THE STEVE TAYLOR FILES: From Harassment Injunction to Obstruction Conviction

By Dr. Richard A. Busalacchi
Franklin Community News

For years, Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve Taylor has publicly dismissed criticism of his past legal troubles as political attacks, a smear campaign, or what he once called "tabloid trash."

Yet surviving police records obtained by FCN, (a 55 page police report) court-related documents, and contemporaneous newspaper accounts tell a far more complicated story.

What began in 1999 as a harassment injunction investigation involving Taylor and his former girlfriend ultimately evolved into allegations that another individual was encouraged to take responsibility for conduct under investigation. The matter later resulted in an obstruction conviction that became a public issue during Taylor's political career.

Today, much of the original court file no longer appears to be available due to the age of the case. However, the surviving La Crosse Police Department investigative file, contemporaneous reporting from the La Crosse Tribune, and later reporting by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel provide a detailed record of what occurred.

The Harassment Injunction

The case began after Taylor's former girlfriend, Jill Kroner, obtained a harassment injunction following the end of their relationship.

The injunction prohibited Taylor from contacting Kroner directly or indirectly. Court documents contained in the police file specifically ordered:

"No contact with petitioner Jill Kroner directly or through a third person."

The injunction remained in effect until July 7, 1999.

The One-Word Voicemail

On June 18, 1999, Kroner returned home and discovered a message on her family's answering machine.

In a written statement provided to police, Kroner described what happened.

"I came home to my parents' home, I picked up the phone to call my boyfriend to tell him I got home safely and found that there was a message on our voice mail system."

Kroner immediately believed she knew who left the message.

"The message sounded like a person whom I have had many arguments with for the past two years, Steve Taylor."

According to Kroner, the message contained only a single word:

"The message consisted of one word only, 'Poo-Kie,' which was a nickname he called me when we were together."

Kroner also told police:

"I have had many problems with Mr. Taylor during the past two years, especially around this time of year."

Because the injunction prohibited contact, police opened a criminal investigation.

The Arrest

Investigators interviewed Kroner, family members, and individuals who had spent time with Taylor during the evening in question.

Police examined Taylor's whereabouts and sought to determine whether he had access to a telephone at the time the call was made.

After reviewing witness statements and the injunction order, officers concluded there was probable cause that the injunction had been violated.

Taylor was arrested on June 19, 1999.

At the time, Taylor denied making the call.

Had the case ended there, it would likely have remained a relatively minor misdemeanor matter.

Instead, investigators soon began uncovering information that dramatically changed the direction of the case.

Enter Brian See

As investigators continued their review, another individual named Brian See became central to the investigation.

Initially, information surfaced suggesting that See might claim responsibility for the call.

However, subsequent interviews painted a very different picture.

According to taped statements documented by police, See described conversations involving Taylor and concerns regarding the political consequences of a conviction.

One statement attributed to Taylor became particularly significant.

According to See, Taylor expressed concern that:

"my political career is going to be screwed."

Investigators questioned See about whether discussions had occurred regarding someone else taking responsibility for the call.

When asked whether he believed references and suggestions made during conversations were directed toward him becoming the individual who would claim responsibility, See answered:

"Yeah. I believe that's why."

Investigators further asked whether Taylor's concern about his political future was connected to finding someone else to assume responsibility.

See again responded:

"Yeah."

The allegations transformed what had begun as a harassment injunction investigation into something much more serious.

Sergeant Mix's Findings

By September 1999, La Crosse Police Sergeant Robert Mix had completed an extensive review of witness statements, recorded interviews, and other evidence.

His conclusions were among the strongest language found anywhere in the investigative file.

After reviewing the evidence, Mix wrote:

"Mr. See is a credible witness with nothing to gain from making the above allegations."

Mix further noted:

"Mr. See is an acquaintance of Mr. Taylor's and in Mr. See's own words, they are friends but they do associate with each other."

Most significantly, Mix formally requested prosecutorial review for additional criminal charges.

His report stated:

"This officer would request that the District Attorney's office review the above information for possible charges against Mr. Taylor for solicitation of perjury and obstruction of justice."

Mix also requested review concerning:

"possible ethics violations."

Those findings marked a turning point in the investigation.

What began as a harassment injunction violation had evolved into allegations involving witness influence, obstruction, and attempts to redirect responsibility for the conduct under investigation.

The Deferred Prosecution Agreement

Records contained within the investigative file show that Taylor later entered into a deferred prosecution agreement relating to the harassment injunction violation.

The agreement required Taylor to:

• Complete community service.
• Undergo counseling.
• Complete a psychological evaluation.
• Participate in alcohol and drug assessment.
• Pay restitution and fees.
• Maintain strict compliance with the no-contact order involving Kroner and her family.

The agreement specifically provided that:

"no contact means no direct or indirect contact whether in person, by phone or by mail."

The deferred prosecution agreement resolved the underlying harassment-order charge but did not end the broader investigation.

The Obstruction Conviction

The allegations documented by Sergeant Mix eventually resulted in an obstruction case.

According to contemporaneous reporting by the La Crosse Tribune, Taylor was later found guilty by a jury of misdemeanor obstruction.

