The Council Heard One Side of the Police Monitor Story. The City’s Own Rules Say Hear Both.
Key Points
On August 31, four City department heads sent Council President Sabrina Madison a memo she had requested, listing budget, contracting, open meetings, and personnel problems in the Office of the Independent Monitor, and she posted it on her blog on September 2.
On September 8, the Common Council voted 7 to 12 against adding $28,500 to the office’s budget; President Madison cited the memo in the debate, and the Monitor had not answered it.
The City’s own written standards, from its Service Promise to the script its investigators read to an employee under investigation, commit the City to hearing the people affected and valuing their side of the story before it decides.
The Council and the public have City staff’s side of the story, and not the Monitor’s; President Madison can ask for hers, and the Police Civilian Oversight Board, which supervises the Monitor, can direct her to give it in writing.
The Board meets tonight, Wednesday, September 16, at 6:00 PM; readers can email the Board and all alders before then to ask for the Monitor’s written answer.
On September 8, the Common Council took up a resolution to move $28,500 from the City’s contingent reserve, the fund it keeps for unanticipated expenses, to the Office of the Independent Monitor. The money would have made the office’s part-time data analyst full-time through the end of the year and paid for training.[1] Council President Sabrina Madison voted no, and in her comments during the debate she referred her colleagues to a memo she had requested from City staff and posted on her blog six days earlier.[2][8] The motion to adopt failed, 7 to 12.[1]
The memo is dated August 31. Finance Director David Schmiedicke, Human Resources Director Erin Stenson, City Attorney Michael Haas, and IT Director Sarah Edgerton signed it.[3] The memo is five pages long. Its authors list what their agencies say has gone wrong in the office of interim Independent Monitor Aeiramique Glass, whom the Police Civilian Oversight Board appointed in November 2025:[4] a late budget submittal, a missed budget meeting, contracts that were never signed, meeting notices posted late, an unanswered question about overtime, a telework agreement that was never approved, leave paperwork that was never filed, complaints, and a hiring process for a permanent Monitor that has not produced a job posting.[3] On September 15, the Wisconsin State Journal reported the memo under the headline “City memo flags possible legal, rules violations by Madison police monitor.”[5]
President Madison asked City staff for their account of the office and gave it to the Council and the public. The memo was in front of the Council when it voted. Nothing in her posts, and nothing in the memo, shows that she or anyone else asked the Monitor for her account before the vote.[2][3][8] The Monitor has not answered the memo in public.[5][9]
Where I stand
I take no position on whether the memo’s claims are correct or on the Monitor’s conduct, and I am not defending her actions. This post is about one thing: the Council and the public have City staff’s side of the story, and fairness, due process, and the City’s own written standards call for hearing the Monitor’s side before anyone decides anything about the office.
What the memo says
President Madison asked for the memo on August 12. Its first paragraph says so: “On Wednesday, August 12, 2026, you requested a summary of Office of the Independent Monitor (OIM) issues and a status on current collaborative work.”[3] The Office of the Independent Monitor is the City agency the Council created in 2020 to provide civilian oversight of the Madison Police Department. The office investigates complaints about the department, monitors its policies, and reports to the public.[6]
The Finance section says the office did not turn in its 2027 budget narrative by the July 17 deadline and did not attend the Mayor’s budget meeting on August 13.[3] The same section says Dr. Victor Weedn, a forensic pathologist, assisted with one of the office’s investigations without a City contract, and that the City Attorney asked for a copy of any contract on July 31 and August 6 and has not received one.[3] The section also says the Monitor retained Sulton Law Office as the office’s lawyer without a City contract, that the City sent Attorney William Sulton its standard contract on August 6, and that he has not returned it.[3] The section quotes an email the Monitor sent the City Attorney on July 31: “we do not have to comply with APMs other than what we do in good faith when I feel comfortable doing so.”[3] APMs are Administrative Procedure Memoranda, the written rules the Mayor’s office issues to City agencies on contracts, purchasing, personnel, and meeting notices.[7]
