Avon Grove board moves draft social‑media policy to second reading after debate over comments

The Avon Grove School District board voted 5–2 on March 26 to move draft policy 8‑20, which governs district social‑media accounts, to a second reading for further review and administrative guidance.

The vote followed more than an hour of discussion about whether the district should allow public comments on a new Facebook page. One board member said the risks of enabling comments — including managing inappropriate posts and the legal limits on removing speech — outweigh the benefits, and recommended launching the page without comments to start. "My preference is very much to begin a Facebook page and see how it goes, and then we can always turn on comments at a later time," the board member said.

Supporters of the draft policy argued the document gives the district flexibility to open comments selectively and that translation and outreach features could increase inclusivity. The administration said a proposed content calendar and posting framework would be presented to the board’s joint committee on April 7 to show what kinds of posts the district envisions.

The district solicitor cautioned that once a public body opens a social‑media post to comments, it must apply moderation and removals neutrally to avoid constitutional claims. The solicitor noted that the policy places the decision to open comments with the director of technology but warned that any content removal should follow neutral, documented procedures and retention rules.

Under the board’s procedural reading, a "yes" vote advanced the draft to second reading; a "no" would have kept it at first reading for further committee consideration. The motion to move the draft to second reading passed 5–2. Board members who opposed advancing the draft said they wanted more concrete administrative rules and examples from other districts before allowing comments.

The board did not take final action on implementing comments at the meeting; administrators were directed to return with a content calendar and recommended administrative rules that, if adopted, would clarify which posts (for instance, community‑input posts versus routine event notices) might open for public comment.