Council debates social media conduct rule; solicitor warns of enforcement limits
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Councilors spent substantial time debating a proposed rule to bar disrespectful references to other members (including on social media). The ordinance committee recommended denial, and Solicitor Bissonnette advised that First Amendment protections and charter limits make sanctions difficult; councilors discussed censure and other nonstatutory remedies.
A proposal to amend council rules to bar members from making "references to or about another member in respectful terms, whether inside or outside the city council chambers, including on social media" drew a lengthy debate on Feb. 17.
The Charter & Rules committee recommended denying the order on the grounds that "respectful" is difficult to define and enforcement would be legally fraught. Councilor Bacon, who supported the idea, said the council could adopt a code of conduct within its rules and asked the law department to advise whether the city's social media policy would apply to elected members.
City Solicitor Bissonnette told the council the panel would face significant legal constraints if it attempted to sanction an elected official for speech. "Under the Charter, nothing short of a criminal conviction that would be, essentially a felony ... could serve to remove someone," Bissonnette said, and First Amendment issues limit the council's ability to sanction members for outside speech. He said the only practical enforcement example he currently knows of involved restricting social-media communication during meetings to comply with open-meeting laws.
Councilors discussed alternatives, including developing a voluntary code of conduct or, in very narrow circumstances, pursuing censure. The council voted to deny the committee report and move on; several members said they would like further legal guidance on whether and how a nonbinding code or clearer social media guidance could be drafted.