A group of Wisconsin parents, students, teachers, school districts and education advocates are suing the Legislature over the current school funding formula, arguing that the system does not meet the state’s obligation to provide educational opportunities to all students as required by the state Constitution. 

The suit was filed Monday evening in Eau Claire County Circuit Court by Madison-based nonprofit Law Forward and the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the state’s largest teachers union.

The plaintiffs in the suit are led by the Wisconsin Parent Teacher Association and include five school districts, including Adams-Friendship Area School District, School District of Beloit, Eau Claire Area School District, Green Bay Area Public School District, Necedah Area School District, the teachers union of each respective district, eight Wisconsinites including teachers, parents, students and community members, as well as the Wisconsin Public Education Network. 

The lawsuit names the state Legislature, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg), and the Joint Finance Committee and its Republican and Democratic members. 

Jeff Mandell, co-founder of Law Forward, told reporters during a press call Tuesday that schools have been doing their best to fully prepare students to be productive and active members of society but that the current funding system is making it almost impossible. 

“These folks are not magicians. They are not Rumpelstiltskin. They cannot turn straw into gold, and we do not have what we need for our schools to thrive,” Mandell said. 

Mandell noted that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has previously considered the way schools are funded in the 2000 case Vincent v. Voight. 

The Supreme Court found in the Vincent v. Voight case, which was initiated by a group of Wisconsin students, parents, teachers, school districts, school board members, citizens and the WEAC president, that the state’s funding formula was constitutional. 

The majority opinion indicated that the Legislature had articulated that an equal opportunity for a sound basic education is “the opportunity for students to be proficient in mathematics, science, reading and writing, geography and history, and for them to receive instruction in the arts and music, vocational training, social sciences, health, physical education and foreign language, in accordance with their age and aptitude.” The opinion also concluded that as long as “the Legislature is providing sufficient resources so that school districts offer students the equal opportunity for a sound basic education as required by the constitution, the state school finance system will pass constitutional muster.”

Mandell said that in the 25 years since the ruling “things have gotten considerably worse, and we are at a point where, for many districts … they are on the verge of crisis.” 

The lawsuit lays out the difference between how Wisconsin schools were funded in the  1999-2000 school year versus the 2023-2024 school year. School funding 25 years ago was comprised of 53.7% state funds, 41.6% local funds and 4.7% federal funding; in 2023-24, the mix had changed to about 45% state, 43% local and 12% federal funding.

“The fault for this crisis lies not at the feet of students, parents, families, teachers, staff, administrators, school districts, or elected board members,” the lawsuit states. “The shortcomings of our public schools are directly traceable to the Legislature’s consistent failures to ensure adequate state funding of public schools and to legislate a rational school finance system that meets constitutional mandates.”

The lawsuit states that school districts across the state are “facing financial crisis” because of expiring federal funding and stagnating state dollars. 

The suit also details the state’s history of funding schools and the increasing reliance on property taxes through school referendums to try to keep up with costs. It also details the ways that the state’s school choice program, which was launched in the 1990s and has grown exponentially over the years, has reduced funding for public schools. 

Law Forward was at the helm of the 2024 lawsuit that ended with the Wisconsin Supreme Court declaring the state’s legislative maps an unconstitutional gerrymander and is in the process of challenging the state’s Congressional maps. 

Mandell said the plaintiffs in the suit include a geographically diverse group to highlight how this is a statewide problem. He said it is possible that other districts will reach out about joining the case and they will “figure that out as we go.”

Joshua Miller, an Eau Claire Area School District parent, told reporters that “the dire need for adequate funding has been made clear to the lawmakers, but they have refused to hear our pleas” 

“The situation is sad, absurd, and it’s infuriating,” he said. “Wisconsin’s current school finance system is broken and this lawsuit, which I am proud to join, would be a way for the courts to force legislators to make a new system that works and actually meets the needs of the students of Wisconsin.” 

Tanya Kotlowski, a plaintiff in the case and superintendent for the Necedah Area School District, said her district is going to referendum for a third time this spring to help fund its operations. In April, the school district plans to ask voters to approve a four-year operational referendum that would provide a total of $5.8 million in order to maintain the district’s current level of educational programming as well as operate and maintain the district. 

Kotolowski noted that she and other school leaders have spent a lot of time advocating on behalf of their schools to lawmakers for additional funding. During the recent state budget cycle, school funding was one of the top issues brought up by members of the public at listening sessions held by the budget committee.

“Despite all of those efforts, the funding system has not kept up with the needs of our children and the needs of our current realities,” she said. “Our local referendum, some would argue or could argue, has been 100% funding that mandated legal, constitutional obligation.”

According to the lawsuit, the Necedah Area School District has directed over $6.6 million — all of its operational referendum revenue — to its special education fund over the past eight years.

