Nelson, Taylor, Eichmann, Konstantakis, and Pyzyk: New Images Reveal Interconnected Political Web Across Four Cities

A web of political, judicial, and municipal connections emerges through public images spanning Franklin, South Milwaukee, Hales Corners, and Greenfield.

By Dr. Richard Busaalcchi- Franklin Community News

In November, Franklin Community News published an article detailing how an October 2024 Disorderly Conduct citation—issued minutes after a failed remand attempt—raised questions about political influence, evidence handling, and municipal case transfers.

The citation, which stemmed from a political blog article containing no threats or harassment, was originally filed in Franklin but later transferred to South Milwaukee Municipal Court due to conflicts involving Franklin’s elected officials.

At the November 20, 2025 hearing in South Milwaukee, an attorney from the law firm Wesolowski, Reidenbach & Sajdak (WRS) appeared without a formal appointment and acted as a prosecutor. WRS simultaneously represents Franklin, South Milwaukee, and Hales Corners—the three municipalities connected to the complaint, transfer, and adjudication of that citation.

The attorney who appeared as prosecutor, Roger Pyzyk, is also a sitting Greenfield Municipal Judge — a dual role that raises additional concerns about judicial neutrality when combined with his employment at the WRS law firm.

The unusual combination of a surprise prosecutor, undisclosed witnesses, missing defense motions, and a multi-municipal law firm raised broader questions about structural conflicts of interest within the interconnected local government network.

Franklin’s Use of a Special Prosecutor and the Legal Requirement for Council Approval

Public records, court statements, and municipal filings reviewed by Franklin Community News reveal that an attorney from the law firm Wesolowski, Reidenbach & Sajdak (WRS) appeared in South Milwaukee Municipal Court on November 20, 2025, identifying himself as a “special prosecutor” for the Disorderly Conduct citation originally issued by the Franklin Police Department.

No Public Record of Council Authorization

Under Wisconsin municipal governance law, a city cannot hire outside legal counsel—or commit taxpayer funds for professional services—without a vote of the Common Council. This authority is defined in:

• Wis. Stat. § 62.11(5) (Council authority over all expenditures and contracts)

• Wis. Stat. § 800.12 (Appointment of municipal prosecutors)

According to the League of Wisconsin Municipalities, which provides guidance to local governments:

“Neither the mayor nor the city attorney may retain special counsel without prior approval of the common council.”

Franklin Community News has not found any record of:

• A Council motion,

• A Council vote,

• A contract,

• A retainer,

• Or a public agenda item authorizing the City of Franklin to engage a special prosecutor for this citation.

Taxpayer Funds and Legal Representation

Special prosecutors—whether appointed formally or informally—are compensated through municipal funds.

If Franklin engaged WRS or any attorney to prosecute the citation, the cost would be borne by Franklin taxpayers, and such expenditures require:

1. Public budgeting or allocation, and

2. Explicit approval by the Common Council.

To date, Franklin Community News has not identified:

• A published budget line item for special prosecutorial services,

• An amendment authorizing expenditure,

• Or a Council-approved contract for outside prosecution.

Overlap With City Attorney’s Law Firm

The attorney who appeared as prosecutor is affiliated with WRS—the same firm that:

• Represents the City of Franklin,

• Represents the City of South Milwaukee,

• Represents the Village of Hales Corners,

• And employs a municipal judge who later appeared in the prosecution.

This overlap underscores the importance of formal Council review and approval, because a municipality’s legal counsel cannot unilaterally appoint outside attorneys without public authorization.

Why Council Approval Matters

Council approval is required to ensure:

• Transparency in municipal spending

• Public accountability for legal costs

• Compliance with state statutes

• Avoidance of conflicts of interest

• Proper oversight when legal authority is delegated

Without Council action, a special prosecutor would have no public authorization and no budgeted compensation, raising questions about:

• Who directed the engagement

• How services were funded

• And whether municipal authority was exceeded

Franklin Community News requested clarification from the City of Franklin and will publish updates as more information becomes available.

Today, Franklin Community News is publishing new information that expands those concerns:

a comprehensive photographic record—Exhibit A—that documents years of political, ceremonial, and social alignment among the very officials who intersected around the citation.

