Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Appointments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wausau council rejects mayor’s ethics-board nominees after weeks of controversy
Summary
The Wausau Common Council voted unanimously to reject four ethics-board nominees put forward by Mayor Doug Denny, after several council members cited appearance-of-bias and recent developments in an ongoing ethics matter. The vote follows public accusations about the mayor’s conduct and months of debate about timing and impartiality.
The Wausau Common Council on April 29 voted 0-10 to reject four ethics-board nominees submitted by Mayor Doug Denny, deepening a months-long dispute over the timing and impartiality of appointments while an ethics matter remains pending.
Mayor Doug Denny told the council the municipal code gives the mayor responsibility for making appointments and urged members to confirm nominees on their qualifications rather than “perceptions or assumptions of bad faith.” He defended restoring staggered terms on the board and said delaying appointments would “undermine both this process and the public trust.”
The council’s majority disagreed. Several alderpersons said new appointments now would create the appearance of partisanship because four nominees would form a majority on a five-member board while an ethics complaint is pending. Alder Rasmussen cited a legal memo received by the council warning of potential organizational liability if the appointments proceed. “You’re creating a majority that on its face appears to be partisanship,” Rasmussen said.
The nominations at issue included Lon Roberts, Thomas Garver, Deborah Hadley and Kevin Hermitting, which the mayor described as correcting improperly staggered prior terms. Council discussion spanned more than an hour. Alders who spoke against confirming the slate pointed to recent developments: an ethics-board hearing schedule change, a resignation from the board announced that day, and an outside legal opinion urging caution. Alder Larson and others said the council and staff now have time to recruit nominees without apparent ties to the dispute.
The vote followed public comments earlier in the meeting from Carrie Morell, who said she wished to file a formal complaint against the mayor and described a March incident in which she said the mayor followed her after a meeting, “getting angrier, red faced, yelling, even finally sticking his finger in my face and telling me that he’s the new sheriff in town.” Morell said she had requested video and had an apology email from the mayor. Her remarks were part of the public record and were cited during council debate over optics and impartiality.
Council members repeatedly emphasized that appointed ethics-board members must follow recusal rules if a conflict arises; several said existing code requires recusal and alternates exist to keep hearings functional. Still, a number of councilors said approving four nominees now — some of whom have publicly expressed views about city matters — would make impartial adjudication harder to achieve and create legal exposure.
After debate and an amendment that separated the ethics nominations from other appointments earlier in the meeting, the council took a final vote on the ethics slate; the motion to confirm failed 0-10.
The mayor said he would continue to follow the city attorney’s guidance on appointments and the municipal code; councilors urged using the four-month deferral window for more outreach to identify candidates without ties to the current dispute.
The council did approve other non-ethics appointments earlier in the meeting, and the ethics-board nominations will be revisited only if the mayor submits a new slate or circumstances change.
Speakers quoted or referenced in this account included Carrie Morell; Mayor Doug Denny; and Alders Reilly Rasmussen, Luke Lukens, Larson, Killian, Larsen, McElhaney, Watson, Tierney, Neal, and Martins.
