0 Printed on Recycled Paper
EMPLOYEE/PERSONNEL MATTERS POLICY NO. 370
2. While elected officials and City Council -appointed board, committee and commission members may maintain and use personal web pages and websites, blogs, and social networking sites, their status as elected/appointed officials requires that the content of any postings on those sites not be in violation of existing City by-laws, policies, directives, rules, or regulations.
3. The City's image as a professional organization is critical to maintaining the respect of its constituents. Although the City recognizes that elected/appointed officials may choose to express themselves by posting personal information upon social media platforms or by making comments on sites hosted by other persons, groups, or organizations, this right of expression should not interfere with the operation of the City. That is, although the City acknowledges its officials have the First Amendment right to free speech, the right is not absolute when involving matters of official City business, issues, or concerns.
4. If a public official conducts any City business or communication as an elected or appointed official from a personal account, or an account created for a City board/committee/commission that is not administered by a City employee, the City -related communications may be considered a public record subject to the California Public Records Act, found at Government Code sections 6250 et seq. When presented with a Public Records Act request, the official must produce responsive public records maintained on the official's personal servers and devices; and/or, after a reasonable search, affirm that the official is not in possession of any such responsive public records on personal devices or personal servers.
5. Officials should exercise caution with respect to comments they post, particularly those concerning the City and the business of the City.
6. All officials are expected and required to conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the City's policies and standards of conduct.
7. Officials must not reveal any confidential or privileged information about the City, its constituents, or its contractors. Officials must be particularly careful to protect against the inadvertent disclosure of confidential information.
8. Officials should be honest and accurate when posting information or news, and should quickly correct any mistakes, misstatements and/or factual errors in content upon discovery. Officials should not post or share information known to be false or unconfirmed rumors about the City, its employees, constituents, officials, suppliers, vendors, contractors, or any other entities or individuals.
ATT POLICY MANUAL CITY COUNCIL
SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY 2/2022
0 Printed on Recycled Paper
EMPLOYEE/PERSONNEL MATTERS POLICY NO. 370
9. Officials should never represent themselves as a spokesperson for the City Administration, any City department, the City Council, or a City board or committee, unless the official has been designated to serve as a spokesperson.
10. Because the posting of content, including simply "liking" or reacting to a post from another official, regarding City -related matters by a public official could inadvertently result in the violation of the Open Meetings Law, officials should consult the Open Meetings Law Guide provided to them by the City Clerk's Office and/or contact the City Attorney's Office for guidance before posting about meetings, conferences, sub -committee meetings, or the work of the public body, or any commission, board, or committee.
11. Officials are expressly prohibited from using social media to engage in any activity or conduct that violates federal, state, or local law (e.g., to circumvent election or campaign requirements, software or data piracy, child pornography, etc.)
12. Officials are prohibited from using social media to engage in any activity that constitutes a conflict of interest.
13. Officials must be mindful that members of the public who may appear before boards, commissions, or committees come from all walks of life. Public comments, in any forum, that contain racial slurs, express bigotry toward a group based on race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or any other legally protected classification may be considered conduct unbecoming.
14. Appointed and elected board/committee members are strongly encouraged to consider the potential impact of social media statements prior to posting.
The City strives to be professional in its operations and processes. Posts that express favoritism and/or bias for or against any individual or group of individuals (e.g., based upon race, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, political affiliation, etc.), reflect poorly on the public official, as well as the City and its residents. Further, comments suggesting such treatment can expose the City to liability and legal costs.
15. Elected and appointed officials should be cautious in using official City - provided head shot photographs on personal social media sites. Elected and appointed officials choosing to use official City -provided head shots on personal social media sites should tailor communications on those sites accordingly.
16.A public official that violates the City's policies and/or by such conduct invites claims or suits or other liability unto the City may be subject to censure; and the City may pursue all remedies available under the law.
ATT POLICY MANUAL CITY COUNCIL
SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY 2/2022
0 Printed on Recycled Paper
EMPLOYEE/PERSONNEL MATTERS POLICY NO. 370
REGISTERING A NEW PAGE
All City social media sites shall be (1) approved by the City Administrator; (2) published using approved Social Media platform and tools; and (3) administered by the Communications and Marketing Analyst or his/her designee.
