“I think we're right on track… I'm happy to meet this afternoon. I mean, I'm sure the governor is practicing his speech for tonight. There's probably some time in between. There's a lot of opportunities to discuss," Vos said at a press conference Tuesday afternoon. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) are proposing a $2.3 billion package to Gov. Tony Evers Monday that would provide one-time tax rebates and raise special education funding, but wouldn’t deliver any general school aid increases.

“We actually accepted the governor’s challenge where he said, make sure that we have money for schools and we wanted to make sure that there is money for the residents of Wisconsin,” Vos said during a press conference on Tuesday. Vos said lawmakers sent their letter to Evers on Sunday and had yet to hear from Evers as of Tuesday afternoon but they hope to “hear from him today so we could be in negotiations to have a bill passed before we adjourn Friday.”

The proposal comes after LeMahieu said last week he was being left out of negotiations with Vos and Evers. Evers’ spokesperson Britt Cudaback suggested the leaders sit down to discuss the plan. She has also previously said that any bipartisan agreement needs “investments to ensure our K-12 schools receive the resources they need and were promised in the state budget.”

The Assembly plans to meet in a series of marathon floor sessions this week with the goal of wrapping up its work for the session by the end of the week. The state Senate plans to work during March as well, but with the Assembly’s self-imposed deadline, this month is the last chance to pass bills that could get to Evers’ desk before the next legislative session.

Vos said the end of the week deadline could help ensure that Wisconsin politicians act and said it is a “perfect time for us to engage in the good faith negotiations.”

“There’s no reason for the money to sit at Madison longer than necessary so we can have it actually out the door,” Vos said. 

The back and forth on the property tax reduction and school funding package came as Evers, who opted not to run for a third term in office this year, prepared to deliver his final State of the State address Tuesday night.

“I think we’re right on track… I’m happy to meet this afternoon. I mean, I’m sure the governor is practicing his speech for tonight. There’s probably some time in between,” Vos said. “There’s a lot of opportunities to discuss.”

One major piece of the GOP proposal is an income tax rebate of $500 per person and $1,000 for married joint filers at a cost of nearly $1.5 billion in 2026-27. Senate Republicans first proposed the idea last week.

Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston) said the surplus is proof that “we’ve over taxed our citizens in Wisconsin” and that the rebate checks could help provide some relief to Wisconsinites.

In response to Evers’ priorities, Republican lawmakers in their letter proposed $200 million for special education costs — including $80 million to bring the special education reimbursement rate to 42% in 2026 and $120 million to bring it to 45% in 2027 — in keeping with Evers’ proposal. 

The state budget committed to reimburse school districts for their special education costs at a rate of 42% in 2025-26 and 45% in 2026-27. However, recent estimates have found that the money that lawmakers and Evers set aside in the budget will not be enough to make good on those promises.

Lawmakers did not provide any additional funding for general school aids in the budget, disappointing school leaders and advocates who said schools will continue to struggle with funding difficulties. Republican lawmakers left out increases to general school aid in part because of their frustration with Evers’ 400-year veto, extending an annual $325 per pupil school revenue limit increase well beyond the last budget cycle. Without state funding, however, schools in Wisconsin only have the option to use the authority Evers extended to increase property taxes to the revenue limit increase amount. 

Evers had proposed $450 million in 2027 for general school aid to backfill the $325 per pupil increase school districts will have the option of using — alleviating the potential property tax increases that communities across the state would see again at the end of this year.

Republicans excluded that request from their proposal and instead suggested $500 million for property tax relief through the school levy tax credit. Evers had suggested $550 million for property tax relief through the school levy tax credit. 

The Wisconsin Public Education Network has called putting state money toward the school levy tax credit as opposed to general school aids “irresponsible and unacceptable.” The credit works by using state funds to reduce property tax bills by making payments to counties and municipalities. It does not provide additional revenue to school districts for operations.

In their letter, GOP leaders expressed concerns about the school revenue limit increases, saying that additional state aid would lead to less responsible spending by school districts.

“While we know you believe that your 400-year veto was a way to permanently send increases to schools for the next 400 years, the truth is it creates a strong disincentive for school districts to find efficiencies while creating an increased property tax burden on taxpayers,” the lawmakers said. 

LeMahieu and Vos said that “no amount of funding increase can address the root causes of the education funding problem” and that leaders should be focused on “reform” as opposed to “guaranteed funding to prop up a broken system.” Republican lawmakers have advocated for bills that would encourage school districts to consolidate this session, which Democratic lawmakers and school advocates have criticized.

Lawmakers said they would also support an individual income tax reduction of up to $300 for teacher expenses at an estimated cost of $1.4 million in 2026-27.

Republicans are also seeking to tie the tax relief package to other priority areas. 

Changes made to the Supplemental Nutrition Aid Program (SNAP) — known as FoodShare in Wisconsin — in the massive tax cut and spending bill signed by President Donald Trump last year included a penalty, requiring states to pick up some costs if the state’s payment error rate exceeds 6%. Wisconsin officials have estimated a penalty could cost the state up to $205 million.

The Evers administration has said $69 million and 56 additional administrative positions for DHS are needed to ensure that the state’s error rate remains below the 6% error rate.

The lawmakers said they would agree to funding for FoodShare to help keep the error rate low, but asked that positions that have been vacant for 18 months be used instead of providing new positions to the agency. 

In addition to the GOP request related to the positions, Republican lawmakers are also seeking to tie a ban on using SNAP benefits to purchase soda and candy to the legislation.

Rep. Clint Moses (R-Menomonie) said the change would ensure SNAP is “utilized for healthy, nutritious foods” and will help make sure that “some of the soda, junk food, and other stuff that our kids and our adults are filling their bodies with” isn’t purchased with the benefits.

The proposal also includes funding to the Department of Military Affairs for disaster assistance including $10 million in 2025-26 for awards no greater than $25,000 per household and $20 million in 2025-26 for grants of up to $50,000 to businesses. 

The money is meant to help Wisconsinites affected by record floods last year after a recent request for disaster assistance was denied by the federal government. 

“We feel that the states have a position here that should have some funds available particularly for businesses where they have no relief available to them at all,” Rep. Dan Knodl (R-Germantown) said. 

The total price tag of the proposed package is about $2.3 billion — nearly the amount of the state’s entire estimated budget surplus.

“This is a generous, good-faith attempt to achieve our mutual goals of limiting the property tax impact caused by your misguided 400-year veto, helping families address rising costs and ultimately doing what is best for the people of Wisconsin,” the lawmakers stated in their letter. “Majority caucuses in both houses have agreed to this plan in principle. With the legislative session soon ending, time is of the essence. We both stand ready to meet at your earliest convenience.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Oak Bluff Natural Area in Door County, which was protected by the Door County Land Trust using Knowles-Nelson Stewardship funds in 2023. (Photo by Kay McKinley)

The Wisconsin Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee voted to advance a Republican bill that would reauthorize the Warren Knowles-Gaylord Nelson Stewardship program with additional amendments Monday.

The bill, SB 685, passed the committee with 11 Republican votes. Rep. Tip McGuire (D-Kenosha), Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay) and Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) voted against advancing the bill. In conjunction with SB 316, the bill would continue the program for an additional two years, but in a limited form.

“When we start to dismantle programs that have been in place for 30 years that were built on bipartisanship, I start to seriously have my doubts,” Andraca said. She added  that Republican lawmakers were willing to kill a popular program because of a state Supreme Court decision that removed their ability to anonymously veto particular projects. 

For many years, Wisconsin lawmakers exercised control over the Knowles-Nelson program through the Joint Finance Committee as members could anonymously object to any project and have it held up for an indeterminate time. That ended last year after the state Supreme Court ruled 6-1 that anonymous objections were unconstitutional. Conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley wrote for the majority that the statutes “encroach upon the governor’s constitutional mandate to execute the law.”

“This is not the best that you could do. This is the best that you chose to do,” Andraca said. “Killing a popular bipartisan program out of spite does not make a great bumper sticker, but it does make it a whole lot easier for your constituents to know where you stand on conservation.” 

The program is currently authorized at $33 million annually. The GOP bill will continue the program at a funding level of $28.25 million and limit land acquisitions for the two-year reauthorization period.

The Assembly passed its versions of the bills on a 53-44 party-line vote in January. 

The Senate Financial Institutions and Sporting Heritage Committee approved changes to the bills on Friday. The recent amendments in the Senate mean the bills will need to pass a vote in both houses of the Legislature. The Senate plans to meet for a floor session on Wednesday.

One recent change to the bill eliminates a requirement that land-acquisition grants to nonprofit conservation organizations only be used for land south of U.S. Highway 8. Another change specifies that provisions related to minor land acquisitions will only be effective in 2026-27 and 2027-28. Under the bill, the department will only be able to make “minor land acquisitions,” defined as parcels of land that are five acres or less in size and would improve access to hunting, fishing or trapping opportunities, or are contiguous to land already owned by the state.

During the two-year period, the DNR would need to conduct a survey of all of the land that has been acquired under the stewardship program including an inventory of all land acquired with money. It would also have to report proposed project boundaries and land acquisition priorities for the next two to five years and proposed changes.

Another change in the amendments prohibits the DNR from acquiring land in 2026-27 and 2027-28 if it would result in more than 35% of the total acreage in a municipality being owned by the state, city, village, town or federal government, unless the municipality adopted a resolution approving the acquisition. That provision does not consider county-owned land in a given municipality.

Democrats wanted a more robust investment in the program. Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) proposed a bill that would dedicate $72 million to the stewardship program  and Gov. Tony Evers called for over $100 million for it in his budget.

The program, initially created in 1989, has allowed for state borrowing and spending for state land acquisition and for grants to local governments and nonprofit conservation organizations with the goal of preserving wildlife habitat and expanding outdoor recreation opportunities throughout Wisconsin. It has traditionally had bipartisan support and has been reauthorized several times throughout its history, including last in 2021. 

The program’s funds will run out on June 30, 2026 if a reauthorization bill is not  signed into law. 

Bill coauthors Rep. Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc) and Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point), who are both members of the budget committee, were critical of Democrats.  

Kurtz said he supports conservation and said the bill had been “hijacked” by politics, including blaming the state Supreme Court decision for the current situation. He also preemptively blamed Democratic lawmakers for the potential end to the program. 

Kurtz said he “wasn’t crazy” about the process, but asked the Legislative Fiscal Bureau what percentage of projects were approved under the program even with the anonymous objector process in place. An LFB staffer said 93% submitted to JFC were approved. 

“93% that was submitted to the Joint Finance were approved — 93% — so basically, we’re bickering over 7% that you didn’t like,” Kurtz said.

Kurtz said there could also be other opportunities to acquire land by passing other bills. 

“If there’s a piece of land that comes up next to Devil’s Lake, and the DNR wants to buy it, and they come to me and say, ‘Hey, Rep. Kurtz, we didn’t get the money in this authorization, but this is an opportunity that we can expand Devil’s Lake’ — I will be the first one to jump on that bill, because I know how important it is,” Kurtz said. “So when people say that it’s only $28.25 [million] they need to start thinking outside the box… If this fails, this is on the doorsteps of the Democrats in the state of Wisconsin, period, and I will sing that every day, 24/7, 365,” Kurtz said. 

Johnson pushed back on Kurtz’s comment, noting that Republican lawmakers currently hold the majority in the state Senate and Assembly. 

“[That] ultimately means that you can do whatever you want,” Johnson said, adding that she was confused by the Republican lawmakers trying to pass blame to Democrats. 

Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) commented that Evers will need to sign the bills for them to become law. 

“This notion that this is somehow going to kill the program. That’s not accurate. We’re trying to save it because there are those of us up here who value conservation,” Testin said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

“What I’m hearing right now is the governor and the speaker are still negotiating, and I have not been invited to those negotiations,” Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu said during a WisPolitics luncheon on Thursday afternoon. “I just feel, at this point, if the governor and the speaker are actually serious about accomplishing something, shouldn't they include both houses?” (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) says he is being left out of negotiations on property tax relief between Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester).

Rising property taxes, a quickly approaching self-imposed deadline to wrap up work in the Legislature this year and a projected state budget surplus of over $2.5 billion formed the backdrop to disagreements between leaders of the Senate and Assembly on a potential tax relief package that broke out into the public this week. 

“What I’m hearing right now is the governor and the speaker are still negotiating, and I have not been invited to those negotiations,” LeMahieu said during a WisPolitics luncheon on Thursday afternoon. “I just feel, at this point, if the governor and the speaker are actually serious about accomplishing something, shouldn’t they include both houses?”

In response to LeMahieu saying he wasn’t included, Evers’ spokesperson Britt Cudaback wrote on social media that “actually, yesterday our office suggested that Republican leaders should try talking to each other since they’re clearly not on the same page.”

Vos, speaking at a press conference at the same time LeMahieu appeared at the WisPolitics event, said he texted LeMahieu Thursday morning asking to meet. He told reporters that he is open to any idea, but the public’s biggest concern is rising property taxes.

“There’s no bad cake, and I feel that same way about tax cuts. There are no bad tax cuts… We have not ruled anything out,” Vos said. “But when we have talked to folks, the thing that has most impacted them is the massive property tax increases they saw last December. My own property tax bill went up 24.7%. That’s the highest that I can ever remember being a homeowner.”

Wisconsin property taxpayers recently absorbed the highest tax hike since 2018 — an increase caused by a state budget that raised school revenue limits while keeping state general aid flat, pushing costs onto local property taxpayers, some of whom also voted to approve additional school district referendum requests.

LeMahieu said the projected $2.5 billion budget surplus led to conversations in his caucus about what to do to provide relief to Wisconsinites as well as a Zoom call between the Republican legislative leaders and Gov. Tony Evers a little over a week ago.

“It’s not just property taxes. People are struggling buying groceries… their utility bills,” LeMahieu said.

