Madison’s Rutabaga Paddlesports will not be closing after all, though owner Darren Bush still plans to transition to a new career as a hospice chaplain.
The post Madison paddling shop owner says he’ll sell rather than close Rutabaga appeared first on WPR.
Two bills signed into law aim to strengthen emergency medical services around the state by reducing costs for education and the burden on local governments.
The post New laws aim to train more emergency medical responders, increase EMS reimbursement appeared first on WPR.
Street fishing involves anglers casting lines from the shores of urban lakes and rivers. Wisconsin’s many city waterways have contributed to impressive growth of the sport here.
The post All-Wisconsin street fishing team will represent US at the world championship in Green Bay appeared first on WPR.
Researchers have long known that the COVID-19 vaccine protects individuals against severe illness. But a study analyzing data from the pandemic finds that the vaccine actually reduces the spread of the disease between vaccinated people and their close contacts.
The post Wisconsin researcher finds COVID-19 vaccine offers stronger protection than once thought appeared first on WPR.
This summer, President Donald Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law, ending various tax credits a decade ahead of schedule. The credits could be used to buy electric vehicles and to install solar panels on homes.
The post Wisconsin residents are running out of time to qualify for solar tax credits appeared first on WPR.
Rebecca Taibleson, the Milwaukee prosecutor picked by President Donald Trump for a federal judgeship, cleared a procedural hurdle Thursday and is on her way to a full confirmation vote next week.
The post Johnson, Baldwin split as Senate advances Trump’s pick for appeals court appeared first on WPR.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has denied Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers' request for public assistance for six counties that were impacted by historic rainfall that led to widespread flooding in August.
The post FEMA denies Wisconsin request for funds to repair infrastructure damaged in August floods appeared first on WPR.
Protesters and counterprotesters on Thursday made their voices heard in the Milwaukee suburb of Hales Corners in a community battle over library books that feature LGBTQ themes.
The post Protesters battle over LGBTQ+ books at Hales Corners Library appeared first on WPR.
The U.S. Capitol building and Washington Monument in Washington, D.C., at sunset on Oct. 14, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — Some members of Congress are asking for their salaries to be withheld during the government shutdown, while federal workers on Friday missed their first full paycheck since many operations closed on Oct. 1.
With no movement toward a deal to end the shutdown, the House remained on a prolonged break from Capitol Hill, the Senate left for its usual long weekend and President Donald Trump prepared to depart for a trip to China, where he will likely focus much more on foreign policy and tariffs than the funding lapse.
The president, lawmakers and federal judges all receive their regular paychecks during government shutdowns, unlike the 2 million civilian federal employees and thousands of staffers who work in the legislative branch. Members of Congress are paid $174,000 a year and leaders are paid more.
Active duty military members would also normally miss their paychecks, but the Defense Department reprogrammed $8 billion earlier this month to avoid a missed payday for U.S. troops. It’s unclear if the Pentagon can do that again ahead of the Oct. 31 pay date or if there was enough money left to cover those salaries.
Unlike most federal workers, members of Congress have the option to receive their pay as normal, donate their salaries to charity, give the money back to the Treasury, or have their checks withheld during this shutdown.
Rhode Island Democratic Rep. Gabe Amo posted a letter Thursday evening from House Chief Administrative Officer Catherine L. Szpindor confirming that House members’ salaries can be held back until after the funding lapse ends.
Szpindor wrote that legal requirements, including the 27th Amendment, entitle members of Congress to their pay and that any lawmaker who has their check withheld during a shutdown can request it be distributed at any time. Szpindor did not respond to a request for comment.
A spokesperson for Ohio Republican Sen. Jon Husted said the Senate Financial Clerk told their office that while senators are required to be paid, officials can withhold his check until after the shutdown ends, at his request.
The Senate disbursing office will continue to cut the check, but Husted will not pick it up until after Congress funds the government, the spokesperson said.
Husted doesn’t believe members of Congress should receive their salaries on time when other federal workers cannot, the spokesperson said.
A different Senate staffer, speaking on background about the issue, told States Newsroom the salary for another senator was transitioned from direct deposit to a physical paycheck so it could be held by the disbursing office for the duration of the shutdown, at that senator’s request.
Members of Congress who have asked for their salaries to be withheld include Colorado Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, Florida Republican Rep. Kat Cammack, New Jersey Democratic Sen. Andy Kim, Oklahoma Republican Rep. Stephanie Bice and Oregon Democratic Rep. Janelle Bynum, among others.
