Determination
114
Minnesota
News Council
In the Matter of the Complaint of
Joe Rudberg, Becker City Administrator against
The Sherburne County Citizen
Attending the hearing was the complainant, Joe Rudberg,
Becker City Administrator, and Dave Hinnenkamp, Becker City Auditor
with the firm of Kern, DeWenter, Viere. Representing the Sherburne
County Citizen was Jake Jacobson, editor and publisher. Also attending,
at the News Council's request, was Jerry Mahoney, a municipal bond
specialist recently retired from the law firm of Dorsey Whitney.
Background:
On June 8, 1996, the Citizen published an article entitled
"Becker's Bonded Debt is $50 Million." It began with an
"Editor's Note" that read, "This is the first in a
two part series. It is an article not authorized by the city, with
much of the financial information coming from county records."
The article calculated the city's debt to be almost $30,000 per man,
woman and child, and suggested that if Northern States Power, which
pays 94% of the city's taxes, ever pays less or closes its Becker
plant, the citizens could be responsible for the debt.
Complaint:
Rudberg complained that the article misled readers about the city's
bonded indebtedness and financial condition through a series of inaccuracies
and omissions. He complained that the Citizen failed to list
a variety of revenue sources used to pay taxes, leaving the impression
that property tax payers must carry all the weight, and that it didn't
apportion indebtedness to parties other than the city itself. Rudberg
also complained that the Editor's Note was misleading in that the
city never authorizes any article the newspaper publishes, thus implying
that the article was exposing something the city was trying to hide.
Rudberg claimed the article was written to do him
harm and to embarrass the city because it does not place its official
advertising in the paper. Among the factual errors Rudberg cited:
- The paper reported Rudberg started his job as city
administrator in about 1990; he was hired in July 1992.
- Many of the projects the article attributed to
Rudberg, such as the building of a community center, were begun
before he became the city administrator, and some of the projects
were a result of voter referendums. Rudberg said the wrongful attribution
implied that he intended to capitalize on the city's huge tax capacity.
- The article reported that he was, "following
the city's master plan that has been put together by Hoingston Kuegler,
a Twin Cities public relations firm." Rudberg said Hoingston
Kuegler is not a public relations firm, but a planning firm specializing
in land use and environmental planning and design.
- The article asserted that he joined the city with
little experience in running city business affairs. Rudberg has
a master's degree in Urban and Regional Studies and had been employed
for the previous 81/2 years as a city administrator in North
Branch, MN.
Response:
Editor Jacobson, who wrote the story, responded that his paper had
performed a public service by informing readers that the city, with
fewer than 950 registered voters, was in danger of being overwhelmed
by debt if revenues from Northern States Power declined. He admitted
the story contained some inaccuracies, but believed the small mistakes
did not discredit the story as a whole. He said readers have a right
to know what their elected officials are doing, specifically if the
city is bonding beyond normal guidelines.
Jacobson contended that Becker city officials are
not accustomed to investigative reporting and resent it, and, as a
result, have steered business away from the newspaper, hurting it
financially. Nonetheless, he denied the article was vengeful and said
it contained no bias, just accurate financial information.
Jacobson said he wrote the Editor's Note because before
he became the publisher three years ago, the newspaper in a nearby
town covered news in Becker by publishing the equivalent of city council
meeting minutes without digging into issues.
Discussion:
Council member Carol Pine asked Jacobson to describe his attempts
to contact Rudberg for the story. Jacobson said he made two phone
calls on each of two days but was unable to reach Rudberg and had
to leave messages with a secretary. He said he quit trying to contact
Rudberg when a city council member told him that Rudberg was unhappy
with the Citizen's coverage of the city and was unlikely to
return his call. Rudberg disagreed, saying he never received a message
from Jacobson about this story, nor did he ever tell anyone that he
wouldn't return Jacobson's calls.
Council member Don Smith asked why Rudberg let months
pass before complaining. Rudberg responded that he feared retribution
from the Citizen, which he said had a habit of getting the
last word. He said although he contacted the News Council shortly
after the article was published, he waited several months to submit
his complaint because he was apprehensive about using the process.