The Senate Republican caucus discussions led to the introduction of a pair of bills this week that would use about $1.5 billion in state funds to provide one-time tax rebates of $1,000 to married joint filers and $500 to individual filers. Under SB 1 and SB 995, the Department of Administration would need to send the rebates by Sept. 1. 

LeMahieu said his caucus thought the rebates were “the best way to use this surplus” and $1.5 billion, the cost for the rebates, is a “responsible number.”

The package announcement came just a day after Vos said he was in negotiations with Evers. According to emails, Evers had proposed to the Republican lawmakers a $1.3 billion package that would provide $200 million, including $80 million to bring the special education reimbursement rate to 42% in 2026 and $120 million to bring it to 45% in 2027, as well as $450 million in 2027 in general school aids to buy out the projected statewide school property tax levy. In exchange, Republicans would get $550 million for the school levy tax credit to help with property tax relief and $97.3 million in 2027 for tax-exempt cash tips. 

Cudaback has said that any compromise on property taxes needs to include “investments to ensure our K-12 schools receive the resources they need and were promised in the state budget.”

Vos said he thinks Evers “sincerely” wants to do something about property taxes.

“There have been plenty of times in the last eight years where we have had a disagreement and we had a public argument with Gov. Evers, but on this one… we feel the same,” Vos said. “I don’t know why we wouldn’t negotiate in good faith to try to find something that can actually get across the finish line.”

Vos said Evers’ point about special education funding is a “legitimate” one, noting that leaders said during the state budget that they would fund it at 42% and 45% but the available revenue will not cover those amounts. 

Senate Republicans, however, are not happy with Evers’ suggestions. 

LeMahieu called the proposal “ridiculous” and said it was only a “BandAid” on the issue that would “saddle the next Legislature with a huge ongoing commitment.” He is referring to the 400-year partial veto exercised by Evers on the 2023-24 budget that has allowed school districts to continue an  annual $325 per pupil increase. 

“Your property taxes are still going to go up because the 400-year veto is still there?” LeMahieu said incredulously.

LeMahieu said he thought the negotiation “seems like a purely political stunt” or an effort to get something through the Assembly, adjourn and put pressure on the Senate to pass it. He noted that the Assembly is less than a week away from its planned final adjournment for the year. 

Vos has said the Assembly plans to be done Feb. 19. The Senate could still pass bills after then, but the same bills must pass the Assembly to make it to Evers’ desk. 

“There is no vehicle for whatever plan they come up with… What’s the time frame for all of this to get done?” LeMahieu asked, referring to the process by which a bill must be introduced, have a public hearing and get a vote on the floor of the both Assembly and the Senate.

LeMahieu pointed out that his bill has support from 16 out of 18 Senate Republican caucus members. He added that several Assembly members have reached out with support for the proposal and said the Senate plan “actually makes sense.”

“There has been no communication between offices… Hopefully we are here past next week,” LeMahieu said, adding that there are session days scheduled for March, when the Senate plans to meet, and lawmakers could also work in April.

No action would likely leave decisions about the budget surplus until after the November elections when the makeup of the next Legislature could look quite different with control up for grabs and the next governor, could be either a Republican or a Democrat and will be new to the office.

Vos said rebates are “less easy” and “more expensive,” but he said his caucus believes that negotiating “to find an answer that gets across the finish line is the best answer for Wisconsinites” and he thinks they need to sit down to do so.

“I don’t think [Evers’] idea is a bad one, but I would say it has to be paired with some reductions,” Vos said. “Based on where the Senate is, it looks like they want to have something that’s way bigger than what we were looking at. Bigger is not necessarily better, but it’s not necessarily worse, so I think that’s part of sitting down and understanding what the perspectives are, and finding something that, again, can pass the Assembly, pass the Senate, and get signed by the governor and not just have an argument.”

The Senate bills received a public hearing in the afternoon. Democratic lawmakers questioned whether the rebates would place the state in a precarious position in the future.

After the state budget was completed in July, but before the recent projections, the Wisconsin Policy Forum warned that Wisconsin is spending more than it brings in through taxes which creates a projected structural deficit.

“Why wouldn’t we just put this money in the bank to help us cover the structural deficit?” Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) asked.

“I think we’ll be fine,” LeMahieu said.

Under the bill, the rebate checks would need to be delivered to Wisconsinites by Sept. 15, 2026.

Spreitzer said he thought the proposal could place the state budget in a “bad situation” going into future budgets and suggested that the timing of the rebate payments are suspicious, coming just ahead of the November election. 

Wisconsin’s fall elections take place Nov. 3, and many legislators are eager to return to their districts to start campaigning.

LeMahieu on WisconsinEye and other issues

A tax relief package is among several bills Wisconsin lawmakers are trying to get across the finish line. LeMahieu spoke to the chances for action on several issues. He said the issue that is the closest to getting done is a bill that would extend the state’s stewardship program. 

State funds will run out for the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program on June 30, 2026, without action. A bill that the Assembly passed and that recently received a public hearing in the  Senate would extend the program, but drastically cut the land acquisition portions of the program. 

“We don’t want to give a blank check to our bureaucrats to go buy a bunch of land across the state of Wisconsin, however, we do own a lot of land in Wisconsin and our caucus feels it’s very important to maintain that,” LeMahieu said. 

Another issue that has received a lot of attention in the Capitol is the livestreaming of government proceedings. LeMahieu said he thought there has been mismanagement at WisconsinEye, the state’s version of C-SPAN, and his caucus wants to see other alternatives  before providing funding for WisconsinEye. 

“Is there some other company out there? Do we need five full-time employees when we aren’t doing a whole lot of work after Feb. 17 in the Assembly and March… outside of interviews of candidates who are running for office? We’re using taxpayer money for that?” LeMahieu said. 

A Senate bill to solicit bids for livestreaming received a public hearing Thursday, though LeMahieu said he thinks lawmakers could also start the process through a vote on the Joint Committee on Legislative Organization.

LeMahieu said Senate Republicans have not spent a lot of time discussing efforts to legalize online sports betting and he wasn’t sure if that proposal would get through the Senate or Assembly by the end of session. He said he thought that “from a policy standpoint it makes sense.”

The Assembly delayed a vote on a bill to legalize online sports betting at the end of last year. 

Sports betting has been allowed in Wisconsin since 2021, but bets have to be made in person at tribal casinos. Lawmakers are seeking to legalize online sports betting by implementing a “hub and spoke” model that would allow servers running betting websites and apps to be housed on tribal land. The state Constitution requires gambling to be managed by the state’s federally recognized Native American tribes.

LeMahieu said he hopes the Legislature takes some action on data centers, though he said he hadn’t looked closely at the bill that passed the Assembly in January. He said he thought data centers are good for local communities, though there are some concerns about ensuring that ratepayers don’t see their utility bills go up. 

“Hopefully we can take action and provide some framework around it. I don’t know if the bill that the Assembly passed needs to be amended,” LeMahieu said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The entrance to the Wisconsin Assembly chambers. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

The Wisconsin Assembly advanced proposals that would restrict executive rulemaking powers and eliminate “race-based” programs in higher education Thursday. 

Wisconsin Republicans have been looking for ways to limit agencies’ administrative rulemaking abilities and exercise additional control over the process in the aftermath of several state Supreme Court rulings. 

One of those rulings, the Evers v. Marklein II decision issued on July 8, 2025, found unconstitutional statutes that allowed the 10-member Joint Committee on the Review of Administrative Rules’ to review and suspend administrative rules.

AJR 133 would allow state lawmakers to suspend indefinitely or temporarily administrative rules that are promulgated by state agencies with a vote of the full Senate and Assembly. The proposal passed 52-45 along party lines. 

“No body of our state government is more accountable to the people of our state than the Legislature, and these bills will restore our ability to represent our constituents and provide them with the regulatory accountability and predictability they need to prosper,” Rep. Brent Jacobson (R-Mosinee) said during the floor debate. 

Constitutional amendment proposals must pass two consecutive sessions of the Legislature and be approved by a majority of voters before becoming law. This is the proposal’s first consideration. It still needs to pass the Senate to advance to a second consideration. 

The Assembly also concurred in four bills related to administrative rulemaking that were part of a package titled the “red tape reset,” which was introduced in May with the support of the conservative legal group Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL). 

One bill SB 277 would have all administrative rules sunset after seven years unless a rule is adopted again through an agency process. The Assembly amended the bill, so it will go back to the Senate. 

Three of the bills will now go to Evers for consideration. Those include SB 276, which would allow those who have challenged the validity of an administrative rule to receive attorney fees and costs if a court declares a rule invalid; SB 275, which would limit the use of scope statements to one proposed rule; and SB 289, which would require agencies to make cuts to offset the cost associated with new regulations.

The constitutional amendment as well as several other bills are the result of a task force organized by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) and chaired by Jacobson.

AB 910, which passed on a voice vote, would establish a process to review fees every 6 years. 

AB 955, which passed on a voice vote, would repeal the current language in state law that allows agencies to promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by the agency if it is necessary to enforce the statute. The bill would replace the language, prohibiting agencies from promulgating rules interpreting the provisions of any statute without explicit and specific statutory authority. 

AB 994, which passed on a voice vote, would restrict agencies from promulgating rules if they are delinquent in complying with the reporting requirement and expand the process for repealing certain rules. 

AB 995, which passed on a voice vote, would change the default effective date for permanent administrative rules to the first day of the seventh month after the date of final publication.

Democratic lawmakers sought to get votes on the floor on several issues, introducing an array of amendments to Republican bills. Some of those included protecting access to contraception and abortion in Wisconsin, requiring former lawmakers to be at least a year out of the Legislature before they can become lobbyists and clarifying the residency requirements for lawmakers. However, none received votes as Republicans took procedural steps to avoid bringing them up. 

“These are going to keep coming forward,” Rep. Lisa Subeck (D-Madison) warned her Republican colleagues as she criticized them for not voting on the bills. “Democrats aren’t giving up on fighting for our constituents, whether we’re talking about the government, whether we’re talking about reproductive freedom or frankly, whether we’re talking about things that would reduce the cost of living for folks in the state. The Republicans time and time again, refused to take a vote.” 

The Assembly also approved several bills that will now head to Evers’ desk. 

The Assembly passed SB 652 which seeks to eliminate “race-based” programs offered through the state’s higher education system, including the minority teacher loan program and minority undergraduate grants. Under the bill, it would instead require the programs to focus on “disadvantaged” students, meaning those who have “experienced any unfavorable economic, familial, geographic, physical or other personal hardship.” It passed 53-45 along party lines and will now go to Evers for consideration. 

SB 498, which passed, would place a number of restrictions in state statute that Republican lawmakers argue would help protect free speech. Those include barring UW institutions from restricting speech from a speaker, creating “free speech” zones, charging security fees as a part of a permit application and sanctioning people for discriminatory harassment unless the speech “targets its victim on the basis of a protected class under law, and is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively bars a student from receiving equal access to educational opportunities or benefits.” 

SB 405, which would create a civil cause of action against health care providers who perform gender transition procedures on someone under the age of 18 if the patient claims to be injured, passed along party lines. It will now go to Evers, who is likely to veto it.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) said the bills are part of a larger effort to "legislate trans people out of public life.” (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

The Wisconsin State Senate passed bills that would restrict administrative rulemaking and that would place restrictions on health care for transgender youth. The bills are likely to be vetoed by Gov. Tony Evers.

Bills to restrict transgender youth headed to Evers

Democrats slammed five bills passed by Republicans that would restrict transgender children from receiving gender affirming care, from choosing the names and pronouns used for them in school and from participating on sports teams that align with their gender identity. Republicans said the bills are meant to protect children. Each bill passed 18-15 along party lines.

Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) said the bills are part of a larger effort to “legislate trans people out of public life.” He noted the Legislature’s emphasis on bills related to transgender people and said he felt a responsibility as a gay man to speak against them.

“Why are gay people and transgender people often lumped together politically? Why do we stand with each other? In large part because it is the same stereotypes. It is the same bias… and rigid ideas of male and female that have led to discrimination against gay people,” Spreitzer said.

Spreitzer said that even bringing the bills forward would do harm to transgender youth.

“It does harm to the mental health of our youth,” Spreitzer said. A 2024 survey by The Trevor Project found that 91% of LGBTQ+ young people in Wisconsin reported that recent politics negatively impacted their well-being. “What do they mean by recent politics? They mean bills like these as well as similar things coming down from the Trump administration.”

He added that he asked lawmakers to stop moving the bills forward during the committee process. “Yet forward they move, despite the Republican majority knowing full well that Gov. Evers will veto all five of these bills. They will not become law this session.”

Evers has vetoed similar bills several times over his seven years in office. Each time, he has promised to veto “any bill that makes Wisconsin a less safe, less inclusive, and less welcoming place for LGBTQ people and kids.”

Spreitzer said Senate and Assembly Democrats would sustain those vetoes if necessary.

One bill passed by the Senate is SB 405, which would create a civil cause of action against health care providers who perform gender transition procedures on someone under the age of 18 if they claim to be injured.

Spreitzer said SB 405 is a “blatant effort to threaten health care professionals with privileged litigation in the hopes that it will create a chilling effect and that they will stop providing gender affirming care.”

Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Grove) made personal pleas, speaking to her own experience as the mother of a transgender child during the floor session. She said it would make life harder for transgender children and their families.

“It’s not about protecting children, it’s about controlling them,” Ratcliff said, adding that decisions about gender affirming care are deeply private and should only be made by families and doctors.

“Why are we not helping families instead of burdening them? Why are we attacking children instead of protecting them? Why are we prioritizing culture wars over real problems?” Ratcliff said. “It’s really pretty obvious you want to use kids as pawns in a cynical political crusade. It’s not your kids that you’re using. It’s my kid and other people’s kids being used as pawns. It’s really shameful.”

“Stop bullying trans kids, and stop bullying their families,” Ratcliff said. 

