Probably the most commonly used — and, in my opinion, abused — exemption in our state’s Open Meetings Law is the one that lets governmental bodies meet behind closed doors “whenever competitive or bargaining reasons require a closed session.”

The exemption, 19.85(1)(e) in Wisconsin state statutes, is used by all manner of public bodies, from city councils to school boards. It is supposed to be used sparingly, when needed to protect ongoing negotiations. But many bodies use this exemption to conceal everything about a potential deal or development, keeping the public in the dark until it is too late for their input.

Thankfully, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals issued a recent opinion, in a case known as Oitzinger v. City of Marinette, that should significantly curtail such abuses. The court ruled that the city’s attempts to use this exemption on two occasions violated the law. 

The first involved an agreement (negotiated for months behind the scenes and presented to the common council for the first and only time in that closed session) that released a PFAS polluter from liability in exchange for a “donation” toward equipment to help address the pollution it caused. The second involved an engineering analysis of methods to provide safe drinking water for people whose well water had been contaminated.

Both closed sessions were illegal, the appeals court ruled, because neither included discussions of negotiation strategies that needed to be kept secret. The court’s ruling does three very important things.

First, the court held Marinette officials accountable for their illegal behavior. The plaintiff, Douglas Oitzinger, was a city council member who thought his colleagues had abused this exemption. He was willing to stand up to his colleagues, endure their scorn and not give up until he won. (His efforts earned him an award from the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council in 2022.)

Second, the case reaffirms an important principle: The law’s exemption protects bargaining tactics, not all discussions about a possible deal. It exists so that government boards don’t have to negotiate at a disadvantage by divulging their strategies, such as the most it is willing to pay to buy a piece of land. But those kinds of discussions are the only thing that is supposed to happen in closed session. Other discussions — particularly debates about the merits of a course of action — need to be held publicly.

Third, the court emphasized that a board’s members need to cast an informed vote to go into closed session. That means it needs to be explained to them — on the record in open session — what kind of information is going to be discussed and why secrecy is necessary. Too often the process for going into a closed session is just a formulaic reading of a vague agenda item and a vote with no explanation or discussion. The court of appeals concluded that more is necessary, not just in this case but whenever this exemption is invoked.

I believe this is the part of the court’s decision that has the most impact. Government board members usually do this work on a part-time basis for little or no pay. They’re frequently happy to follow the lead of full-time government administrators or experienced board members. Administrators or presiding officers now must take the time to explain why they want to go into closed session. That will not only provide more information to the public, it will help board members think about and answer the question of whether secrecy is really necessary.

As an advocate for government openness, my hopes are high. I’ve seen reports from around the state that government attorneys are advising their clients about this case and explaining these requirements. I’m hopeful that abuse of this exemption will significantly decline.

Your Right to Know is a monthly column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council (wisfoic.org), a group dedicated to open government. Tom Kamenick, a council member, is the president and founder of the Wisconsin Transparency Project.

Your Right to Know: Want a closed session? Explain yourself! is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A widely anticipated list of “ sanctuary jurisdictions” no longer appears on the Department of Homeland Security’s website after receiving widespread criticism for including localities that have actively supported the Trump administration’s hard-line immigration policies.

The department last week published the list of the jurisdictions. It said each one would receive formal notification the government deemed them uncooperative with federal immigration enforcement and whether they’re believed to be in violation of any federal criminal statutes.

The list was published Thursday on the department’s website, but on Sunday there was a “Page Not Found” error message in its place.

The list was part of the Trump administration’s efforts to target communities, states and jurisdictions that it says aren’t doing enough to help its immigration enforcement agenda and the promises the president made to deport more than 11 million people living in the U.S. without legal authorization.

The list is being constantly reviewed and can be changed at any time and will be updated regularly, a DHS senior official said.

“Designation of a sanctuary jurisdiction is based on the evaluation of numerous factors, including self-identification as a Sanctuary Jurisdiction, noncompliance with Federal law enforcement in enforcing immigration laws, restrictions on information sharing, and legal protections for illegal aliens,” the official said in a statement.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” that there had been anger from some officials about the list. However, she didn’t address why it was removed.

