FCN Obtains Warrant Detailing Alleged Misuse of Public Resources by Mayor John Nelson
Franklin's Official "Unofficial" News Source
By Dr. Richard Busalacchi
Publisher, Franklin Community News
FRANKLIN, Wis. — A verified ethics complaint filed in 2025 is now expressly incorporated into a criminal investigation confirmed by a newly unsealed search warrant, raising serious questions about whether City of Franklin funds were allegedly used to support political and personal campaign activity connected to Mayor John Nelson.
On December 18, FOX6 News was the first outlet to report that a search warrant obtained by the West Allis Police Department had been unsealed by the Milwaukee County Circuit Court. Franklin Community News subsequently obtained a copy of the unsealed warrant through an open-records request to the Milwaukee County Clerk of Courts.
Mayor John Nelson has not been charged.
Judicial Finding of Probable Cause
The warrant includes a finding by Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge A.M. Gansner (Branch 46) that, after reviewing the Assistant District Attorney’s request and supporting affidavit, there is probable cause to believe that the records sought:
“may constitute evidence of the crime of Misconduct in Public Office in violation of Wisconsin State Statutes: § 946.12(2).”
A finding of probable cause is not a determination of guilt. It is a judicial determination that the investigation is legally grounded and that the records sought could relate to a specific criminal offense defined by statute.
Statutory Framework: Misconduct in Public Office
The court specifically cited Wis. Stat. § 946.12(2), which applies when a public official or public employee:
intentionally uses or permits the use of public funds, public property, or public services for a purpose not authorized by law.
Under Wisconsin law, a violation of § 946.12(2) is classified as a Class I felony.
If convicted, the statutory maximum penalties include:
-
Up to 3 years and 6 months imprisonment (up to 1 year and 6 months initial confinement, plus extended supervision),
-
A fine of up to $10,000, or
-
Both imprisonment and a fine.
Separate from criminal penalties, a conviction could also result in removal from office, ineligibility to hold public office, and other collateral consequences. No such determination has been made in this matter.
How the Investigation Began
In the Probable Cause section of the warrant, the affiant states that:
“On 07/23/2025, the West Allis Police Department began investigating an ethics complaint that was filed against the Mayor of the City of Franklin.”
The warrant identifies Nelson as an elected public official serving as Franklin mayor from April 2023 through April 2026.
The warrant then identifies the core allegation prompting the investigation:
“The ethics complaint alleges that in June of 2024, Mayor John Nelson and city employee Kelly Hersh hired a Public Relations Consultant on retainer for the City of Franklin but utilized the consultant to work on behalf of Mayor John Nelson’s political campaign.”The warrant and complaint use the term “political campaign” to describe the alleged activity; investigators have not determined whether the conduct meets the legal definition of campaign activity under Wisconsin law.
Director of Administration Kelly Hersh has not been charged, and no finding of wrongdoing has been made with respect to her.
Ethics Complaint Allegations and Facebook Activity
Item 12 of the warrant explicitly incorporates the ethics complaint and explains why investigators sought Facebook group records.
Item 12 states that:
The ethics complaint alleges that Mary Christine was identified by Franklin in addition to Waterford residents on both Franklin Facebook groups and Waterford Facebook groups providing a pro Nelson ‘spin’ on issues not directly related to the City of Franklin Marketing or Public Relations.”
The warrant summarizes allegations involving Mary Christine Bayerlein, associated with MCPR Marketing, including commentary related to:
-
Nelson’s termination from the Town of Waterford Police Department,
-
allegations arising from the Waterford investigation, and
-
disputes involving former Town of Waterford Board Chair Terri Jendusa-Nicolai.
The complaint alleges this activity constituted a direct conflict of interest and alleged misuse of Franklin resources.
Bayerlein has not been charged and is not accused by law enforcement of committing a crime; she is identified in the warrant as a person whose records investigators seek to review.
Contract, Budget, and Consultant Identification
The warrant documents that MCPR Marketing was retained on a $25,000 annual contract, structured as a $2,083 monthly retainer, and identifies Bayerlein as the consultant associated with MCPR and listed as the City’s media contact.
The warrant notes that the City of Franklin does not have a clearly defined, publicly available “media contact” position as a standalone municipal role.
Invoices and Waterford Facebook Activity
Invoices from October 2024 through March 2025 show MCPR billed the City of Franklin for social-media services, including managing the Mayor’s Facebook page.
The warrant further states that screenshots of Facebook comments by Bayerlein in Waterford community groups were provided to investigators, with activity believed to have occurred around late April 2025. The complaint alleges this activity coincided with billing to the City of Franklin and constituted alleged misuse of public resources.
Item 21 summarizes exchanges on the Waterford Government Accountability page, including questions from community members regarding Bayerlein’s role, employment status, and relationship with the City of Franklin.
