My name is Frank Bach and I serve as the president of the Board of City Service Commissioners.

The first item on today's agenda is a call to order.

This March 27th, 2026 meeting of the Board of City Service Commissioners is called to order.

The next item on the agenda is the roll call.

Will the executive secretary please call the roll?

Commissioner Miller, present.

Commissioner Quary.

Present.

Commissioner Smith.

Commissioner Wixporal.

President Bach.

Present.

We have we have a quorum.

We have a five-member commission.

We have to have three members in order to conduct business.

We will uh take up the next item, please.

Item number three, uh, file number two five one six nine five communication for the approval of the March 13, 2026 meeting minutes.

Do commissioners have any comments or questions concerning the proposed minutes?

No.

I move approval.

I'm afraid I can't do anything.

I wasn't at the meeting.

Oh, can't do that.

So why don't we come back to it?

Yeah.

Once we have that.

Uh usually the chair does not second the motions.

So we're gonna table it.

We're gonna table that for the time being.

Uh next item, please.

File number four, item, I'm sorry, item number four, file number two five one four zero five communication regarding the discharge appeal for Anthony Bass, former bridge operator in the Department of Public Works, Infrastructure, Bridges, and Buildings.

All right.

Regarding what commissioner?

Anthony Bass.

Oh, Anthony Bass.

Oh, that's today.

Sorry.

I'm losing my mind.

God.

I'm going to um uh make the opening statement on behalf of the meeting, and then we're going to look at umstipulated exhibits, and I will rule whether they're in or out of the hearing.

The commission anticipates that Commissioner Wick Sporl will be here.

She's in route as we understand it, and we are uncertain about Commissioner Smith.

But I did make contact with him, President Bach just now, and he's in route also.

All right.

Uh, we will once we do the introduction and get into the unstipulated uh exhibits.

Those are exhibits which I will rule on whether or not they're admitted or not.

Um, but we will not conduct the actual hearing until uh the other commissioners who we anticipate are going to arrive, do arrive.

State statute and our rules allow a city employee to appeal a discharge action.

Today we're hearing an appeal from Anthony Bass concerning his discharge, which was signed on October 27th of 2025.

The commission will decide whether or not the department had cause to discipline him.

And if we find there was cause, the commission will decide on the appropriateness of the penalty.

The court reporter will swear in witnesses, but that will be done just prior to their testimonies for the record.

And I was just beginning the introduction to the hearing itself.

The parties have stipulated at certain exhibits and other matters, including the fact that Mr.

Bass filed a timely appeal.

The hearing will be conducted as follows.

First, we'll consider the exhibits.

Second, we'll have opening statements from each of the parties.

Third, we'll hear direct testimony from the witnesses.

Each witness will be subject to questions from the commission.

And then cross-examination by the other party.

Fourth, we'll have closing statements from each of the parties.

And finally, the commission will deliberate on the matter.

Typically, our deliberations are conducted in closed session, but the decision is announced in open session.

There'll be a lunch break at noon.

If the hearing is not completed at by 4 30, staff will work with the parties to schedule an additional hearing date.

Is the court reporter with us at this time?

Yes, sir.

I'm here.

Thank you.

Have you received copies of the exhibits?

I have, sir.

Okay.

Good.

Some exhibits were stipulated too.

For example, there was one joint exhibit.

That exhibit's been marked J1 and is part of the record in this matter.

The department submitted eight exhibits, which were stipulated to by the appellant.

Those eight exhibits have been marked D1 through D8 and a part of the record in this matter.

I would note that the discharge notice is exhibit D2.

The appellant submitted 12 exhibits, which were stipulated to by the department.

Those 12 exhibits have been marked A1 through A12 and are part of the record in this matter.

In addition, there were exhibits submitted by both the department and the appellant, which were not stipulated to.

All right.

And at that time, he will confirm the identity of the document itself.

And at that time, the representative on behalf of Mr.

Bass can raise the objection to it.

At this time, I'd like the representative for Mr.

Bass to identify himself for the record.

Brad Amos.

Thank you, Mr.

Amos.

Exhibit DU two is a one page document, which was titled by staff as statement from Nick Goodwin.

Mr.

Goodwin is the bridge maintenance manager, and who is presumably the author of the document.

It's dated August 25th, 2025, and concerns his involvement in the events of August 2nd.

Mr.

Simons, will Mr.

Goodwin be testifying today?

President Bach, yes.

All right.

Like the previous document, when he testifies, we will have him confirm the identity of the document.

And at that time we'll hear the objection from the appellant.

Exhibit DU3 is a one-page document, which is titled by staff as email.

The document is an email dated August 25th from Karen Florenza, bridge operator supervisor to Nicholas Goodwin.

She forwards an email dated August 25th from Thomas McGuire.

The subject of Mr.

McGuire's email is Wisconsin Blind Spots.

Mr.

Simon, who is Thomas McGuire?

Thomas McGuire is a bridge bridge operator who had the assignment of the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge for an extended period of time.

Mr.

Amos, what is the objection to this exhibit?

The question was there's been other opinions about the visibility on the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge, other than this.

Well, that's argument, but I'm not I'm talking about the exhibit.

Then I have no objection to the exhibit being.

Okay, my apologies.

I that's all right.

Yeah, I just set up speeding record on the link to it.

Okay, nine thirty, I thought they had agreed.

Well, if that's true, we have got few.

The staff and the parties went with nine o'clock because they had been meeting much sooner and set everything up on that basis.

Okay, well, that's why they decided to go with nine.

And they understand staff understands that all the feature wants in the nine thirty.

Pardon me.

It's a photo, and uh it's um of the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge, or at least uh a good portion of it.

Mr.

Simon, what's the objection to this exhibit?

So this exhibit is a picture that does provide an unobstructed clear view of the Wisconsin of the West Side of the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge, taken from the bridge house operator perspective.

The picture does not seem connected to the incident that occurred on August twenty-second, two thousand and twenty-five.

With that said, it is Wisconsin Avenue Bridge, so we're we're willing to remove the unstipulated objection.

And we were the appellant had twelve stipulated uh sevens, so A one will become A thirteen AU two is a two-page document.

It's my copy is uh printed back to back.

It's a statement from Anthony Bass.

Mr.

Simon, what's the objection to this exhibit?

We object to the relevancy.

The document seems to be the appellant's testimony, which this appeal proceeding provides an opportunity for witness testimony as well as the opening and closing statements.

Further, the document includes various topics unrelated to the incident that we are here to discuss today.

Uh I do agree that it covers other some other topics, but it also is from Mr.

Bass, the appellant, and uh it's my inclination because as you know, we we receive appeal statements from employees who have been discharged or demoted, and those uh those can sometimes be rambling, but we accept them nonetheless.

And uh since I'm assuming that this was in fact produced by Mr.

Bass, uh my inclination is to admit it for what it's worth, and that would become exhibit A fourteen, AU3 is a um a mixture of citations from the work rules and safety rules of DPW, and it's also information arguments from Mr.

Bassing those work rules, Mr.

Amos.

What's the purpose of this document coming into the record when you when the witness the appellant is here?

Oh yeah, okay.

As well, and explain that what I was interested in to this accusations to me, aren't sure?

The reprimand becomes obviously displayed.

So President Bach, forgive me.

We remove our unstipulation to this.

You remove your all right.

AU3 becomes A15.

AU4 is uh one page color photo.

Um Mr.

Bass, did you take you take this photo?

Yes.

Um is this the South First Street Bridge?

That no, this bridge is um pleasant street.

Pleasant street, yes.

Thank you.

I'm gonna start by um asking you why you are including this, Mr.

Amos.

Why are we including this photo in this case?

Well, when I was accused of not basically doing a uh correct job, and also was um more or less told that I was doing an incompetent job the day after our storm in August.

I took it upon myself to take my time off of my located bridge to go to other bridges to see if there was any damage and or to assess what we needed to do as far as emptying the um pits below to release water that may have been in.

So this is the point of origin that I started from my location at Knapp Street, venturing back north to work my way south past Wisconsin Avenue to Clydeboard that I went above and beyond my duty to use the city vehicle to stay within my jurisdiction to do an extra, you know, go above my job on 10% to present this to the lead worker at time that was on this um on the shift at that date or the day after.

I'm not going to admit this uh because it's it's not relevant to the case that's before us.

We're dealing with an incident that occurred a day or so before at the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge.

If that the case will rise or fall on that situation, so this is denied and the next exhibit AU five is also a photo.

Um Mr.

Bass, did you take the photo?

Correct.

Did uh can you describe where this is?

This photo is basically located under beneath the Wells Street Bridge.

The same day the photo was taken of Pleasant Street Bridge, far as the water damage and excessive water that basically uh rose above and beyond the pits.

So this is the furthest location I could go to uh try and drain the pits without being in an unsafe condition.

So this photo was taken in forward again the lead person that was on duty that day.

So this one is denied.

And then finally, in terms of the unstipulated exhibits, I have one that's been marked AU6.

It's a two-page exhibit.

It appears to be, and it's described in the list of exhibits as email voto note, and then uh and I I see I can't read it.

I I think I see that the page two is that a um a copy of that note, a more legible copy, so to speak.

Yes.

Okay.

Uh and what is what is the purpose of requesting that the commission look at this note?

Well, that note was basically to reassure that I had requested a vacation date the day after the particular incident of cause, which was August 22nd.

So when I was told that someone came to my home, which I have two or three other documents that have different addresses on them, but my actual address was entered into the system when I purchased my home.

So if it didn't happen to have email information, just letter information, I wouldn't have never gotten two of those stipulations or two documents.

So this particular document is just basically explaining that if someone came to my home the day after or the day of the incident, I didn't know which address they went to, number one.

Number two is once I left my post for the day.

I had a vacation day scheduled due to a family union, so I didn't go right home.

So I was told that I didn't answer the door to let them in.

So this email is uh November 3rd, which is well after the discharge action occurred.

Um, the correspondence is not seemed connected to the incident.

Um not clear that the appellate spoke directly to management about this.

Um, so it's our belief that the documents unrelated to the incident that we're here to discuss today.

Well, uh I have a question, please, Mr.

Simons.

Uh, was there not a portion in the disciplinary proceedings that Mr.

Bass was approached?

We uh we received the discharge notice and a variety of other items, which I referenced uh briefly.

Um there is reference to the following day and the attempts to contact Mr.

Bass.

Uh, for that reason, uh, I'm gonna err on the side of uh it of making a full record, and we're going to include what had been AU6 that's gonna now become A16.

So that is in the record.

All right, we've gone through the stipulated and unstipulated exhibits, and now I uh get to the point where I have to ask the parties if they have any additional exhibits which they wish to submit at this time, and for any proposed exhibit, the first question will be why was it not stipulated at the pre-hearing conference or at least much earlier than today's date?

I'll start as as I do with every step in the procedure.

We start with the department first, and uh for the record, uh before the hearing began, Mr.

Simons, who's representing the department today, handed me a document.

Uh for the record, Mr.

Simons.

Is are you requesting that this item be placed as an exhibit in the in the hearing today?

Yes, President Bach.

uh for the record uh uh before the hearing began mr simons who's representing the department today handed me a document uh for the record mr simons is are you requesting that this item be placed as an exhibit in the in the hearing today yes president bach all right the what what he gave me there's a cover cover page and then a three page narrative decision in the matter of mr bass it's an appeal tribunal decision concerning an unemployment compensation claim this is not the first time this commission has received such documents and uh i will let the other commissioners read it for what it is worth but i would point out that we are not bound by the decision of state agencies just as they are not bound by our decision and uh so this will become d 10 but i uh i caution my fellow commissioners in terms of the weight to apply to this because the we do not know what the testimony or documents will put into the record and we don't know the exact standard that was applied by the hearing this hearing examiner so um but with that with that caveat uh we have it admitted this um d10 into the record i assume that the court reporter has not received this three page um appeal tribunal decision is that correct i'm gonna say i do not have it but i'd have to check my emails to verify elizabeth can you confirm uh karen i'm sending it right now as we speak all right can you send it to me as well yes absolutely thank you you're welcome and mr simons have you provided a copy to mr bass i have one right here i also have a copy for the commissioners please distribute them i you gave me one so i don't need one if they send it to janit right elizabeth says she will and the copy these comments thank you for thinking of me let the record show that the commissioners received a copy of this uh tribunal decision and uh as well as mr amos the representative of the appellant and the court reporter mr simons do you have any additional okay uh mr amos do you have any additional exhibits for the commission we do we have some medical documentation of mr bass's that some some of it he received after his discharge date and his work with his caregivers to try to meet the requirements of what the city was asking uh since that's part of the group of the discharge including his bridge operation offense we felt that was relevant information to be about uh do you have copies for the uh for the department we have these these one copies with us right now because this is his first chance to submit them if if they could be copied that'd be ready you can um why don't um i guess i would ask staff to work with mr amos to have copies made for the parties and also to email a copy of the documents to the court reporter and uh we will deal with it um either just before or just after lunch i'm not gonna start ruling on things when nobody else can even see what's uh what the document is or documents how many pages is this um when we get those that document uh are they separate for separate days or is this one long report no this is it's these are separate events if you if you look at his hearing that ended like October 20th this stuff progresses past October 20th so i mean it goes all the way until november 17th november 18th but they're separate dated yes all right well we'll uh we'll look at them as a package and then we'll probably consider them um individually and we'll do that and we'll take a short break

If you if you looked at his hearing that ended like October 20th, this stuff progresses past October 20th.

So I mean he goes all the way until November 17th, November 18th.

But they're separate dated yes.

All right.

Well, we'll uh we'll look at them as a package, and then we'll probably consider them individually, and we'll do that, and we'll take a short break once we get copies.

So if staff can get somebody to make copies for everyone, we'll deal with that a little later on.

President Bach, would it be appropriate for me to object to it later on?

Or yes, okay.

Very good.

When we have when we see what's being objected to, because I don't have any, I haven't seen any of this stuff yet.

Okay, as I I believe that uh that concludes the uh for now, the consideration of exhibits.

We're now going to go to uh the second step in the process, which is opening statements.

Um as I indicated at each step in the process, the department goes first and the appellant goes second.

And so I'm looking for Mr.

Simons to make an opening statement on behalf of the department.

Mr.

Simons.

Thank you, President Bach.

Thank you, Commissioners, for this opportunity, opportunity to appear before you regarding Anthony Bass's discharge appeal.

During this appeal, testimony and facts will be provided to demonstrate the department had proper cause to take a discharge action, and that the disciplinary action imposed was appropriate.

The appellant was a bridge operator.

This position is responsible for ensuring the safe passage of boat, vehicle, and pedestrian traffic.

Bridge operators must follow step-by-step protocols and procedures to safely operate bridges.

Ensuring overall safety is a primary responsibility of this position.

On numerous occasions, the appellant did not follow proper procedures while operating a bridge.

On August 6th, 2024, the appellant did not follow the procedures and lowered a bridge.

Well, one of the largest boats on the riverways was still passing under the bridge.