The Senate also concurred in AB 100 and AB 102, which would prohibit transgender students from being able to participate on sports teams that align with their gender identity at Wisconsin K-12 public and choice schools, University of Wisconsin campuses and technical colleges.

Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), the lead author of the sports and the civil action bills, said he has met with the “transgender community” while working on the legislation and added that it “doesn’t matter who that is, doesn’t matter what their name is, but all that matters is I’ve been able to reach out.”

Hutton said his bills would help “protect fairness, safety and privacy” in girls’ and women’s sports. He said SB 405 would ensure that there is the “same level of support for those who realize now that the issue that they’re physically dealing with and mentally dealing with, that they were wronged and they believe there should be some accountability to the health care professional.”

The Senate also concurred in AB 103, which would require that school districts adopt policies to inform and get permission from parents before a student would be allowed to use names and pronouns that differ from their legal ones, and AB 104, which would prohibit health care professionals from providing medical gender affirming care for those under 18.

Ratcliff said the bills are part of a political strategy for Republican lawmakers.

“Last year, you weaponized trans kids for campaign points and you’re doing it again,” Ratcliff said. “In both cases, the cost is the same. Real children are being harmed. It didn’t work last year and it’s not going to work this year.”

Wisconsin has a slate of elections coming up this year including a state Supreme Court race in April as well as an open governor’s race and state legislative races that will determine control of the Senate and Assembly.

The only Republican gubernatorial candidate, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, kicked off his campaign by playing up culture war issues including promising to keep transgender girls off of girls’ sports teams. He has also recently released a campaign statement calling on the New Richmond School District to reverse its current policy and bar transgender girls from being able to use the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity.

Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee) accused Democratic lawmakers of  engaging in “political theater” and said anyone who allowed a minor to “make irreversible decisions is a catastrophic failure of parenting and society in general.”

All of the bills except SB 405 will now go to Evers for consideration.

GOP seeks to restrict administrative rules

Republican lawmakers introduced bills — packaged together as the “red tape reset” and supported by the conservative legal group Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) in May. The bills would increase legislative control over decisions made by executive agencies. Republicans have increased their efforts to limit and restrict agency rulemaking powers in the aftermath of state Supreme Court rulings that limited their ability to block rules.

SB 275 would limit scope statements, which are the first step in the rulemaking process, so they could only be used for one proposed rule. 

SB 276 would allow those who have challenged the validity of administrative rule to receive attorney fees and costs if a court declares a rule invalid. 

SB 277 would have all administrative rules sunset after seven years unless a rule is adopted again through an agency process.

SB 289 would require agencies to make cuts to offset the cost associated with new regulations.

Each bill passed 18-15 along party-lines. They will now go to the Assembly for consideration.

Democratic lawmakers did not speak on the bills during the floor session.

Megan Novak, the Americans For Prosperity Wisconsin state director, said in a statement that Wisconsin has been overregulated and that has restricted its economic growth.

“Between our excessive regulations and the misguided decision by our partisan Supreme Court that removed a necessary legislative check on the governor in the rulemaking process, Wisconsin businesses and families deserve regulatory relief,” Novak said. “These bills are a welcome step to get Wisconsin back on the right track.”

Grooming bill heads to Evers

The Senate concurred in a bill that would make “grooming” a felony crime in Wisconsin. 

The bill was introduced after a report from the CapTimes that found there were over 200 investigations into teacher licenses stemming from allegations of sexual misconduct or grooming from 2018 to 2023, though authors of the proposal say they have been working on the legislation for longer.

Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp) told reporters ahead of the floor session that the bill would protect “our vulnerable population from supposed trusted adults who would do our kids harm.”

“I can’t bear to think of the many dangers my grandkids will face, however, with this bill, I can sleep just a little bit better,” James said, adding that the bill would act as a deterrent to tell people that “our kids are not targets.”

The bill would define grooming as “a course of conduct, pattern of behavior, or series of acts with the intention to condition, seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child for the purpose of producing, distributing or possessing depictions of the child engaged in sexually explicit conduct.”

Under the bill, a person convicted of a grooming charge would be guilty of a Class G felony. The charge would increase to a Class F felony if the person is in a position of trust or authority, and to a Class E felony if the child has a disability and to a Class D felony if the violation involves two or more children. A convicted person would need to register as a sex offender.

The bill, which passed the Assembly 93-6 last month, will now go to Evers for consideration. 

Another bill that was introduced following the CapTimes report passed on a voice vote. SB 785 would require the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) to maintain an online licensing portal that is searchable by the public at no cost. The portal would need to include information on license holders under investigation and the name of individuals who have had their licenses revoked.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) told reporters on Wednesday ahead of a floor session that he hadn’t spoken recently with Gov. Tony Evers or Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) about property tax relief proposals. LeMahieu speaks at a 2023 press conference with Vos (left) and other Assembly Republicans standing behind him. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

Senate Republicans are not on the same page as Assembly Republicans and Gov. Tony Evers when it comes to how to use the projected $2.5 billion state surplus to provide tax relief to Wisconsinites. 

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) told reporters on Wednesday ahead of a floor session that he hadn’t spoken recently with Evers or Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) about property tax relief proposals. Vos told reporters on Tuesday that he was negotiating with Evers on a property tax proposal and was backing off a demand to repeal the partial veto that extended school revenue limit increases for 400 years. 

LeMahieu said his caucus was working on fine tuning its own proposal.

“When you have a surplus, you want to give it back to the people who are paying taxes in Wisconsin, the hard working families of Wisconsin,” LeMahieu said.

Hours later, LeMahieu announced the introduction of SB 1, which would provide rebate payments of up to $1,000 to taxpayers, and SB 995, which would provide a sum sufficient appropriation for the proposal. 

“You and your family know how to spend your hard-earned dollars best, not the state government,” LeMahieu said in a statement. “So, whether you need more room in your budget for groceries, or if Governor Evers’ 400-year veto sent your property tax bill through the roof, the State Senate intends to vote next week to return the surplus to the people who created it in the first place: you, the taxpayers.”

Wisconsin leaders are debating ways to provide some financial relief to residents in the aftermath of a significant jump in property tax bills in December. The hikes were fueled by a state budget that increases school revenue limits while keeping state general aid flat — pushing education costs onto local taxpayers — as well as voter approval of school district referendum requests. Further property tax hikes are expected if there is no action from policymakers.

The Senate bill would provide a one-time rebate to taxpayers who filed a Wisconsin individual income tax return in tax year 2024 and owed for that year. It would provide a rebate of $1,000 for joint married filers and a $500 rebate for other individuals. 

The Department of Revenue (DOR) would make the payments without the taxpayers having to take any further action and they would need to be made by Sept. 15, 2026. The rebate would not exceed the amount of the taxpayer’s 2024 net income tax liability.

The bill will receive a public hearing Thursday afternoon in the Senate Agriculture and Revenue committee. The committee chair, Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point), called the 400-year veto “irresponsible” and said Republicans “know that many families across Wisconsin are struggling financially” and they believe their proposal “will go a long way toward reducing the tax burden on our residents.”

Asked about the new proposal, Evers’ spokesperson Britt Cudaback referred the Wisconsin Examiner back to a statement she made on Tuesday. 

“The governor’s been clear that any bipartisan bill on property taxes must include investments to ensure our K-12 schools receive the resources they need and were promised in the state budget,” Cudaback said. “We look forward to hearing back from Republican leaders regarding whether they will support the governor’s plan that both addresses property taxes and invests in our kids and our schools.” 

According to emails shared by Cudaback, Evers has proposed to Republican lawmakers a bill that would pair funding for schools with tax relief. The proposal would include $200 million, including $80 million to bring the special education reimbursement rate to 42% in 2026 and $120 million to bring it to 45% in 2027, as well as $450 million in 2027 in general school aids to buy out the projected statewide school property tax levy.

In exchange, Republicans would get $550 million for the school levy tax credit to help with property tax relief and $97.3 million in 2027 for tax exempt cash tips. 

According to the email, Evers was willing to discuss changes to the 400-year veto but only if Republicans would “approve a significant and ongoing state investment in K-12 schools, including, at minimum, closing the gap in special education funding from the 2025-27 Biennial Budget and making special education aid a sum sufficient appropriation,” meaning it would cover all special ed costs at the set rate, unlike a “sum certain” appropriation which is a limited pot of money regardless of increased expenses.

“However, we understand from our conversation that neither of the two leaders would like to have discussions about the 400-year veto,” Madden wrote in the email. 

While Vos may not be set on eliminating the partial veto, LeMahieu told CBS58 on Wednesday that the veto would need to be repealed to do anything on property tax relief. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

“Maybe, we are getting the best value currently with WisconsinEye, but we don’t know... We want to be responsible with taxpayer money," Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) said. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Senate Republicans are proposing that Wisconsin solicit bids for parties interested in taking over livestream coverage of the state government — making WisconsinEye, the nonprofit that has done the job since 2007, compete for the job. 

The introduction of SB 994 follows the state Assembly unanimously passing a proposal Tuesday that would eliminate match requirements for $10 million that was set aside in the state budget for WisconsinEye, and place it in a trust fund from which the organization could draw interest.

WisconsinEye had to halt its coverage for about a month due to financial difficulties and has turned to state lawmakers for a long-term funding solution, and while the Assembly has been on the same page, the Senate has expressed skepticism about providing help.

Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) told reporters Wednesday that his caucus wants to see whether there is another party that could do the job for less. He said his local county board livestreams its meetings and it “doesn’t seem like it’s rocket science.”

LeMahieu said his caucus has been frustrated trying to get answers from WisconsinEye and with the lack of fundraising by the nonprofit since state funds were first set aside in 2023.

“There was a promise to raise funds to keep going over the last three years with state matching funds. That has not worked, so we think there is a different path,” LeMahieu said. “Maybe, we are getting the best value currently with WisconsinEye, but we don’t know… We want to be responsible with taxpayer money.”

WisconsinEye’s current annual operating budget is nearly $1 million. The Assembly proposal would allow the organization to use the interest on the trust fund for its operating expenses, though it is expected the organization would still need to fundraise hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to meet its annual costs. 

The coauthors on the Senate bill include 15 of the 18 Republicans; those not on the bill include Sens. John Jagler, Chris Kapenga and Eric Wimberger. The Assembly lawmakers coauthoring the Senate bill are Reps. Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) and Chuck Wichgers (R-Muskego). Both voted in favor of the Assembly bill this week. 

Under the Senate proposal, the state Department of Administration would solicit bids for the operation of a statewide public affairs network that would provide unedited live video and audio coverage of state government proceedings.

Those proceedings would include Senate and Assembly floor sessions, legislative committee meetings, state agency meetings, state Supreme Court and other judicial meetings. The bill states that if “practicable,” the network can also cover eligible news conferences and civic events. 

Lawmakers said in a cosponsorship memo that the bill would ensure “high-quality, secure, and cost-effective coverage of legislative, executive and judicial proceedings while maintaining strict nonpartisanship.”

“For years, the state has relied on a single public affairs network model without a competitive procurement process that ensures taxpayers receive the best return on their investment,” the cosponsorship memo on the bill states. “As technology evolves and expectations for public access increase, it is time to modernize how Wisconsin provides live coverage and archives of government proceedings.”

The bill also requires the network to prohibit coverage from being used for campaign purposes. 

The Senate proposal would prohibit fees from being charged to access live and archived coverage of floor sessions and Joint Finance Committee meetings. Other meetings are not covered under this part of the bill.

The Assembly bill, in contrast, would generally require WisconsinEye to provide free online public access to all of its live broadcasts and archives. That bill would have WisconsinEye focus its coverage primarily on official state government meetings and business. 

Assembly lawmakers also wanted to implement some additional accountability measures, requiring WisconsinEye to submit an annual financial report to the Legislature and place additional members on its board of directors who would be appointed by legislative leaders.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said Tuesday lawmakers are in negotiations with Gov. Tony Evers on a bill package to provide property tax relief before the end of the legislative session. Evers delivers his 2025 state budget address with Republican legislative leaders sitting behind him. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said Tuesday lawmakers are in negotiations with Gov. Tony Evers on a bill package to provide property tax relief before the end of the legislative session. 

Vos made the comments ahead of an Assembly floor session during which lawmakers passed a bill to provide long-term financial support to WisconsinEye, the state’s version of C-Span. Vos said the state Senate may have its own bill in the works.

Vos said that lawmakers have been discussing a property tax-reduction package for weeks, and had intended to announce it last week, but delayed due to discussions with Evers. Republicans want to  tap into Wisconsin’s budget surplus, estimated at over $2 billion, to fund a property tax relief package. 

“We have been trying to negotiate with Gov. Evers to have a bipartisan package that can get through both chambers, hopefully, and to his desk,” Vos said. “The goal would be to try to return a sizable chunk of the surplus back to Wisconsinites to help deal with rising property taxes.” 

Property tax bills jumped significantly in December, fueled by a state budget that increases  school revenue limits while keeping state general aid flat — pushing education costs onto local taxpayers — as well as voter approval of school district referendum requests. Further property tax hikes are expected in coming years without action from policymakers.

Republicans, angry about a line-item veto by Evers in the last budget, refused to give any state aid to schools in the current two-year budget.  Evers’ partial veto extended a $325 per-pupil increase in revenue-raising authority granted to school districts in the last two-year budget cycle for the next 400 years. Without state funding to backfill the revenue limit increases, school districts only had the option to raise property taxes or to forgo additional revenue. Vos had earlier said he wanted to see a repeal of Evers’ partial veto in any property tax package, but he backed off that demand Tuesday.

“Certainly want to see if we can have reforms in there, but the most important thing for us is to get relief, so some of the politics might have to wait until the election cycle,” Vos said. 

There is an open race for the governor’s office and control of the state Legislature is up for grabs in November. Republican gubernatorial candidate U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany is seeking to make property taxes a major point of his campaign — promising to freeze property taxes and repeal Evers’ partial veto if he is elected.

