Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Board Grievance Social Media topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Judson ISD trustees deny level 3 grievance alleging trustee social-media bullying

2211346 · January 31, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

On Jan. 30, 2025, the Judson Independent School District Board of Trustees denied Christopher Garza’s level 3 grievance alleging online bullying and improper use of a trustee’s Facebook account, upholding the administration’s earlier decision after legal review.

The Judson Independent School District Board of Trustees voted to deny a level 3 grievance filed by Christopher Garza during a special meeting Jan. 30, 2025, upholding the administration’s level 2 decision after hearing testimony and legal argument.

Garza told the board his complaint “boils down to one thing,” accusing a trustee and others of participating in online bullying, describing posts that he said called him a “convicted *** offender” and claiming he had been blocked from a Facebook page presented as representing a district trustee. He asked the board to order the trustee to unblock him, to issue a public apology and to provide assurance the trustee would not post about named individuals again.

The grievance centered on whether a trustee’s social-media activity could be treated as state action under the governing legal framework cited by both sides. Hannah Kramer, an attorney for the administration, told the board that “school board members don't relinquish their First Amendment rights just because they become a trustee,” and that the district’s good-governance policy designates the board president and superintendent as official spokespeople. Kramer said the Facebook page Garza submitted as evidence included a disclaimer and was not a district-controlled account, and she recommended the board uphold the administration’s level 2 decision denying Garza’s requested remedies.

During the hearing Garza read excerpts of case law and argued that context — including account names such as “Stephanie Faulkner, district 2, board trustees, Judson ISD” — could make the account appear to speak for government, referencing the U.S. Supreme Court authority discussed in the transcript as “Linke v. Fried.” Kramer and the administration responded that the two-prong test in that precedent was not met here: the trustee had not been delegated authority by written law or district policy to speak on behalf of the district in the contested posts.

Board members questioned timing and legal standards, noting portions of the alleged postings dated to April 2024 and asking whether a two-week reporting window applied. The board heard from legal counsel and then convened in closed session under Texas Government Code sections 551.071 and 551.074 for attorney consultation. After returning to open session, Trustee Suzanne Kenoyer moved to deny the level 3 grievance and uphold the administration’s level 2 decision; the motion passed. The board recorded a tally of four votes in favor, one no and one abstention (one trustee was absent for the meeting); the board’s motion therefore denied Garza’s requested remedies.

The board’s packet and the administrative record cited board policy GF(Local) as the district’s grievance procedure and referenced GF(Legal) guidance. The administration told the board it did not consider the Facebook blocking to be a Judson ISD action because the account was a personal page, not a district or board-controlled account.

The meeting record shows the board kept the decision to the administrative record and did not accept outside materials. The board also noted that individual trustees maintain personal social-media accounts and that those personal accounts are not passed down to successors.

Following the vote denying the grievance, the board moved on to other agenda items. The board’s action concludes this level 3 grievance; the district will maintain the record of the hearing and the administrative documents referenced at the meeting.