“Some of the cities have pushed back,” Noem said. “They think because they don’t have one law or another on the books that they don’t qualify, but they do qualify. They are giving sanctuary to criminals.”

The list, which was riddled with misspellings, received pushback from officials in communities spanning from urban to rural and blue to red who said the list doesn’t appear to make sense.

In California, the city of Huntington Beach made the list even though it had filed a lawsuit challenging the state’s immigration sanctuary law and passed a resolution this year declaring the community a “non-sanctuary city.”

Jim Davel, administrator for Shawano County, Wisconsin, said the inclusion of his community must have been a clerical error. Davel voted for President Donald Trump as did 67% of Shawano County.

Davel thinks the administration may have confused the county’s vote in 2021 to become a “Second Amendment Sanctuary County” that prohibits gun control measures with it being a safe haven for immigrants. He said the county has approved no immigration sanctuary policies.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

List of ‘sanctuary jurisdictions’ removed from US government website following criticism is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The Department of Safety and Professional Services (DSPS), the agency responsible for licensing about 200 credentials, including in health care, business and the trades, would face a 31% staff cut starting Oct. 1 under the budget Republicans advanced in committee last week. 

The reduction would mean longer wait times for licenses and worse call center customer service, DSPS Communications Director John Beard said.

During Thursday’s Joint Finance Committee meeting, Republicans rejected the agency’s proposal to add 14 full-time call center positions and 10 licensing positions for DSPS to replace the temporary positions funded through federal stimulus set to expire this fall.

DSPS warned lawmakers that without the additional staff, licensing wait times could double from about eight to 16 days and answer rates at the call center could fall below 40%, reaching pre-pandemic lows. In 2018 only a little over half of the calls were answered.

Gov. Tony Evers granted DSPS federal stimulus funding in 2023. At the time, licensees were stuck waiting months at a time to receive their licenses. After DSPS used the stimulus to hire additional, temporary staff, they saw those wait times decline sharply, now averaging about 2-5 days to review application materials.

The agency’s recommendations highlighted the impact additional staff members would have on the agency, including maintaining high answer rates for the agency’s call center and minimizing wait times for licensees. 

If the agency were to fall back into a similar backlogging crisis from 2023, DSPS warns it could lead to drastic reductions in licenses issued to Wisconsin workers.

“That’s a staffing shortage in our clinics, in our hospitals, and it’s a problem for us individuals who are depending on these individuals to be licensed as quickly as possible and move onto the floor,” Sen. LaTonya Johnson, D-Milwaukee, said during the budget committee meeting. 

The day before the meeting, the Wisconsin Medical Society and health care providers and institutions sent letters to lawmakers, urging them to vote in favor of the agency’s budget proposal, which Evers included in his budget recommendation. 

“If the DSPS request is not approved, we fear a return to increased license processing times, longer call center hold times, and less responsiveness overall,” Wisconsin Medical Society Chief Policy and Advocacy Officer Mark Grapentine wrote. “These types of delays in the past resulted in applicants choosing to practice in other states due to languishing frustrations.”

DSPS said more efficient licensing created $54 million in additional wages for Wisconsin workers in 2023, compared with a projected $2 million annual cost to create the permanent positions.

Wisconsin Watch previously reported on an alcohol and drug counselor from Minnesota who waited 16 months before being told she had to take additional courses through University of Wisconsin-Superior to be eligible. 

The DSPS legislative liaison at the time boiled it down to inadequate staffing, reducing the efficiency of the agency. 

The Republican-controlled committee approved only five limited term positions for the agency. The JFC co-chairs said in a press release Thursday the committee voted to fund important government services, while limiting spending.

“We provided funding for DSPS call center staff who work to help credential holders and the public navigate licensure platforms. This investment ensures the department can operate effectively and provide these critical services to professionals,” Sen. Howard Marklein, R-Spring Green, and Rep. Mark Born, R-Beaver Dam, said. 

Republican lawmakers have previously rejected Evers’ recommendations to add staffing to the agency, even though the funding comes from department licensing fees — not taxpayer dollars. As a result, the agency’s surplus of unspent licensing fees increased from $4.4 million to $47 million, all while its services deteriorated.