At that time, the appellant was advised that if a further major safety violation occurred, that their employment would be in jeopardy.

The appellant admitted to their error and acknowledged being clear on operating procedures.

They received remedial training.

On August 22nd, 2025, the appellant raised the bridge with a woman on it.

The pedestrian needed to jump off to ensure their own safety.

This incident could have resulted in a tragedy.

And as the appellants and was the appellant's second major violation, as part of this incident, the appellant violated numerous rules and procedures.

Furthermore, following the incident, they walked away from their job-related responsibilities.

Then the appellant chose not to respond to management's calls during a home visit.

They did not properly cooperate with an investigation.

The department attempted to preserve the appellant's employment.

They offered a different position as a as the section had a vacancy and another job title.

The appellant again did not follow clear and straightforward procedures related to the city's standards pre-placement process.

They were deemed not deemed non-compliant and the job offer was rescinded.

As a result, a discharge action occurred.

It's the department's sincere belief that Anthony Bath Bass cannot be a bridge operator.

They pose a demonstrated public safety risk.

During today's discharge appeal, the department will present testimony, evidence, and facts.

Thank you.

Normally we don't uh get into uh offers to settle a case, but in this instance, because time elapsed, it while the parties were discussing it.

It was I did not cut off Mr.

Simons uh because I wanted the commission and anyone else who's listening to understand why it took a while for the department to make a decision in a matter.

But the fact that there was discussions about an alternate settlement is not relevant to our hearing today.

Mr.

Simons has now arrested his opening statement.

Mr.

Amos, do you have an opening statement on behalf of Mr.

Bass?

I do.

Um thank you, Commissioners.

Um, I've been a representative labor for about 20 years now, and this is a really atypical case for me to move through.

Um I found that during our hearing.

It was hard for the city to substantiate part of the claim of about a person being on the bridge.

There's testimony today.

There's not a lot of concrete evidence that was presented to us for that.

Um Mr.

Bass, I feel was punished excessively for what happened that day, even if in case he did have a pedestrian on his bridge.

We also feel that the discharge notice doesn't represent what the city is actually doing during that event.

Mr.

Bass was terminated during that event.

He chose termination, and they chose to send us from the room and then bring us back in again, at which point they offered him a job as a city laborer.

I found that highly atypical.

I've never, I've never in my time of dealing with administration in termination hearings, had an employee choose to be terminated, be excused from the room, and then have one re-offered a job.

And and to me, to me, that reeks of not giving this employee the original CSC hearing he would have had.

If you are demoted forcibly, you are entitled to a CSC hearing, as I understand correctly, according to the COC rules.

But he was he was terminated and then brought back in and say, Oh, we can offer you a job today instead.

And I feel that's putting up an employee in a position where they're not at favor to make a reasonable decision for themselves.

I found it particularly peculiar that even after that, they took and offered a laborer job to a 66-year-old bridge worker, which we know the physical requirements are for said employment.

Um I found the scenario that evolved around this to be egregious, and obviously four months later.

If we've been through multiple rescheduling this hearing, we still find the scenario around this not to be copacetic or perspective to labor.

Okay, that concludes the opening remarks.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Um next step is hearing direct testimony from witnesses, and as I indicated, we go to go to the department first.

Mr.

Simons, are you prepared to call your first witness?

Yes, President Bach.

Will will that person be testifying virtually?

Yes, they will.

All right, uh, please identify the person.

First witness is Nick Doney.

Hello.

President Bach, this was DU one.

Uh is that Mr.

Dhoney in the upper right-hand corner?

Yes.

Well, um, would the court reporter please swear in this witness?

Mr.

Doney, if you could raise your right hand, please.

In the testimony you're about to give under the pains and penalties of perjury of the state of Wisconsin.

Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

Thank you.

Mr.

Simons, he's your witness, but let's start by having him identify himself in religion, you know, in a work relationship with the city and the river, and then also have him.

I assume he has a copy of this letter, and then have him identify the letter.

Please proceed.

Nick, please introduce you.

Nick, please introduce yourself and identify a brief scope of your work responsibilities related to your work in the city.

Uh good morning, counsel.

Uh, my name is Nicholas Doney.

I operate a multiple vessels on the Milwaukee River as a captain for the Milwaukee boat line.

I transit the Milwaukee River uh up to five out and back journeys a day from pretty far upriver near the Pfizer Forum region of the city out into the lake and back.

And I communicate with bridge operators throughout the day to ensure safe passage for my passengers.

Liz, if you would please share DU one screen when it's visible.

Please review the document and identify if uh this is your writing.

Where should I be seeing this document?

Liz will put DU1 up shortly.

Understood.

Thank you.

Liz, are you there?

President Bach, I can come back to this question if that's okay.

Yes.

Uh we'll take up the what has been marked DU1 will take that up at the end of Mr.

Dony's um testimony.

Nick, how long have you performed um this line of work?

I've been operating with this company as this position for three years.

I've been with the company for six.

Were you a captain of the Vista King vessel on August 22nd, 2025?

That is correct.

On this date, did you observe a pedestrian in an unsafe location on the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge?

That is correct.

Please tell us what occurred uh regard to this incident.

During a downbound uh journey on the Milwaukee River approaching the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge, uh the bridge was actively closed.

Pretty normal procedure is to uh hold station, have a holding pattern while waiting for safe bridge transit.

During this time, I observed uh while the bridge traffic gates were down to block traffic, there was a pedestrian on the west side of the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge span, at which point I made the decision to call on Marine Radio VHF Channel 16 to contact the bridge operator to alert them that there was somebody on the bridge while the gates were down at this point.

The Wisconsin Avenue bridge span began to lift while the pedestrian was on the bridge.

What did the pedestrian do in this incident in this moment?

The bridge had gone up about, I would say from looking from a distance, of course, uh two feet or so, and the pedestrian uh decided to jump off of the bridge while the bridge was in motion, uh lifting up.

They jumped down off of the bridge and appeared to stumble as they came down.

Several other pedestrians and passerbys uh extended some assistance to help her up.

She appeared to be perhaps in the range of I would say 40 to 50 years old.

Why did you alert the bridge operator that a pedestrian was behind the gates on the bridge?

Although not directly within my realm of duties for what I do, as I am up in the wheelhouse of a big boat.

I'm always observing and looking at things for general public interest and safety.

It felt like it was my best interest to alert the bridge operator of a potential of a potential safety hazard.

When you radioed the bridge operator, what were you anticipating they would do?

Not open the bridge.

In that moment, why was stopping the bridge important?

For the safety of the pedestrian that was um on the bridge as it was opening.

Nick, please see the document on the screen.

The top it says observation from Vista King Pilot House.

And the bottom it has um Nicholas Date Doney.

Um is this your statement?

This is my statement.

This is my handwriting.

Um, which I submitted uh after the uh the situation occurred.

Thank you, Nick.

President Bach, I have no further questions.

Then the commissioner's last questions.

And then finally, there'll be cross-examination.

Mr.

Doney, do you recall when you wrote that note that you just testified?

Was it the same day or a subsequent day?

That was the same day after my shift had concluded.

If there's any sort of uh situations on the river that are noteworthy, that could have been a safety concern.

It's pretty standard procedure to have some sort of statement written down, whether it gets submitted or not.

Okay, thank you.

Do my fellow commissioners have any questions for Mr.

Dony?

Yes, I do.

Commissioner Miller.

Uh Mr.

Dony, who did you submit this to?

This was submitted to the uh City of Milwaukee Bridge Department.

Okay, City of Milwaukee.

And then my other question is when you radioed or called in that somebody was on the bridge, did you get a response from anybody?

That's negative.

There's no radio contact after I had reached out.

So you just so how did how did the contact get made?

Uh there's a when you're operating a boat, there is a marine radio channel, which is um listed in this document as VHF 16 channel 16.

Um boats and the bridges listened to channel 16 for navigational information.

It's our main method of communication, and you're expected to listen at all times.

So that is a uh the place to announce something if it is a safety hazard or a navigational concern.

Okay, so you're saying to me then that the whoever the bridge operator was should have been listening to that.

That is correct.

And Commissioner Smith.

Um Mr.

Dhoney, you indicated that the pedestrian was uh behind the southwest traffic gate, and you know, there's a paper area uh east of the gate before you get to the bridge.

Do you have any question uh about whether the pedestrian was actually on the bridge or in the pavement area behind the traffic gate?

There's no question, they were on the movable span of the bridge and needed to physically hop down from the elevated section of the bridge.

Thank you.

Commissioners, any other questions for Mr.

Dony?

Hearing no request for questions.

Um I'm not gonna look to Mr.

Amos for any cross-examination.

Mr.

Amos.

We were just curious.

Um, you mentioned the traffic gate was down.

There is a pedestrian gate on the bridge as well.

Did you see that gate down, sir?

I'm not familiar with the specific mechanisms of the bridge.

I can't say.

You said that you didn't get a response from your immediate announcement that someone was on the bridge.

Um, when this person, alleged person on the bridge left the bridge, was the bridge going back down.

After the person had gotten off of the bridge, the bridge did go back down and the traffic gates were lifted.

And from your perspective in the pilot house of your boat, like how how are you relative to looking at the bridge from in in your vessel that day?

The boat needs the bridge to go up in order to uh clear.

So the pilot house when the bridge is in its closed position is at street level, if not perhaps a foot or two higher.

Okay.

Thank you.

So it at no point did Mr.

Bass reach out to the vessel and say he was going to attempt to open the bridge.

Prior to or after the incident.

I would say prior, given his timeline and his statement here, yes.

There was a radio call given many minutes in advance that uh there was uh traffic on the bridge and that the bridge would open in a moment after a brief wait.

And there is usually a horn that sounds before they open the bridge, correct?

That is correct.

If if you see an obstruction on the bridge, you generally immediately inform the bridge operator that there's an issue up there.

Typically, no.

Typically, the obstruction is cleared before any attempt to make the bridge open is uh made.

I have no further questions for Mr.

Dony.

Commissioner Smith, did you have a question?

Yeah, uh Mr.

Doney, as the Mr.

King Captain, every time you approach a bridge, for example, the Wisconsin Emmanuel Bridge, what are methods do you use to communicate to the bridge operator?

You need the bridge lifted.

Uh throughout our travel, we give what's called a secure take-all, which is a uh on the marine radio is essentially an announcement of navigation.

You're you're just making an announcement of where you are and where you're heading.

So when we depart the dock and periodically throughout our trip, we will make one of these secure take halls, uh giving the name of the vessel, the direction we're traveling, where we are at, and call for bridge openings.

Uh typically the bridges will uh open up and there's green or red lights on the bridge to indicate whether or not the bridge is completely open or um not all the way open, red for not open, green for all the way open, and we navigate accordingly.

We are able to, in most cases, depending on weather and uh winds, current in the river, um, hold position in the river for periods of time, small periods of time, sometimes longer periods of time to wait for bridges to open.

Um, in many cases, the bridges are already open upon our arrival to the span.

Thank you.

Mr.

Amos, based on uh this extra question by Commissioner Smith, do you have any follow-up on that question?

No, I did not then uh I think we'll uh excuse Mr.

Doney.

Um, and I will look to Mr.

Simons to identify the second witness.

Thank you, President Bach.

Is it okay if if Nick um leaves this proceeding at this time?

Yes.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

The next witness is Nick Goodwin.

Mr.

Goodwin, are you with us?

Oh hey, I see you on the screen.

Um I'd like the I'd like you to identify yourself by name and title when the um port reporter comes on, she will swear you in.

Mr.

Goodwin.

My name is Nick Goodwin.

I'm the bridge maintenance manager for City of Milwaukee Department of Public Works.

I've been in this position for approximately 4.5 years, and I oversee the operation and maintenance of the city's bridges.

Well, the court please swear on in.

Mr.

Goodwin, if you could raise your right hand, please.

And the testimony you're about to give under the pains and penalties of perjury of the state of Wisconsin, do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Thank you.

Mr.

Simons?

Liz, if you would please share DU2 on the screen.

Nick, is this your statement?

It is.

Thank you.

Excuse me.

When did you did you prepare this document on August 25th?

Uh yes.

I'm sorry.

Yes.

Okay.

And who did you give it to?

I believe I gave it to Andrew Simons.

Yes, when I gathered all the documents, I sent it to Andrew Simons.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Amos, what is the objection to this document as an exhibit?

I thought we accepted this one earlier, Michael.

No, we didn't.

There were some facts listed in it that I had questions about, but I guess the document in itself is acceptable.

I will ask Mr.

Goodwin.

Relative to those dot what those statements that are in there.

All right.

One that would be 10.

And D U two will be D11.

Mr.

Bach detail with the appeal to say that.

Oh, I'm sorry, I apologize.

Then the votes, the statement by Mr.

Dony is 11.

And this statement by Mr.

Goodwin is 12.

Thank you.

I forgot about the uh the UC decision.

Uh I think Christian Simons, um I'm done interrupting you about the exhibit.

Uh please proceed with questions for Mr.

Goodwin.

Thank you, President Bach.

Nick, describe how you got involved in the incident which occurred on August 22nd, 2025.

Yeah, so I was uh the bridge operator supervisor Karen Ferenza reached out to me because she had received a call from City Hall that was forwarded to her from the United Call Center that there was a woman on the bridge on Wisconsin Avenue when it was raised up, and the woman had to jump off the bridge.

It was her daughter that called about it because apparently the woman didn't speak English.

So the daughter called and let Karen know that her mom was really shaken up and that she had to jump off the bridge.

Um then at that point I had tried to reach out to the bridge operator, Anthony Bass.

His phone went straight to voicemail.

Um at that time, I reached out to the bridge operator lead worker Dean Martinez to ask him what had occurred uh over there.

And he had basically said that he didn't uh uh witness anything with his eyes as far as a pedestrian on the bridge when it was lifted, but what he said was he heard over the radio the uh boat captain, Nick Dooney, who was just on, or Dony, um states that there's a pedestrian on your bridge as as it was lifted.

So that uh so after that, um I had also looked.

We have a DPW bridge log where the operators have to enter incidents that occur, and the incident, Mr.

Bass did enter an incident, but it didn't state that there was a pedestrian on the bridge itself.

He just he said there was an emergency prior to the bridge emergency prior to the bridge, pedestrian on sidewalk, fire and police along with rescue boat, possibly jumper, uh caused 30 minute delay for Vista King.

Um is basically what he had stated on there, which doesn't state the main incident of a pedestrian on the bridge as it was lifted.

Um so after all of that, we just we tried to get in touch with Mr.

Bass some more.

He had stated earlier that we had the wrong address, but originally we had the wrong address, but then we found the right address and went to it, and Karen for Lenza, the bridge operator supervisor went to his home that evening uh prior to 7 p.m.

Knocked on his door, rang his doorbell, did not answer.

Um approximately two days later, he did get back to us.

We asked him for a written statement, um, and he agreed, and he met Karen at the Plankington Bridge, which is the closest to his uh where he resided, provided the statement, and then we also at that time requested uh drug tests since we weren't able to give him one yet.

