Lena V

SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT: “INSIDE THE PRICE COUNTY BRYLSKI BLOCKADE”

Brittany L. Volkman — Sun, 30 Aug 2026 01:36:43 GMT

John J. Brylski v. Brian Schmidt & Robert M. Mihelich | Price County Circuit Court

| Case No. 2026CV000108 |

By: Brittany L. Volkman | Executive Director | U.T.A.V.

Date of Report: August 25, 2026

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Over an extraordinary ten-day span between August 12 and August 21, 2026, a legal and administrative battle erupted inside the Price County Courthouse in Phillips, Wisconsin.

Following the filing of an Intentional Tort lawsuit (Case No. 2026CV000108) by John J. Brylski against Price County Sheriff Brian Schmidt and Attorney Robert M. Mihelich, county officials and defense attorneys executed a rapid sequence of legal maneuvers. When an independent civilian representative attempted to inspect public evidentiary exhibits at the Clerk of Circuit Court’s counter, Clerk Lisa Walcisak placed an administrative blockade on the file, citing a pending judicial reassignment hold and unruled motions to seal.

However, an exhaustive analysis of CCAP court records, verbatim audio recordings, and municipal committee records reveals a dynamic tactical battleground:

1. The Game of Judicial Musical Chairs: After Judge Mark T. Fuhr recused himself, the Chief Judge takes over the case and the plaintiff executed statutory judicial substitution strikes under Wis. Stat. § 801.58, cycling through three circuit judges in eight days before permanently locking in Judge Timothy Gebert. WHO IS HONORABLE TIMOTHY GERBERT? – OSINT Article currently under investigation.

2. The Defense Reinforcements: As six key evidentiary exhibits hit the docket, Sheriff Brian Schmidt expanded his legal defense team, retaining high-profile civil defense litigation attorneys Ronald S. Stadler and Jonathan E. Sacks alongside Corporation Counsel Bryce Alan Schoenborn. A TEAM OF DEFENSE LAWYERS? FIGHTING FOR WHAT EXACTLY? – Next Upcoming Series

3. The Formal Open Records Mandamus Ultimatum: United Together Against Violence (U.T.A.V.), led by Executive Director Brittany L. Volkman, drafted a formal legal demand to Clerk Lisa Walcisak, demonstrating that pending motions do not equal judicial seal orders and warning of imminent mandamus litigation. WILL SHE SEND THE REQUEST IN TIME? – Memo Coming Soon

CASE ORIGINS & DOCKET ANOMALIES

The Intentional Tort Counter-Offensive

On August 12, 2026, John J. Brylski initiated civil litigation against Price County Sheriff Brian Schmidt and Attorney Robert M. Mihelich in Price County Circuit Court. This lawsuit represents an aggressive counter-offensive following a retaliatory defamation suit previously filed—and subsequently abandoned—by Sheriff Schmidt against Brylski.

The “Lightning Speed” Anomaly

According to official statements delivered during the Price County Law Enforcement Committee meeting on August 13, 2026, the county court system is bogged down by severe operational backlogs: 230 active cases and 250 cases awaiting initial review, with standard civil matters routinely waiting 1 to 3 years to reach a courtroom.

Yet, in Case 2026CV000108, the judicial posture shifted at unprecedented speed. Within 24 hours of filing, recusals, entries of appearance, substitution requests, and motions to seal were processed instantaneously.

DA OPERATIONAL REPORT

THE AUGUST 17 COURTHOUSE BLOCKADE

On August 17, 2026, at approximately 4:15 PM, a civilian representative (”Female Victim #2“) acting on behalf of an out-of-town party entered the Price County Clerk of Circuit Court office in Phillips, WI, to obtain copies of the documents associated with the case number 2026CV000108.

Elected Clerk of Circuit Court Lisa Walcisak and her front-desk deputy clerk intercepted the request, refusing to release or pull any case documents.

Price County Circuit Court Records Request Transcript [final]

152KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Intelligence & Operational Anomalies Discovered

1. The Preemptive Administrative Lock: Clerk Walcisak treated a proposed Motion to Seal and an active Judicial Substitution Hold as a blanket gag order, refusing to pull even unsealed public documents.

2. Courthouse Financial Discrepancies: The audio captured staff actively attempting to reconcile loose cash and deposit records involving a missing $10 or $110 ticket receipt entry, mentioning deputy staff member Alexis.

3. Lack of Institutional Preparedness: The elected Clerk admitted on record that it was “lame” her office lacked official business cards to provide citizens requesting formal correspondence.

4. Visible Agitation: Eyewitness reports from the visitor noted Clerk Walcisak displayed visible distress when pressed by informed citizens demanding compliance with public records statutory access.

THE “DOUBLE SUBSTITUTION” CHESS MATCH

The rapid movement of judicial assignments between August 12 and August 20 reveals a calculated tactical war over which judge would decide whether Brylski’s evidentiary exhibits remain open to the public or locked behind court seals.

Defense Strategy: Schoenborn’s “Double-Tap” Sealing Motion

On August 13, Corporation Counsel Bryce Alan Schoenborn executed a two-pronged legal filing:

1. Motion to Redact Protected Info in Court Record

2. Motion to Seal Document

By filing these motions on the exact same day that Judge Mark T. Fuhr recuses himself, Attorney Schoenborn was able to effectively created an administrative impasse. The Clerk’s office utilized the pending status of these motions to block civilian access while no judge was actively seated to rule on them.

Wis Stat 801 Highlighted

376KB ∙ PDF file

Download

DEFENSE HEAVYWEIGHTS REINFORCE SHERIFF SCHMIDT

As John Brylski inundated the record on August 17 with an Amended Complaint, an Amended Summons and Complaint, an Objection to Motion, and six separate “Other Papers” (Evidentiary Exhibits), the defense posture escalated significantly.

On August 20, 2026, two new notices of retainer were entered on behalf of Defendant Sheriff Brian Schmidt:

The mobilization of three veteran defense attorneys highlights the high risk these six evidentiary exhibits pose to Price County leadership, WCMIC liability payouts, and the ongoing investigation into local law enforcement operations.

PRICE COUNTY BUDGET MEMO

Price County | Board of Supervisors Meeting | August 18th, 2026

U.T.A.V. FORMAL LEGAL DEMAND & MANDAMUS WARNING

On August 20, 2026, following the permanent assignment of Judge Timothy Gebert, Brittany L. Volkman, Executive Director of United Together Against Violence (U.T.A.V.), drafted an explicit legal demand letter to Clerk Lisa Walcisak. Confirmation of sent correspondence in regards to formal demand on August 27, 2026.

Core Legal Arguments of the Demand

1. Expiration of Administrative Shield: With Judge Gebert assigned and actively issuing scheduling orders, the Clerk’s claim of “waiting for a new judge” is legally void.

2. Pending Motions Do Not Equal Sealing Orders: Under Wisconsin law (Wis. Stat. §§ 19.31–19.39) and Clerk duties (Wis. Stat. § 59.40(2)(a)), court documents are strictly presumed open. A defense motion or proposed order does not alter public status until a judge actually executes a signed sealing order.

3. Formal Itemized Document Demand:

○ Original Summons and Complaint

○ Amended Summons and Complaint

○ Amended Complaint

○ Plaintiff’s Objection to Motion

○ All six (6) evidentiary exhibit documents filed on August 17, 2026 (”Other papers”).

4. Litigation Warning: Failure to produce unredacted electronic copies to UTAV.advocacy@gmail.com will result in the immediate filing of a Mandamus Action in Price County Circuit Court to compel disclosure and pursue statutory punitive damages for arbitrary delay.

Formal Demand Letter 08 25 2026

149KB ∙ PDF file

Download

COMPLETE CHRONOLOGICAL CASE DOCKET

(AUG 12 – AUG 21, 2026)

2026cv000108 Case Details In Price County 08 21 2026 Eod

77.5KB ∙ PDF file

Download

OSINT DIRECTIVES & ACTION ITEMS

To maintain momentum and ensure full investigative coverage, the following operational task list has been generated from intelligence notes:

Special Investigative Report The Price County Litigation [final]

234KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Legal Disclaimer: This content is produced by United Together Against Violence (U.T.A.V.) for investigative, informational, and educational purposes. The findings herein rely on publicly available court dockets, statutory law, and verifiable public records. Allegations contained within civil complaints or referenced motions represent one side of a legal argument and do not constitute established facts. All individuals and entities mentioned are presumed innocent of civil or criminal wrongdoing unless adjudicated otherwise in a court of law. This report does not constitute legal advice.

Report Compiled & Verified by U.T.A.V. — August 28, 2026

_________________________________________________

Brittany L. Volkman Executive Director, U.T.A.V.

“When you refuse the people Hope, and replace that with persecution, you only leave them with, nothing left to lose. But accountability.”

CALL TO ACTION: IF YOU MADE IT ALL THE WAY TO THE END, COMMENT AND LET ME KNOW IF YOU WOLD LIKE ME TO WRITE ABOUT AND RELEASE THE RESIGNATION LETTER MENTIONED IN THE AI AUDIO PODCAST OVERVIEW?! :)

The Sound of Silence: What Happens When You Put a County Board on Notice | MAY 19, 2026

Brittany L. Volkman — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 22:38:03 GMT

By: Brittany L. Volkman | Executive Director, U.T.A.V.

