City employees forbidden to speak with reporters at public meetings

Pay attention to what a person does, not what they say they are going to do. That reveals who the person actually is. Emily Larson speaks pretty words. That is all they are.

Another attempt for the city to censor the truth. How can the city push a policy of transparency and then obstruct and sanitize the information through the propaganda office? This is a corrupt policy that allows them to hide the truth if they wish.

It appears the local government’s policy of communication with its taxpayers has separated its obligations to the ones they serve. A self-serving government that tries to control information, craft answers to questions, may not necessarily be hiding something, or narrating an agenda…but are protecting its people from the truth.

If this policy holds true, then the council and all commissions should respond more forcefully when the administration is asking for a vote NOW because, if not, it would jeopardize the project. This happens way too often. This policy will now make all projects that require or deserve the public’s input take longer, or it could very well eliminate it, as I suspect is the real goal here. If you cannot ask questions in a timely manner, then the project timelines need to account for this new policy. Council and commissions should push back and do more tabling even if it is costly to whomever or whatever project.

Maybe John needs to start adding his name to the public comment list so John can then stand up in front of the commission and ask a commissioner to ask his question right there and now. John would need a commissioner that is willing to do that (most will not). At least it would be on the record and maybe even recorded in the minutes (good luck on that as well).

Local government is not that much different than what’s going on on the national level. Most folks want to watch the national stuff live on TV when they could go to local city meetings and see this live-action right here in the greatest outdoor city.

We see how government tries to control the message to hide the truth and to manipulate truth-tellers. Surprising for Duluth unless you ponder the question, why would someone want to do that? I suggest there may be a larger political agenda when this control and the effort to craft sophist arguments to mitigate fallout. John Ramos’ commentary on his experience and history of dealing with city employees is a preposterous tale of government misconduct. My view of Emily Larson has been one of a progressive Mayor with liberal leanings; this tale and apparent policy change certainly is not the view of Emily Larson I was entertaining,. Instead this is a Trumpian effort to control the message, and, beyond, provide the opportunity to manipulate the message. This provides the fodder to imagine that, perhaps, there is a larger effort to lay the groundwork for a future platform. Personally, I am disappointed to see this behavior creeping into City politics and to see our elected officials and their appointees distancing themselves from the truth and their constituents. “I can’t answer because it’s City Policy.” This is pathetic and indefensible; it is sad and a cruel effort to stifle legitimate investigation.

I’ve had suspicions that this type of behavior was quietly happening ever since her first inauguration… at that time, when I clicked a link to write Emily Larson about a concern (after she officially took office), and noticed the default email it was sent to was Phil Jents. This was eventually rerouted–but for the first several months, Mr. Jents / this corrupt team of so-called “leaders” held a gatekeeper policy without announcing it. Just who is this man? How did he end up in this role? Is he saintly? ..and why should he be the fellow who dictates what gets addressed and what gets washed over? The more you know, the less you enjoy the beauty of this corrupt town. Thanks a lot, Emily (and Donny Boy too)!!

Don’t know how useful it may be in comparison to other news topics, but I’d love to see you look more into Phil Jents and his past. How did he arrive at his position? A campaign manager turned political operative for the Larson regime. What’s this guy all about–seems shady and greasy to me. Find the photo within the linked page of Phil and Emily–makes me sick.

https://www.dl-online.com/news/4805487-Photos-capture-the-regions-biggest-triumphs-defeats-of-the-past-decade

If Emily were to run for House District 8, would you support her or the Pete? Emily is going to DC for the big Donald gloat Tuesday. Is this the start of a new campaign?

The Monitor does not endorse candidates, or even cover campaigns very much. We are firm believers in the secret ballot.

Thank you for the question. The reasons the Monitor does not endorse candidates are:

1) Often, entering the voting booth, we ourselves do not know who we are going to vote for. We wouldn’t really want to subject the public to the ridiculous mishmash of factors that goes into that decision.

2) Given our limited resources, we prefer to keep our focus on the present and recent past. Campaigns are more focused on the future. There are so many people out there, with so many ideas. But every campaign rally we cover takes time away from reviewing our last data request.

3) As controversial investigative journalists, we know there will always be people who question our motives. The truth is we don’t always know what our motives are—sometimes we’re just following a trail. If we made endorsements, that would just give people one more reason to dismiss what we say. Who needs that?

4) We love the secret ballot!

I think everyone should post the definition of transparency on her Facebook page!

Would someone please advise me when the next truck parade around her house will be held? I missed the last one.