"The mayor is the first person quoted in the story. It's the statement/reason he included with the bill."
Well, the original statement is, of course, news, but it's *not* asking for a comment on the story. Receiving a bill to talk with someone doing city business is extraordinary: totally newsworthy. 
That being said, quoting him from the bill e-mail is *not* seeking comment. 
Seeking comment would imply that Callision had a chance to respond to your assertion that Langley "...began a new practice of billing the media for time spent speaking with a city employee." 
Implication being that from now on, the the media must pay for any time spent speaking to a city official. So you make that implication, and then seek follow up from 13 (by my count) sources for response to that assertion... but not the mayor's office? 

Did you ask for a comment on this story or not? Unclear from either article or comment.

Where's the hatchet job? 
Setting up a strawman to tear down. 
Callison=Strawman