WisPolitics reports that Evers is proposing a $1.3 billion package that would pair school funding with tax relief, according to  emails from Zach Madden, Evers’ legislative affairs director, to Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) the news outlet obtained. 

According to WisPolitics, the deal put forth by Evers would include $200 million towards special education funding and $450 million for general aid to schools in 2027 to lower the amount of revenue that districts would raise through property taxes. Evers would in exchange support providing $550 million toward the School Levy Tax Credit and $97.3 million in 2027 to exempt taxes on cash tips.

Assembly passes bill to create endowment for WisconsinEye

The Assembly passed a bill Tuesday to provide a long-term funding solution for WisconsinEye, the nonprofit organization that livestreams and archives government proceedings, but the bill likely faces difficulty in the Senate.

AB 974 would eliminate the match requirement on $10 million, which was initially set aside for WisconsinEye in the state budget, and place it in an endowment fund to help provide a stable form of income to the organization. WisconsinEye would receive the interest from the endowment for its operations, though the revenue is not expected to cover all of its costs so the nonprofit would still need to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars each year. 

Lawmakers have been working on a way to support the organization after it said it was dealing with fundraising difficulties and had to shut down its coverage. WisconsinEye resumed its coverage on Feb. 2 after over a month offline after the Joint Committee on Legislative Organization approved $50,000 for it to do so. 

“They need around $50,000 a month to be able to continue operations as they work toward their long-term goal of having a partnership with the state and through their private fundraising,” Vos said. “I think the goal would be that the Legislature and the executive branch hopefully will be able to provide a longer term contract to at least get us through the balance of this year.”

The bill would require WisconsinEye to focus its coverage primarily on official state government meetings and business, provide free online public access to its live broadcasts and archives as well as submit an annual financial report to the Legislature. It would also require WisconsinEye to add additional members to its board of directors.

The bill states that if WisconsinEye ceases operations and divests its assets, then it must pay back the grants and transfer its archives to the Wisconsin Historical Society.

An amendment to the bill will require WisconsinEye to open all meetings of its board of directors to the public, broadcast those meetings and archive them and stipulates that the state will own all video cameras, audio equipment, connecting cables and wireless transmission equipment that is operated or maintained by WisconsinEye in the Capitol.

Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine), the lead coauthor on the bill, said she is glad WisconsinEye is back online.

“Without it, however briefly, the Legislature was less transparent and accessible to all of our constituents,” Neubauer said. “Thankfully, we’re here to fix this issue today… I certainly hope that this bipartisanship will continue with the Senate, and they will pass this bill so that we can ensure that WisconsinEye has a path to long-term sustainability.”

The bill passed 96-0 in the Assembly.

Vos said that lawmakers have had “brief discussions” with the Senate, but he believes that Senate Republicans are working on their own bill related to WisconsinEye. 

LeMahieu’s office has not responded to a request for comment from the Examiner.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

One City Schools founder and CEO Kaleem Caire, left, foreground, and state Rep. Shelia Stubbs (D-Madison), center, take part in a Jan. 28 hearing on a bill to boost funding for "demonstration" charter schools. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin lawmakers are set to advance a bill that would create a “demonstration” charter school designation and boost state aid for that school by more than 50%.

During the Jan. 28 public hearing, Rep. Robert Wittke (R-Caledonia) and Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton) said the bill would help create a mechanism in the state to try out innovative teaching methods and export them across the state.

“Right now, we are reinventing the wheel in isolation rather than sharing the blueprint for success,” Wittke said. “A teaching hospital receives higher funding to train research and innovate. Similarly, a demonstration school would be a K-12 education lab.” 

Independent charter schools are different from traditional charter schools. They are not authorized by a public school district and do not answer to a public school board, but instead are authorized by one of a number of designated authorizers, including the Universities of Wisconsin’s Office of Educational Opportunity (OEO).

AB 818 would allow the Office of Educational Opportunity to designate a school that meets a certain set of criteria as a “demonstration” charter school. For a school to receive the designation, it would need to participate in a longitudinal study; provide professional development opportunities; share the best practices from its educational model to other schools and maintain partnerships with community organizations. 

The school would receive an additional $6,863 per pupil — a 55% increase from its current funding. The bill is scheduled for a vote in the Assembly Colleges and Universities committee Tuesday.

Wittke said that any school authorized through the Office of Educational Opportunity could apply once the program is set up. 

“Once this bill would get signed into law, they would have to make an application to be designated as this. Any other charter school that is under the OEO presence could make an application to do the same. There could be others that want to be chartered under OEO for the purpose of doing this. We would love to see that,” Wittke said. “This is an idea that was brought in front of me, so we looked at this framework. It wasn’t to preclude anyone, but this is what I believe is a step in the right direction so that others can follow, and we can start moving the needle up so that our children will realize opportunities that are in front of us.”

The UW Office of Educational Opportunity currently authorizes nine schools, though there is one that is seeking to serve as a model for what the bill proposes.

One City Schools, a Madison area independent charter school, operates One City Elementary and One City Preparatory Academy. The two schools serve kindergarten through 8th grade, in Monona. It also operates One City Preschool, which serves ages 2 through 4-year-old kindergarten, on Madison’s south side.

Kaleem Caire, One City Schools’ founder and CEO, told lawmakers that the organization is trying to serve students who have not been served by traditional schools, as well as to act  as an incubator for innovation. But One City Schools is always in need of money to continue operating.

“If any of you have money that you don’t like, you can send it to One City Schools,” Caire quipped, adding, “Yes, we are always at risk of closing our doors” because of the needs of students. 

He said the student population of One City Schools is 94% students of color, about 70% students in poverty and 17% special needs.

“We are the least funded public school,” he said.

The school has struggled with sustainable growth in the past. In 2023, the school sent 51 ninth- and tenth-graders back to Madison Metropolitan School District after one semester due to teacher shortages, pausing its high school aspirations for several years.

At the time, Caire said the school would reopen its high school in 2025, but as of last year, those plans have been delayed until 2026-27 due to its eighth grade enrollment numbers, facility readiness and funding uncertainties.

Caire said the independent charter school currently serves about 400 students and its preschool serves about 80. Practices that he said set the schools apart from traditional schools include providing breakfast and lunch to students each day and its partnership with Project Read AI, an artificial intelligence program meant to help teach literacy.

The bill has support of one Democratic lawmaker: Rep. Shelia Stubbs (D-Madison), whose district includes the schools.

Stubbs urged lawmakers to support the bill, calling the school a “pioneer in providing innovative, high quality education and wrap-around support services to some of Dane County’s and Wisconsin’s most vulnerable scholars.” She said the bill will “ensure that an operator with an innovative learning model is able to continue improving the educational outcome of hundreds of scholars in our community every year.” 

Stubbs said the additional funding would come from the existing charter school payment appropriation.

“Why do we need to spend more if you’re really successful?” Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville) asked Caire, who said that the organization currently must raise about $5 million annually to meet the needs of its students.

According to written testimony provided by One City Schools, the organization’s long-term sustainability goal will rely on increased state funding, including by nearly doubling its student base and boosting state aid overall. 

“Their goal is to reach 900 students, which they consider a funding tipping point where they’ll receive more predictable public funding and substantially reduce their need for private support,” the testimony stated. It also identified a plan for achieving financial sustainability including securing multi-year funding, growing enrollment, achieving “economies of scale” and increasing state aid.

Rep. Jerry O’Connor (R-Fond Du Lac) said he didn’t think the funding in the bill would provide a “phenomenal advantage” to the schools, but would instead give them, as independent charter schools, “equal funding.” 

“These are poor lives and kids and people, so I don’t have a problem with the funding,” O’Connor said. “I like the fact that the rules are in place. There’s accountability. There are consequences.”

Democratic lawmakers expressed caution and concerns about the bill, saying they weren’t sure how it would help schools and students more broadly. 

“It feels like you all are doing some amazing things at One City and I appreciate that. I think most schools would like to have the holistic approach that you are aiming for, but money is always the issue,” Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire), a member of the committee, said during the hearing. 

Emerson noted that Democratic lawmakers have proposed legislation that would allow for free school meals at all public and voucher schools in the state. “That’s what I’d like to see our body advocating for more than picking winners and losers, and to be honest, sir, I feel like that’s what this bill is right now.”

Caire told lawmakers that there aren’t other schools that have volunteered to serve as a “demonstration” school for the state.

“That is why we’re coming here to you,” Caire said. “How many public schools in Wisconsin do you know of are germinating this level of opportunity for kids intentionally to scale across the country at an affordable price?… What we’re asking the state for is the average per-pupil revenue that the average public school system gets from the state of Wisconsin.”

The Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC), the state’s largest teachers union, opposes the bill, saying it would further drain resources from traditional public schools. 

“This bill hands a single, unaccountable charter operator a funding windfall that educators in every comer of this state can only dream of for their own students,” WEAC said in written testimony. 

The union said the bill comes as public schools continue to face difficulties, and as state funding has not kept pace with inflation.

In the most recent state budget cycle, Wisconsin’s traditional public schools did not receive any increase in its state per-pupil aid. The budget did provide additional funding for special education, but the available funds are not expected to meet the percentage promised by lawmakers and Gov. Tony Evers. School districts are instead turning to property tax increases to raise additional funds.

“Public school educators experience the consequences of state budget choices every day in crowded classrooms, growing student mental health needs, outdated materials, and painful cuts to electives that once kept kids engaged in school,” WEAC’s statement said. “AB 818 does nothing to address those real and urgent problems. Instead, it carves out a special lane for one favored type of charter operator and invites others to line up for the same bonus, further draining resources from the vast majority of students who attend public schools that are transparent, democratically governed, and open to all.” 

Democratic lawmakers on the Assembly Education Committee, including Reps. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire), Angelina Cruz (D-Racine) and Joe Sheehan (D-Sheboygan), submitted testimony opposing the bill. They said they had concerns the legislation would divert resources from public schools and continue a pattern of “linking education privatization to segregation.” 

“Policies that funnel public money toward select private and charter operators have repeatedly exacerbated segregation and disparities along lines of race, socioeconomic background, disability status, and more, leaving public schools with fewer resources to meet all students’ needs despite our constitutional obligation to help them do so,” the lawmakers stated. “AB 818 promises to continue that legacy.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Washington, D.C., and 38 states have enacted some form of statewide restriction or requirement for districts to limit student phone use. Of those, 18 have bans for the entire day. (Photo by SDI Productions via Getty Images)

Wisconsin lawmakers are calling for the state to ban cell phones throughout the school day and to implement regulations on social media and other platforms in an effort to protect children from the negative consequences of internet and social media use.

The bills regulating cellphone and internet use are the result of a task force organized by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) last year. The group of lawmakers, which met four times, was tasked with examining the effects of social media on youth development, evaluating the benefits and drawbacks to children having unlimited, unsupervised access to the internet and assessing the risks and dangers of children being online.

Bell-to-bell cell phone ban

Following the lead of several other states, Wisconsin lawmakers are pushing for a “bell-to-bell” cell phone ban in schools, about six months before school districts in Wisconsin are required to implement the instructional cell phone ban in schools recently required by state law. 

Washington, D.C., and 38 states have enacted some form of statewide restriction or requirement for districts to limit student phone use. Of those, 18 have bans for the entire day. 

AB 948 would require policies banning cell phone use in school to prohibit them throughout the entire school day including during instructional time, recess, the time students travel between classes and the lunch period. This would need to be implemented by July 1, 2027, under the bill. 

Rep. Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) told lawmakers on the Assembly Education committee that the bill is just one part of a “multifaceted approach” to addressing the question of protecting children online. 

“If schools can be a safe zone that this bill helps implement, that is a huge piece,” she said. 

Brill said that a student during one of the task force meetings said that he had many experiences on social media and “most of them were bad” and that social media “brings you down.”

Wisconsin recently enacted a statewide cell phone ban, signed into law by Gov. Tony Evers in October. But  2025 Wisconsin Act 42 only requires school districts to implement policies that ban cellphones during instructional times. These policies need to include exceptions for emergencies, for educational purposes and cases involving student health care, individualized education plans (IEPs) or 504 plans (learning environment accommodations).

Even prior to the recent state law, according to a Wisconsin Policy Forum report, most Wisconsin school districts already restricted student cellphone use, though policies and enforcement varied widely across the state.

However, Brill said the state should go further.

“School districts are right now considering adopting these policies independently and there’s a groundswell of parents calling for it,” Brill said.

Rep. Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay), who led the first cellphone ban law, noted that he got a lot of pushback when he first proposed the idea because it was a “fairly new concept.” He said he would have liked to pass a bell-to-bell ban to begin with, but he didn’t think there was the political support necessary.

“Since that time, though, this issue has exploded across the country and Wisconsin is now on the weaker end of it,” Kitchens said, adding that New York, a Democratic-led state, and Louisiana, a Republican-led state, have the strictest bans in the country.

AB 948 would also explicitly allow school districts to use pouches or other storage devices for cellphones or ban having cellphones on school premises. 

Democratic lawmakers on the education committee questioned the approach as a  “one-size-fits-all” solution to the issue of cellphones, as well as the exclusion of the state’s private choice and independent charter schools, which receive taxpayers dollars, from the requirement.

“Why the one-size-fits-all nature of this?” Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) asked. He noted that there may be students who have a part-time job and need to stay in-touch with their employers during the school day and asked whether lawmakers would be open to allowing exceptions for phones during lunch if a school chooses.

“We did it for 200 years without cellphones before and I think we can do it again,” Kitchens said. “The more you understand the issue the more clear it becomes. You have to have a strict policy.”

Rep. Joe Sheehan (D-Sheboygan) said that the superintendent of the school district in the area he represents in the Assembly did not want the broader ban on cellphones. He also asked about the exclusion of the state’s voucher schools. He said if the schools don’t want to follow the regulations placed on schools getting taxpayer funding then “don’t take the money.” 