Kotlowski said her district has been underfunded by $13 million for special education costs over the last decade, and that if funding had kept pace with inflation, the district wouldn’t need to go to referendum this year.

Mandell said that referendum requests used to be fairly rare and used when a school district had large projects.

“What we’re seeing now is a system where school districts have no choice but to go to referendum regularly to try to fund basic operations to keep the lights on and to keep payroll flowing, and it’s really a tremendous problem,” Mandell said. 

Referendum requests that allow schools to exceed state-imposed revenue caps through approval from voters became a part of Wisconsin’s school funding equation in the 1990s. Lawmakers implemented school revenue limit caps as part of an effort to control local property taxes. 

The revenue limits used to be tied to inflation, but that was ended in the 2009-11 state budget, leaving increases up to the decisions of state lawmakers and the governor, who have not provided predictable increases budget to budget.

The recent state budget did not invest any additional state dollars into school general aid, in part because lawmakers were upset with Evers’ 400-year partial veto in the prior state budget. The partial veto extended a $325 per pupil school revenue limit increase from two years to four centuries, giving, schools the authority to bring in additional dollars from state funds or property tax hikes. Without the state providing additional funding, many schools have turned to raising property taxes using the school revenue authority to help support their operational costs. 

“I understand there’s a big political debate about that veto, and about that mechanism, we don’t have a position on this. What we’re saying is that the school funding mechanism is not sufficient and is unconstitutional, even with that,” Mandell said.

The state budget did provide additional funding for special education reimbursement, but recent estimates show that the amount of funding will not be enough to provide reimbursement at the promised rates of 42% and 45%. Increasing special ed funding is part of ongoing negotiations between legislative leaders and Evers. 

The lawsuit comes as the legislative session is coming to a close. 

The state Assembly adjourned for the session last week and the Senate will wrap up next month, but the only bills with a chance of becoming law are those that have already passed the Assembly. 

Even if a deal arises out of the current negotiations on property taxes and school funding, Mandell said the problem identified in the lawsuit will still exist. He noted that a proposal from Evers included $450 million towards school general aids — an amount that is $2 billion less than what schools would get if inflationary increases had continued in 2009. Mandell said Evers is not named in the suit because it is the Legislature that is chiefly responsible for appropriating funds. 

“This is not a problem that arose overnight. It has developed over decades, and it’s not a problem that will be solved overnight,” Mandell said. “Any deal that the Legislature and the governor might reach… is not going to solve the problem.”

Mandell said that the plaintiffs in the lawsuit  are not looking for the court to decide on a specific amount of money that the state should provide to schools, but instead want the court to “fully explain and delve into how the finance system works, what the needs are, and to make some of those decisions.”

The lawsuit asks the court for a judgement that declares the Legislature hasn’t fulfilled and cannot “shirk” its constitutional obligation to fund schools at a sufficiently high level to “ensure that every Wisconsin student has an equal opportunity to obtain a sound basic education that equips them for their roles as citizens and enables them to succeed economically and personally in a tuition free public school where the character of instruction is as uniform as practicable.” It calls for the current funding system to be ruled invalid. 

The lawsuit calls for relief that will “establish a schedule that will enable the Court — in the absence of a superseding state law, adopted by the Legislature and signed by the governor in a timely fashion — to adopt and implement a new school finance system that meets all relevant state constitutional guarantees.” 

Mandell said, however, that it likely won’t be up to the court to decide exactly how the state should fund schools. 

“There are almost an infinite number of options for how the Legislature could do this, but what we’re asking the court to do is to look at it and say to the Legislature, not good enough…. then we do expect that the Legislature and the governor will do their jobs,” Mandell said. 

Mandell said that ideally a ruling would give lawmakers the opportunity to make changes in the next budget cycle. The budget process will kick off again in January 2027, after the state’s fall elections which will determine the make-up of the Senate and Assembly as well as choosing a new governor. 

If the Legislature and the governor don’t fix the problem, Mandell said, the court should step in again.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

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

State Rep. Tip McGuire (D-Kenosha) argues in opposition to a bill that would repeal a 2023 partial veto by Gov. Tony Evers that extended an annual $325 per-pupil increase in public school revenue limits by 400 years. (Screenshot/WisEye)

The Legislature’s powerful budget committee voted on party lines Tuesday to endorse a bill repealing Gov. Tony Evers’ 2023 partial veto that enables Wisconsin public school districts to raise their revenue limits by $325 per pupil per  year for the next four centuries.

The measure was the only legislation to get any significant debate during the two-hour session of the Joint Finance Committee, even as its outcome was a foregone conclusion: an 11-4 vote with only Republican support.

The state Senate version of the bill, SB 389, has already passed that chamber on a party-line 18-15 vote. The Assembly version is AB 391.

