Residents press council over social‑media 'Weasel Report'; mayor and council dispute allegations

Public comment at the Indian Trail Town Council meeting focused heavily on a long‑running local social‑media dispute. Several residents used their allotted time to raise nearly identical themes: assertions that a Facebook page (referred to throughout the meeting as the "Weasel Report") had posted misleading or false claims about council members and town staff, questions about how town emails became public, and calls for accountability.

Jim Latrell opened the public‑comment block by asking whether an absent council member "is aware that independent counsel hired by this very council report implies that the Weasel report was basically Mr. Barber," framing his remarks as a call for answers about misinformation and tone in local discourse. Michael Falenberry and Lynn Cole urged more open, transparent process for town events and criticized anonymous posts; Cole praised staff professionalism and said attacks on employees were unfair.

Mayor David Conn devoted part of his remarks to contesting the social‑media narrative and defending his and staff's conduct. He said the town had previously commissioned outside legal review of the page, summarized key findings from the attorney’s report as he understood them, and disputed assertions that he or staff improperly released emails. "I will be happy to put something together for you next year," the mayor said in response to a suggestion about recognizing the National Day of Prayer; he also described the posts as "mistruths" and criticized the inability to respond on that page.

Council members and speakers repeatedly referenced past council censures and an attorney’s investigation; the mayor read excerpts from a long report during his remarks alleging the Weasel Report retained a digital link to a councilman's earlier campaign page and that the public would reasonably conclude an affiliation existed. Members of the council urged civility and emphasized that disagreement is normal in governance while asking speakers to avoid personal attacks.

What happens next: the public‑comment period does not itself change town policy. Several speakers asked for clearer rules about what constitutes official town communications and who may use town resources; staff and council suggested that residents who want further action should submit formal requests or agenda items so the council can consider policy changes. The issues raised may resurface in future agenda items if council directs staff to research remedies for repeated misinformation or to revise social‑media guidance.