The Wisconsin Ethics Commission (WEC) ruled that two candidates in this year’s Springdale Town Board Election violated they distributed election signs and purchased ads without properly identifying who paid for them.
The ruling was covered in a Sept. 11, 2025 piece that appeared in the Mount Horeb Mail. According to the story:
The commission ruled that both John Hensey and Joe Karls broke Wisconsin’s attribution rule during their campaigns. The WEC issued warnings — but no fines — to both candidates.
According to Wisconsin State Law, “every communication containing express advocacy, the cost of which is paid for by a committee or for which a committee assumes responsibility, shall identify its source by the words ‘Paid for by’ followed by the name of the committee making the payment or assuming responsibility for the communication.”
The rule exists to promote transparency regarding which people and organizations are funding political candidates. In the April 1 election, incumbent town president John Rosenbaum earned close to 67% of the vote (780 votes) and defeated Karls, who earned 33% (387 votes). In the race for the seat being vacated by Wayne Hefty, Kelly Altschul won with nearly 69% of the vote (790) to defeat Hensey, who earned 31% (356).
Both Rosenbaum and Altschul ran on platforms that pledged to abide by Springdale’s current land use plan and keep the community rural. The challengers advocated for loosening restrictions and allowing for more development.
Prior to Election Day, WEC received multiple complaints from citizens alleging that Hensey and Karls used promotional campaign materials that did not include attribution saying who paid for them.
WEC reviewed the complaint against Henley as well as his response to it in a closed session at its May 13 meeting. In his response, Hensey said any violation was unintentional and that he was initially unaware the attribution requirement applied. He all noncompliant materials to include the required attribution” and “updated a second ad published in the newspaper to include the required attribution,” according to the WEC.
At the same meeting, the WEC reviewed the complaint against Karls. However, “The Wisconsin Ethics Commission did not receive a written response in this matter.”
In both cases, the WEC voted to terminate the complaints and issue a written warning to the respondents in lieu of any further enforcement action because of the respondents’ lack of any prior offenses.
In a letter to the editor published in the Mount Horeb Mail following the April election, Karls and Hensey called their alleged violations “minor transgressions often seen during political campaigns.”
