Kevin Hoffman told the Richland County Community and Health Services standing committee on Dec. 4 that Wisconsin child-protection workers unlawfully removed his son from his home and committed multiple procedural and constitutional violations during the investigation.

“My name is Kevin Hoffman. I am here to formally address significant violations of Wisconsin’s CPS policy and procedures that occurred during an investigation involving my son, Jordan,” Hoffman said during a public-comment period. He said workers removed his son on Oct. 20 without identifying abuse or neglect, misrepresented a supervisor consultation, administered a contaminated drug test that was not lab-confirmed, and directed the absent mother to take custody without a court order or a background check.

Hoffman cited state safety-intervention standards he said require immediate supervisor consultation and accurate documentation and invoked constitutional protections, saying his Fourth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated. He told the committee he plans to file a federal civil-rights action and will submit a written complaint to county and state officials.

Committee members and the chair did not dispute the factual assertions during the meeting but did not take formal action. The chair and staff asked Hoffman to submit his written statement to the Richland County administrator so it can be routed to the appropriate state or county offices; Hoffman said he will also send the materials to the Department of Children and Families. The committee said staff would add his letter to the meeting packet for follow-up review.

What happened in this meeting
- The committee received Hoffman’s allegations during the public-comment period; he provided specific procedural claims about documentation, drug-testing procedures and lack of investigation into the other parent.
- Committee members asked him to submit his written complaint to county administration; staff said they would forward it to the appropriate state agencies as needed.
- No formal county investigation or motion was initiated at the meeting.

Why it matters
Allegations of procedural failures in child-protection cases can trigger internal administrative reviews, referrals to state oversight agencies, or civil litigation. The committee’s immediate response was procedural—staff requested a written complaint—so any review by county or state authorities will depend on documents Hoffman files and on decisions by those agencies.

What the record shows
Hoffman’s remarks, as made at the meeting, included direct allegations about specific workers, dates, and procedural steps he said were mishandled. Committee members repeatedly encouraged him to provide the complaint in writing so staff can ensure it reaches DCF and other appropriate reviewers. The committee did not vote to open a formal county investigation during the meeting.

Next steps
Hoffman said he will send his letter to the Richland County administrator and to state DCF. County staff said they would add his materials to the county packet and ensure they reach proper staff for follow-up. Any subsequent administrative or legal actions were not recorded in the meeting transcript.