Wausau ethics board unanimously closes investigation into complaint against Mayor Doug Denny; notes subpoenas remain available

The Wausau Ethics Board voted unanimously to close its board-led additional investigation into a complaint filed against Mayor Doug Denny and said it may subpoena nonresponding witnesses to testify at the upcoming hearing. Board chair Calvin (Chair, Wausau Ethics Board) opened the agenda item by noting the board’s order for additional investigation dated 07/01/2025 and that the deadline for responses from 12 ordered subjects was July 22. “Having passed that deadline, we have received responses from 7 subjects,” Calvin said, and added that five subjects “provided no response of any kind.” Why it matters: the decision ends the board’s separate fact‑finding phase and shifts remaining evidentiary work to the scheduled hearing, where the board said it can compel testimony under oath from those who did not respond. The board recorded that seven people answered the board’s orders; five did not. The five listed by the board as providing no response were Deputy Police Chief Todd Baden, Finance Director Mary Anne Groot, Facilities Manager Leo Gao, Consulting IT Director Gerard Klein, and contractor Kyle Ozmitz. The fire chief and deputy fire chief told the board they had no contacts responsive to the orders. Board counsel Eric Larson reminded members that the documents sent were board “orders” and not mere requests, and chair Calvin noted the board’s authority to issue subpoenas: “of course, the board, if it so chooses, may subpoena any subjects who failed or refused to respond, to appear in person at the hearing to answer questions under oath.” Some respondents provided written answers; two responses were described to the board as nearly identical and appearing to have been provided with counsel, declining to answer on grounds the orders were “overly generalized, vague, and ambiguous” while offering to answer more specific questions in writing or in person. Board member Doug Hossler moved to close the additional investigation; the motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Several board members and counsel said that if additional testimony were needed the board would compel attendance at the hearing rather than leave outstanding investigative steps open indefinitely. What was not decided: the board did not at this meeting issue subpoenas; it closed the investigation and left subpoenas as a tool to be used at the hearing if the board later determines they are necessary. Ending note: the board’s action centralizes remaining fact‑finding at the hearing rather than continuing separate investigative orders, and several members said subpoenas would be used there if needed.