A Taxpayer-Funded, Election-Timed Mailer Filled With False Numbers — Released While Franklin Declared a Budget Crisis

by Dr. Richard Busalacchi – Franklin Community News

A glossy, professionally designed “Economic Development Update” mailed to every household in Franklin during the week of November 27 has raised serious concerns about spending, accuracy, transparency, and political intent.

The mailer was sent just four days before the December 1 opening of nomination papers for the mayoral election — and it is the first citywide economic-development mailing Franklin has issued in at least a decade.

A full FCN investigation confirms the following:

The mailer and brochure likely cost $15,000–$20,000+ in taxpayer money.

The numbers inside the brochure are mathematically incorrect and wildly inflated.

Multiple projects featured were actually launched under former Mayor Steve Olson.

The city’s Finance Committee simultaneously ordered all departments, including Police, Fire, and DPW, to prepare for 5% operating cuts due to a lack of funding.

Despite this, the Mayor chose to spend scarce public money on a glossy, election-timed publication.

The contradictions — and the inaccuracies — demand deeper scrutiny.

The Real Cost: $15,000–$20,000+ in Taxpayer Funds

A single postcard mailed to every home in Franklin is expensive. When you add glossy printing, design, coordination, and staff labor, the numbers climb quickly.

A. Postage Cost (USPS EDDM): $3,985.34

Mailing 16,135 postcards to every address in ZIP 53132 costs nearly $4,000 in postage alone.

B. Printing & Mailing Preparation: $6,679.04

An industry-standard quote for a 6.25” × 9” glossy EDDM card includes:

Printing: $1,327.07

Mailing services (bundling, preparing USPS route trays, paperwork): $4,479.09

Shipping: $872.88

Subtotal: $6,679.04

C. Staff Time: $3,000–$7,500

The 8-page brochure was:

professionally designed,

photo-heavy,

curated,

edited,

attributed to the Mayor,

reviewed by staff and department heads,

and coordinated across multiple departments.

City staff time is taxpayer-funded labor.

A conservative estimate puts labor costs at $3,000–$7,500.

TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $13,664.38–$18,164.38

Realistically:

➡ The true cost to taxpayers was likely $15,000–$20,000+.

All during a financial crisis.

Franklin Has Never Done This Before

Longtime officials and former administrators confirm:

Franklin has not mailed a citywide economic-development postcard in at least 10 years.

Former Mayor Steve Olson said that during his tenure:

Economic updates were done through a State of the City presentation.

A PowerPoint version of the presentation was posted on the city website and social media.

No postcards were mailed.

No printing contracts were issued.

No paid design work was done.

No postage was used.

No glossy brochures were sent to homes.

Olson’s approach was simple, transparent, and low-cost.

Nelson’s approach is the opposite: expensive, glossy, unprecedented, election-timed.

The Brochure’s Headline Claim Is False — The Math Doesn’t Add Up

Page 2 of the brochure makes a bold claim:
Click on Image to View Brochure

“Adding $1.1B in Value in Two Years” – Assessed Value Growth 2022–24
Directly beneath that headline, the brochure lists the following increases:

Residential: +$811,591

Commercial: +$249,425

Manufacturing: +$30,125,500

Other Units: +$16,620,100

Total: +$1,107,761.4

But adding these four categories produces this total:

811,591

249,425

30,125,500

16,620,100

--------------------

47,806,616(actual total)

Claimed total: $1.1 billion

The claimed total is exaggerated by more than $1 billion — a 23-times inflation.

Even the “total” printed on the page — $1,107,761.4 — has no mathematical relationship to the component numbers.

This is not a typo.

This is the headline claim in a taxpayer-funded mailing.

And it is wrong.

4. Taking Credit for Projects Started Under Olson

Many of the developments highlighted as recent “wins” actually began years earlier under former Mayor Olson’s administration, including:

Ballpark Commons expansions
Yaskawa development
Carma Labs growth
Business Park expansions
Industrial and manufacturing relocations
RISE Commercial District groundwork

The brochure repackages multi-year projects as recent accomplishments under Nelson.

This is misleading at best — and dishonest at worst.

TID 10: The Brochure Admits Offering Modine $1.6 Million

The brochure states:

“The City of Franklin has offered $1.6 million in TIF to support the development.”

This refers to TID 10 (Modine) — and its inclusion in a campaign-style brochure raises questions about whether major financial commitments are being marketed for political benefit rather than presented transparently at public budget sessions.

Meanwhile, the Finance Committee Ordered 5% Cuts Across All Departments

On October 1, 2025, the Finance Committee voted to require every department, including:

Police
Fire
Public Works (DPW)

to prepare 5% operating budget reductions, citing a “significant lack of funding operationally.”

While no specific positions were publicly identified for elimination, the directive clearly put public safety and essential services on the table.

Yet during this same period of claimed austerity, the Mayor approved an unprecedented, glossy, inaccurate taxpayer-funded publication costing tens of thousands.

This raises an unavoidable question:

**If the city can’t afford to support core services, how can it afford election-timed political marketing?**

Why Now? Why This? Why in an Election Year?

Citywide economic mailers have never been a Franklin practice.

This one appears only now — right before an election, at a moment of political vulnerability, and tied to deeply misleading economic claims.

The involvement and influence of Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve Taylor, long known for behind-the-scenes maneuvering in Franklin politics, heightens concerns about coordination, timing, and intent.

This publication walks like campaign literature, talks like campaign literature, and reads like campaign literature.

Except taxpayers paid for it.

Potential Violations of Wisconsin Campaign-Finance Law, Ethics Law, and Misuse of Office

The timing, content, and taxpayer-funded nature of the mailer raise significant legal concerns. Several Wisconsin statutes and ethics rules appear to be implicated by the creation, production, and distribution of this glossy, election-timed political-style mailing.