Spokespeople for Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., did not respond to a request for comment about whether they are having their salaries withheld during the shutdown. A spokesperson for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he is having his paycheck held back.
Congress has voted several times over the years to officially withhold members’ salaries during a shutdown, but none of the bills have ever become law. There have been questions during past funding lapses about whether members’ paychecks could legally be withheld.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office wrote in a letter to Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst just before the shutdown began that member pay “is required by the Constitution and is considered mandatory spending.”
“Thus, Members of Congress would continue to be paid during a lapse in discretionary appropriations,” CBO Director Phillip L. Swagel wrote.
That assessment lines up with a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, updated in August, that says “Members of Congress continue to receive their pay during a lapse in appropriations for a number of reasons.”
Lawmaker salaries “have been provided by a permanent, mandatory, appropriation since” 1981, the report says.
The U.S. Constitution, in Article I, Section 6, Clause 1, says: “Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.”
And the 27th Amendment to the Constitution says: “No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.”
The CRS report quotes the Government Accountability Office’s principles of federal appropriations law as saying, “The salary of a Member of Congress is fixed by statute and therefore cannot be waived without specific statutory authority.”
But the report also points out nothing prevents a member of Congress from accepting the salary and then donating all or part of it back to the Treasury.
That same choice isn’t available for the people who work for members of Congress or those at departments and agencies throughout the executive branch.
They must go without their paychecks until after Congress and the president broker a deal to fund the government and end the shutdown.
Any worker who manages national security issues, or the protection of life or property, is considered exempt and continues working until the shutdown ends. Any federal employee not in that category is placed on furlough.
The Senate was unable to advance multiple bills Thursday that would have provided salaries to some federal employees and contractors during the shutdown.
Absent new congressional action, both exempt and non-exempt federal workers are supposed to receive back pay under a 2019 law once government reopens, though Trump and administration officials have cast doubt on whether they will do that for employees in the executive branch.
Guidance from the House Committee on Administration says that all employees who work within the legislative branch will receive back pay once a funding bill becomes law.
“Neither essential nor furloughed employees are authorized to receive compensation during a lapse in government funding,” the report says. “Federal law statutorily requires retroactive pay for furloughed and essential employees following the end of a lapse in government funding.”
Kilmar Abrego Garcia speaks to a crowd of people who held a prayer vigil and rally on his behalf outside the Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Baltimore on Aug. 25, 2025. Lydia Walther Rodriguez with CASA interprets for him. (Photo by William J. Ford/Maryland Matters)
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration Friday identified the West African nation of Liberia as the location for the removal of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, noting his deportation could come as soon as Oct. 31.
In a Friday court filing in the District of Maryland, the Department of Justice argued that Liberia is a close partner with the United States and that the federal government has received assurances from Liberia that Abrego Garcia will not be harmed if he is deported there. They added that Abrego Garcia, who has a wife and family in Maryland, has not expressed fear of being removed to Liberia.
“Although Petitioner has identified more than twenty countries that he purports to fear would persecute or torture him if he were removed there, Liberia is not on that list,” according to the filing.
Abrego Garcia’s attorneys in his Maryland case could not be immediately reached for comment.
The new filing comes shortly after attorneys for Abrego Garcia in a separate case in Tennessee this week requested to subpoena Trump DOJ official Todd Blanche in connection with Abrego Garcia’s claim that his criminal case by the Trump administration is vindictive. That hearing is set to start Nov. 4.
Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty to those charges, which accuse him of the human trafficking of immigrants in an incident stemming from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee.
Abrego Garcia, whose wrongful deportation cast a spotlight on the president’s aggressive immigration crackdown, is challenging his detention on the grounds that the Trump administration is using his imprisonment as punishment rather than for the purpose of removal.
Abrego Garcia has stated he is willing to be deported to Costa Rica, which has agreed to accept the longtime Maryland man as a refugee.
Because Abrego Garcia has deportation protections from his home country of El Salvador, the Trump administration must find a third country that is willing to accept him and a country where Abrego Garcia believes he will not face harm or persecution.
The Trump administration so far has floated sending Abrego Garcia to one of three nations in Africa — Ghana, Eswatini and Uganda.
Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis found little evidence the Trump administration has made any effort to remove Abrego Garcia either to the southern African nation of Eswatini or Costa Rica.