Brill said that parents are sending their children to voucher schools so they can get the education that fits their children best and that she doesn’t want there to be “punitive damages on private schools because they’re getting tax dollars when, in reality, it’s that child who’s getting the education.”

Kitchens said a bill that only includes public schools is all they can get done “politically” right now.

No one else testified on the bill.

Regulations on content, social media access

The Assembly Children and Families committee took up a set of bills that would regulate social media companies and platforms. 

AB 961 would require distributors of media, including print publications and digital platforms, to use prominent “explicit content” warning labels.

Rep. Joy Goeben (R-Hobart) said the bill would establish a “common-sense framework ensuring that material intended strictly for adults … is clearly identified before it is accessed.”

The bill defines “explicit content” as material “intended for an adult audience” that “lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value” and that “depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way.”

Under the bill, the warning label would need to be on the front cover or first page or on the packaging for print publications and for digital platforms, the label would need to appear for at least 10 seconds or until a user acknowledges the warning.

The warning label would need to be similar to: “WARNING: This material contains explicit content that may be harmful or offensive. Viewer discretion is advised. Not intended for minors.”

“Ultimately, this bill is about consumer transparency, helps protect minors by ensuring explicit material clearly is labeled and responsibly presented,” Goeben said. 

Rep. Jill Billings (D-La Crosse) asked Goeben whether she would be open to an amendment to remove printed materials from the bill, citing concerns from book sellers. 

“If this got this signed, you betcha I would, but realistically most things that are sold, aren’t they sold, like, in a wrapper?” Goeben asked, adding that she didn’t think it would be fair to social media or internet stakeholders to exclude printed materials.

“I think we really need to think about applying equally to all the people who create disturbing content,” Goeben said. 

“Maybe take print media out of it because again… this isn’t like the emerging technology where parents are struggling with trying to address what their kids are seeing and how they’re putting parental controls on it. Print media is a bit of a different animal,” Billings said. 

AB 962 would require app developers and app stores to verify the age of users and, if they identified a minor’s account, to get parental consent before child users are able to download or purchase apps or make in-store purchases. Accounts belonging to a minor would have to be affiliated with an account owned by a parent.

Goeben said the bill would give parents tools they have been asking for. 

“Parents should never discover after the fact that an app that their child has used daily has become more invasive or more dangerous,” Goeben said. “This proposal is narrowly and carefully tailored… it does not ban apps or censor content or interfere with innovation… What it does do is establish clear and uniform rules so families are no longer forced to navigate a confusing patchwork of opaque policies… written by corporations.” 

The bill would also prohibit apps and app stores from enforcing a contract or terms of service against a minor unless there is parental consent. And it bars knowingly misrepresenting any information in a parental consent disclosure and sharing or disclosing any personal information collected when conducting age verification.

The bill includes a provision to allow a minor or parent of a minor harmed by a violation to bring civil action against an app store provider or developer. They could be awarded actual damages or $1,000 for each violation, whichever amount is greater, and punitive damages if the violation was egregious, as well as court costs and reasonable attorney fees.

AB 963 would impose a number of requirements related to underage users on social media platforms that bring in more than $1 billion in revenue per year. Social media platforms would need to estimate the age of users and whether they are minors. 

The requirements include setting the default privacy settings at the most private; not allowing for “addictive features” including infinite scrolling, a profile-based feed, push notifications, autoplay and displaying likes; and preventing profile-based, paid commercial advertising in a minor’s feed.

Platforms would also need to terminate an account if they have reason to believe the user is a minor without parental consent. If a parent requests the termination of a child’s account, it must be done within 14 days, and the means to terminate an account must be clear, simple, and easy to locate. 

The bill includes a provision to allow a private civil action by a parent or child aggrieved by a negligent, reckless or knowing violation for declaratory or injunctive relief and damages. If the violation was reckless or knowing, the parent or minor would be entitled to $10,000 or actual damages per violation.

Brittney and Luke Bird, the parents of Bradyn Bohn, the 15-year-old who killed himself after falling victim to sextortion, testified in favor of the bill. They have become prominent advocates for online safety and child protection in the wake of the death of their son. 

Luke Bird told lawmakers on the committee that the bills are “meaningful steps towards preventing further tragedies.” 

“Over the last 11 months, we’ve learned firsthand how inadequate current safeguards are when it comes to internet use. The dangers are real, they’re immediate, and they’re widespread and growing,” he said. “There’s an active case against Meta involving sextortion scams. Snapchat is facing cases tied to drug distribution. TikTok has been tied to dangerous online challenges…. As parents and as citizens we’re expected to trust that our children can safely navigate these digital spaces. We believe safeguards, accountability and stronger protections must be put in place. That begins with you, in here.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Rep. Lisa Subeck (D-Madison) is proposing that Wisconsin require crisis pregnancy centers to get express written permission before releasing a person’s private health information. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Rep. Lisa Subeck (D-Madison) is proposing that Wisconsin require crisis pregnancy centers to get express written permission before releasing a person’s private health information. Those who have given permission would also be able to withdraw their permission at any time under the bill. 

“Many people assume that when they seek care for pregnancy or other reproductive health services that that information is protected, just like any other medical records under HIPAA, and while that is true at your doctor’s office or at the hospital, it’s not always true when you visit other providers,” Subeck said at a press conference Thursday.

Concerns about information being gathered about women’s reproductive health, including by crisis pregnancy centers, have surged in the years since Roe v. Wade was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, especially in states where abortion has been criminalized. 

A 2022 TIME Magazine report found that crisis pregnancy centers have been collecting information including sexual and reproductive histories, test results, ultrasound photos, and information shared during consultations, parenting classes, or counseling sessions, from women they interact with through telephone and online chats. They are not required to follow federal health data privacy laws. The report led to U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren requesting an examination of the practices by crisis pregnancy centers.

The bill, coauthored by Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee), would also require centers to disclose in “plain language” that they are not a HIPAA-covered entity for the purpose of federal privacy regulations as well as disclosing any data breach that exposes individual digital health information.

Subeck said the centers can “look and feel an awful lot like a traditional medical clinic,” noting that they might offer ultrasounds, pregnancy tests and claim to have counselors on staff. However, she said “many of these centers are not licensed medical providers, and therefore they are not covered by HIPAA privacy protections.”

Subeck said that changes in reproductive health laws have raised concerns about the misuse of health related information and data. She said the bill would not close unregulated pregnancy centers, limit the services they can provide or limit speech. Rather, she said, it “simply sets some basic privacy expectations and protections for unsuspecting individuals.”

Subeck noted that lawmakers in other states, including Pennsylvania, have introduced similar measures, though none have become law.

Subeck said the violations of the provisions in the bill would be treated as “unfair and deceptive practices” under existing state law.

Laura Hanks, an OB-GYN and legislative chair for American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said at the press conference that the bill shouldn’t be political.

“It’s about privacy, honesty and safe, medically accurate care. Unregulated pregnancy centers often look like clinics, but they aren’t held to the basic medical privacy rules,” Hanks said. “This means they lack regulation, medical oversight or standard confidentiality rules. Too many people are walking in and assuming their health care information is protected when it isn’t. This bill sets commonsense guardrails.”

The headline on this report has been revised for clarity. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

An empty high school classroom. (Dan Forer | Getty Images)

The Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee has delayed the release of $2 million for the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) operating budget following a report on the cost of a meeting held at a water park resort in 2024. The agency says continued delays in the release of the funds could lead to layoffs and other cuts.

The powerful budget committee’s agenda for Tuesday, Feb. 2 included a DPI request, originally submitted in September, for the release of $2 million over the biennium. However, at the start of the meeting, committee co-chair Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) said the vote on the money would be delayed. 

Born cited a report from the Dairyland Sentinel, a nonprofit publication published by Brian Fraley who is a longtime GOP strategist, that found through open records requests that the agency spent over $368,000 on its standard setting meeting in 2024. 

“We are not going to take up the DPI agenda item today. Within the last couple of hours a media report came out, Dairyland Sentinel report, regarding taxpayer use of funds at a resort for a conference,” Born said during the meeting. “Since it’s so new, we just want the opportunity to at least review what’s going on there with this questionable use of funds at least according to that report that’s very new, so just want to hit pause on that.”

The records request had been submitted about a year ago and was released after the Institute for Reforming Government (IRG), a conservative think tank, issued a demand letter on Jan. 21 on behalf of Dairyland Sentinel. The records were subsequently released. 

The report noted that the four-day event that included 88 educators and DPI staff was held in June 2024 at Chula Vista, a water park resort in the Wisconsin Dells. 

The Dairyland Sentinel report noted that Chula Vista is “a premier destination known for luxury amenities, including massive indoor and outdoor water parks, spa services, and multiple bars” and that “the agency did not provide receipts for staff time, food, travel, or lodging,” leaving taxpayers to “wonder how much of that $368,885 was spent on resort amenities, alcohol, or water park access for the 88 educators and various staff in attendance.” 

Chris Bucher, director of communications for DPI, told the Examiner in an email that the number cited by Dairyland Sentinel included all costs related to the standards setting meeting. Bucher said the agency works with its vendor for the Forward Exam, Data Recognition Corporation, each year to update the assessment and the work includes review of test questions at offsite, secure locations. 

“The department uses federal and state money directed to support the exam to pay for these events. The funding cited in the blog post includes salaries, hotel costs and vendor costs to perform the work – it is not all directed to Chula Vista,” Bucher said. “We conduct these meetings in Wisconsin to support our local tourism community and to cut down on associated travel costs for all involved. This is a common approach used by at least 24 other states who also contract with the DRC.”

Dairyland Sentinel emphasized that the fulfillment of the open records request did not include an itemized list associated with the overall cost.

Bucher said the Data Recognition Corporation provides the facilitation of the Forward Exam for more than 400,000 public and private school students as well as the standard setting workshop. Bucher said in response to why a breakdown of the costs wasn’t available that as the facilitator, Data Recognition Corporation plans and maintains the information related to costs and the agency is “working with them as we speak.”

Born said JFC expects to meet several times in the next four to six weeks as the end of the legislative session approaches and there “should be an opportunity to look at this again down the road, but we just wanted to make sure we had all the information necessary as we’re considering this request.” 

The $2 million, which makes up 10% of the DPI operating budget, was placed in a supplemental fund as a part of a deal negotiated between lawmakers and Gov. Tony Evers. Republican lawmakers on the Joint Finance Committee initially wanted to cut those funds from the agency’s budget. Since it is in a supplemental fund, it must be released by lawmakers on the JFC. 

Bucher said the agency is “deeply disappointed” by the delay. He said the agency had been in contact with committee members and staff leading up to yesterday’s meeting and lawmakers indicated that the committee was going to approve the request.

“The department was singled out for a set aside of 10% of its operating budget and without that money, will need to consider layoffs which will impact our ability to investigate educator wrongdoing, license teachers, pay choice schools and operate the agency,” Bucher said.

U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who is running for governor, also weighed in — calling for an audit of the agency. 

“Their priorities are completely misplaced if they can waste nearly $400,000 on a water park junket to lower standards while claiming they need more funding. It took them over a year to respond to an open records request, and taxpayers should never have to wait that long for basic transparency,” Tiffany said in a statement.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

GOP lawmakers said they needed to reimplement checks on the executive branch. Gov. Tony Evers delivers his 2025 state budget address. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Republican lawmakers on Wednesday argued for a constitutional amendment proposal and a set of bills that would allow them greater say over the administrative rulemaking process.

The effort follows Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions in recent years that have limited lawmakers’ ability to restrict administrative rulemaking. The proposals are the result of a task force on administrative rulemaking organized by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester). 

Rep. Brent Jacobson (R-Mosinee), who chaired the task force, cited the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Evers v. Marklein II decision issued on July 8, 2025 that found unconstitutional statutes that allowed the 10-member Joint Committee on the Review of Administrative Rules’ to review and suspend administrative rules.

Jacobson’s constitutional amendment proposal, AJR 133, would allow state lawmakers to suspend indefinitely or temporarily administrative rules that are promulgated by state agencies with a vote of the full Senate and Assembly.

Jacobson said the proposal would “ensure that the Legislature remains an effective check on the administrative state and that our constituents can still look to us to be a voice in the rulemaking and regulatory process.” 

As a constitutional amendment, the proposal would need to pass the Legislature in two consecutive sessions before it would go to voters for a final vote. It would not require approval from the governor. This is the proposal’s first consideration. 

AB 955, coauthored by Jacobson, would repeal the current state statute that includes language allowing agencies to promulgate rules interpreting the provisions of any statute enforced or administered by the agency if it is necessary to enforce the statute. The bill would replace the language to prohibit agencies from promulgating rules interpreting the provisions of any statute without explicit and specific statutory authority.

Jacobson said the proposals are not about giving Republicans an advantage, but rather are about “ensuring good governance and our democratic system of checks and balances are in effect, regardless of which parties are in control of which branch of our state government.” 

Rep. Mike Bare (D-Verona)  expressed concerns about whether the bill would implement some “real tight constraints” on what agencies are able to do. 

“We trust our executive branch with some discretion over making things happen, implementing the policies and the statutes that we’re trying to have happen,” Bare said. “I’m wondering if that creates scenarios in the future [that]… limit too much what they’re able to do.”

“The key is that that statute should specifically and explicitly say, you have authority to promulgate rules around implementing the statute that we in the Legislature have passed,” Jacobson said in response. “That still gives them considerable discretion… Now if they go beyond what our intent was, that’s why we have the backstop of the constitutional amendment to say that rule that has taken effect now by joint resolution, we’re gonna suspend it, maybe temporarily.” 

Rep. Dan Knodl (R-Germantown) said he was glad the issue was in front of the committee. 

