TEMECULA -- A proposed policy that would require city officials to communicate only in writing with one area newspaper has some First Amendment advocates fearing the move aims to censor news coverage.

The proposed policy, which was placed on the City Council's agenda at the request of Councilman Ron Roberts, would require all inquiries from the Riverside-based Press-Enterprise to be put in writing to council members and administrators. In turn, all responses would be provided in writing.

The City Council will consider adopting the policy during its meeting at 7 tonight in City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive.

Exempt from the proposed policy would be communications between reporters and representatives of the police and fire departments about life and safety situations while at emergency scenes, according to a staff report that outlines the proposal.

Roberts could not be reached for comment Friday or Monday to explain what prompted the proposal, which is described in the staff report as a way to "ensure accuracy and effective flow of communication."

Assistant City Manager Bob Johnson offered a similar explanation.

"I think there has been a concern with the accuracy and completeness of the stories that have been written. Because of this, we want to make sure that we are clear on what is being asked so we can provide accurate and concise responses," he said.

Johnson said the proposed policy has been reviewed and cleared by City Attorney Peter Thorson, who could not be reached for comment Monday.

Temecula City Councilwoman Maryann Edwards said the policy would be a way to ensure the accuracy of information being published.

"If you submit facts verbally, but some of those statements are omitted, what recourse do you have?" she asked.

While not specifically cited on the staff report, the communication clampdown comes about a month after an article published by the Press-Enterprise outlined ties that four of the five council members have with a prominent local developer and raised questions about possible conflicts of interest.

Neither the editor nor the publisher of the Press-Enterprise returned calls from The Californian on Monday.

Government watchdog groups see the proposal as a way to limit the newspaper's access.

Terry Francke, general counsel for Californians Aware -- a nonprofit group specializing in public forum law -- said that while there is no law that requires public officials to answer questions, it is common practice for most government bodies to cooperate with the press.

Francke said it is discriminatory to single out one news organization and make its reporters jump through hoops to attain information. He said that to impede the news-gathering abilities of a single media outlet is a violation of the First Amendment. He said a blanket policy that effects all news agencies equally would be constitutional, but is not desirable for the sake of public access to information.

"To admittedly discriminate against one player is the problem," Francke said.

Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, a public interest organization that advocates free speech and open-government rights, described the proposal as "legally suspect."

"It's sort of a gray area," Scheer said. "On the one hand, the city does have authority, internally, to designate certain people to talk to the press so they can better keep track of inquiries going in and the substance of comments going out. What is problematic here is that it is directed to a single organization, not all media."

Scheer said that while he has seen similar variations of the proposed policy where communications from a particular agency are filtered through one spokesman or where sheriff's departments have restricted media access, he said that to subject a single news outlet to such regulation is troubling.

"It does raise serious First Amendment questions," Scheer said.

Contact staff writer Nicole Sack at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2616, or nsack@californian.com.