May 19, 2026

When you walk into a room full of people who hold systemic power over a county, you expect a fight. You expect them to talk over you. You expect them to justify their actions, discredit your character, or hide behind bureaucratic jargon.

On Tuesday this week, I walked into the Price County Board of Supervisors meeting expecting exactly that. I was armed with months of audited police reports, FOIA denials, and documented evidence of systemic failures regarding domestic violence and firearms.

But what actually happened in that room was far more telling than a shouting match.

It started before I even reached the microphone. Board Chairman Brian Ernst attempted to use parliamentary procedure as a shield. When the motion was made to allow me to speak, Price County Administrator Nick Trimmer insisted that to change the rules and give me the floor, the board had to formally vote on it.

It was a classic bureaucratic trap. The assumption was simple: force a public roll-call vote, let the board quietly vote “No” under the guise of “following the rules,” and silence the domestic violence advocate without getting their hands dirty.

But the trap spectacularly backfired.

The 11-to-1 Fracture

The Chairman called the roll. One by one, every single member of the board had to publicly declare their stance. And one by one, they broke ranks.

Jennifer Baratka: Yes.

Brian Ernst: Yes.

Robert Kopisch: Yes.

The final tally? 11 to 1.

Eleven board members—whether out of genuine concern for the community or simple political self-preservation—voted to give me the floor.

The single, lone “No” vote was Larry Palecek.

For context, Larry is the board member who previously attempted to gaslight the public at several public meetings by comparing on content on social media to “Alfred Hitchcock” and “Orson Welles” for bringing these issues to light. He wanted to frame me as a dramatic storyteller spinning fiction. His “No” vote was a last-ditch effort to keep the truth out of the permanent record.

He failed.

The Three Minutes That Froze the Room

When I stepped to the podium, I took away their remaining power with my first sentence:

“Before I begin, I formally request that my following statement be entered word-for-word on the public record.”

I didn’t give them opinions. I didn’t give them emotion. I gave them three minutes of cold, hard, audited receipts. I laid out the chilling reality that

40 percent of all firearms violence in Wisconsin happens right here, in the sparsely populated rural Northwoods.

I called out the systemic cover-ups—the brick walls of FOIA denials, and the county’s absurd attempts to extort citizens by demanding exorbitant fees just to email a public PDF.

“That is what we pay taxes for,”

I reminded them.

“That is what their salaries are to do.”

Then, I addressed the “Hitchcock” in the room. I looked directly at the one man who tried to silence me.

“It is undeniable that there is something that you guys don’t want us to know... Because what open-source intelligence uncovers, Larry, paints a horrific picture. You’re right. If we analyze the records we do have, the list of victims is long, and it keeps growing.”

I put it on the official record that local law enforcement had severed direct emergency contact with domestic violence agencies—simply because a DV shelter put up a Black Lives Matter sign in 2020. I asked them how exactly severing ties with victim advocates over a yard sign keeps anyone safe in a small town.

I asked them to justify an “honor system” for violent felons regarding firearms surrenders—a system algorithmically proven to increase the rate of homicide.

The Legal Checkmate: Monell Liability

Then came the final blow. I didn’t just complain about bad policy; I invoked federal civil rights law.

“How long do you have to prove something before you enforce the law? This is the perfect example of what they call Monell liability. You knew this was a problem across two neighboring jurisdictions. You ignored it, you let it fester until pure ignorance became your official procedure.”

For those unfamiliar, Monell liability is the federal legal standard used in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuits. It means a municipality can be sued directly when their unconstitutional policies, practices, or willful ignorance result in the violation of civil rights.

By putting Monell on the permanent, word-for-word meeting minutes, I stripped Price County of their plausible deniability. They can never stand in front of a federal judge and say, “We didn’t know our system was broken.”

The Sound of Silence

I finished my three minutes. I braced myself for the counter-attack. I waited for the dismissive remarks, the attempts to discredit my data, or the angry rebuttals.

Instead?

Absolute, deafening silence.

The Chairman simply said,

“Thank you Ms. Volkman, that’s three minutes,”

and they moved on.

In the moment, that silence felt anti-climactic. But looking back, that silence was the ultimate victory. When a governing board is put on formal notice for civil rights violations, their legal counsel’s first rule is:

Do not engage, do not argue, and do not make admissions on the record. They didn’t argue because they couldn’t. I didn’t give them a story they could dismiss; I gave them a mirror they couldn’t look away from.

We walked into that room and exposed a fractured system. Eleven board members are now officially, legally on notice. The lone holdout was publicly isolated. And the truth about what is happening to victims in the Northwoods is now permanently cemented in the county’s own minutes.

The fight is far from over. But on May 19th 2026, we proved that when you bring the receipts, even the loudest rooms are forced to sit in silence.

If you believe in transparency, accountability, and the protection of domestic violence victims, please follow and share this post, and stand with U.T.A.V. as we continue to dismantle these broken systems.

#UTAV #civilrights #Wisconsin #CivicEngagement #municipality #BoardofSupervisors #pricecountywi #domesticabuseawaereness #UnitedTogetherAgainstViolence #accountability #MakeWaves #municipalgovernment

Subscribe now

PRICE COUNTY | Board of Supervisors Meeting | MAY 19, 2026

Brittany L. Volkman Executive Director, U.T.A.V.

“When you refuse the people Hope, and replace that with persecution, you only leave them with, nothing left to lose. But accountability.”

Memorandum: 2027 Budget Challenges and Proposed Strategic Funding Solutions

Brittany L. Volkman — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 17:31:18 GMT

Analysis of 2027 Budget Outlook and Proposed Operational Sustainability Strategies

STRATEGIC OVERVIEW:

THE FISCAL GAP AND THE LEVY LIMIT STALEMATE

Price County stands at a fiscal crossroads as they finalize the 2027 budget. For over 15 years, Wisconsin counties have operated under a restrictive 0% levy cap—a legislative stalemate that effectively strips local control over essential service funding. While the state provides a “Net New Construction” allowance, the growth in this area averages under 1%. Mathematically, this does not keep pace with standard inflation, let alone the rising costs of state-mandated services.

The current analysis identifies a projected operational overage between $500,000 and $1,000,000. It is vital for the Board to understand the “100 levers” of municipal taxation: while the levy itself may rise, our equalized values have increased such that the actual mill rate has gone down. This distinction is critical for their communication with constituents; they are managing a structural revenue gap, not a spending spree.

The fiscal pressures are no longer outliers, but systemic failures of the state funding formula to cover:

● Wages and Benefits: A necessary 2% market-rate wage adjustment and health insurance realignments.

● Operational Inflation: Fuel costs and highway equipment (a single salt truck now exceeds $380,000).

● Statutory Constraints: Fixed costs that rise while revenue remains capped by state law.

EVALUATION OF RISING OPERATIONAL COST DRIVERS

Modern technical and human service demands have outstripped the capacity of traditional “lean budgeting.” Price County is currently facing significant “cost to exist” increases driven by external vendor contracts and state mandates.

Regarding the Radio System, the Board has allocated $55,000 for a Phase 1 study to determine the actual “Service Life“ of their equipment. This is a strategic move to avoid a rushed, unvetted $2 million capital expenditure. Similarly, in Health and Human Services (HHS), they are seeing an unprecedented trend where AODDA and Behavioral costs are both rising simultaneously, rather than one offsetting the other as seen in previous fiscal cycles.

PROPOSED STRATEGY: SHIFTING INSURANCES TO DEBT LEVY

To protect the General Fund, Price County must utilize the debt levy as a fiscal relief valve. The state effectively forces the County into a “shell game” by capping operations while allowing borrowing for specific liabilities. By shifting approximately $400,000+ in liability and property insurance expenses into the debt levy, they “buy“ the operational room required to fund mandated services.

Risk Assessment:

This strategy requires a three-quarters (3/4) board majority vote every year. The risk is tangible: if a future board refuses this vote, the County would be forced to revert to “state-mandated service levels.” In practical terms, this means moving from a service model where a case is handled in one week to the state-allowed maximum of 90 days. This would represent a catastrophic degradation of service to citizens.

CAPITAL AND EQUIPMENT SUSTAINABILITY: THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT PLAN

The County can no longer rely on the “luck” of a mild winter to build the fund balances necessary for heavy equipment. We are transitioning to a proactive model to de-risk the budget from unpredictable weather patterns.

● “Yellow Equipment” 5-Year Plan: Trimner is proposing a consistent $500,000 annual borrowing rotation for loaders, graders, and bulldozers. This replaces the historical reliance on winter maintenance surpluses.

● Large Truck Strategy: To maintain a 10-year service life rotation, the county must purchase two trucks per year. The existing equipment fund covers one truck; he propose utilizing the debt levy for the second truck ($380,000) to prevent a maintenance debt that would destabilize future budgets.

FISCAL PERFORMANCE OF THE SELF-INSURED HEALTH PLAN

Price County’s self-insured status serves as a strategic shield against the 14% to 17% premium spikes currently devastating other Wisconsin municipalities. By maintaining a “slow and steady“ approach, they avoid radical budget shocks.

