By Morgan Freret

A new federal ruling requiring public libraries to filter out Internet pornography or face funding cuts will not affect the Santa Clara County Library System, which includes the Los Altos and Woodland libraries.

The Santa Clara County Library System does not receive federal funding, said Gay Strand, the Los Altos Library finance manager. “The Supreme Court decision will have no effect on us whatsoever.”

Under the United States Supreme Court’s ruling June 23, all public libraries will be required to filter out Internet pornography. Filtering does not violate First Amendment free-speech rights, the court ruled.

Santa Clara libraries were among those to voluntarily install Internet filters to block pornography in 1998 following a controversial debate over the public’s First Amendment rights.

All nine branches of the Santa Clara County Library System use CyberNOT filtering software to restrict access to sexual content on the Internet.

All children’s room computers are filtered, and all other computers allow the user a choice of filtered or non-filtered Internet use.

Carol Tefft, chief librarian at the Los Altos Library, said software programs that filter Internet Web sites are not 100 percent effective because none can distinguish between illegal pornography and legal material. Filters could block anything from poetry by Ann Sexton — because of her name’s spelling - to information about breast cancer.

Since the installation of the filters, the Los Altos Library has received very few complaints.

“The filtering system we have and the policies we have in place seem to be working quite well,” said Catharine Fouts, community library supervisor at the Los Altos Library. “We were really one of the first to come to grips with the issue. We were in the forefront of that compromise … I believe we have a very workable situation already in place.”

By Linda Taaffe

Downtown merchants miffed over the Los Altos City Council’s decision to put a parking permit plan in place without their input will have the opportunity to voice their opinions July 8 during a special public hearing. The council agreed last week to possibly rescind the paid-parking idea, pending public comment from downtown merchants who said they were never notified of the city’s plan until after the council had already made its decision.

A handful of merchants urged the council last week to correct what they called a flawed notification process and to hold a public hearing regarding the parking plan. Merchants suggested the city update its database with information from its business license application records.

“We need to feel represented and listened to,” said one State Street merchant. “I am concerned and bothered by what happened.”

The problem seemed to stem from the county assessor’s tax roll database that the city used to notify downtown businesses about the plan to initiate a permit parking plan at the end of the year.

The database included the names and addresses of the property owners rather than the merchants.

The city sent a single additional notice to each building addressed to the “current occupant,” including buildings with multiple merchants.

About 25 out of 27 merchants surveyed were not notified of the pending discussions, according to an informal merchant poll.

Some merchants were prepared to wage a protest against the city, posting “public protest of public hearings” posters in their windows.

The public meeting is scheduled for 6-7 p.m., July 8, at the city council chambers.