“The Legislature has been ceding authority for decades, and it probably goes back to the legislators not wanting to make tough decisions or take tough votes, but over time, a lot of authorities have been given to the executive branch. The agencies have absorbed a lot of that,” Knodl said. “Now we have a Supreme Court that is dialing back even more of our authority.” 

“Quite frankly, we’re on a path of irrelevance as a Legislature,” he added.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Democratic lawmakers gathered with a handful of veterans after the meeting to criticize the delay and call for Republican lawmakers to advance the bill. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

A bill that would provide funding to a program that helps identify the remains of missing-in-action service members is in limbo after an Assembly committee put off a vote Wednesday due to concerns by Republican lawmakers that Gov. Tony Evers would use his partial veto on the measure.

The University of Wisconsin Missing-In-Action (MIA) Recovery and Identification project, which was started in 2015 at the state’s flagship campus, works to further the recovery and identification of missing-in-action American service members. Those working on the project include researchers, students, veterans, alumni and volunteers who conduct research, recovery and biological identification. The program is partnered with the federal Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) on the work and has acted as a model for DPAA, which now partners with more than 50 other academic and nonprofit institutions to work on MIA identifications. 

AB 641, coauthored by Rep. Christine Sinicki (D-Milwaukee) and Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton), would appropriate $500,000 in each year of the 2025-27 fiscal biennium for the UW MIA Recovery Project. The purpose of the funds would be to allow the program to prioritize recovering and identifying service members from Wisconsin, according to written testimony from Hesselbein. 

According to the program, there are around 82,000 missing-in-action American service members with 1,500 of those coming from Wisconsin. According to the UW MIA program, of those from Wisconsin, approximately 1,300 were lost during World War II, over 160 were lost in the Korean War, 26 are missing from the Vietnam War and one service member is missing as the result of other Cold War-era operations.

The Assembly Veterans and Military Affairs committee was scheduled to vote Wednesday on the bill, setting it up for a vote on the Assembly floor. However, committee chair Rep. William Penterman (R-Hustisford) announced at the start of the committee that it had been removed from the calendar.

Sinicki thanked Penterman for his efforts but said she was disappointed with the entire Assembly Republican caucus because the bill is not being taken up.

“Many of you on this committee have come to me praising this program and tell me it’s got to get done, but once again that is so disingenuous — you are showing these military families just how disingenuous your support of this bill is,” Sinicki said during the committee meeting.

Sinicki said lawmakers were choosing once again to not “give these families the closure that they’re so desperately seeking” and that the “money requested is a drop in the bucket compared to the return that these families are going to get.” Wisconsin currently has a projected budget surplus of over $2 billion.

Penterman told the Wisconsin Examiner after the meeting the bill “just wasn’t ready for primetime” and said there are concerns in the Assembly Republican caucus related to what would happen if it makes it to Gov. Tony Evers’ desk.

“I mean, it spends money, so it gives the governor the option to line-item veto things, so he’s shown time to time again that he’s willing to take that to the extreme, so there’s concerns there,” Penterman said. 

Penterman said the pause on the vote Wednesday “doesn’t mean it’s not going anywhere for the rest of the session.”

Penterman also brushed off Sinicki’s accusation that the bill was removed from the calendar at the request of Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester).

“There’s been concerns. My job as chair is to listen to concerns of members on both sides… I’d rather give it more time than rush it,” Penterman said.

Republican lawmakers have worked hard to try to get around Evers’ partial veto powers for the last several years, taking additional steps to try to prevent such action including passing bills without funding attached during the budget cycle. Under Wisconsin state law, the executive partial veto power, which is one of the strongest in the nation, can only be used on appropriation bills. 

Evers proposed dedicating the same amount to the program that is specified in the current bill in his 2025-27 state budget, but Republican lawmakers rejected that proposal.

Evers’ spokesperson Britt Cudaback said in an email to the Examiner that there is “virtually no basis for such a concern” and it’s “an absolutely bogus excuse.” She noted Evers’ previous support for the effort as well as email exchanges between Penterman’s office and Evers’ office, which were shared with the Examiner.

On Jan. 29, the day the bill received a public hearing, Penterman emailed Evers’ office asking for assurances that Evers would not use his partial veto power on the bill before he would schedule a committee vote.

On Feb. 2, two days before the committee was to vote, Zach Madden, Evers’ legislative affairs director, confirmed in an email to Penterman that Evers would not use his partial veto power on the bill as long as it remained in its original form.

“As you may recall, the Governor has been extremely supportive of the program and has proposed funding the UW Missing-in-Action Recovery and Identification Project in the last three of his biennial budgets,” Madden wrote. “It has been your Republican colleagues on the Joint Committee on Finance that have removed it each time. We would need to review any amendments to the bill to extend this same commitment if there were to be any changes from what was originally proposed.”

Cudaback said on Wednesday that “it seems Republicans simply don’t want to fund a program that helps identify and recover the remains of Wisconsin veterans who are missing in action, and that’s no one’s fault but their own.”

Democratic lawmakers gathered with a handful of veterans after the meeting to criticize the delay and call for Republican lawmakers to advance the bill. They stood in front of the POW/MIA Chair of Honor, a permanently empty, dedicated seat to represent service members who never returned, in the rotunda of the Wisconsin State Capitol.

Sinicki said at the press conference that Vos is to blame for the bill being pulled from the calendar. She called for people who live in districts represented by Republicans to call their legislators and “tell them to stand up to Robin Vos.”

“[Vos] is the one and only person holding up this bill, and it’s because of his crazy hatred for our UW system. That is the only reason why he’s holding this bill,” Sinicki said. “It is time for him to put that hatred aside and do what’s right for our military families.”

Republican lawmakers have criticized the UW system for an array of reasons, including its spending, and sought to cut the UW budget in recent years. Vos, the state’s longest-serving Assembly speaker, has also been at the center of a number of bipartisan bills being blocked this session, including one to provide Medicaid coverage to postpartum mothers and to expand health insurance coverage of breast cancer screenings for at-risk women. His office did not respond to a request for comment from the Examiner by the time of publication.

Rep. Maureen McCarville (D-DeForest) spoke about her late uncle who died serving in the south Pacific in World War II. She said his remains were identified and returned seven decades after his death.

“I can’t say enough how much this project means to families out there… We need to fund this so that every other family can have that same closure,” McCarville said. “There are no words to express how disappointed I am sitting on the vets committee knowing that the chair of that committee, who is also an active service member, allowed this to be pulled from his agenda.”

Wisconsin VFW Adjutant Adam Wallace quoted the Soldier’s Creed, which says “never leave a fallen comrade,” and said the bill would help ensure this promise is kept. 

“We as a state have the opportunity to advance this piece of legislation, but unfortunately, petty politics and backroom politics has led to this being off the floor, and we are tired of the games,” Wallace said. “These games have real consequences. Every day, every year, every legislative session this does not pass is one next of kin or family member who can’t bring that closure.” 

Sinicki told the Examiner that the concerns about a partial veto are “an excuse they’re using to cover their butts.” She said barring some change, she thinks this is likely the end of the line for the bill this session. 

“I would find it hard to believe that they would do anything at this point,” she said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WisconsinEye Board of Directors Chair Mark O’Connell called WisconsinEye “a worthy, appropriate use of state funds” for people to know how their elected officials are “controlling and charting the course of our future.” (Screenshot via WisconsinEye)

An Assembly committee voted Tuesday to advance a bill to provide long-term support to WisconsinEye, the state’s nonprofit news organization that livestreams and archives government meetings and legislative sessions.

WisconsinEye resumed its coverage in February — after more than  a month offline — with the help of a $50,000 cash infusion approved by the Joint Committee on Legislative Organization Monday.

Mark O’Connell, chair of the WisconsinEye Board of Directors, explained the organization’s financial difficulties to lawmakers during the Assembly State Affairs committee hearing. 

After going off air, O’Connell told lawmakers on the committee that WisconsinEye had reduced some salaries and cut back on expenses as much as possible. It also turned to state lawmakers, who had already set aside $10 million to be used for an endowment for the organization, but with match requirements that WisconsinEye could not meet. The organization also started to boost its fundraising efforts among small-dollar donors. A GoFundMe has raised over $56,000 as of Tuesday.

“While you allocated $10 million to WisconsinEye and said, ‘If you can raise $10 million, we’ll give you matching dollars up to $10 million,’ — that was incredibly gracious of you — but that was hard, hard to the point where it couldn’t be done in a very difficult fundraising environment,” O’Connell said. “That has resulted in where we are today.” 

O’Connell called WisconsinEye “a worthy, appropriate use of state funds” for people to know how their elected officials are “controlling and charting the course of our future.”

Under the Assembly proposal, which was first announced by Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) last month, the match requirements for the $10 million would be eliminated and the money would go to establishing an endowment fund for WisconsinEye.

“WisconsinEye will still have to put in quite a bit of work and raise the remainder of their operating budget each year,” Neubauer told lawmakers Tuesday. “If we assume a rate of return of about 4 to 7% on the endowment, WisconsinEye will still have to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to be able to maintain something close to their current budget, which is $950,000 annually.” 

Neubauer said the organization has said that maintaining that budget is necessary to operate at its current level and to meet its contractually obligated services. She added that she hopes that one day WisconsinEye would be able to cover every committee meeting and hearing in the state Capitol, though that would “require strong private fundraising from them.”

“If we… bring in about $600,000 from the endowment each year, they would need to raise about $350,000. They have communicated that they think that that’s possible,” Neubauer said. “They would live off the interest. The endowment stays with the state of Wisconsin.”

O’Connell told lawmakers that approving the bill would help secure additional funding from donors. 

“We are going to continue to raise funds as best we can. We currently have seven entities that contribute $25,000 per year. We have one entity that contributes $50,000 per year. We have a handful of folks that, to the tune of about $175,000, that are waiting to see if this commitment from the state is solid, and if it is, then we’re going to see those funds come in,” O’Connell said. “I am very optimistic that if we can come to a resolution on this piece of legislation, that we are going to be in a relatively strong position to have a solid base with the partnership with the state as we continue to do fundraising in the private sector.” 

The proposal would require WisconsinEye to add four additional members to its board of directors who would be appointed by each legislative caucus leader, focus its coverage primarily on official state government meetings and business, provide free online public access to its live broadcasts and digital archives as well as submit an annual financial report to the Legislature and the Joint Finance Committee. The board appointees would not be allowed to be current legislators.

The bill also states that if WisconsinEye ceases operations and divests its assets, then it must pay back the grants and transfer its archives to the Wisconsin Historical Society.

O’Connell said there are some other details that need to be worked out with the bill. He said WisconsinEye will need “bridge financing” to help the organization function until interest from the trust fund begins to come in. 

“We’ve got to operate between now and whenever that return comes in, so we’ll need some kind of bridge. We’ll work with the Legislature on that,” O’Connell said. “We will need to work on the trust fund language. We would like the state of Wisconsin investment board to be aggressive… There are some issues we’ll have to address, but we are incredibly appreciative of the state of Wisconsin… saying [to] the citizens of Wisconsin, it is important for us in the Legislature for you to know what we are doing.”

The committee approved the bill unanimously immediately following the public hearing, setting it up for a vote in the full Assembly in the near future.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Oak Bluff Natural Area in Door County, which was protected by the Door County Land Trust using Knowles-Nelson Stewardship funds in 2023. (Photo by Kay McKinley)

A pair of Republican lawmakers, desperate to advance a Knowles-Nelson stewardship program bill that can garner GOP support, urged Senate lawmakers and members of advocacy organizations to get on board with pausing land acquisition for two years.

“I think we’ve landed it in a good spot now. Is it perfect? I’ll be the first to admit this is not a perfect bill,” Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point) said during the Senate Financial Institutions and Sporting Heritage committee meeting Tuesday. “If we simply allow the clock to run out, this program goes away, and I certainly don’t want to be behind the wheel when the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program phases out.”

Since 1990, the Warren Knowles-Gaylord Nelson Stewardship Program has preserved wildlife habitat and expanded outdoor recreation opportunities throughout Wisconsin by authorizing state borrowing and spending for the purchase of land and by giving grants to local governments and nonprofit conservation organizations.

The program will run out of money on June 30, 2026 without legislative action. Reaching an agreement to continue the program has been difficult, however, with Testin telling the committee that legislators  have faced “buzzsaws” from all sides as they have worked to put together their plan. 

The Assembly passed a pair of amended bills on a 53-44 party line vote last month.

“A lot of my colleagues said ‘Oh, you’ll never get a hearing in the Senate,’” Kurtz said. “Thanks to Chairman Stafsholts, we’re having a hearing in the Senate, so it’s baby steps. It’s like chopping wood. Sen.  Testin and I are committed to keep working on this.” 

“It’s not done, so time hasn’t ran out,” Kurtz added.

Under the current proposal, the program would receive funding for another two years. 

The DNR would need to conduct a survey of all of the land that has been acquired under the stewardship program under the bill, as well as listing land acquisition priorities. The survey would need to be submitted to the Legislature in two years.

Kurtz told the committee that recent changes to the bill do “refocus” the program towards maintaining the land that has already been acquired under the program. He said that lawmakers had to make “some tough decisions.”

“It does temporarily change the focus of the program to maintain what we already own and catch up on backlog maintenance, while DNR is doing the study, planning and prioritizing a comprehensive path forward for land acquisition,” Kurtz said. “We’re confident this plan will ensure the long-term legacy of stewardship for generations.”

The lawmakers said there are still some additional changes to the bill to come. 

Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) expressed concerns about the decreasing funding and scope of the program and questioned how lawmakers got to the point of cutting the land acquisitions portion of the program. 

The Knowles-Nelson program is currently funded at about $33 million annually. Habush Sinykin and Democratic lawmakers proposed a bill that would dedicate $72 million to it and Gov. Tony Evers had called for over $100 million for it in his budget.