Even though Wisconsin law contains no formal deadline for releasing taxpayer-funded communications, timing alone can make a publication illegal if it appears intended to influence an election. The election-week timing of this mailer places it squarely in the range of prohibited political activity under Wis. Stat. § 11.1203.”

Below are the relevant laws and how this situation may violate them.

A. Wisconsin Statute § 11.1203(1) — Use of Public Funds for a “Political Purpose”

Wisconsin law is explicit:

“No person may use the funds of a state or local governmental unit to engage in activities for a political purpose.”

— Wis. Stat. § 11.1203(1)

Under § 11.0101(16), a “political purpose” includes actions intended to influence voting, including:

Promoting an incumbent officeholder,
Highlighting accomplishments for electoral benefit,
Distributing communications timed to affect an election.

The Franklin mailer contains:

A first-person promotional letter from the mayor,
Photographs of himself at events,
A list of “accomplishments,”

A bold and inaccurate economic headline,
Selective, overwhelmingly positive messaging,
Timing four days before nomination papers opened,

Taxpayer-funded production and distribution,
The first and only citywide economic mailing in over a decade.

These elements collectively satisfy the definition of a political purpose, making the use of taxpayer funds a likely violation of § 11.1203.

B. Wisconsin Statute § 946.12 — Misconduct in Public Office

Wisconsin law criminalizes using public office for personal or campaign benefit.

Per Wis. Stat. § 946.12, a public officer commits misconduct if he:

Exercises official functions in a way that he knows is improper,
Uses public funds or resources to obtain a dishonest advantage,
Engages in conduct that violates public trust,
Acts in a manner that benefits himself at the expense of the public.

Approving, coordinating, and distributing a taxpayer-funded, election-timed, promotional mailer could fit squarely within these definitions — especially given:

The false economic numbers,
The inflated claims,
The timing days before re-election paperwork,
And the unprecedented nature of this mailer not used by any prior mayor.

Using public resources in this way can constitute an abuse of office for private political gain.

C. Wisconsin Ethics Commission Rules — Use of Government Resources for Campaigning

The Wisconsin Ethics Commission consistently warns local officials that government resources may not be used to influence an election.

This includes:

Staff labor,
City equipment,
City facilities,
Public communication channels,
Graphic design services,
Printing and postage funded by the government.

The commission specifically cites:

“Communications that highlight an elected official’s achievements near an election may constitute prohibited political activity if taxpayer resources were used.”

This is exactly the scenario Franklin now faces.

The brochure:

Highlights achievements,
Showcases the mayor personally,
Is timed immediately before the election,
Uses city staff,
Uses city design resources (or hired contractors),
Uses taxpayer-funded printing and postage,
Presents false and misleading information,
And had no precedent in at least 10 years of city governance.

This is a textbook example of prohibited government-funded political communication.

D. Wisconsin Statute § 19.45(2) — Code of Ethics for Local Officials

The state’s ethics code prohibits public officials from:

Using their office or public resources in a way that results in a private benefit not available to others.

A taxpayer-funded, glossy, promotional mailer containing personal political messaging — timed to influence the mayor’s re-election prospects — is a private electoral benefit paid for by the city’s taxpayers.

This raises clear ethics concerns under § 19.45(2).

E. Wisconsin Statute § 19.59 — Local Government Ethics

Local officials may not:

Use city resources for campaign purposes,
Grant themselves an advantage not enjoyed by other candidates,
Use taxpayer money to promote themselves,
Participate in official actions that substantially affect their personal political interests.

Approving and distributing a city-funded political-style promotional mailer violates both the spirit and letter of these ethics rules.

F. Pattern Consistent With Coordinated Political Influence

In light of long-standing concerns about Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve Taylor’s behind-the-scenes political involvement in Franklin affairs, this mailer raises additional questions about:

Who directed or influenced its creation,
Whether the timing was coordinated,
Whether political insiders had a hand in crafting messaging,
And whether public resources were misused under political pressure or strategy.

While further investigation is warranted, the pattern aligns with coordinated political advantage, not neutral public communication.

Legal Summary

Based on the publicly documented facts, the Franklin mailer raises strong and credible grounds for potential violation of:

✔ Wis. Stat. § 11.1203(1)

(Use of public funds for a political purpose)

✔ Wis. Stat. § 946.12

(Misconduct in public office)

✔ Wis. Stat. §§ 19.45(2) and 19.59

(Local government ethics and misuse of office)

✔ Wisconsin Ethics Commission campaign-activity prohibitions

(Prohibited use of government resources near elections)

✔ General principles of public trust and office integrity

Given the timing, the unprecedented nature of the mailer, the inaccurate economic claims, and the use of taxpayer resources, the conduct at issue is not merely questionable — it may be unlawful.

Conclusion: Franklin Deserves Leadership That Acts “For the Greater Good” — Not for Political Gain

Franklin residents have been told the city is in a financial crisis so severe that all departments — including critical emergency services — must find 5% cuts.

And yet, at this very moment, the Mayor invested $15,000–$20,000+ of public funds into a glossy, professionally designed, unprecedented mailer containing false numbers, credit-stealing, and selective messaging timed directly before the election.

That is not transparency.

That is not responsible leadership.

That is not public service.

It is political self-promotion paid for by the people of Franklin.

In a community that values integrity, honesty, and open government, residents have every right to demand:

accurate reporting,
transparent budgeting,
independence from political influencers,
and leadership that serves the public — not itself.

Franklin deserves leadership that tells the truth, uses resources responsibly, and acts with integrity.

Franklin deserves leadership that works for the greater good — not for political advantage.

🕯️ 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.

Mayor Nelson’s $20,000 Glossy Mailer Claims $1.1 Billion Growth — Actual Math Shows $47 Million.