Following a campaign in which Wisconsin voters frequently cited concerns about data centers and energy affordability as major issues and Democratic candidates for the Legislature touted plans to restart the state’s land conservation program, Wisconsin Democrats are signaling they’ll use their new control of state government to take action on a number of climate and environmental issues. 

“We are going to deliver bold action for Wisconsinites. We are going to lower costs, support our public schools, protect our rights and freedoms, help working families, ensure safe and welcoming communities, hold big corporations accountable, fight back against federal overreach, ensure a clean environment for future generations, and much more,” Rep. Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) said in a statement after being elected to serve as the next speaker of the Assembly.  

Wisconsin Democrats will take over state government at a time when President Donald Trump’s administration has prioritized extractive industries and rolled back environmental protections. 

There are limits to what officials in one state can do to address a global problem like climate change, but state government’s purview over environmental issues includes regulating pollutants in the state’s air, land and water, purchasing and maintaining public land, overseeing the state’s electric utilities and funding efforts to protect the environment. 

As Democrats prepare to take majority control of the Legislature  in January, advocacy groups are pressing Democratic lawmakers to address their concerns both through standalone legislation and in the next state budget — which will dominate the agenda next summer. 

Clean Wisconsin has released a list of its policy priorities for 2027, which include increasing efforts to keep pollutants such as PFAS, nitrates, lead and phosphorus out of the state’s water; providing farmers with more tools to responsibly manage the land; investing in county-level initiatives; regulating data centers; changing how utility companies plan their energy development and expanding renewable energy.

“We’re really focused on pragmatic work, like a long list of on-the-ground programs that help protect our water systems, our groundwater, drinking water, our surface water, and help protect our climate and our air, and put some meaningful guardrails in place around AI data centers,” Amy Barilleaux, a spokesperson for Clean Wisconsin, told the Wisconsin Examiner. “I think people want to hear, ‘Oh, this big thing and that big thing,’ but it takes like a thousand little things to accomplish that big thing.

Barilleaux said that Gov.-elect David Crowley and whomever he appoints to run the state Department of Natural Resources can have a significant effect on environmental protection in the state simply by working to restore the agency’s muscle to what it was before Republicans slashed its staffing and budget under former Gov. Scott Walker. 

“I think it’s not that the DNR doesn’t recognize some authority, but you have to have people to do the work,” she said. “It’s been very difficult with understaffing at some agencies to really be able to do the work they are in statute being asked to do. So that’s a big one as well. We just need to improve the function of our government.”

Utility regulation 

In the days since their electoral victory, Wisconsin Democrats have signaled that their first priority in January will be addressing the affordability concerns that dominated the debate on the campaign trail. For environmental groups, that has led to a focus on how the state regulates its utility companies. 

In recent months, the Public Service Commission — the agency responsible for utility regulation — has taken some actions to prevent data center developments from increasing electric bills and to slow down requests to raise rates. But, Barilleaux said, the commission has also said in its recent decisions that if it’s going to do more, the Legislature needs to give it some help. 

Clean Wisconsin and a number of other groups are pushing for integrated resource planning. Under current law, the state’s utilities are not required to make long-term plans for where they’ll get the energy required to meet the state’s demand. This means that as hyperscale data centers have begun to pop up around the state, the utilities can do whatever they want to meet that increased demand. So far, that has meant extending the life of or planning to build new plants that rely on fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas. 

Moving to integrated resource planning would require that the utilities get their future plans approved by the PSC, which advocates say will encourage them to use energy from sources that are cheaper in the long term, largely solar and wind. 

“Our utilities don’t have to be transparent about what they’re doing, they don’t have to have a big picture where we look at different utilities together for a full statewide energy system in Wisconsin, and that leaves us very vulnerable in this moment, extremely vulnerable as we have these AI data center projects coming in and demanding just intense amounts of energy, historic amounts of energy,” Barilleaux said. “So we’re just sitting here flat-footed with no integrated resource plan. So the Public Service Commission … when it approved the latest two gas plants, it was almost a cry for help, saying, ‘We can’t, we don’t have any authority to do anything about this,’ and that should be alarming to everyone. Even though integrated resource planning does not sound like a super exciting topic, when you see how things are unfolding here in Wisconsin, when you see the Public Service Commission saying we need help from lawmakers right now — we’re expecting lawmakers to take that very seriously.”

PFAS

Barilleaux said that another big priority for Clean Wisconsin is doing more to clean up PFAS contamination in the state’s water. 

Over the last year, the Legislature and Gov. Tony Evers have finally passed legislation to spend $125 million set aside for PFAS mitigation after years of partisan deadlock. The Natural Resources Board recently established a standard for the amount of PFAS allowed to be in the state’s groundwater after years of failed efforts. 