Um it's standard after an incident like this to give someone a drug test, which he wasn't available for, and then at that time he denied the drug test because he said he it's his day off and he had been drinking, so then we did not uh administer the drug test.

Following a major safety incident such as this one, what are the bridge operators procedurally required to do?

Procedurally, they do have to report anything immediately to their lead worker in full detail, and then the lead worker can take the next best action, which would be to reach out to the supervisor or myself.

Um that contact wasn't made because the information that was given to the lead worker didn't state the serious issue.

It didn't state that there was a pedestrian on the bridge who jumped off.

So that contact was never made, but it was corroborated by two different sources: the phone call from the unified call center and the boat captain.

Was this the first major safety incident that the appellant um was involved in?

It was not uh approximately a year prior in August of uh 24.

He also lowered the bridge uh on the same vessel, the list Vista King, it was under the draw.

He started lowering it.

They had to accelerate to avoid being hit.

Um at that time, we had retrained him and issued him a memo, and he uh agreed that he was at fault and that he would after being retrained that he was uh you know safe to operate.

Liz, please share D2.

Page five.

Nick, is this document?

Is this significant?

Is this notification related to that incident?

Yes.

Does the city of Milwaukee um bridges have standard operating procedures?

We do.

Liz, please show D6.

Nick, please describe this document.

So every spring, the bridge operators, every single one of them have to read through the operating procedures on how to operate each bridge, both remotely and locally, if it's a bridge that can be operated remotely.

Um they have to one, they're trained on how to operate the bridge, and two, then they have to acknowledge these documents that they do know how to operate said bridge.

Liz, please show D5.

Page two.

Nick, are these the bridge operating procedures for the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge?

Yes, it appears to be please read number five.

Turn traffic signal switch D to stop the bells, gate lights, and stop here on red lights will come on.

Sorry, please read number six.

When vehicle and pedestrian traffic are cleared from the bridge, press and hold the near oncoming gate yellow, push the lower button M on the gate control screen until the gate is fully down.

Did the appellant follow the proper operating procedures specifically related to opening the bridge on August 22nd, 2025?

They did not because there was pedestrians on the bridge, and you cannot lower the gates until it is clear.

Please share with us how bridge operators are expected to ensure all vehicle and pedestrian traffic are clear of the bridge.

Um a summary to kind of what this all says.

Um basically they have to turn on the bells and the lights and all these noises, and they have to wait until the cars stop going or it's clear and there's no people on the bridge.

Then they drop the first oncoming gates so that no more cars can go through, and that the if there are still cars on, they can exit through the offgoing.

Then they look again if there's no pedestrians, then the offgoing gates go down, and then they look again before they raise the bridge.

Is anyone other than the bridge operator responsible for ensuring the bridge is all clear?

No.

How many times a year is the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge generally raised?

Roughly 3,000.

Do the procedures need to be followed explicitly to ensure bridges are operated safely?

They do.

Why was a discharge action taken?

Because for the second time the bridge was not operated in a safe manner, and it's become a public safety risk to have him continue to do so.

Thank you.

President Bach, I have no further questions.

Commissioners, do you have any questions for our second witness?

Yes, I do.

Commissioner Miller.

Um Mr.

Goodwin, what what is ending time of work or what would have been the ending time of work for Mr.

Bass?

Three o'clock.

Three o'clock.

Yes.

So this incident happened about two o'clock.

And my understanding of what you wrote is that you asked him to write up an incident report before he left work.

The lead worker did.

Or someone asked him to write up a report.

Yes.

Okay.

Would one hour have been a reasonable time to write something up?

Um, I would say one hour.

You should be able to summarize what occurred, yes.

Say say again, please.

Yes, I believe it is enough time.

Okay, can you explain to me?

I'm a pedestrian getting ready to cross, walk across the bridge.

What happens?

Because I've never had this experience.

So does I hear something about a gate coming down for cars?

Does something come down for pedestrians?

What happens?

Um, some of the bridges have separate gates for pedestrians, and some of them just have very long arms that go across both the sidewalk and uh the roadway.

Um, but first the traffic signal starts flashing red, and all these bells and noises are being made.

Um prior to anything, any gates coming down.

So that's letting you know clear the way.

Um if people don't clear the way, sometimes they have to tell them, like they may, if it's if it's local, if the bridge, if they're operating a bridge right in front of them, they can yell out the window like, hey, please get off the bridge.

We're about to operate.

Um, because that happens at times as well.

And um, once the people do clear, then they lower the first set of gates, and then they'll lower the second set of gates.

Does that answer your question?

Yes.

Um, on the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge.

You said some bridges have something different than other bridges.

So on the Wisconsin Some have two sets of gates, like a set of gates that goes over the sidewalk and a set of gates that goes over uh the roadway, and then others just have ones that go over the sidewalk and the roadway.

What does the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge have?

Um, I can't think off the top of my head, uh which ones those have.

All right, thank you.

I have a question, President Black.

Oh Mr.

Cleary.

Yes, thank you.

Um, Mr.

Goodwin.

How would I know I understand that Mr.

Bass was asked to uh write a statement before he left for the day?

Um following up on uh Commissioner Um Miller's uh question.

Does that presume he should stay until that's done, whether it's after the end of his work day?

Correct.

Okay, and how would he have known that he also would need to submit to an alcohol drug test?

Um it's standard for work rules when there's safety incidents.

So having read the work rules, he may have known that.

Would he have would he have had those reviewed with him and would he have signed off that he received them?

Yeah, yes.

And when um this intermediary supervisor that you spoke with, I'm sorry, I don't have the document in front of me.

Uh spoke to him and uh told him he had to write up the statement.

Are you aware whether she specifically told him or not that he had to stay there until a supervisor came to take him for a drug test?

I'm not aware of that.

Okay.

Do you know if that person will be uh or perhaps this is for Mr.

Simon?

Do you know if that person will be a witness here today?

No, that that is not a department witness.

Okay, thank you.

That's all my questions.

Okay, yeah, Mr.

Goodwin.

Regarding the policy of drug and alcohol testing after a major safety incident.

Um an attempt is made through various methods to communicate with the person.

Um is the employee able to refuse a drug test in these cases?

No.

So the behavior of being unavailable at after a major incident.

Does that constitute a refusal?

This was a unique situation.

We didn't consider it a fail or refusal because we weren't able to get in touch with him, and his shift ended.

Okay, uh one more question.

Um, on the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge.

Is there a blind spot on the west side?

No.

I've been so the only sorry the blind spot is on the other end of the bridge near the bridge house.

There's no blind spots.

The in areas that are uh to aid your visibility, there are a few mirrors.

Um but in mirrors, there are no blind spots.

The um the operator is on the the top floor of the bridge house, correct, and that convex mirror that's there.

Using that, you can see if there's a pedestrian down there.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Any further questions by commissioners?

No.

All right.

Um, Mr.

Amos, do you have questions for cross-examination?

Um, I do.

Um, I asked this question during our original disciplinary hearing.

Um, Mr.

Goodwin.

How common is it that a pedestrian might be caught inside the barricade of a bridge?

Uh pretty uncommon, I would say.

It does happen.

Uh I would say it happens, but uh pretty rarely.

But lifting with a pedestrian on the bridge is extremely rare.

Oh, I understand that.

Um, you said in your statements just recently that Mr.

Martinez didn't witness the event on Mr.

Bass's bridge that day.

Is that correct?

From my recollection, he could see the pedestrian going on the bridge, but then uh the pedestrian went out of his sight line.

So he didn't actually witness the pedestrian on the bridge as it lifted.

He just heard it over the radio.

So relative to your statement D12, didn't directly see what that happened.

Do you want me to pull up the statement?

The U2 slash D12 that is now, correct?

U2.

I can pull it up with my screen otherwise.

So yeah, he didn't see the pedestrian because he can't went out of his sight line, but he did see the bridge stop uh and then lower back down.

Okay.

Um relative to the drug testing policy.

I mean, I I'm on a much more stringent drug testing policy of the city than Mr.

Bass's.

Um if Mr.

Bass was unaware of a pedestrian on his bridge, would he feel it'd be subject to an immediate drug testing incident if he thought there was no incident in my perception here?

Well prior hearing we had, he said said there was a pedestrian.

So I think he was aware, but if he wasn't aware, then probably not.

But he had say stated that he was aware in our previous hearing.

And then I would assume the city's policy goes under reasonable suspicion.

Did you you or Miss Florenza feel you had a reasonable suspicion to test Mr.

Bass?

It was more due to the safety incident.

I have one other question for you.

Um you had an incident some time ago where a pedestrian was killed on a bridge.

Is that correct?

That is correct.

Does that employee still operate bridges in the city of Milwaukee?

Objection.

I'm sorry, your answer, sir.

Objection.

No.

He could if he can answer if he knows.

There was an objection, Mr.

Good, Mr.

Gluten.

Could you repeat your answer?

He does.

There is still an operator operating bridges who's involved in a lethal accident with a pedestrian.

That's correct.

Correct.

That's all the questions I have.

Okay, indeed.

Witnesses excuse.

Commissioners, does anybody need to take a break at this time?

I do not.

Okay.

We're going to proceed.

Mr.

Simon, can you call from all witness number three?

President Buck, I just want to clarify something.

Earlier, you mentioned that an alternate settlement, such as the department engaging the appellant in a different employment opportunity to help preserve their employment with the city.

I believe I heard it stated that an alternate settlement is not really relevant or related today's proceedings.

So I said that we can discuss it because there's a gap between the pre-discharge meeting and when the discharge became effective.

And at least reading the paperwork we received ahead of time.

There apparently was discussion and consideration by both sides about possibly going this route, but it didn't end up going that way.

Understood.

Thank you for that clarification.

The next witness will be Aisha Henry.

Sorry.

Okay.

Do we have Aisha Henry?

Yes.

All right.

The court reporter will square you in.

And then I'd like you to give your full name and child channel.

Court reporter?

If you could raise your right hand, please.

I don't see you on screen at the moment, but if you could raise your right hand and tell me when you've done so.

It's raised.

And the testimony you're about to give under the pains and penalties of perjury of the state of Wisconsin.

Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Thank you.

Aisha, please introduce yourself and identify a brief scope of your work responsibilities.

Yes, my name is Aisha Hendry.

I am the workforce planning and certification supervisor with the Department of Employee Relations.

Overseeing processes, ensuring candidates are properly certified and ready for hire and compliance with civil service rules, which also includes the administration of any pre-employment medical injury testing that may be required.

What was your andor your staff's role in regard to the city's pre-placement process for the as it relates to the appellant, which occurred in the beginning of September of 2025?

Um, yes.

So communication comes to my section, the certificate certification team in regards to um employees, whether they are um new employees or um current employees on being hired into a position.

Um and we are responsible for administering any pre-employment testing that may be required and also certifying those appointments.

So on September 9th is when we received an email from um DPW infrastructure HR team notifying us that Mr.

Bass was um going to be placed in a city labor position um based upon the requirements.

That position does require pre-employment medical and drug testing to ensure that he is able to perform the duties needed for that position.

So what my staff does is they send a medical authorization form over to Freighter, which is our vendor that conducts our pre-employment testing.

Provides them with the components that the individual needs to complete as part of that testing process.

So once that form was sent over, we also notify the department to let them know that that medical authorization form has been submitted to Freighterd so that way they can contact that individual to let them know to contact Freighterd in order to schedule their appointment.

That was done because Mr.

Bass did contact Freighter's scheduled his appointment.

He did go to his appointment.

During his appointment with Freighterd, there was additional information that was needed in order for them to properly evaluate him.

So what Freighter does is they place an individual on a hold.

They notify my group, which is responsible for follow-up to let us know that that has been done.

So, you know, we don't know the circumstances of that hold.

We just know that that is, you know, there's additional information that they need to move forward.

Um our process in that is a few days after we're notified from Freighter, we just follow up with that individual just to kind of check in with them, let them know that we were made aware that you know there's some information that Freighter needs, and to kind of basically get maybe a timeline if they may know as to when they would be able to have whatever information is needed by Freighter provided back to them.

Um during that time, um, we so we contacted Mr.

Bass on the 11th.

Um he let us know that you know he did provide his provider with the necessary paperwork, and it was probably seven to ten days, business days that they um advised that they would um turn around and provide that information to Freightered.

Um, so we didn't feel a need to check in with Mr.

Bass until the 22nd, which was about seven business days later, just to kind of check in as part of our protocol just to make sure that things are still on track.

Um he did advise that his um provider wanted to see him before completing that paperwork.

Um on the 24th, we just checked in again with him September 24th to see if an appointment had been made with his provider and to kind of get another timeline from him as well.

Um on the 25th, um, we received a return call from him letting us know that he had an appointment scheduled that next day, which would have been September 26th.

Um we followed up with him on September 30th just to kind of give it a few days.

Um that morning um we were able to make contact with him.

He confirmed that is his uh provider had signed the necessary paperwork and that was returned to Freighter.

Um our next step was to confirm with Freighter that they had indeed received the information.

Um we did get an email from them indicating that they had not received the paperwork.

Um, so we did attempt to reach back out to Mr.

Bass and just let him know that Freighter indicated that they had not received the necessary paperwork yet, just so maybe he could touch bases with his provider to see if he could obtain any information.

Um, we did not make contact with him that second call to him, but we did leave a voicemail.

Um, from that point, we had not had any contact with Mr.

Bass until October 27th.

The appellant properly follow the expectations and requirements of the process.

Um, because of that extended time period with us not having any contact with Mr.

Bass from September 30th, um, returning our voicemail less message to him.

Um, I would say he did not.

Our candidates are always expected to be able to return a phone call to us or email just so we can be apprised of the situation because if we don't have any communication with them, um, you know, we ultimately are at a uh a loss of what to do.

So that is when we reach out to the department to let them know that we have not had any contact with this person during the pre-employment process, and then they ultimately would take over and figure out what they they want us to do as far as the next steps.

For the period of time the appellant was in the pre-placement process in your review, is it safe to say the department was flexible or lenient with the candidates' ability to complete the required pre-placement process?

I would say yes.

Inquiries and contacts from DER staff during the pre-placement process.

For a current employee, I would say no, that is very uncommon.

Liz, please show D2 page four.

Is the information you provided similarly consistent with the information provided on page four where it starts the Department of Employee Relations oversees the City of Milwaukee pre-placement examination process?

Yes, that is an accurate representation of the timeline from all of our communications from uh uh with Mr.

Bass or as related to this situation.

When uh a candidate uh applicant must interact with a healthcare provider, is it their responsibility to provide DER the requested documentation or the health care provider's responsibility?

It is the applicant's responsibility to provide that information um back to Freighter Um because they are the ones that are, you know, they're they're the ones that know are in communication with their health care provider.

We can't, you know, intercede in that information because there are, you know, obviously HIPAA regulations.