These images do not show wrongdoing on their own. But when viewed together, they illustrate an unusually tight network of political relationships among:

• Franklin Mayor John Nelson

• Franklin Alderwoman Michelle Eichmann

• Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve Taylor

• Franklin Municipal Judge Georgia Konstantakis

• Greenfield Municipal Judge Roger Pyzyk (also an attorney at WRS)

• Other municipal actors connected through shared events, endorsements, and swearing-in ceremonies

The public photographs, collected from open sources and community postings, raise legitimate questions about judicial neutrality, prosecutorial independence, and the appearance of fairness in Franklin-area municipal courts.

Exhibit A: A Visual Timeline of Political Alignment

EXHIBIT A Source: “Evidence Illustrating Appearance of Impropriety and Structural Conflict in Municipal Case Assignment” 

Franklin Community News examined the four-page image set and identified clear patterns:

1. Political Support and Campaign Participation

A March 2025 photo shows Mayor Nelson and Alderwoman Eichmann attending a campaign fundraiser for Georgia Konstantakis as she sought the Franklin Municipal Judge position.

Eichmann and Nelson at Konstantakis fundraiser at Root River Lanes on March 15, 2025

(Exhibit A, p.4) 

On the same page, Greenfield Municipal Judge Roger Pyzyk publicly endorses her election in a printed letter.

April 2, 2025 - Konstantakis election endorsement by Pyzyk

2. Mutual Elevation Through Swearing-In Ceremonies

Exhibit A captures a rapid sequence of back-to-back civic ceremonies:

(Exhibit A, p.5)

• Konstantakis swearing in Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve Taylor

April 15, 2025 - Milwaukee County Courthouse - Konstantakis swearing in Steve

Taylor as Milwaukee County Supervisor

• Judge Pyzyk swearing in Konstantakis as Franklin’s Municipal Judge

  (Exhibit A, p.5)

  

April 26, 2025 - Pyzyk installs Konstantakis as Franklin Municipal Judge

• Mayor Nelson speaking at Konstantakis’s installation ceremony

  

April 26, 2025 - Franklin City Hall, Nelson speaking at Konstantakis Swearing in

 Ceremony, Pyzyk in background swearing in Konstantakis

(Exhibit A, p.6)

• Taylor appearing at yet another installation event

  

April 26, 2025 - Taylor at Konstantakis swearing in ceremony

with2026 Aldermanic Candidate Daielle Kinney

(Exhibit A, p.4)

This pattern of reciprocal participation reinforces the political and civic closeness among the group.

3. Chamber of Commerce and Public Events

A new photograph from November 20, 2025, shows Nelson, Taylor, Eichmann, and Judge Konstantakis together at a South Suburban Chamber event at Blum Coffee.

November 20, 2025 - Taylor, Nelson, Eichmann and Konstantakis

At a South Suburban Chamber event at Blum Coffee.

(Exhibit A, p.4) 

The same individuals appear across campaign events, official ceremonies, and community gatherings.

Why These Political Relationships Matter Now

These images take on new significance in light of what occurred around the handling of the October 2024 Disorderly Conduct citation:

• The citation originated in Franklin (where these officials hold power).

• The case was transferred to South Milwaukee (a city represented by the same law firm).

• The presiding judge sits in Hales Corners (also represented by the same law firm).

• A Greenfield judge and WRS attorney appeared as prosecutor.

• The complainants were Franklin officials who appear throughout Exhibit A.

None of this demonstrates illegal conduct.

But from a governance and public-trust perspective, the structural overlap is undeniable:

• The same political network

• The same social circles

• The same municipal law firm

• The same local officials

The same judicial and prosecutorial figures all intersected around one municipal citation brought against a journalist who had criticized these officials publicly.

That level of interconnectedness, especially when viewed through the lens of Exhibit A, raises valid concerns about the appearance of impartiality—a standard required not only by ethics rules but by Wisconsin’s Judicial Code.

UPDATE - Judge’s Initiated Text Message Adds New Questions About Procedural Transparency

Shortly after the article was published, Franklin Municipal Judge Georgia Konstantakis contacted me directly by text message, stating that my reporting was “false” and demanding that her name be removed from the post. In response, I asked a single, neutral question regarding how the municipal citation had been transferred from Franklin Municipal Court to South Milwaukee Municipal Court — a question related solely to the judicial procedure required under Wisconsin Statutes and the Chief Judge’s administrative rules.

