Ethics Complaint Targets Supervisor Steve Taylor’s County-Supported Facebook Page and Its Direct Link to Campaign Fundraising

Complaintants asks Milwaukee County Ethics Board to examine whether County staff, taxpayer-funded resources and a governmental social-media platform have been commingled with Taylor’s political campaign; verified-complaint process also requires a copy to be provided to the District Attorney

By Dr. Richard Busalacchi
Franklin Community News

A signed and notarized verified ethics complaint formally submitted on August 28, 2026 against Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve F. Taylor (D- Franklin/Oak Creek) raises a basic public-integrity question:

Where does Milwaukee County government end and Steve Taylor’s political campaign begin?

Richard Busalacchi, publisher of Franklin Community News, and FCN contributor Kevin Fischer signed and notarized the verified complaint and formally submitted it to the Milwaukee County Ethics Board on August 28, 2026. The complaint challenges Taylor’s use of a Facebook page titled “Supervisor Steve F. Taylor”—a page that identifies him as a “Government Official,” discusses Milwaukee County governmental business and, according to the complaint, receives support in connection with his County office.

The central allegation is not that Taylor is prohibited from campaigning, raising money, defending his record or criticizing Franklin Community News.

It is that the governmental-facing Facebook page directs the public straight into Taylor’s political campaign infrastructure—including a website that solicits campaign contributions.

That connection is at the heart of the complaint.

A Government Page That Leads to a Campaign Website

Taylor’s Facebook page does not present itself merely as a private personal page.

It is titled “Supervisor Steve F. Taylor.”

Facebook categorizes the page as:

“Government Official.”

And the page states:

“This page will be used to talk about matters facing Milwaukee County.”

The page is used to communicate about County programs, committee activity, public policy, budgets, capital projects, newsletters, press releases and Taylor’s work as an elected Milwaukee County supervisor.

According to the complaint, County staff also provide support associated with the page.

Yet the contact infrastructure displayed through the governmental-facing Facebook presence includes:

www.stevetaylor4milwaukeecounty.com

and

stevetaylor4milwaukeecounty@gmail.com

Neither is Taylor’s official Milwaukee County governmental website or County email address.

Since this article was published, Supervisor Taylor added an additional link directing followers to his Milwaukee County Web Page.

They are campaign contacts.

Follow the Link—and You Reach Campaign Fundraising

The website linked from Taylor’s governmental-facing Facebook page is an active political campaign website associated with Friends of Steve F. Taylor.

It includes Taylor’s campaign biography, political positions, campaign information, events and political communications.

It also solicits money.

The site provides a mailing address for campaign contributions and an electronic PayPal contribution mechanism.

The site carries the disclaimer:

“Authorized and Paid for by Friends of Steve F. Taylor, Jim Gilboy, Treasurer.”

The pathway identified in the ethics complaint is therefore unusually direct:

County-supported Government Official Facebook page → Taylor campaign website → campaign contribution solicitation → campaign contribution mechanism.

That does not automatically establish an ethics violation.

But it raises the question the Ethics Board is being asked to answer: Were County personnel, County work time, County equipment, County communications systems or other taxpayer-supported resources being used to maintain a governmental communications platform that benefits Taylor’s political campaign?

Finance Committee Leadership Raises the Stakes

The issue also comes at a time when Taylor holds one of the County Board’s most consequential leadership assignments: Chair of the Milwaukee County Finance Committee.

That position gives Taylor a prominent role in the oversight of county finances, budgeting and the stewardship of public resources. While serving as Finance Committee chair does not by itself determine whether an ethics violation occurred, it arguably heightens the public-interest significance of the questions raised by the complaint.

The complaint centers on whether an official-facing Facebook presence—one identifying Taylor as a “Government Official,” describing itself as a page addressing “matters facing Milwaukee County,” and displaying his Milwaukee County Board position—was improperly connected to a campaign fundraising website.

For an official entrusted with significant responsibility over taxpayer dollars, the distinction between public resources and private political activity should be especially clear.

The Ethics Board, not the complainant or Franklin Community News, will ultimately determine whether the circumstances constitute a violation. But Taylor’s position as Finance Committee chair makes the underlying question particularly significant: If county officials are expected to maintain a clear boundary between government and campaign activity, should the official responsible for leading the County Board’s Finance Committee be expected to model that distinction with particular care?.

Taylor Appears to Stand Alone Among County Supervisors

The complaint includes a comparative review conducted by Busalacchi of all 18 current Milwaukee County supervisors.

