Note: Howie's daily column is powered by Lyric Kitchen & Bar.
Duluth Mayor Roger Reinert is choosing message control over public accountability. A recorded statement can inform the community, but it cannot substitute for standing before reporters and answering reasonable questions about public safety. When gunfire has wounded four people in three separate Duluth shootings over five days, and another man was stabbed in Canal Park two days later, residents deserve more than carefully selected words delivered into a camera. They deserve an elected leader willing to face the questions that begin when the recording ends.
The joint video statement from Reinert and Police Chief Mike Ceynowa contained useful information. Police said they had viable leads, found no evidence that the three shootings were connected and saw a troubling commonality: Most of those involved were juveniles prohibited from possessing firearms. Reinert reminded residents to call 911 when they see something suspicious and urged gun owners to secure their firearms. Those are responsible messages, and nobody should pretend otherwise.
But City Hall decided what would be said, how it would be said and when the conversation would end. Local reporters requested interviews. Instead, the mayor and police chief produced a video that news organizations could distribute but could not question. That is communication without scrutiny. It gives officials every advantage of public exposure while denying the public the benefit of follow-up questions.
No provision in the Duluth City Charter requires a mayor to answer every question from every reporter. This is not a legal argument. It is a leadership argument. The city’s own 2026 budget describes the mayor as Duluth’s chief executive officer and its “identifiable representative.” Those words carry responsibility. The mayor is not merely the voice used to read the administration’s message. He is the elected official accountable for explaining how the administration is responding when residents begin questioning whether their neighborhoods, downtown and Canal Park remain safe.
Ceynowa has legitimate reasons to protect details of active investigations. Police cannot disclose evidence that could compromise arrests or prosecutions, and responsible reporters understand that. But nobody is asking Reinert to identify suspects, reveal confidential evidence or speculate about motives. The mayor can answer broader questions without interfering with a single investigation: Does he believe the violence represents an emerging pattern? Are police staffing and resources adequate? What is the city doing about juveniles gaining access to firearms? Has the administration changed its strategy? What should residents expect next, and when will they hear another update? Those are not ambush questions. They are the ordinary questions of public leadership.
Other Midwestern mayors have faced the same obligation, sometimes well and sometimes poorly, and their responses show that appearing before reporters does not require a mayor to jeopardize an investigation or pretend to possess answers that police have not yet found.
After a 37-year-old woman was killed in crossfire during a July 2025 outbreak of gun violence in Racine, Wisconsin, Mayor Cory Mason joined police and community-safety leaders at an afternoon news conference. According to WGTD public radio, Mason explained that the city was focused on identifying those responsible, preventing additional violence and supporting the neighborhoods most affected. His most important phrase was also his shortest: “resources, not just words.”
Rockford, Illinois, faced something far worse in March 2024, when four people were killed and seven wounded during a stabbing and beating rampage. Mayor Tom McNamara spoke publicly that day and appeared at a detailed news conference the following morning with police, prosecutors and other officials, according to WIFR and The Associated Press. The city also announced counseling services for victims’ families and affected residents. McNamara could not explain every unanswered detail. He showed up anyway.
Madison, Wisconsin, held several public briefings on the day of the December 2024 shooting at Abundant Life Christian School and another the following day, according to the city’s running incident record. Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway fielded questions, although the city required reporters to submit questions in advance for the second-day briefing. She was later criticized by Isthmus for harshly rebuking reporters who asked when victims’ identities would be released. Madison’s response was not a perfect model of press relations, but its officials repeatedly stood before the public, corrected changing information and accepted that difficult questions were part of the moment.
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, also moved quickly after a police officer was ambushed and shot in April. Police released additional details the following day, and KELO-AM reported that Mayor Paul TenHaken was publicly calling the state’s parole system broken within two days because both suspects had been under state supervision. He did more than offer sympathy. He identified the policy failure he believed had contributed to the danger and demanded action.
The most instructive comparison may be Fargo, North Dakota, because Fargo initially got it wrong. After two connected shootings killed two people and injured two others in August 2025, city officials did not hold an immediate news conference. A contentious briefing followed about 36 hours later, and the delay became a controversy of its own. Then-Mayor Tim Mahoney criticized the handling of the response and acknowledged that the public had deserved timely communication. “You have to get out there in front and tell the public what’s going on,” Mahoney told WDAY Radio.
Mahoney was right, although he was not exempt from criticism for failing to convene the briefing himself. That is the point. Accountability does not disappear because a police chief handles the investigation or because a communications staff prepares a statement. The mayor remains the mayor.
Reinert is an experienced and politically skilled communicator. He regularly uses video to promote city projects, explain policy and shape his administration’s message. That makes his reluctance to participate in unscripted questioning during a public-safety scare more conspicuous, not less. A mayor cannot embrace the camera when the subject is favorable and replace accountability with production control when the questions become uncomfortable.
Duluth should also resist exaggeration. Three apparently unconnected shootings do not prove that the city has suddenly become unsafe, and one additional stabbing does not establish a crime wave. Police have made progress, developed leads and arrested a suspect in Thursday’s Canal Park stabbing. Responsible journalism should report those facts as clearly as it reports the violence.
But reassuring residents requires more than repeating that Duluth remains safe. It requires explaining why city leaders believe that, what evidence supports the conclusion and what they are doing to keep it true. A live news conference would allow Ceynowa to address the investigations within appropriate limits while Reinert answers for policy, resources and the city’s broader response. Neither man must know everything. Both should be willing to say what they know, what they do not know and what happens next.
This is not about reporters demanding attention. Reporters are the stand-ins for residents who cannot walk into the mayor’s office and question him themselves. When elected officials refuse interviews, they are not merely declining a conversation with a television station or newspaper. They are preventing the public’s questions from being asked in a setting where vague answers can be challenged and incomplete answers can be followed.
Reinert and Ceynowa should hold a live news conference. They should provide the facts that can responsibly be released, explain the city’s strategy and answer reasonable questions until those questions are exhausted. If some answers cannot yet be provided, they should say so and explain why. That is not surrendering control. It is accepting responsibility. Recorded statements have their place, but in moments that test a community’s confidence, leadership begins when the prepared statement ends.
eMail Howie at Duluth@aol.com
