Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance And Ethics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Big Walnut board votes to censure member Zach Duffy over crowdfunding and social-media conduct
Summary
After amending the agenda, board members adopted a resolution that publicly censured Board member Zach Duffy for an unauthorized crowdfunding campaign and for a board-member social media page that used district logos and made statements the board said created the impression of board endorsement.
The Big Walnut Local Board of Education voted Monday to censure Board member Zach Duffy, adopting a resolution that criticized Duffy for operating an unauthorized online crowdfunding campaign and a social-media page that the board said used district imagery and posted misleading statements.
The board added the resolution as an amendment to the agenda and then debated and adopted the measure in a roll-call vote.
What the resolution says
The resolution, read into the record by a board member during the meeting, said the board "censures and reprimands" Duffy for two reasons: 1) creating and accepting donations to an online crowdfunding campaign that "did not comply with our board policies," directed funds to a personal account rather than through district channels, and continued despite requests to suspend it and work with the superintendent to create a compliant process; and 2) operating a board-member social media page that used the district logo and, according to the resolution text, "made inflammatory, reckless, and untrue statements" that created the false impression the posts represented the board's official position.
Board discussion and supporters of the resolution
Board members who spoke in favor said earlier private counsel and direct requests were made to Duffy to stop the crowdfunding campaign and to work within policy; when those requests were not followed, members said the board had little choice but to act. One member said they had "given him counsel and the advice from our legal counsel" and followed up personally; when the campaign remained active, the member said he called Duffy again and asked him to follow policy.
During discussion some board members described the move as "past due" and "a drastic step" but said it is the only formal measure available to the board to signal a member has violated internal governance protocols. Several members read or referenced the board—s governance-team protocols and cited the district code of ethics bylaw in explaining why they supported the reprimand.
Vote and outcome
Board members voted on the resolution by roll call; the chair called the vote and the clerk recorded the result. The resolution carried on the voice and roll-call procedures used in the meeting and was recorded as adopted during the meeting's business items.
Reaction and next steps
Those who supported the censure framed it as necessary to protect public confidence in district governance and to reinforce policy compliance for all board members. The resolution text ordered that the censure be entered into the board—s official minutes.
Ending
The board moved on to public participation and other business after the vote; the censure resolution and related governance protocols remain in the minutes and the public record for this meeting.