The Legal section says the City Attorney’s office has stepped in when the Board’s meeting notices were posted late or a closed session was handled incorrectly, and that the Monitor has told the City Attorney that his office is not the office’s lawyer.[3] The Human Resources section says the Monitor told a March 19 news conference that her staff was working more than their paid hours, that an employee worked from another country without an approved telework agreement, that an employee took leave without the required paperwork, and that Human Resources forwarded two complaints to the office in August, one about an employee’s behavior and one about an employee’s social media posts.[3] The Human Resources section also says the department has received complaints about the Monitor’s own conduct on or after July 23 and that an outside attorney is investigating them.[3] The section says the hiring process for a permanent Monitor, which the interim Monitor was hired in part to run, has produced no job posting, no hiring panel, and no public engagement session.[3]
What the public has heard since
President Madison posted the memo on September 2 and explained why she asked for it: “I requested this info as I believe the full Common Council should have a better understanding of these issues that have been raised and the status of efforts to address them.”[2] On September 12 she posted her answer to a constituent who had asked why she voted against the budget amendment. She gave two reasons. She wanted the money to go toward an endowment for the permanent men’s shelter, and she was “overwhelmingly concerned that these conflicts remain unresolved.”[8] She wrote that she had invited the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement to present to the Council to help resolve the conflicts, and she linked the memo and the meeting video.[8] Neither post says whether she asked the Monitor for her account of the memo or whether the Council would hear it before voting.[2][8] The State Journal reported the memo’s contents on September 15 and wrote: “Glass did not respond to a Wisconsin State Journal request for comment this week.”[5] The Monitor’s office has posted nothing on its news page since August 4.[9]
What the public has not heard
The memo has five attachments. Four emails from the Monitor are among them, and they state her side of the contracting and legal counsel disputes in her own words.[3] She wrote on July 31 that the office follows state and federal law and its own ordinance, and that she would not give the City Attorney information about her contractors before an investigation was complete.[3] She wrote on August 11 that the City Attorney is not the Monitor's lawyer.[3] She wrote on August 31 that Madison General Ordinances 5.19(7)(l), the subsection that lets the Monitor retain independent counsel, does not require a City-form contract.[3] Readers can judge those arguments for themselves.
On every other item, the public has only the authors’ account. The memo says as much about the personnel items. Five times, the Human Resources section states that the department cannot tell whether a problem is ongoing because it lacks access to the office’s work, its leave records, or the Monitor’s response to a complaint.[3] The memo’s authors also say they do not know the rest of the story.
The Monitor may not be able to answer everything. The complaints about her conduct are with an outside investigator, and the telework and leave items concern the Monitor's employees.[3] A response can say that item by item.
What the City’s own rules say
The City has written standards for how it treats an employee it has questions about, and the Monitor is a City employee.[6] The Service Promise the City posts with its mission, vision, and values includes two pledges: “Listen actively and communicate clearly” and “Involve those who are impacted before making decisions.”[10] The City’s Equity value, posted on the same page, reads: “We are committed to fairness, justice, and equal outcomes for all.”[10]
The memo cites APM 2-33, the City’s rules of conduct for employees, as the rule at issue in the complaints about the Monitor and about one of her employees.[3] The purpose section of APM 2-33 commits the City “to ensuring all employees are treated in a respectful and fair manner.”[11] When the City investigates a complaint against one of its employees under APM 3-5, its Resource Guide tells the investigators to open the interview with two sentences: “We value your side of the story and take all that you have to say into consideration during this investigation. Just because you are named a Respondent we do not automatically assume you are at fault.”[12]
Who can ask
President Madison asked City staff for their account, and she can ask the Monitor for hers. The Monitor does not report to the Council President or the Mayor, though. Under Madison General Ordinances 5.19(5), the Monitor “shall report directly to the Board and the Board’s Executive Subcommittee” and “shall act as directed by the Board and the Board’s Executive Committee.”[6] The Board is the Police Civilian Oversight Board, eleven residents appointed by the Mayor and the Council to hire and supervise the Monitor.[6] The Board can direct the Monitor to answer the memo in writing. Under MGO 5.20(9)(b), the Board is also the body that advises the Mayor and the Council on how well the office is working.[6]