The review identified readily recognizable official or governmental-facing Facebook pages for 16 of the 18 supervisors.

Comparable official pages were not identified in the review for Supervisors Deanna Alexander and Willie Johnson Jr.

Among the 16 supervisors with identifiable governmental-facing Facebook pages, the review found something significant:

Taylor was the only supervisor observed using a campaign website and campaign-branded email address as the contact infrastructure associated with the governmental-facing Facebook page.

The other 15 used Milwaukee County email addresses, Milwaukee County webpages or other governmental contact information.

That comparison matters because it undercuts any suggestion that campaign contact information is simply an unavoidable or standard feature of Milwaukee County supervisors’ Facebook pages.

Taylor has official Milwaukee County contact information available to him.

Nevertheless, the page presented to the public as his governmental Facebook presence sends visitors to his campaign website and campaign email.

Milwaukee County Ethics Officials Have Already Addressed Campaign Content on County Social Media

The Taylor complaint also points to the Milwaukee County Ethics Board’s own previous guidance.

In its 2024 Annual Activities Report, the Ethics Board described a separate situation involving political campaign-related material appearing on a County-affiliated social-media account.

According to that report, the Ethics Board Executive Director and Board Chair reviewed the matter and concluded that the documented conduct “would potentially violate” Ethics Code provisions.

The report then states:

“The official was made aware and advised against posting any political campaign-related content on their County-affiliated social media accounts in the future. MCO §9.06(1).”

That prior matter did not involve Taylor and does not determine the outcome of his case.

But it is highly relevant.

Milwaukee County ethics officials have already recognized that campaign activity on a County-affiliated social-media account can potentially implicate the County Ethics Code.

The Taylor complaint also cites an October 6, 2025 Ethics Board formal opinion concerning the use of office or public funds, including provisions now raised in Taylor’s case.

Three Ethics Provisions Are at Issue

The complaint asks the Ethics Board to examine Taylor’s conduct under three principal provisions of the Milwaukee County Ethics Code.

MCGO § 9.05(2)(a) generally prohibits a County public official from using public office to obtain financial gain or something of substantial value for private benefit or for an associated organization.

Importantly, that section contains an exception allowing an elected official to use the title or prestige of office to obtain lawful campaign contributions.

The complaint expressly acknowledges that exception.

In other words, the allegation is not that Taylor violates the Ethics Code merely by calling himself a County supervisor while fundraising.

The issue is whether something more was involved: County-funded personnel, work time, equipment, information-technology systems, governmental communications or other public resources.

The complaint also invokes MCGO § 9.05(2)(c)(2), which prohibits using public office in a manner that produces or assists in producing a substantial direct or indirect benefit for the official or an associated organization.

Potential campaign benefits identified in the complaint include increased website traffic, campaign visibility, supporter engagement, campaign contacts, political goodwill, fundraising opportunities and financial contributions.

The complaint does not presume those benefits automatically satisfy the ordinance's “substantial benefit” standard. It asks the Ethics Board to make that determination after examining the facts.

Finally, the complaint cites MCGO § 9.06(1)(c) and (d), dealing with solicitation of campaign contributions and political campaign activity by County officials or employees at their place of employment while engaged in official duties.

That makes one factual question particularly important:

Who was actually administering Taylor’s Facebook page—and when?

County Staff and Technology Records Could Be Critical

The complaint asks the Ethics Board to determine whether Taylor, his legislative staff or other County employees possessed administrator, editor, moderator, manager or posting privileges for the Facebook page.

It also seeks review of whether County personnel:

created or drafted content;

edited, scheduled or published posts;

moderated comments;

performed Facebook-related work during compensated County time;

or used County computers, phones, networks, software, photographs, graphics, newsletters, press releases, email systems or other taxpayer-funded resources.

The complaint also asks for preservation of relevant technical records.

Those could include network information, device-access records, account-access records, County-assigned devices, dates and times and other records capable of showing whether activity involving Taylor’s Facebook page occurred through County systems.

The complaint appropriately recognizes that an IP address alone would not necessarily identify who made a particular post.

The more meaningful evidence would come from correlating dates, times, devices, accounts, employee assignments and Facebook administrative activity.

A separate Wisconsin public-records request is also being pursued seeking records concerning administration of the Facebook page, County employee involvement, campaign links, moderation activity and applicable social-media policies.

