Kenosha committee recommends 10-day suspension and 85 demerit points for operator after contested hearing

The Kenosha Licensing and Permits Committee on June 22 held a contested revocation hearing into complaints filed by the city clerk against operator Nicholas Anzaldua and recommended a 10‑day suspension and assessment of 85 demerit points.

The city presented documentary evidence — including the summons and complaint, affidavits of publication and mailing, a Wisconsin Department of Transportation driver record abstract, criminal and traffic disposition records and earlier council minutes. The committee stipulated that all paragraphs of the complaint were admitted except paragraph 7, which Mr. Anzaldua contested. The city's attorney directed the panel to the application and supporting documents that the city said substantiate the allegations.

Mr. Anzaldua acknowledged personal and family hardships and said he needs the job. He told the committee he completed alcohol and drug assessment work previously in Illinois but that the Wisconsin Department of Transportation record does not reflect compliance. The committee and city attorney discussed that closed or dismissed dispositions do not by themselves explain application fields that ask for charge, state, date and results.

After admitting the city's documents into evidence and hearing testimony, the committee moved into closed session to deliberate under state statute; it returned to open session and voted to recommend a 10‑day suspension and assessment of 85 demerit points. The motion to recommend suspension and impose 85 demerit points was made on the record and seconded; the committee voted in favor.

City attorney Bridal Charbosian said the city was not taking a position on whether suspension or revocation was ultimately appropriate but noted the committee had discretion to recommend a term and that points above 100 could warrant suspension or revocation under municipal rules. The committee chair directed that findings of fact and conclusions of law be drafted; those findings will return to the committee for review, then be forwarded to the Common Council on the stated timeline. If the Common Council adopts the recommendation without change, the suspension would begin after that adoption and the council's action.

Quotes

"I really, really need this job," the respondent told the committee, acknowledging hardship and asking for leniency.

"The word 'closed' does not answer the question," the city attorney said when explaining why the documented results must specify whether charges were dismissed, resulted in a fine, or remained pending.

Next steps

The city attorney will draft findings of fact and conclusions of law for the committee to review. The committee planned to review the draft at a future meeting and, if it concurs, forward a recommendation to the Common Council. The committee indicated the suspension timeline could begin only after council action; the clerk gave tentative dates for committee and council consideration.