Their internal controls, including the Health 360 program and the Taylor Health Family Clinic , are performing exceptionally well. The clinic, specifically, saves the County approximately one-third of the cost compared to external facilities. While the health fund balance remains lower than the $500,000 target, these initiatives provide the long-term stability needed to keep their benefits competitive without draining the levy.

MACRO-STRATEGY AND THE LONG-TERM LEVY OUTLOOK

As Price County looks toward 2027 and beyond, administrative maneuvering must be paired with strategic legislative awareness.

● Referendum Reality: Recent history shows that general HHS referendums (like Ashland County’s $1M “miserable failure”) struggle due to the complexity of the mandate. However, “thematic branding” works; St. Croix County’s success was built specifically on a Law Enforcement frame. If the Board eventually seeks a referendum, it must be centered on public safety.

● Financial Legacy and Sales Tax: They are currently “unraveling the partnership“ with Bug Tussle to clean up a $15 million bond liability. By paying this off early, the county eliminates a significant long-term risk. Additionally, while Sales Tax is up 5.2% YTD, they anticipate a plateau as limited wage growth and high mortgages reduce discretionary spending.

● Legislative “Rumblings”: Discussions with representatives “down south” suggest a growing appetite for levy limit reform following the November elections. 2027 should be viewed as a “bridge year” while they await potential state-level relief.

Recommendation: The 2027 budget is lean and technically complex. The proposed shifts to the debt levy and the strategic borrowing for highway equipment represent the most viable path to maintaining mandated services without a referendum. Citizens of Price County must ask the Board to review these strategies thoroughly ahead of the September Executive Committee meeting.

Subscribe now

Price County 2027 Budget Memorandum 08 27 2026

162KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Price County | Board of Supervisors Meeting | August 18th, 2026

Legal Disclaimer: The information provided in this content is based on the analysis of the "Price County 2027 Budget Memorandum 08-27-2026.pdf" prepared by U.T.A.V. (United Together Against Violence). This summary is intended for informational and educational purposes only to encourage civic engagement and should not be construed as official legal, financial, or tax advice. Budget projections, proposed strategies, and legislative outlooks are forward-looking statements subject to change based on Board actions, state legislative decisions, and economic variables. Viewers and readers are encouraged to consult official Price County government records and attend public Board meetings for the most current and authoritative information.

Report Compiled & Verified by U.T.A.V.— August 28, 2026

_________________________________________________

Brittany L. Volkman Executive Director, U.T.A.V.

Price County Circuit Court | INTELLIGENCE REPORT | 08-17-2026

Brittany L. Volkman — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 17:07:14 GMT

District Attorney Alexis Nash: Operational Report Analysis

Brittany L. Volkman — Thu, 27 Aug 2026 23:21:41 GMT

Executive Summary

This Aritcle isolates and analyzes the department report given by District Attorney (DA) Alexis Nash during the Price County Law Enforcement Committee meeting on August 13, 2026.

Key takeaways from the report and subsequent discussions include:

Severe Case Backlog: The office is dealing with a high volume of cases, including 250 cases pending review and 230 active filed cases.
Staffing Imbalance: The office operates with only two attorneys—DA Alexis Nash and Assistant District Attorney (ADA) Ian Mickelson. DA Nash carries an overwhelming majority of the workload, prosecuting 191 active cases (82 felonies, 109 misdemeanors) compared to ADA Mickelson’s 39 active cases (10 felonies, 29 misdemeanors).
Focus on Victim Services: Staff training is prioritized to streamline and improve victim services through the office’s sole Victim Witness Coordinator.
Administrative Bottlenecks: Systemic bottlenecks like open records requests and appeals frequently pull the DA away from active case review.

Transition & Transparency: Having been in office for only four months, DA Nash is establishing her rhythm and committed to introducing structured, data-driven reports in future meetings to improve transparency.

District Attorney Alexis Nash Report Transcript And Analysis 08 26 2026

230KB ∙ PDF file

Download

THE CONTRADICTION:

-What happens when the victims start asking for Records. The same victims that are being left behind in drowning judicial system. Just trying to come prepared when they finally do get their day in court.

Analytical Breakdown of the District Attorney’s Report

DA Alexis Nash’s presentation provides a transparent, data-driven window into the severe operational strain, workload distribution, and strategic focus of the Price County District Attorney’s Office.

1. The Backlog Bottleneck (Cases Pending Review vs. Filed)

The most striking operational metric in the report is the ratio of pending cases to active cases:

Pending Review (250 cases): These are cases referred to the DA’s office by county law enforcement that have not yet been evaluated for formal charges. This represents a substantial intake backlog.
Active Filed Cases (230 cases): These are cases that are currently active and being litigated.
Total Office Caseload Potential: Between pending and active cases, the two-attorney office is responsible for 480 total cases in various stages of the legal pipeline.

Recent Charging Movement: DA Nash noted that approximately 50 cases were formally filed in the previous 60 days, demonstrating that the office is actively working to convert the pending pile into resolved or active litigation, but the inflow continues to challenge their capacity.

2. Workload Distribution and Staffing Strain

The staffing structure of the office consists of only two prosecutors: DA Alexis Nash and Assistant DA Ian Mickelson, who also works in neighboring Taylor County part-time as DA Kristi Tlusty’s ADA. A comparison of their respective caseloads reveals a steep distribution curve:

Workload Imbalance: DA Nash carries 191 of the 230 active filed cases (83%), while ADA Mickelson manages 39 cases (17%). This heavy concentration on the District Attorney suggests that the DA handles almost all major or complex criminal trials directly, in addition to her administrative responsibilities as department head.
Severe Felony Burden: DA Nash is personally handling 82 of the 92 total felonies (89.1%) in the county. Felonies require substantially more litigation time, research, and court appearances than misdemeanors, representing an immense individual professional burden.

High-Intensity Litigation (OWIs): Of the pending felonies, 14 are felony OWIs (Operating While Intoxicated) that are actively being litigated or prosecuted. OWI litigation frequently involves technical blood-alcohol data, expert witnesses, and rigorous motion practice, compounding the resource strain.

3. Professional Development and Victim Witness Advocacy

Despite the crushing caseload, the DA is actively focusing on organizational improvement:

Victim Witness Services: The office employs one Victim Witness Coordinator whom DA Nash praises as doing an “exceptional job.” Given the high caseload, a vast majority of these cases involve victims who require statutory notifications, support, and court accompaniment under Wisconsin’s crime victims’ rights laws (e.g., Marsy’s Law).
Upcoming Training: Staff members are scheduled for professional development training in the coming weeks specifically aimed at streamlining and improving victim services. This investment is crucial for maximizing efficiency in a single-coordinator office, ensuring that victim communication does not slip amidst the heavy litigation schedule.

4. Administrative Interferences: Open Records and Appeals

DA Nash highlighted that her prosecuting capacity is frequently degraded by non-prosecutorial legal mandates:

Open Records Demands: As detailed in her earlier comments, complying with Wisconsin Open Records laws is a major operational drain. The DA cannot simply hand over files; she must spend extensive hours conducting legal reviews, performing sensitive redactions (such as protecting victim or juvenile identities), or writing and legally defending formal denials.

Appellate Work: Handling appeals of lower court decisions requires extensive brief-writing and research, which further pulls the DA away from clearing the 250-case pending review pile.

Isolated Transcript: The District Attorney’s Department Report

The following is the word-for-word transcript of the portion of the meeting where District Attorney Alexis Nash is called upon to give her formal department report.

