Vilas County board approves Overbey recall resolution

The Vilas County Board of Supervisors has approved a resolution supporting a recall of circuit court judge Daniel Overbey. The 9-7 vote took place on Aug. 27.

Overbey was elected in April, 2022, as the second circuit court judge for Vilas County in the newly established Branch 2.

By the end of 2023, word of an affair between Overbey and the county’s clerk of courts, Beth Soltow, began circulating and in May of this year, The Vilas County News Review in Eagle River published an article that made the affair public. Both Soltow and Overbey eventually also eventually acknowledged it. 

The newspaper article also referenced what was described as a “hostile work environment” type situation, primarily in the offices of the clerk of court on the third floor of the Vilas County courthouse.

In the days following publication of the newspaper article, Vilas County board chairman Jerry Burkett, during the county board’s May 28 meeting, referenced the issue without naming names.

“I will tell you that against elected officials, I have no jurisdiction and a call was place to a higher authority to no avail,” he said at the time. “So, if the work environment is affected anymore, I’m prepared to put a topic on next month’s meeting because the jurisdiction falls to you, the voters ... and if there isn’t a resolution to this unnamed, unclaimed situation, I will ask the county board and any citizens that would like to be involved, to start a recall because a recall has jurisdiction.”

A resolution calling for a recall  of Soltow was defeated 18-2 during the June 25 county board meeting, in which Soltow acknowledged the affair.  

Also during that meeting, the county board tabled a resolution calling for a recall of Overbey, the tabling was suggested by Overbey himself in a letter  to the county board. 

“I ask that you table your resolution and allow the Judicial Commission to do their job,” he wrote in the letter dated June 24. “If you are not satisfied with their decision, you can bring your resolution back for a vote.”

‘I’ve apologized’

As was expected, the Overbey recall resolution appeared on the agenda for the Aug. 27 meeting of the Vilas County board. 

If Overbey didn’t resign as requested in the resolution, the county board’s resolution stated the document “serves as our recommendation to State Court officials and the Governor of State of Wisconsin that he (Overbey) be removed from office.”

“Be it further resolved,” the resolution continues, “that if State Court officials and the Governor decide not to act, this resolution shall serve as our support of a recall effort of Judge Daniel Overbey.” 

Before the county board vote, Burkett asked Overbey if he would like to address the board. The judge did choose to speak. 

He apologized for not being able to attend the June 25 county board meeting as he was presiding over a jury trial. 

Overbey also thanked Burkett for reading his June 24 letter “into the record” at that meeting. 

“I stand by everything in it,” he said. “I’m not going to rehash everything in it. I’ve apologized, I’ve taken responsibility and I am doing my job just as everyone else in the court system here is.”

Overbey said he’d “skimmed over” a desk drop that had been provided at the meeting. 

The desk drop consisted of two anonymous letters.

“I will say that it’s kind of hard to respond to things in anonymous letters but the things that were in those letters and the things that were before you are things that happened one to two years ago and the notion that I’m not contrite or anyone else is not contrite, for that matter, is simply not true,” Overbey said. 

“Some of you have talked to me and you know that. All of you read my letter and you know that ... if the citizens of Vilas County want a recall, they have the right to do that. It’s a lengthy and expensive process. I don’t think they will but they have that right,” Overbey added.

In the meantime, he said, there is a need for him to focus on “what I’m doing here.

He also made an attempt to address the “hostile work environment” claims that sprung up in wake of the news of the affair.

“I just got back from the annual judicial college,” Overbey said. “It’s made up of brand new judges and past experienced judges and we spent a lot of time talking about how things are run in different counties. We are blessed in this county to have things run like they do. They’re not perfect, there’s room for improvement, I’m certainly doing what I can to improve things myself and everybody else but the atmosphere and relationships that I’ve heard about in some counties, between the district attorneys, even their IT (information technology) departments do not plague us here. We have been working together, we are working together.”

He then made a direct request of the county board. 

“I’m asking you to defeat this (resolution) and allow me to go on with my job until such time as the judicial commission finishes their report and does what they do or the voters of Vilas County do a recall but this is ... I want to do this job without having to be defending things that I did years ago,” Overbey said. “That doesn’t mean I’m asking for forgiveness. I’m not. That doesn’t mean by voting this down, you’re condoning it. I don’t condone it but it is time to allow me to focus on my time on the bench and to move forward and again, moving forward isn’t forgetting things.”

‘For the employees’

After Overbey was finished, Burkett made some initial comments before the other board members weighed in. 

“I’d like to remind everybody that if this resolution passes, all it does is ask the judge to resign or recommend to Vilas County that someone other than this board start a recall,” he explained. “We’re not in the recall business. We’re trying to be responsible to our citizens. This is in response to outcries. Most of this will be handled by our corporation counsel, Chad Lynch. The last thing I want to do is step where no man shall step.”