Um our our my staff is just responsible for communicating to you know ensure that that is being done, um, which is why we reach out multiple times between phone calls and emails, just so that we are um aware of what exactly is going on, even if there's any sort of delays or miscommunication.

Um that's us trying to be able to resolve those sort of issues so that way that process can move forward and that person can move into that position that they are looking forward to moving into.

Does it determine the appellant was compliant with this pre-placement process?

It was not compliant because uh we there was no response from September 30th to any communication from our voicemail message left for him.

So um, no.

Thank you.

President Bach, I have no further questions.

Commissioners, do you have questions for Ms.

Henry?

Commissioner Cleary.

I have no questions.

I just I would I would just comment, you have remarkable um memory without notes or anything.

That's all no, I had no comments or no questions.

Thank you.

Um we've had direct testimony.

There are no questions from commissioners.

Mr.

Amos, you have cross-examination.

Um, I wondered if uh Andrew, Ms.

Henry.

Um, obviously, due to like HIPAA regulations and such like that, we provided the commission with some documents today relative to some scenarios which prohibit Mr.

Bass from assuming the new job due to some health regulations on that and what the job demands.

Were you made aware of what those documents were?

Are those the documents you submitted today?

Correct.

So uh President Bach, those are the documents we have copied them now that were not considered yet.

Okay.

That's why I brought them up just in case.

There was a honestly, we know when we deal with health providers, there's a lot of length time between ourselves and health providers and how soon and how fast we can get in the seat providers.

If you even just look at some of the dates on the documents in this list, you'll see that they trail in a November, much less late September.

Mr.

Amos.

Um I know that you add this is the package that you said you'd like to introduce as an exhibit, correct?

Yes.

But has Miss Ms.

Henry, has she seen this prior to today?

That's why I just asked if she'd heard due to HIPAA regulations stuff, if she'd received any information from freighters relative that Mr.

Bass couldn't immediately assume the role of a city laborer.

Due to some health concerns.

Separate from the from these documents.

I think some of them might have covered some of that, but she saw them.

Yes.

So first, we're gonna let uh this is a little unusual because we haven't dealt with the exhibit itself.

Um maybe that's what we should do.

Let's um let's just take uh a few minutes so that the commissioners can read through the documents first.

And uh Ms.

Henry.

How will she get a copy?

Okay, so uh commissioners, I would uh appreciate it if all the commissioners would uh look through this material and we'll see what we're gonna proceed, whether the we'll proceed with the exhibit, or if we'll proceed with uh with the witness and the exhibit.

Thank you.

And I've completed reviewing it, President Bach.

I'm sorry.

I I just wanted to let you know I've completed reviewing the documents.

Okay, well, thank you.

I'm a slower reader, so I'm taking more time.

Good.

So she will what she's gonna live in the law on If it didn't be admitted before she emailed it, but you'll not get put it on the phone.

Oh I didn't error a communication.

It's it is it my understanding from staff that the witness will not be receiving this material.

Once you all determine if it will be admitted, they will send it to the witness.

Okay.

So we'll have to deal with the exhibit first of all.

Um Straymos, what this doesn't go to the heart of the matter.

This concerns possible placement as a city laborer of this review by the private doctor and by Freder.

Um and so I guess I'm wondering what is the purpose of of submitting this exhibit at this time.

I believe that Mr.

Bass has issues potentially taking the job relative to the timeline that they're they've given him to turn in all of his information.

He's waiting on medical response to facilitate.

He also mentioned that during during that time frame that he wasn't in just communication with Ms.

Henry, he was also in communication with Miss Karen Beernaut and had a hard time communicating with her.

And it wasn't uh say probably doesn't seem like a continuous flow of information from his perspective.

So I mean him him jumping through the physical hurdles of him actually taking the job that they offered him versus what that looked like in real time from his perception physically.

Like I you you want me to meet these physical requirements for this job, my doctors have to sign off on this information, but I have these underlying circumstances to address.

Correct.

So that's that's fine.

Uh but he that was just an option back then.

Um it wouldn't materialize if they ended up the department ended up firing them for cause uh in their opinion.

Correct.

So that's what we're here about.

And uh we're not here because of city labor.

We're here because of bridge operator.

So we want to so all then all that clause of of health issues in in D2 here from the disturbance are irrelevant.

Is that what we're gonna say?

That's informational in my opinion.

Okay, I appreciate that.

That's my opinion.

The other commissioners can inform their own opinion, but you're he's not getting fired because he didn't take the city labor job.

He's got getting fired for allegedly screwing up at the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge.

Great.

At least that's how I understand the case.

And only accepting that this time.

Okay, I agree with that uh perception that um we're here regarding bridge operator, not the offer for the city labor.

Uh if if you want to submit it, uh I would accept it with the understanding that it's it helps explain just like the material in D2 helps explain why the decision wasn't made until later, but it doesn't go to the heart of the matter.

Okay, do you want this as an exhibit?

If that's your perception, then I guess I I don't necessarily need it then.

Well, I'm not gonna force you to admit it.

Um we'll put that off to the side.

Um so we don't need to give this exhibit to this witness.

Um you have any questions for the witness.

I I don't, then I guess I I I question her relevance as a witness in the statement at all, then if we're just talking about him being a bridge operator, her comments relative to his replacement in another job have nothing to do with him as a bridge operator.

Well, it's it's it does it only in the sense that it's explains the timeline.

Okay, just like there's he has a couple paragraphs on D two.

They only help explain the timeline.

That isn't what this case is about.

Okay.

Anybody need to take a break?

No.

No.

Yes.

Thank you, President Buck.

I'll call Dan Thomas.

Like to use the restroom if that's possible.

Oh, certainly.

Come back at eleven o'clock, please.

And the hearing starts tomorrow at nine a.m.

So that was yes.

Text.

Okay, not an email.

But she has sent an email to say it's on top twelve.

Yeah, but that was long.

So I it was okay, we're gonna send stuff.

Okay, it was a text.

Thank you.

It's uh it's eleven oh two in the commit Florida City Service Commission meeting is resuming.

Uh we're going to do a small housekeeping matter first.

We please announce item reannounce item three on our agenda today.

Number three is file number two five one six nine five communication for the approval of the March thirteenth, twenty twenty-six meeting minutes.

Commission commissioners, do you have any comments or questions regarding the proposed minutes?

Is there a motion?

It's been moved and second to approve the March thirteenth meeting meeting minutes as submitted.

Um poll the commissioners.

Commissioner Miller, yes.

Commissioner Smith, yes, Mr.

Cleary.

I must abstain.

I wasn't at the meeting.

Thank you.

Commissioner Wickspoil?

Yes.

Uh the minutes are approved as submitted.

We will now resume the discharge appeal hearing of Mr.

Bass.

And we were at the point uh prior to the break where Mr.

Simons was going to call Mr.

Thomas as a witness.

Uh commissioners, uh, my name is Dan Thomas.

I'm the administrative services director for the Department of Public Works.

Good morning, everyone.

Mr.

Thomas, could you raise your right hand, please?

In the testimony you're about to give are the pains and penalties of perjury of the state of Wisconsin.

Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Thank you.

Mr.

Simons.

Dan, please identify how you are involved in this matter.

Um director of administrative services.

I oversee the um disciplinary um function um of the department to include uh making decisions relative to um actions like discharge termination, uh transfer to motion, etc.

Thank you.

I have a series of work rule related questions.

Liz, please show D three.

Employees are expected to um provide complete and robust um reporting on any safety incident um or concern that could involve, depending on the circumstance, a you know, uh a verbal statement that is recorded by a manager.

It could be a requirement that the employee provide a written um statement him or herself.

It would require them to remain on the scene for as long as that process takes to complete, which may on occasion um involve overtime.

We're always willing to pay overtime if need be to make sure that we secure um proper um documentation and reporting relative to any incident.

Um and uh it is it is important and it is critically important for employees to remain on the scene so that management can evaluate whether or not um a drug test um request is going to be made of an employee involved in a safety related matter.

Does the department have rules related to safe operation of equipment?

Uh we do.

We we demand um and expect that employees are going to operate um any machinery, um vehicles or tools in a safe manner, um, you know, utilizing any uh uh uh protective uh equipment, personal protective equipment, is otherwise known as PPEs.

Um that you you must abide by um standard operating procedures and above all you have to um you know operate vehicles and machineries safely.

Does the department have rules related to reporting misconduct?

Misconduct is expected to be reported immediately by any uh member of the organization or the department, whether you be a you know, uh a laborer uh or a line staff person or a manager, um it doesn't matter.

We you know, safety is first in our in our department and in our operations.

And if um if there is an issue um with regard to misconduct um and safety, uh our expectation is that those those matters are reported um and documented immediately.

Does the department have rules related to cooperating with investigations?

Absolutely.

Our our refusal to cooperate in an investigation in the department of public works is deemed to be misconduct by itself.

Does the department have rules related to participating in a post-acident testing and an incident involving a safety-related concern?

Yes, our expectation and our protocol to include standard operating procedures requires that you are mandated to participate in that.

It's not a choice.

Yes, it happens.

Unfortunately, it happens, you know, fairly frequently.

I don't want to mislead the commission into thinking that it happens every day, but you know, there are certainly occasions where a first offense of misconduct will result in discharge.

I will give you a couple of examples.

Umplace violence could result in an immediate discharge.

Situations involving sexual harassment or sexual misconduct could result in an immediate um discharge for a first offense.

Situations involving theft of city property could result uh could result um in discharge for a first offense.

And in the case of the appellant, um, unsafe operation of a bridge could result in discharge for a first offense.

Um a bridge operator is responsible for operating a you know a movable structure that involves um the traffic on the river, the traffic on the roadway or in the right-of-way, uh, meaning vehicular traffic and citizens are all uh a part of that operation and must be um you know considered before any action is taken and any action taken with regard to those um different um sorts of modes of transportation has to be done safely.

That is the first and most important thing as it relates to a bridge operator is that everybody everyone's kept safe.

The appellant violate various rules in regard to the um incident and related to this matter.

Well, I would say to summarize it, he operated this bridge in a manner that um that we conclude was unsafe.

Um it it put the citizen on the bridge at risk of um serious bodily harm, you know, potentially a fatality.

I mean, that you know, the the this situation could have resulted in the loss of life.

Um we we considered it a serious violation.

Liz, please show D4.

Dan, what is this document represent?

This is a summary of of the documents.

Um the standard operat standard operating procedures and or work rules that um an employee is responsible for being familiar with this act this document actually represents um our electronic record um of sign off on these various policies by Mr.

Bass.

Is it fair to say the appellant was aware of the rules and procedures uh I would say that he was expected to be um aware of them by virtue of uh of being informed of them and and being given them by management?

Why did the department take a discharge action?

Because Mr.

Bass, in the opinion of of uh DPW management represents an unreasonable risk for the citizens of the city of Milwaukee, um whether they be out of boat, in a car or on foot, um, as it relates to his um um functioning as a bridge operator.

Um it was a risk that we were no longer willing to take.

Thank you, President Bach.

I have no further questions.

Commissioners, do you have a questions for Mr.

Thomas?

I have a question, President Bach.

Commissioner Cleary.

It's been testified earlier um by both sides that um in lieu of discharge, Mr.

Bass was offered a job as a city laborer should he meet the qualifications.

Um it would have been safe or it would have been prudent for him to be a uh a city laborer while he could not be a bridge operator.

Well, um sure, I can I can attempt uh an answer to that.

First of all, I I would say um the bridge operator um position is one, and I don't mean to be facetious here, but you know, he's operating a bridge.

Um, you know, he he has in his hands or under his control the ability to raise or lower that bridge.

And um, because he has that responsibility, he has you know the safety that he's responsible for the safety of pedestrian foot traffic, vehicular traffic, and the um and the boat traffic on on the river.

Um, as a city laborer, he has no such exposure, and there aren't um uh equivalent consequences to any sort of mistake that he might make as a city laborer as a city laborer when compared to a bridge operator.

So he, as a city laborer would would more more likely than not be a part of a crew, the crew would be dis you know um uh uh assigned in the you know within the city someplace.

Um they would potentially be you know uh filling potholes or um you know uh installing um asphalt um in and various um situations where the water to you know water division of DPW may may um have cut the curb in some fashion and so the the consequences uh commissioner um cleary the consequences for error are are distinctly different between these two positions.

And I would add, I would also add um for the record um that Mr.

Bass never mentioned any medical concern um relative to an inability to perform this work at any time that I interacted with him.

Thank you.

Uh follow-up question, President Bach.

Um, if someone were to question the question why the department would offer a job if they felt that he was unsafe in operating a bridge, then to to distill all this down, it's because he's not operating any equipment for the city, he's not driving, he's not doing anything uh that on its face would pose uh injury to himself to a co-worker or to the public.

He's not driving, he's not doing anything that on its face would pose uh injury to himself to a co-worker or to the public.

Is that a question?

I don't know.

It was sort of a speech, wasn't it?

Well, uh, I would say I would simply say again that um, well, actually, I didn't I didn't make this remark before now, but I'll make it now.

Um, we take very seriously the separation of an employee from their um their position with the city.

We take that very seriously.

And and and we are not cavalier about simply discharging someone.

In the case of Mr.

Bass, um, I believe he had uh a fairly significant uh tenure with the city, and as a as a you know, as we consider all facts and circumstances, I felt it was reasonable to explore whether or not Mr.

Bass might be able to function in some other capacity within the city of Milwaukee as opposed to being discharged.

We attempted to do that, we attempted to engage with Mr.

Mass in that effort to um find an alternative placement for him, and uh according and and as you heard uh the DER rep testify, that effort went on and on and on, unsuccessfully to the point where we had no choice but to discharge him finally and formally, and that's what we did.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate your candor.

I have a question.

Commissioner Miller, um, Mr.

Thomas, when people receive the work rules, what are all the different ways they receive them?

There's two primary ways, um, Commissioner Miller.

Um, the old fashioned way, which is simply uh uh a set of documents, and and as you saw that exhibit um that Mr.

Simons put up before, there are several documents that are each several pages long.

So in one in one manner of uh of receiving this documentation, it could just be um a manager giving an employee a stack of papers.

Um, but we also have a 21st century um option that we have, which is simply having employees log in um to our website um and they are able to see um and read and download and print those documents electronically if they choose to.

How would you know if the person read the documents before they signed them?

So when they receive this stack, do they have them sit down and actually read through it, or does anybody go over this on a PowerPoint, or how do you know that they actually read it?

Well, that question um is an age old or the the issue that you raise is an age-old issue, and and it's it's related to um whether or not we can mandate that someone reads something, right?

We cannot do that.

We can make sure that they've received it.

Um, we can explain it to them, which we do.

Um, our work rule distribution um routinely involves presentations where managers and the various divisions will go over the work rules.

Um, and in particular, those reviews um are usually um uh focused on any any major changes that may have taken place from one iteration to another.

Um, but there are also question and answer situation or you know, um sessions where where employees are encouraged to ask any questions that they have about any section of the work rules and managers respond.

So we have what I would describe as a robust um you know um uh work rule distribution that takes place every other year.