Then Came “More Fake Community News”

The issue took on another dimension on August 27 when Taylor used the same “Supervisor Steve F. Taylor” Government Official Facebook page to publish a post titled:

“More Fake Community News.”

Taylor was responding to sharply critical FCN commentary concerning his performance in Milwaukee County government, including County spending, the Capital Improvements Committee and the proposed Investing in Justice Courthouse Complex.

Taylor has the right to respond to that criticism.

The ethics complaint does not argue otherwise.

But Taylor’s post went beyond a defense of his governmental record.

He characterized the writers as “sick,” referred to Fischer as a “two-time DUI champion,” suggested that Fischer appeared to be “back off the wagon,” described Busalacchi as “deranged” and “obsessed,” and discussed Busalacchi’s legal history.

The complaint expressly acknowledges that offensive, insulting or highly critical speech does not, standing alone, establish an Ethics Code violation.

The significance lies instead in the platform Taylor selected.

He had personal Facebook channels, political channels, campaign channels and independent community forums available to him.

Instead, he published the response through the same Facebook page presented to the public as the governmental page of Supervisor Steve F. Taylor.

A Critical Comment Then Appeared to Disappear

The complaint also documents what happened after Busalacchi responded to Taylor’s post.

Busalacchi posted a comment under the August 27 publication.

When Busalacchi viewed Taylor’s post through his own personal Facebook account, his comment remained visible.

But when the same Taylor post was viewed through a separate Facebook account, Busalacchi’s comment was not visible.

That pattern is consistent with a Facebook comment having been hidden or otherwise restricted.

The complaint does not allege that Taylor personally performed the moderation action because the screenshots alone do not establish which administrator acted.

Instead, the Ethics Board is being asked to determine who did it.

That raises additional questions:

Who had administrative control of the page?

Was it Taylor?

Was it a County employee?

Was the moderation performed during County work time?

Was County equipment or an official County account used?

And what Milwaukee County policy, if any, governed the decision to hide or restrict criticism on a governmental-facing page?

The complaint seeks preservation of moderation records, administrator activity, hidden or deleted content and related records so those questions can be answered from evidence rather than speculation.

The Filed Complaint Triggers a Specific County Process

The August 28 filing is not simply a letter asking the Ethics Board to look into something.

Milwaukee County General Ordinance § 9.09 establishes a specific procedure.

A verified complaint must be in writing and sworn. Busalacchi and Fischer submitted the complaint in signed and notarized form on August 28.

The Ethics Board is required to review it.

And importantly, County ordinance provides that a copy of the verified complaint must be provided to the Milwaukee County District Attorney.

That requirement should not be misunderstood.

It does not mean filing an ethics complaint establishes that Taylor committed a crime.

It does not mean the District Attorney has made any finding against him.

And it should not be described as a criminal referral resulting from a finding of misconduct.

Rather, providing the complaint to the District Attorney is a mandatory procedural step built into Milwaukee County’s verified-complaint process.

If the District Attorney asks the Ethics Board to delay its proceedings, the ordinance provides for the Ethics Board to hold off while the matter is reviewed.

Once released by the District Attorney, the Ethics Board may continue its review.

The ordinance also provides for notice to the subject, Ethics Board deliberation and ultimately a written decision.

A Familiar Question: Public Resources and Political Activity

There is also an unavoidable parallel to another public-integrity matter already familiar to Franklin residents.

A separate matter involving Franklin Mayor John Nelson is currently being investigated by an Assistant District Attorney.

That investigation involves different officials, different facts and different legal provisions.

Nothing in the Nelson investigation establishes wrongdoing by Taylor, and nothing alleged against Taylor establishes misconduct by Nelson.

But the underlying public-integrity question is similar.

In the Nelson matter, investigators have been examining allegations concerning whether taxpayer-funded personnel or governmental resources were used in connection with political activity.

The Taylor complaint asks whether County-funded personnel and resources were used to support a governmental Facebook platform that directs the public into Taylor’s campaign infrastructure.

Put more simply:

Nelson matter: Were public personnel or resources used for political purposes?

Taylor matter: Were County personnel or resources used to maintain a governmental communications platform that benefits and directs users to a political campaign?

The cases are not identical.

But the boundary being examined is the same one:

Taxpayer-supported government resources should remain distinguishable from campaign resources.

There is also an important procedural connection.

Because the Taylor complaint was filed as a verified complaint under Milwaukee County's ordinance, a copy must be provided to the Milwaukee County District Attorney—the same office currently handling the Nelson-related public-integrity matter.