In 2021, the committee approved two of the 13 positions Evers recommended. In 2023, the committee granted 18 of the 80 positions Evers requested. 

Evers used federal stimulus funding for temporary positions, including adding additional project positions. But the funding for those temporary positions will run out this year. 

Beard said by Oct. 1 the call center staff will go from 28 to 11 positions and total staff will go from 58 to 40. 

Republicans also voted to transfer $5 million in program revenue — the money collected from the fees paid when applying for, obtaining and maintaining a license — to the general fund, which is expected to have a $4.2 billion surplus at the end of the month.

At the end of the last fiscal year, the DSPS surplus was around $39 million, according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

Despite having the huge surplus of program revenue — including money accumulated from fees applied to permit and license applications — DSPS can’t use those funds to hire more staff without JFC approval.

“Licensees pay fees so that they can be appropriately regulated, and what we are doing is starving that system and making it harder for every single one of us to access needed professional services,” Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, said in support of adding 24 permanent positions using program revenue.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.

Republican budget plan could pour sand back into licensing agency gears is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The percentage of Wisconsin schoolchildren not receiving state-mandated vaccinations because of their parents’ personal beliefs is four times higher than it was a generation ago.

That rise in personal conviction waivers has driven a decrease in all immunizations among Wisconsin children ahead of new measles outbreaks hitting the U.S. that are linked to three deaths.

Wisconsin’s measles vaccination rate among kindergartners was the third-lowest in the nation in the 2023-24 school year, behind Idaho and Alaska. (Montana didn’t report data.)

Here’s a look at how we got here.

Vaccine laws in all 50 states

Immunizations are so common that all 50 states have laws requiring them for schoolchildren. Wisconsin was among the first, in 1882.

In the 1950s, the child mortality rate was 4.35%, largely due to childhood diseases. That rate dropped to 0.77% by 2022, according to the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

“Vaccines have brought about one of the largest improvements in public health in human history, making diseases that once caused widespread illness and many deaths, such as measles, mumps, and rubella, rare in the United States,” the agency reported.

For the 2024-25 school year, Wisconsin required seven immunizations (18 doses) for children to enter school. That included shots for measles (MMR), polio and hepatitis B. COVID-19 and influenza vaccines are not included.

Overall, the vast majority of Wisconsin students, 89.2%, met the minimum immunization requirements in the 2023–24 school year, according to the state’s latest annual report. 

That’s essentially unchanged from the previous two school years. 

But it’s down more than three percentage points from 92.3% in 2017-18.

For highly communicable diseases such as measles, a threshold above 95% is needed to protect most people through “herd immunity.”

More parents refusing to get kids vaccinated

Wisconsin had been a national leader in childhood immunizations. 

But increasingly, Wisconsin parents are opting out:

• For all childhood immunizations, vaccination rates statewide were lower in almost every quarter from 2020 through 2024, in comparison with the average rate in the three years before COVID-19.

• Wisconsin was one of the states with the largest drops in the measles vaccination rate for kindergartners between the 2022-23 and 2023-24 school years, and no county had an MMR vaccination rate above 85%, The Economist reported.

• By a different measure, the measles vaccination rate for 2-year-olds in 2024 was as low as 44% in Vernon County and under 70% in 14 other counties.

On exemptions, Wisconsin differs from most states

All states have exemptions that allow parents not to have their children vaccinated. Medical and religious reasons are the most common. 

In Wisconsin, there’s also a third waiver.

Wisconsin regulations say the Wisconsin Department of Health Services shall provide a waiver for health reasons if a physician certifies that an immunization “is or may be harmful to the health of a student”; or, if the parent of a minor student, or an adult student, submits a signed statement that “declares an objection to immunization on religious or personal conviction grounds.”

That philosophical exemption, based on personal beliefs, exists only in 15 states, including Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota.   

“The bottom line is: If you don’t want your child vaccinated, you don’t have to,” said Kia Kjensrud, interim director of Immunize Wisconsin, which supports vaccination organizations.