So our our work rules are revised um semi-annually or actually biannually, it's the correct um description.

Um, and when we when we have new versions of work rules, we have sessions throughout DPW where we explain and distribute those work rules to anyone who wants them in a paper form, and then we we provide instructions for those that are not accepting the paper copies, um, how they can access those documents um online.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioners, any further questions for Mr.

Thomas?

Yeah, Mr.

Thomas, Commissioner Smith.

The after a major safety incident, the expectation that the employee should file a report.

Um how was that um covered?

I mean, how should the employee know something happened here?

I should communicate with my supervisor.

That that's in the work rules, it's in the it's in the standard operating procedures.

Um it is it it's no different.

Uh and I will say that that the reporting requirement and the the obligation that we believe um exists with regard to employees extends through um vehicular accidents, injuries, safety um situations like the one that is at issue um in this appeal.

Um, if anything out of the ordinary happens um related to um uh a safety situation, we have an unequivocal expectation that that employees participate fully and completely in any investigation until it's completed.

Okay, the the management made considerable efforts to contact Mr.

Bass uh through various methods um after the incident, and they were unsuccessful.

Um hypothetically, on my shift, if I had been uh drinking or some drugs, I I could see being unavailable for the next day or so.

Um, is that is that refusing drug and alcohol if he wasn't available?

In my view, it is, Commissioner.

Um, and under these facts and under these circumstances, there is no doubt in my mind that Mr.

Bass should have remained on scene until a full investigation could have taken place to include a manager's evaluation as to whether or not Mr.

Bass should have been drug tested.

When he left without allowing that to happen, he he he made it impossible for management to do what I would consider to be a full and complete investigation of the situation, which in this case probably would have involved Mr.

Bass being drug tested by virtue of him not making himself available for that uh drug test, uh Commissioner Smith.

I believe that he refused to do that.

And that in other circumstances, if it was a CDL driver that we were talking about, the actions of Mr.

Bass would have been clearly uh determined to be a refusal and would have been a positive um under our routine drug testing protocol for CDL drivers.

Thank you.

Uh President Bach.

Yes.

Um uh Janet Cleary.

I I have one follow-up question, but perhaps you're not the best person to answer it, Mr.

Thomas, because you probably don't have this at your fingertips.

I don't remember hearing how long Mr.

Bass has been an employee.

I I saw it in one document what his age is, but I don't know what uh his length of tenure is.

Is there do you know Mr.

Simon or I believe about four years?

Perhaps Mr.

Bass.

Mr.

Bass can respond to those.

Well, you'll be testifying later, Mr.

Bass.

Okay, yes, I can get it at that time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah, that's fine.

Thank you, Mr.

Thomas.

Oh, you're welcome.

If there are no further questions for Mr.

Thomas, pardon me.

Uh the commissioners, we're going to go to cross-examination by Mr.

Amos.

Ms.

Tramos.

Good morning, Mr.

Thomas.

Um morning.

I'm gonna ask you first of all uh Mr.

Bass's disciplinary hearing were that would be D1, I believe.

Was I present at that meeting with Mr.

Bass?

Uh I don't recall independently, no.

So for the commission's interest, I was at that meeting with Mr.

Bass.

That's he Mr.

Thomas attends a lot of meetings of that nature, I'm sure.

Um do you recall in that meeting?

Your first decision with the bridge operator uh management staff that you offered Mr.

Bass's termination or his resignation.

Well, I wouldn't have offered him a termination because that uh is um exclusive to probationary employees, and I didn't understand him to be a probationary employee.

Um and so the answer to that is no.

Um it is not uncommon for me to offer um resignations in lieu of discharge um to employees that are facing a discharge.

So it's possible that I I made that offer to him.

In fact, I'm I'm pretty sure I did during that hearing.

So you offered him a choice to be discharged or to resign.

That's what you're saying.

Correct.

So in your in your last few statements.

I'm going to back up here a second.

So you excused Mr.

Bass and I from that hearing at that moment to talk about that decision, correct?

Or would you believe you would have?

Um I believe that I yeah, I typically give uh an employee who's facing that kind of a decision an opportunity to contemplate it.

And if you were there, it's like it's very likely that we would have uh uh adjourned the hearing um temporarily to allow you and your um your uh member to um you know talk about the offer um and so I don't dispute that that um may have happened.

So during your your statements earlier, and I'll try to quote the best you that I can write them down as fast as I could.

You deliberated whether you could use Mr.

Bass in some other function of the city than having to discharge him.

Now obviously that statement's coming after the fact, it sounds like from my perspective.

Um Mr.

Bass and I came in from that decision.

Do you remember what our decision was?

Well, it it obviously was that you rejected the uh the opportunity to resign in lieu of just of discharge.

And the you you recall excusing us again then.

I'm sorry, I didn't I didn't hear your question.

Do you recall excusing us again then at that moment to have a discussion with the bridge bridge operation managers?

No, I don't recall that, no.

Okay, so as far as the at that point, we're just still at Mr.

Bass being discharged.

Uh we we you did excuse us in that meeting.

We were we returned to talk to you.

At which point then you offered Mr.

Bass this laborer position.

That sounded like a statement, um, but if it was a question, it is so to refresh your memory as I was there, and I'll I'll follow with a question to it.

That we did we did return, and do you don't remember offering Mr.

Bass the chance to have a labor position at that point in time?

Is that correct?

Oh, I uh no, I didn't say that.

I do remember that.

Okay.

So you you admit to discharging him, dismissing us, and then us coming back in and offering him a different job, two separate occurrences there.

There are oftentimes multiple decisions or decision points that are possible in a scenario like this.

And yes, I was prepared to discharge Mr.

Bass, as I mentioned.

He is as far as DPW management is concerned, represented an unreasonable risk in his position as bridge operator.

Um, because uh as I mentioned before, because we take you know we um we take matters involving separating people from their employment seriously, um, we considered other options.

Um, one of them being the possibility that Mr.

Bass could have worked um in the in the position of city laborer, where the consequences for error are extremely different and markedly different um between one another.

The consequence for error in a bridge operator position could result in the loss of life of someone, either someone in a vehicle, someone on a boat, someone who is a pedestrian, as opposed to a city laborer who's out in in the field filling potholes, um, going from place to place uh as a part of a crew.

There isn't the same risk of um uh uh consequence relative to an error or omission that Mr.

Bass may have made in that other position.

So just for the clarity of my question, it wasn't for you to expound on that necessarily, it was to say that you did initially discharge Mr.

Bass, correct?

You dismissed us.

No, that's not true.

He he is not discharged.

An employee is not discharged until the uh the due process hearing has been completed.

Um there is uh conclusion at the at the the the close of the pre-um or or the due process hearing.

Um there are oftentimes situations where we don't make a decision immediately.

We may adjourn the meeting for the purpose of uh of you know um reviewing the information that's presented during the due process hearing, and then we make a decision or or or or a decision is arrived at late later.

Sometimes it's a day or two later, usually not longer than that.

But the point is that we often um and in many cases don't make a final decision um at the time that the hearing is taking place.

So you do understand that had you just demoted him, that he could have taken that job in that effect versus potentially saying you can either just be discharged and resign, since you eventually chose to voluntarily let him make that choice versus just demoting him into that position.

Is that correct?

I don't understand the question.

So the question is why did why did the department not just forcibly demote him then versus trying to go through the process of saying Mr.

Bass, you can choose between discharge or resign, and then we come back and he has a job offer versus the department just demoting him from the front.

Okay, you should put an employee in a position to make a choice under duress of being terminated and then come back to make a decision.

Oh, we can offer you this job instead.

Um, every employee that finds themselves a part of a pre-discharge hearing has the same you know, pressure with regard to the decisions that they make, the same duress that you describe.

Um, Mr.

Bass is no different.

Um, as it relates to the options that were pursued, as I mentioned to you before, when when we're talking about separating someone from their employment, um we we we don't take that lightly.

We explore whatever decisions are that that may be available under the circumstance.

Um we we you know, we review things like an employee's past disciplinary history, um uh you know, things like that.

And and the decision that we made with regard to Mr.

Bass was that again, he represented an unreasonable risk to continue in his position as bridge operator.

We made him an offer.

Um, he for whatever reason um found himself in in um in a non-compliant um uh position with regard to his interactions with DER and them them uh attempting to go through their legitimate process to determine whether or not he was fit and suitable for this change, uh, this alternative position, and he didn't complete um the requirements that were necessary.

So he left us no choice uh but to discharge him.

You made the comparison between uh a bridge operator and a city labor being not as equally potentially dangerous or as destructive if there's issues.

Um obviously you understand that all city laborers have CDLs, correct?

Yes, I'm aware of that, and they drive massive equipment around on the streets on a semi-regular basis.

That is not the same thing as operating a bridge.

I'm not I'm not insinuating it is, Mr.

Thomas.

What I'm saying is that they have a fairly high potential to cause harm with a moving vehicle, much less a stationary bridge.

So there are many there are many city laborers that don't drive, okay, that they're a part of a crew, and so your your logic doesn't follow, and that there are many city laborers that work every single day as a member as a part of a crew, and they don't get behind the wheel of a vehicle.

And so they so they they they um create no risk as it relates to operating these vehicles that you're talking about.

So this so the city the city gives all city laborers commercial driver's license, that's correct, right?

Well, Mr.

Amos, we're getting a little far afield.

I no, I think we're well aware of that okay.

Commission's well aware that laborers, for example, uh have to be new laborers have to become qualified to drive CDLs for the purpose being part of snow and ice control operation, correct?

But there can be many people, as Mr.

Thomas just indicated, who could be a laborer and not do driving as any significant part of their regular day-to-day job.

May I don't know, Mr.

Bass.

You get a chance to testify.

That could happen.

I agree, Mr.

Bach, but if you're going to give all these all these commercial driver's licenses to any city laborer, there is an expectation that they could be somewhere at some point behind the wheel of a 35,000-pound vehicle, potentially creating as much havoc as anything else out there on the road.

That's that's true that they could that there's occasional opportunities for that, especially during snow and ice control operators, but uh not as a part of a regular day-to-day job.

I mean, I'm out on the field every day, Commissioner.

I guess in some ways I would disagree.

They have the potential on the street.

Anyway, I mean they drive all kinds of things, not always as big a things, not always the small things, but they're usually out there assigned to a piece of equipment.

They may be a helper one day, they may be an operator the next day.

It I mean, I'm I'm in operations.

I I see it every day, right?

But you're right.

There, it's not a bridge, but they're they can put a lot of things in harm's way and moving vehicles out there as well.

I I tell my co-workers on a regular basis out in traffic is our biggest threat, not usually other things.

So I mean, there's a million things to not hit when you're moving around in traffic.

Well, that that's for argument a little later.

Uh I think I think we've kind of peaked this topic that's that's what I mean.

Um I had a question relative to uh if Mr.

Thomas was also aware, as I asked Mr.

Goodwin, that he that is he aware that there is a bridge operator still employed with the city that had a lethal accident that's still operating bridges.

I am aware of that.

And that is um a completely different circumstance, a completely different um set of facts, and it's not relevant to this.

Did you write this um this document D2, Mr.

Thomas?

I have to take a look at it.

Hang on just a second.

I can't find it.

Can you can someone put up put it up on the screen, mate?

Or you put it uh discharge notice D2, right?

All right, uh D2.

Page three.

I'm looking at I have it now.

Um page three, yes.

On the fifth paragraph down, I guess I want to touch base on this during our hearing.

Uh you said it's more likely than not that this event occurred is reported as witnessed by this boat captain.

What page are you on?

Where are you?

D three, D two, page three, page three.

Yep, paragraph five.

Okay, I'm there.

Based on the facts and circumstances, is that paragraph?

That's correct.

That's correct.

Okay, what is your question?

Um, the statement that you follow that with it is more likely than not this event occurred as reported and witnessed by the boat captain.

That would intimate to me there's some question of whether that incident did actually happen.

There was obviously a lot of contradiction story about that incident.

Is that correct?

There is no question in my mind that I understand that.

Okay, so what is the question?

Did you did you think this statement sounds as if there is still some question relative to that incident actually occurring?

There's no question in my mind about what occurred or what the investigation and and and the facts that were derived there from.

Um there is no question in my mind what happened, and and I believe what happened is what was reported by the boat captain.

There was some reference to a phone call submitted to uh the city.

I think that was on page one of that document of D2.

Um, aren't most phone calls to like the city service center or the operator, isn't that that not all recorded?

We have um we have many, many different um phones and phone exchanges within the city.

Some of them are recorded.

I don't know whether or not um the line that this person called on was recorded or not, but I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

Well, it was part of the entire incident of the what happened on the bridge that morning.

There's there's no names, no places, no times.

Well, there's a time, I guess, relatively speaking, but we asked for more concrete information in the hearing, but none could be provided outside that someone said that there was a caller and informed that a person had been on the is there a question there, the the question was whether they had any more concrete evidence relative to that happening that morning than what that statement says.

I mean, city phone lines record a lot of information usually some of them do, yeah.

Yeah, usually the call center is good at taking information when we deal with them.

I deal with them quite frequently.

So I I'd hope for something more concrete from the department relative to this, but um no, that's that that's the end of my questions for Mr.

Thomas.

Uh Mr.

Thomas, you're excused.

Um Thank you.

Mr.

Simons, I've got 20 to 12.

Uh do we have a person that could fit in in that between now and 12?

Or should we should we take an early break?

Perhaps an early break, uh, as the department doesn't have any further witnesses to call.

Oh, you're not gonna call.

Okay, that's I mean, there's a list of people.

Uh all right, that's good information.

Um I only have one more witness.

Well, you have I assume you have Mr.

Bass.

Correct.

Are you calling anybody else besides Mr.

Bass?

No.

Okay.

Um, we have Mr.

Bass done as a witness, and then we have closing statements by each of the parties.

And then I suspect that's nine out of 10 times we go into closed session that we would then pull into closed session.

Um the other commissioners have any suggestions as should I proceed?

Uh I would proceed.

And with what are you proceeding with?

Well, just with the hearing, I would I would ask Mr.

Amos to call Mr.

Bass as a witness.

Oh, and then proceed to closing statements.

All right.

Um I have heard no objections from my fellow commissioners.

So uh Mr.

Amos, you indicate that uh you have one witness, the appellant, which could we call him at this time?

I would call Mr.

Bass correctly.

All right.

Then uh I would like the court reporter to swear in Mr.

Bass and for him to for Mr.

Bass to give his full name and former job title to the court reporter.

Mr.

Bass.

Yes.

Uh please give your full name and former job title to the court reporter.

My full name's Anthony S.

Bass.

My previous position with the city of Milwaukee was bridge operator on several bridges, other than one substantial location, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

All right.

Thank you.

Uh court reporter, could you please swear?

Mr.

Bass, if you could raise your right hand, please.

In the testimony you're about to give under the pains and penalties of perjury of the state of Wisconsin.

Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Thank you.

In this case, we have a witness for the appellant and uh Mr.