At that hearing, Abrego Garcia’s attorneys told Xinis they have not received an answer from the federal government as to why officials won’t remove Abrego Garcia to Costa Rica.
Xinis is currently mulling whether or not to order the release of Abrego Garcia, who is detained at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Pennsylvania.
Any indefinite stay would likely be unconstitutional, per a 2001 Supreme Court ruling that does not allow for immigrants to be detained longer than six months if the federal government is making no efforts to remove them.
In March, Abrego Garcia was wrongly deported to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador, where he detailed his experience of psychological and physical torture.
Produce at a Virginia grocery store in 2011. (Photo by Lance Cheung/U.S. Department of Agriculture)
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Agriculture said in a memo Friday the agency’s contingency fund cannot legally be used to provide food assistance benefits for more than 42 million people in November, as the government shutdown drags on.
The position is a reversal from the department’s earlier stance, according to a since-deleted copy of the USDA’s Sept. 30 shutdown plan that said the department would use its multi-year contingency fund to continue paying Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits during the ongoing shutdown.
SNAP has about $6 billion in the contingency fund — short of the roughly $9 billion needed to cover a full month of the program, putting November benefits in jeopardy.
Because of a stalemate in Congress over a stopgap spending bill, the government shut down on Oct. 1 without new SNAP funding enacted.
The memo, which was first reported by Axios on Friday, said states would not be reimbursed if they use their own funds to cover the cost of the benefits.
“There is no provision or allowance under current law for States to cover the cost of benefits and be reimbursed,” the memo says, while also noting that “the best way for SNAP to continue is for the shutdown to end.”
The memo also says the contingency fund is meant for natural disasters and similar emergencies, not for a lack of appropriations.
But USDA’s Sept. 30 contingency plan contradicts that and appears to greenlight the use of SNAP’s contingency fund during a lapse in funding.
“Congressional intent is evident that SNAP’s operations should continue since the program has been provided with multi-year contingency funds that can be used for State Administrative Expenses to ensure that the State can also continue operations during a Federal Government shutdown,” according to the plan. “These multi-year contingency funds are also available to fund participant benefits in the event that a lapse occurs in the middle of the fiscal year.”
USDA’s contingency plan is no longer online, but is accessible through an internet archive.
After providing States Newsroom with the memo Friday afternoon, USDA did not immediately respond to a follow-up inquiry about the discrepancy between Friday’s memo and its contingency plan.
In the memo, USDA said transferring money toward SNAP from other sources “would pull away funding for school meals and infant formula.”
The agency said it has shuffled funds to cover several nutrition programs during the shutdown, including the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, or WIC, as well as the National School Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program, and the Child and Adult Care Food Program.
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said last week the government would run out of funds to deliver November SNAP benefits as a result of the ongoing shutdown.
Friday morning, U.S. House Democrats, like nearly all of their Senate counterparts and the Republican chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, urged Rollins to not only use the contingency fund, but to reprogram other money to cover a $3 billion shortfall.
“A potential lapse in benefits would be felt by Americans of all ages and affect every corner and congressional district in the country,” according to the letter from more than 200 House Democrats.
In a separate letter, 46 Senate Democrats sent to Rollins on Wednesday, voicing concerns that USDA told states to hold off on sending in SNAP benefits to be processed for November.
“We were deeply disturbed to hear that the USDA has instructed states to stop processing SNAP benefits for November and were surprised by your recent comments that the program will ‘run out of money in two weeks,’” according to the letter. “In fact, the USDA has several tools available which would enable SNAP benefits to be paid through or close to the end of November.”
The chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Republican Susan Collins of Maine, also urged Rollins in a Thursday letter to “consider all available options in accordance with federal law to ensure that this vital nutrition assistance continues, including the use of contingency funds and looking at the viability of partial payments or any transfer authority you may have.”
States have been told by the agency to hold off on submitting SNAP benefit requests to processing centers. Food banks and pantries are already bracing for the increased need, including in Iowa, where more than 270,000 Iowans rely on SNAP each month.
However, even if Congress immediately reached a deal to end the shutdown, the time needed to process the payments and make them available for recipients means SNAP benefits would likely be delayed. State officials have warned SNAP recipients of the possibility of delays.
In West Virginia, officials said delays are expected and told residents to seek assistance at local food pantries. Roughly 1 in 6 West Virginia residents rely on SNAP each month.
