Residents defend council members’ First Amendment rights after social‑media posts; some urge city to resist funding threats

Dozens of residents used the City Council’s public comment period Monday to defend council members’ right to speak as private citizens and to criticize a reported threat by U.S. Rep. Derek Van Orden to withhold federal funds from the city in response to social‑media posts.

Council member Jeff Miller opened the discussion with an explanation and apology for comments he made online following a widely publicized attack on a national figure; Miller said his words were intended to make a point and that he did not intend ill will. “I hope I’ve been able to clarify the meaning and intent of my comment,” Miller said.

During the public comment window, multiple speakers framed the matter as a First Amendment issue and urged the council not to resign or retract lawful speech because of political pressure. Diane Leader, a former public librarian, read the First Amendment and told the council members that social‑media posts by elected officials are protected speech. “The current representative for the Third District…is attempting to coerce Eau Claire by withholding funds,” Leader said, urging council to stand firm. Laura (last name not provided) likewise told the council that threats to withhold federal funds are “an abuse of power” and said the city should resist intimidation.

Others tied the debate to broader concerns about chilling political speech. Joe Thielen and Frank H. Robinson urged the council to resist what they described as coercive tactics and to defend free expression. Several speakers said they wished to see evidence if a removal petition had been filed and asked for transparency on who had signed it. Multiple local civic and business voices had earlier publicly urged measured responses and constitutional protection for speech.

Council president (Bergey) had reminded the room of public comment rules at the start of the session: comments should focus on citywide issues, not on personal attacks, and each speaker is limited to three minutes; the council also imposed a 20‑minute limit on the public‑comment block unless the council votes to extend it. Several speakers said they objected to any de facto restrictions that might discourage criticism of public officials.

No formal council action was taken in response to the public comments during Monday’s meeting; residents asked the council to resist political pressure, to be transparent about any petition, and to continue to treat social‑media speech by elected officials as constitutionally protected.

Note: speakers during the comment period referenced local and national events and expressed a range of views on tone and responsibility; this article records speakers’ statements and does not attribute actions (such as any cut‑off of federal funds) as verified facts beyond what commenters asserted during the meeting.