In another of the seven proposed policy revisions on next week’s agenda, the Board of Regents appears to add verbage that’s already implicit in good practice and law.
The current Regental Policy 4:21 on employee political activity currently says folks who work for the Regents may “Take an active part in political management, political campaigns, or non-political activities except during regularly scheduled working hours….” I’m not sure why the Political Activity policy presumes to grant permission to engage in “non-political activities,” but the Regents aren’t touching that phrase.
Instead, the draft revision would add these words to that clause: “without the use of Board information and communication technology systems, Board services or Board property that is not available to the public and paid for at the rate offered to the public….”
When I was a graduate assistant at DSU several moons ago, I already understood that I was not to use my public employment to further my political blogging, campaigning for candidates or other activities with the Lake County Democratic Party or other groups. When I wanted to blog about higher education policy, I refused to use information that i had only by dint of my employment. For example, if I learned something about university policy at a staff meeting or internal communication, that didn’t go on the blog. But if that same information was available by some other means to the public—in published minutes or the press or a journal article, then it was fair game.
And for Pete’s sake, don’t blog on university computers or use the university e-mail! If nothing else, if you’re campaigning, you don’t want the boss in Pierre reading your e-mails and passing them on to GOP headquarters!
The Regental policy only reiterates what SDCL 12-27-20 already covers for every public employee Regental or otherwise: no public resources may be expended on political campaigns. I suppose a gentle reminder in the Regental policy manual that certain behavior is illegal doesn’t hurt, but technically speaking, a policy that restates law is unnecessary.
But you know how we higher education folks get: we do love to talk.