Amos will go first.

Other commissioners will go second, and then the department may uh cross-examine Mr.

Amos.

Um, Mr.

Bass, would you describe that incident that morning?

The best of your remembering.

Sure.

I um reported for my duty or my tour at 8 a.m.

that morning.

Everything was fine.

Operations were successful as they are on any bridge that I'm responsible for operating.

Seeing that I have an extensive background in health and safety prior to working for the city of Milwaukee, and once hired with the city of Milwaukee, I was hired as a code enforcement uh uh professional and uh for um the uh um health department more or less, and then I basically took the job as a bridge operator after a formal discussion with my immediate supervisor in that department.

That particular day, everything went well, roughly around 2 05 p.m., the Vista King departed's dock.

Soon after vessel had hailed up, the vessel was held up at the Well Street Bridge due to a pedestrian being on the bridge for about seven to eight minutes, at which time I had raised the Wisconsin Bridge prior to 2 p.m.

at his departure on his oncoming, which I lowered the bridge again because he was held up.

Once the vessel passed under the Wisconsin, um under the Wales Street Bridge, he approached my bridge.

Prior to him approaching my bridge, a presence of one Milwaukee Police Department squad stopped on my bridge facing east and stayed there for approximately seven to ten minutes, then moved to the west side of the bridge facing west on the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge itself and parked shortly after that.

Another squad showed up, and I observed two officers patrolling the south side of the riverwalk east of the bridge towards Michigan Street.

Once that task was completed, additional emergency police squads arrived on the west side of the bridge prior to the passing or entering the safety zone of the area.

About 210 or 215, I made contact to the this vessel Vista King that there was an emergency vehicles present, a lot of vehicles present in the area, and I will access the area prior to operating the bridge.

Once the area was cleared, seeing that all the pedestrians were in or not close to the bridge operating area and traffic was controlled as well.

I reached out to the Vista King again through our PA assistance and also emergency radio system and stated that I would attempt to open the bridge.

Again, checking the entire bridge, it was clear to sound the horn first to gain attention of everyone in the area, including the emergency personnel.

Checking the bridge once more, I noticed a person within the safety zone on this northeast corner facing west.

Talking and checking, talking, taking photos, I'm sorry, taking photos of the Vista King and using the PA system.

I announced to that person that hey, the bridge is preparing to go up.

We have to clear the bridge.

The police officers and all the pedestrians that were in this emergency area also yelled and screamed at this particular pedestrian to move back.

So the ongoing coming gate, which was the southwest corner, went down first.

The ongoing traffic, which is the northeast side, went down second.

That's to control traffic vehicle and pedestrian.

After that, the two adjacent safety barriers can go down.

I then announced to the Vista King again that I'm attempting to open the bridge, and his reply was Roger that.

In any other situation and on any other bridge that I've experienced my profession with as a bridge operator, if any vessel approaches the bridge with or without a PA system, the bridge captains will say, Hey, you have a pedestrian on the bridge through the two-way radio system.

Don't open the bridge.

In this particular case, after several attempts to reach it out to the Vista King that I was attempting to raise the bridge, he never told me anything about a pedestrian being within the safety zone, less than only being on the deck of the bridge.

From the position in the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge House, you can see the deck clearly, north, south, east, and west.

If there was a pedestrian standing on the deck within eight to 10 feet or 10 to 15 feet prior from the sidewalk to where the bridge will left, you can't miss them.

You can't miss them.

Any other bridge basically has TV monitors so that you can observe everything around the bridge.

Wisconsin Avenue Bridge has a convex mirror directly in front of the bridge house, which only gives you vision if someone was standing directly on the deck of the bridge beneath the bridge house itself.

It also has a concurve mirror down the steps for the bridge operators to enter in and out of the bridge so that they can look out and see if there's any basically girl X or just say street people who are resting in that area when you want to try to do harm when you leave your job.

Those are the only two mirrors there.

The only TVs or monitor systems that that bridge has is one below the bridge, which only shows you boat traffic because that's an angle there from west to east.

And also it has two monitors on the adjacent side on the adjacent control panel so that you can monitor the Clydeborne Street Bridge, which you are responsible for operating after closing the Wisconsin Avenue Street Bridge.

So I observed about five to six police officers speaking with a few people, and everyone all seemed to be within the safe zone.

I did use the PA system again to alert everyone that the bridge was going up.

Due to the major blind spot, that southwest corner with the flower pot on the bridge located on the southwest corner of Wisconsin Avenue.

It's very hard to see if someone was near that particular area.

That's a picture of A13, I think he references that flower planting was there.

Yes.

It's right adjacent to the dropping gate for the bridge.

Once I observed everyone else in the safe zone, I proceeded to open the bridge.

Shortly after that, the captain of the vessel reached out and said, someone was past the safe zone, which was a lady dressed in black and white outfit.

Slacks and a shirt or top whom had been talking with the law enforcements and had disappeared to the major bright spot.

The bridge didn't go up six inches to seven inches before it was lowered down because we have a paddock button.

And seeing that the operator himself, far as the vessel didn't locate or didn't, or refused to or didn't take the initiative like they would have done on any other bridge if they could see someone within district or the safe zone as well as on the deck of the bridge to know to notify the operator or bridge operator of that possible incident, and it never happened.

It never happened.

So I requested that the upper management look into this situation as a bridge operator because every other bridge is have mirrors, PA systems, and monitors, and Wisconsin Avenue doesn't have that full safety equipment to basically look into the blind spot.

And the person that was mentioned earlier that they said was a bridge operator, he has the total wrong corner.

He's referencing the northeast corner, and the incident was the southwest corner, which was basically not an incident at all.

What actually occurred was there is a uh a particular word that we receive as bridge operators, which is called pond pod.

Pond pond means that there is someone located near a bridge or on a bridge that may be a jumper.

So when I heard that particular alert on the radio, which would have been roughly around one twenty or so, maybe one forty prior to the Vista King departing from their from their dock, and the emergency vehicles and everyone arrived in my area.

I noticed that they were basically assisting someone that was to the south west corner of that blind spot area, and then all of a sudden, here comes the uh fire department rescue boat.

So now I'm thinking that seeing that the police officers did patrol the east side and the west side of the riverwalk, north of the bridge and south of the bridge.

I'm thinking that this may have been the pawn pond scenario.

So more emergency crew members pulled up.

And at that time, I told Mr.

King, hey, it's kind of congestive out here.

And at that same time, I did reach out to the lead person that's in charge was on my tour that day, Dean Martinez.

And his response was do what you have to do.

That was the second time he told me that since my employment with the bridges.

And just to submit that the only issues I've ever had as a bridge operator has been between the Vista King, who refuses to obey the traffic signal that's on the bridge, red and green, green meaning go, red meaning stop.

He likes to get right to the bridge.

And as you start raising the bridge, I guess it's to attempt or to surprise his crew or passengers of excitement of seeing the bridge open on the scale of the ship.

He likes to do this.

Instead of stopping, he takes that chance of timing the bridge while the bridge is going up when he should come to a complete stop and then proceed once the light turns green.

He doesn't.

So the emergency personnel ended up taking away a young man, which was approximately, I want to say about five, six.

I want to say about 132 pounds to 142 pounds.

He was dressed in all white, and they took him to an ambulance and departed.

So your perspective, that was the only incident that happened.

That was the only incident that occurred that day on my tour.

Immediately after that, I reached out to Dean Martinez again via the telephone that there's a complex issue near my bridge.

And again, he replied, do what you have to do.

I considered being in a situation where he didn't care or was already part of the problem at the same time.

Speaking, I told him that as well, the Climbborne Bridge was stalled in a full open position to reach out to the electrician so that they can come service.

You got to understand all of these bridges have some type of major mechanical issue, which is out of the bridge operator's control.

Okay.

So basically, from I can see through the monitor that he had left his position to go over to the Clydeborne Bridge to do that manually.

So seeing him in the screen, there was no way he could see what was going on on the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge.

So I'm looking at you in the in the bridge house on Clydeborne, as far as Wisconsin Avenue, the only incident that was basically uh attended to by emergency personnel, Milwaukee Fire Department, as well as the Milwaukee Police Department, was the young man that was slightly past the flower pot closer to the athletic facility, Planet Fitness, that walkway on the river walk that they took away in an ambulance.

I entered that particular information into the system, which could have been roughly around 3 05 or so.

My shift, my tour ends at three o'clock.

My second shift replacement guy came in.

I reached out to the phone to touch bases with Dean Martinez to tell him that what I observed was entered into the system.

He had already departed for the day.

So I ended up speaking with the second shift lead person, which was uh Roderick Bestise.

So I left him a message that hey, I did everything, I'm out of here.

So I depart the bridge house roughly around, I want to say 3 15, 317 p.m.

Give or take, I take the bus home because I live close to my my position.

I'm on the bus, so I couldn't receive any telephone signal.

However, no management, no emergency personnel, no disciplined personnel called me while I was on my bridge duty pertaining to this particular incident, nor anyone showed up prior to me leaving.

Once I got off the bus, I walked maybe about six blocks to my home, went into my home.

No one's there.

No one's at my door.

I changed clothes because I requested a vacation day for the next day, which I was granted, and attended my family reunion.

I got home roughly around, I would like to say one or two a.m.

the 24th.

And I checked my home uh answering machine, and here's a lot of messages that hey, we were at your house, where are you?

You need to call us.

So I immediately started calling my immediate supervisor and Nick Goodwin right around 2 a.m.

that morning, I couldn't get in touch with either or until approximately 7 o'clock or 8 o'clock the next day.

One person's voicemail was full, the other one was on a holiday as well.

When I reached out to them, they said, hey, we need additional information.

I'm like, additional information for what?

What happened on the bridge?

So I said, it's in the system.

No, that didn't happen.

I'm like, well, what happened?

So I said, I'll give you a full account of what my day was from 8 a.m.

until 3 p.m., which was what I what I wrote.

So I said, I have a bad penmanship due to I played drums, have a bad penmanship.

Oh, we don't care.

Well, let me just go and purchase a computer because my laptop wasn't working so that I could turn in a professional version of what you want.

Oh, okay.

So I kept them in the loop from the time I took the bus to Best Buy, purchased a computer, got home.

Oh, I need paper for my printer.

I reached out again, kept them in the loop, went to Walmart, got the paper.

Oh, we don't need that.

Just bring it down handwritten by four o'clock.

It's already like 2:30.

Okay, no problem.

I wrote it, which should be evidence too.

Got on the bus, took it down to the Plankington Street Bridge, where I was told it's just a personal issue.

Just you and I will be meeting.

This is what we need you to do, hand deliver this, your version of the uh of the account.

So I walk over and I get in there, and it's like you have paperwork turned over, and I'm like, here you go.

She said, Oh no, no, you have to stay.

For what?

We're gonna drug test you.

I said, drug test me for what?

Uh not on duty.

Matter of fact, I'm on vacation and I have the day off.

So we came to your house to do that.

Why would you come to my house to drug test me?

I haven't done anything for drug testing, and I've never was told that you would be drug test for doing your job.

So I departed and went back home.

That's what happened.

So from your perspective, you have what's called your safe zone, which is not on the bridge deck itself, correct?

Correct.

The safe zone is the safest zone is prior to the safety barriers coming down.

F the bridge only has one that controls pedestrian and vehicle traffic.

The safe zone would be outside of that, which all of the personnel was far as the emergency personnel.

However, that particular person of this incident that they claim made a phone call.

No one could describe what she had on but myself.

She was within the safe zone, but she was 15 to 20 feet away from the movable deck.

She was just inside by the power pot, which is a blind spot.

And after this king had saw that prior to me relating to him that I am getting ready to attempt to raise the bridge for you, he should have said, like he does with any other bridge that I've worked on and had communications with him as well as any other of the big vessels.

Hey, you got a pedestrian.

We will help you clear them because if you don't have a PA system at some of these bridges, the boat captains have a system where they can say, hey, the bridge is about to go up.

Could you step under or go under the barrier?

And that didn't occur.

So from your perspective, there was not an incident with a pedestrian on the deck of the bridge.

No, it was not.

That's all the questions I have.

Before we all cross examination, the uh commissioners get to ask questions of the witness.

Does any of the commissioners have questions for Mr.

Bass?

I do.

Commissioner Smith.

Okay, Mr.

Bass.

Uh, you have stated that there's a major blind spot on the southwest corner near the flower pot.

Um, is that where the Vista King captain maintained there was a person, is it the southwest area?

Yes.

And uh from your point of view, the pedestrian wasn't physically on the bridge, but just in the pavement area between the barrier and the movable bridge.

Yes, the pedestrian was inside the barrier.

The emergency personnel and everyone else were outside of the barrier.

The emergency personnel all seemed to be focused, looking south east, as though there was someone there which was the individual who needed medical attention, and also the lady who was slightly inside the barrier, which she must have had showed up from west to east and ended up wondering what was going on because she didn't come from east to west crossing the deck.

So once everything went down, she was 15 to 20 feet away from the moving movable portion of the bridge, but slightly inside of the safety barrier, which happens often on any bridge.

Some pedestrian seems to not want to obey the horns, the whistles, the bells, and seem to just sneak in there and stand.

And you have to, if you have the right equipment to reach out, hey, bridge is about to go up, you have to go back behind the safety zone.

In this case, she was in a total blind spot, which Vista King was aware of, but she was not on the movable portion of the bridge.

Just slightly inside the sidewalk, sir.

Okay, now I this next question, I don't know if it's for you or something else, but um there was a communication from Tom McGuire to Karen Burlensa, uh, where he says the only blind spot on the bridge um is the southeast corner, and it's overcome by using the mirror on the east side and looking out the northeast window.

Okay, so facing the the north portion of the bridge, standing on the bridge itself.

The only blind spot that's covered by a mirror, convex or concave, is directly under the bridge house itself.

So if someone managed to make it past your your your your bridge sidewalk to the movable portion of the deck, which now you have another blind spot.

The only way you can figure that that person's, let's just say smack dead in front of the bridge house itself, or smack dead in the center of the bridge is to look in that mirror and see that there's someone here.

Far as the southwest corner, that flower pot is a major obstruction, especially when there's flowers in it that time of year.

We have one on the southeast corner, you have one on the northeast corner, you have one slightly with inside this the north northwest corner, I mean northwest, southwest, northeast, southeast.

You have the same type of flower plots.

But seeing that the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge is on an angle.

When you get to Frankington going east on Wisconsin Avenue, and you approach the Wisconsin Bridge, you have Planet Fitness, the Riverside Theater.

From the bridge house, you can see the riverside Key Corner.

But if you slightly bend over the control council to get a straighter view, now you can see where Wisconsin angles in and it angles out again to go up if you're going east on Wisconsin Avenue.

So the only other blind spot that has a concave mirror is the steps that the operators take down to enter the bridge house because there's been issues of someone standing in that whale area at night if you're working third shift or so.

You just open the door and they're there.

