Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Records Social Media topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lake Stevens council weighs social‑media options amid public‑records concerns
Summary
Council discussed options for councilmember social‑media pages after staff warned that allowing comments on official pages raises Washington Public Records Act and litigation risks. The mayor directed staff to return with a policy and costed options for city‑managed, archiveable council pages.
Lake Stevens council spent a lengthy portion of their meeting debating how council members should use Facebook and similar platforms, with staff and council members weighing constituent engagement against public‑records obligations.
A staff presenter summarized the central legal and practical problem: opening comments on council or councilmember pages can create public‑records retention obligations and expose the city to legal risk. The meeting cited guidance and court activity about comment moderation and records retention, and staff said the city’s archiver (Jatheon) can capture official pages but that any councilmember page would need archiving credentials and staff access after an official leaves office.
Councilmembers expressed differing views. Some said they want more two‑way interaction with constituents and suggested a city‑sponsored page or individual city‑managed pages with comments turned off or restricted. Others warned that enabling comments—even with policies—creates difficult moderation, first‑amendment and litigation risks and could require significant staff time to monitor. Costs to archive and secure individual council pages were estimated by staff at roughly $400 per page.
The mayor instructed staff to return with a package that includes a proposed policy, estimated costs, an administrative process for archiving and a potential peer‑review or vetting step for posts. Staff said they will include options such as push‑only city pages, city‑managed individual council pages captured by the archiver, templates for disclaimers and a communications plan for rollout.
Councilmembers also suggested near‑term practical steps: improved, digestible meeting recaps, more use of timestamps/indexes on YouTube meeting videos, and better coordination with the city’s limited communications staff. No formal policy change was adopted; the council asked staff to report back with a full policy package and cost estimates.