Sharon Parrott, a White House Office of Management and Budget official during the Obama administration who now leads a left-leaning think tank, said in a Thursday statement that USDA is legally required to use its SNAP contingency funds.
Parrott, the president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said the multi-year contingency fund is “billions of dollars that Congress provided for use when SNAP funding is inadequate that remain available during the shutdown — to fund November benefits for the 1 in 8 Americans who need SNAP to afford their grocery bill.”
Parrott said the Trump administration could use its legal transfer authority, just as it did with WIC funding, to “supplement the contingency reserves, which by themselves are not enough to fund families’ full benefits.”
Social Security benefits will see a 2.8% increase in payments next year, the Social Security Administration said Friday. (Photo illustration by iStock/Getty Images Plus)
The 75 million Americans who receive Social Security benefits will see a 2.8% increase in payments next year, the Social Security Administration said Friday.
The cost-of-living adjustment is just below the inflation rate of 3% announced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, also on Friday.
The adjustment is lower than the average over the past decade, but higher than last year’s. The average adjustment for the past 10 years is 3.1%, including a 2.5% increase last year. On average, beneficiaries’ monthly payments will rise by about $56, the SSA said.
Beneficiaries include people who receive Old-Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance, as well as Supplemental Security Income.
“Social Security is a promise kept, and the annual cost-of-living adjustment is one way we are working to make sure benefits reflect today’s economic realities and continue to provide a foundation of security,” Social Security Administration Commissioner Frank J. Bisignano said in a statement. “The cost-of-living adjustment is a vital part of how Social Security delivers on its mission.”
The tax rate for Social Security and Medicare will remain steady at 7.65% for employees and 15.3% for self-employed workers.
Underly was invited by the committee to deliver testimony and answer questions last week, but she sent other representatives, including Deputy Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy, for the agency in her stead on Thursday. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Exmainer)
State Superintendent Jill Underly didn’t show up to answer questions from Wisconsin lawmakers about the process the Department of Public Instruction uses for investigating reports of sexual misconduct by educators and for determining licensing.
Underly was invited by the committee to deliver testimony and answer questions, after a report from The Capital Times last week found that DPI investigated over 200 cases of Wisconsin teachers, aides, substitutes and administrators accused of sexual misconduct or grooming behaviors toward students from 2018 to 2023. Underly sent other representatives for the agency in her stead on Thursday. According to WisPolitics, Underly was out of state to accept an alumni award from Indiana University.
The conversation surrounding the agency’s handling of sexual misconduct and grooming allegations and licensure was sparked by the CapTimes report, which detailed a number of questions related to the system the agency uses to track data on cases, suggested the agency wasn’t making information readily available to the public and noted the few resources that the agency has to investigate cases and track information.
In a YouTube video posted Thursday, Underly said lawmakers, law enforcement, educators and families would need to come to the table to build a “stronger system that protects every child and respects the rule of law.”
“Let me be absolutely clear: the safety, dignity, and well-being of Wisconsin’s children is — and will always be — our first and most important responsibility,” Underly said. “We investigate every single complaint we receive. These investigations are conducted thoroughly, professionally, and within the legal authority given to us. Licensure actions — whether it is a suspension, revocation, or voluntary surrender — are not made lightly. They are based on evidence, not speculation; on due process, not headlines.”
Last week, Underly called the report “misleading” in a letter and requested a retraction or correction from the CapTimes. In response, CapTimes Editor Mark Treinen said the paper stands by the reporting.
Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) announced that she is working on a set of bills in response to the article.
One bill focuses on implementing a criminal penalty for “grooming” of children by sexual predators in state statute. Nedweski also said she is drafting a bill to require school districts to adopt clear policies outlining appropriate communication boundaries between staff and students and a bill to prohibit DPI from allowing teachers under investigation for sexual misconduct to surrender their teaching license to avoid further scrutiny.
Lawmakers expressed concern at Underly’s absence, noting the seriousness of the issue.
At the start of the hearing, Rep. Mike Bare (D-Verona) said he was “disappointed” by Underly’s absence.
“I am deeply, deeply disappointed that Superintendent Underly could not bring herself to the meeting,” Nedweski, who chairs the committee, said. “These are very, very serious issues.”
Nedweski said she had a meeting with DPI staff on Monday, but the Underly never reached out to her to ask to reschedule the hearing. She said she would have gladly accommodated a different date.
“I guess she just couldn’t find it important enough,” she added.