In 2023-24, 6.1% of Wisconsin students used a waiver. 

That includes 5.2% who had a personal conviction waiver — a rate more than four times higher than the 1.2% in 1997-98.

Waiver use has increased because the number of required vaccines and the legal protections given to vaccine manufacturers have “fueled skepticism about vaccine safety and testing rigor,” Wisconsin United for Freedom said in an email. The De Pere-based group works to protect “rights to medical freedom” and promotes vaccine skepticism. 

Rep. Lisa Subeck, D-Madison, one of the lawmakers who introduced legislation in 2023 to repeal the personal conviction waiver, said she believes some parents have genuine convictions against vaccinations. But “many of the folks who are choosing this exemption are doing it because of misinformation” claiming that vaccines are dangerous, she said.

Groups that registered to lobby in favor of Subeck’s bill included associations of physicians, nurses and local health departments. Wisconsin Family Action, which works to advance Judeo-Christian values, opposed it. The bill did not pass.

Kjensrud also blamed Wisconsin’s declining immunization rates on misinformation. But she said that rather than legislation, her group wants to improve “messaging the safety, efficacy and lifesaving importance of vaccines, and increasing vaccination rates however we can.” 

Bipartisan support for personal exemption

Wisconsin’s modern student immunization law was passed in 1975 with only the medical and religious waivers. In 1980, the Legislature added the personal conviction waiver. 

The waiver was included in a broader amendment proposed by 10 Democratic members and 11 Republican members of the Assembly.

The lead sponsor was the late Richard Flintrop, who represented Oshkosh and was known as a child welfare advocate. He also was a former staff member to maverick Democratic U.S. Sen. William Proxmire.

Wisconsin United For Freedom said the recent measles outbreaks “raise valid concerns,” but that “the focus should be on balanced public health strategies that prioritize sanitation, nutrition, and informed choice alongside vaccination, rather than relying solely on mandates.”

Wisconsin Watch wants to hear your perspective on vaccinations. Do you have questions about measles, its vaccine or how to keep your family safe? Or do you have perspectives to share about prevention efforts in your community?

If so, fill out this brief form. Your submissions will shape the direction of our reporting and will not be shared publicly.

Wisconsin, once a leader in childhood vaccinations, now a leader in vaccine skepticism is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

One Republican lawmaker and a group of Democrats are hoping to protect bees, butterflies and other pollinators in Wisconsin through a series of bills.

The post Pollinator Protection Package reintroduced in Wisconsin Legislature with bipartisan support appeared first on WPR.

The state’s first large utility-scale battery storage project came online in southeastern Wisconsin this month, providing enough storage to power more than 130,000 homes for four hours.

The post Wisconsin’s first large-scale battery storage system comes online in Kenosha County appeared first on WPR.

A Wisconsin mother who lost her daughter to suicide is urging lawmakers to make it easier to get mental health treatment for older teens.

The post Wisconsin lawmakers propose dozens of mental health care bills appeared first on WPR.

A Milwaukee man is facing criminal charges after he admitted to sending letters threatening President Donald Trump under an immigrant's name, telling police his plan was to have the man deported.

The post Milwaukee man charged with identity theft for allegedly writing letter that led to arrest of man by ICE agents appeared first on WPR.

In a new book, Eau Claire-based authors curate 11 road trips to take readers to different regions across Wisconsin.

The post New book invites readers to explore Wisconsin off the beaten path appeared first on WPR.

Wisconsin is one of three states, along with nearly a dozen local governments, celebrating June 2 as National Mississippi River Day. 

The post Wisconsin celebrates National Mississippi River Day appeared first on WPR.

Arguments began Monday in a lawsuit that could change Wisconsin’s participation in a national group that helps maintain state voter laws.

The post Arguments begin in former Rep. Janel Brandtjen’s lawsuit against ERIC elections database appeared first on WPR.

Three zookeepers introduced WPR’s “Wisconsin Today” to the newest additions at their grounds: Canada lynx kittens, a baby camel born at 99 pounds and two North American river otters.

The post Camel, otters and lynx: Take a trip around Wisconsin to meet the newest baby zoo animals appeared first on WPR.