How to get the other side
On September 15, I sent President Madison a memo asking her to ask the Board to direct the Monitor to prepare a written response to each item in the August 31 memo.[13] I also asked her to share the response the way she shared the memo, with the full Council and on her blog.[13] I copied Board Chair Maia Pearson, the Board, and all alders. I asked that the response follow the memo’s order, give the facts before any legal argument, attach the documents it relies on, say what the office is doing now on each item, and be signed by the Monitor herself.[13] I asked that the Board set a date and post the response, or the fact that none came, with the memo.[13]
The other side of the argument
The Monitor’s office is small and busy. The office has an open investigation of the July 22 police shooting of Corey Ruiz, a court petition against the Chief of Police over records, and a hiring process to run.[9][15] The Monitor said at a March news conference that her staff already works more than their paid hours.[3] A written answer to a five-page memo about her own office is not investigative work. Most of the items take a paragraph and a document she already has. The Monitor also produced a public memorandum with exhibits on April 21, in response to what it called misinformation about the proposed changes to its ordinance.[9]
The Monitor has argued that the office is independent of the Council and the Mayor and that the City Attorney has no jurisdiction over it.[3] Those arguments do not apply to the Board. The ordinance the Monitor relies on makes the Board her supervisor.[6]
The memo’s authors could say that her emails already state her side. Her emails do, on the contracting and legal counsel disputes, and on nothing else.[3]
President Madison could say that she and the Council have supported the office and that she brought in the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement to help resolve the conflicts.[8] She could add that the Monitor has had the memo since September 2 and could answer it on her own. All of that can be true. None of it puts the Monitor’s account of the memo before the Council or the public.
The Board could say the Monitor’s performance evaluation, on its agenda tonight, belongs in closed session.[14] State law allows that, and the Board’s Executive Subcommittee listed the Monitor’s evaluation for closed session on August 5.[3] A closed-session evaluation and a public response to a public memo are different things. The memo is public. The response can be too.
What you can do
Before 6:00 PM tonight, Wednesday, September 16, email the Board at pcob@cityofmadison.com and the Council at allalders@cityofmadison.com. Ask that the Board direct the Monitor to answer the August 31 memo in writing, item by item, set a date, and post the response, or a notice that none came, next to the memo. You can also register to speak at the meeting at cityofmadison.com/MeetingRegistration.[14]
Bottom Line: President Madison asked City staff for their side of the police monitor story, and she should ask for the Monitor’s side too, for the Council and the public
The Council President asked City staff for their account of the Monitor’s office, put it before the Council and the public, and cited it in a budget vote.[2][8] Nothing she has posted shows that she asked the Monitor for her account before that vote. If the memo was material to the vote, the Council could have referred the resolution and heard from the Monitor first. The Council voted instead.
The Council President is not a prosecutor. She holds the office for the public and the Council, and both sides of the story serve the public and the Council, not just one. The City tells its own investigators to say to the employee under investigation that the City values their side of the story and does not assume they are at fault.[12] The Monitor is a City employee.[6] The Council President and the Board that supervises the Monitor owe her the same, and they owe the public both sides.
The Board will evaluate the Monitor tonight with the same one side unless it asks for the other. The Board’s agenda for tonight lists eleven items, and none is the memo or a response to it.[14] The Board’s history of unfinished business is why we should ask now rather than wait. The Board took 93 days to schedule the ordinance changes the Council sent it on April 21, and gave the public one day’s notice when it did.[16] The Council withdrew those changes on August 4.[17] The same agenda lists minutes for approval from the Board’s June 18 and July 23 meetings.[14] The City Attorney first asked the Monitor for her contracts on July 31.[3] Nearly seven weeks later, the public has the City’s account of that dispute and everything that followed, and nothing from the Monitor. The Board can change that tonight.
77SquareMiles.com covers the votes, the money, and the process at Madison City Hall that mainstream media misses.
© Alex Saloutos 2026.