Barilleaux said more money beyond that previous appropriation is needed to address the full scope of the problem statewide and added she’d like to see a total ban on the use of PFAS in the state. 

“We need to take this seriously. We can’t pretend like it’s not happening. We can’t pretend like groundwater standards and surface water standards and drinking water standards are it, because it’s not,” she said. “It is over $100 million a year in health harms that PFAS exposure is causing right here in Wisconsin, and so these are tremendous costs. I think sometimes things get characterized as, you know, cost versus environmental protection, or jobs versus environmental protection, but really, this is people’s health on the line. It is expensive to be sick from pollution and contamination. You know, this is about protecting the health of our communities.” 

Knowles-Nelson

Among the most divisive environmental issues during the last legislative session was the failure to reauthorize the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant Program, which for nearly four decades had allowed the DNR to fund the purchase and maintenance of public land. 

A faction of Republicans in control of the Legislature had become hostile to the program — which had previously enjoyed bipartisan support — over broad objections to government land conservation and more specific complaints about the hit to local property tax revenues that can be caused by state land purchases. 

Multiple compromise bills were proposed, but nothing was able to pass and the program expired this summer. The reauthorization of the program was a campaign issue in some of the legislative races that helped Democrats win majority control. 

Charles Carlin, the director of strategic initiatives at the land conservation nonprofit Gathering Waters, told the Examiner that Democratic control opens up new possibilities for what the program can become, balancing how much money is spent purchasing new public land and how much is spent developing existing public land into both usable space for recreation and wildlife habitat. 

“It feels like everybody is sort of absorbing the ramifications of the elections, what’s possible,” Carlin said. “But I think that certainly one of the things that you know that we are looking at now is it feels like there is a real opportunity here to have a long-term authorization for Knowles Nelson, one that is appropriately funded, and I think the other thing we’re looking at is there’s an opportunity to rebalance the program between development projects and land acquisition.” 

He said it’s helpful not to have to negotiate with people who are hostile to the idea of public land conservation and added that the complaints about dwindling local government revenue on this issue tie in to coming debates about local government funding in general that are likely to play a major role in the work of the new government. 

“Local government revenue is likely to be a hot topic of conversation in the next legislative session on all kinds of issues,” Carlin said. “So public lands is one small one, but shared revenue, school funding, transportation — these are all going to be things that get talked about and considered a lot. But I do want to see a renewed emphasis on DNR soliciting input from local governments on projects that are happening in their jurisdiction and taking those viewpoints and that feedback into account. I also think that if the conversation in the Legislature can be more fact-based and less driven by an anti-conservation ideology, then I think that creates the space for us to have a really solution-focused conversation about how tax and land use policy really impacts local government revenues.”

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Marinette resident Andi Rich occasionally shows her anger over how elected officials don’t always seem to grasp the significance of PFAS-contaminated groundwater.

For years, Rich has kept up with the latest PFAS research and advocated for clean water in northeast Wisconsin. 

“It is a complicated issue, but it’s frustrating that the people who were put in charge to figure it out … are failing to even understand the issue well enough to know how to do anything about it,” said Rich, a former candidate for the state Assembly.

Perfluoroalkyl- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or so-called “forever chemicals,” have been linked to health issues, such as certain types of cancer, liver damage, thyroid issues and developmental effects or delays in children. The chemicals are used in a variety of manufactured goods, such as firefighting foam, nonstick coatings, textiles, carpeting and personal care products. 

Sign up for Northeast News, our free email newsletter focused on northeast Wisconsin.

In Marinette County, PFAS thought to stem from Johnson Controls’ and its subsidiary Tyco Fire Products’ Marinette Fire Training Facility have contaminated groundwater used for drinking water.

This election season, candidates in state and national races on both sides of the political aisle are confronting voters’ growing concerns about the quality of their drinking water – in part because people like Rich have kept the heat on.

Widespread contamination

Throughout Wisconsin, PFAS contaminations have caught the attention of elected officials who say clean, safe drinking water is a critically important issue. A Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources study found 71% of 450 shallow, private potable-water wells sampled in 2022 contained at least one detectable PFAS. However, the authors note that “low percentages of samples” surpassed state (1% of samples) or federal (4% of samples) health limits for PFAS.

All of the state candidates who responded to the Northeast Wisconsin News Lab’s general election questionnaire in September said PFAS is a serious issue in Wisconsin. 

Bipartisan support for PFAS-free drinking water motivated state Sen. Eric Wimberger, R-Gillett, to rewrite PFAS legislation in 2024 and 2025 to garner Democrats’ support. Assembly Rep. Jeff Mursau, R-Crivitz, co-authored the 2025 bill. 

