Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Ethics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lynchburg council adopts resolution acknowledging 2023 defamatory remarks; directs staff to review city-managed digital content
Summary
Lynchburg City Council on June 10 adopted a resolution acknowledging a court finding that defamatory statements were made during a Nov. 28, 2023 council meeting and directed staff to review city-managed digital postings for legally permissible redaction or annotations.
Lynchburg City Council adopted a resolution on June 10 acknowledging that defamatory statements were made against a private citizen during the Nov. 28, 2023 council meeting, directing staff to take legally permissible actions to protect the citizen's rights and dignity and asking staff to propose procedural changes to prevent similar incidents.
Vice Mayor Deemer introduced the resolution after noting that a Virginia circuit court had on June 6, 2025, entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff (identified in the resolution as Sean Hunter of the Peacemaker's organization), finding that statements made by another individual during the Nov. 28, 2023 meeting were false and constituted defamation under Virginia law. The court awarded Mr. Hunter $50,000 in damages and court costs, the resolution says.
The resolution states that the official public record of the meeting must remain unchanged under the Virginia Public Records Act but directs staff to review city-controlled copies and publicly posted versions of the meeting video and audio to identify duplicative or nonessential postings that contain defamatory content and to remove or redact them where legally permissible. It also directs staff to add annotations or disclaimers to retained online versions to reflect the court's ruling and to propose rule changes that strengthen enforcement procedures for presiding officers and guidance for camera control during public meetings.
Council voted to suspend the rules of procedure to consider and adopt the resolution during the work session; the motion to suspend the rules passed on a roll call. Council then adopted the resolution, and the motion passed. The resolution called for a report back to council within 30 days summarizing actions taken, legal limits encountered and recommendations to strengthen protections for citizens who address council.
Ending
Councilors said the action was intended to correct continuing reputational harm while preserving the official record. The resolution does not authorize deletion of the official meeting minutes or the official record required by law; it directs staff only to take legally permissible steps on city-managed copies and to propose procedural changes to prevent future personal attacks from remaining unaddressed.