Footnotes
[1] City of Madison, Legistar File 94261, “Amending the 2026 adopted operating budget by transferring $28,500 from the contingent reserve to the Office of the Independent Monitor for additional staffing and services costs, and directing staff to provide a full accounting of costs associated with the City’s critical incident response between July 22, 2026 and September 8, 2026,” fiscal note and history, Common Council vote of September 8, 2026 (motion to adopt failed, 7 to 12), https://madison.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=8164920&GUID=98A67543-9FDC-484F-899B-1C0A711C82BE
[2] Sabrina Madison, “8 updates to check out from Common Council President Sabrina Madison,” District 17 Blog, September 2, 2026, https://www.cityofmadison.com/council/district17/blog/2026-09-02/8-updates-to-check-out-from-common-council-president-sabrina
[3] David Schmiedicke, Erin Stenson, Michael Haas, and Sarah Edgerton, memorandum to President Sabrina Madison, “Request for Information,” August 31, 2026, with attachments, https://www.cityofmadison.com/council/district17/documents/Request%20for%20Information%20-%20Admin%20and%20OIM%20with%20attachments.pdf
[4] 77SquareMiles.com, “Madison’s Interim Police Monitor: Experienced Advocate Ready to Build Madison’s Oversight,” December 6, 2025, https://www.77squaremiles.com/post/madison-s-interim-police-monitor-experienced-advocate-ready-to-build-madison-s-oversight
[5] Chris Rickert, Wisconsin State Journal, “City memo flags possible legal, rules violations by Madison police monitor,” September 15, 2026, https://madison.com/news/local/government-politics/article_cb04e40c-c796-4643-9d94-ced2bc211f76.html
[6] Madison General Ordinances 5.19, Office of the Independent Police Monitor, and 5.20, Police Civilian Oversight Board, https://library.municode.com/wi/madison/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=COORMAWIVOICH1--10_CH5PODEPORE_5.19OFINPOMO
[7] City of Madison, Mayor’s Office, Administrative Procedure Memoranda, https://www.cityofmadison.com/mayor/apm/
[8] Sabrina Madison, “The question being asked is why you and other alders voted No on increasing the OIM budget,” District 17 Blog, September 12, 2026, https://www.cityofmadison.com/council/district17/blog/2026-09-12/the-question-being-asked-is-why-you-and-other-alders-voted-no-on
[9] City of Madison, Office of the Independent Police Monitor, News, accessed September 16, 2026, https://www.cityofmadison.com/independent-police-monitor/news
[10] City of Madison, Vision & Awards (mission, vision, values, and Our Service Promise), https://www.cityofmadison.com/vision-awards
[11] City of Madison, Administrative Procedure Memorandum No. 2-33, Standard Expectations and Rules of Conduct, November 3, 2022, Purpose, https://www.cityofmadison.com/mayor/apm/2-33.pdf
[12] City of Madison, Resource Guide, APM 3-5 Prohibited Harassment and Discrimination, page 11, https://www.cityofmadison.com/mayor/apm/dcr/APM3-5ResourceGuide.pdf
[13] Alex Saloutos, memorandum to Council President Sabrina Madison, “Request that the Police Civilian Oversight Board direct the Independent Monitor to respond to the August 31, 2026 memo,” September 15, 2026, https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/c0hogcg1q5ch4wiaj78wn/260915_MEMORANDUM_MADISON_IMRESPONSE.pdf?rlkey=ul10s1d7dcrdsw6xmwyf75155&dl=0
[14] Police Civilian Oversight Board, Agenda (Amended), September 16, 2026, https://www.cityofmadison.com/city-hall/committees/police-civilian-oversight-board/2026-09-16
[15] Corey Moen, Channel3000, “Madison Finance Committee rejects $28,500 for police monitor office,” August 31, 2026, https://www.channel3000.com/news/madison-finance-committee-rejects-28-500-for-police-monitor-office/article_309b81ed-ac91-4af2-9f9f-b80cfee19399.html
[16] 77SquareMiles.com, “93 Days of Silence, Then One Day’s Notice,” July 23, 2026, https://www.77squaremiles.com/post/93-days-of-silence-then-one-day-s-notice
[17] City of Madison, Legistar File 92386, history (withdrawn by the Common Council on August 4, 2026), https://madison.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=7988410&GUID=6D618C28-9FCF-4259-8402-00773301AA85
Comments