At a press conference after the hearing, Nedweski, Sen. John Jagler (R-Watertown) and U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who is running for governor in 2026, criticized Underly for her absence.
“I would call on [Gov. Tony Evers] at this point… do you find this acceptable? Is this acceptable what has gone on here in the state of Wisconsin?” Tiffany asked. “I think it’s time for the governor to call on Jill Underly to either do her job or step aside.”
Tiffany said he would ensure proper investigations and create a public dashboard showing why teachers lose their licenses if he is elected governor.
The hearing began with testimony from Kenosha Chief of Police Patrick Patton, Deputy Chief of Police Joseph Labatore and officer Kate Schaper, who addressed the difference between investigations conducted by law enforcement and the role of the DPI.
DPI Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy delivered testimony and answered questions on behalf of Underly and the agency. He was joined by Rich Judge, who serves as DPI’s assistant superintendent of government and public affairs, and Jennifer Kammerud, who serves as the educator licensing director.
McCarthy began his testimony by laying out the role of the agency in handling sexual misconduct and grooming allegations. He said the agency’s main role is in the state’s licensing system, which is how they can draw attention to people who shouldn’t be in the classroom.
“When we hear about allegations … we are deadly serious,” McCarthy said. “We use all of the tools that we have available. We do not have subpoena power, but we do attempt to get information from anybody that can support a license investigation case, and given how sensitive these things are, we try to work as thoroughly and quickly as possible.”
McCarthy noted that DPI typically receives accusations from law enforcement agencies, required reporting from local school districts, complaints from members of the public and from news media reports, which McCarthy said the agency scans frequently.
Both McCarthy and the law enforcement officers spoke to concerns about the lack of a definition for grooming in Wisconsin state statute.
According to RAINN, grooming is the “deliberate act of building trust with a child, teen, or at-risk adult (such as an adult with a cognitive impairment) for the purpose of exploiting them sexually.”
DPI recommended in its testimony that a definition for grooming should include patterns of flirtatious behavior, making any effort to gain unreasonable access to or time alone with any student with no discernable educational purpose, engaging in any behavior that can reasonably be construed as involving an inappropriate relationship with a student and engaging in any other special treatment not in compliance with generally accepted educational practices.
McCarthy said lawmakers should consider requiring an annual training should they adopt a definition of grooming.
“We need to be reminding folks of the types of behaviors and things that we expect from them. It doesn’t matter what type of school,” McCarthy said.
Questioning by lawmakers was tense and combative at times.
Nedweski said she was unclear about why there is confusion over whether grooming can be used to remove a teacher’s license.
Current state law says that a teacher’s license can be revoked due to “immoral conduct,” which is defined as “conduct or behavior that is contrary to commonly accepted moral or ethical standards and that endangers the health, safety, welfare, or education of any pupil.”
“Do we have to explicitly write the word ‘grooming’ in this law to spell out that grooming is not commonly accepted moral at ethical standards? I tend to believe that most Wisconsinites would think the law is comprehensive. Any kind of behavior that resembles grooming in any definition is already covered there,” Nedweski said.
McCathy said the statute right now is “vague and ambiguous.”
“When we find these things we go after them,” McCarthy said. “The department is using all of its authority to put its foot down in the spaces and revoke licenses. We’re doing that in a space right now where the authority doesn’t necessarily back us in every instance.”
The Assembly Government Oversight, Accountability and Transparency (GOAT) committee voted unanimously to approve a motion to request that Attorney General Josh Kaul provide an opinion on two questions: whether grooming is “contrary to commonly accepted moral or ethical standards” and does grooming “endanger the health, safety, welfare or education” of a pupil.
McCarthy also told lawmakers that they view voluntary surrenders as an important tool for them. He said they will ask educators under investigation to do so throughout the process.
The agency has noted that it often gives several opportunities for teachers to voluntarily surrender their licenses.
McCarthy said that voluntary surrenders related to a sexual misconduct investigation are most often lifetime surrenders, meaning that in a legal agreement they won’t be able to apply for an educator’s license again.
Revocations and voluntary surrenders are also reported to the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) — a national database that state education agencies can access that includes information about the misconduct. That database is not accessible to the public.
McCarthy noted that information is available on the DPI website on the status of a teacher’s license, though one needs to know a licensee’s name in order to check. The information will say whether an educator’s license is under investigation, has been revoked or voluntarily surrendered, though it doesn’t include information on why. He said the agency is working with old, rigid software that makes it difficult to add additional information.