DEREGISTERING AN EXISTING PAGE
If a social media page is no longer of use, (1) notify the Communications and Marketing Analyst, (2) ensure records have been archived according to agency guidelines, (3) unpublish and delete page.
ATT
POLICY MANUAL
SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY
0 Printed on Recycled Paper
CITY COUNCIL
2/2022
EMPLOYEE/PERSONNEL MATTERS POLICY NO. 370
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF POLICY NO. 370
POLICY NO. 370 SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY
This statement acknowledges that I have received, read and understand the Agency's guidelines for using Social Media. I acknowledge, and fully understand the terms of this policy and agree to abide by them.
ATT POLICY MANUAL
SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY
Print Name and Department
Signature Date
0 Printed on Recycled Paper
CITY COUNCIL
2/2022
City of Placentia
Best Practices for Social Media Use by Candidates and Officials The City Council adopted Policy No. 370, which is a formal social media policy that all officials and employees should comply with. Candidates should become familiar with the contents of this policy so they can immediately comply once elected.
Social media has transformed the ways candidates and elected officials interact with constituents. But social media use by elected officials isn't without potential legal risk. To avoid potential legal liability, candidates and public officials should follow the following best practices with respect to (1) managing content and users on social media sites and (2) interacting with other officials on social media sites.
1. Managing Content on Various Tvpes of Social Media Accounts Official City Social Media Accounts
Elected officials may not lawfully block constituents from accessing the elected officials' official social media accounts because of differing political views. Official City social media pages, and those that are created by an official to communicate with constituents, are public forums where First Amendment protections apply. The following are features of a social media page that would probably be considered a public forum:
• The page is named after the public official's title, such as "Mayor" or "Councilmember";
• The page lists the public officials' official contact information; • The public official is explicitly listed as a "public figure"; • The page primarily contains videos and posts regarding current City issues and the public officials' work with respect to those issues; • The page contains official letterhead or content regarding votes or issues involving the public official and the body he or she is on; 1 • The page contains photos or video of official business at an official meeting; • The page is primarily used as a tool of governance to communicate information regarding official votes that were taken and the effects of that vote on the City; • The page uses government employees and public resources to maintain the account;
• The page contains an explanation of any official agenda item and/or meeting protocols.
To avoid confusion and potential liability, public officials should refrain from using their private personal accounts to engage with constituents on issues relating to official business. Doing so could blur the line between a private social media page, where comments and users can be blocked, and an official social media page, where comments and users cannot be blocked without exposing the City to liability under the First Amendment.
For example, a county supervisor in the case of Davison v. Randall, 912 F.3d 666 (2019) was found to have violated the First Amendment rights of a citizen who the official blocked after the citizen posted critical comments on her personal Facebook page. The court held that because the personal Facebook page contained enough references to the official in her official capacity, censuring of critical comments was attributable to the county and a violation of the First Amendment. The Ninth Circuit, which includes California, recently came to the same conclusion in Garnier v.
O'Connor -Ratcliff, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 20719 (July 27, 2022). Personal and Campaign Social Media Accounts.
Social media accounts that are established for campaign purposes or personal purposes cannot reasonably be considered an official City account given that their purpose is to advance the candidate or personal communications and not provide a public forum for citizens. For this reason, candidates and officials can restrict comments and users from social media sites dedicated to their campaign as they would with personal social media accounts. However, if the candidate is elected, continuing use of the campaign page to communicate with the public is risky if users are blocked and critical comments deleted. Rather, the successful candidate should invite their followers to join/follow the official's City site instead of continuing to use the campaign page.
2 The following are features of social media pages that would promote the idea that it is not a public forum:
• The banner photo on the page is a campaign or personal photo; • The page is self -described as a campaign or personal page; • The page is run by a campaign;
• The email associated with the page is a campaign -related email or personal email account, not a City email address;
• The "Intro" and "About" sections of the page contain links to a campaign website or discuss personal items;
• The majority of the posts relate to the public official's campaign activities or personal activities rather than official City business.
A public official who has a campaign or personal social media page, which is used as a campaign newsletter to notify the public of campaign -related items, will likely be permitted to ban comments or users because it is not a public forum. If the page's overall theme is to promote the public official as the right person for the job rather than as an organ of official business, it will not be a public forum, and the public official will not be acting under the color of official authority. However, a social media page that discusses governmental activities, such as announcing appointments and providing official responses to the public, is more likely to be characteristic of a public forum.