The Trump Administration is asking states to more closely watch the citizenship status of people receiving benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. But some advocates for immigrant families worry the messaging could hurt people who are eligible for the food assistance.

The post Federal calls for SNAP data could deter eligible immigrants from applying, advocacy groups say appeared first on WPR.

A Newcomb College vase circa 1905; an 1875 W.S. Young landscape oil; a collection of Noel Coward “Sail Away” memorabilia.

The post Antiques Roadshow:Charleston Hour 3 appeared first on WPR.

Left to right, Denver Mayor Michael Johnston, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and David J. Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, are sworn in during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on sanctuary cities' policies at the U.S. Capitol on March 5, 2025 in Washington, D.C.  (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Homeland Security over the weekend took down a public list of cities and jurisdictions that the Trump administration labeled as “sanctuary” cities, after a sharp rebuke from a group representing 3,000 sheriffs and local law enforcement.

On Saturday, National Sheriffs’ Association President Sheriff Kieran Donahue slammed the list as an “unnecessary erosion of unity and collaboration with law enforcement.”

“The completion and publication of this list has not only violated the core principles of trust, cooperation, and partnership with fellow law enforcement, but it also has the potential to strain the relationship between Sheriffs and the White House administration,” Donahue said.

DHS published the list Thursday and it was unavailable by Sunday. It’s unclear when it was removed, but internet archives show Saturday as the last time the list was still active.

In a statement, DHS did not answer questions as to why the list was removed.

“As we have previously stated, the list is being constantly reviewed and can be changed at any time and will be updated regularly,” according to a DHS spokesperson. “Designation of a sanctuary jurisdiction is based on the evaluation of numerous factors, including self-identification as a Sanctuary Jurisdiction, noncompliance with Federal law enforcement in enforcing immigration laws, restrictions on information sharing, and legal protections for illegal aliens.”

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem on Fox News Sunday did not acknowledge that the list was taken down, but said some localities had “pushed back.”

“They think because they don’t have one law or another on the books that they don’t qualify, but they do qualify,” Noem said. “They are giving sanctuary to criminals.”

List followed Trump executive order

Local law enforcement aids in immigration enforcement by holding immigrants in local jails until federal immigration officials can arrive.

The creation of the list stems from Donald Trump’s executive order in April that required DHS to produce a list of cities that do not cooperate with federal immigration officials in enforcement matters, in order to strip federal funding from those local governments.

Those jurisdictions are often dubbed “sanctuary cities,” but immigration enforcement still occurs in the city — there’s just no coordination between the local government and the federal government.

The jurisdictions are often a target for the Trump administration and Republicans, who support the President Donald Trump campaign promise of mass deportations of people without permanent legal status.

Congressional Republicans in March grilled mayors from Boston, Chicago and Denver, on their cities’ immigration policies during a six-hour hearing before the U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

‘Strong objection’

Local officials were puzzled by the list.

One law enforcement association in North Dakota questioned why several counties — Billings, Golden Valley, Grant, Morton, Ramsey, Sioux, and Slope — were listed as sanctuary jurisdictions because those areas cooperate with federal immigration officials.

In a statement, the North Dakota Sheriff’s and Deputies Association said the “methodology and criteria used to compile this list is unknown,” and there has been no communication from DHS “on how to rectify this finding.”

“The elected Sheriffs of these counties take strong objection with language in this release characterizing them as ‘deliberately and shamefully obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws endangering American communities,’” according to NDSDA.

“The North Dakota Sheriff’s and Deputies Association is working to gather more information regarding the lack of transparency and reasoning as to why the Department of Homeland Security did not fact check prior to incorrectly naming these North Dakota counties.”

Local advocacy groups also noted the problems with the DHS list.

“I assume they’ve removed (the list) because they were bombarded with complaints about inaccuracy and how and why these various jurisdictions got on the list,” Steven Brown, executive director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island, said in an interview Monday.

According to the Internet Archive website Wayback Machine, the states, as well as the District of Columbia, that were on the list included Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington state and Wisconsin.

Christopher Shea and Amy Dalrymple contributed to this story.