New Rochelle Authorizes Unlimited Funding of Private Lawsuit to Suppress Reporting by Local Journalist
Resolution further authorizes unlimited funding to investigate Robert Cox
NEW ROCHELLE, NY (December 11, 2024) — In an unprecedented decision, the New Rochelle City Council last night adopted, by a 5-2 vote, a resolution authorizing the unlimited funding of an investigation of Robert Cox and a private lawsuit by Corporation Counsel Dawn Warren and Development Commissioner Adam Salgado against Cox, publisher of Words in Edgewise at robertcox.ie and Talk of the Sound, this site.
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert and Councilmembers Shane Osinloye, Sara Kaye, David Peters and Martha Lope supported the resolution. Councilmembers Matt Stern and Al Tarantino were opposed.
For now, I am content to simply publish below a video clip of last night’s discussion and vote along with my best effort at a full, but unofficial, transcript. I will be interested to hear readers' thoughts on what transpired in the comments below as I think about my response.
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: Item number 19, which is a proposed resolution authorizing certain city employees to retain legal counsel. City Manager, would you like to add any context to this?
City Manager Will Melendez: Yes, I'll add some context to it. So I'll just read off a couple points here. So our city code on the Section 50 authorizes either me, the city manager or city council to prosecute, defend lawsuits to which the city is a party of, or which, in this case, in which in any way been interested. I thought it for transparency and for openness, I thought it would be, rather than me take that upon myself, that we bring it to city council, I understand the role of public questioning, of government practices, criticisms, inflammatory remarks, I get all that, name calling. And, you know, actually at times that could be very healthy. You know, it's a little ironic, but it's healthy. It's a good check sometimes. But in this case, I believe, you know, me observing it personally, that you know it crossed a line into false statements that could potentially harm the reputation of individuals on staff. You know, it's false statements within the workplace that could affect the ability to perform their duties efficiently. So it could have a detrimental effect, if left unaddressed, productivity, not only for the individuals involved, but also could spill over into staff. That was concerning, at least to me. The nature of the defamation suit, it would be filed on behalf of two employees. We want to stress this under their professional capacity. It's not under personal capacities. The city, from what I understand, is not a party to this lawsuit. It's therefore eliminating the risk of a cross or a counter claim, the resolution does not admit liability, liability or wrong doing by the city, limiting its role to legal support for employees. Another context here is statements such as false accusations of drug use in this case are wireless, damaging, and not protected on the First Amendment. It doesn't set a precedent. From my standing as the statements are alleged to constitute, not mere criticism or inflammatory remarks, and we are willing, if, again, we're at the point now where a cease and desist letter was given. My hope is that it ends there. We don't continue with this anymore. If one day it does go into a settlement or fee, we proposing that this legislation be amended to include a provision that grants the city the right to recover 100% of any fees, of any awards of this settlement. So it is not the purpose of gaining money, just, and again, I hope it doesn't get to that point, but I think it just there was just a point in time with with what was going on, and I understand the whole process, but I believe we crossed the line at some point here, that it could potentially affect productivity within city hall. I just wanted to say.
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: Questions or comments or observations from my colleagues. Councilmember… Tarantino.