Committee Chairperson (Larry Palecek): All right. Thanks again, Bob. Alexis, it is your turn now.
District Attorney Alexis Nash: Oh, yeah. It’s my turn. I’ll—I’ll make it quick. Um, first of all, I apologize for being a few minutes, uh, late.
Chairperson (Larry Palecek): Not a problem. Thank you.
DA Alexis Nash:
Um, so I’ll just kind of give you a quick synopsis of kind of where the DA’s office is in terms of volume, and then just kind of generally give you an idea of where we are in terms of staffing, and, um, just generally how everything is going.
Um, so what I will say is that, uh, we’re still at a high volume in terms of cases. Um, right now we have—I’ just break it down this way. Uh, we have about 250 cases still pending review. Um, so they’ve been referred in by law enforcement, but we have yet to still review those and determine if they should be charged offenses or not. Um, and then we have a total of 230 filed cases. So those are currently active cases right now in Price County.
Uh, of that 230 filed cases, uh, we have about—let’s see here, where’s my numbers? It’s on my screen. Ah, yes. Uh, we have a total of two—there’s only two of us, so it’s myself and then it’s my ADA, uh, Ian Mickelson. So, uh, for myself, I’m carrying 82 felony cases and 109 misdemeanors. And then Ian is carrying 10 felony cases and 29, uh, misdemean [misdemeanor] cases. And of those felony cases, there are a total of 14 felony OWIs that are actively pending. Um, so those are the cases we are actively, uh, litigating or prosecuting currently.
But like I said, we have still about 200 plus still needing to be reviewed. Um, and of that number, we recently—just recently, maybe in the last 60 days, maybe roughly—um, just filed about 50 of those, um, cases. So we’re—we’re working towards getting to that number down as fast, um, as we can.
Uh, but in general, um, from my perspective, I—I believe everything is going well. I haven’t received any complaints, at least not to my face. Um, and so, uh, staffing is going well. I do have staff that is going, uh, for training in a few weeks. Um, they’re going to be bringing back some information regarding bettering our victim services. Um, so we have one victim witness coordinator in our office who I think is doing an exceptional job, honestly. And so she will be attending, um, this conference to bring back some information how we can streamline some services with regards to victims because, as you can see, we have a huge volume of cases and a lot of these cases have victims in them, and we want to make sure that we’re providing the best service, um, to—to victims.
Um, in addition, uh, to that, there isn’t much, um, else going on the DA’s office. Like I said, we’re just constantly trying to get the volume of the case load, um, down. Uh, sometimes I am pulled away to handle things like open records requests, or I have to deal with appeals. So, um, that does slow things down just a little bit. Um, but otherwise, we are working diligently to try and get—you know, address these concerns from the community. Um, and that’s—that’s the end of my report unless you have any questions.
Chairperson (Larry Palecek): And you thought it was going to be quiet up here.
DA Alexis Nash: Yes. Right. My mistake.
Chairperson (Larry Palecek): Thank you for the report. Uh, I wish we had some numbers that we could refer to going historically, but we haven’t getting [gotten] a report like this in a long time. So thank you.
DA Alexis Nash: Yes, thank you very much. So, yeah, it—it is my, uh, intention to try and, uh, produce a report for you, and so you can see the—the movement that’s happening. Um, but I get—I’ve been here now, I want to say four months. So I am still, honestly, still getting, uh, finding my—my—my rhythm here, uh, with, uh, everything that’s going on. But my intention is to have that report so it’s more clear and transparent.
Chairperson (Larry Palecek): Thanks, Alexis.

Additional Isolated Transcript: Remarks on Open Records Requests

Earlier in the meeting, during a discussion initiated by Chief Deputy Robert Hawn and County Administrator Nicholas Trimner regarding the rising tide of open records requests, DA Alexis Nash offered highly relevant professional guidance on how the county should approach these legal mandates.

DA Alexis Nash:
Yeah. Hello. Okay, now you can hear me. Um, so I feel like I can teach a class on this as much law if I’ve read on this already. So dealing with the sheriff’s office and my office, obviously we’re dealing with very sensitive information, right? Um, and so there are provisions in the law that permit us to not always disclose certain information. So I know the—the—the first reaction to of course I have to share this with you, right? And then of course the law does say, yeah, you have to disclose, but it’s the time that you have to put in, right, to see what you can and cannot disclose.
So I unfortunat [unfortunately]—I don’t have an answer for you with how to do that because we’re—I have even smaller office, right? I—and I’m trying to, do, be in court and answer these, you know, requests at the same time, but also going through these files and making sure that we’re not, um, disseminating information that we shouldn’t be, right? So I do spend quite more—a lot of time declining, uh, requests, um, and citing law for that reason.
But, um, you know, I would just say, when—if you get those requests, my recommendation is of course—it sounds like you already are doing it—it’s just, um, try to ascertain as much as you can about what there is they’re asking for. You’re right, they give a broad stroke, right? And they really don’t have to be that detailed in their request. Um, but if you can, you know, have a relationship and say, “Hey, if you can just be more specific about what it is you want cuz we don’t have the manpower, we don’t, you know, have the time, we want to satisfy your request.” Um, and sometimes they can be a little bullish, right? Um, they just want to do the whole “I gotcha” thing like Nick was saying.
Um, and so I guess just understand that, and it sounds like you’re already doing it. So don’t just default to disclosure immediately cuz, you know, maybe there’s this inclination to do that because yes, the law says you have to disclose, but what exactly are you asking for and where are we at in this stage of this thing and, um, there may be a blanket denial that you can, uh, you know, disseminate to them.
So I would just encourage to make sure that you are—we are as the county, um, making sure that we are getting as much as information as possible from them about what is it—what it is they exact—what they want exactly, um, and then making sure, you know, we are doing redactions as we can, but sometimes you don’t have to redact, sometimes just a—it’s just a denial, you know, but you have to try to ascertain as much as you can about what it is exactly you’re looking for because the law does provide for exemptions and exceptions to that.

5. Transition, Culture, and Future Committee Governance

DA Nash’s report represents a major step forward in committee-department relations:

Establishing a Rhythm: Having been in office for only four months at the time of the meeting, DA Nash is still transitioning into her role.
Historic Transparency Deficit: Chairperson Larry Palecek explicitly noted that the committee “hasn’t been getting a report like this in a long time,” pointing to a historical lack of detailed, quantitative reporting from the DA’s office.
Commitment to Clear Reporting: DA Nash committed to formalizing these verbal updates into structured, written reports in future meetings, providing the committee with the quantitative “movement” and data points they need for effective county governance and budgetary planning.

Subscribe now

UPCOMING ARTICLE: “U.T.A.V. ON THE RECORD”

UPCOMING SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT: INSIDE THE “BRYLSKI BLOCKADE”

Legal Disclaimer: This content is produced by United Together Against Violence (U.T.A.V.) for educational, informational, and advocacy purposes. The analysis provided is based on publicly available transcripts, government meetings, and official reports. It does not constitute legal advice. Mentions of active legal cases, pending charges, or investigations are public matters; all individuals discussed are presumed innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law. U.T.A.V. advocates for transparency and accountability within the justice system, and opinions expressed are solely those of the organization based on available public data.

Report Compiled & Verified by U.T.A.V. — August 27, 2026

_________________________________________________

Brittany L. Volkman Executive Director, U.T.A.V.

“When you refuse the people Hope, and replace that with persecution, you only leave them with, nothing left to lose. But accountability.”

The Architecture of Belief

Brittany L. Volkman — Tue, 25 Aug 2026 17:42:36 GMT

The Sound of Silence: What Happens When You Put a County Board on Notice | MAY 19, 2026 | PRICE COUNTY | Board of Supervisors Meeting | 9AM | U.T.A.V. ON THE RECORD | PART 1

Brittany L. Volkman — Sun, 23 Aug 2026 20:26:36 GMT

By: Brittany L. Volkman | Executive Director, U.T.A.V.

May 19, 2026

But what actually happened in that room was far more telling than a shouting match.

But the trap spectacularly backfired.

The 11-to-1 Fracture

The Chairman called the roll. One by one, every single member of the board had to publicly declare their stance. And one by one, they broke ranks.

Jennifer Baratka: Yes.

Brian Ernst: Yes.

Robert Kopisch: Yes.

The final tally? 11 to 1.

Eleven board members—whether out of genuine concern for the community or simple political self-preservation—voted to give me the floor.

The single, lone “No” vote was Larry Palecek.

He failed.

The Three Minutes That Froze the Room

When I stepped to the podium, I took away their remaining power with my first sentence:

“Before I begin, I formally request that my following statement be entered word-for-word on the public record.”

I didn’t give them opinions. I didn’t give them emotion. I gave them three minutes of cold, hard, audited receipts. I laid out the chilling reality that

40 percent of all firearms violence in Wisconsin happens right here, in the sparsely populated rural Northwoods.

I called out the systemic cover-ups—the brick walls of FOIA denials, and the county’s absurd attempts to extort citizens by demanding exorbitant fees just to email a public PDF.

“That is what we pay taxes for,”

I reminded them.

“That is what their salaries are to do.”

Then, I addressed the “Hitchcock” in the room. I looked directly at the one man who tried to silence me.

I asked them to justify an “honor system” for violent felons regarding firearms surrenders—a system algorithmically proven to increase the rate of homicide.

The Legal Checkmate: Monell Liability

Then came the final blow. I didn’t just complain about bad policy; I invoked federal civil rights law.

The Sound of Silence

I finished my three minutes. I braced myself for the counter-attack. I waited for the dismissive remarks, the attempts to discredit my data, or the angry rebuttals.

Instead?

Absolute, deafening silence.

The Chairman simply said,

“Thank you Ms. Volkman, that’s three minutes,”

and they moved on.

The fight is far from over. But on May 19th 2026, we proved that when you bring the receipts, even the loudest rooms are forced to sit in silence.

#UTAV #civilrights #Wisconsin #CivicEngagement #municipality #BoardofSupervisors #pricecountywi #domesticabuseawaereness #UnitedTogetherAgainstViolence #accountability #MakeWaves #municipalgovernment

EXECUTIVE DOSSIER:

Brittany L. Volkman — Tue, 11 Aug 2026 04:53:29 GMT

Date: August 2026

Subject: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Failure to Supervise, Deliberate Indifference, and Election Interference

Prepared By: United Together Against Violence (U.T.A.V.)

OVERVIEW & THE HYPOCRISY OF COMMAND

Chief Deputy Robert C. Hawn is currently seeking election as the Sheriff of Price County, campaigning on a platform of law and order. However, a forensic audit of his administrative command reveals a legacy of severe, systemic misconduct within the 9th Judicial District’s “Iron Triangle.” Operating as the operational head of the Price County Sheriff’s Office, Chief Deputy Hawn has cultivated an environment of “Deliberate Indifference.”