The case of Campbell v. Reisch, 986 F.3d 822, 826 (8th Cir. 2021) is an example of how to properly discuss official business on a campaign page without converting the page into a public forum. There, the court recognized that the page was created to emphasize the candidate's suitability for public office and used to promote herself and position herself for more electoral success down the road. While the social media page, in that case, also provided updates on bills, stances on political issues, and the effects of laws, these updates were providing information on campaign promises rather than providing a space to conduct official business where the public must be heard.
Finally, with respect to all campaign accounts, City resources should never be used in any way. Government Code section 8314 prohibits elected officials from using government resources for campaign purposes. This includes using City staff and public 3 funds, and office technology. The easiest way to avoid an ethics violation is, therefore, to use separate social media accounts for campaign activities and official activities.
2. Social Media Use
Public officials may utilize social media platforms to communicate with their constituents about topics within the City's jurisdiction. The Brown Act prohibits officials that sit on the same legislative body (and elected candidates before taking office) from "discussing among themselves" official business on social networking platforms.
These types of "discussions" can be as simple as posting a comment on a social media site in response to a post or even an "emoji" (ideograms or smileys used in electronic communications) where another member has also commented. As minor as an emoji response may be, it is a violation of the Brown Act if only two officials are "communicating" on a social media platform regarding matters within their legislative body's jurisdiction. This could easily occur on popular sites like the Placentia Buzz Facebook page, where posts often have dozens of comments and replies. Prior councilmember comments, replies, or likes could be easily overlooked before another councilmember joins the discussion and unknowingly violates the Brown Act by simply liking a comment in a post another councilmember has already participated in. 4 Best Practices for Social Media Use by
City Officials and Candidates
January 24, 2023
Presented by Keith F. Collins, Asst. City Attorney
Background
Background
• Social media has transformed the ways
candidates and elected officials interact with
constituents.
• This exposes the City and elected officials to
legal risk if social media use is not done
carefully.
Background
• On February 1, 2022, the Placentia City Council
adopted an amended Social Media Policy (Policy
No. 370) for City Officials and employees.
• The policy is a comprehensive document that sets
forth permissible and impermissible uses of official
City social media sites and personal social media
use.
• As a companion to the policy, staff recently
developed a streamlined "Best Practices" guide for
social media for use by City Officials and
Candidates.
Background
To avoid potential legal liability, candidates and
public officials should follow some "Best Practices"
with respect to how they:
Manage content and users on social media sites;
and
Interact with other officials on social media sites.
Managing Content and Users on
Official City social Media Accounts
Managing Content and Users on
Official City Social Media Accounts
• Official City social media pages, and those that are created by an official to communicate with constituents. are public forums where First Amendment protections apply.
• This means that critical comments cannot be deleted, and critical users cannot be blocked from commenting.
> How can we tell if the social media page is an "official" City social media page?
Managing Content and Users on
official City Socias Media Accounts
The social media site is an "official" City site where
First Amendment protections apply if enough of
these factors are present:
The page is named after the public official's title, such as "Mayor" or "Councilmember";
o The page lists the public officials' official City contact information; The public official is explicitly listed as a "public figure"; The page primarily contains videos and posts regarding current City issues and the public officials' work concerning those issues;
Managing Content and Users on
official City Socias Media Accounts
The social media site is an "official" City site where
First Amendment protections apply if:
Tha Flaf'1C rnntaine nffirial IcttarhAarl nr rnntcnt
regarding votes or issues involving the public official and the body he or she is on;
The page contains photos or video of official business
at an official meeting;
i_.
Managing Content and Users on
official City Socias Media Accounts
The social media site is an "official" City site where
First Amendment protections apply if:
The page is primarily used as a tool of governance to
communicate information regarding official votes that
were taken and the effects of that vote on the City;
oThe page uses government employees and public
resources to maintain the account;
The page contains an explanation of any official agenda item and/or meeting protocols.
Supervisor Don Wagner
6K followers • 30 following
Posts About Mentions Followers Photos Videos More
Intro
Get the latest by following @DonWagnerCA
O Page • Public figure
• 400 W Civic Center Drive , Santa Ana, CA, united
States, California
to (714) 834-3330
► l [email protected]
Q donwagnerca
• donwagnerca
® donwagnerca.com
Featured
Upcoming event
►X1 Send Email
SAT, DEC 17 AT 6 AM
Inaugural Trout Fishing Derby 11 Ir... 'f
17 Interested • 6 Going
® Follow
Q Search
Managing Content and Users on
official City Social Media Accounts
If enough of these factors are present, the social media site should be considered a "public forum" where users and their content have First Amendment protections.
Users should not be blocked, and comments should not be deleted from official City sites unless those comments violate the City's official social media policy (no profanity, threats, commercial posts, etc.)
"anaging Conte and Users on
Personal & Campaign Social Media
counts
Managing Content and Users on
Personal & Campaign Social Media Accounts
Social media accounts that are established for campaign or personal purposes cannot reasonably be considered an official City account.
Critical comments and users can be regulated on personal and campaign accounts.
>How can we tell if the social media page is a
campaign or personal social media page?
Managing Content and Users on
Personal & Campaign Social Media Accounts
The social media site is a personal or campaign
social media site where content and users can be
controlled if enough of these factors are present:
The banner photo on the page is a campaign or personal photo; The page is self -described as a campaign or personal page; The page is run by a campaign;
The email associated with the page is a campaign -related email or personal email account, not a City email address;
ti_
Managing Content and Users on
Personal & Campaign Social Media Accounts
The social media site is a personal or campaign
social media site where content and users can be
controlled if:
The "Intro" and "About" sections of the page contain links to a campaign website or discuss personal items;
o The majority of the posts relate to the public official's campaign activities or personal activities rather than official City business. 4 Tim Shaw
472 followers • 0 following
Posts About Mentions Followers Photos Videos More •
About
Contact and basic info
Page transparency
Category
Political Candidate
Contact info
►�� [email protected]
Websites and social links
https://wmv.shawforschools.com/
0 team More
Q Message a Follow
17 2.91C friends • 30 mutual
Posts About Friends Photos Videos Check -ins More
About
Overview
Work and education
Places lived
Contact and basic info
Family and relationships
Details Ahnut Tim
_n21)cln21nac
•
Friends
Trustee at Orange County Board of Education, Government Affairs Director at Pacific West Association of REALTORS T — and Adjunct Professor at Rio Hondo College
Past: City of La Habra - City Hall and OCTA
Studied Legislative Affairs at The George Washington University '0 AtterCed from 2003 to 2074
• Lives in La Habra, California
O From La Habra, Califomia
IDMarried to Shannon Bryant Shaw
since Juiy 23, 2005
18 Managing Content and Users on
Personal & Campaign Social Media Accounts
Candidates and officials can restrict comments and users from personal and campaign social media sites because these sites cannot reasonably be considered "public forums." These sites are not ".-.....-.•-•....-." .-.-C .. #: - I t_';4., I.....-.: ...
VI ly. QI IJ VI UI I IIrIGII l.,ILy IJUJII ICJ.
However, if the candidate is elected, continuing the use of the campaign page to communicate with the public about official business is risky if users are blocked and/or critical comments are deleted.
The better practice is for the successful candidate to invite their followers to follow the candidate's official account instead of rnntini jinn to IMP the ramnainn arrni int or refrain from contrnllinn the content on campaign/personal sites.
Managing Content and Users on
Personal & Campaign Social Media Accounts
Remember:
City resources, including staff time, funds, computers, and other equipment, should never be used to promote or
populate campaign accounts. Govt. Code 8314.
Social Media Use by Officials &
Elected Candidates
Social Media Use by Officials &
elected Candidates
Members of the City Council and City Commissions/Committees are subject to the Brown Act.
('.anrlirlatcc AIArtcrl to the rihi Council are also cid-liar-I- to the Brown Act before taking office.
This means that generally, these individuals should not discuss official business with other members outside the context of a properly agendized public meeting.
Social Media Use by Officials &
Elected Candidates
Discussions on social media sites that involve these individuals can inadvertently violate the Brown Act.
Simply "liking" or reacting .. to a post on City business that another official has commented on can violate the Brown Act.
The better practice is not to comment or react to discussions on social media pages that touch on official business (Placentia Buzz, etc.) because it is very easy to miss another official's post or reaction earlier in a long discussion thread.
Questions & Comments