Councilmember Al Tarantino: As you know, city manager, we had a discussion on the phone this morning. I had quite a long conversation with Vince Twomey, who's the attorney that is evidently involved with this. We went over a number of questions that I have because I asked you, and of course, you referred me to him, which was the proper thing to do. And I thank you for that. And you know, there's a case NYT versus Sullivan, which is the landmark case that rules on this type of thing. And the case clearly states that the city should not be party to personal civil suits, which this, you know, you can argue with, the courts will decide if it is or not. But this is, clearly is, but the bigger questions were that I asked him a question about cost of doing a case like this, and when I asked him about the estimated cost, the first thing he said, well, I'll find another attorney to handle is because I don't do this. So, Vince Twomey is telling me that you don't you're ruling, and telling us that we should go forward with this, but you are going to hire somebody else to handle the case, which tells me that this isn't your expertise. So you know, I asked last week of having an attorney come here that has expertise in this to talk to us, and of course, that didn't happen. But when I asked him about the cost, he was very kind to go through it all with me and the total from filing this lawsuit, defending it, going through discovery, going possibly to trial, the possibility of a counterclaim being filed, and if the counterclaim was successful, the damages I got a number here, one, two, about $250,000 so my question is this. I mean, obviously, you know, council will decide whether to go forward with this or not. But my concern is, you know, this is City, this is community money. This is the money from the people who collect the taxes and fees. My question is, you know how what's the limits on this? I mean, if it went to that level, is the city prepared to spend a quarter million dollars on this suit, and possibly, if they lost it, have to pay the other money. You know, it seems to me that we're opening a Pandora's box of allowing other employees to utilize the same services. And, you know, I'm not arguing the point of whether this is right or wrong, or, you know, what was said was, was okay, it's not. But my concern is, you know, going forward, what's going to happen. And you know, like I said, Mr. Twomey was very kind to give me the information he did, but he was very clear that he was not going to be the one to do a defamation suit, because he doesn't do that stuff. So my question is, should we have a defamation attorney come here and explain to us what, what it entails, and, you know, understand better the financial ramifications of this? You know? That's about it.
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: Thank you. Other comments or questions for my colleagues at the table. Councilmember Lopez?
Councilmember Martha Lopez: For the past month, we have heard all of the wonderful initiatives that the city has undertaken, and we owe it to very responsible staff making sure that everyone does the best that they can do as a staff. I have trust, complete trust in our city manager, that if he saw something that was not a problem, that he would be the first one to say, this is it goodbye. However, I feel that mental wellness is at stake 100% we want our city to continue to thrive. We want our staff to feel comfortable. We want them to, to come to work, because this is what they wanted to see the city move forward, and therefore, I, you know, to talk about transparency. I think that that's extremely important, and I applaud. I approach you for that. So I want to thank you, and I think that we are going right path. We are going the right path.
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: Councilmember Lopez, any other questions? Council member Kaye?
Councilmember Sara Kaye: I'm just going to say I concur.
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: Thank you Councilmember, Kaye. Councilman Osinloye?
Councilmember Shane Osinloye: Certainly, we speak frequently with the things that we've passed throughout the year to elevate our employees, to reinforce the work that they're doing. This is absolutely no different than any of that it has you know, the situation at hand has risen to the level of disrupting city business. We have discussed employees who felt scared submitting paperwork because they were not sure of themselves and they didn't want to be targeted. We have vendors and contractors who have lost business and are being perpetually harassed. The cost of doing business we could lose and the services disrupted, I think more than are valuable enough to move forward with this. This is not personal. This is our city leadership protecting our employees. I hope our employees, from our commissioners to our frontline lawyers, see that we are willing to protect you. And justice is not justice if we only do it when it's easy. And thank you for arranging this responsibly so that we can recover the fees involved. And that's it.
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: Other comments or questions? Councilmember Stern?
Councilmember Matt Stern: I would say, for one, I mean, I have absolute faith that the allegations are not true. And I think all of us, at some point or another have kind of been the target of some misrepresentations and out right falsehoods from this person. I do worry about the precedent that it's setting. I worry about the bar for success in this case and for the actual taxpayer implications, not just for this this example, but I think for going down the line, if you know this continues to happen. You know, when do we decide that something has reached a point where we're going to continue and proceed with defamation lawsuits? I haven't seen other examples of a municipality doing this. You know, I've heard about Yonkers, where city employees brought a lawsuit but (unintelligible) from the actual city itself. Yeah, and ultimately, this person who is writing, I don't think that this is going to be a wise course of action to draw a lot of attention to it. And so I just, I don't like where this is going, and I'm not comfortable with saying yes for this.
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: I don't know if Councilmember Peters, you want to add anything?
