Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Appointment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables ethics-board alternate appointment amid ongoing complaint; motion added exception if quorum needed
Summary
Mayor Denny’s nomination of Dylan Anderson to serve as an alternate on the city ethics board was tabled after extended debate about optics and timing while an ethics complaint involving the mayor is pending. Council added a carve-out so the appointment can be brought back if the board lacks a quorum.
The Wausau Common Council voted 8-3 on Feb. 25 to table Mayor Denny’s nomination of Dylan Anderson to an alternate seat on the city ethics board until the current ethics investigation concludes or until the ethics board needs a fourth member to meet quorum requirements.
Mayor Denny introduced Anderson and said Anderson would be able to serve; Anderson described his background as a constituent services director for Congressman Thomas Tiffany and said his federal constituent work included handling sensitive personal records and adherence to ethics rules. Anderson told the council he was “a 27 year old father of 2” and that he believed his experience made him a good fit for the board.
Several alderpersons said they were concerned about optics while the mayor is the subject of an active ethics review. Alder Watson asked whether the council should delay the appointment “because the ethics commission, the goal of it is to show impartiality to the community,” calling it “slightly questionable” for someone to be appointed while an investigation is active. Others, including Alder Killian and Alder Tierney, thanked Anderson for applying and said they saw no impropriety in the mayor making appointments, but public concern about timing was widespread.
Alder Henke moved to table the nomination “until the current ethics investigation is complete or the need for a fourth member is required;” Henke’s motion was seconded and the motion passed 8-3. Council discussion clarified that tabling with the stated wording would prevent the nominee from being confirmed until either the investigation ends or the board needs an additional member, and staff said the council still has a duty to ensure the ethics board can operate if recusals reduce its membership.
Council members also noted multiple applicants had applied for the alternate seat and that some applications arrived after the mayor’s initial nomination. Several alderpersons referenced constituent emails raising concerns about timing and optics.
What passed: motion to table appointment until the current ethics investigation concludes or until a fourth member is needed (motion by Henke; outcome: tabled 8-3).
