Subscribe | E-Editions | River News 75Ę | Super Shopper - FREE | About Us | Contact Us | FREE Classified Ė Items Under $50
The Northwoods River News | Rhinelander, Wisconsin

Flanders Realty Group

home : news : county/state news
November 20, 2019

9/28/2019 7:30:00 AM
Sheriff's department says supervisors 'clearly' discussed topics not on agenda
Complaint referred to DA for charging decision

Richard Moore
Investigative Reporter

A sheriff's department investigation of a Lakeland Times complaint alleging an open-meetings violation by two Oneida County supervisors has found the two did indeed discuss topics not on the meeting's agenda.

The department has forwarded its findings against supervisors Robb Jensen and Jack Sorensen to the Oneida County district attorney for a charging decision.

The Times and publisher Gregg Walker have alleged the two engaged in an illegal discussion about building a new highway facility that did not appear on the Aug. 19 Oneida County capital improvement program subcommittee meeting agenda, a meeting at which the committee reviewed various departmental capital improvement requests for 2020.

The agenda for that meeting lists no discussion about a potential new highway facility, yet, as The Times has reported, Jensen and Sorensen engaged in an extended discussion about the merits of a new or expanded facility.

No new highway facility is proposed for 2020, and, The Times alleged, during review of the highway department's 2020 capital improvement requests, which included upgrades for the existing building, Jensen and Sorensen undertook a discussion about a potential new or expanded highway facility that stretched on for more than six minutes total.

In a Sept. 11 officer's supplemental report, Oneida County detective sergeant Kelly Moermond substantiated the complaint's allegations.

"It was found that Jensen and Sorensen were first talking about building a new brine building," Moermond wrote. "They then got off topic and began talking about building a new highway building as well as east side and west expansion locations for a new highway shop. Jensen and Sorensen also began speaking about Kwik Trip being interested in the highway shop in this portion of the meeting."

As The Times also alleged in the complaint, the two supervisors returned to the topic in another portion of the meeting, Moermond determined.

"Later in the meeting, Jensen and Sorensen again spoke of building a new highway shop rather than fixing or upgrading the exhaust system on the current shop," she wrote. "Sorensen also spoke of putting all this money into the existing building but suggested they should build a new building and that they need to move forward with building a new building."

Those discussions were not posted to the public, Moermond determined.

"These topics involving building a new highway department (building) were clearly not on the agenda for the 2020 capital improvement meeting," she wrote. "This case will be forwarded to the Oneida County district attorney's office for their review on the open meeting violation."

Walker reiterated this week that the two supervisors pursued a significant discussion about a new facility that rose to the level of a violation.

"It contained arguments by the supervisors about why the existing facility should be abandoned for a new one," Walker said.

Indeed, Walker said, Sorensen called the upgrades Band-Aids, and Jensen said he and others that he did not name were putting numbers together and scouring potential sites for a new facility.

Walker again called on district attorney Michael Schiek to aggressively prosecute the supervisors.

"As Mr. Jensen himself has said, a new highway facility is an emotional issue," Walker said. "This is not an insignificant aside about something that carries no consequences for taxpayers. It raises questions about the county's priorities. Do we put money into roads or expensive government buildings?"

At a cost of more than $10 million, building a new highway facility also raises other questions about the responsible use of tax dollars, Walker said.

"As such, any discussion of a new facility must be on an agenda, particularly if those discussing the topic are advocating for a particular position," he said. "Supervisors cannot be allowed to manipulate tangental agenda items to promote special interest causes and leave the public and those who might oppose such projects in the dark about those discussions."

Walker again said supervisors should use advice given in the attorney general's open meetings compliance guide when determining whether a topic to be discussed should be on an agenda.

"In order to draft a meeting notice that complies with the reasonableness standard, a good rule of thumb will be to ask whether a person interested in a specific subject would be aware, upon reading the notice, that the subject might be discussed," the compliance manual states.

