WARNING letter to Ellendale, MN Council on Freedom of Speech

FORMAL COMPLAINT & REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF DOCUMENT SUBMISSION POLICY

Date: 4/15/2025 ELLENDALE, MINNESOTA

To: Ellendale City Council, City Clerk, and Mayor, and its Citizens

Subject: Violation of Open Meeting Laws & First Amendment Rights Regarding Public Document Submission Policy

Dear Mayor and City Council Members, and Community Members;

I am writing as an independent investigative journalist to formally object to the recently enacted rule prohibiting the distribution of documents to the City Council during public meetings and requiring all materials to be submitted through the City Clerk at least five (5) days in advance.

This policy violates Minnesota’s Open Meeting Law (Minn. Stat. § 13D), the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and the fundamental principles of democratic participation. I request that this rule be immediately rescinded or amended to comply with state and federal law.

Legal and Procedural Violations

· First Amendment Violation (Freedom of Speech & Right to Petition)

The U.S. Constitution protects the right of citizens to speak, assemble, and petition their government.

A blanket ban on handing out documents at public meetings is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech unless the city can prove it is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest (City of Ladue v. Gilleo, 512 U.S. 43 (1994)).

The rule eliminates spontaneous public input, which is a core function of open government.

·Minnesota Open Meeting Law (Minn. Stat. § 13D.04) – Lack of Timely Agenda Access

The council does not publish meeting agendas online in advance, making it impossible for citizens to know what will be discussed and submit documents five days prior.

While the law requires agendas to be posted at least three (3) days before a meeting (Minn. Stat. § 13D.04), the city’s practice of only posting a physical copy at City Hall—and often only three days in advance—fails to provide reasonable public access, and violates ADA laws.

This denies citizens their right to meaningful participation in government.

· Due Process & Arbitrary Restriction

The five-day rule is arbitrary and unreasonable when the public cannot access agendas in a timely manner.

The policy effectively silences dissent by making it procedurally impossible for citizens to submit relevant materials.

· Requested Actions

To comply with state law and constitutional rights, I demand the following:

ü Repeal or Amend the Five-Day Document Submission Rule

ü Allow citizens to distribute documents during public comment periods, as has been past practice.

If the council insists on advance submission, the deadline must be tied to when agendas are made publicly available online.

Publish Meeting Agendas Online in Advance

Agendas must be posted on the city website at least three (3) days before meetings, per Minn. Stat. § 13D.04.

Formal Review of Policy’s Constitutionality

The council should consult with legal counsel to ensure compliance with the First Amendment and Minnesota Open Meeting Law.

If the council does not take corrective action, I will have no choice but to:

1. File a complaint with the Minnesota Department of Administration (Open Meeting Law violation).

2. Authorize legal counsel to initiate a First Amendment lawsuit over $100,000.00

3. Organize public and mainstream media awareness efforts to address this suppression of civic participation.

I request a written response within 14 days detailing how the council intends to resolve these violations.

Sincerely,

Keith Haskell

Constitutional 1^st Amendment Press