Nedweski said she didn’t “buy” the explanation that the agency was giving.
“It’s remarkable because the Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services can show you the reason for a license revocation for anyone,” Nedweski said, including explanations for manicurists. “It’s easier for me as a member of the public to find out why a cosmetologist lost their license and why it was revoked than it is for me to find out why a teacher license was revoked… Why is it so hard for us to find out critical safety information?”
The agency requested $600,000 in the most recent state budget process to modernize its online background checks and licensing platform — a request that was rejected by the Republican-led Legislature.
The agency also suggested that lawmakers consider increasing reporting requirements to all school types and all individuals who are present in schools. McCarthy noted that the agency doesn’t have the ability to revoke licenses of people that don’t have to be licensed — including paraprofessionals and teachers in taxpayer-supported private schools.
Lawmakers said they plan to provide Underly with other opportunities to speak in public forums about the issue.
Jagler said the Senate Education Committee, which he chairs, will have an informational hearing on Nov. 4 where Underly will be the only invited speaker.
The Joint Audit Committee also noticed a hearing on Nov. 5 to launch an audit of educational licensure revocation, suspension, restriction and investigation at DPI.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
Joy Kirkpatrick spends much of her time thinking about the future of Wisconsin’s farmland.
As a farm succession outreach specialist for the University of Wisconsin-Madison Division of Extension, she helps farmers figure out what to do with their farms when they’re ready to retire.
A flood of farmers will soon face that question. The average Wisconsin farmer is nearly 57, and a growing share are 65 or older.
For generations, the answer was simple: Hand off the land and operations to their kids. But farmers are increasingly finding their grown children have other plans.
To fund their retirement, today’s farmers will often weigh whether to rent or sell their land to larger agricultural operations, real estate developers, energy companies or even private equity firms.
Meanwhile, a new generation of aspiring farmers is struggling to get started. Many didn’t grow up on farms and don’t have the land they need. In surveys, beginning farmers nationwide say their biggest challenge is finding affordable farmland.
Nationally, nearly 70% of all farmland is expected to change hands in the next 20 years, whether through inheritance or sale, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture. What happens to that land will determine whether Wisconsin’s farmers can retire comfortably, and whether small farms have a place in the state’s future.
“If we want land to be available to new or beginning farmers, figuring out ways that the land can be affordable for them and still provide the income that the owner generation needs is key,” Kirkpatrick said.
Experts say meeting those two goals will require a combination of strategies including tax incentives, conservation easements and loan assistance. But a group of Wisconsin lawmakers is looking to make a dent in the problem with a simple step: a website to connect those with farmland for sale or rent to those looking to start new farms.
A group of Republican lawmakers introduced Assembly Bill 411 and its Senate counterpart, SB 412, this summer. The legislation would direct the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to create a “farmland link” program to assist farmers with transferring property. Central to that effort, the bill instructs DATCP to build and maintain a website where farm owners could post land for sale or rent, and beginning farmers could inquire about the opportunities they’re looking for, including the chance to be mentored by an experienced farmer before taking the reins.
The legislation’s lead author, Rep. Clint Moses, R-Menomonie, grew up on a dairy farm and now runs a roughly 50-head beef operation. He’s watched farmland prices rise, much like home prices.
“It’s much, much more challenging than it was even five to 10 years ago,” Moses said.
It’s not just a cost problem, Moses said. In the past, farmers looking to pass on their land would talk to their neighbors to see who was interested. Today, those communities are often less connected, so prospective farmers need other ways to find land, Moses said. That’s the purpose of a farmland link website.
“It kind of allows them to not have to go out and sift through all the other real estate listings,” Moses said.
Eight other states, including neighboring Minnesota and Michigan, have land link programs run in whole or in part by state or local governments. In Wisconsin, where the previous state-run program shut down around a decade ago, only regional nonprofit organizations now offer the service.
While some Wisconsin farm advocates are optimistic the bill could chip away at a tough problem, others say it lacks the funding and specifics to make it work.
Les Macare and Els Dobrick of Racing Heart Farm in Colfax found their 36 acres in the Farmland Clearinghouse listings, published by the Minnesota-based nonprofit Land Stewardship Project.
It was 2016, and the two lived in Minneapolis and rented farmland in Stillwater, where they grew vegetables for Minneapolis farmers markets and a CSA.
But they were getting tired of commuting 40 minutes every morning and evening.