Gov. Tony Evers signed into law two new PFAS statutes in April. The measures, which aim to hold polluters accountable, created a state PFAS trust fund with about $133 million in grants for PFAS remediation. 

However, observers say it’s just the beginning of what’s needed.

Rich and other local clean water activists continue to push for state groundwater limits for PFAS and ways to prevent contamination, such as banning products containing the substances.

Marinette County’s contaminated area has expanded as biosolids containing PFAS were spread on lands, with the forever chemicals seeping into groundwater, Rich said. The contamination migrated with the groundwater’s flow into new areas, including into waterways that feed into the bay of Green Bay. 

The DNR verified that the contaminated area has expanded, and agency experts discussed the size of the Expanded Site Investigation Area in Marinette County during a July listening session. 

“The groundwater impacted by PFAS is extensive in this area and actions available to clean up PFAS will take a long time to achieve results,” said Alyssa Sellwood, DNR project manager for remediation and redevelopment.

While progress has occurred, including construction of new deep wells on private properties in a limited area, complaints about the new wells also are flowing as residents say water quality is an issue. The new wells are over 500 feet deep, Sellwood said. 

“The water from that depth in this area can be very hard and contain naturally occurring contaminants like radium and strontium, which require treatment to lower the concentrations to levels that are safe to drink,” she said.

Piping in Lake Michigan water

The threat of PFAS making its way into other communities in northeast Wisconsin has encouraged some to connect to larger water systems. Officials in the city of Green Bay and Central Brown County Water Authority are selling their treated water, pulled from Lake Michigan, to nearby communities that have been using deep wells.

Making the move to a new system is costly, as residents of Pulaski learned. The village of Pulaski Board agreed to purchase its drinking water from the city of Green Bay, after years of relying on deep wells that produced water heavy in iron and other minerals, said Board Chair Keith Chambers. Water rates in the village could rise by as much as 230%, according to the village’s website.

In need of more water capacity, the board considered constructing two new deep wells and adding treatment facilities to two other wells to filter PFAS and other contaminants. Doing so would have been expensive and without a guarantee of high-quality water, Chambers said. Sediment from the minerals turned the water tan, and people complained about it, he said. 

“We did not have any PFAS, but that can change in a heartbeat. Some could start leaching in. The DNR might change their threshold limits, or the EPA. You could have perfectly good water one day and the next day, they’re telling you it’s bad,” Chambers said.

The board opted to purchase water from the city of Green Bay, pulled out of Lake Michigan near Kewaunee and piped to Pulaski. The major construction project took longer than expected.

“We had two buildings we had to build and 6.5 miles of 20-inch pipe that we put in the ground,” Chambers said. “Right after COVID, prices were going through the roof; supplies weren’t available.”

The result is a substantial water rate increase. While the quarterly bill for 10,000 gallons was about $151, it is expected to rise to about $351, Chambers said. Ratepayers are footing most of the project’s cost, he said.

“Now there are a lot of people who are angry that we didn’t put it to a referendum,” he said. “I’m a big man, so it’s hard to tar and feather me, but if they could, they would.” 

The estimated cost of constructing a new deep well was $20 million, he said, while the Green Bay water project ended up just north of $16 million. Grants from the DNR and city of Green Bay helped offset some of the cost. 

In Wisconsin, the Natural Resources Board passed PFAS limits for community drinking water at the same level as the federal limits passed in April 2024. The board is expected to take up groundwater standards for PFAS in the near future, with a proposal to impose the same limits used for community drinking water.

What candidates say

Several candidates who responded to the NEW News Lab’s general election survey suggested phasing out use of the substances where feasible. Furthermore, they said funding is only one aspect of the issue that affects many Wisconsin communities. 

“We need continued testing, help for communities facing contamination they didn’t cause and stronger prevention. I support holding responsible companies accountable for remediation costs while using state and federal resources when a responsible party can’t be identified,” said Emily Tseffos, a Democrat running to represent state Senate District 19.

Rep. Joel Kitchens, a Republican incumbent running for reelection in Assembly District 1, said the federal government should set PFAS limits for emerging PFAS varieties. 

“There will undoubtedly be more contaminants that are currently unknown to us that will emerge, and I hope that the federal government will take a stronger role in addressing them. We are not adequately equipped at the state level to determine safe levels,” he said.

To fully address the problem will take more than the PFAS trust fund, Rich said. She’s still waiting for Wisconsin to set PFAS limits for groundwater.

“Everybody wants to point fingers and say somebody else should do it,” she said. “Maybe it’s time for our local representatives to actually try to do something about it.”

This story was produced as part of the NEW (Northeast Wisconsin) News Lab, a consortium of five news outlets.

Concerned Wisconsinites push candidates on PFAS regulations 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.