Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Ethics Subpoenas topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Wausau ethics board grants motion to compel depositions and approves subpoenas in complaint involving Mayor Doug Denny

5555435 · August 8, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Wausau Ethics Board unanimously granted Mayor Doug Denny’s motion to compel depositions and approved subpoenas for nine witnesses ahead of a hearing on a complaint. The board declined subpoenas for two other staff members in a 3–1 vote and said depositions must occur before the hearing.

The Wausau Ethics Board voted unanimously to grant respondent Mayor Doug Denny’s motion to compel depositions and, in subsequent votes, approved subpoenas for nine witnesses to appear at a hearing on the pending ethics complaint.

A board member read the board’s written determination saying the panel had reviewed filings from both sides — including the motion to compel filed on behalf of Denny by attorney Andrew Erlinson and the city’s response filed on behalf of city clerk Caitlin Bernardi and city attorney Anne Jacobson by attorney Sam Hall — and concluded that the respondent must be allowed to take depositions necessary to exercise discovery rights under the city code and state procedure. The board’s determination said a February denial of a records request and an ongoing criminal investigation by the Wisconsin Department of Justice did not justify denying depositions in the board’s proceeding.

The board’s written determination cited the city ethics code provision identified in the hearing (referenced in the record as section 2.03.0.08) and said taking depositions “is necessary to provide due process to the respondent.” It ordered that the city attorney and the city clerk sit for deposition before the date of the hearing at a time agreeable to all parties.

After the motion to compel, the board considered a list of potential witnesses and whether to issue subpoenas. The board voted 3–1 not to subpoena two employees identified in the record as Mary Anne Groat and Cody Hart, with the meeting record showing a 3–1 result on that specific motion. The board then approved subpoenas for the following individuals, each motion passing on a recorded vote described as unanimous in the meeting transcript: Ashley Klein (city clerk’s office), Police Chief Matthew Barnes, Public Works Director Eric Lindman, facilities manager Leo Gallo, Common Council President Lisa Rasmussen, IT Director Gerard Klein, contractor Kyle Osmitz, City Attorney Anne Jacobson and City Clerk Caitlin Bernardi. The board member tally recorded in the transcript identified nine individuals included on the subpoena list as approved at that meeting.

Members discussed that some proposed witnesses had provided written responses or limited information to the board earlier and that testimony from certain witnesses might overlap. Board members said that if an uncontested statement of facts were agreed to by the parties before the next meeting, the board could release some witnesses from subpoenas to shorten the hearing. The board noted Attorney Larson had been working with Erlinson on a possible stipulation of facts but that no agreement existed at the time; officials said they would proceed on the assumption there was no stipulation unless one was reached.

The board recorded that its next scheduled meeting would rule on dispositive motions on August 25; members said subpoenas could be revisited at that time if a stipulation were reached. The board also noted that the city attorney and city clerk must sit for depositions before the hearing, at times agreeable to all parties, consistent with the board’s order granting the motion to compel.

Procedural notes recorded in the meeting: the board cited its subpoena authority in the city ethics chapter (identified in the record as section 2.03.0.075, paragraph b) when discussing the power to require witness attendance and document production for investigations and hearings under the code. The board also referenced a prior Wisconsin Elections Commission dismissal of a complaint that had involved the city clerk’s office when discussing the relevance of some supervisory staff testimony.

The board adjourned at the end of the meeting after completing its votes and reviewing the subpoena list.