He has actively intimidated whistleblowers, sworn to defamatory statements in official court records to destroy victims of police sexual misconduct, and permitted his subordinate investigators to illegally leak suppressed police memos doxing victims of armed abduction for his own faction’s political gain. The documentation below establishes irrefutable Monell liability and supervisory liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

UTAV HAS GENERATED A GEMINI AI AUDIO PODCAST FOR YOU TO LISTEN TO BELOW

STATE-CREATED DANGER & ELECTION INTERFERENCE (FEMALE VICTIM #1)

The most egregious failure under Chief Deputy Hawn’s command occurred in the summer of 2026, when his department prioritized a political campaign over the life of a pregnant woman abducted by an armed white supremacist.

The Perpetrators:

● Sheriff Brian S. Schmidt (Price County Sheriff’s Office)

● Chief Deputy Robert C. Hawn (Price County Sheriff’s Office)

● Lt. Blaine V. Peterson (Phillips Police Department)

● Investigator Dylan Scheller (Price County Sheriff’s Office)

● Robert Ray Anderson Jr (Abductor)

The Thrice-Reported Abduction & The Blotter Cover-Up:

Witness testimony confirms that Robert Ray Anderson Jr. abducted FEMALE VICTIM #1 three separate times. Official reports were filed on June 20 and June 22, 2026. On June 22, at 4:17 p.m., Sheriff candidate Walt Madsen contacted the Phillips Police Department reporting an active emergency, stating that FEMALE VICTIM #1 was

“possibly being held against her will”

begging for an exigent Flock ALPR camera search. According to the department’s own published public blotter, Lt. Peterson refused to investigate, determining instead that Madsen was “possibly being scammed,” and buried the abduction as a mere “report for record.” Peterson created an off-the-books “shadow file” (the June 22 memo) to falsely minimize the kidnapping as a consensual “civil breakup.”

Lethality Profile & Deliberate Indifference:

Law enforcement possessed constructive knowledge of extreme danger. The abductor, Robert Ray Anderson Jr., possesses a swastika tattooed on his forehead, a known indicator of supremacist gang affiliation. During the abduction, Anderson explicitly threatened:

“If I can’t have you, no one will.”

The Price County Sheriff’s Office is intimately aware of the lethality of this profile; when arresting another local abuser with a facial swastika (“Josh/a.k.a Harley,” who abused FEMALE VICTIM #2), the department required six-officers to restrain him and a tactical perimeter. Yet, they willfully ignored the exact same threat profile when the victim was tied to a political rival. It’s alleged that there was a prior report made of stalking where Robert Ray Anderson Jr. was watching the victim’s family in a tree at Elk Lake Park, this report has not yet been factually confirmed, as it was not listed in the Police Blotters investigators have reviewed and requires further requests for Police Reports. As this case is an on-going interstate investigation it is assumed these records will be subjected to a balancing test in which it is indefinite that the harm to the investigation will outweigh the public’s interest in obtaining these documents.

The Interstate Armed Abduction of a Pregnant Victim:

Because the Phillips Police Department exhibited deliberate indifference, Anderson successfully abducted FEMALE VICTIM #1—who’s medical records confirm was pregnant—and her existing MINOR CHILD across state lines. On July 9, 2026, Anderson was arraigned in Clarke County, Iowa. Verified Iowa Trial Court Dockets (Case Nos. FECR017567 and FECR017569) confirm the horrifying reality. Anderson was charged with:

● Sexual Abuse - 2nd Degree (Class B Felony)

● Assault with Intent to Commit Sexual Abuse - Bodily Injury

● Assault While Displaying a Dangerous Weapon

● Going Armed with Intent

● Child Endangerment

Sheriff Schmidt’s Obstruction & The Weaponized Dox:

As of August 2, 2026, Sheriff Brian Schmidt actively refused to acknowledge the abduction occurred within Price County. Despite victims providing direct contact information for the Clarke County District Attorney, Schmidt refused to contact Iowa authorities, actively obstructing the cross-jurisdictional investigation.

During Madsen’s campaign he had boisterously denounced his distaste for the newly installed FLOCK ALPR cameras in Price County, alleging that law enforcement bypassed standard civilian oversight on the installation. Rather than admitting their catastrophic failure, Investigator Dylan Scheller posted Lt. Peterson’s un-filed and unredacted shadow memo on Facebook during a live streamed political Q&A to attack Madsen’s campaign against the FLOCK cameras, effectively doxing a pregnant survivor of armed sexual violence in violation of Wisconsin Marsy’s Law and Wis. Stat. § 946.12.

In this Internal Memo the Lt. notes that Madsen asked to use the FLOCK cameras to locate FEMALE VICTIM #1 during the active abduction. In the same memo, Lt. Peterson documents how he conveniently used, “Fourth Amendment Violations,” to excuse their refusal to use the FLOCK cameras to aid in the rescue of Madsen’s girlfriend and her child. To which investigators argue there is absolutely no excuse for their inability to search the cameras database for the abductors license plate. Which law enforcement and their supporters argue that these cameras are allegedly installed and used for this exact purpose in the statewide debate on the topic. It can even be argued that the Price County Sheriff’s Office should have no logistical reasons as to why they wouldn’t have been able to apprehend a known threat to vulnerable pregnant woman, as they have been capable to have done this in the case of FEMALE VICTIM #2.

WARRANTLESS ASSAULT & SWORN DEFAMATION (FEMALE VICTIM #2)

Chief Deputy Hawn explicitly utilized his authority to revictimize a survivor of police sexual misconduct, signing official court documents that defamed her while ignoring blatant Fourth Amendment violations committed by his own investigators.

The Sworn Defamation:

When Officer Connor Newman was criminally charged for his on-duty sexual misconduct with FEMALE VICTIM #2 (Case No. 2025CF000131), Chief Deputy Hawn signed and swore to the criminal complaint as the official Complainant. In that document, Hawn swore to a narrative written by Investigator Dylan Scheller that baselessly labeled FEMALE VICTIM #2 a

“known methamphetamine user.”

Investigators confirmed this was a calculated smear tactic to destroy her reputation in the public record. Despite there being no actual proof on the public record of this fact. Investigators confirmed this after searching CCAP for prior drug charges, only to find that the victim was subjected to hair and nail follicle testing at the will of her ex-husband and a conflicted Guardian Ad Litem. Investigators further deducted that there were no findings in the family court record to suggest that FEMALE VICTIM #2 has ever test posted for the substance mentioned in the Criminal Complaint against Connor Newman.

Supervisory Endorsement of Warrantless Assault:

Within that exact same sworn complaint, Investigator Scheller explicitly admitted to committing a warrantless assault. Scheller admits he did not have a warrant:

“I told [her] I would like consent to get [her] cell phone or I would be applying for a search warrant...”

This statement alone proves that Investigator Dylan Scheller did not, in fact, have a warrant to obtain FEMALE VICTIM #2’s cellular Device, nor did the officer have authority to enter the home of the victim. When FEMALE VICTIM #2 attempted to retreat into the privacy of her own home (a constitutionally protected space), Scheller bypassed the warrant requirement via physical force:

“I grabbed [her] arm and attempted to control [her] from going back into the residence. [She] fell to the ground.”

Chief Deputy Hawn signed this document, reviewing and endorsing a subordinate’s written confession to a severe Fourth Amendment civil rights violation. No disciplinary action was taken as August 10, 2026, this derives of the knowledge of all three victims and individuals/witnesses involved in this investigation.

The Department’s Clinical Network:

Hawn’s department utilizes Anna Jo Childs as their primary AODA counselor—a compromised individual who made an unannounced visit to FEMALE VICTIM #2’s home, bizarrely gifting the victim a “torch lighter” (used for street drugs) in a calculated attempt to induce or allege a relapse and seize her children. This was confirmed by witness testimony and verified through correspondence between medical professionals and the attorney’s involved in the Family Court case between FEMALE VICTIM #2 and her ex-Husband. These specific documents are consequently protected by HIPPA LAWS, investigators do not feel compelled to release such information on the public record despite expressed permission from FEMALE VICTIM #2.

THE ATF INTERVENTION & WITNESS INTIMIDATION (FEMALE VICTIM #3)

Chief Deputy Hawn oversaw the deliberate suppression of felony firearm offenses committed by a known domestic abuser (Gregory Pittman), only acting when forced by federal authorities, and actively threatening the victim who exposed the cover-up.

The Gun Laundering, Ghost Arrest, & Missing Pistol:

In May 2025, the Price County Sheriff’s Department willfully ignored a felony transfer of firearms involving Pittman. FEMALE VICTIM #3 was forced to bypass local corruption and contact the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) just to compel the Sheriff’s Department to execute their basic duties. It was only after FEMALE VICTIM #3 brought in the federal ATF that local authorities were compelled to act in the retrieval of the Ruger Rifle that Pittman was arrested for and initially charged with, 19 days after the initial report of transferred firearm.

During the investigation, local law enforcement seemingly conducted a “ghost arrest”—bypassing standard booking and public blotter protocols effectively shield Pittman from public scrutiny. Furthermore, a crucial piece of evidence, a pistol, mysteriously vanished from the evidentiary chain of custody in Phillips Police Department. This deliberate spoliation of evidence by law enforcement guaranteed Pittman would receive a highly lenient, deferred sentence instead of the federal felony convictions he warranted.

