Gomez won’t sue: Neighborhood spokeswoman says her freedom of speech is the issue
City councilor Eric Gomez is backing off a threat to sue the head of a neighborhood group that collected signatures to have him removed from office last year.
On Oct. 10, 2008, attorney Joel Wohlgemuth sent a letter to Julie Hall, the spokeswoman for a neighborhood group Who Owns Tulsa, claiming she had published “false statements” about Gomez that were “defamatory” under state law.
The letter claims Hall improperly charged Gomez with “neglect of official duty, incompetence or malfeasance.”
Wohlgemuth’s letter acknowledges the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution but it claims Hall’s e-mail campaign was “reckless and malicious” and “exceeded legal boundaries.”
Wohlgemuth’s letter instructs Hall to notify him in writing that she will “immediately discontinue the distribution of defamatory statements regarding Councilor Eric Gomez.” Without that notification, Wohlgemuth threatened “all remedial measures,” which presumes filing a lawsuit.
The letter also demands that Hall prevent anyone else from having access to the disputed comments about Gomez.
Hall, who is an attorney, said the letter was simply an attempt to make her shut up.
“The threat was prompted by my role in coordinating a recall petition against Councilor Gomez and related criticisms of his actions as a public official,” Hall told the Tulsa Beacon.
Hall led the fight against a planned 76-unit housing complex for the homeless and recovering drug addicts near Admiral Boulevard on Yale Avenue. Neighbors didn’t find out about the project until it had already been approved by the city.
Gomez is in favor of the project, which is in his district.
City Clerk Mike Kier, based on advice from City Attorney Diedre Dexter, determined that two recall petitions aimed at Gomez and Councilor David Patrick don’t meet charter guidelines. In 13 days, volunteers collected enough signatures to qualify for the first stage of a recall of Patrick and Gomez.
Instead of fighting the decision in court, Hall’s group turned its attention to the November 2009 city election and efforts to replace Gomez and Patrick.
Gomez said he deserves an apology for Hall’s criticism.
It’s extremely difficult under Oklahoma law for an elected official to win a libel or slander suit. The law generally protects political speech unless the statements are knowingly false and malicious.
Hall spoke after a citizen who in February reported a possible ethics violation regarding two city councilors was threatened.
“One of my concerns is that the initial response from the City Council included the implied threat of legal action,” Hall said. “It would appear that the biggest mistake the citizen made was giving his name rather than reporting his concerns anonymously.
“As citizens, we have First Amendment rights. These rights are so important that with respect to public officials and their acts, Oklahoma law protects these communications unless they falsely impute a crime to the officer criticized. Under federal law, speech concerning public officials is actionable only if it is false, defamatory, and made with actual malice.”
Hall said the letter by Gomez’s attorney was a threat to everyone who signed the petition to get him recalled.
“Lawsuits can financially devastate those involved, and the threat of such lawsuits has a chilling effect on free speech,” Hall said. “Lawsuits designed to silence opposition on public issues are known nationally as SLAPP (strategic litigation against public participation) suits, and several states have passed legislation to protect their citizens from such threats. You rarely hear of threatened SLAPP suits because they are so effective, but they happen more often than you might think.
“Councilor Gomez is gearing up for an election year. In my opinion, any Councilor who would sue or threaten to sue constituents for criticizing his official actions should not be re-elected. I encourage you to ask your Councilor if you, too, are at risk of a lawsuit if you criticize his official conduct.”