“We knew either we were going to start looking for land, or not farm,” Macare said.
From the listing, the former sheep and vegetable farm in Dunn County sounded like a dream. The owners, a pair of sisters and their young families, were looking to move somewhere less rural. When Macare and Dobrick visited, the rolling hills and rocky outcroppings reminded Macare of their home state of Connecticut.
“We got back in the car and we looked at each other like, can we make this happen? Because it was absolutely the perfect thing for our farm business, and for us,” Macare said.
Getting financing took more than nine months, but the sellers waited. That, Macare said, is one benefit of this kind of listing service: The buyers and sellers know the farm business and its particular challenges.
Many landowners who advertise through the Clearinghouse are motivated by more than money, said Karen Stettler, who oversees the listings for the Land Stewardship Project. Many have cultivated their land organically for years and want to see their farms continue the same way.
“People have a lot of connection to land and to what they’re doing on farms and so are very good stewards and caretakers of their land, and they’re wanting to make sure that the next generation also has that same sort of value and vision around stewardship,” Stettler said.
Today, Macare is grateful for the opportunity to raise their vegetables and sheep on their own land.
“The cost of land has just gotten really astronomical,” Macare said. “I feel so lucky that we bought when we did because I don’t know that 10 years later I would be able to even consider spending what I think the value of this land is now based on seeing prices around us change.”
If the proposed legislation passes, Wisconsin will offer a similar service to the one Macare used, but the one-page bill offers little detail on how it would work.
That might be a good thing, said Dan Bauer, program supervisor for the Wisconsin Farm Center at DATCP. His office would oversee the program if the Legislature passes the bill and it’s signed into law.
The broad nature of the bill could allow his team to create what they think will be most effective, Bauer said.
He first heard about the bill around the time it was introduced in August, when his department was asked to estimate its cost. They budgeted $66,800 in one-time costs for building the website and $100,300 a year for a full-time staff person to help design and promote it, as well as to provide “shoulder-to-shoulder, on-the-ground, wraparound farmland access services” to site users. They added another $5,000 for initial education, outreach and marketing efforts.
For the plan to work, Bauer said, staff will need to reach out to farmers who are preparing to transition out of farming and encourage them to advertise their land. Farmers will also need expert help before, during and after any land transfer.
“A website by itself is not going to deliver the desired outcomes as a stand-alone,” Bauer said. “To really design and launch a program that the state would be happy with, I think it has to be a combination of the website and then also that on-the-ground coaching and advising and mentorship.”
The bill doesn’t include any appropriations, so if it passes, Bauer said the department “would have to explore its options” to cover the $172,100 total.
While Wisconsin’s two nonprofit-run farmland link programs primarily serve farmers who use organic or “sustainable” practices, the state-run program would serve all kinds of farms and farmers, Moses said.
Bauer and an agency spokesperson said they knew the Farm Center previously administered a similar program, but they did not know how it worked, when it operated or why it closed. Ryan LeCloux, a Legislative Reference Bureau analyst, said the prior program began in 1993 as part of DATCP’s Farmers Assistance Program and existed until at least 2015, before it was removed from the agency’s website.
In any case, Bauer said, his team would likely create the new program from scratch. “Even if we had really good information on how the last program was operated, I’m not even sure how relevant it would be when you consider just how much technology has advanced in the last 10, 15, 20 years.”
Before the bill was introduced, representatives of a handful of organizations that support farmers and aspiring farmers were already discussing such a possibility. A working group convened by the Farmland Access Hub began meeting last year after members identified the idea as a top priority.
“The big elephant in the room is that Wisconsin doesn’t have a (state-run) Farm Link program,” said Mia Ljung, a member of that working group and a community development educator for Outagamie and Winnebago counties through UW-Madison Extension.
“Not to say that it’s going to be a quick fix, but if you don’t have a Farm Link program in your state, it’s going to be much harder to make those connections between current land holders, land owners and land seekers.”
The group has been studying how such programs work in other states. That research is especially important as legislators consider the bill, Ljung said, calling the proposed budget “very slim.”
“If the initiative will be supported by enough infrastructure, funding and outreach, I am supportive because there’s a big need,” Ljung said.
The state’s biggest farm lobby has officially backed the bill. Jason Mugnaini, executive director of government relations at the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation, said supporting Wisconsin’s current and future farmers will take a variety of strategies, from creating conservation easements to helping farm families get health insurance.