The GOP bill in its current state would dedicate $28.25 million.

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) would be allowed to obligate $13.25 million a year under the bill in its current form. Of that, $1 million would be for land acquisition — a cut from $16 million — that could only be used for the Ice Age Trail. DNR would also be able to obligate $9.25 million for property development and local assistance — a cut from $14.25 million — and $3 million for recreational boating aids. 

Funding for the program includes $7.75 million for DNR property development and grants, $4 million for local assistance grants and $3 million for grants for wildlife habitat restoration. There would also be $250,000 set aside each year to be used for DNR land acquisitions, but acquisitions would be limited to parcels of land that are five acres or less and meant to improve access to hunting, fishing, or trapping opportunities or are contiguous to state-owned land.

“Where we find ourselves now is a situation where we have zero dollars awarded to land acquisition,” Habush Sinykin said, adding, “When does this program stop being the Knowles Nelson stewardship program?” 

Testin said the funding was what was “politically palatable” for the Republican authors’  Assembly and Senate colleagues.

“There are some individuals that have strong feelings both for and against this program,” Testin said. “And where we think we’ve landed is at a point to keep the program going in some form or fashion, continue to put state resources behind it, and then as we do every two years, when we come back in January 2027, regardless of what happens in — shakes out in the November elections, we will begin another state budget process, which then gives us the opportunity once again to take a look at where we are financially as a state, hopefully put more resources into various programs, whether it’s Knowles-Nelson or others.” 

Habush Sinykin said funding acquisitions is necessary to maintain the “vitality” of the program. She also noted that there is strong bipartisan support for the program including from constituents and from conservation and recreation organizations 

“What we’re hearing is we in the Legislature need to put our money where our values are, and this is a program that is valued,” Habush Sinykin said. 

Kurtz shared what he said was the “Assembly perspective” with the committee. 

“It became abundantly clear for the [Republican] caucus I represent that land acquisition was a problem, and that’s why we kind of pivoted to the major land acquisitions, which some people did not like that as well,” Kurtz said. “I’d love to see more money in the program… But I know what the power of our caucuses is, they don’t like borrowing money, and so that’s an issue. They don’t like buying all the land up north. That’s an issue…. Let’s focus for a couple years on maintaining what we have. Let’s do the inventory. Let’s see what the path is for, and in two years, we’re going to be right back here, saying, hey, we need to do this.”

Part of the political problem for the popular Knowles-Nelson stewardship program involves legislative Republicans’ resentment of a 2025 state Supreme Court decision. 

For many years, Wisconsin lawmakers exercised control over the program through the Joint Finance Committee. Members of the committee had the ability to anonymously object to any project and have it held up for an indeterminate time. But last year the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled 6-1 that anonymous objections were unconstitutional, with conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley writing for the majority that the statutes “encroach upon the governor’s constitutional mandate to execute the law.” 

Republican lawmakers on the committee complained that eliminating the anonymous veto had placed them in a difficult position. 

Committee Chair Sen. Rob Stafsholts (R-New Richmond) said he was “a little disappointed” that the committee  had to be there working on the issue at all, noting that the state Supreme Court ruling changed the shape of the program.

Testin said there was not a problem with the way that the program functioned prior to the decision and that the Supreme Court ruling is the reason the program is in trouble. 

“By and large, the vast majority of projects that came before the finance committee were approved and enumerated,” Testin said. “We no longer have that authority and put this entire program in jeopardy.” 

Republican lawmakers on the committee suggested that environmental groups that supported the Supreme Court case overturning the anonymous veto process were responsible for damaging the Knowles-Nelson program. 

Cody Kamrowski, executive director for the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation, met a cold reception when he told lawmakers about his organization’s decision to withdraw its support for the bill after the recent amendments.

“Land acquisition is not incidental. It is what makes public access, habitat protection and outdoor opportunity possible in the state of Wisconsin,” Kamrowski said, warning that setting aside more land is particularly important in fast-growing areas where preserving wild land will soon be “gone forever.” 

“Have you thought about where we’re at and the political reality of where this program is at?” Stafsholts replied.

Charles Carlin, director of strategic initiatives for Gathering Waters, an alliance of 40 land trusts around Wisconsin, said his organization is concerned about the elimination of the land acquisition portions of the program and language that would limit habitat management to government-owned land. 

GOP lawmakers on the committee were not receptive to Carlin’s pleas, especially since his  organization was part of the Supreme Court case as a co-plaintiff.

“Do you as an organization regret intervening in that lawsuit knowing where we’re sitting here today?” Sen. John Jagler (R-Watertown) asked.

Carlin said Gathering Waters is “incredibly proud of the work” the group  did on the lawsuit. He noted that there were more than two dozen projects blocked by the committee in the first two years of Evers’ term. 

“I don’t agree with the framing of the question that we are here today because of the Court decision,” Carlin said. “We are here today because of an apparent reluctance to come together and make a bipartisan compromise to keep the program moving forward.”

“I will happily go before the public any day to talk about why projects should always move forward with a democratic process, and that all of our decisions in government should be transparent and open to public scrutiny,” he added.

Stafsholts disagreed. 

“I think that 100% of the reason we’re sitting here today is because of that lawsuit… you can’t sit there silently and watch something dramatically reduce the ability to have stewardship in Wisconsin and then come back here and beg for it.” Stafsholts said. 

Testin said the lawsuit is the reason he and Kurtz had to “bend over backwards” and “move heaven and Earth” to get a bill advanced in the Legislature. 

After the hearing, Carlin told the Examiner he wasn’t expecting to be challenged on his group’s participation in the lawsuit during the hearing. He questioned Republican lawmakers’  characterization of  the “anonymous objector” system as good governance. He also said that Republicans could simply work together with Democrats to pass a bill that continues the program, which has long enjoyed broad, bipartisan support. Instead, Republicans are presenting an ultimatum that they will only consider a bill that has majority Republican support. 

“This is what is politically possible right now, if we only rely on the votes of Republican legislators,” Carlin said, noting that all 60 Democratic legislators signed on as cosponsors to a Democratic proposal and the authors of that proposal, including Habush Sinykin, have said they want to work with Republicans. “Compromise is an absolute necessity in the Senate… If lawmakers were willing to work across the aisle — and they don’t even have to meet in the middle, they just have to make some meaningful progress towards supporting the core functions of the program — then there would be absolutely no problem getting this across the finish line,” he said. “The problem is only there if lawmakers insist on it being a partisan bill.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

“The issue is not whether we remember the past, because we don't have a memory problem, we have a mobilization problem," Pastor Treyvon J. Sinclair of Christ the King Baptist Church said during his keynote address. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin’s Legislative Black Caucus kicked off its annual celebration of Black History Month in the Capitol rotunda Tuesday with a ceremony that included the playing of drums by One City School students, a group rendition of  “Lift Every Voice and Sing” — the Black National Anthem — and Rep. Supreme Moore Omokunde (D-Milwaukee) pouring libations to honor ancestors.

Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee), the chair of the caucus, said the event was a moment to “honor and celebrate the rich tapestry of Black history, a story woven deeply into the fabric of our nation.” 

“Black history is the cornerstone of understanding, empathy and unity. By embracing the full scope of our history, we equip our youth with the knowledge to foster a multicultural, just and informed society,” Drake said. “The words that resonate deeply with me: you don’t truly love America unless she has made you cry. Our love for our nation is not just rooted in its triumphs but also in the lessons learned from its flaws and challenges. It is through acknowledging our past that we pave the way for a more united and equitable future.”

Pastor Treyvon J. Sinclair of Christ the King Baptist Church delivered a keynote address, telling the crowd gathered in the Capitol that Black history did not start in a textbook.

“It started in a courtroom. It started in cotton fields. It started in a jail cell or in church spaces. It started anywhere Black people were told, ‘You don’t belong.’ We said, ‘Well, if you don’t want to make room for us, we’ll build our own.’ We don’t celebrate Black History because life is good. We celebrate it because life was brutal,” Sinclair said. “Memory became our resistance. Education became our rebellion. Faith became our fuel.” 

Sinclair called on Black Wisconsinites to organize to fight for stronger communities and progress.

“Division in our community is intentional… They don’t fear anger, but they fear our agreement. Because history knows that when Black people get organized, systems get nervous. When Black people get united, laws get rewritten. When Black people get strategic, empires get uncomfortable,” Sinclair said. “The issue is not whether we remember the past, because we don’t have a memory problem, we have a mobilization problem. We know the names, we know the dates, we know the quotes, but the question is, can we build something in the future worthy of the blood that was shed in the past?”

“Our ancestors didn’t survive for us to be comfortable. They survived for us to be courageous. They’ve survived for us to be builders. They survived for us to be free enough to fight for somebody else,” Sinclair said.

The Legislative Black Caucus plans to host its “State of Black Wisconsin” later this month in conjunction with its Black advocacy day in the Capitol. The lawmakers plan to unveil their annual policy agenda, which will take into account feedback from a statewide tour the caucus did last year.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Wisconsin State Capitol. Control of the state Assembly and Senate will be at stake in the 2026 November elections. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

It is still early in a significant election year for Wisconsin, but the story of its state legislative races is “beginning to emerge,” John Johnson, a research fellow in Marquette Law School’s Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education, told the Wisconsin Examiner in a recent interview. Among  the developments helping to shape it are recently announced retirements of two Senate Republicans and campaign finance reports that show a Democratic advantage in the Senate and a Republican advantage in the Assembly. 

State Senate retirements and fundraising 

Republicans currently hold an 18-seat majority in the 33-seat state Senate, where the 17 odd-numbered seats will be up for election this year. Democrats need to win two additional seats in the state Senate to flip control of the body.

Lawmakers have slowly started to announce their plans. On Monday, Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater), who has served in the Legislature since 1991 and is one of the most conservative lawmakers in the state Senate, announced he will not run for reelection. He said in a statement that the “time has come for a new fighter to take on the mission of preserving life, liberty and pursuit of happiness” for residents of Senate District 11. 

“It has been one of the greatest honors of my life to serve in the Wisconsin State Legislature representing the people of Southern Wisconsin,” Nass said. “I have always been bipartisan in my scorn of fiscal mismanagement and bureaucratic overreach regardless of whether the Republicans or Democrats were in charge, since the affliction of Big Government is a disease that infects both parties in Madison.”

His district leans Republican. The three Assembly districts within his are represented by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) and Rep. Tyler August (R-Walworth). 

Nass is the second Republican legislator to announce his  retirement in recent weeks. 

The State Senate Democratic Committee (SSDC), the fundraising arm of the caucus, said in a statement that his announcement “is yet another proof point that Republicans are expecting to lose control of the Senate in November” and are confronting the “reality of a Democratic majority.”

The SSDC has been laying the groundwork to flip the chamber over the last year, especially over the summer. In its recent campaign finance report, the SSDC reported raising $771,870 — more than two times what its Republican counterpart brought in — between July 1 and Dec. 31. According to the SSDC, that’s the most the committee has ever raised in a non-election year.

“Senate Democrats have the message, the fair maps, and the candidates to win a majority in November, and these fundraising numbers are proof of that,” the SSDC said in a statement. It ended the period with a $446,605 cash balance. 

The Committee to Elect a Republican Senate (CERS) reported raising $306,674 during the fundraising period. It spent $21,249, and ended the period with $728,682 cash-on-hand. 

The first Senate retirement announcement this year came from Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), who represents Senate District 5. The district includes portions of Milwaukee County, encompassing West Allis and Wauwatosa, and Waukesha County, including Pewaukee, Brookfield and Elm Grove. 

Hutton’s exit is significant, Johnson says.

“That’s an essential target for Democrats to win if they want to take a majority of the state Senate,” Johnson said. “The Democrats have also recruited a quite strong challenger there.” 

Hutton said in a statement that the decision was “very difficult” but that “increasing personal and professional obligations have made it clear that stepping aside is the right decision at this time.” 

“I look forward to continuing to work hard in this final year and beyond to push for more needed reforms that streamline government, address affordability for families, support law enforcement and increase access to quality education, healthcare and economic opportunity for all Wisconsinites,” Hutton said. 

Hutton had reported raising $24,325 in his December campaign finance report, which included a $20,000 contribution from himself. 

The Democratic candidate running for Hutton’s seat, State Rep. Robyn Vining (D-Wauwatosa), who has served in the Assembly since 2019, raised $98,913 since her Senate campaign launched in July and had $114,471 cash-on-hand, according to her campaign finance report.

Vining raised $83,403 from individual contributions. The SSDC provided over $30,000 in in-kind contributions, including wages for campaign staff, consulting and printing. She is the only candidate in the race since Democrat Sarah Harrison, a Brookfield businesswoman, dropped her bid due in part to poor fundraising. 

Johnson said Vining is a strong candidate for Democrats because she is an Assembly incumbent, who has represented one-third of the state Senate district and has a proven track record of winning parts of the district.

Johnson tracks races across the state, but said “most of them don’t quite have the clarity of the 5th Senate District in terms of who the candidates will be.”

Incumbents Johnson said, have about a 4-point advantage in reelection races.

“A seat that would otherwise be like 50-50, you’d expect the incumbent to maybe get 52% in the last cycle,” Johnson said – resulting in a 52-48, 4-point win for the incumbent. “In 2024, it was worth a little bit more for Republicans than it was for Democrats.”

There are three other Senate districts considered targets.

Senate District 21 encompasses part of Racine County, including the northern part of the city, and part of Milwaukee County, including Franklin, Hales Corner, Greendale and Greenfield.

The incumbent, Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), has served in the Senate for the last decade. He hasn’t announced yet whether he’ll run for reelection. 

After the recent retirement announcements of other Republican lawmakers the SSDC began pushing for Wanggaard’s  retirement: “Good news comes in three… C’mon @Vanwanggaard, you can do it!” the SSDC account posted on X. 