The Tribune reported that prosecutors alleged Taylor attempted to convince an acquaintance to take responsibility for the phone call made to his former girlfriend while Taylor was prohibited from contacting her by court order.

Following the verdict, La Crosse County Circuit Judge Dale Pasell imposed a fine and probation.

According to the Tribune, Judge Pasell stated that Taylor's conduct:

"smacks of a certain arrogance"

The newspaper reported that Taylor did not testify during the trial.

Following the conviction, Taylor publicly stated:

"Today was a very humbling experience. Obviously, I wish the outcome had been different."

He also stated:

"I'm sorry if something that I said or expressed was taken in the wrong way and resulted in this whole process."

Taylor maintained his innocence and indicated that he was considering an appeal.

The conviction later became an issue during Taylor's 2001 reelection campaign for the La Crosse Common Council.

Daniel Bice Revisits the Case

More than a decade later, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel columnist Daniel Bice revisited the matter while reporting on Taylor's political career.

Bice reported that Taylor had entered a deferred prosecution agreement related to the harassment injunction violation and was later convicted of misdemeanor obstruction after prosecutors alleged he encouraged an acquaintance to provide false information during the investigation.

Bice also reported that Taylor described the case as a political attack and claimed he had been "railroaded."

The Journal Sentinel article largely mirrored the findings documented years earlier in the police file and reported by the La Crosse Tribune.

A Different Public Image

The historical record stands in notable contrast to Taylor's current public image.

On June 15, 2026, Taylor publicly recognized National Crime Victims' Rights Week and stated that his office would continue to serve as a resource for people who have been:

"abused, stalked, harassed, and obsessed over."

The statement presented Taylor as an advocate for victims of harassment and stalking.

Yet surviving police records document a period in which Taylor was the subject of a harassment injunction investigation that later evolved into an obstruction case.

Whether readers view that contrast as evidence of personal growth, political reinvention, or an unresolved contradiction is ultimately their own conclusion.

What cannot be disputed is that both events are part of the public record.

Why FCN Is Investigating

Some readers have asked why Franklin Community News continues to investigate Steve Taylor.

The answer is simple.

Steve Taylor is not a private citizen.

He is an elected public official entrusted with public authority, public resources, and public decision-making.

FCN's investigation did not begin with a decades-old police report.

The investigation began after multiple individuals contacted FCN regarding concerns about Taylor's conduct as a public official. Those concerns included allegations involving political retaliation, misuse of public office, intimidation, interference in public matters, employment-related disputes, and the use of political influence for personal or political purposes.

As part of its ongoing investigation, FCN publicly requested information from individuals with firsthand knowledge, emails, text messages, public records, court filings, employment records, and other documentation relevant to Taylor's conduct.

The purpose of the investigation is not to relitigate old personal disputes.

Rather, it is to determine whether a pattern exists that helps the public understand how an elected official exercises power, responds to criticism, treats political opponents, and conducts himself both inside and outside public office.

Public accountability does not expire because records become difficult to locate.

Nor does it disappear because the events occurred decades ago.

Questions involving honesty, judgment, credibility, and the exercise of power remain relevant regardless of when they first arose.

Taylor's Position

Taylor has consistently denied wrongdoing.

In public statements, he has characterized the cases as politically motivated and has maintained that he was unfairly targeted by opponents.

Readers should consider both the documentary evidence and Taylor's response when evaluating the historical record.

FCN's role is not to determine guilt or innocence.

Its role is to review records, verify facts, gather evidence, present relevant information, and allow readers to make their own informed judgments.

Conclusion

The surviving records tell a story far different from the abbreviated descriptions often associated with Steve Taylor's legal history.

The files document an investigation that began with a one-word voicemail, expanded into allegations involving witness influence, and ultimately resulted in an obstruction conviction reported by contemporaneous news coverage.

Whether voters view those events as ancient history, evidence of poor judgment, or a matter bearing directly on public trust is ultimately their decision.

What cannot be disputed is that the investigation occurred, the records exist, and the questions raised by those events remain part of the public record.

For that reason alone, they remain worthy of public examination.

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/

Judge Sentences Driver to 18 Years in Fatal Franklin DUI Crash, Questions Wisconsin’s Lack of Accountability for Overserving

By Dr. Richard A. Busalacchi
Franklin Community News
May 23, 2026

MILWAUKEE — A Milwaukee County judge sentenced Leonel Molina Rios to 18 years in prison Friday for the fatal Franklin drunk-driving crash that killed 74-year-old James Riegling and the family dog, Posey, on November 2, 2024.

Judge David Borowski imposed 12 years of initial confinement followed by six years of extended supervision, calling the sentence necessary for punishment, deterrence, and community protection. Rios received 566 days of sentence credit. A restitution hearing was scheduled for July 17.

The sentencing hearing was marked by devastating victim-impact statements from Riegling’s widow, children, and son-in-law, followed by pointed remarks from Borowski, who described drunk driving as inherently selfish and questioned whether Wisconsin should do more to hold bars, restaurants, owners, and bartenders accountable when visibly intoxicated patrons are overserved.

“All you had to do was spend $10 on an Uber,” Borowski told Rios. “But you didn’t do that.”

“You Didn’t Kill an Elderly Franklin Man”

Deborah Riegling, James Riegling’s widow, told the court she never imagined herself speaking in a courtroom.

“I lived my life to never see the inside of a courtroom, and so did Jim,” she said. “But thanks to you, Mr. Rios, here I am.”

She described a 54-year marriage, a family built over decades, and the ordinary acts of devotion that defined her husband’s life: morning Starbucks waiting for her, gas always filled in her car, repairs completed without being asked, and a quiet presence that held their family together.

“You didn’t kill an elderly Franklin man, as the news report stated,” Deborah Riegling said. “You killed a vibrant, hardworking provider, who was active and happy, and just entering a phase of his life where he could enjoy the fruits of his many, many labors.”

She also reminded the court that Posey, the family dog, died in the crash.

“You took two lives that night,” she said. “You killed Posey, how I needed her now, but I guess God wanted them together.”

“Your Choices Were Not an Accident”

Steven Swiertz, Riegling’s son-in-law, focused on the preventability of the crash.

“Your choices and actions that evening were 100% preventable,” Swiertz said. “Your choices and actions were not an accident. They were intentional.”

Swiertz told Rios that no one forced him to go to Irish Cottage, no one forced him to drink, and no one forced him to get behind the wheel.

“You alone,” he said. “Selfish.”

In one of the hearing’s most emotional moments, Swiertz described having to tell Riegling’s widow that her husband was dead and later identifying the body at the Milwaukee County Medical Examiner’s Office.

“I want to see Jim,” Swiertz said. “I want to see my father. I have to drive to a different state and look at a headstone.”

Despite his anger, Swiertz said he chose forgiveness so that hatred would not consume his memories of Riegling.

“I do not hate you,” he told Rios. “I hate what you did.”

“This Is My Dad”

Megan Riegling Swiertz told the court the case had become a “regular revictimization” for the family after repeated hearings, delays, interpreters, late filings, and continuances.

“This is my dad,” she said. “He is the only reason that we’re here today.”

She described the impact on her children, who lost a grandfather who built projects for them, attended events, and helped shape their childhood.

“They both stood in the freezing November rain, my parents’ 54th wedding anniversary, at the cemetery watching him lowered into the ground,” she said.

She asked the court to impose the strongest sentence available, pointing to Rios’ history of driving without a license and what she described as a longstanding relationship with alcohol.

“He must not be allowed to destroy another life,” she said.

The State: Intentional Drinking, Intentional Driving

The prosecution emphasized that while Rios may not have intended to kill James Riegling, he intentionally made every decision that led to the crash.

The state noted that Rios intentionally went to a bar after work, intentionally drank beer and shots, intentionally got into his vehicle, and drove despite being nearly three times the legal limit.

Prosecutors also told the court Rios did not have a Wisconsin driver’s license and had never had one.

The state did not request a specific sentence length, leaving the final decision to Borowski, but made clear that incarceration was required.

Defense Asked for 10 Years

Rios’ defense attorney asked for a 10-year bifurcated sentence: five years of initial confinement and five years of extended supervision.

The defense described Rios as a hardworking 60-year-old man who came to the United States from Mexico in 1995, served in the Mexican Navy, worked multiple jobs, and supported his family. His attorney said Rios had no prior OWI history and was deeply remorseful.

Rios personally apologized to the family.

“How can I ask forgiveness?” he said. “I am speechless. I am guilty. I am guilty of what happened.”

He also spoke about prior military service and rescue work, saying he had once helped save more than 100 people during flooding and earthquake response.

But he acknowledged none of that changed what happened.

“It doesn’t matter everything I did in my life,” Rios said. “Because in the end, I failed.”

Judge: “Frankly, It’s a House of Horrors”

Before imposing sentence, Borowski described the volume of homicide cases moving through Milwaukee County Circuit Court as overwhelming.

“Frankly, it’s a house of horrors,” Borowski said, noting that Rios was the third homicide defendant he had dealt with that day.

Borowski said Milwaukee County is facing a serious homicide problem, including domestic violence homicides, shootings, and intoxicated driving homicides.

He said Rios and the victim were similar in age and criticized any public characterization of Riegling as merely an “elderly Franklin man.”

“For the news media, mid-60s is not elderly,” Borowski said, adding that Riegling could have reasonably expected many more years with his wife, children, and grandchildren.

“All You Had to Do Was Call an Uber”

Borowski repeatedly emphasized that modern transportation options made Rios’ decision to drive inexcusable.

“There was a time in the ’80s or ’90s when it might have been hard to find a ride,” Borowski said. “But nowadays, you click the button on your phone, and miraculously, Uber or Lyft shows up in five minutes, maybe eight minutes.”

The judge directly questioned Rios during sentencing about how much alcohol he consumed before getting behind the wheel.

“Now that we are here, how much did you really have to drink?” Borowski asked Rios during the hearing. According to statements discussed in court, Rios admitted consuming approximately nine or ten drinks, including multiple shots, before driving.

“You were basically obliterated,” Borowski said.

Borowski repeatedly returned to the amount of alcohol consumed that night, emphasizing that Rios was not someone who accidentally crossed the legal limit after one or two drinks.

“There’s no way that I can handle nine or ten drinks, including five or six shots,” Borowski told him. “No way. I’m surprised you could stand up. I’m surprised you could operate a vehicle.”

The judge said the level of intoxication made the decision to drive especially aggravating and underscored that Rios knew he was severely impaired before entering his vehicle.

Borowski called drunk driving “self-centered, selfish behavior” and said those who drive intoxicated disregard pedestrians, other drivers, and the broader community.

“You did not intend to kill Mr. Riegling,” Borowski said. “But you intended to drive drunk.”

Judge Questions Overserving Accountability

In remarks directly relevant to the broader public questions raised after the crash, Borowski questioned whether Wisconsin should hold establishments accountable when they overserve intoxicated patrons.

“Maybe it’s time in Wisconsin that we’ve got a way to hold owners of establishments, bartenders, and owners responsible for overserving people like this defendant,” Borowski said.

He added that he would like someone to answer whether it is time to hold bar owners, restaurant owners, and possibly bartenders responsible when someone is “clearly overserved.”

Those comments are significant because, while Wisconsin’s dram shop liability laws are limited, municipalities still possess substantial authority over liquor licensing and operator licensing.

Under Wisconsin law, the City of Franklin has the authority to approve, deny, suspend, or revoke:

• Class B liquor licenses issued to establishments
• Operator licenses, commonly referred to as bartender licenses
• Annual liquor license renewals
• Alcohol-related licensing conditions tied to public safety concerns

That means Franklin officials are not powerless in situations involving serious alcohol-related incidents.

The Franklin Common Council and License Committee retain authority to review liquor license renewals and operator licenses connected to establishments or individuals involved in incidents raising public safety concerns.

The judge’s remarks are likely to intensify questions regarding whether Franklin officials should conduct an independent review not only of Irish Cottage’s liquor license renewal, but also whether any review of operator licenses or bartender conduct is warranted following testimony and evidence presented during the criminal proceedings.

The issue is not whether a bartender intended harm. Rather, the public policy question raised during sentencing is whether municipalities should examine alcohol service practices and licensing oversight when an individual later convicted in a fatal drunk-driving homicide consumed large amounts of alcohol at a licensed establishment before getting behind the wheel.

Earlier this month, Franklin Community News raised similar questions regarding whether the city should more closely examine liquor license renewals tied to serious public safety incidents instead of treating them as routine annual approvals.

Borowski’s comments from the bench now place those questions squarely into the public conversation.

The Sentence

Borowski rejected the defense recommendation of five years of confinement, stating it was not enough to punish Rios or deter the community.

“It’s not a maximum case,” Borowski said, citing Rios’ limited criminal record and guilty plea. “But he needs to be punished and deterred.”

The court imposed:

• 12 years initial confinement
• 6 years extended supervision
• 566 days sentence credit
• No fine
• Court costs, fees, surcharges, and DNA surcharge
• Alcohol and other drug assessment
• Mental health evaluation
• No firearms or weapons while on supervision
• Full-time employment requirement upon release
• No eligibility for Challenge Incarceration Program
• No eligibility for Substance Abuse Program
• Restitution hearing scheduled for July 17

A Case That Raises Larger Questions

Friday’s sentencing closed one criminal chapter, but it did not answer all of the public policy questions surrounding the crash.

Rios is now headed to prison. The Riegling family remains permanently changed. And Franklin residents are left with broader questions about impaired driving, liquor licensing, alcohol service, and whether local officials are willing to examine the systems that allow intoxicated patrons to leave establishments and endanger the public.

The judge’s comments made clear that this was not simply a tragic accident.

It was, in his words, the result of selfish, preventable choices.

And in Wisconsin, those choices continue to destroy families.

Did Vincent Mislead Greendale Residents on The Rock Festival Permits?

By Dr. Richard Busalacchi
Franklin Community News

Open records email, Zimmerman’s public comments, and conflicting statements to residents fuel questions about transparency and representation during the Tacos & Tequila and Country Rising permit debate.

An email obtained through a Franklin open records request is raising new questions about Milwaukee County Supervisor Kathleen Vincent’s public position regarding the controversial Tacos & Tequila and Country Rising music festivals approved this spring at The Rock Sports Complex.

The March 16, 2026 email — sent by Vincent to Franklin Mayor John Nelson, members of the Franklin Common Council, Greendale Village President Jason Cyborowski, Greendale Village Manager Mike Hawes, and others — appears to significantly soften the opposition Vincent publicly expressed less than two weeks earlier during a heated Franklin Common Council meeting regarding the proposed Tacos & Tequila and Country Rising concert permits.

During the public comment at the March 3 Franklin Common Council meeting — comments preserved in the publicly available YouTube recording and transcript of the meeting — Vincent directly urged Franklin officials to reject the proposed Tacos & Tequila and Country Rising permit, citing years of documented noise complaints, explicit language allegedly heard in Greendale neighborhoods, and ongoing impacts on nearby residents living near The Rock Sports Complex.

“Tonight, I respectfully ask this body to vote down the proposed  permit due to the proven disruption,” Vincent told the council on March 3.

Vincent also rejected comparisons between The Rock’s large-scale music festivals and once-a-year community events such as Greendale Village Days, arguing that the frequency and impact of the concerts were fundamentally different.

“The scale, frequency, and documented impact are not comparable.”

She further referenced complaints from Greendale residents regarding profanity and racial slurs allegedly audible during prior events.

“There are also very racial epitaphs that have been heard in my community from the events in this community.”

At the March 3 meeting, Vincent positioned herself firmly alongside Greendale residents opposing the permit and emphasized that surrounding communities deserved a stronger voice in Franklin’s event approval process.

“Being good neighbors requires transparency, communication, and shared accountability,” Vincent stated during the meeting.

Vincent presented herself as an advocate for Greendale residents frustrated by years of noise complaints and what many viewed as insufficient regional coordination between Franklin and neighboring municipalities.

March 16 Email Reveals Softer Tone

However, the March 16 email obtained through the open records request reflects a markedly different tone.

In the email, Vincent informed Franklin officials that she had spoken directly with ROC Ventures owner Mike Zimmerman and praised him for his willingness to discuss mitigation efforts tied to The Rock events.

“I also want to express my appreciation for Mr. Zimmerman’s willingness to have a direct conversation about these concerns and to discuss steps that may help address the impact on surrounding communities,” Vincent wrote.

Vincent further stated that Zimmerman told her ROC Ventures intended to implement recommendations from the Franklin sound study and described efforts to address profanity concerns through what Zimmerman characterized as “PG-13” artist agreements.

Most notably, Vincent no longer asked Franklin officials to reject the permits.

Instead, Vincent wrote:

“I believe it is possible to strike a balance that allows this venue to continue operating successfully while also being mindful and respectful of neighboring communities—particularly the residents of Greendale, whom I represent as Milwaukee County Supervisor for District 11.”

While Vincent continued to emphasize the need for mitigation measures and additional sound monitoring on the Greendale side of the venue, her email stopped short of opposing approval of the festivals and instead focused on coexistence, balance, and implementation of safeguards.

Vincent wrote:

“If the City chooses to move forward with permitting events of this nature, it will be important that appropriate safeguards and mitigation measures are implemented.”

To many residents following the debate, the contrast between Vincent’s March 3 public opposition and her March 16 email represented a substantial shift in tone and messaging.

Zimmerman Publicly Says Vincent “Changed Her Tone”

The change became politically significant during the March 17 Franklin Common Council

meeting, where comments made by ROC Ventures CEO Mike Zimmerman — preserved in the publicly available YouTube recording and transcript of the meeting — suggested that Vincent’s position had softened following private discussions regarding mitigation measures and the future of The Rock events.

During his presentation to the council, Zimmerman directly referenced Vincent’s prior opposition to the proposed Country Rising permit.

“I believe Supervisor Kathy Vincent sent a letter to you folks and said that she was asking for no votes,” Zimmerman told the council.

Zimmerman then informed council members that he had personally spoken with Vincent regarding concerns raised by Greendale residents and ongoing discussions surrounding sound mitigation efforts.

“I had a very nice conversation. She has changed her tone.”

Zimmerman further stated:

“As long as there’s a balance, she supports this.”

Zimmerman’s comments created the public impression during the meeting that Vincent had shifted from outright opposition to conditional support for the events if mitigation measures, sound monitoring, and operational safeguards were implemented.

The remarks came after Vincent’s March 16 email to Franklin officials in which she praised Zimmerman’s willingness to discuss mitigation efforts and stated she believed “it is possible to strike a balance” between neighborhood concerns and continued operation of the venue.

Residents Say Vincent Later Disputed Zimmerman’s Characterization

However, according to Greendale residents Joy Zingales and Dana Gindt, Vincent later privately disputed Zimmerman’s characterization of her position during the March 17 meeting itself.

According to Zingales, she texted Vincent during the meeting after hearing Zimmerman publicly state that Vincent now supported the events “as long as there’s a balance.”

Zingales stated Vincent responded that Zimmerman was not telling the truth regarding her support for the permits.

Dana Gindt and Ryan Antczak independently corroborated the interaction and stated Vincent arrived at City Hall shortly afterward and privately spoke with Zingales in the outer lobby during the meeting.

According to both residents, Vincent clarified that she had not agreed to support approval of the permits despite Zimmerman’s public statements to the council.

The differing public statements, private discussions, and evolving messaging surrounding Vincent’s position have since become a major source of controversy among some Greendale residents, particularly those who viewed Vincent’s March 3 public comments as clear opposition to approval of the Tacos & Tequila and Country Rising permit.

Critics argue Vincent’s March 16 email materially softened her earlier position and gave Franklin officials and ROC Ventures political cover to move forward with approving the controversial events, while later private comments to residents appeared inconsistent with both her email and Zimmerman’s public characterization of their discussions.

Because Vincent’s Milwaukee County supervisory district includes all of Greendale, some residents are now questioning whether she ultimately represented the interests of Greendale residents who opposed the events or whether political relationships and behind-the-scenes discussions influenced her evolving public position.

Some critics have specifically questioned whether Vincent’s working relationship with Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve Taylor — a politically influential figure in Franklin and Milwaukee County politics — may have contributed to her apparent shift in tone. At present, however, no public evidence has emerged showing any improper coordination or agreement regarding the permits.

Supporters of Vincent may argue that she never explicitly endorsed the permits and consistently emphasized the importance of mitigation measures, regional cooperation, and neighborhood protections throughout the process.

Broader Scrutiny Over Multiple Public Roles

The controversy surrounding Vincent’s position on The Rock permits comes amid broader public scrutiny regarding her multiple public roles and overlapping responsibilities.

Vincent currently serves as:

• Milwaukee County Supervisor for District 11,
• a Greendale School Board member,
• and a full-time educator within the Racine Unified School District.

Her overlapping taxpayer-funded positions have previously drawn criticism from political opponents, conservative media figures, and local watchdog publications questioning whether one individual can effectively balance multiple elected and professional public responsibilities simultaneously.

In September 2024, disciplinary records involving Vincent became public following reporting by Franklin Community News and Kenosha County Eye regarding allegations that Vincent conducted Milwaukee County Board and Greendale School Board business during school hours while employed as a teacher within the Kenosha Unified School District.

The reporting cited records allegedly showing Vincent participating in virtual meetings, calls, and governmental activities unrelated to classroom instruction during school hours. Records obtained through open records requests reportedly showed Vincent received disciplinary action connected to the allegations.

The controversy gained additional regional attention after conservative talk radio host Mark Belling discussed the issue on WISN-AM, referring to Vincent as a “Triple Dipper” for simultaneously collecting three taxpayer-funded paychecks tied to her multiple public positions.

Critics have argued that the overlapping roles raise legitimate concerns regarding scheduling conflicts, divided responsibilities, and public accountability — particularly when Vincent publicly represents constituents on controversial regional issues such as the debate surrounding the Tacos & Tequila and Country Rising music festivals at The Rock Sports Complex.

Supporters of Vincent, however, have argued that she maintains active participation in county government, school board matters, and constituent advocacy despite the criticism surrounding her multiple positions. Vincent has previously defended her attendance records and public service involvement, arguing that political opponents have exaggerated the controversy for partisan purposes.

Questions surrounding Vincent’s overlapping public responsibilities resurfaced again on May 18 during a Milwaukee County Committee on Community, Environment and Economic Development meeting.

Although Vincent does not serve on the committee, meeting records and the Microsoft Teams broadcast show Vincent participating remotely for approximately 30 minutes between roughly 9:45 a.m. and 10:15 a.m.

A review of the Racine Unified School District academic calendar does not indicate that either students or faculty were off on May 18.

No public evidence has been presented showing Vincent violated district employment policies related to the May 18 meeting participation, and educators frequently participate in outside meetings during planning periods, breaks, or approved release time. However, critics argue the incident is likely to renew scrutiny regarding overlapping public responsibilities and scheduling conflicts tied to Vincent’s multiple taxpayer-funded positions.

For some Greendale residents already frustrated by what they viewed as conflicting public and private messaging regarding the Tacos & Tequila and Country Rising festival permits, the broader controversy surrounding Vincent’s overlapping governmental and professional roles has added to growing concerns about transparency, accountability, and whether constituents are receiving clear and consistent representation from elected officials.

Debate Over The Rock Continues

The controversy unfolded amid a broader debate over The Rock Sports Complex and Franklin’s push to expand large-scale entertainment events as part of the city’s economic development strategy.

During the March 17 meeting, Zimmerman repeatedly argued that concerts and festivals are essential to The Rock’s long-term viability.

“When we started this development over a decade ago, it was never just about baseball,” Zimmerman told the council.

He described entertainment events as “absolutely critical” to the venue and promoted Country Rising and Tacos & Tequila as economic drivers capable of positioning Franklin as a regional entertainment destination.

Residents opposed to the events, however, continued to raise concerns regarding:

• excessive noise,
• profanity,
• impacts on children and families,
• and the effect large-scale concerts have on nearby neighborhoods in both Franklin and Greendale.

Despite the controversy, the Franklin Common Council ultimately voted 5-1 on March 17 to approve permits for both the Tacos & Tequila and Country Rising music festivals.

But for many residents following the debate, the controversy surrounding Vincent’s March 16 email and the conflicting accounts regarding her actual position became almost as contentious as the permits themselves — raising broader questions about transparency, political messaging, and whether residents received a clear and consistent understanding of where elected officials truly stood as Franklin moved forward with approving the events.

Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve Taylor Accused of Pressuring Franklin Alderman Salous Following ROC Festival Vote

By Dr. Richard Busalacchi
Franklin Community News

Newly obtained public records reviewed by Franklin Community News raise significant ethical and public-interest questions involving Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve Taylor, ROC Ventures, and communications surrounding the Franklin Common Council’s March 17, 2026 vote approving the “Country Rising” and “Tacos & Tequila” festivals at Ballpark Commons.

The records include:

• text messages allegedly sent by Taylor to Alderman Nabil Salous shortly after the council vote,
• ROC Ventures-related communications involving permit advocacy and elected officials,
• and records showing Taylor operating through a ROC Ventures organizational email account while serving as both a Milwaukee County Supervisor and Chairman of the Milwaukee County Board Finance Committee.

