Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Shelter Ethics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council on shelter funding and ethics subpoenas during public comment
Summary
Multiple residents used the public-comment period to criticize city handling of shelter funding, ask about subpoenas and ethics enforcement, and call for spending priorities to shift from legal fees to basic services.
At the Aug. 26 Wausau Common Council meeting several residents addressed the council during public comment, focusing on homelessness services, the Good Shepherd Shelter, and the ongoing ethics process involving city officials.
Gary Beltis (identified in the record as representing Good Shepherd Shelter) asked the council to refrain from negative comments about the shelter and described the organization’s expanded services, saying the shelter "has served this community for years" and noting volunteers and the shelter’s in-kind contributions. He said earlier agreements referenced about $350,000 of unspent funds and questioned what happened to that money, and urged the council to focus on helping unhoused residents.
Other speakers raised concerns about the ethics committee and subpoenas. Maggie Cronin cited the ethics committee’s authority to administer oaths and subpoenas and said she believed two city employees were refusing to comply with ethics subpoenas; she urged the council to act and warned about legal costs drawing funds away from city services. Jack Hoogendyk and Orlando Alfonso urged the council to stop spending on legal fees and criticized the ongoing investigation as politically motivated; several speakers thanked Mayor Doug Denny and urged the council to end the matter and redirect funds.
Deborah Chapman Moore, speaking for residents from multiple districts, told the council "no more money" and said tax dollars should instead pay for basic services. Commenters asked whether legal fees were reducing funds for police, fire, roads and housing.
Ending — council response and next steps: Council acknowledged the public comments. The ethics and outside-counsel items later on the agenda prompted an extended council debate and a decision to table further counsel funding to a closed-session special meeting for additional review.
