Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council June 11, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 20 <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas noted that, due to the nature of lawsuits, the most common answer is <br />that due do pending litigation Council Members are unable to comment. She noted that without <br />the motion “no comment” would be the answer to all questions. She then noted that it may be <br />possible to answer some questions with better detail if they are run through the City Attorney. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty stated he understood the motion but stated he believes there have been a <br />number of statements released to the press that he personally questions and those were never <br />brought before Council. He then indicated he received telephone calls on some of the newspaper <br />articles that appeared to have comments as coming from the Council as one body that he was <br />unaware of. He further noted that he feels some of the information was printed simply to inflame <br />residents and try certain people in the press which he takes great issue with. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas noted that the motion would not solve that issue as the City cannot <br />control what other people release to the press. She noted that most or the majority of those <br />articles were not released by Council and stated that the motion would allow for some control of <br />what the City represents as its answer. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty stated he agreed that the City could not do anything about articles <br />released by other people but stated the articles were not released by other people they were <br />released by or directly quoted the Mayor. He noted Council Member Stigney and former mayor <br />McCarty were also quoted and he found their comments to be reasoned and factual and had no <br />exception with them at all. He further noted that he realizes that the City is in the position of <br />possible litigation and recognizes the consequences a Council Member’s comments could have <br />but noted he still stands on freedom of speech for anyone and everyone. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas indicated that freedom of speech does not take away the consequences. <br />She further noted the motion would control the responses that go out to the questions that come <br />in. <br /> <br />Council Member Quick noted that, when misinformation is printed, the City can respond in a <br />single voice. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney asked for clarification as to the motion. He then stated he wanted to <br />make sure that communications will come back to Council for approval and input before being <br />sent out rather than just being approved by the Mayor. <br /> <br />City Attorney Riggs stated that, in all honestly, in a situation of imminent pending litigation the <br />comment of Council will be “no comment” and the matter will be handled either by his office or <br />an attorney with the League of Minnesota Cities. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty asked if the City Attorney was aware of any litigation on the matter at <br />this point. <br /> <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated that, based on correspondence received a week a go Wednesday, <br />there is a threat of imminent litigation but noted he had not received anything at this point.