So seeing that the dangerous portion of that particular issue is that they could grab you as a bridge operator, snatch you out of it, and toss you right over into the river.

Or you can peek out and see through the mirror in the bridge house prior to going down the stairs or leaving to see if someone's down there.

Those are the only two covered areas for safety.

And that's particularly one for pedestrians directly under the bridge house and the convex mirror directly going down the stairs.

And the only other visual aspect to help an operator on Wisconsin Avenue is a little screen right above the council, but the cameras under the bridge.

Because again, there's slight angle for the bolts, but that's the only thing an operator has.

And if the operator turns around to operate Cryborne, you have two monitors for that bridge.

You have under and over.

But Wisconsin doesn't have one at all.

Now, at the time that uh Mr.

Dhoney, the Vista King captain maintained there was a pedestrian on the bridge.

Were there police officers there at that time?

Yes.

Milwaukee fire department as well as the police department.

And they didn't even, they like what they did, they assisted me with the pedestrian that was on the northeast corner, which was probably from another country.

I want to say China or so, because he was of an Orient accent and et cetera.

He was trying to take pictures of the Vista King, and he was way within the same zone.

He was on the deck of the bridge, and they all were waving back and I'm blowing the horns, whistles, and bells prior to even letting down the ongoing and outgoing traffic control barriers.

He moved and then proceeded to do that.

She was nowhere on that bridge far as the deck, and she was in a total blind spot.

And Vista King had a clear view of that.

If she was on the deck, he and I both would have saw that.

But he insisted that she was on the deck, but she was not on the deck.

She was within the safe zone or within the barrier safe zone, but it's not a safe zone.

But she was 20 feet from the deck.

And when he did, he should have said, You got he, like they do, there's there's there's what there's four or five big boats that we work with.

And each boat basically has about six to seven tours per day.

And all of the boat operators, the captains, if they see a scenario on any bridge, and especially any of all the bridges I've worked on, being on the squad or post to just a regular bridge house, certain times of the year, the communication is excellent.

But like I said, it's just that the Vista King has an issue with not obeying the traffic signals.

Bread meaning stop, green meaning go.

And like he said, having that schedule of making a run out and a run in, as far as a tour boat, everything should go their way.

But far as safety being for vehicular, boat traffic, as well as pedestrian, there's a job I have to do.

I have to obey the safety rules, and I keep my manual with me on every bridge that I ever operate.

So you have to do it.

And he just I assume, seeing that he had to wait at Wells Street, that's slowing down his time limit for what he needs to do to get out to the lake, stay basically an hour and a half, return and come back.

So he was held up at Wells for a pedestrian issue.

But when he got to Wisconsin, I clearly communicated through the PA system more than once.

There's a major emergency issue on my bridge, stand by.

And he sees all of this.

And then upper management, it's all in the system.

Exactly what happened.

And no one reached out to me until I want to say Saturday morning at 1 a.m.

when I got home and checked my physical answer machine.

And there was all this, hey, where are you?

We tried to find you.

We were at your house.

And then you are forced to not force, it's it's it's it's procedure and standard to submit your address once you relocate with the city of Milwaukee within a certain time frame, which I did.

No one checked the system to see what my address was.

If I didn't have access to email, there's four or five different letters with five or six different addresses on it that I've never lived in.

So how would I have gotten those that that correspondence if I hadn't had email?

So that's another red flag that to me, something's just not right about this entire scenario.

And it's how it is.

And everything that I should have done prior to, after, and during anything that could have saved my employment or would have, I completed it.

Everything by a certain deadline.

Any further questions for Mr.

Bass.

Commissioner.

Thank you.

Um, Mr.

Bass, when you left your work site that day, what time did was that that you left?

I tour ends at three o'clock.

Our replacements, we normally come 30 minutes prior to.

I entered this information to the system.

I want to say roughly around 310.

And I think I departed there about 317, maybe 320.

That's when you left the that's when I left my post, yes.

And and I have nothing further.

Did you receive any text messages though from the city?

No.

No text messages, no phone numbers.

I reached out to the lead person that was on my shift that day, and he had departed already.

So I ended up speaking with the second shift lead person, telling him, hey, I had an incident, it's in the system.

And he said, okay.

And I said, if I he asked me, I said, where's the dean?

He said, Dean left for the day.

And my response to that was, I said, well, I'll just reach out to him tomorrow, just to reassure that everything's in the system, more or less telling one or more people that, hey, what was requested was done prior to my departure.

And what was requested?

Do well, any incident of any kind, you have to enter into the system.

So what I entered into the system was the emergency portion of what occurred, which no one's speaking on is in the system.

So I reached out to the lead person that day to tell him what I did.

He was already gone.

So I ended up communicating that to the second shift guy, then I left my post.

So your description of the incident regarding a pedestrian, how did you describe that in your communication?

I described it.

I'm sorry, this is the court reporter.

I'm not getting testimony.

He's still looking for his report from that day.

I'm sorry, thank you.

Okay, I described it as this checking the checking traffic and pedestrian positions.

I noticed that all emergency personnel was in the in the safe zone behind the bridge safety gates, working on a person which was later taken by medical, a male, approximately five feet nine inches, approximately 160 pounds, short hair, Caucasian complex, and wearing a off-white cream jogging suit.

But you're reading from notes that you prepared for this.

I'm reading from notes that I prepared, yes.

Yes, which were already submitted, yes.

President Bach.

This is the handwriting portion that they requested the next day.

But the initial re entry was what I just said.

That was what was that was what was submitted after the incident, yes.

President Bach.

Yes.

Uh Janet Cleary, uh, I just have a question for Mr.

Bass.

Um, and and really I don't need a very long answer, um, just more of a direct answer.

What motivation do you think that the um the boat captain uh had to lie and make a report that there was a pedestrian on the bridge if there wasn't my honest opinion is that when I first uh was was was trained to do my position, I take safety seriously, and it's just like running the traffic like if you were in a car.

And it's just like running the traffic like if you were in a car.

If if you've ever been in a car accident or got T-bone, you know what that's like when it's unexpected.

It's no different with with controlling the river traffic.

Red means stop, green means proceed.

I had to call his attention to that more than once about the bridge is not gonna go up, or you're trying to beat the bridge up.

And for some odd reason I feel that him and I doesn't, we don't click because if if he doesn't obey, you don't go until I control that switch more or less.

Red means stop, green means go.

And the light is not going to change until the bridge is in a near open position or a full open position, which means you don't start moving until it's in at least a near open position.

So I think that him knowing the shifts that certain bridge operators are on, and or how our voices sound over the radio, created a not so much pleasant uh um partnership between him and I.

And that's just how I feel.

I have a follow-up question for you, Mr.

Bass.

Yeah, someone you've never, I'm assuming met or come in contact with before.

The daughter of the woman that was on the bridge made a phone call.

Uh, what reason would she have to lie about the fact that her mother was on the bridge when it was going up?

Well, you know, uh that's a good question.

And from my perspective, there was no phone call because no one reached out to me.

No one showed up on my bridge, uh, lead personnel when I told him what actually would he told me to do what you have to do.

So when I get home, it's like we came to your house and I'm asking why to drug test you, and then it's now give us a full statement and what occurred two days ago, which I did, took the bus down there, and then all of a sudden, when I get into the first meeting with HR and et cetera, it's this lady who's on the bridge.

The boat kept everything seemed it seems as though they took what I did in my statement and kind of changed everything.

Well, Mr.

Ball, I have another follow-up question.

Um I think I heard um Mr.

Um Thomas talk about the work rules and the fact that there's always been a work rule that you have to stay on the scene if there's been a problem, and uh you must make a statement before you leave.

Um is there a reason why you did not do that?

Well, that's a good question, also.

I did make a statement, and the way we make our statements is if there's an incident report as a bridge operator, we are to initial that information into the computer system, which is later checked by I would assume upper management.

That was done, and I also reached out to the lead person, which is basically your supervisor on your immediate shift, and told him what the scenario was.

His reply was to do what you have to do.

And then when I reached out to him to indicate that I basically overseen the uh entire situation and that the information is entered into the system, he's already gone for the day.

So I did follow protocol, and seeing that no one else called, showed up, it was 320 or so.

When I left my bridge house, traffic was flowing and everything was smooth.

Okay, thank you very much.

If there are no other questions from commissioners, uh then we'll allow Mr.

Simons for doing cross examination.

Thank you.

When did you first start City Milwaukee in employment?

I started City Manwalking Plant want to say four years ago in the Department of Neighborhood Services.

Did you sign off on the Wisconsin Avenue bridge operating procedures?

Yes, I signed off on all the bridge operating procedures, and I do carry my manual with me on every bridge that operate, seeing that I was a more or less floater type of operator, which means I operate all the bridges, no particular one.

Did you receive uh uh a memo notification in November of 2024 related to a different safety incident?

Yes.

Were you informed of your requirement to follow bridge operator procedures?

Yes, once I printed out all of the procedures and created my own manual, and again, I do want to stress that each and every one of the bridges do have some type of mechanical issue that basically ask and will create problems to this day and in the future, such as hydraulic pressure and et cetera.

Were you ever informed um that if you did not follow the procedures that it would be considered a major safety violation and that you could be discharged?

Again, yes, I was informed that, and I'd like to say again that each and every one of the bridges that are movable, best scale, flat, have some type of mechanical issue, which sometimes, for example, a bridge you can stop operating and it still floats up or floats down.

But yes, I was informed.

On August 22nd, 2025, did the boat captain of the Vista King notify you that a pedestrian was on the bridge?

No, I notified the boat captain prior to him responding that I had an emergency situation on my or near my bridge.

And then once he replied, his reply was Roger, that so then after I assessed the area and attempted to lift the bridge, I communicated with him again.

I'm attempting to raise the bridge.

At that time, if there was a pedestrian in such a point of danger that I didn't see, he would have or should have said, hey, you still have a pedestrian out there.

Let me communicate with them from my boat in, which he didn't do and has done it on other bridges.

So that boat captain provided testimony today that said that they did um notify you that someone was on the bridge?

After I communicated and reached out to him first that he will be held up or stand by on my bridge due to several individuals and pedestrians, including the emergency personnel, which was the majority of individuals on my bridge or near the bridge.

No one was actually on the deck of the bridge.

Again, all of the commotion took care, took took place in the southwest corner in the blind spot by the flower pot.

So the boat captain gave you no notice that there was a pedestrian on the bridge.

Correct.

And then did you say, did you stop the bridge?

Yes.

Why?

Because once the bridge is going up, he then reached out saying that there was a pedestrian near the bridge.

He didn't say the pedestrian was on the bridge.

He just said there's a pedestrian near the bridge.

So the boat captain did notify you a pedestrian was on the bridge.

And you stated earlier that you raised it six to seven inches.

Is that correct?

I notified the boat captain first.

We kept in communication.

And again, if there was a pedestrian such a dangerous spot, or even within the safety barriers, boat captains normally do reach out to bridge operators and say, hey, there's someone still on your bridge.

Don't lift the bridge.

So you raised the bridge six to seven inches?

Yes.

To my knowledge and to my visual perspective and my double standards of checking the bridge twice, there was no one in my bridge site that was in danger of the bridge being lifted.

So I do have a question here.

So you raised the bridge six to seven inches, and then you stopped it.

And we heard we heard testimony today that said that um someone jumped off the bridge for their own safety.

And I just want to confirm with you.

Um, are you saying that no pedestrian needed to jump off the bridge?

Correct.

No pedestrian jumped off the deck of the bridge at all.

No pedestrian was on the movable portion of that bridge.

You've stated that you've uh made an entry into the system, correct?

Correct.

And this would be the MKE bridge log?

Correct, yes.

What was your entry?

What did it say?

My entry was pertaining to the incident where the male about five feet nine, approximately 160 pounds, basically was having an issue.

That's part of the entry, I do believe.

But the majority of the entry, I'm strong if I'm not believed if I'm not mistaken, was pertaining to emergency personnel on the bridge, was there for a while, something on that source, but it didn't have anything to do with a pedestrian being on my bridge or near my bridge, or even in a blind spot, if I'm not mistaken, but I don't have a copy of that because it's entered in the system.

And the time I don't have because I don't remember exactly what time it was entered.

And if you have a copy of it or the time, you can at least review it with me.

I will.

So at 2:36 p.m., this is your quote.

Emergency prior to bridge, pedestrian on sidewalk, fire and police along with rescue boat, possible jumper cause a 30-minute for the Vista King and traffic delay.

Fire and police along with rescue boat, possible jumper, cause a 30-minute for the Vista King and traffic delay.

Correct.

So like I mentioned earlier, we do have that communication word pawn pawn.

When I heard that about maybe, let's say 130 or so, you may think it's a different bridge.

Then all of a sudden, when everybody starts showing up near your bridge, and then they take a walk down the river walk.

Now it's a concern, but you don't actually see the person.

So then here's the fire rescue boat.

So then when they all stop just south of the barrier, just west of the barrier on the north and southwest side of Wisconsin Avenue, they all came to the southwest side of the bridge, and they're doing something, and they're there for a while.

So automatically I'm thinking, wow, this may be the pawn-pawn scenario.

But it turned out to be something a little bit different.

So I did describe exactly what I saw.

Emergency personnel.

You mentioned that this is your communication with upper management, correct?

And this is my communication into the system after reaching out to my lead worker for that particular shift.

And like he said again, do what you have to do.

And I did what I have to do.

I did what I should have done.

But his response was, I don't care.

You know, do what you have to do.

But I'm reaching out to him because he was the main contact for me to express that hey, there's an issue on my bridge because the bridge, the boat's held up, so we have to communicate.

So there's an issue on my bridge, and this is what's occurring.

And then he said, make sure it's in the system, which we all do, and that's what I put in the system.

So once I left for the day, 315 or 320 or so, 317.

I get home, and two days or a day later, I check my answer machine at home, and it's all of this totally different things.

You mentioned you you stopped the bridge, and um, and that the at that time it was identified, some you received notice that someone was on the bridge.

So, my question is why did you not express that in this bridge um MKE bridge log entry?

Because that was not part of the scenario at all.

That was not part of the scenario at all.

There was no pedestrian on the deck of my bridge.

When the Vista King was when I communicated, I am going to attempt to raise the bridge for you.

He should have said, No, there's a pedestrian on your bridge, which didn't occur.

From my perspective and point of view, there was no one on my deck of my bridge.

There was no one within plain sight of that flower pot, even within the the safety area of the bridge, except the emergency personnel.

And again, look at it, they're all six feet, six, six or so, big guys.

You can see them.

Here's a lady that's slightly inside the barrier, not on the deck.

So then he's like, Oh, yeah, you got someone on your bridge.

Well, why didn't you say, Hey, you have to go under the safety barrier, or Anthony, don't open the bridge now because you have a pedestrian.

You just said Roger that, which means go ahead.

So I attempt.

Then it's oh, stop.

There's someone, so you immediately hit the prank button to stop the bridge.

But no one had any opportunity of being within that safe zone, past the designated 15 or 16 feet from from the sidewalk on the deck of the bridge, or him and I both would have saw that.