Councilmember David Peters: No. I think. I appreciate that, that this has moved in a direction of protection for city employees, as it has been said, I think that that, that as it's been described by the city manager, that it's, you know, that has crossed a cross the line that that is impacting the capacity and the ability of staff to function, free from from from feeling harassed or fear, depending upon what that means. So I think it's I think it's important to… there are times when when we have to kind of embrace the moment and and see what it brings. I think the city manager has indicated that he hopes that that this action will stop at the at the at the cease and desist in this matter, and that individual involved will take that into consideration around the impact of what's going on. So I'm I am I am pleased that or not necessarily pleased, but I'm clear that this action in this particular moment is one that cares to be responsible on the city side,
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: I'll just add so with respect to precedent, I'm glad the city manager set the precedent of bringing it to council. So I appreciate that, even though our own charter statute would have allowed you to authorize this within your own right and permissibility. So I appreciate that that precedent, and I think that provides transparency in a way that allows for feedback or comment on something that is unprecedented within itself. So I'm grateful for that leadership there. It's not the city pursuing the suit, it's the city supporting the staff members who will be the name party, so the city will not be any party. So I just want to make sure that we are clear on that which is consistent with other municipalities. I think it's just important to align it that way. It's important to understand maybe what the outside scope of the totality of the cost could be but we need to remember that we're not authorizing them to necessarily go all the way through a full law student discovery and damages and counterclaims for giving them the opportunity to retain counsel as needed. This cost could come in well under $250,000 and as noted, the intent is, and the hope is that the cease and desist will do the work. But if not, then they will need legal counsel to decide what next steps are. And that doesn't mean that it's going to immediately balloon to the highest possible cost. So this gives them the freedom to engage with legal counsel in a way that supports the staff that we're hearing the majority of my colleagues speak about so and again, the stat we have that our charter, our statute, anticipates this, so it gives us the ability for the city to underwrite this cost when they're being when their allegations and they're in the professional capacity. And I appreciate the specificity with which this is happening. It's not just a vague my feelings are hurt. It's not just a vague harassment. There are very specific situations that are being addressed in this in this motion. So I do think that there is an intentionality around being responsible and fiduciaries of the city's budget and even the way that it was arranged. So with that said, if there's nothing further, do you want to roll call vote? Would my colleagues prefer a roll call vote?
Councilmember Al Tarantino: Yes.
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: Okay, and so it would be Madam Clerk, please a roll call vote for item number 19, which is a proposed resolution authorizing certain city employees to retain legal counsel with the amendment, as articulated by our city manager for the city's right to recover 100% of the fees. Madam Clerk, please start to call the roll.
City Clerk Michelle Oliveros: Councilmember Lopez?
Councilmember Martha Lopez: Yes.
City Clerk Michelle Oliveros: Councilmember Tarantino?
Councilmember Al Tarantino: I want to make a short statement is that I'm going to vote no, but the reason I'm voting no is I want to make sure. I'm not comfortable with what was told to me today by Vince Twomey, I'm still I still have a big concern about the impact this will have the finances of the city, and also on future lawsuits being brought by employees because they have an axe to grind with another employee, so or somebody else. So I'm voting no.
City Clerk Michelle Oliveros: Councilmember Peters?
Councilmember David Peters: Yes.
City Clerk Michelle Oliveros: Council member Osinloye?
Councilmember Shane Osinloye: Yes, with the understanding that employee this has disrupted City Business. Employees have reported not feeling safe in doing their work. Vendors and contractors are being harassed and have lost business, so there are damages and the cost of doing business to the services that we need to provide for the city that need to continue every day. That's why I'm voting yes on this.
City Clerk Michelle Oliveros:
Councilmember Kaye?
Councilmember Sara Kaye: Yes.
City Clerk Michelle Oliveros: Councilmember Stern?
Councilmember Matt Stern: No.
City Clerk Michelle Oliveros: Mayor Ramos-Herbert?
Mayor Yadira Ramos-Herbert: Yes. 19 passes.
