 N Chestnut St and review the books in person. 

Had the district been willing to allow the inspection of books in other buildings, such as the central office, that would have been included in this email.  There should also have been some instructions on submitting a records request.  It wasn’t.  The only mention of how to inspect physical books was a suggestion that Mr. Landi visit a public library.   The intent behind this email appears to be that Mr. Landi can kick rocks.  His days of trying to find and inform the district of sexually explicit books in its libraries are over.

What was his purpose behind inspecting the books

The district has been asked multiple times to police the books in their libraries for the arguably harmful content that isn’t appropriate for children.  The school district refuses.  Mr. Landi is among several concerned parents and taxpayers who have volunteered their time to identify books that contain sexually explicit content that may be harmful to minors.  Because of the efforts of this group the district’s book review committee has identified and restricted more than 40 books.  The district wouldn’t have known to review those books without his assistance.  Those books and others he helped find are on our Cameron R-1 School’s Dirty Book List.  

On the day he attended the district’s open house at the high school he was interested in getting a closer look at two books.  One was a graphic novel by an author who has books restricted to adults only.  The other he understood contained detailed descriptions of gang rape, murder, incest, explicit sex acts and necrophilia.   Those don’t sound like very wholesome or family-values type reading.  They should appreciate his efforts and welcome the free help from his group. Instead of being grateful for his assistance in protecting children from harmful material they’ve dismissed him.  They told him to kick rocks.

What does the district have to say about this email and refusal to allow book inspections

We have submitted a request to Gina Bainum, the school district’s Communications Director, to ask for comment. We asked Mrs. Bainum the following: “Considering the school district required these book inspections occur through a Missouri Sunshine Law request, how does the school district justify the end of these inspections made through the Sunshine Law? Additionally, does this inspection refusal extend to books which are required reading in the classroom and mentioned on a class syllabus?”

Right before publishing this article, I heard back from the communications director in response to my request for comment. Mrs. Bainum had clarifying questions and indicated she wasn’t aware of the email sent to Mr. Landi. I have shared the screenshot from this article and am awaiting a response. If we receive any comment, this article will be updated.