Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Media Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sheboygan council adopts citywide social media policy after public comment urging review
Summary
The Sheboygan Common Council adopted a citywide social media policy after resident Lisa Salgado raised concerns that the policy could silence constituents; councilors asked for clarifications on scope, moderation, and public-records implications and a typographical error will be corrected before final publication.
The Sheboygan Common Council on an unanimous voice vote adopted Resolution No. 4 (26/27) to establish a citywide social media policy for official city accounts.
Lisa Salgado, of Fourth Street, used the public comment period to urge the council to reconsider elements of the policy and to discuss it at a committee-of-the-whole meeting. Salgado alleged that an interim city attorney previously pursued actions she viewed as attempts to silence criticism and said taxpayers were charged $2,847 in connection with a complaint she described; she urged transparency and questioned who drafted the policy.
The City Attorney, speaking to the council during the item, described the draft policy as a staff-facing tool to set parameters for employees’ use of official city accounts, not as a rule governing private citizens’ pages. The attorney emphasized that employees retain First Amendment rights in their personal capacities but noted that official communications posted on city accounts are subject to public-records laws and retention requirements.
Alder Perella asked whether the policy’s definition of “city officer” could sweep in appointed committee members or elected officials; the City Attorney explained the concept of dual capacities (personal vs. official speech) and said that where a member’s social media is used in an official capacity, those communications may become public records. Administrator Bradley reiterated that the policy applies to official city accounts and does not regulate personal, elected-official campaign pages, though such content may still trigger record-retention obligations when it concerns city business.
Council members expressed general support for having a guiding policy while voicing concerns about inadvertently discouraging public engagement; the City Attorney told councilors that content moderation would be handled on a case-by-case basis and that staff should bring questionable posts to the attorney’s office for review. Councilors also pointed out a typographical numbering error in the draft; the attorney said that correction would be made prior to final adoption.
The council approved the resolution by voice vote. The policy as adopted distinguishes between department account types (informational versus dialogue-focused), provides guidance on moderation and record retention, and directs staff to follow applicable state and federal law when moderating content.
The council did not specify amendments at the meeting; members asked that any future proposed changes (for example, to assign further authority to a communications director) be considered after that position is filled. The council will publish the corrected final text and proceed with implementation through department heads.