It's just impossible to stand on the deck of the bridge on Wisconsin Avenue and not being seen by the bridge house, and especially when you're two or three floors higher than the bridge.

We learned that uh the bridge deck.

I'm sorry, we learned that uh the Vista King's a large boat and they can see at street level, more or less, correct?

No, I'm not quite, not quite.

They can this is how I would assume you to uh ask that question, which is a good question.

If the if the boat can if the boat is traveling outbound, they could probably see, for example, the south side of uh Wisconsin Avenue, not as quite as they could see the east side.

If the boat's right there, you can see anybody that's on the deck of the bridge.

Far as the opposite side, it'll be a little it'll be a little problem because the boat's not exactly eye to eye with the bridge level or above.

That's that's include Vista King, uh all the rest of the big boats, they're not actually eye to eye.

No, they're not.

Can most of the boats that go through the go under a bridge or are most of them that same height, or are they much smaller than that?

The majority of boats are smaller.

You have the five tour boats out like the call them that are just the bigger boats.

Had this been a smaller boat passing under the bridge, um, and you did not receive an alert.

What do you think might have happened here?

Well, the smaller boats, they have uh we don't have to really open the bridges for them.

There's certain bridges that they can clear, and the bridges are labeled where they can clear under where they don't need an open.

It's certain, it's certain boats that we have to open for.

Let's say this this is a bit of a smaller boat, and the bridge had to be open.

Um, and this the smaller boat could not see at street level that a pedestrian was on it.

What do you think would have happened?

Had the had the bridge continued to be to raise, not received a notification.

Well, well, the bridge was not raising due to the fact that that was a smaller boat.

Again, a smaller boat would have had clearings.

There's certain bridges that you have to open for a boat, depending on the size of the boat.

Yeah, I'll move on.

Did you start as a bridge operator approximately three years ago?

I would say yes.

And with the first year question, I asked if he started as a bridge operator approximately three years ago.

During that first year of employment, did you work the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge?

I've worked all the bridges in the city of Milwaukee.

And the second year of employment, did you work the Wisconsin Avenue?

No.

Did you work the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge prior to this incident?

Um, in the year 2025?

No.

I was more or less stationed for my station was Knap Street or McKinley, which is closer to Fiverr Pfizer Form.

The bridges I operated on that end would be I would walk north to Plankington, uh, Cherry Street, Knapp Street itself, remotely from Knapp Street, I would operate State and Wales.

I believe that was my to be honest with you, that was the majority of my tour for at least two and a half years.

Understood.

Yes or no?

Did you did you work the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge prior to this incident?

No.

Earlier I asked if the first year of employment as a bridge operator if you worked the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge, and you said yes.

Well, my mistake, because I've my mistake.

Let me let me just reiterate on that.

In the winter, I'm on squad.

Squad, the first squad I was was probably this season.

No, last season I was squat for the winter.

I ended up working Plankington, which is just a holding spot.

And in the winter, we don't have any particular openings.

So I would like to say the first season that I've actually did Wisconsin on squad was this year or 2025.

Prior to that, no.

So August 22nd, 2025 was the first time you ever operated the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge?

I would like to say yes.

Yes.

Because I was I was that was my that was my bridge for the season because of squad when normally the majority of my employment, I was not on a squad, squad one nor squad two.

And squad one, would you would operate?

I want to say Plankington, no, uh no, KK Kinnekinick, Wisconsin.

Squad two, you're doing Water Street and KK and Knapp.

Thank you.

Did you submit a safety grievance?

Yes, I think I did.

Yes, I did.

My concern was that the blind spot by the flower pot on Wisconsin Avenue Street Bridge.

Liz, would you please show exhibit J1?

I'll read the a portion of the last paragraph.

Based on my visit to the bridge and discussing with the bridge operator and management, there is not a blind spot in that particular area of the bridge.

Um yes or no?

Would you agree or disagree with that notion?

I would disagree, depending on who basically looked at that portion of the bridge and where they were standing, whether it was outside the bridge house or inside the bridge house.

Again, the only blind spots that are actually somewhat covered is the convex mirror that's in front of the bridge house itself.

The concave mirror that protects the door where bridge operators enter in and enter out.

That flower pot on that corner of the bridge, there is no other, there's no cameras, there's no TV screens inside that particular bridge, like there is on other bridges.

If there was a camera somewhere on that bridge facing west and facing east, there was no way anyone could be even inside the uh safety barrier, but there's no cameras.

The only camera that will give you a strong view of the Wisconsin Avenue Bridge is underneath the bridge itself.

And that angle coming from west to east is not that pleasant.

And the photo that I showed or have, you can see that corner with pedestrians on it now that was basically getting ready to go to a concert.

Some two or three of them are out of sight.

Following this incident, uh, you you left and you indicated, I believe, that you went to a family reunion.

Um did you did you state that you did not receive text messages from anyone or the phone calls that that were um management attempted to contact you on that same day?

Again, if someone attempted to contact me after my tour, I was on the city bus.

I guess I didn't get any communication point because I'm on a cell phone, and then when I got home, I have a hard line, which basically is the number that the city of Milwaukee has to contact me.

To my jurisdiction, in my understanding, there was no incident for anyone to contact me.

So I went home and I had a vacation day the next couple of days, and I went to my family reunion.

So when I came home from my family reunion, I checked my hardline answering machine, and here's all these messages.

I want to say they have to be the 24th.

I don't think any of them were dated the 22nd.

They may have been dated the 23rd or so, but it was about the 24th when I made initial contact with them after midnight, and no one seemed to answer their phone.

So I left messages with only the one I could, the other one, voicemail was full.

So I just kept calling on the hour every hour, from it's at least about one in the morning until at least seven or eight, due to the fact that it sounded like it was a major concern.

Thank you.

Liz, please show D1.

Did you receive this discharge hearing notification letter?

And what's the date on the top of the letter?

It's 28th.

And what does it say right below that?

Revised letter.

And then in the first paragraph towards them, it says, um, what's the what's the date after Friday?

The date, Friday, August 29th.

That'd be the next day.

Is this your correct address?

That's my correct address.

Yes.

You you indicated earlier that five or six different addresses were used.

What documents are you referencing with those with an incorrect address?

That are in there, should be or in our packet over there.

What's the address on there?

Or it's a couple addresses up.

There's other addresses.

41 something.

I saw it in something earlier.

Have it in my package, but it's in here too.

That we were didn't use 4131 North 45th Street.

It's on J1.

Another one is 3968 or something, North 29th Street.

Is it fair to say you're properly notified of the pre-discharge hearing and that you attended it?

Oh, yeah, that's properly, but my my statement was, and if I'm not mistaken, was that if I had been someone that was computer illiterate or didn't have access to an email or so, I would have never got this correspondence via mail.

And then they would have went to somewhere where I didn't reside.

So that's confusing to me.

Understood.

Thank you.

I have no further questions.

Regarding communication between the Vista King and the bridge house, um, you're telling us that you were the one that contacted Vista King.

So you had a pedestrian situation.

Yes, because the Vista King departed its dock roughly around 2 05.

Soon after that vessel left this dock, which is north of Highland Pedestrian Bridge, and south of Kilborne.

When he got to Wells Street, the operator that's at Knapp Street told him, hey, I have a pedestrian, let me clear the bridge.

So when the bridge when the boat gets closer to like Wales, Wisconsin can start preparing to open up.

That means making sure everything's safe, let down a barrier or two.

So part of that, here's the emergency vehicle.

So once he was released from Wales Street, I radioed out.

This king, I have a situation or a medical emergency at Wisconsin, stand by.

And when he got Roger that he said Roger that.

But you were referring to the incident on the other side of the bridge.

The man in white and black and white outfit.

That's because he's coming south.

The incident is is headed, the incident is southwest of my bridge.

So if I'm facing north, I'm looking Vista King at his boat, but he's looking at me, and he's able to see that all of the fire trucks and the emergency vehicles are there.

So that's why he had to stand by because I couldn't open the bridge with all this commotion until it was clearly safe.

So I'm preparing him that hey, it might be a long wait.

I do recall saying something about maybe 30 minutes or so that he was held up at Wisconsin because there was no way a responsible operator would even try to attempt to open a bridge with that many emergency personnel present.

You don't know what's going to happen.

They may have to have to bag up.

Like I did.

Fire truck came on the bridge, made a wide turn and went the other way.

The two police cars that were there that ended up parking north east of the bridge, but on Wisconsin Avenue, directly across from the bank.

So they were totally out, but then they were on foot doing the river walk and the bridge.

So total safety was in my hand.

So with all that personnel, Vista King would have lost 30 minutes or did lose about 30 minutes of his time, but it was out of our control.

But I what the Mr.

King captain was saying Roger that to was the pedestrian incident you referred to, which was different than later, he said.

Correct.

You've got a person on the bridge.

Correct, yes.

All right.

Yes.

He sent Roger to me informing him that once he departed from Well Street Bridge and arrived to Wisconsin that I had an emergency situation, which is going to keep you held up.

His response was Roger that.

And then when I took care of the situation and kind of observed the situation, my next statement to him through the radio, which was probably about 30 minutes later or so, was I'm going to attempt to raise the bridge for you.

But I still had some emergency personnel there.

But everything was kind of clear.

So I proceeded to let the ongoing and offgoing traffic barriers down.

At that time, if there was someone in visual sight that I couldn't see due to the lack of cameras that's not on that bridge, or cameras that are on other bridges that you can't see, he would have said, hey, you got a pedestrian, don't open up.

He didn't.

So when I said I'm going to attempt to let you through, his response was Roger that again, which means okay.

No, President Bach, thank you.

And Mr.

Lemos, he is the only witness you're going to call.

Yes, sir.

All right.

Uh then we've had both the departmental witnesses and they tell us uh witness on his own behalf.

Um we're ready for closing statements.

Commissioners, if it's all right, then we'll proceed.

Otherwise, it's fine.

Thank you, President Bach.

Commissioners, the department chair testimony today to demonstrate the appellant poses an ongoing and unreasonable risk to the public health and safety.

The department needs to employ bridge operators that are able to follow procedures.

The appellant raised the bridge while a woman was on it.

The pedestrian needed to jump off the bridge.

Had the boat captain andor woman not acted so quickly within the split second, then this incident could have resulted in tragedy.

The appellant violated various rules and had multiple major safety violations.

On August 22nd, 2025, they walked away from their responsibilities.

They left work without notifying management.

Um invest they they evaded the required investigation.

Um they have established a history of not cooperating.

The appellant was advised, warned, coached, and encouraged on a numerous occasions to follow the procedures.

After the first incident, they were given a second chance to continue as a bridge operator.

After the second major incident, the department performed due diligence in attempts to preserve the appellants' employment with the city in Milwaukee by engaging them in a different job.

However, due to not following proper procedures and after numerous notifications, they were deemed non-compliant with the city's standard pre-placement process.

It's the department's sincere belief that Anthony Bass cannot be a bridge operator.

They pose a demonstrated public safety risk.

Changing this discharge action to allow another opportunity to endanger the public could have future severe consequences.

Based on the facts and circumstances, it's our sincere belief that the discharge action was warranted, appropriate, and should be upheld.

Thank you.

Well, we also will hear on behalf of an appellant.

Mr.

Amos, do you have opposing statement on behalf of Mr.

Bass?

I do.

I've pursued this with Mr.

Bass for the last four to five months, obviously, by the delays we had here.

Um this whole disciplinary scenario was super atypical from my standpoint as a labor representative.

I can honestly say I've never been in a hearing where Mr.

Thomas has chosen to discharge an employee.

We leave and then we come back and he comes back and he offers us a job.

He could have forcibly demoted Mr.

Bass, which would guarantee him a hearing here by pretending to discharge him and then allowing him a job voluntarily.

To me, it was an end around a skate him away from a hearing potentially.

That's my personal feelings.

Um that aside, like I said, that's an age atypical performance for Mr.

Thomas and how he generally disciplines people.

We found the discipline to be egregious.

Um that being said, I don't know what other grounds I can stand on besides saying if you're gonna have one bridge operator that actually killed someone on the job and then terminate one we can't even prove yet if someone was on the deck of the bridge.

I guess that's not what fair treatment to an employee of the city at this time.

That's all I have.

Okay.

If the commission was wishes to go in the closed session to consider this matter at hand, and it must do so by a hold of the commission.

Before we do that, what uh yes, my question did we ever accept um that last document from or that document from the um from the uh unemployment office?

I think that was supposed to be looked at during testimony, or am I mistaken?

Not accepted.

No, no, it was the DCA.

It was accepted.

Yes, okay.

Yes, yes, that was DTA.

Thank you very much.

I'm sorry.

Please go ahead, Steve Smith.

I have a motion, Mr.

President.

Um, I move for the commission to convene and close session as authorized by section 19.85 1A Wisconsin statutes to deliberate on the discharge matter.

It's been moved and seconded to consider this case in closed session.

I'll pull the commissioners.

Commissioner Miller.

Yes.

Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Commissioner.

Yes.

Commissioner.

Yes.

Chair also holds yes.

We are now on closed session, except for uh except for staff.

The uh we will be coming back into open session to our decision.

Um staff will have to make sure that we are connecting Commissioner Cleary plus here in the room, and then the court reporter will have to be excused from this meeting at this time.

We'll bring you back when we can.

Are we doing the lunch break now?

When you are ready, both systems are running.

Okay.

Simons to repeat.

All right.

Virtual.

Okay.

And Commissioner Curry is here.

Yes.

And the court reporter confirmed as well.

All right.

The uh the commission did vote to come back into open session.

Uh, because we have not yet dealt with the decision in this matter.

Um is there a motion regarding the issue of cause to take disciplinary action?

Mr.

President, I have a motion.

I move that based upon the preponderance of the evidence that the department did have cause to discipline the appellate.

I second that motion.

It's been moved and seconded to grant that there was cause for the department to take action against the appellant.

I'll poll the commissioners.

Commissioner Miller?

Yes.

Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Commissioner Cleary?

Yes.

Commissioner Wick Sparl?

Yes.

And the chair votes yes.

Is there a motion in that regard?

I have a motion, President Bach.

Um my motion is that based on the preponderance of the evidence, the department did have cause to discharge the appellant.

I second the motion.

It's been moved and seconded.

To approve the decision to take a discharge action in this matter.

I'll pull the commissioners.

Commissioner Miller?

Yes.

Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Commissioner Cleary.

Yes.

Commissioner Wick Sparl?

Yes.

And the chair votes yes.

What that means, Mr.

Bass is your appeal was denied and the discharge stands.

Um I believe that that's the was the only remaining item on our agenda.

I would entertain a motion to adjourn.

I move that we adjourn.

It's been moved and seconded that we adjourn.

I'll pull the sheet.

Yes.

Yes.

Commissioner Cleary.

Yes.

Commissioner Wick Sparrow.

Yes.

The meeting is adjourned.

Thank you, Mr.

Thank you all.

Thank you.