Controversial Columbia Heights council member fights recall at state high court

The fate of a special election to recall an embattled Columbia Heights City Council member now rests in the hands of the Minnesota Supreme Court, which will have to quickly decide if proceedings can continue.

The state’s highest court heard oral arguments Wednesday morning in the case involving KT Jacobs, who faces the recall attempt over allegations she made a racist phone call to a council candidate, which she denies. The recall election is set for Tuesday, and early voting has been underway since January.

Jacobs allegedly called council candidate Justice Spriggs in July 2022 and questioned him about his ethnicity and qualifications for office. Since then, the City Council has censured Jacobs, twice passed resolutions asking her to step down, and removed her from all boards and commissions. Spriggs was elected that November and now serves alongside Jacobs.

The city also hired an outside consulting firm to investigate. It found that Jacobs was “untruthful” and failed to act according to the council’s Code of Conduct. A citizens’ group then filed a petition over the summer, leading the City Council to vote 4-1 in July to proceed with a recall election.

Jacobs, whose term runs through December 2025, refused to resign and has repeatedly denied the allegations against her. She sued the city to stop the recall election, contending that a petition was “procedurally defective” and behavior she is accused of fell “woefully short of malfeasance,” a requirement needed for a recall election.

The case was rushed to the Supreme Court after an Anoka County judge in November sided with the city and allowed the recall election to continue. Three candidates are on the ballot, as is one question asking voters to decide if Jacobs should be recalled.

Jacobs has maintained a relative placed the call to Spriggs on her cellphone without her permission. In the two-hour call, Jacobs allegedly asked Spriggs, who identifies as biracial, which members of his family were people of color, as well as berating him about his ideals.

Jacobs’ attorney, Gregory Joseph, argued on Wednesday that Jacobs’ conduct did not rise to the level of malfeasance, which he defined as acts such as bribery, accepting money for political favors, dereliction of duty or commission of serious crimes that betray the public trust.

When asked by Chief Justice Natalie Hudson if lying constitutes malfeasance, Joseph replied, “No I don’t think it does.” While he said he does not condone lying, “the allegations are little more than name calling,” and that type of behavior is more appropriately suited for a general election, not a recall.

City Attorney Bradley Kletscher contended that lying during official city proceedings, as Jacobs was found to have done, crossed the line and does qualify as malfeasance because it eventually impacted her ability to carry out duties.

“Society fails to function appropriately when you allow people to lie,” he said. “When you are not truthful, that is when you create this problem.”

Kletscher acknowledged under continued questioning that lying “is on the outer edge” of what constitutes malfeasance.

The court will also have to sort out whether state laws or rules stated in city charters govern recall elections. It will also have to weigh whether Jacobs’ behavior was a private personal conversation with Spriggs, or conducted in her role as a City Council member.