Judge Konstantakis declined to answer, stating that she “cannot discuss City of Franklin business,” even though the transfer of a recused municipal case is judicial business, not city business, and judges are routinely permitted to explain general court procedures. When asked again to describe the process used for transfer — not anything about the merits or specifics of the case — she refused and ended the conversation with:

“Stop texting me. You have no idea how the judicial system works.”

The significance is not the tone of the exchange, but what her refusal suggests:

• A judge may always explain general, non-case-specific procedure, including recusal and reassignment rules.

• Her characterization of judicial procedure as “City business” is incorrect under Wisconsin law.

• Her reluctance to explain even the basic statutory procedure for case transfer raises questions about whether proper transfer protocols were followed under Wis. Stat. § 800.05.

• Because she initiated the dialogue by challenging the accuracy of the reporting, her refusal to clarify a simple administrative question speaks directly to the transparency concerns raised in this article.

For these reasons, the matter has been formally referred to the Chief Judge of District 1 for administrative review and clarification.

What Franklin Residents Deserve

Local government cannot function on relationships alone—it must operate on public trust.

Even if no wrongdoing occurred, the appearance of conflicts can damage confidence in:

• Judicial fairness

• Prosecutorial neutrality

• Municipal independence

• The integrity of case transfers

• The legitimacy of municipal enforcement decisions

As Franklin Community News continues to investigate, Exhibit A provides a critical visual context for understanding how political networks shape the environment in which municipal cases are handled.

PUBLISHER’S EDITORIAL: The Greater Good Belongs to the People — Not the Inner Circle

By Richard A. Busalacchi

Publisher, Franklin Community News

When I started Franklin Community News, I never imagined I would one day become the subject of my own reporting. I never expected that writing about local government — or analyzing a political phrase like “for the greater good” — would result in police reports, municipal prosecutors, withheld documents, and elected officials appearing together in a courtroom over a blog post.

But here we are.

And after everything I’ve seen, everything I’ve documented, and everything that has unfolded in plain view, it’s time to speak honestly about what is happening in Franklin.

There is an inner circle in this city — a political orbit where the same officials attend fundraisers together, endorse each other, swear each other in, celebrate each other’s campaigns, and appear in the same courtroom when a critic becomes inconvenient.

The photos tell the story.

The filings tell the story.

The behavior tells the story.

This is not about one citation.

This is about a system.

A system where elected officials call police about political commentary.

A system where a police report can be withheld for eight months yet quietly circulated among political allies.

A system where a municipal judge from another city arrives unannounced to act as a “special prosecutor” — despite no Council approval, no contract, and no transparency.

A system where the same law firm represents every municipality involved in the complaint, the transfer, and the adjudication.

And a system where political power protects itself first and asks questions later.

Let me be direct:

A justice system that operates inside a political clique cannot claim impartiality.

A government that tries to criminalize criticism cannot claim legitimacy.

A network of officials who appear together in political events and court proceedings cannot claim independence.

If all of this can be set in motion because a journalist wrote something they didn’t like, what does that say about the health of local democracy?

If criticism becomes “disorderly conduct,” what happens to residents who don’t have a newspaper to defend them?

If the “inner circle” can coordinate responses across municipalities, judges, and prosecutors, who watches the watchers?

This isn’t just my problem.

It’s Franklin’s problem.

Because this is how communities lose their voice.

This is how power consolidates.

This is how truth becomes optional.

For the record: I did not ask for this fight.

But I am not walking away from it.

Not when the First Amendment is at stake.

Not when public records are withheld or selectively shared.

Not when a municipal citation is issued minutes after a failed remand attempt.

Not when judges, prosecutors, and elected officials all appear at the same events and inside the same courtroom in a case involving a critic.

Not when the “greater good” is being defined by the people who benefit from controlling it.

The real greater good is simple:

Transparency.

Accountability.

Independence.

The Constitution.

A justice system that belongs to the people, not to a network of insiders.

Franklin is better than this.

Franklin voters are smarter than this.

And Franklin residents deserve institutions that do not buckle the moment they are questioned.

The greater good has never belonged to the inner circle.

It belongs to the community.

And as long as I publish Franklin Community News, I will make sure the community is heard.

“The greater good isn’t a slogan — it’s a responsibility.  The truth is the foundation on which democracy stands.”

🕯️ 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.

© 2025 Franklin Community News. All rights reserved.