Taken together, the records raise broader questions involving:

• political pressure,
• conflicts of interest,
• disclosure obligations,
• nonprofit governance,
• and the relationship between public office, nonprofit leadership, and private development interests connected to Ballpark Commons and ROC Ventures.

The March 17 Vote

The controversy centers on the Franklin Common Council’s March 17, 2026 approval of ROC Ventures’ extraordinary entertainment permit for the 2026 “Country Rising” and “Tacos & Tequila” festivals at Franklin Field.

According to official meeting minutes, the permit included conditions involving:

• independent sound monitoring,
• “PG-13” artist performance expectations,
• pre-event sound calibration,
• coordination with Franklin Police and City officials,
• and a voluntary “Resident Staycation Program” for nearby residents impacted by the events.

The motion was approved on a 5-1 vote:

• Peccarelli — Aye
• Eichmann — Aye
• Hasan — Aye
• Day — Aye
• Salous — Aye
• Craig — No

According to the official minutes, Mayor John Nelson recessed the meeting at approximately 8:55 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 9:08 p.m.

Text Messages Sent After the Vote

Records obtained through open records requests indicate Taylor attended the March 17 meeting.

Shortly after the vote and recess, Taylor allegedly sent a direct text message to Alderman Nabil Salous stating:

“You really surprised me by doing the right thing. Suggestion… Quit listening to people who have no clue and if you want to talk about me do it to my face or we will have some serious issues.”

The message was later forwarded by Salous to the Franklin City Clerk in response to an open records request.

Three days later, Taylor allegedly sent Salous another message stating:

“Almost time for a recall.”

The communications have raised concerns regarding:

• political pressure,
• retaliation,
• intimidation,
• and outside influence tied to ROC Ventures-related municipal matters.

A reasonable person could interpret the messages as attempts to pressure or influence an elected official following a controversial municipal vote.

Whether the communications rise to the level of unlawful threats would depend on additional facts and legal interpretation.

Similar Messages Previously Sent to FCNewsWI Publisher

The Salous messages are not the only records raising questions regarding Taylor’s communications with critics or individuals involved in ROC-related disputes.

Additional records reviewed by Franklin Community News show Taylor previously sending confrontational messages to FCNewsWI publisher Dr. Richard Busalacchi during disputes involving Franklin politics and ROC-related reporting.

In an April 11, 2023 exchange, Taylor wrote:

“Then it will be game on if you write anything regarding Mike, John or I on anything outside of the City of Franklin municipal government.”

During the same conversation Taylor also stated:

Taylor also stated:

“Anything outside on City of Franklin municipal government is off limits.”

and later:

“I am done with you. We will handle you accordingly.”

The exchanges involved:

• Mayor John Nelson,
• ROC Ventures CEO Mike Zimmerman,
• and disputes surrounding reporting published by Franklin Community News.

Standing alone, each communication may be subject to interpretation. However, when viewed alongside the later Salous messages involving:

• “serious issues”
• and
• “Almost time for a recall,”

critics may reasonably argue the records reflect a broader pattern of confrontational or retaliatory communications directed toward individuals involved in criticism, reporting, or ROC-related governmental controversies.

Taylor’s Expanding Role in ROC Ventures Matters

Additional records reviewed by Franklin Community News show Taylor communicating through:

stevet@rocventures.org

in discussions involving:

• ROC permit advocacy,
• meetings with elected officials,
• and operational matters tied directly to the Country Rising and Tacos & Tequila festival approvals.

One March 16, 2026 email sent from Taylor’s ROC Ventures organizational account to Alderman Yousef Hasan and businessman Mohamad Khalek referenced materials prepared for presentation to the Franklin Common Council and stated:

“Mike and I look forward to discussing and answering any questions.”

The attached documents were formal ROC Ventures memorandums supporting permit approval for the festivals.

The records appear to show Taylor:

• directly participating in ROC permit advocacy,
• coordinating meetings involving elected officials,
• and functioning in a governmental-relations or operational role tied to ROC Ventures.

From Public Office to ROC Leadership

Questions surrounding Taylor’s role become more significant when viewed in the broader context of the Ballpark Commons redevelopment itself.

At the time of the redevelopment and sale of the former Crystal Ridge Ski Hill property, Taylor simultaneously served as:

• a Milwaukee County Supervisor,
• and a Franklin Alderman.

The former Crystal Ridge property — a landfill and ski hill owned by Milwaukee County — was ultimately transferred to ROC Ventures as part of the Ballpark Commons redevelopment project.

Public records indicate the transaction reportedly occurred:

• without a traditional request-for-proposals (RFP) process,
• without competitive bidding,
• and without broader public solicitation for alternative redevelopment proposals.

The property was reportedly transferred for a purchase price of $1 as part of the redevelopment arrangement.

During the same period, Taylor participated in governmental matters connected to:

• redevelopment approvals,
• zoning,
• financing discussions,
• and municipal actions tied to the project.

Following his unsuccessful reelection campaign in 2018, Taylor later became Executive Director of the ROC Foundation, a nonprofit organization affiliated with the same Ballpark Commons/ROC enterprise connected to the redevelopment.

