Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civility Resolution topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board tables civility resolution after hourslong debate over social media and enforcement
Summary
A proposed resolution committing the board to member safety, civility and limits on social-media engagement prompted lengthy discussion; trustees split over scope and timing and ultimately voted to table the resolution for further review by committees.
Board member Valentina Mendez read a detailed draft resolution Dec. 11 that would commit the Marlboro Township Board of Education to “promoting civility, mutual respect, and the safety of all board members, staff, and community participants” and to examine digital-harassment and decorum response protocols.
The effort drew substantial debate. Supporters called for a formal statement to guide policy updates and enforcement, while opponents warned the draft was too long, potentially overbroad, and could chill free speech. Mendez proposed replacing several occurrences of the word “online” with the broader term “digital spaces” to ensure the draft covered multiple platforms and channels.
“Personal attacks, hate speech, defamatory comments, and coordinated online or in-person harassment undermine civic participation,” Mendez said when reading the draft. Some trustees praised the intent but urged shortening the language and routing parts to the policy committee so that enforceable rules could be developed.
Several members raised particular concerns about a sentence Mendez offered as optional language suggesting board members should “refrain from engaging in social media discussions, debates, or commentary related to board business,” proposing instead that questions be referred to the superintendent. Defenders of broader language said consistent guidance for digital interactions was necessary given recent controversies; others argued disclaimers and private civic engagement should be preserved.
A procedural motion to table the amended resolution was seconded and passed by roll call (five in favor, three opposed). Board members who voted to table said they want a fuller public review and more time to digest the draft; supporters of immediate passage said delaying implementation left members vulnerable and risked further erosion of public trust.
What’s next: The board agreed to refer work on the resolution and any resulting policy changes to the appropriate committees for public review. Proponents said they will press for expedited committee review early in the new board year.
Sources: Full board discussion and roll-call vote recorded during the Dec. 11 meeting.