Creating a land link program would be a key step, Mugnaini said. “It’s a challenge for those young folks, so finding access to land is one of the easiest ways that they can start farming full time,” Mugnaini said.
Still, the proponents agree it will take much more to get land into the hands of a new generation of small farmers.
“It’s a good tool in the toolbox, but it’s just one part of a very difficult and challenging discussion that has to be had, not only just in Wisconsin, but throughout the United States: Who are the next generation of farmers going to be? Where are they going to find the ability to continue farming, and how are we going to continue to feed the United States of America?” Mugnaini said.
Among the other challenges to address are the reasons farmers may be reluctant to list their land. Many farmers invest nearly everything they have into their farms, and some haven’t paid enough in Social Security taxes to qualify for payments. That means they need their land to pay their bills after they retire, said Kirkpatrick, the farm succession planner.
Fearing a hefty capital gains tax bill, many farmers opt not to sell during their lifetimes. But the idea of renting to someone just getting started in a tough business may sound risky, and beginning farmers may not be able to pay as much as bigger players can.
“If the owner generation is dependent on the sale or some sort of income coming from farmland or other assets for their late years, they’re going to be making decisions that they perceive as less risky to them,” Kirkpatrick said, explaining that many will choose to rent to an established farm operation that’s looking to expand.
Beginning farmers need affordable land, Kirkpatrick said, “and we also need to make sure that that owner generation is able to live and age gracefully.”
A land link program won’t change the economics of the market, but Kirkpatrick thinks such a website, combined with proactive succession planning, could help farmers achieve their own goals for their land.
“I think there are a lot of farm owners that would love to see their farm used in a similar way of, you know, raising a family on it … And to be honest, it would be great for rural communities to still have those farms,” Kirkpatrick said. “If this linking program helps them realize that that’s possible, that’s great.”
“I think that we need to really think about what that generation of owners need and how we can help them plan in a way that feels right for them, and also give opportunities to others,” Kirkpatrick said.
Meanwhile, several other farm lobby groups in the state have taken a neutral stance on the bill. That includes state associations of producers of cattle, corn, pork and vegetables, as well as Wisconsin Farm Credit Services and the Michael Fields Agricultural Institute, a nonprofit that researches and promotes sustainable farming practices.
“This bill is incomplete as written and requires funding to be successful,” read the Michael Fields Agricultural Institute’s comments on the legislation. “However, we encourage the idea and want to explore this option further.”
Chuck Anderas, the institute’s policy director, said he’s worried that the bill doesn’t include any appropriations.
“That doesn’t mean that there’s no plans ever to include funding for it, but it needs to be funded enough to be successful,” Anderas said. “Otherwise, it could just be like a website that doesn’t really get used all that much.”
That could discourage farmers and land seekers who come to the site hoping for help, Anderas said.
“We’d rather see it not happen than happen in a way that sets it up to fail.”
Neither the Senate nor Assembly versions of the bill have any Democratic co-sponsors. Sen. Brad Pfaff, D-Onalaska, serves on the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Revenue, which is currently reviewing the bill.
Pfaff said creating a farmland link program is “an excellent idea” but the bill is “incomplete.”
“Let’s hope that we can get some more meat on the bones here and be serious about the piece of legislation, and hopefully we can get it passed before the legislative session comes to an end.”
Natalie Yahr reports on pathways to success statewide for Wisconsin Watch, working in partnership with Open Campus. Email her at nyahr@wisconsinwatch.org.
Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters for original stories and our Friday news roundup.
Beginning farmers struggle to find land. Could a new website help? 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 private zoo in Washington County is under legal fire with neighbors over a land permit to help expand operations.
The post Popular Washington County zoo caught in land legal battle appeared first on WPR.
Crawford's decisions leaves the court with a 3-3 split between liberals and conservatives.
The post Wisconsin Justice Susan Crawford recuses from Gableman disciplinary proceedings appeared first on WPR.
State lawmakers are seeking a legal opinion from Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul about whether allegations of public school teachers grooming students is punishable by an existing state law barring immoral conduct that endangers children's safety.
The post Lawmakers seek legal opinion from Wisconsin AG following report on teacher sexual misconduct appeared first on WPR.
FBI agents arrested more than 30 people in the scandal involving illegal betting and poker scams.
The post Ex-Milwaukee Bucks guard arrested in gambling bust appeared first on WPR.
Login