The finance committee weighed in on the bill — along with the rest of nearly two dozen items it voted on Tuesday — under the Legislature’s rule requiring the panel to consider any legislation that appropriates money, provides for revenue or relates to taxation.

The committee’s action clears the bill for the Assembly floor, where it is likely to pass on a party-line vote before going to Evers to be vetoed.

In the 2023-25 Wisconsin budget, lawmakers agreed to increase schools’ revenue limits for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 school years by $325 per pupil each year.

In signing the budget Evers used his partial veto power to strike two digits and a dash from the years, extending the annual revenue limit increases through 2425. The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in April 2025 that the maneuver was within Evers’ partial veto powers. The change didn’t funnel more money to schools automatically, but instead raised the annual ceiling in how much revenue they are allowed to collect.

The 2025-27 state budget approved in July 2025 did not include any general aid increase, so property taxes are the only source school districts have to pay for the additional $325 per pupil they were authorized to receive by Evers’ 2023 veto. The  increase is not automatic; school budgets are controlled by individual school boards.

At a media session before Tuesday’s meeting and during the debate, the Joint Finance Committee’s co-chair, state Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam), blamed Evers’ 2023 veto for property tax hikes around the state.

Past state budgets have increased school aid, sometimes with “record levels, massive increases,” Born said shortly before the committee’s vote.

But Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison) said that after adjusting those increases for rising costs, per-pupil funding is $3,400 below what it was in 2009. “We’re actually giving them less money in inflation-adjusted terms,” Roys said.

Democrats pointed to the spate of school funding referendum questions over the last two years in which school district voters have agreed to raise their own property taxes to cover funding gaps.

“Referendums were never meant to fund the core operations of our schools,” said Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee). “Yet we see districts year after year leaning more on referendums.”

Rep. Tip McGuire (D-Kenosha) told Republican lawmakers that they could have prevented property tax hikes if they had increased general state aid to public schools in the current budget. By not doing so, “you chose to put that pressure on property taxpayers,” he said.

Tax credits after stillbirths

The only other item that produced any debate Tuesday was SB 379/AB 373, creating a state income tax credit for the parents of a stillborn child. As originally created the legislation called for the tax credit — $2,000 for a couple filing jointly or $1,000 for each parent if filing separately or if they are unmarried.

As originally drafted the legislation calls for a refundable tax credit. A taxpayer whose total income tax liability is less than the amount of the credit would get a direct payment for the balance of the credit that exceeds their tax bill.

For example, a person who qualifies for a $1,000 credit but whose state income tax bill is $600 would get a check for the additional $400.

Finance Committee co-chair Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) introduced an amendment Tuesday that would make the tax credit non-refundable. For a person with a tax bill of $600, the $1,000 credit would only be worth $600, while a person with a tax bill of $1,500 would get the full $1000 credit, reducing their tax bill to $500.

“It’s very expensive in this country to go through labor, delivery and postpartum, and when someone has a stillborn baby they still have all these expenses,” Roys said. “When you say you’re not making this credit refundable, you’re hurting the lowest-income people.”

The amendment would save the state $200,000, changing the tax credit’s cost from $600,000 to $400,000, a Legislative Fiscal Bureau analyst told Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay). That would “make it less useful,” Andraca said.

While the amendment passed 11-4, with all the Democrats on the panel voting against it, the amended legislation passed on a unanimous 15-0 vote.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

UW-Milwaukee. (Photo | Isiah Holmes)

The Joint Finance Committee unanimously approved the release of $53 million for the University of Wisconsin system to support campuses struggling with declining enrollment. 

The UW system will have $26.5 million in the 2025-26 fiscal year and $26.5 million in the 2026-27 fiscal year that can be used for grants to campuses. The funds were initially set aside for the system in the recent state budget. 

In each year, $15.25 million will be distributed to campuses with declining enrollment over the last two years and $11.25 million will be distributed through a formula dependent on the number of credit hours undergraduates complete.

In 2025, enrollment across the system’s 13 campuses remained stable with about 700 more students enrolled in the fall when compared to 2024. The slight increase represents the third consecutive year of increased enrollment. 

UW President Jay Rothman thanked lawmakers and Evers in a social media post and said the release of the funds “affirms our shared commitment to student success and Wisconsin’s workforce.” 

“Together, we’ll keep more talented graduates in Wisconsin and ensure our universities are delivering the education students deserve and parents expect,” Rothman said.

At the time of the budget process in June, committee co-chair Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) said the funds would “put the thumb on the scale” to help campuses with declining enrollment over the last decade including UW Platteville, which is in his district.

Lawmakers did not debate the release of the funds, though Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto), who voted to release the money, noted that the system has had a growing number of staff members even as enrollment has declined.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE