In one of her comments here on my site, [Maplewood Mayor Diana Longrie noted](http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/06/20/more-maplewood-minnesota-fireworks/#comment-1262) that the fact the her husband had a restraining order issued against him was something that had been picked up on in various news stories in the past. Here’s an example mention from the Pioneer Press [by Steve Smith, posted on Thu, Nov. 03, 2005] (no longer available by direct link; I got it via Google’s cache ):
> [Diana] Longrie hosts a weekly cable show, separate from the one her husband of 11 months, Kevin Berglund, used to produce. Longrie rebuffed any questions about Berglund, who two years ago was served with a temporary restraining order barring him from contact with four female city employees. A judge later lifted the order for lack of evidence of misconduct.
Now, of course, that sounds icky. He was “barr[ed] from contact with four female city employees”. Eeew. And the order was lifted for lack of evidence. Not really a resounding absolution.
Anyway, [Mayor Longrie noted](http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/06/20/more-maplewood-minnesota-fireworks/#comment-1262) that she’d provided the actual Order to a site called [SaveMaplewood.com](http://www.SaveMaplewood.com) or the [Maplewood Citizens League](http://www.intercognition.net/mplwdcl/publichome.asp) (MCL), in order to set the record straight (I assume).
MCL bills itself as “a nonpartisan organization”. I question that. For example, the domain “savemaplewood.com” was registered on March 31, 2006 by Peter Fischer and seems by it’s title and timing to be a reaction to the new conservative majority leadership in Maplewood. Peter Fischer was at least at one point vocally critical of the current Maplewood leadership majority ([my comments here](http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/04/29/the-local-paper-is-at-it-again/)).
The mayor also noted that Dale Trippler, Judith Johannesen and Stephen Flister are involved in the site. I finally verified that [here](http://www.intercognition.net/mplwdcl/Board.asp). It’s not like they hid it; I just never looked. [Dale Trippler](http://www.kpmartin.com/index.php?s=Dale+ppler) is a name my readers might recognize.
I wonder why they cast SaveMaplewood.com as nonpartisan. I wonder in what way nonpartisanship expresses itself. They *do* do a *very good job* of keeping up with events and news concerning Maplewood; for those following these things, they’re a must-read. But nonpartisan?
Not posting Mayor Longrie’s information seems to me to be a possible indication of being partisan. It’s a bit of information that Maplewood residents who may have heard about the restraining order may be interested in.
Now that I’ve read the order, it seems so even more.
This wasn’t just a “lifted order”. This was nearly a rebuke of those who brought forward the complaint. The order was “[dismissed with prejudice](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice_%28law%29)” by District Court Judge Michael F. Fetsch, and found that Berglund, while annoying and persistent, was within his rights in his requests for information from the city. And the judge found that…
> A culture developed with the City of Maplewood to make Berglund’s acquisition of information as difficult as possible and to punish him for perceived transgressions, all of which were related more to social etiquette than to safety, security or privacy issues.
Isn’t that interesting. So much chatter has gone into how the Maplewood city administration has *become* foolish or childish. I have to admit I agree on many counts. Perhaps against both sides, to be blunt. But it doesn’t appear it was a sudden turn of events with the arrival of a conservative majority. Rather, it seems like dysfunction has been festering for a while. (This was all early and mid 2004.)
###What can we get from all this?
We can legitimately wonder if SaveMaplewood.com is truly nonpartisan if they are unwilling to publish something that:
– Gives a glimpse into pre-2006 Maplewood City behavior, showing that oddities don’t appear to be something brand new this year
– Gives a glimpse into how city leaders at the time chose to spend city time and money
– Gives a glimpse into a city culture which made it difficult for a member of the public to obtain information the city was bound to provide (a point that directly touches on their “Your neighbors working to restore and preserve open government in Maplewood” header on their site)
– Clears up some public misconceptions about the husband of the current mayor
We can re-read that paragraph I quoted from the Pioneer Press and wonder “if I read that at the time, what would I have thought? And how accurate would I have been?” It’s a decidedly different impression after reading the order, isn’t it? I can’t shake wondering about how news gets to us. That’s actually the underlying thread that’s more interesting to me than the Maplewood stories themselves.
Well, since the “nonpartisan” [Maplewood Citizens League](http://www.intercognition.net/mplwdcl/publichome.asp) doesn’t see fit to publish the document, I’ll make the PDF available here:
* [City of Maplewood v. Berglund – Restraining Order Dismissed](http://kpmartin.www62.a2hosting.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/BerglundRestrainingOrderDismissed.pdf) 6 page, 900 KB PDF file
###Quick notes
* I searched SaveMaplewood.com via Google and via their own searchable archives to verify that they have not uploaded the PDF prior to this post. I can find no mention of “Berglund”. If I am wrong, **please** correct me so I can correct this post. (Time of writing: Saturday, Sept. 23, 5pm)
* If the offer of the file was not extended to MCL or it’s individual members, **please** let me know so I can correct the Mayor’s assertion.
* I really would like to know if there actually is some conservative balance on [Maplewood Citizens League](http://www.intercognition.net/mplwdcl/publichome.asp).
* The PDF has some interesting stuff about the allegations brought against Berglund. For example, something Kathleen Juenemann alleged turned out not to show up on videotape… how does that happen?
* Though Berglund and Mayor Longrie may be happy someone’s willing to post this information publicly, keep in mind that now the world can know that a judge has found Kevin “insistent”, “argumentative”, and “at times offensive”. Reading this, I hope I never have information you want. :)
* I now have reason to know it was *very* likely Peter Fischer [visiting my site from the Minneapolis Club](http://www.kpmartin.com/2006/06/13/to-whoevers-visiting-from-the-minnapolis-club/). C’mon, man… where’s my honorary membership? OK, I’ll settle for lunch. (On you, of course.) :)
For my previous coverage of the Maplewood City Council happenings and related news coverage comments, [click here](http://www.kpmartin.com/index.php?s=maplewood).