The agenda for the Aug. 19 meeting did not come close to meeting that standard, Walker wrote in the original complaint.

"The August 19, 2019, subcommittee notice simply lists, 'Review of 2020 Capital Improvement Program Project Process and Requests,' and lists a presentation by the highway department of its proposals," the complaint states. "There is no mention of a new highway facility. No one reading that agenda could possibly know that a discussion about a new facility that would exceed $10 million in taxpayer costs would be discussed, much less advocated for. That's especially true because the county had previously and publicly decided not to pursue a new facility - as was reiterated several times during the August 19 meeting - and has not publicly changed that position."

As such, Walker concluded, the only reasonable expectation by those reading the agenda would be a discussion about upgrades and proposals for the existing facility, not a re-opening of the discussion about a new facility.

Richard Moore is the author of the forthcoming "Storyfinding: From the Journey to the Story" and can be reached at

Article Comment Submission Form
Please feel free to submit your comments.

Article comments are not posted immediately to the Web site. Each submission must be approved by the Web site editor, and meet the comment guidelines (see "Comment Guidelines" at right). There may be a delay of 24-48 hours for any submission while the web site editor reviews and approves it.

Note: All information on this form is required. Your telephone number and email address is for our use only, and will not be attached to your comment.
Submit an Article Comment
First Name:
Last Name:
Anti-SPAM Passcode Click here to see a new mix of characters.
This is an anti-SPAM device. It is not case sensitive.

Advanced Search
search sponsored by

Subscription Login

Today's Circulars
Print-N-Save Coupons
Order photo reprints

Advertising Information

Community Connections
Submit to Newspaper...

Ced Vig's books for sale
Kris Gilbertson's 'I Recall...'

Relay for Life

Reader Poll

Do you agree with the School District of Rhinelanderís decision to dismiss football coach Chris Ferge?

Please select one:
I have no opinion.

View Results
Reader Poll

Which of the following best describes your reaction to the Republicans move to curtail the power of Governor-elect Tony Evers and Attorney General-elect Josh Kaul?

Please select one:
I have no issue with it. Itís a normal part of todayís politics.
Itís unconscionable, but Iím confidant the courts will overturn the bills.
Iím OK with it as long as both parties are allowed to do it.
I have no opinion on this question.

View Results
Reader Poll

Which City of Rhinelander elected officials should be recalled?

Please select one:
All of them. The mayor and the entire Common Council.
I would recall the council but keep the mayor.
I would recall the mayor but keep the council.
Everyone but alderman Emmer, as he was just appointed.
Frederickson, Sauer, Holt, Rossing and Larson.
Rog, Kirby and Kelly.

View Results
Reader Poll

Do you support so-called red flag bills which would allow judges to seize people's firearms for up to a year if they pose a threat to themselves or others?

Please select one:
I donít know enough about red flag bills to offer an opinion.
I have no opinion on this question.

View Results
Reader Poll

In light of the city's recent update on well testing, which of the following best describes your thoughts regarding use/consumption of city water?

Please select one:
I feel completely confident in allowing my family to consume the water.
The latest results are somewhat reassuring but I still have concerns.
I remain very concerned about the safety of the city's water.
I'm still not sure what to think about the water.
I have no opinion on this question.

View Results

Facebook | All Things | Wisconsin Lottery | The Lakeland Times - affiliate | Winter Road Conditions | Snow/Trail Conditions

The Northwoods River News | Walker Communications, LLC
232 S. Courtney Street, Rhinelander, WI 54501 | Office (715) 365-6397 | Fax (715) 365-6361

Corporate billing office: The Lakeland Times / Lakeland Printing Inc. | P.O. Box 790, Minocqua, WI 54548 | (715) 356-5236 | Fax (715) 358-2121
Members of the Wisconsin Newspaper Association, Wisconsin Community Papers, Rhinelander Area Chamber of Commerce, Minocqua Area Chamber of Commerce

Site Design and Content | Copyright 2019 1up!

Software © 1998-2019 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved