Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Media Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees debate social‑media policy after insurer counsel recommends a closed forum
Summary
The board revisited a social‑media comments policy after IRMA (insurance) advice favored a closed comment policy to reduce liability; trustees and counsel discussed options ranging from closed forum to limited public forum with strict rules and monitoring obligations.
Village staff asked the board to revisit the village’s social‑media comments policy. The item followed a prior change that had restricted public comments on village posts; staff and counsel summarized options including a closed forum (no public comments), a limited public forum (strict removal rules), or effectively opening comments with minimal moderation.
Legal counsel and staff reported that IRMA (the village’s liability insurer) advised that a closed forum carries the least exposure. Counsel said that the Illinois attorney general’s public access counsel promotes greater openness where feasible, creating a policy trade‑off: greater openness increases public engagement but also raises legal and moderation risk, particularly when staff cannot monitor the page 24/7.
Trustees raised several practical concerns: weekends and off‑hours posts that could spread false emergency information, the absence of continuous monitoring, and the subjective nature of content moderation decisions. One trustee asked whether Facebook’s own content‑policy enforcement could be relied upon to remove posts that violate platform rules; staff said reporting remains a village responsibility and that Facebook does not proactively police individual municipal pages for all content.
Several board members suggested technical mitigations before any change in comment policy: a prominent “how to contact” linkage on the village Facebook page that routes public input to a village email or request portal; automated acknowledgement replies; and an email alias that forwards public comment submissions to staff and trustees. Staff offered to research examples from other municipalities and return with options, and trustees scheduled continued discussion for the May 20 meeting.
No vote was taken; trustees asked staff to return with detailed policy options that clearly define which categories of posts would be removed and to estimate monitoring workload and any staffing implications.
