1/2
I appreciate your willingness to respond. Please make no mistake. :) 
I also think that passing along the lawyer's bill was boneheaded: the city should eat that as part of doing public business. Tim's response frankly seems petty. The article seems about as petty if not more so; it's one-sided, designed to make people ab-react against the mayor. It serves to support the self-righteous editorial.

"The only part of the email that was not included....."
Fair enough. Hopefully you'll allow that a reader might not know that.

"I don't agree that we implied the city will now be charging the press for speaking with all city employees."
Agree to disagree :) That was the response several people discussed with me. And that headline is designed to provoke. That's a headline designed for late night comics. The headline sticks. 

For those playing along at home:
I deleted my earlier response when I re-read and realized that I was right the first time (about seeking a *comment* from the mayor).