Legalectric

When I spoke with the County Attorney, Steve Betcher, today, he said that a number of papers, radio stations and even a TV crew were following this. He’s been digging through election law, and has advanced the investigation of my formal Complaint against the City by assigning it to the County Sheriff’s Office’s investigators. I can’t find a statute that forbids collection of information, but I’m betting there is a lot of choice case law about setting standards for candidacy, or intimidation of candidates, or… or… or…

And if I ever get it figured out how to upload, I’ll post the City of Red Wing’s press release that is outright lying. If I ruled the city, heads would roll. I’d want the named writer of the press release in the park on the main drag with a sandwich sign on the days the peaceniks aren’t there, the sign saying, “This is what happens when a City employee lies.” And as for her boss? Because the false press release probably wasn’t the employee’s idea, I have to come up with something appropriate. Manana…

Here’s the City’s original form.

Here’s the City’s new form.

Here’s KSTP’s report — they were running around town trying to find a candidate who would talk to them. I wonder if they had a chat with my girls, who probably told them a thing or two!

Red Wing candidate checks controversial

Updated: 07/18/2006 10:11:39 PM

A new policy in Red Wing to perform background checks on city council candidates is causing controversy among many residents and city officials.

The city says it asked candidates for city council positions to sign a two page form which authorizes the city to hire a private firm to research a personâ??s criminal, driving, educational, employment and credit records.

Red Wing officials say the city did not intend to include any request for financial information, so it issued a revised form that does not include that request.

City Clerk Kathy Johnson says she just wanted to make sure candidates were eligible to run, although state law only requires their signature on a different form, promising that they meet all the requirements. Cities must then place them on the ballot, and let voters decide.

“It’s in the best interest of the city just to be doubly sure,” says Johnson.

Minnesotaâ??s top election official says that what Red Wing is doing goes beyond the law and could possibly open itself up to a lawsuit.

â??You uphold the law as it is written,” Kiffmeyer says. â??When you’re in the middle of a game being played, you don’t change the rules.”

“Stick with what the law requires,” she adds. “That is your safest place to be.”

Former councilman and now candidate Joe Krueger not only refused to sign both the original and revised petitions, but he says it is an invasion of privacy and may intimidate some people from running.

“This does not belong in a democracy,” Krueger says. “We’re not talking national security. We’re talking a city council in Red Wing.”

Candidate Dean Hove, though, says he has no problem signing up for the background checks.

Johnson adds that the very personal information will not be made public.

This is the text of the City’s Press Release:

July 14, 2006, Red Wing, Minn.

Recently, there have been media stories which have created misconceptions about the City of Red Wingâ??s practices in accepting affidavits of candidacy from individuals who wish to file for public office. These misconceptions have been based on inaccurate information. The purpose of this news release is to clarify these practices and prevent further reports based on inaccurate information.

The City of Red Wing does not run credit checks on candidates, nor does the City require that candidates consent to credit checks. The City does not refuse affidavits of candidacy, nor does the City intend to refuse to place an individual on the ballot, for any reason other than the proper execution of the affidavit of candidacy and related filing documents. The City does not require candidates to sign consents for background checks as a prerequisite for filing.

The City does ask candidates to sign a consent to run a criminal background check for the sole purpose of determining whether the candidate has a felony conviction, without the restoration of civil rights, and is therefore ineligible to run for office. However, even if a candidate opts not to sign the consent form, the City accepts the affidavit of candidacy and places the candidate on the ballot. The City of Red Wing has never instituted policies or practices which prevent an individual from filing for election to public office.

XXX

Here’s the paper’s editorial, and I think it’s too generous with the City — they should have used the word “lie” more often:

Editorial: City Hall balks
R-E Editorial Board
The Republican Eagle – 07/18/2006

Red Wing has backed off from requiring City Council candidates to authorize background checks. That’s good news.

Authorization is now strictly voluntary. We wish the same thing could be said about people who want to serve in a non-elected capacity, but those who want to help at the Sheldon Theatre or Public Library, for instance, can volunteer elsewhere if they don’t want to sign.

The bad news is that City Hall isn’t being entirely truthful about said background checks. Spin doctors are attempting to make it look as if the checks have been voluntary all along.

The city issued a press release Saturday afternoon stating “there have been media stories which have created misconceptions about the City of Red Wingâ??s practices in accepting affidavits of candidacy from individuals who wish to file for public office. These misconceptions have been based on inaccurate information.”

What misconceptions?

City Hall issued an updated candidate list Friday that bore nine names. Behind one candidateâ??s name it reads: (filed 7/7/06, but still in the process of submitting necessary paperwork). The only paperwork missing is the background check form.

What inaccurate information?

Saturday’s press release states: The City of Red Wing does not run credit checks on candidates, nor does the City require that candidates consent to credit checks.

Fact: The original form said, “the City may desire to request reports from one or more consumer reporting agencies which may include, but not be limited to, criminal records checks, court records, driving records, credit reports and summary of educational or employment data and histories.”

City officials say they do not run credit checks, but the initial authorization form allowed them to do so.

Saturday’s press release states: The City of Red Wing has never instituted policies or practices which prevent an individual from filing for election to public office.

Fact: Most candidates tell us they were told they had to sign, and at least six people did. If they didn’t sign, they were led to believe their names would not be on the ballot.

The newspaper questioned this practice. Two candidates challenged its legality: one crossed out major portions of the release before signing and one refused to sign.

City Attorney Jay Squires told the latter candidate on Wednesday that he needed to sign, but by late Thursday concurred that it wasn’t necessary and a rough draft of a revised form would be forthcoming.

Saturday’s press release states: The City does ask candidates to sign a consent to run a criminal background check for the sole purpose of determining whether the candidate has a felony conviction, without the restoration of civil rights, and is therefore ineligible to run for office. However, even if a candidate opts not to sign the consent form, the City accepts the affidavit of candidacy and places the candidate on the ballot.

Fact: The original form was in place from July 5, the day filing opened, until Friday, when officials amended the form. The form is now voluntary, and still reads that candidates release the city “from any and all liability for its receipt and use of any data received pursuant to this Authorization.”

The truth is that city officials overstepped their bounds. They should admit it, acknowledge that the form was required and never should have been and, if they still believe candidate background checks are critical, then bring the matter to the City Charter Commission.

For people who hesitated to seek office because of the background check, we encourage you to file. You have until 5 p.m. today. We also encourage candidates who signed the original form to rescind it in writing. Candidates can decide for themselves whether to sign the new form. (We wouldn’t.)

Voters have the duty of quizzing candidates and deciding who should serve. The new council members in turn can decide who they want working at City Hall, not the other way around.