Burkett said the county board was trying to do its job and that he was “in the business of listening to every person in this courthouse,” using the example of when he was elected board chairman in 2021 taking steps to increase wages in the sheriff’s office and social service office and positively impact morale in those county departments. 

“Nobody said it would be easy,” he said. 

Burkett then asked Lynch if he was aware of the identities of the two people who wrote the anonymous letters and why the letters presented to the board members at the meeting were anonymous. 

Lynch said he could confirm the identities and that those individuals were afraid of retribution, “revenge, scared for their job.” 

“You are convinced they were indeed written by people who are employed here?” Burket asked. 

“Yes,” Lynch replied.

 “Why are we here today?” Burkett asked Lynch.

“Again, for the employees,” Lynch said. “These actions may have happened years ago, a couple years ago ... the fallout is still in the courthouse. The individuals that gave me the letters, there’s a current state. They’re currently ... I just want to give them a voice because they’re the ones that had to work in the courthouse the last two years. Everyone wanted the Branch 2 judge to hit the ground running.”

He noted a concern has been expressed regarding appeals in cases over which Overbey presided during the time the affair was taking place. 

According to one of the anonymous letters presented to the county board Tuesday, Overbey lost three court employees because of the affair and wasn’t always paying attention during court proceedings, at times “texting or scrolling on his phone” instead.

“I read there was an appeal filed in a sexual assault case in Branch 2 where they are seeking (from the) appellate court to bring the case back to circuit court to have a hearing to determine if there was judicial misconduct during the jury trial,” Lynch said. “That’s the first I’m aware of but I’m not sure how many may be filed in the future.”

He said in recent weeks, an email was received regarding the findings of an investigation by the “state courts” regarding “conduct off the bench.”

Lynch said the findings of the Judicial Commission are, for the most part, “completely confidential” but his understanding is on-the-bench conduct by a judge is what the Judicial Commission would be investigating. 

He said what has been established by the state courts, based on the information submitted by county court employees, is, essentially, a hostile work environment. 

“That is why I’m talking for the employees that are still submitting anonymous letters because they’re nervous,” Lynch said.

Burkett asked if there have been any personnel changes “on the third floor” of courthouse since the June 25 county board meeting and Lynch reported there had been one job posting for a judicial assistant. 

Regarding the statewide court calendar, Lynch said he was informed that court cases outside of Vilas County that Overbey had been assigned have been assigned to other judges.

“He will be strictly here in Vilas County from here on out,” Lynch said. “That’s what I was told.”

“Why would they do that?” Burkett asked. 

“I was not given a reason,” Lynch said. “I’m not sure. That’s what the district court administrator had indicated. That out-of-county cases would be assigned to other judges within the district.”

When Burkett gave him an opportunity for rebuttal, Overbey said the person who left the judicial assistant job did so for other reasons and not because of anything he did. 

Human resources director Kris Braynack could corroborate that, he insisted.

He also said there are applicants for the position who are aware of what happened, something else he said Braynack could confirm. 

Not going to resign

For the most part, the discussion among the 16 supervisors present was favorable toward the resolution although there was concern expressed by supervisors Joe Laux and Leah Trojan about the anonymous letters presented that day. 

Trojan stated she was uncomfortable addressing the matter in open session as names were used in one of the letters. 

She, along county supervisor Tom Maulson, were among those who voted against the resolution. 

County supervisor Marv Anderson requested that the vote be conducted by secret ballot but there was opposition to that suggestion.

“We’d be no different than the secret letters that went out,” Maulson noted.

Anderson then asked to have his request rescinded. 

In his rebuttal before the roll call vote, Overbey stated he will not resign and one of the anonymous letters presented to the board Tuesday was written by someone who didn’t work for him.

“They don’t work in my department,” he said. “As far as I know, they don’t work in the Vilas County court system.”

As for concerns people may have regarding any type of retribution, Overbey said he has no way to retaliate. 

“The only person I’m retaliating against is myself every time I look in the mirror,” he said. “I’m not going to resign because an imperfect elected judge is better than an appointed one at this point in time.”

Overbey said the governor has “no authority” in the matter.

“The process is this goes to the Judicial Commission and if they deem it worthy ... they will petition the (state)  supreme court which is the only agency that can remove a sitting judge,” he said.  

In addition to Trojan, Maulson and Anderson, county supervisors Jacob Postuchow, Mike MacKenzie, Daniel Swiecichowski and Pat Weber also voted against the measure.

Those voting for the resolution’s passage were county supervisors Lake Edwards, Arlene Harsvick, Dan Kramer, Art Kunde, Joe Muehlbach, Thomas Petrusky, Carolyn Ritter, Laux and Burkett.

County supervisors Bob Hanson, Joseph Wildcat, Sr., Richard Logan and Holly Tomlanovich were absent.  

Brian Jopek may be reached via email at [email protected].