Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Controversial Historical Figures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Monona commission weighs Charles Lindbergh marker while research and grant options remain on hold
Summary
Commissioners discussed whether to pursue a marker or supplemental marker for Charles Lindbergh, noting research materials in the packet and a pause in grant opportunities; concerns about potential legal exposure and text drafting led members to recommend additional research and consultation with the Minnesota museum and city attorney.
Commissioners discussed the legacy of Charles Lindbergh and whether Monona should pursue a marker that acknowledges both his aviation achievements and the controversy over statements perceived as antisemitic.
Staff presented background materials at the Feb. 18 meeting, including a speech transcript and references from the Minnesota Historical Society and the Charles Lindbergh museum. A staff summary described the controversy as statements that were "perceived as antisemitic," and included a transcript excerpt identified in the meeting packet as the Des Moines speech that critics point to as the primary focal point of controversy.
Commissioners noted grant opportunities could support a marker but were told the main state grantmaker referenced (Wisconsin Humanities) had paused applications because of a federal grant freeze; commissioners said they have subscribed to the grantmaker’s listserv for updates. One commissioner asked that the museum in Minnesota be contacted for additional context; staff said they had the museum’s contact information and would reach out.
Several commissioners raised legal concerns about wording for a local marker. One commissioner stated during the discussion: "I want the city attorney to clear us to make sure there's no defamation potential here. I don't want my taxes going to pay for defamation lawsuit." Commissioners agreed that if the commission or city funds a local marker, staff should do due diligence on language and legal risk, and that an expert — either a historical scholar or the state historical society — should be used to draft marker text rather than the commission drafting language internally.
The commission did not vote on creating a marker, but members instructed staff to continue research, make contact with the Minnesota museum and the Wisconsin Historical Society resources, and seek city attorney guidance on potential legal risk and drafting approach before pursuing grant applications or local funding.
