Wausau Ethics Board delays hearing on complaint against Mayor Doug Denny, orders further investigation

The Wausau Ethics Board voted to reschedule a hearing on an ethics complaint against Mayor Doug Denny for roughly 120 days and approved additional investigative steps after the city attorney and city clerk said they likely would not appear at the hearing because of an ongoing Wisconsin Department of Justice investigation.

Board counsel Attorney Larson recommended postponing the hearing, saying the delay would allow further discovery and protect due process; the board approved a motion to reschedule by a 4–1 vote. The board separately voted to conduct additional investigation, with the motion passing 4 in favor, 1 abstention.

The board convened to consider “possible action to reschedule the hearing” and to discuss subsequent investigative work after the city attorney, Anne Jacobson, and city clerk, Caitlin Bernardi, responded to subpoenas by indicating they anticipated not appearing at the hearing scheduled for April 30. In a letter quoted to the board, Jacobson wrote, “I would inform the board that at least 5 additional witnesses exist with direct and personal knowledge of this matter... They would not be subject to the Supreme Court rules of privilege or confidentiality and could testify about relevant facts from firsthand personal knowledge, which I cannot do.”

Attorney Larson told the board a postponement would allow parties to conduct discovery and to consider any resulting motions; he proposed “a hundred and 20 days.” The board accepted the proposed interval and asked the deputy clerk to find a specific date approximately 120 days out and notify the parties.

Board member Brian Mason urged a different approach: he moved that the board dismiss the complaint against Mayor Doug Denny “without prejudice,” citing the unavailability of witnesses and the constraints of the ongoing DOJ inquiry. That motion failed to proceed for lack of a second and therefore was not considered.

Members discussed next steps for investigation. The board agreed to draft investigative orders to identified witnesses, to consider subpoenas extended to the rescheduled hearing (so those subpoenas do not require attendance on the originally scheduled date), and to invite supplemental information from complainants. Board counsel said she has a list of the five witnesses referenced by Jacobson and that the board could decide which people to target with investigative orders at a follow-up meeting. The board discussed meeting availability the week of May 19 and tentatively considered Tuesday, May 20, at about 4 p.m. to start drafting questions and identifying targets for orders.

A board member noted a timing constraint in the city ordinance: the board believes the ordinance contains a 12-month limitation tied to the conduct at issue; counsel warned that dismissing now could risk losing an opportunity to proceed later depending on how any state process unfolds.

Votes at a glance: The board voted to reschedule the hearing to roughly 120 days from the meeting date (motion passed 4–1). The board voted to conduct additional investigation into the complaint (motion passed 4 in favor, 1 abstention). A separate motion by Brian Mason to dismiss the complaint without prejudice did not receive a second and therefore was not considered.

Next steps: the deputy clerk will set a specific date about 120 days out and notify parties; board counsel will circulate the list of potential witnesses and members will meet in late May to draft investigative orders and identify which witnesses to subpoena or question.

The board adjourned by unanimous voice after completing the agenda.