It is 2026, and the pace of technological improvement in such a short time is nothing short of remarkable. I identify as an elder millennial, and I usually explain the difference as being old enough to remember the first computer in our home or, perhaps even more relatable to some, watching my folks do their taxes on paper forms spread all over the kitchen table. Many things, like myself, age well. Social media policies are not one of them.
So why am I talking about aging well? Simply put, the City of Pasco, Washington, has a councilmember social media policy in place that still talks about MySpace. While that is a great nostalgia hit, and I truly hope it comes back as some rumors suggest, it is not a great look for the City to be so far behind the times. The policy says nothing about AI, an emerging technology with great power and risk, while relying on a dated list of platforms that includes MySpace, Flickr, Twitter, and RSS feeds. With AI changing the landscape, this policy is now two generations of technology old.
I understand that, to some, the names of the websites do not matter. The content of the policy and its enforcement mechanisms are what truly matter, and those people would be correct. So the first thing I did before sitting down to write was look at the current policy and what it actually covers. Resolution No. 3821 can be found on the City’s website for anyone who wants to read it, but the short version is that the policy:
Applies to councilmembers acting in their official capacities.
States a preference for official communication through City-owned accounts.
Strongly discourages conducting official business through private accounts.
Covers public records, confidential information, campaigns, and open-meeting concerns.
Says online communication should reflect the professionalism expected at council meetings.
Here is something I want to point out. There is a lot of suggestion here and not a lot of enforceable language. During my time living in Pasco, I have seen councilmembers operate their own social media pages that carry their elected titles as part of the page name. The problem begins when those privately controlled, title-bearing pages are also used for City updates, constituent complaints, or other official communication—the exact kind of crossover the current policy discourages. That is a major red flag because “discouraged” is not the same as being banned.
At the same time, the policy fails to identify where the line is. I have seen citizen-shot videos posted on a councilmember’s “unofficial official page” that call out local builders for charging too much, show a private person’s home, and elevate a partisan argument based on information that was later proven false. That post remained despite the councilmember receiving a call informing them that they were sharing incorrect information.
I am not writing today to dig into these examples, so I am being intentionally vague about the details. The point is that these are things that have happened in our city, and if we do not make changes, these problems will continue to get worse.
So, what changes do we need to see made to Pasco’s social media policy? The first step, in my view, is to drop the vague language that makes everything a suggestion. After all, when the policy only discourages conduct instead of clearly prohibiting it, meaningful accountability becomes nearly impossible.
It is kind of like the “Slow Down, Kids Live Here” signs. They can work. Responsible folks do slow down and pay more attention. Still, you are trusting people to always be responsible and police themselves. After all, if they ignore the sign but follow the actual speed limit, they are not breaking a rule. Elected officials need a higher standard, at least when they are using their title in a public forum.
Hand in hand with eliminating the vague language, we also need to define when online activity becomes official business. I want to be clear: everyone has a First Amendment right to free speech. I am not here to censor councilmembers. I want to make sure they act civilly toward the people they serve, do not expose people to harm through accident, misconduct, or intentional action, and do not amplify claims and rumors that may not be true.
This would create a clear line between personal opinion and speech that should be treated as official business under City policy. No matter the platform or account name, Pasco’s updated policy should treat the following as official business:
Announcing or explaining City actions.
Talking about pending City policies on which the Council has not yet voted.
Providing constituent services or communicating about a constituent’s needs.
Accepting and following up on complaints.
Speaking with City employees about City matters.
Using City information, staff, equipment, branding, or other City accounts.
Claiming to speak for the City or City Council.
Deliberately invoking the Councilmember title to give a statement the weight or appearance of an official City communication.
These may seem broad, but they set a standard that the people of Pasco can expect and understand. Councilmembers remain free to debate policy, state general positions, and express personal opinions on clearly personal accounts. But if you are discussing City business, communicating about City employees, or using the Councilmember title to make a statement appear official, then you should be held to a higher standard.
Another area where Pasco is lacking and, to be fair, where most municipalities are also lacking, is a robust generative AI policy. From deepfakes to fully written opinions produced in seconds, AI has the power to change the world or simply help your email reply sound perfect.
I am no stranger to this technology. I use it in my business and to help me research. It is an amazing tool when used correctly. It also makes a shocking number of errors because of both user input and imperfections in the technology.
I advocate for AI to be used to make work more productive in the office and in the City, but it has no place in outward communications. Because it is unreliable and attempts to fulfill the user’s request, sometimes by making assumptions and filling gaps incorrectly, it simply should not be used to communicate official business in any way.
Cutting to the chase, it is clear that we need to update our policies, and we need to do it quickly. The citizens of Pasco deserve to know that factual claims posted by councilmembers have been reasonably verified and that the information they receive can be trusted.
I am calling on the City Council to create and implement social media and AI policies that, at minimum, accomplish the following:
Restrict the use of the Councilmember title so it cannot be used in the name of social media pages not controlled by the City.
Create enforceable rules and an independent enforcement process so that violating those rules has real consequences.
Define official and personal business and establish what can or cannot be shared without verification.
Ban generative AI from being used to communicate with constituents.
Require visible corrections when mistakes are made. Not an acknowledgment buried in the comments, but a forward-facing correction stating what error was made and how it will be prevented in the future.
These rules should allow everyone to express their opinions while keeping personal opinions separate from the City’s official positions. At the end of the day, everyone who lives in Pasco should be able to trust that communications from the City and its councilmembers are honest and helpful.