Merced City Schools board course corrects on free speech issue after scrutiny

January 29, 2025

By Brianna Vaccari

After a warning about potential First Amendment violations, the Merced City School District’s board of education is no longer telling public commenters they can be accused of defamation.

The quiet change occurred after the First Amendment Coalition, in an October letter, warned the board that a specific statement read before the public comment portion of meetings could expose the district to legal action for threatening free speech.

The statement, typically read by the school board president running the meeting, said speakers during public comment should be aware that making derogatory comments against district employees could be “actionable as defamation under certain circumstances.”
The First Amendment Coalition in its letter said that statement could have a chilling effect on the public’s freedom of speech. Furthermore, the statement exposed the district to legal action under the First Amendment and California’s open meeting law, the Brown Act.
Earlier this month, FAC sent a new letter to district officials acknowledging the recent change.

“FAC welcomes the Board’s change and urges you to continue to invite robust public comment and the democratic engagement of your community,” Annie Cappetta, a legal fellow for FAC, wrote in a Jan. 22 letter to Trustee Priya Lakireddy, the new board president.

Cappetta noted that in her recent review of meetings, Allen Brooks, the prior board president, did not read the statement about defamation at the Dec.10 meeting. Lakireddy didn’t read it either at the board’s first meeting of the year on Jan. 14.

Brooks previously told The Merced FOCUS the statement was intended to protect district employees from harmful remarks.

In her letter, Cappetta wrote that she reviewed videos of school board meetings and found the statement was read as far back as March 2022 – a rocky time for Merced County’s largest school district. Four of the school board’s five trustees were different then, and an assistant superintendent was filling in at the top amid a search for a new, permanent leader.

Lakireddy told The FOCUS the change was made because of the first letter from FAC.
“We saw the letter and responded to it because it’s the right thing to do,” she said. “If this will encourage more people to come to board meetings and speak, it’s great, and this is what we should be doing.”

Donna Polk, a former executive assistant to the school board, previously criticized Brooks for reading the statement as well as Lozano Smith, the law firm the district pays for legal services.

Polk welcomed the new change at board meetings.
“I am happy to hear that the district will no longer engage in threatening free speech at board meetings and am thankful to the First Amendment Coalition for their involvement as well as The Merced FOCUS for reporting,” she said.

Polk said she wished district officials would have independently responded to public concerns.

“It is unfortunate that district leadership and their legal counsel were unable to regulate their actions and address public concerns without the involvement from outside entities,” she said. “I hope the district becomes more transparent and respectful of public concerns, including a serious review of the quality of counsel being provided by current legal services.”

FAC was not the only group to put Merced City Schools’ leaders on notice over the Brown Act last year. The Merced County Civil Grand Jury also investigated and found the board violated the Brown Act.