St. Paul’s independent probe found Mayor Kaohly Her violated workplace rules and created an uncomfortable environment for staff, even as it stopped short of labeling the conduct sexual harassment.
Story Snapshot
- An outside investigation found offensive, inappropriate behavior by the mayor but no substantiated sexual harassment.
- Police Chief Axel Henry’s lawsuit alleges sexualized comments, unwanted touching, and retaliation after he complained.
- Investigators interviewed multiple people and reviewed tens of thousands of texts from city and personal phones.
- The mayor apologized for crossing lines but denies harassment and says she will continue to lead the city.
What the Investigation Confirmed and What It Did Not
City-hired investigators concluded that Mayor Kaohly Her engaged in “offensive and inappropriate behavior” and contributed to an uncomfortable work environment. The full report and earlier summary both said the evidence did not meet the legal definition of sexual harassment or retaliation under city policy. That split finding matters. It confirms boundary crossing while leaving the core legal claim unproven. The city’s letter and report framed the conduct as policy violations rather than harassment, which shapes early public perception.
Mayor Her’s office echoed the report’s bottom line, stating that harassment and retaliation claims were unsubstantiated, and said she would not comment further due to active litigation. Her also admitted she became too informal and apologized for causing discomfort, while disputing that her conduct was harassment. This response accepts fault for unprofessional behavior yet resists the heavier label and penalties that can follow a harassment finding. That tension now moves from city hall into a courtroom.
What the Lawsuit Alleges and Why It Resonates
Police Chief Axel Henry’s lawsuit describes repeated sexualized conduct, including explicit comments, unwanted thigh touching under a conference table, and sexual noises in a city gym. He also claims city officials retaliated after he raised concerns. These are serious claims that go to safety, dignity, and chain of command. The case is larger than one shocking line or text. It alleges a pattern that, if proven, could have changed how he worked and reported issues inside the city’s leadership.
Reporters say the outside law firm interviewed Her, Henry, and nine others, and reviewed more than 55,000 text messages from Her’s city-issued and personal phones. That scope gives the investigation weight, even if it reached mixed conclusions. It also hints at how discovery could unfold in court. Text archives, calendars, and witness statements can help build a timeline. They can also expose gaps that raise new questions about culture, oversight, and whether leaders follow the same rules they set for others.
Why the “Inappropriate But Not Harassment” Line Matters
Public sector cases often turn on legal thresholds that differ from common understanding. Investigations can find behavior unprofessional yet not “severe or pervasive” enough to be unlawful harassment. Anti-retaliation standards also focus on whether a worker faced a “materially adverse” action after protected activity. The city’s report placed this dispute on the policy side, not the legal-violation side, at least for now. That distinction shapes headlines and public trust, which can be hard to reset later.
The gap between policy breaches and legal liability frustrates people across the aisle. Many feel leaders get gentle write-ups while regular workers face harsh discipline. When top officials get lawyers, summaries, and time, residents wonder if the system protects the powerful over the public. That concern does not prove harassment occurred. It does explain why voters in both parties want clear rules, quick accountability, and full transparency when leaders cross lines.
What Comes Next and What To Watch
The lawsuit now drives the process. Depositions can test memories. Document requests can verify timelines. A third-party witness could clarify the under-table touching claim. Release of complete investigative files, including interview notes and exhibits, would help the public see how investigators weighed conflicting accounts. Until then, two truths stand together: the city validated policy violations, and the investigation did not substantiate harassment or retaliation under its standards.
A police chief is suing his own mayor, alleging sexual harassment, unwanted touching and retaliation after he complained.
St. Paul Police Chief Axel Henry claims Mayor Kaohly Her called herself a "MILF," made sexually suggestive remarks about his body and placed her hand on his… pic.twitter.com/wIJvN5jJbf
— Mike Netter (@nettermike) September 27, 2026
For residents, the stakes are practical. Trust in city leadership affects budgets, policing, and basic services. For workers, the lesson is also clear. Speak up early. Save records. Know that retaliation protections can apply even during internal probes, not just formal complaints, according to Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidance. For leaders, the rule is simpler: model the standards you set. When you do not, you feed the belief that government serves insiders first—and everyone else last.
Sources:
twincities.com, cbsnews.com, foxnews.com, startribune.com, axios.com