This effectively emboldened the abuser and demonstrated the exact liabilities to argue state created danger, as this firearm had previously been surrendered to the law enforcement of Taylor County, at the order of a Domestic Abuse Injunction granted in January 2023 until January 2027. This order was still enforced at the time of Pittman’s arrest for both the Rifle and the Pistol. Yet the firearms remained in his possession for over 2 years until he decided to illegally transfer and sell them across county lines, but not until Federal agents got involved.

The Newman Spoliation:

During the investigation into an HK Pistol illegally traded by Pittman, Phillips Police Officer Connor Newman (who was actively engaging in sexual misconduct with FEMALE VICTIM #2) deliberately contaminated the witness pool. Newman failed to file supplemental police reports regarding the firearm seizure to protect the individuals involved in the gun trade. On October 24, 2025, Price County DA Ian Mickelson explicitly admitted on a recorded call that he had to drop the felony gun charges because of Newman’s spoliation, claiming conflicted witness testimony.

The Intimidation Tactic:

When FEMALE VICTIM #3 met with Chief Deputy Hawn in his office and correctly identified the missing report as “corruption,” Hawn did not initiate an internal affairs investigation. Instead, according to verified audio transcripts, Hawn seemingly threatened the federal whistleblower:

“I would caution you on the use of the word corruption. That has a very definitive legal meaning... in which you are now essentially accusing public officials of... doing criminal activity.”

The Records Blockade & Fake Hearings:

Under Hawn’s command, the Sheriff’s Office and Corporation Counsel actively obstructed FEMALE VICTIM #3 Open Records requests. Hawn participated in active deception. On July 17, 2026, Corporation Counsel Bryce Schoenborn refused to speak with FEMALE VICTIM #3 and FEMALE VICTIM #2 by claiming he was locked in an active Zoom hearing. Minutes later, Chief Deputy Hawn admitted to being on the phone with Schoenborn discussing her records, proving the “hearing” was a coordinated deception to dodge a citizen in person. This interaction was recorded as evidence.

After issuing a formal blockade on bodycam footage under the guise of sudden “emergency redactions,” they subsequently imposed arbitrary, administrative protocols to force FEMALE VICTIM #3 to resubmit her original records request citing a 30-day policy. Which was expired due to FEMALE VICTIM #3’s inability to pay the exorbitant location fees, erecting an effective retaliatory paywall. Fee’s that she has specifically asked to be waived in writing on several occasions.

CONCLUSION & FEDERAL DEMAND

Chief Deputy Robert C. Hawn’s tenure is defined by a systemic weaponization of the Price County Sheriff’s Office. He intimidates whistleblowers who expose missing evidence, he swears to provably false and defamatory statements to destroy the credibility of victims of police sexual misconduct, and he allows his investigators to commit warrantless assaults and dox pregnant abduction survivors to rig an election. Chief Deputy Hawn is not a candidate for law and order; he is the de facto architect of the county’s liability, following the reign of the previous Sheriff Brian S. Schmidt. Investigators believe that the actions of Chief Deputy Robert C. Hawn did not happen in a vacuum, the current Sheriff and previous Sheriffs before him have allegedly committed these same systemic violations of civil rights against woman and children over several decades. Insinuating a policy of oversight that either encourages or ignores such heinous crimes to protect the status of an apparatus that Watch Dog groups across the state of Wisconsin, have coined the Good Old Boys Network or the G.O.B. for short.

The evidence herein supports immediate federal oversight and investigation by the Wisconsin Department of Justice (DCI) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation for systemic 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights deprivations.

Subscribe now

LEGAL DISCLAIMER: The statements, timelines, and claims presented in this publication are derived directly from verified public records, official court dockets, sworn criminal complaints, authenticated audio transcripts, and direct witness testimony. This publication is distributed by United Together Against Violence (U.T.A.V.) strictly for educational purposes, public awareness, and the furtherance of civil rights transparency under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. As public officials and candidates for elected office, the subjects mentioned herein are subject to public scrutiny. All individuals, including law enforcement officers, are presumed innocent of any criminal charges until proven guilty in a court of law. U.T.A.V. expressly disclaims any liability for the interpretation or utilization of this information by third parties. This documentation is provided to ensure taxpayer transparency and accountability in municipal government.

Price County Resolution Proposal Point #2: The $12.6 Million Digital Rescue

Brittany L. Volkman — Mon, 18 May 2026 14:03:35 GMT

The Protocol of Negligence: Closing the Rural Compliance Gap

Brittany L. Volkman — Mon, 18 May 2026 12:02:12 GMT

“When the justice system and crisis advocates fail to integrate, the safety net shatters. And in the sparsely populated regions of Northern Wisconsin, that shattered net has a body count.”

The Audit & The Architecture (Official May 19th Board Briefing)

Brittany L. Volkman — Sun, 17 May 2026 04:12:31 GMT

🎙️On Tuesday, May 19th, I will step up to the podium at the Price County Board of Supervisors meeting. I will not be there to complain about the state of our local government. I will be there to present the absolute, federally funded architecture required to fix it.

05 19 2026 County Board Agenda (1)

34.8KB ∙ PDF file

Download

🤗 Welcome to the official launch of the U.T.A.V. Agenda Briefing.

🗓️ Over the past several months, United Together Against Violence has executed a relentless, purely blind Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) and forensic financial audit of the 9th Judicial District. We mapped the municipal ledgers. We pulled the federal court dockets. We analyzed the environmental permits and the public safety statistics.

🚩 The data reveals a county buckling under massive infrastructural debt and severe administrative negligence.

But U.T.A.V. does not just expose systemic failure; we engineer sovereign, community-owned solutions.

🎥 This is the cinematic executive summary of the four-point resolution proposal I will be presenting to the board.

🎞️ This video is merely the introduction. It is the roadmap.

📓 Over the course of the next two days, exclusively here on Substack, I will be releasing the unredacted, deeply detailed OSINT dossiers for each of these four points. For paid subscribers only. This is our proprietary Intellectual Property and there for needs a paywall to protect it. Each 4 of my resolution points will have a free Video deep dive posted for those of you who can’t afford the IP documents.

Tomorrow:

☑️ We expose the lethal “Firearms Gap” and the ‘Honor System’ that continues to put rural domestic violence victims in the crosshairs.

☑️ We release The $12.6 Million Digital Rescue, detailing exactly how U.T.A.V. can bypass the county’s failed $15 million fiber-optic project using Low Earth Orbit Starlink networks.

☑️ We drop the raw files on the United Pride Dairy CAFO solution, outlining our Chapter 185 Worker-Owned Cooperative transition plan.

🏛️ The local political establishment has relied on closed-door meetings and complex bureaucracies to keep the public in the dark for decades. That ends on Tuesday.

👀 Watch the briefing. Prepare for tomorrow’s document drops. And join me in demanding absolute accountability.

— Brittany L. Volkman, Executive Director, U.T.A.V.

Subscribe now

The Price County Files: The Architecture of an Agricultural Oligopoly

Brittany L. Volkman — Fri, 15 May 2026 02:26:47 GMT

By U.T.A.V. Investigative Reporting | The Price County Files: Phase 3

The Milk Moguls of Price County

Brittany L. Volkman — Fri, 15 May 2026 02:22:08 GMT

Subscribe now

1. Introduction: The Industrial Shift

In the American cultural imagination, the dairy farm remains a relic of pastoral stewardship—a red-barn operation defined by family labor and a connection to the soil. However, the reality of modern agriculture in Price County has mutated into a “vertically integrated corporate enterprise.” At the center of this transformation is United Pride Dairy (UPD), a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) that functions less as a farm and more as the nucleus of a highly sophisticated financial and political network. The shift from agrarian roots to an industrial machine is best symbolized by UPD’s 60-stall rotary parlor. This “industrial carousel” allows for the continuous, non-stop milking of 2,540 cows, but it also serves as the corporate headquarters, complete with administrative offices and a conference room overlooking the production floor. This transition was cemented in 2020 with a generational shift to Jeremy Pesko and Bill Harper. Harper, who manages the dairy’s financial architecture, notably held virtually no working knowledge of dairy animals prior to 2005, highlighting a modern reality: these mega-dairies are increasingly governed by logistical and financial imperatives rather than traditional husbandry.

2. The $3 Million Safety Net: Socializing Agricultural Risk

The growth of United Pride Dairy is not merely a triumph of free-market efficiency; it is the result of a systematic extraction of federal support. Between 1995 and 2024, UPD secured a staggering $2,959,254.92 in cumulative federal subsidies, ranking as the #1 recipient in the region. This financial flow is not a historical artifact—as recently as 2023, the dairy extracted $155,223 in direct payouts. This “socialized risk” model utilizes programs like Price Loss Coverage (PLC)—where UPD ranks #7 in Wisconsin’s 7th District—to insulate profit margins from global market volatility. By leveraging these sophisticated mechanisms, the ownership syndicate ensures that operational risks are offloaded onto the taxpayer while capital gains are kept strictly private. To understand the monopolistic nature of this capture, one must compare United Pride Dairy to its closest regional competitor. While UPD extracted nearly $3 million, the second-highest recipient in the county, Kenneth Denzine, received just $257,636 during the same period. This ten-fold disparity illustrates how federal farm policy disproportionately fuels the expansion of corporate CAFOs while mid-sized family operations are left with the scraps.

