No one likes to be yelled at or cursed at, least of all a public official trying to do a hard job under difficult circumstances.

That has been happening a lot at Frederick County Board of Education meetings recently. Some members of the public show up simply to spew venom at the officials. It is pretty tough to sit there and take it.

The temptation is to prohibit people from cursing or yelling. The urge can be strong — but public officials need to resist it.

The Policy Committee of the school board is considering updating its meeting policy to prohibit personal attacks during public comment.

Some members said they wanted to update the policy because of the use of profanity and other disruptions during public comment periods at school board meetings.

At first blush, it sounds like a good idea. But it can be a trap, as the panel tries to write rules to limit public comments without violating the public’s First Amendment rights.

Board members say they want to protect those rights while maintaining an expectation for how people should act. It is almost impossible to do both.

Even if new rules are written, some clever critics can say to the board “I’m not going to call you X, Y or Z,” thereby delivering the obscene insult while claiming not to.

The Policy Committee is made up of three board members — Dean Rose, the chair; Karen Yoho; and Nancy Allen — and Citizens Advisory Council member Celeste McNiesh.

They discussed potential changes last month after some board members said the policy needed to be updated to include decorum expectations.

Rose said he spent time doing research about U.S. Supreme Court rulings on limiting profanity since free speech laws are broad.

“My largest concern and the whole reason for bringing this back … is decorum in our board room during public comment,” he said. “That’s my whole reason.”

One of Rose’s suggestions was to prohibit personal attacks directed toward the school board, Frederick County Public Schools staff members or audience members.

But Allen said prohibiting attacks crosses the line into restricting speech. “We’re elected officials,” she said. “We should be in a position to be criticized by the public.”

Rose argued that there was a difference — criticism is not the same as personal attacks and harassment. True, but it can be a difficult difference to define.

Steven Blivess, chief legal counsel for FCPS, said the school board cannot prohibit people from coming to meetings, but could prioritize the school board’s list of speakers.

He said that if a member of the public is deemed to have violated the expectations, they could “get dropped to the bottom of the list.”

Rae Gallagher, president of the school board, said in an interview with News-Post reporter Esther Frances that the policy updates need to help refocus on “what the actual purpose of the public comment period is,” which is for community members to offer feedback on education-related issues.

School board member Jaime Brennan told our reporter that prohibiting personal attacks on board members is a “slippery slope” and is too open-ended as far as what qualifies as an attack.

“We’re government representatives, and it’s our obligation to hear the attacks that people want to throw at us, in my opinion,” excluding threats of violence, she said.

Board member Colt Black said prohibiting personal attacks would violate the First Amendment, and he might sue the school board if that change passed.

It’s a frustrating situation, and we are sympathetic with board members who don’t want to be cursed at, but they might need to tolerate it.

The First Amendment protects speech — including unpopular, ugly speech.

— Frederick News-Post