What Typically Happens Next
With a warrant issued and unsealed, investigations of this type typically move into a corroboration phase. Investigators generally:
-
review platform records to confirm authorship, timing, and account control,
-
compare invoices with social-media activity,
-
conduct interviews of involved parties and witnesses, and
-
submit findings to prosecutors for charging review.
At this stage, no charging decision has been announced.
What Is — and Is Not — Established
Established by public record:
-
an ethics complaint was formally filed,
-
West Allis Police opened an investigation,
-
a circuit court judge found probable cause under § 946.12(2),
-
MCPR Marketing was retained and paid by the City of Franklin, and
-
social-media management of the Mayor’s Facebook page was billed to the City.
Not established:
-
that a crime occurred,
-
that invoices were improperly billed, or
-
that public funds were used for campaign purposes.
All individuals referenced in the warrant are presumed innocent.
Why It Matters
Wisconsin law strictly prohibits the use of public funds for political purposes. The unsealed warrant confirms that investigators and the court are examining whether that line was crossed — based on contracts, invoices, and documented online activity — not conclusions.
Continuing Coverage
Franklin Community News will continue to report on this matter using court records obtained from the Milwaukee County Clerk of Courts, public filings, and verified sources as additional information becomes available
Opinion: When Public Resources Blur Into Political Power, Transparency Is No Longer Optional
Franklin residents do not need to presume guilt to demand accountability.
They do not need an indictment to ask hard questions.
And they do not need a verdict to expect that public officials treat taxpayer resources with restraint, transparency, and respect for the law.
What they do need — and what they are entitled to — is clarity when the machinery of government appears to blur into the machinery of politics.
That is the moment Franklin finds itself in now.
This Is Not About Politics — It’s About Boundaries
At its core, the investigation involving Mayor John Nelson is not about ideology, party affiliation, or campaign rivalry. It is about boundaries.
Wisconsin law draws a clear line between:
-
municipal communication, which taxpayers fund, and
-
political advocacy, which they do not.
That line exists for a reason. When public money is used — or appears to be used — to promote, defend, or advance the political interests of an individual officeholder, the integrity of local government is put at risk.
The unsealed search warrant does not accuse anyone of a crime. But it does confirm that a judge found probable cause to believe records sought may constitute evidence of misconduct in public office. That alone should command public attention.
Silence Creates a Vacuum — and Others Will Fill It
Mayor Nelson has not addressed the substance of the allegations. That is his right.
But silence from leadership does not create calm. It creates a vacuum — and vacuums invite speculation, distrust, and institutional drift.
When elected officials decline to explain how public contracts are monitored, how boundaries are enforced, or how political and governmental roles are kept separate, confidence erodes. Not because wrongdoing is assumed — but because accountability is absent.
Transparency is not a concession. It is a responsibility.
The Danger of “It’s All Just Messaging”
One of the most troubling aspects of this episode is how easily public relations work can slide into political narrative management.
Words matter.
Tone matters.
Timing matters.
Audience matters.
A Facebook post is not neutral simply because it does not say “vote for.” When messaging consistently defends one official, attacks their critics, and appears in campaign-adjacent spaces — all while funded by public dollars — the distinction between information and advocacy collapses.
That is precisely why Wisconsin law is strict. And why oversight exists.
This Is Bigger Than One Mayor
Franklin should resist the temptation to reduce this moment to personalities.
The real question is institutional:
-
Who decides what city-funded messaging can say?
-
Who monitors compliance?
-
Who draws the line — and who enforces it?
If those answers are unclear today, they will remain unclear tomorrow — long after this investigation concludes.
Accountability Is Not an Attack
Too often, scrutiny is dismissed as hostility. Oversight is framed as a “witch hunt.” Transparency is treated as a threat.
That mindset is corrosive.
Accountability is not an attack on public service. It is the condition that makes public service legitimate.
No official is diminished by explaining how taxpayer money is safeguarded. No administration is weakened by clear rules. No city is harmed by sunlight.
The Standard Franklin Should Demand
Franklin residents should demand a simple standard:
-
Public money for public purposes.
-
Political advocacy paid for privately.
-
Clear lines.
-
Clear answers.
That standard protects everyone — officials, staff, contractors, and the public itself.
Whatever the outcome of the investigation, Franklin has an opportunity right now to reaffirm its commitment to ethical governance. That opportunity should not be wasted.
Final Thought
This moment is not about rushing to judgment.
It is about refusing to look away.
When public trust is tested, the answer is not silence or spin. The answer is transparency, humility, and a renewed respect for the limits of power
Franklin deserves nothing less.
This commentary reflects the views of Franklin Community News and is published as analysis alongside related reporting.
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.
Comments
Post a Comment