Council member Jim Pumarlo asked Jacobson if he received complaints
about this story from other readers. Jacobson said a neighboring town's
paper received a letter of complaint, but that he had not received
any other complaints.
Council member Maureen Reeder asked Jacobson why he
published the Editor's Note. He explained he wanted to make sure his
readers understood the information was not spoon-fed to him by the
city. Council member Jim Wychor asked Jacobson if he'd ever written
an Editor's Note that said a story had been authorized by the city.
Jacobson replied that he had not.
Referring to a letter Jacobson sent to Rudberg on
October 15, 1996, Council member Mollie Hoben asked Jacobson what
he meant by, "what eventually emerges from slanted or inaccurate
stories is fact." He said he meant that a newspaper can't always
know all of the information when publishing a story but that readers
will call the paper to account and the truth will emerge.
Council member Nedra Wicks asked if the city of Becker
has a greater debt burden than other cities of similar size. Becker
Auditor Hinnenkamp explained statutes define a city's legal debt margin
as 2% of the city's market value. Because Becker's value is assessed
at $700 million, it carries a $14 million legal debt margin. After
subtracting the types of debt that do not apply to the calculation,
the auditor said, Becker is actually well below its legal debt margin.
He also said that while figuring debt per capita, as the Citizen did,
is one measurement tool, it does not account for the fact that an
expanding city, like Becker, tends to have high debt because the population
growth has not had time to match commercial growth.
Council member Tom Keller asked Jacobson how the negative
comments about Rudberg's personal style contributed to the thrust
of the story. Jacobson said that this was not strictly a financial
story, and in balancing positive and negative quotes from different
people about Rudberg he was trying to relate the "who" of
the story.
Determination:
Most members agreed that although the article was far from flawless,
it did attempt to shed light on an important issue. Pine suggested
that if the story misled readers, it did so through omissions and
a lack of context necessary for readers to understand a complex story.
Wicks agreed, saying she was troubled by the lack of research on a
difficult and complex topic, which led her to believe that the story
was not driven by a real intent to educate the public. Conner said
the article would have been better had it explained the information
brought out in the Council's discussion. Nonetheless, she applauded
the paper for taking on a difficult issue. Council member Tom Keller
likened the story to the Leaning Tower of Pisa, saying it slants drastically
but stops short of crashing.
Some members felt the personal information about Rudberg
contained in the story was gratuitous and detracted from the seriousness
of the story. Many were bothered by the Editor's Note. Council member
John Kostouros called it a poorly worded way of expressing that Rudberg
had not returned Jacobson's calls.
Reeder said that as a public official, Rudberg had
a duty and responsibility to be a source of information for the media.
By not doing so, "You get the press you deserve," she said.
At the same time, Reeder faulted the Citizen for writing about Rudberg's
personality without making extraordinary attempts to contact him.
While Hoben agreed that Rudberg had a responsibility to be a source,
she argued the paper had a greater responsibility to do the work of
putting together the story.
Determination #1: The Council denied the complaint
that the article misled readers about the city's finances.
Concurring: Amaris, Conner, Hage, Keller, Kostouros,
Pine, Reeder, Sellers, Van Pilsum, Wychor
Dissenting: Hoben, Pumarlo, Smith, Thompson, Wicks
Abstaining: Anderson, LeGrand
Determination #2: The Council upheld the complaint
that the Citizen was unfair in its reporting of Rudberg's role
in city projects and finances.
Concurring: Amaris, Hage, Hoben, LeGrand, Keller,
Pine, Pumarlo, Reeder, Sellers, Smith, Thompson, Van Pilsum, Wicks,
Wychor
Dissenting: Conner, Kostouros
Abstaining: Anderson
April 10, 1997
Read
Determination 115
Back
to Main Determination Index
Back
to News Council Main
Page
Want
to comment? Send a message
to the News Council.