Again, that does not mean prosecutors will reach the same conclusions or even pursue the matters in the same manner.

But it means the question of public resources and political activity will also be placed before the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office through the ordinance’s verified-complaint procedure.

A More Direct Parallel to the Nelson Investigation

The Taylor complaint also echoes a public-resource issue already under active investigation in Franklin.

In December 2025, Franklin Community News obtained an unsealed search warrant showing that a previously filed ethics complaint involving Franklin Mayor John Nelson had been incorporated into a criminal investigation. The warrant stated that West Allis Police began investigating allegations that a City-retained public-relations consultant had been used to perform work benefiting Nelson’s political campaign. FC News Wisconsin

The warrant also documented that the City contractor billed Franklin for social-media services, including management of the mayor’s Facebook page, while investigators examined Facebook activity and whether taxpayer-funded services were allegedly being used for political purposes. A Milwaukee County judge found probable cause to believe the records sought could constitute evidence of misconduct in public office under Wis. Stat. § 946.12(2). No criminal charge had been filed at the time of that reporting, and the probable-cause finding was not a determination of guilt. FC News Wisconsin

The Taylor complaint involves different facts and a different governmental entity, but the factual question is notably similar:

Were publicly funded personnel, services or communications resources being used in a way that benefited an elected official’s political campaign?

In the Nelson matter, investigators examined a City-paid communications contractor and Facebook activity.

In the Taylor matter, the Ethics Board is being asked to determine whether County staff, County work time, County equipment, County technology or other public resources supported a governmental Facebook page that directly links users to Taylor’s campaign website and campaign contribution mechanisms.

That does not mean the two matters will have the same outcome. It does mean the boundary between taxpayer-funded communications and campaign activity is already an issue Milwaukee County prosecutors have treated seriously enough to investigate through records, Facebook evidence and a search warrant.

The Central Issue Is Bigger Than Taylor’s Fight With FCN

Taylor and Franklin Community News have had a contentious relationship.

That makes it easy to view the ethics complaint as simply another round in an increasingly personal dispute.

That would miss the larger issue.

Taylor is free to criticize FCN.

FCN is free to criticize Taylor.

Taylor is free to operate a campaign.

He is free to solicit lawful campaign contributions.

And he is free to defend his governmental record vigorously.

The Ethics Board question is narrower—and more important:

Can a County-supported governmental communications platform, potentially maintained with County staff and taxpayer-funded resources, simultaneously function as a gateway into an elected official's campaign and fundraising operation?

The comparative evidence makes the question more difficult to dismiss.

Of the 16 Milwaukee County supervisors whose identifiable governmental-facing Facebook pages were located in Busalacchi’s review, Taylor was the only one observed using campaign website and campaign-email infrastructure instead of governmental contact infrastructure.

And Milwaukee County’s own Ethics Board has previously warned against political campaign-related content on County-affiliated social-media accounts.

The filed complaint does not ask the public to assume Taylor violated the law.

It asks the Milwaukee County Ethics Board to obtain the records, identify who was operating the page, determine what taxpayer resources were being used and apply the County Ethics Code to the facts.

That is ultimately the question:

Was Milwaukee County government being used to support Steve Taylor’s political campaign—or were the two properly kept separate?

The records should provide the answer.

FCN will provide the full complaint after it has been provided to Supervisor Taylor.

This piece reflects the author’s personal opinion and experiences. All statements are presented as commentary protected under the First Amendment. Readers are encouraged to review public records, filings, and documented evidence referenced throughout this article.

Dr. Richard Busalacchi is the Publisher of Franklin Community News, where he focuses on government transparency, community accountability, and local public policy. He believes a community’s strength depends on open dialogue, honest leadership, and the courage to speak the truth—even when it makes powerful people uncomfortable.

🕯️ The solution isn’t another insider in a new office. It’s sunlight, scrutiny, and the courage to vote differently.

Because until voters demand honest, transparent government, the corruption won’t stop — it will only change titles.

Elections have consequences — and Franklin’s next one may decide whether transparency makes a comeback.

💬 If you value hard-hitting, fact-based investigative reporting about our hometown of Franklin — follow Franklin Community News on Facebook.

Together, we can keep local government honest, transparent, and accountable 

— for the greater good.

© 2026 Franklin Community News. All rights reserved.

Join Us at:

 https://www.facebook.com/share/g/1a3NsgvAGn/