Heber City, Utah - After more than two months of intense discussions and public scrutiny, the Heber City Council has officially adopted a new communications policy aimed at establishing a clear distinction between city communications and the personal opinions of its elected officials. The decision came during a council meeting this week, concluding a protracted deliberation period that included four public meetings and significant debate over issues of censorship, political speech, and the role of the city manager. The policy’s primary goal is to ensure that the city presents a consistent and trustworthy public identity while delineating official city statements from the personal views of council members. The new guidelines were first introduced by former City Councilor Scott Phillips shortly after Mayor Heidi Franco's reelection, sparking immediate controversy and concerns from various community stakeholders, including the Wasatch County GOP. At the heart of the debate was the city newsletter, which became a focal point for discussions on whether elected officials should express personal opinions through official city channels. City Councilor Mike Johnston expressed his belief that the newsletter should only reflect a unified council perspective. "We generally tend to be political animals. We want our opinion known, and we want to push it. And if I’m in the minority, I have two choices. I can just let it go, or I can find a way to be more effective in speaking with you guys to persuade you to my way of thinking," Johnston remarked during the meeting. In contrast, City Councilor Yvonne Barney argued for the necessity of allowing minority voices to be heard. "Even if there is a minority, it does not mean that that’s the city minority. That just means that it’s the council minority," she stated, emphasizing the importance of inclusivity in council communications. She proposed a revision to the policy to include a clause against personal attacks, highlighting concerns over decorum in official communications. However, Councilor Aaron Cheatwood rejected the idea, arguing that it would limit the freedom of expression for elected officials. "If somebody’s going to write in a disrespectful way, they’re going to be voted out of office," Cheatwood contended, emphasizing that accountability should come through electoral processes rather than restrictive policies. Mayor Franco voiced her opinion that the newsletter should maintain a professional tone, arguing against the inclusion of a decorum requirement. Despite the push for a more comprehensive policy, the council ultimately decided to drop the proposal for a requirement on personal attacks, focusing instead on the policy’s fundamental structure. Another point of contention was a clause in the policy stating that the City Manager or their designee would have the final authority to amend or refuse publication of any official city communications. This raised questions among council members about whether the council, rather than the city manager, should retain final approval over city communications. Johnston and others expressed concern that delegating this authority could lead to bottlenecks in communication, potentially stifling the city’s operations. Representatives from the Wasatch County GOP expressed their discontent with the proposed limits on the city manager's authority, advocating for more direct communication from elected officials to the public. GOP Vice Chair Patty Sprunt articulated this sentiment, stating, "We want to hear directly from you," emphasizing the importance of transparency and accessibility in local governance. Councilor Morgan Murdock, who recently took office after Phillips' departure, raised concerns about the incompleteness of the policy, suggesting it should address social media and other communication platforms. "I don’t think this is the end; this is the final document," Murdock remarked, indicating that further refinements might be necessary. Despite the ongoing debates, Cheatwood advocated for the necessity of moving forward, arguing that establishing a baseline policy was preferable to delaying further action. "I just think getting something in place and then continuing to refine it in the future is better than not getting something in place and continuing to debate forever," he said. Ultimately, the council voted 4-1 to approve the communications policy, with Johnston casting the lone dissenting vote. The approved policy includes the clarification that the city manager’s editing powers apply only to communications from city staff and not to those from elected officials. This decision marks a significant step in Heber City’s governance, setting a framework for future communications and potentially influencing how local officials engage with their constituents. As the council moves forward, the implications of this policy will likely be closely monitored by both the community and political observers, as stakeholders assess its impact on public discourse and transparency within the city’s governance. The Heber City Council’s decision is not just a procedural update; it represents ongoing tensions within local politics and the broader dialogue about the balance between professional conduct and personal expression in public service. As the city navigates this new chapter, the effectiveness and reception of the communications policy will be closely scrutinized by residents and officials alike.