“3. The TN Visa “Bait-and-Switch”: Labor Exploitation in the Parlor

The labor required to sustain a 24/7 industrial milk plant is massive, but the local domestic labor pool in northern Wisconsin has functionally collapsed. To solve this, UPD turned to international labor pipelines, specifically the TN (Trade National) Visa program. However, federal litigation filed by the EEOC (EEOC v. United Pride Dairy LLC) in late 2025 alleges that the dairy utilized a fraudulent “bait-and-switch” scheme to procure cheap labor. The lawsuit alleges that UPD made formal representations to the U.S. Embassy promising Mexican nationals professional roles such as animal scientists or veterinarians. Once the workers arrived in Phillips, the dairy allegedly revoked these roles and forced them into grueling manual labor. To justify this treatment, management reportedly used hostile national origin stereotyping, calling American workers “lazy” to pressure migrant workers into longer hours and harsher conditions. This toxic culture extended beyond discrimination; the complaint details a culture of unpoliced sexual harassment, including an allegation that a supervisor sent unsolicited pornographic images to a female subordinate without intervention from the Bill Harper-led management team.

4. The Local Power Web: Owning the Bank and the Ballot Box

The dairy’s dominance is protected by an intricate “Power Web” that allows the Pesko-Harper syndicate to capture local administrative and financial nodes. This regional oligopoly ensures that the macro-environment remains perpetually favorable to the dairy’s expansion.

● The Conflict of Interest Matrix: As of April 2025, Jon Pesko serves as the Chairman of the Board at Forward Bank, the primary regional lender. This position grants him immense “soft power” over the very capital markets his dairy relies on for expansion, effectively overseeing the flow of regional liquidity while serving as the bank’s largest borrower.

● The Taxation Nexus: Jon Pesko also serves as President and Treasurer of the Phillips School District Board of Education. In this role, he oversees an annual budget of $13.3 million—$ 6 million of which is derived from local property taxes. As one of the largest real estate holders in the county, Pesko is the chief tax levier for the exact same tax burden his own corporate holdings must pay.

● Infrastructure Control: Jeremy Pesko’s seat on the Town of Worcester board provides direct influence over zoning and road maintenance. This allows the dairy to direct municipal tax dollars to repair specific roads destroyed by their own 80,000-pound milk tankers, effectively subsidizing their logistical wear-and-tear through the public purse.

5. The Pandemic Payday: A $487,000 Tax-Free Grant

The COVID-19 pandemic provided a unique opportunity for UPD to demonstrate its administrative agility. On April 9, 2020, the dairy secured a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan of $487,200. Despite being classified as an “essential business” that faced no operational shutdowns or revenue loss—with cows requiring daily milking and milk collection continuing unabated via Foremost Farms—the dairy claimed the relief. On April 19, 2021, the federal government forgave 100% of the loan. This converted the debt into a direct, tax-free cash grant. This massive liquidity injection gave UPD a distinct, asymmetric advantage over smaller farms that lacked the accounting infrastructure to maximize such relief, further driving the concentration of agricultural wealth in the hands of the “Milk Moguls.”

6. Conclusion: A Testing Ground for Federal Accountability

The evolution of United Pride Dairy represents the definitive end of the traditional agrarian model in northern Wisconsin. It has replaced stewardship with a hyper-concentrated power structure that integrates banking, municipal governance, and federal welfare into a single corporate architecture. By privatizing gains and socializing risks, the ownership syndicate has effectively insulated itself from the traditional challenges of the free market. As the 2025 EEOC lawsuit moves through the federal docket, it stands as a critical test: can federal civil rights and labor enforcement actually penetrate a politically and financially insulated regional mega-dairy, or has the “Power Web” become too entrenched for the law to reach?

COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL DISCLAIMER

1. Applicability This legal disclaimer applies to this Substack article, the accompanying research document (”Dairy LLC OSINT and Financial Investigation”), the audio overview (”How United Pride Dairy Captured Price County”), and the video overview (”The Anatomy of a Rural Oligopoly”), collectively referred to herein as the “Published Materials.”

2. Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) and Public Records The information presented in the Published Materials is the result of a blind Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) investigation. All financial, corporate, and political data discussed has been synthesized from publicly available sources, verifiable records, and government databases. These include, but are not limited to, the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions (WDFI), municipal property data, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) Farm Subsidy Database, the USDA, ProPublica’s tracking of SBA Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans, and federal/state judicial dockets (PACER and CCAP). While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the data collected, the author makes no warranties or guarantees regarding the absolute completeness or real-time accuracy of these public third-party databases.

3. Pending Litigation and Presumption of Innocence The Published Materials discuss active federal litigation, specifically EEOC v. United Pride Dairy LLC (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, Case Number: 3:25-cv-1030). Readers and viewers are strictly advised that the claims outlined in this lawsuit—including allegations of visa fraud, Title VII civil rights violations, national origin discrimination, and sexual harassment—are currently allegations only.

United Pride Dairy LLC, through its retained legal counsel (Cross Jenks Mercer & Maffei LLP), has vehemently denied all charges, stating that it has not discriminated against or mistreated any of its employees. The corporate entity and its ownership (including Jon Pesko, Jeremy Pesko, Bill Harper, and Ed Jasurda) retain the presumption of innocence, and these allegations remain legally unproven until officially adjudicated in a court of law. Furthermore, public judicial records indicate no significant historical individual criminal records or personal civil judgments against the primary personnel.

4. Editorial Analysis and Protected Opinion Certain characterizations made within the Published Materials—such as the existence of a localized “Power Web,” “oligopoly,” or “hegemony” regarding local banking, school board operations, and municipal zoning—represent the analytical opinions and editorial conclusions of the author based on the intersection of the researched public data. These assessments are protected as journalistic commentary, fair use, and freedom of speech under the First Amendment.

5. Fair Use Statement Any trademarks, corporate names, or publicly sourced images used in the Published Materials, including the video and audio overviews, are used under the doctrine of “Fair Use” (17 U.S.C. § 107) strictly for the purposes of news reporting, commentary, criticism, and investigative journalism. The author is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by United Pride Dairy LLC, Forward Bank, the Phillips School District, or any other private or municipal entity mentioned herein.

6. Limitation of Liability and No Professional Advice The Published Materials are provided for informational, educational, and journalistic purposes only. They do not constitute legal, financial, or tax advice. The author shall not be held liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages arising from the use, interpretation, or reliance upon the information provided in the article, research document, video, or audio overview.

Price County United Limited

Brittany L. Volkman — Sat, 02 May 2026 03:31:22 GMT

THE PHILLIPS PARADOX: 5 Startling Realities Behind a Small-Town Revitalization

The Price County Files: PCUL

Brittany L. Volkman — Tue, 28 Apr 2026 17:17:40 GMT

**What happens when a highly ambitious community revitalization project faces mounting public scrutiny?** 🤔

We are about to publish the full investigative file into Price County United Limited (PCUL), a non-profit organizing a multi-million-dollar real estate redevelopment in Phillips, Wisconsin. While their public mission focuses on economic resilience and the remediation of the local Lionite Mill property, a recent open-source intelligence investigation reveals a much more complex story behind the scenes.

In this video, we explore:

🏢 The structural intersections between the non-profit's activities and a network of 14 private, for-profit LLCs.

💰 The administrative vulnerabilities and compliance risks surrounding a $1.67 million federal EPA grant.

🏞️ The environmental challenges and ongoing legal complexities at the 26.2-acre historic industrial site.

🤝 The rapidly shifting dynamics and growing friction between the organization, the local municipal government, and concerned residents.

With project leaders recently urging an increasingly skeptical public to simply "forgive and forget" the organization's missteps, the need for civic transparency has never been more important.

Watch the full video to learn more about the data behind the development and what it means for the future of downtown Phillips! 👇

#Wisconsin #CommunityDevelopment #PhillipsWI #LocalNews #RealEstate #UnitedTogetherAgainstViolence #Transparency #OSINT #Wisconsin #CivicEngagement #CommunityAction #UTAV

**Legal Disclaimer for Video**

This video is for informational, educational, and civic engagement purposes only. The information presented is derived from a blind Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) investigation and forensic financial analysis.

All data, corporate topography, and legal dockets referenced in this content have been gathered directly from publicly accessible records and databases. These sources include the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions (DFI), Price County Register of Deeds, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) spending databases, and the Wisconsin Circuit Court Access (CCAP) system.

The findings and events discussed—including those regarding Price County United Limited (PCUL), its affiliated private corporate entities, municipal disputes, and pending civil litigation involving CAP Minnesota LLC and third-party auctioneers—represent documented public records, analytical observations, and active allegations. They do not constitute formal legal, criminal, or regulatory conclusions.

All individuals and organizations mentioned are presumed innocent of any legal or regulatory violations unless explicitly determined otherwise by a court of competent jurisdiction or an official regulatory agency.

