Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Elections And Ethics topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident urges Monroe-Woodbury to seek trademark protection after local political ad use of district colors

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

A resident urged the board to pursue trademark and copyright protections for district marks and to consider a cease-and-desist after an independent expenditure committee used district colors and branding in campaign materials that have confused parents.

A resident, BJ Mendelson, told the Board of Education on June 18 that political mailers and online ads he said were paid for by an independent expenditure committee using the domain protectmw.com have caused confusion among local families and might infringe on district intellectual property.

Mendelson described the committee as an independent expenditure committee tied to a state senator (name as spoken during the comment was not independently verified) and said the committee had paid roughly $10,000 to a public-relations firm and additional sums for social-media advertising and mailers. He said some materials used the district’s colors in ways that prompted parents to believe the materials represented the school district.

Mendelson urged the board to seek trademark and copyright protections for Monroe-Woodbury marks and to consider sending a cease-and-desist letter to the committee. He said attorneys advised him that a school district can protect its marks but that a stronger legal case would result if the district first registered trademarks and copyrights.

The board did not take immediate action on the comment; no staff report, legal opinion or motion was offered during the meeting. Board members did not respond directly during the public-comment period. Mendelson asked the board to pursue protections “now before” additional outside spending in local elections, but the district did not announce any next step or timeline on the record.

Ending: The comment was part of the public-comment section and did not prompt a board motion or vote during the June 18 meeting.