moms4all

The 186 Books

An unnamed lawmaker gave state auditors a list of 186 RatedBooks titles. They chose 22 books to read in full. Follow how they made that choice, what they found and what is still unknown about the list.

Who supplied the list? What did the auditors read?

The scope of the follow-up

June 18, 2025 · Utah

The June 2025 audit covered 15 districts and two charters. On June 18, 2025, Senate President Stuart Adams moved for a limited follow-up on content flagged by parents and legislators.

Documented
41 sources for June 18, 2025
Full record

From 186 candidates to 22 full readings

October 14, 2025 report · Utah

State auditors reported reading 22 school library books in full. They found sexual conduct, as Utah Code defines it, in 21 of the 22 (95 percent), and nudity, as Utah Code defines it, in 16 (73 percent). The site dates the Office of the Legislative Auditor General’s report October 14, 2025.

Show the dated details

An unnamed legislator supplied the list from ratedbooks.org. It rates books from 0 to 5 using the system of the now-defunct booklooks.org, according to the report.

Auditors randomly reordered the 186 titles rated 4 or 5. They checked public library and eBook catalogs at randomly selected secondary schools in seven districts: Davis, Weber, Salt Lake City, Granite, Canyons, Alpine and Washington. They chose 20 books across 42 libraries and added two more because of legislative concern.

Where the audit appears next

April 2024–July 2026 · Utah

On April 16, 2024, Emily Green asked whether staff choose library books or vendors send preselected orders. Davina S., USBE’s library media specialist, said librarians, educators and district staff normally choose books under local policies. Donations sometimes arrive, but she had not experienced routine unsolicited shipments.

Show the dated details

On May 8, 2026, Joann Brinton asked about having vendors rate books using the Texas approach she described. Jennie Earl said that would require a legislative request. Meeting captions identify the speakers.

On May 18, 2026, members said a broad library review could not be ready by June or August. Green accepted Earl’s revised motion asking staff for a timeline. It still covered funding, purchases, vendors, librarian qualifications and distributor influence. The committee approved it unanimously.

On June 5, 2026, the committee voted 4–1 to request $60,000 for the review plan, with Reale opposed. Green asked Board leaders to send the timeline to July’s Law and Licensing meeting, seek discretionary funding and bring it to the full Board in August.

On July 14, 2026, the Law and Licensing committee unanimously recommended the 2026 Timeline Policy and $60,000 in discretionary funds to the full Board, with Longacre absent. Staff described it as monitoring by staff and local school systems, rather than an audit.

Documented
40 sources for April 2024–July 2026
Full record

Open questions

Who supplied the original list, and which version? Why were these books chosen? How were the title-level findings later used?