The Price County Files: The Carbon Credit Deal

Brittany L. Volkman — Sun, 26 Apr 2026 02:08:40 GMT

The 40-Year Handcuff: Deconstructing the Financialization of Price County’s Public Forests

The Carbon Credit Deal

Brittany L. Volkman — Sun, 26 Apr 2026 01:42:07 GMT

🌲 **What happens when a local county turns its public forests into a 40-year financial asset?** The answer might surprise you. 👀

In Price County, Wisconsin, officials entered a complex carbon credit program to help cover local budget gaps caused by state-mandated tax caps. But when you follow the financial trail—specifically into a special county account named “Ledger 100-78”—the planned revenue allocations take an unexpected turn.

Instead of going directly to general environmental upkeep, a significant portion of the projected funds was heavily targeted toward upgrading the local Sheriff’s Department. The carbon offset revenue was intended to finance the acquisition of three new squad cars and a specialized tactical drone. The county even created a new “Recreation Patrol Officer” position specifically to police the forest acreage and ensure the trees aren’t disturbed. 🚓 🚁

Add in a 40-year binding commitment, mandatory clear-cutting operations from local utility companies, and fierce opposition from nearby logging towns, and this rural finance initiative becomes incredibly complicated.

Watch the video to see the full breakdown of how public land is being monetized!

👇 Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

#PublicLands #LocalNews #UTAV #FollowTheMoney #Forestry #EnvironmentalFinance #Wisconsin #BudgetBreakdown #CarbonCredits #UnitedTogetherAgainstViolence

**COMPREHENSIVE LEGAL DISCLAIMER**

**1. Informational Purposes Only**

The content of this video and all associated materials are for informational, educational, and journalistic purposes only. This content does not constitute formal legal, financial, investment, or professional municipal advice.

**2. Nature of the Research and Sources**

The findings presented in this content are the result of a “Forensic Legal and Financial OSINT Extraction”. The narrative and data rely upon a “blind public-records extraction and municipal audit”. Evidence has been compiled by executing targeted data extractions of municipal voting records, internal financial ledgers, corporate filings, and utility easements.

**3. Financial Estimates and Contractual Opacity**

Discussions regarding the financial architecture of the Price County Forest Carbon Credit Initiative are based on available public records, internal executive financial plans, and comparative industry models. The exact proprietary revenue-share split negotiated between Price County and the corporate broker, Anew Climate, LLC (formerly Bluesource, LLC), was conducted in closed executive sessions and actively shielded from the public administrative record under Wisconsin State Statute exemptions. Consequently, figures such as the estimated 55% landowner and 45% corporate/registry revenue split are reconstructed using standard corporate operating procedures and comparable regional forest carbon programs. Furthermore, the projected $980,000 in year-one carbon credit revenue is based on initial financial modeling provided to the Board of Supervisors. As noted in the county’s 2024 audit and early 2025 administrative reports, zero carbon revenue has been realized to date due to regulatory backlogs.

**4. References to Corporate Entities and Public Officials**

This production identifies specific corporate entities, including Anew Climate, LLC, BW Papersystems, and Price Electric Cooperative, as well as specific Price County municipal supervisors. The operational details, voting records, and political shifts of these entities and individuals are cited strictly from extracted multi-year municipal meeting minutes, state corporate registries, technical college reports, and published utility policies.

**5. Forward-Looking Statements and Structural Risks**

Analysis regarding structural risks to the project’s biological carbon baseline—specifically the mathematical conflict between Price Electric Cooperative’s mandatory seven-year mechanical clear-cutting cycle and the American Carbon Registry’s 40-year biological permanence requirement—represents an assessment based on overlapping utility easements and registry methodologies.

**6. Limitation of Liability**

While every effort has been made to reconstruct the lifecycle of this carbon credit architecture accurately, the creators of this content make no warranties regarding the absolute completeness of the municipal public records analyzed. Viewers are encouraged to independently verify all municipal, legal, and financial conclusions drawn from this investigation.

Subscribe now

UTAV Substack Upcoming Schedule

Brittany L. Volkman — Sun, 26 Apr 2026 01:03:29 GMT

Welcome to The Price County Files: Official Publishing Schedule

By: Brittany L. Volkman | U.T.A.V.

First, I want to extend a massive and sincere thank you to everyone who has subscribed to this publication. Your support proves that this community is hungry for transparency, accountability, and the truth.

Over the last few weeks, they have tried to write me off as “just someone on the internet.” They assumed I was just making noise. They were wrong.

Behind the scenes, we have been running an exhaustive, blind Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) dragnet on Price County’s municipal, corporate, and financial history. We have pulled thousands of pages of municipal meeting minutes, federal grant applications, state environmental permits, commercial banking records, and federal court dockets.

We didn’t write an opinion piece. We built a 50-year map of who actually holds the power, where the taxpayer money goes, and who is quietly footing the bill.

Because the sheer volume of this data is overwhelming, I am not going to just dump the documents all at once. I want you to be able to digest the information, listen to the analysis, and review the receipts yourself.

We will be releasing this intelligence in a serialized, multimedia format. Each “Issue” will include a cinematic video overview, an audio podcast deep-dive, a written executive summary, and the raw PDF dossier for those who want to read the source documents.

Here is your official publishing schedule for the coming weeks:

📂 VOLUME 1: The Carbon Trap (Dropping This Weekend)

We start at the municipal level. How did the county get locked into a 40-year land encumbrance? Where did the $3.6 million projection go? We map the timeline of the American Carbon Registry contract, the commingling of federal ARPA funds, and the multi-million dollar short-term bank loans the county was forced to take out to cover the deficit.

📂 VOLUME 2: The Downtown Grift

We pivot to municipal real estate. We dive into the Price County United Limited (PCUL) non-profit and the 26-acre Lionite Mill property. We track the $1.67 million federal EPA grant, map the network of private LLCs buying up the adjacent downtown corridor, and expose the severe environmental liabilities and escalating civil lawsuits currently plaguing the site.

📂 VOLUME 3: The Agricultural Oligarchy

We pull back the curtain on the largest private operations in the county. We map the corporate architecture of local mega-dairies, their extraction of millions in federal USDA subsidies, their intersection with local banking and school boards, and the devastating federal civil rights and labor exploitation lawsuits currently sitting in federal court.

The first drop happens tomorrow to align with our #FAFOFriday video release.

Make sure your notifications are turned on. It is time to read the ledgers.

—B.L. Volkman

LEGAL & METHODOLOGY DISCLAIMER: The dossiers provided in this publication are the result of blind Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) extractions. All data, financial metrics, court dockets, and administrative timelines are sourced directly from publicly accessible databases, including the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions (WDFI), Wisconsin Circuit Court Access (CCAP), federal PACER dockets, municipal meeting minutes, and registered property tax rolls. The information presented is a synthesis of public records intended for educational and civic transparency purposes. U.T.A.V. and the author act solely as aggregators of public data

Beyond the Lens

Brittany L. Volkman — Fri, 20 Mar 2026 01:28:29 GMT

Beyond the Lens:

Documenting the Collapse of the

Wisconsin Judicial System

Date: 03-19-2026

For 15 years, my life was defined by what I could capture through a professional lens. I looked for the right light, the right angle, and the unvarnished truth of the human experience. But lately, the lens has shifted.

I am no longer just a photographer or a graphic designer. I am a pro se LITIGANT. I am a WITNESS. I am a SURVIVOR. And I am tired of the “Wisconsin Nice” facade that masks a deep-seated corruption in our judicial districts.

My civil rights litigation isn’t just a personal battle—it’s a case study in systemic failure. In this space, I am opening the folders that have been hidden for too long. I am sharing the transcripts, exposing the names of the “untouchables” on the bench, and documenting every step of my fight for ACCOUNTABILITY.

What to expect from this publication:

The Evidence Folders: Direct access to the court records and transcripts they don’t want you to see. In Wisconsin we have some of the most Open Records systems in the entire United States, but they aren’t all as open as we think they are. Especially when corruption plagues our Law Enforcement and Judicial networks. Spoilation of Evidence is a regular thing up here in the 9th Judicial District. I refuse to allow that to continue to happen, the INTERNET is FOREVER.

The Litigation Map: Deep dives into the legal strategies used to bypass our civil rights, and the strategies beta tested to counter them. As well as, Mapping out the entire “open records system” across the State of Wisconsin-Eventually creating a SEO to help every citizen navigate the intentionally confusing system to request records(IPP).

Visual Transparency: Using my background in design to map out connections between the key players in the district.

Forensic Science: Forensic Audits detailing the past and present of the 9^th Judicial District of Wisconsin. Fact based research on the psychology, sociology, and economic systems playing a direct role in the disparity of the Northwoods of Wisconsin. Including deep research into the very actors implementing and enforcing these systems on a county and district level.

U.T.A.V: Insider updates on the start up of my non-profit business development, United Together Against Violence. Where technology, Legal Literacy, and Survivor Advocacy dramatically collide together to change the justice system forever.

This is where the “Here and Now” meets the rule of law. If you believe that justice should be blind—not bought—then I invite you to subscribe and join this movement for transparency.

A massive document Drop will be coming soon.

Welcome to the Wisconsin Reset of 2026

“When you refuse the people Hope, and replace that with Prosecution, you leave them with nothing left to lose. But Accountability”

Executive Director - L. Volkman