Editorial: Wiza’s Aug. 7 remarks went too far

By Brandi Makuski

Stevens Point Mayor Mike Wiza’s Aug. 7 scolding of the Police and Fire Commission was not his finest moment.

The exchange stemmed from a July presentation by City Treasurer Corey Ladick on creating a joint fire department with Park Ridge. Ladick repeatedly described his plan as “preliminary” and “conceptual,” but the 36-slide presentation seemed anything but initial. It came complete with financial projections, operational outlines, governance structures, and even suggested names for the new department—even though Fire Chief Jb Moody was adamant that he had “zero” input on the presentation.

The commissioners saw it for what it was: a fully developed concept that could have significant consequences for public safety, staffing, and budgets. Their reaction was authentic and thorough. They pressed Ladick on levy impacts, capital spending priorities, legal requirements, and implementation timelines. In fact, the PFC’s questions and scrutiny far exceeded the vetting that the city’s elected finance committee gave the same proposal.

In other words, the commissioners did exactly what they were appointed to do. A former mayor even expressed similar concerns. 

Commissioners Joseph Kirschling, Tom Zenner, Jason Behrendt, and Denise Mrozek all challenged Ladick directly during that July meeting. Only Commissioner John Pingel, the newest appointee of the group, was silent during the three-plus-hour meeting last month.

Kirschling questioned the compressed timeline, saying it didn’t allow enough time for proper evaluation. Zenner pressed for clarity on how the joint department would affect operational autonomy. Behrendt drilled into budget impacts and the long-term sustainability of the plan. Mrozek asked whether the move would inevitably raise taxes and how costs would be divided. None of the questions was out of line—each reflected the commission’s duty to fully understand a proposal of this magnitude.

Under Wisconsin law, an Optional Powers Police and Fire Commission, governed by Statute 62.13, is designed to be independent from day-to-day city politics. They are appointed citizen bodies with statutory authority to hire, discipline, and remove police and fire chiefs, and to oversee their departments.

Although they are appointed by the mayor, they are not subordinate to the mayor or the common council, nor do those elected bodies control how the PFC conducts its business. However, any appointee can be removed, for cause, by a majority of the common council.

But that independence is a critical part of the checks and balances in Wisconsin’s municipal system, and although only about a dozen municipalities employ an optional powers PFC, it protects public safety operations from political influence. Under state law, no more than three members of the same political party can be appointed to the commission for this very reason.

Wiza knows this. He appointed these specific commissioners, presumably because he believed they would bring the independence, judgment, and diligence the position requires. Yet on Aug. 7, he singled out one of them—Mrozek, the sole woman—repeatedly, questioning her questioning, and interuptions, of Ladick last month.

“If at any time you feel this job is not for you, you are unwilling or unable to live up to the expectations charged to you… I’ll be happy to accept your resignation and search for a replacement,” he said.

He also nodded when Mrozek said she expected he would not reappoint her when her term expires next April. This focus on one commissioner was inappropriate—especially given that three of her male colleagues were just as forceful, if not more so, in their questioning of Ladick a month earlier. It also shows a clear disregard for her institutional knowledge; Mrozek previously served on the city council and has spent, and continues to spend, a lot of time at police and fire departments and talking with line personnel, learning how and why they do what they do and what their needs are.

Wiza’s remarks also revealed that he had asked to meet with Mrozek privately to discuss his concerns. Mrozek declined, saying it was inappropriate to have such communication outside a public meeting before the full commission. It is not clear whether Wiza extended the same request to any other commissioners. On Aug. 7, Mrozek responded to the mayor directly:

“I do believe in transparency. We are not elected. We are citizens of Stevens Point… If the mayor stated he was going to meet with each one of us individually, but to pick me out—that he wanted me to come in and meet with him privately—I didn’t feel that was appropriate… I will stand behind anything that I say and I feel I do my job.”

She also told the public she believed Wiza would not reappoint her because of her approach on the commission:

“Citizens, really think about that. If you are a person who does your job and has the courage to speak up… we have a mayor who doesn’t like that.”

Kirschling, the commission’s president, also pushed back against Wiza’s criticism:

“From my standpoint, exploring something goes much further beyond than a presentation and just a little bit of time… We did ask questions. We did ask hard questions of Corey, and Corey knew a lot of the answers, and there were some that he didn’t, which was expected.”

Equally troubling is the fact that at no other municipal meeting in Stevens Point would a speaker be permitted to address a specific member of the body. Standard practice—and a rule Wiza himself has enforced time and again when chairing the plan commission, city council, and other boards—requires speakers to address the body as a whole, not target individuals. By abandoning that rule here, Wiza set aside a long-standing principle of decorum that he has otherwise upheld.

The mayor admitted at last week’s meeting that he was “wanting to say things that a mayor shouldn’t really say”—and then proceeded to say some of them. That is not the standard of restraint or professionalism residents should expect from their top elected official.

If Wiza felt the PFC’s conduct crossed a line, he could have issued a written statement or, if warranted, followed a formal process of removal outlined in state statute. Instead, he chose a public confrontation that overshadowed the policy discussion and risked sending a message that vigorous oversight will be punished.

The PFC was doing its job—vetting a significant proposal far more thoroughly than any other city body had. That diligence should be encouraged, not berated.

Stevens Point residents deserve leaders—both elected and appointed—who respect each other’s roles, welcome tough questions, and keep the focus on the issues. On Aug. 7, Wiza failed that test.