Franklin Council Agenda Item Targeting FCN Raises Broader Questions Over Branding & City Practices

The proposal requested by Mayor Nelson follows sustained reporting and records requests, as comparable branding by City officials remains unexamined.

By Dr. Richard A. Busalacchi
Franklin Community News

FRANKLIN, Wis. — The Franklin Common Council will consider an agenda item Tuesday, February 3, 2026, authorizing enforcement action against Franklin Community News (FCN) for alleged misuse of City branding. The proposal comes amid a prolonged and increasingly contentious dispute between City leadership and the local news outlet over public records, enforcement practices, and reporting critical of elected officials.

The agenda item seeks authorization for the Mayor to issue a cease-and-desist order based on the City’s claim that FCN’s logo created a misleading impression of municipal authority or endorsement.

FCN disputes that characterization and states that at no time prior to the agenda posting did the City of Franklin contact FCN to raise concerns about its branding, request clarification, or seek informal resolution. FCN reports it first became aware of the City’s concern when the Common Council agenda was published.

Voluntary Redesign and Community Feedback

After the agenda was posted, FCN voluntarily redesigned its branding to further distinguish itself from City imagery. The redesign adopted a different color palette, typography, and layout; incorporated editorial messaging (“For the Greater Good”); and prominently identified the outlet as Franklin’s “Official” Unofficial Facebook Page

The redesign was undertaken without conceding that prior branding constituted infringement, but as a good-faith effort to address the City’s stated concern.

FCN also sought direct community input. On Saturday, January 31, at approximately 9:00 p.m., FCN published a poll on two Facebook pages it manages — Franklin Community News (approximately 2,000 followers) and the South Suburban Community Page (approximately 6,000 followers).

As of Sunday afternoon, 39 unduplicated responses had been recorded:

• 54% — “A clearly independent community news outlet”

• 29% — “An official City of Franklin logo or publication”

• 17% — “Unsure / never thought about it”

UPDATED FEBRUARY 3, 2026

As of TUESDAY afternoon, 53 unduplicated responses had been recorded:

• 57% — “A clearly independent community news outlet”

• 23% — “An official City of Franklin logo or publication”

• 20% — “Unsure / never thought about it”

While informal and non-scientific, the poll represents the only publicly available data point reflecting community perception of the FCN logo.

The poll results, combined with the redesign, raise a broader question for the Common Council: whether the City’s proposed action addresses confusion — or whether it reflects a continuing dispute over critical reporting.

City Officials’ Use of the Franklin Logo

The City’s agenda item asserts that FCN’s branding risks confusing residents about official endorsement. However, publicly available records show that elected officials themselves have used the official City of Franklin logo and City identifiers on Facebook pages that are not designated as official City accounts.

Alderperson Michelle Eichmann

Alderperson Michelle Eichmann operates a Facebook page titled “Alderwoman Michelle Eichmann,” which Facebook categorizes as a “Government Official” page. The page states it was created “for the Constituents of D2 in Franklin, WI,” lists an official @franklinwi.gov email address, and uses the City of Franklin logo as its cover image.

City officials, including Eichmann, have publicly stated that the City of Franklin does not maintain an official Facebook page. The City has not publicly designated Eichmann’s page as an official City account, nor announced any trademark enforcement or corrective directive related to its branding.

In at least one public post dated October 21, 2025, Eichmann displayed the City logo while warning residents that the City does not have an official Facebook page and urging the public not to be misled by unofficial sources.

Mayor John Nelson — Current FacebookPage

Mayor John Nelson operates a Facebook page titled “Mayor John Nelson – Franklin, WI,” which Facebook categorizes as a “Government Official” page. The page identifies Nelson as Mayor of Franklin, lists Franklin as the location, and uses City imagery consistent with official municipal branding.

The City has not publicly identified the Mayor’s page as an official City Facebook account, nor clarified whether it is governed by City social media policies, records retention requirements, or trademark licensing standards.

Additional Context: Mayor Nelson’s Page Prior to DA Complaint

Archived screenshots show that prior to a complaint being submitted to the District Attorney’s Office, Mayor Nelson’s Facebook page contained additional elements that further blurred distinctions between official, political, and campaign activity, including:

• Facebook’s designation of the page as “Government Official”

• Administrative responsibility listed as “Friends of John R. Nelson”

• A listed @franklinwi.gov email address alongside campaign-related links johnnelsonformayor.com

• Campaign authorization language identifying campaign treasurer Kristen Wilhelm

• Use of City imagery and identifiers

• Posts promoting public “town hall” meetings and addressing matters related to Nelson’s official role

Despite this configuration, the City has not announced any trademark enforcement or corrective action related to the Mayor’s page.

Contrast: Alderperson Courtney Day

In contrast, Alderperson Courtney Day’s Facebook page is labeled as “Politician,” does not display the City of Franklin logo, and does not present itself as an official City communication channel. The page demonstrates that elected officials can communicate with constituents without using City branding or creating ambiguity about municipal endorsement.

No Official City Facebook Page — But City Staff Posting

City officials, including Mayor Nelson and Alderperson Eichmann, have repeatedly stated during Common Council meetings that the City of Franklin does not maintain an official Facebook page.

At the same time, during multiple Common Council meetings, Nelson and Eichmann have encouraged alders who operate Facebook pages to have the City’s public relations representative, Mary Christine, prepare or post content on their behalf.

As of publication, the City has not issued a written policy or public explanation clarifying:

• whether alder-managed Facebook pages are considered official City communications,

• what limits apply to City staff involvement on those pages, or

• how the City distinguishes neutral governmental information from personal or political messaging.

This lack of clarity contrasts with the City’s assertion that FCN’s branding poses a risk of public confusion.

Broader Context: Complaints, Enforcement, and FCN Reporting

The agenda item does not arise in isolation. Since 2024, Franklin Community News has published extensive reporting based on court records, police reports, public meetings, open records responses, and municipal billing documents.

That reporting has included:

• documentation showing Disorderly Conduct citations issued to residents following criticism of Mayor Nelson, while similar or more direct statements by elected officials resulted in no enforcement;

• analysis showing that a $376 municipal citation generated thousands of dollars in taxpayer-funded legal costs;

• reporting on Open Meetings Law complaints filed after mayoral rebuttals during citizen comment periods;

• examination of official crime statistics contradicting political claims of a “crime wave”;

• reporting on search warrants, court filings, and oversight complaints involving City officials; and

• coverage of leadership disputes and allegations raised by former City employees.

During the same period, FCN filed multiple formal complaints and public records requests seeking transparency on enforcement practices, legal expenditures, and law-enforcement coordination. Several requests experienced significant delays or partial responses.

Legal & Ethics Analysis: Use of Public Resources on Social Media

This section analyzes Wisconsin law and ethics guidance. It does not allege a violation or make a legal determination.

Local officials in Wisconsin are governed by Wis. Stat. § 19.59, which prohibits the use of public office for personal benefit and the provision of anything of value that could reasonably influence official actions.

Ethics guidance from the Wisconsin Ethics Commission emphasizes that public staff time and taxpayer-funded resources may be used only for official governmental purposes — not for personal, political, or campaign activity. Commission guidance on social media stresses the importance of clearly distinguishing official government communications from personal or political messaging and avoiding the use of public resources in ways that benefit individual officeholders.

If City staff are preparing or posting content on Facebook pages that are:

• controlled by individual elected officials,

• not designated as official City accounts, and

• intermingled with political or campaign-related messaging,

those practices raise legitimate questions under Wisconsin ethics standards — particularly where those pages also use City branding.

The Question Before the Council

Trademark law exists to prevent consumer confusion. It does not exist to resolve disputes over criticism, public records, or accountability.

The Common Council is being asked to authorize enforcement action against a local news outlet that:

• was not contacted before enforcement was proposed,

• voluntarily redesigned its branding,

• explicitly disclaims official status, and

• sought community input,

while unresolved questions remain about City officials’ own use of City branding and City staff resources on social media.

The Council will consider the matter Tuesday, February 3, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. at Franklin City Hall.

Editorial: When Enforcement Follows Scrutiny, Questions of Retaliation and Double Standards Are Inevitable

The Franklin Common Council’s decision to consider trademark enforcement against Franklin Community News does not occur in a vacuum. It follows nearly two years of sustained reporting, public records requests, formal complaints, and court-documented analysis focused on City leadership, law enforcement practices, and the use of public resources.

In that context, the timing and selectivity of the proposed enforcement raise serious concerns about whether standards are being applied evenly — or only when scrutiny becomes uncomfortable.

No one disputes that the City of Franklin has a legitimate interest in protecting its trademarks. Trademark law exists to prevent confusion. But it also requires consistent application, particularly when the alleged confusion is not raised contemporaneously and when similar or greater risks of confusion have existed elsewhere without enforcement.

At no time prior to the publication of the February 3 agenda did the City contact FCN to express concern about its branding. There was no warning, no request for clarification, and no attempt at informal resolution. Instead, the issue surfaced only after months of reporting critical of City leadership and after multiple complaints and records requests were filed.

That sequence matters.

A Question of Equal Treatment

The City now argues that FCN’s prior logo created a misleading impression of official endorsement. Yet City officials themselves have used the official City of Franklin logo and City identifiers on social media pages that are not designated as official City accounts — without trademark review or enforcement.

Some of those pages are labeled “Government Official.” Some list City email addresses. Some have been administered, at least in part, by campaign committees. And City staff have been encouraged to assist with posting content on those pages, despite repeated statements that the City does not maintain an official Facebook presence.

If the concern is truly about public confusion, residents are entitled to ask why those practices did not prompt similar scrutiny.

Voluntary Compliance, Escalating Enforcement

When the City’s concern became public, FCN voluntarily redesigned its branding. It further differentiated its logo, added prominent disclaimers, and sought direct community feedback. The results showed that a majority of respondents viewed FCN as clearly independent.

That response reflects good-faith engagement, not defiance.

Yet the enforcement effort has not paused. Instead, the City has moved forward with a formal cease-and-desist authorization — even as unresolved complaints about records access, enforcement disparities, and public-resource use remain unanswered.

Why Retaliation Concerns Arise

Retaliation does not require overt threats. It is often inferred from pattern and timing.

When enforcement authority is exercised selectively, after criticism intensifies, and against a party engaged in protected activity such as reporting, records requests, and petitioning government, it inevitably invites the question:

Would this action have occurred absent the scrutiny?

That question is not an accusation. It is a test of institutional fairness.

The Standard the City Should Apply

The City of Franklin can and should protect its trademarks. But it should do so by applying the same standard to:

• itself,

• its elected officials,

• its staff practices, and

• outside entities.

Anything less undermines public confidence and risks transforming a neutral legal tool into a perceived instrument of pressure.

Transparency, consistency, and restraint are not weaknesses. They are the foundation of public trust.

The Common Council now has an opportunity to demonstrate that enforcement decisions are guided by principle — not by discomfort with criticism.

How it chooses to proceed will speak louder than any logo ever could.

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/