Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Media Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council committee moves to limit political messaging on city social media and communication platforms
Summary
A proposed ordinance would restrict use of official city social-media and email accounts to neutral informational messages and prohibit political messaging, personal score‑settling and partisan campaigning; the Administrative Services Committee advanced the draft to the Committee of the Whole.
The Cleveland Heights Administrative Services Committee on June 30 voted to forward a draft ordinance that would prohibit political messaging and personal or partisan communications on city-operated social media accounts, email, and other electronic communications.
Committee Chair Craig Cobb said the draft, which he authored, would bar city accounts from posting criticism or support of elected officials, advocacy for or against political parties or ballot measures (except legally permitted neutral explanations), fundraising, campaigning and “score settling with the media.” The draft would limit official accounts to factual, neutral information about city programs, services, operations, announcements of city‑sponsored events, emergency notifications and legally required notices.
Why it matters: Committee members said recent city communications have included what they regard as non‑informational, partisan, or personal content. The draft is intended to create a single, enforceable standard that applies equally to council communications and the administration’s messaging on official city platforms.
Key points from the committee discussion
- Scope: The ordinance defines “city communications platforms” broadly to include the official social media account, official city email, website, or any electronic communication system operated or managed by the city of Cleveland Heights. Cobb said the rule should apply to both elected officials and city employees when using official channels.
- Examples and enforcement: Committee members discussed expanding the prohibited uses to include personal messaging and “score settling.” Cobb said he planned to broaden the prohibited-use language and, if necessary, test enforcement through the courts: “If someone wants to go ahead and violate this provision, at least we will then have the ability to go to court … and if they violate that injunction, seek to hold them in contempt of court,” he said.
- Administration communications: Members noted a recent email from the city’s new communications director that one committee member said would fall within the draft’s prohibition; the communications director was referenced by name in the meeting but did not speak at the committee hearing.
Outcome and next steps
The committee voted to forward the draft ordinance to the Committee of the Whole for further review by the law department; Cobb said he will revise the draft’s prohibited‑use language before the next discussion. Committee members did not specify civil penalties in the draft beyond referring to potential judicial remedies.