Johnson says that of all the Senate districts, SD 21 changed the most — meaning Wanggaard’s incumbency advantage is smaller than that of other incumbent candidates. 

“He has the fewest constituents who were previously represented by him and his district, which means that his incumbency advantage is worth less than it would be under his district as it previously existed,” Johnson said.

In recent campaign finance reports, Wanggaard reported raising $36,461 in the latter half of 2025 and having $46,319 in cash on-hand.

The Democratic challenger in the district is Trevor Jung, who is the city of Racine’s transit director. He reported raising $133,512 and ending the period with $129,265 in cash on-hand.

Another key district is Senate District 17, which encompasses Iowa, Lafayette, Green, Crawford and Grant counties as well as parts of Dane County and where longtime Republican incumbent Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) is outraising his SSDC-endorsed challenger.

Marklein, who is the co-chair of the powerful Joint Finance Committee and has served in the Senate since 2014, reported raising $194,137 during the recent campaign finance filing period, of which $148,549 came from individual contributions. He reported spending $23,441 and having $741,753 in cash on-hand.

Rep. Jenna Jacobson (D-Oregon), who was first elected to the Assembly in 2022, reported raising $118,243, spending $4,741 and having $113,888 in cash on-hand at the end of the period. 

There are also two other Democratic candidates running: Corrine Hendrickson, who raised $13,081, spent $10,021 and had $3,059 in cash on-hand, and Lisa White, who reported raising $12,202, spending $15,966 and having $2,764 in cash on-hand. 

Senate District 31 is also considered a key district for legislative control. There, Democrats are seeking to protect incumbent Sen. Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick), who has served in the Senate since 2018. The district represents the entirety of Eau Claire County and parts of Dunn, Trempealeau and Chippewa counties.

Smith faces a challenge from Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp), who was elected to the Senate in 2022, moved to stay in his district when legislative maps were redrawn and recently moved back to the area that is now represented by Smith. Smith reported raising $86,123 during the latter part of the year and having $153,493 in cash on-hand. James reported raising $42,817 during the period. He spent $3,355 and has $61,234 in cash on-hand.

“I would say the edge is still to Jeff Smith in that race, but less so than if he were against someone who is a political unknown,” Johnson says. 

Johnson also says he thinks total spending in each contested Senate race this year could easily reach $1 million.

Assembly GOP bring in $4 million haul as Dem challengers start emerging

Republicans currently hold a 54-seat majority in the 99-seat state Assembly. Democratic lawmakers need to hold all of their current seats in the Assembly and pick up five additional seats to flip the Assembly. 

Johnson says Democrats have a path but only if they “run the table” of competitive races. 

“There are demonstrably enough voters in those [key] districts who will vote for a Democrat, so that’s the optimistic case for Assembly Democrats. The optimistic case for Assembly Republicans is that Assembly Republican candidates tend to be more popular than other kinds of Republicans, and so that’s what they’re going to be counting on,” Johnson said. 

The Republican Assembly Campaign Committee (RACC) outraised its Democratic counterpart, bringing in over $4 million during the most recent reporting period, with the majority of the total coming from two GOP megadonors. 

The committee reported raising a total of $4,210,809 and spending $42,351 and ending the year with $5,241,793 in cash on-hand. Billionaire donor Diane Hendricks gave over $1 million to the RACC in the latter half of 2026 and another billionaire, Elizabeth Uihlein, donated $3 million. 

The Assembly Democratic Campaign Committee (ADCC), the fundraising arm of the Assembly Democratic caucus, raised $1.44 million during the reporting period. According to the ADCC, the overall total it raised in 2025 — $1.78 million — is the most the committee has ever raised in an off-election year. 

The ADCC’s top donors included venture capitalist and LinkedIn cofounder Reid Garrett Hoffman, who gave $175,000, David Hall of Pewaukee, who gave $150,000, and Lynde Uihlein, who gave $100,000 (She also gave $100,000 to the SSDC).

Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) said in a statement that the fundraising numbers show that “voters are fed up with the partisan games from Legislative Republicans and ready for change” and a Democratic trifecta is within reach. She said they are working to make investments, hire on-the-ground staff and invest in incumbents’ campaigns to set Democrats up for success this year. 

With all 99 seats up for election in the Assembly, the candidate fields are also still taking shape. 

Democrats are investing early in the districts they need to protect. State Rep. Steve Doyle (D-Onalaska) reported raising $1,007,842 and $1 million of that was contributed by the ADCC.

“Just kind of shocking,” Johnson said of Doyle’s campaign finance report. “But he’s the most vulnerable Democrat.”

Doyle was first elected to the Assembly during a May 2011 special election and has been reelected since. He won another term in office in 2024 by just 223 votes against the Republican candidate.

One key district to watch is Assembly District 51, where incumbent Rep. Todd Novak (R-Dodgeville) recently announced that he will run for reelection.

Johnson said Novak is a candidate who “really, punches above his weight as a Republican in that district.”

“There have been a lot of years that Democrats thought they could win it, and Democrats all across the rest of the ticket won in that district, but Novak keeps on winning there,” Johnson said, adding that Novak is “probably one of the most moderate Republicans in the Assembly.” 

According to his campaign finance reporting, Novak raised $22,475 during the period and had $29,934 in cash on-hand. The majority of the funds — $20,000 — came from a contribution made by the RACC on Dec. 31.

Novak highlighted his work with Democrats in his press release, including with Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, to secure permanent funding for the Office of School Safety and to secure mental health funding for the UW system. He said that in another term in office he would work to address “affordability, budget responsibly and reduce tax burden, improve healthcare access and costs, and continue supporting our schools.” 

“Working across the aisle for common sense solutions is how I’ve always approached governing. We’ve been able to accomplish a lot to help address affordability, reduce the tax burden, support education, and reduce healthcare costs,” Novak said in a statement.

Johnson says the thing that may tip elections in these close seats are candidates’ personal connections to voters.

“There’s not a lot of daylight between members of the same party on any election these days, but these seats are close enough… that even a little bit of daylight — even a little bit of a, well, I’m mad at the Republicans, but I know Todd Novak. Like, we go to the same events. I see him talk. I trust him personally’ — even if that’s just a few 100 people, that can be the difference,” Johnson says.

With the support of the ADCC behind him, Ben Gruber, a Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Conservation Warden and President of AFSCME Local 1215, launched his campaign to challenge Novak last week. 

He criticized Novak and Marklein at his campaign launch, saying that Republican lawmakers’ decisions to not provide adequate funding to schools in the area have hurt the community. 

“I grew up here, and we’re raising our kids here. I want our kids to have the same opportunities we did growing up. The reality is because of incumbents like Todd Novak and Howard Marklein they don’t have those opportunities,” Gruber said when he announced his campaign. “In 2019 when my oldest daughter was ready to go to kindergarten, she was faced with a 90-plus minute bus ride to get to kindergarten twice a day because the incumbents defunded our public education in Wisconsin and our local elementary school closed in 2018.”

Gruber said he would advocate for working class families if elected to the Assembly. 

“We see the same story play out across this district every single day,” Gruber said. “Our communities are hurting. Schools are closing. Our ambulances are often unstaffed and our police departments are closing. We can do better for our communities.”

The ADCC has announced several other Democratic challengers in recent weeks including: 

• Marathon County Board Supervisor John Kroll is running for AD 85. The district is currently represented by Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston) won the district with 53% of the vote in 2024. 
• Oak Creek Mayor Dan Bukiewicz launched a campaign for AD 21. The district is currently represented by Rep. Jessie Rodriguez (R-Oak Creek), who won the district with 51% of the vote in 2024.
• De Pere School Board Member Brandy Tollefson is running for AD 88. The district is currently represented by Rep. Benjamin Franklin (R-De Pere), who won the district by 220 votes in 2024. 

While Johnson said he thinks incumbency and fundraising will matter in the races, he said one of the biggest factors that will sway state legislative races will be a person who won’t be on the ballot at all.

“The most important thing will be, if the candidate has a D or an R after their name,” Johnson said. While candidates’ relationships with voters in their districts are important, many people don’t have that kind of personal contact and will be “making their mind up about …what they think about Donald Trump, and they’re going to go in and they’re going to vote based on that feeling, I’m confident.”

State legislative races will appear on voters ballots in November alongside an open race for governor, congressional races as well as other statewide and local races.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

WisconsinEye livestreamed a press conference on Monday morning. (Screenshot via WisEye)

WisconsinEye, the state’s nonprofit that livestreams and archives government meetings and legislative sessions, restarted its coverage Monday after lawmakers approved a $50,000 cash infusion for the short term and as they continue to work on a longer term deal. 

The organization, which has been providing streaming services in the Capitol for nearly two decades, halted its coverage about seven weeks ago due to financial and fundraising difficulties. Its leaders turned to state lawmakers for help. The Legislature and Gov. Tony Evers had already set aside $10 million for WisconsinEye, but with a fundraising match requirements the service was unable to meet.

WisconsinEye is now back online, broadcasting a Monday morning press conference and with plans to stream Tuesday legislative activity after the Joint Committee on Legislative Organization (JCLO) voted unanimously via paper ballot to provide $50,000 to the organization to resume its February coverage. According to a memo on the vote results, the costs will be divided equally between the Senate and the Assembly.

“WisconsinEye Public Affairs Network is operational for the month of February. We invite you to enjoy the benefits of State Capitol coverage and the program archive,” a message on the website states.

An Assembly committee is also preparing to consider a bill Tuesday that would provide a longer term solution for the organization. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) and Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) announced that they had found a bipartisan legislative solution, which had yet to be considered by the Senate, about two weeks ago.

Under the Assembly proposal, the match requirements for the $10 million would be eliminated and would go to establishing an endowment fund for WisconsinEye. The interest from the endowment would help pay for the organization’s operational costs. Lawmakers said that since the interest won’t cover all of its costs, WisconsinEye will still be responsible for raising some money for its operational costs.

According to the bill draft, WisconsinEye would need to add four additional members to its board of directors who would be appointed by each legislative caucus leader, focus its coverage primarily on official state government meetings and business, provide free online public access to its live broadcasts and digital archives as well as submit an annual financial report to the Legislature and the Joint Finance Committee. The board appointees would not be allowed to be current legislators.

The bill also states that if WisconsinEye ceases operations and divests its assets, then it must pay back the grants and transfer its archives to the Wisconsin Historical Society.

The Assembly State Affairs Committee plans to consider the bill during a public hearing Tuesday afternoon and is scheduled to vote on it immediately following the hearing.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Protesters gather in downtown Milwaukee to voice opposition to the actions of federal immigration agents. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

Hundreds of people marched up State St. Friday from the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus to the Wisconsin State Capitol to protest federal immigration enforcement in Minnesota and across the country.

The anti-ICE protest was part of a day of action across the country organized in reaction to the recent killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good by federal agents in Minneapolis, and the ongoing federal crackdown in Minnesota. Friday’s national shutdown — a day of no school, no work and no shopping — was called for by student groups and immigrant rights advocates in Minnesota.

“What do we want? ICE out. When do we want it? Now,” protesters bundled in coats, scarves, gloves and hats chanted as they marched in the 13-degree weather.

“This month, I watched our neighbors in Minneapolis fight ICE on days colder than this one with love and solidarity,” Halsey Hazzard, a co-chair of Madison Area Democratic Socialists of America and a UW-Madison library employee, told the crowd gathered on the steps of the Capitol. Hazzard said the Trump administration “fears” people “coming together, reaching out to one another and learning that love is stronger than fear.” 

Dozens of businesses in Wisconsin’s capital city showed solidarity by closing up shop or donating proceeds to advocacy groups in Minnesota and Wisconsin. 

People carried signs expressing their opposition to the actions federal immigration agents have  taken in Minnesota and elsewhere, including detaining children. “Children aren’t criminals. Trump is,” one sign declared.

Recently, the Trump administration came under fire for its detainment in Minnesota of 5-year-old Liam Ramos and Vice President J.D. Vance defended the action. Ramos remains in a detention facility in Texas.

“No fear! No hate! No ICE in our state!” the Madison marchers chanted.

“Immigrants Make America Great,” another sign stated.

One sign called out the only Republican in the open race for governor of Wisconsin, stating “Tom Tiffany Likes ICE.” Tiffany, the congressman who represents the Northwoods, said in the wake of the shooting of Pretti, who was an ICU nurse from Green Bay, that he would work with local, state and federal law enforcement to “remove criminal illegal aliens.” He urged Minnesota leaders to do the same.

“Cooperation is how you avoid tragic consequences. Deporting illegal aliens is how you make America safer. And waiting for the facts is how you avoid escalating the situation,” Tiffany said.

Pretti’s death prompted protests across the country, including in Green Bay, last weekend. 

Once the group made it to the Capitol, a number of speakers criticized the Trump administration and called for the elimination of ICE.

“Today, we are standing together to demand defund ICE,” Hazzard said.

“Defund ICE,” protesters echoed. 

“Not another dollar for ICE to terrorize our communities. We must strip ICE of its funding for both enforcement and detention. Abolish ICE. End the occupation of Minneapolis and all other cities,” Hazzard said.

A big crowd descends on Milwaukee’s Cathedral Park

Hundreds of people raised their voices in Milwaukee on Friday in opposition to a federal immigration crackdown in Minnesota. Trudging through  a  fresh coat of snow,  protesters streamed into Cathedral Square Park by the dozens. Activists from various local groups charged the crowd with a short round of speeches before taking to the streets for a march. 

Chanting “move ICE, get out the way;” “no ICE, no KKK, no Fascist USA,” and the names of Renee Good and Alex Pretti — two Minneapolis residents who were killed in separate incidents involving federal agents — the marchers filled the streets of downtown. The crowd of people of all ages from  young children to older seniors, passed the Federal Building of Milwaukee and City Hall before returning to the park. 

No violence, conflicts, or destruction occurred. A single drone was seen hovering over the march, and police presence was minimal.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE