City Council to consider ‘social media’ rules resolution

Would adopt rules for acceptable social media ‘discourse,’ asking citizens of Mandeville to abide

Seen as direct response to local activist comparing ‘campaign contributions’ to ‘bribes’ on social media

Backs Sucette lawyer who warned he’ll sue those making ‘insinuations’ about his integrity

Rule calls on citizens to ‘Apologize if Needed’

MANDEVILLE — The Mandeville City Council will consider a resolution that would ask citizens to limit their free speech in accordance with a set of rules laid out in the document, which was authored by Councilman at Large and current Council Chairman Rick Danielson.

This is an obvious pushback to a local activist who repeatedly compared campaign contributions to bribes during a firestorm of back and forth on the social media platform Nextdoor over the proposed Sucette Harbor project. Again and again, they used the phrasing “campaign contributions (bribes)” or “campaign donations (bribes)” and even sent an email to the entire City Council advocating a change to city code concerning contributions and complaining about Sucette Harbor attorney Paul Harrison appearing at a campaign event for District II Councilman Dr. Skelly Kreller.

Resolution 23-22 has been added to the June 8th City Council meeting agenda, published yesterday (June 1, 2023) on the City of Mandeville official website.

It would adopt a set of rules referred to as “Basic Simple Rules of Speak Your Peace Principles” for behavior by citizens of the “Greater Mandeville Area” to follow at “public meetings, small group discussions and through all social media outlets” in conjunction with debate on issues before the City Council.

These proposed rules are:

1. Show Respect to others
2. Be open minded but agreeable even when you don’t personally agree with someone else’s viewpoint or opinion
3. Listen to Understand
4. Do Not Gossip or Spread False Information either verbally, in writing or through social media outlets
5. Apologize if Needed
6. Pay Attention
7. Be Inclusive
8. Give constructive criticism if or when needed
9. Take responsibility

While resolutions do not carry the weight of law, they can be used to set procedural rules and acceptable behavior inside Council Chambers during meetings.

The current body of rules that governs how the City Council conducts its meetings was adopted via Resolution 20-14, shortly after this council took office in July 2020.

This new resolution could be interpreted as an extension of those rules, attempting to hold citizens accountable not just for what they say during meetings but also outside the Council Chambers as well, specifically on social media.

Opponents fear that if this rules resolution is adopted, their posts on social media platforms, such as Nextdoor, Facebook and Twitter, could place them under council scrutiny and even invite their neighbors to report them, potentially leading to them being asked to apologize before being allowed to speak out.

What’s more, because proposed Ordinance 23-16 (Sucette Harbor) is only listed as being up for “discussion” and not “adoption” on the June 8th agenda, the council technically could pick and choose who it allows to speak. Louisiana state law only requires that public comment be allowed before actual votes occur.

At the May 25th City Council meeting, the same activist’s posts were shown as part of a slide deck presentation made by the Sucette Harbor developers team.

In an earlier email sent to the City Council, that activist advocated for an ordinance that would make campaign contributions to a council member within a certain timeframe of a vote on a major issue illegal.

This email and the previous social media posts caused harsh reactions from Danielson and Kreller at the meeting, with Kreller saying he was taking legal action. The criticism directed at the activist was that they used the word “bribe” or “bribes” in their social media posts.

“I have retained counsel to fully investigate her claims and everyone connected to these, and that legal action against her and then if necessary against them,” Kreller said.

However, each reference that Mandeville Daily was able to find (the posts have been removed from Nextdoor) seemed to use the phrasing “campaign contributions (bribes)” consistently.

Mandeville Daily did find one reference, however, of the word “bribe” without the preceding “campaign contributions” qualifier, but that was a reply in a larger thread on the discussion where there was a lengthy and testy exchange between the activist and others on the platform.

Harrison appeared to become agitated at the meeting after the activist attempted to defend themself and justify their position.

Harrison warned: “If someone defames me… online, you write it down. You will be sued the next day by my firm. Let’s be very clear about that… But you make an insinuation about my integrity, you will get sued. That’s it.”

-30-