ROC Foundation Finances and Governance Questions

IRS Form 990 filings reviewed by Franklin Community News show the ROC Foundation reported fluctuating financial performance between 2020 and 2024, including:

• multiple years of operating losses,
• one year of near break-even performance,
• a significant surplus in 2023,
• and a return to losses in 2024.

Executive compensation paid to Taylor reportedly increased during that same period:

• 2020: approximately $53,000
• 2021: approximately $60,000
• 2022: approximately $63,000
• 2023: approximately $79,000
• 2024: approximately $79,000

The filings also show substantial fluctuations in charitable program spending ratios:

• 2020: 3.9%
• 2021: 24.2%
• 2022: 25.9%
• 2023: 12.3%
• 2024: 85.7%

Several nonprofit accountability organizations commonly view spending approximately 65% or greater on charitable programming as a benchmark for stronger mission alignment and efficiency.

The records additionally show payments from the ROC Foundation to ROC Ventures reportedly increasing from approximately:

• $10,000 in 2023
  to:
• approximately $23,000 in 2024,
  including rent and management-related expenses.

ROC Foundation Financial Overview (IRS Form 990 Summary)

The filings also reportedly disclosed:

• no formal conflict-of-interest policy,
• no independent compensation review process,
• and limited documented board oversight.

These disclosures are not themselves evidence of wrongdoing. However, they raise broader governance and transparency questions given the overlapping relationships between:

• ROC Ventures,
• the ROC Foundation,
• Steve Taylor,
• and politically sensitive municipal matters tied to Ballpark Commons.

What Role Does the ROC Foundation Actually Play?

One significant question raised by the records remains largely unanswered:

What role does the ROC Foundation actually play in the day-to-day operational, governmental-relations, and political activities involving ROC Ventures and Ballpark Commons?

The ROC Foundation publicly presents itself as a separate nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization focused on:

• youth athletics,
• recreation,
• community programming,
• and charitable initiatives.

However, records reviewed by Franklin Community News appear to show Taylor — while serving as Executive Director of the ROC Foundation — simultaneously engaging in:

• ROC Ventures permit advocacy,
• municipal coordination,
• operational discussions,
• and politically sensitive governmental matters benefiting the broader ROC enterprise.

The records raise broader questions regarding:

• whether sufficient separation existed between the nonprofit and for-profit entities,
• whether nonprofit leadership became intertwined with private development advocacy,
• and whether the Foundation operated at sufficient arm’s length from ROC Ventures operations.

What Could Steve Taylor Potentially Gain?

The records do not establish that Taylor personally profited unlawfully from ROC Ventures-related matters.

However, they do raise legitimate public-interest questions regarding what Taylor potentially stood to gain — politically, professionally, financially, or organizationally — through his close involvement with ROC-related activities before, during, and after the Ballpark Commons redevelopment process.

The records reflect a progression in which Taylor:

• participated in governmental matters involving Ballpark Commons while serving in public office,
• later became Executive Director of the ROC Foundation affiliated with that same development,
• received increasing executive compensation through the Foundation,
• and now appears operationally involved in ROC Ventures governmental and permit matters.

Critics may reasonably question whether:

• public office and political influence translated into professional or organizational opportunities tied to ROC-related entities,
• and whether sufficient separation existed between:
  • public decision-making,
  • nonprofit leadership,
  • and private development advocacy.

Ethical and Public-Interest Questions

The records reviewed by Franklin Community News do not by themselves establish criminal wrongdoing.

However, they raise substantial public-interest and ethics questions involving:

• conflicts of interest,
• political pressure,
• nonprofit governance,
• disclosure obligations,
• transparency,
• and the increasingly blurred lines between public office and private development interests.

Potentially relevant statutes and ethics provisions that could warrant review include:

• Wis. Stat. § 19.59 governing ethical conduct of local officials,
• Wis. Stat. § 946.12 concerning misconduct in public office,
• Milwaukee County ethics disclosure requirements,
• and applicable financial disclosure standards.

The records also raise questions regarding:

• behind-the-scenes coordination involving elected officials,
• the use of personal devices and personal accounts for public business,
• and whether all responsive records were fully produced in response to open records requests.

Broader Public-Interest Concerns

The issue is not whether elected officials may support redevelopment projects or maintain political alliances.

The broader public-interest concern is whether:

• a sitting Milwaukee County Supervisor,
• using a ROC Ventures organizational email account,
• while actively participating in ROC-related municipal affairs,
  crossed the line from political support into inappropriate influence over local governmental decision-making.

Taken together, the records raise growing questions regarding:

• political influence,
• transparency,
• conflicts of interest,
• disclosure obligations,
• nonprofit governance,
• and the increasingly blurred relationship between public office, nonprofit leadership, and private development advocacy tied to ROC Ventures and Ballpark Commons.

Critics argue the records reflect an increasingly close relationship between ROC Ventures leadership and influential Franklin political figures — a relationship likely to intensify ongoing public debate surrounding Ballpark Commons, redevelopment politics, and governmental transparency in Franklin.

County Supervisor Steve Taylor, Franklin Mayor John Nelson, and ROC Ventures CEO Mike Zimmerman