Gov. Tony Evers vetoed a handful of Republican education bills Friday including one that would have put limits on school districts’ ability to seek property tax increases at the ballot box by requiring that the districts submit financial documents on time before going to referendum. 

As Wisconsin school districts continue to rely on property tax increases sought through referendum to keep up with costs, Republican lawmakers have been seeking ways to put up roadblocks to those efforts.

AB 457 would have required the Department of Public Instruction to certify that schools are in compliance with requirements to submit financial information to DPI before they could seek a referendum. If a district is not in compliance, the school board would be prohibited from adopting a resolution to hold a referendum and any resolutions adopted or referendum passed without the certification would be void.

Republican lawmakers introduced the bill in reaction to the passage of Milwaukee Public Schools $252 million recurring operating referendum in April 2024 and the news that broke afterward, in May 2024, that the district was months late in submitting required financial reports. 

Evers said in his veto message that he objected to lawmakers encroaching on local decision-making and trying to limit referendum requests. He noted that Wisconsin has limits on the books already including restrictions on the dates and frequency with which districts can seek a referendum and blocking districts with a failed referendum from accessing increases to the per-pupil “revenue ceiling” provided by the state for three years.

In April, 74 referendum requests, which, combined, come to more than $1 billion for operational costs, will be on ballots across the state. The requests come as Wisconsinites have become increasingly concerned about rising property taxes with the most recent Marquette Law School poll finding that 58% of Wisconsinites say they are more concerned about property taxes, while 41% are more concerned about funding for K-12 public schools.

Evers noted in his message that he has sought billions in state funding to help with general school aid, special education, mental health supports and other education issues with lawmakers often rejecting his proposals. Evers and lawmakers have also been discussing providing additional funding to schools as well as property tax relief, though they have not yet come to an agreement.

“Funding our schools is a responsibility that the state and local partners share; local property taxes go up when the state fails to do its part to meet its obligation. If the Legislature is purportedly concerned about the rate at which communities across our state are going to referendum and families are being forced to raise their own property taxes to keep their school doors open, it should start by approving the investments in our schools that our kids need and deserve.” 

Disruptive students

Funding also came up in Evers’ veto of AB 614, which would have created expanded definitions in statute for the types of behavior that would have allowed for the removal of students from class due to disruption or violence. The bill would have also required that all parents in a classroom be notified if a student was removed and that the situation that cut into classroom time be described to them. 

GOP lawmakers said the bill would have helped teachers by giving them clarity on what they could do when there are serious disruptions happening in the classroom, though Democratic lawmakers and disability rights advocates criticized the bill, saying the definitions in the bill were too broad and the provisions included could stigmatize and ostracize students.

Evers said lawmakers should have invested additional resources in behavioral and mental health supports to ensure that students and teachers have the help they need in school. 

“Our kids are struggling perhaps now more than ever — the solution is not to micromanage schools with unfunded mandates from Madison, it is to invest in ensuring schools across our state have the resources they need to support our kids,” he said in his veto statement. 

Evers also vetoed AB 518, which would have created a carve-out for private choice schools to allow them to hire someone with a short-term substitute teaching permit issued by the Department of Public Instruction even if the employees do not hold at least a bachelor’s degree. Employees at private choice schools do not need a DPI license, but they are required to have at least a bachelor’s degree.

Evers said he was vetoing the bill because he objects to “further lowering educator credential requirements, especially in private choice schools, where professional requirements for the individuals charged with educating our kids are already much lower than their public school district counterparts.” 

Authors of the legislation had said the bill would help with hiring challenges that the schools face.

“Our state’s challenges recruiting, training and retaining talented educators cannot be solved by lowering state standards for the individuals entrusted with educating, empowering and inspiring our kids,” Evers said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Gov. Tony Evers vetoed Republican bills Friday that would have limited state agencies’ rulemaking abilities, prohibited “rights of nature ordinances,” eliminated “race-based” programs within the University of Wisconsin system and allowed for telehealth care providers with licenses from out of state to practice in Wisconsin. 

Bills to limit rulemaking rejected

A set of bills that sought to limit agencies’ rulemaking abilities were also vetoed. Republican lawmakers introduced the legislation, called the “Red Tape Reset,” alongside the Wisconsin  Institute for Law and Liberty, a conservative legal advocacy group. 

SB 275 would have required agency scope statements, which are necessary to start the rulemaking process, from being used for one proposed rule and would have set a six-month expiration period for the use of a scope statement for an emergency rule. 

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

SB 277 would have implemented a seven years expiration date on all administrative rules unless a rule is adopted again through an agency process. 

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

The bills were introduced in light of recent decisions by the Wisconsin Supreme Court that have limited lawmakers’ ability to oversee the rulemaking process, including by blocking rules indefinitely.

“The Legislature asks me, in effect, to undo this decision, enabling the Legislature to go right back to indefinitely obstructing the People’s Work and returning state government to inaction, delays and gridlock,” Evers said in his veto message for SB276. “I decline to do so.”

Rights of Nature prohibition

Evers also vetoed SB 420, which would have prohibited local governments from passing ordinances protecting the rights of nature. GOP lawmakers introduced the measure after Green Bay and Milwaukee pursued symbolic ordinances meant to protect the rights of bodies of water to be kept clean. It is a concept that originates from provisions in constitutions of some South American countries and Native American tribes such as Wisconsin’s Ho-Chunk Nation.

Evers said that he objected to lawmakers “continued efforts to restrict and preempt local control across our state” and GOP lawmakers’ failure to acknowledge that “climate change is affecting our Wisconsin way of life…” and efforts to “make it even harder for Wisconsin to respond to and mitigate the effects of our changing climate.”

“I have always believed the state should be a partner in — and not an obstacle to — the important work our local partners do every day,” Evers said. “ I trust our local governments and the Tribal Nations of Wisconsin to know best how to address environmental concerns within their communities and how to protect the natural resources that are vital to local health, economies and quality of life.”

UW free speech penalties

SB 498 would have barred UW campuses from being able to prohibit speakers from campus and prohibited the establishment of “free speech zones” among other actions. Republican lawmakers supportive of the bill said the goal was to protect free speech and academic expression.

Violations of the provisions in the bill could have resulted in financial penalties including a two-year tuition freeze for more than one penalty on a campus within a five-year period. 

The UW system already implements a policy that establishes its commitment to freedom of speech and expression along with some accountability measures including conduct and due process mechanisms to address violations.

This was the second iteration of the bill. The idea was first developed by Republicans after a controversial survey of UW campuses, which had an average response rate of 12.5%, found that a majority of students who responded said they were afraid to express views on certain issues in class.

Lawmakers introduced the proposal this legislative session just six days after the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, saying it was just one example of conservatives having their voices silenced on college campuses. 

Evers said in his veto message that he disagrees with lawmakers’ attempts to interfere in the day-to-day operation of the state’s higher education system. 

“Students, faculty and staff across university and technical college campuses in Wisconsin continue to discuss diverse ideas and perspectives, engage in thoughtful and difficult discussions with each other, grapple with complex issues and challenges, navigate conversations with people who have different experiences and backgrounds, and hear from other students, as well as faculty and staff, who have viewpoints from across the political spectrum,” Evers said. “I have no doubt this will continue to be the case on our campuses — as it should — so long as Republican lawmakers remain unable to inflict their radical and purely ideological agenda on higher education institutions across Wisconsin through legislative efforts like this.”

Evers also vetoed SB 652, which sought to eliminate “race-based” programs offered through the state’s higher education system, including the minority teacher loan program and minority undergraduate grants, by refocusing the programs to focus on “disadvantaged” students. The bill defined the term “disadvantaged” as applying to people who have “experienced any unfavorable economic, familial, geographic, physical or other personal hardship.”

Evers said he objected to lawmakers trying to create “new censorship rules that are designed to police language on our higher education campuses and ultimately prevent our state’s higher education institutions from acknowledging students come to our college campuses with unique and diverse backgrounds, experiences, and needs.”

The bill is part of GOP lawmakers’ attempts to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion efforts throughout the state.

Another bill related to the UW system, SB 532, was also vetoed. It would have prohibited UW institutions from charging students additional fees for exclusively online courses.

“If lawmakers sincerely cared about the soaring costs of higher education for students on Wisconsin campuses, they would have approved any number of the countless measures and investments I have proposed over my tenure to ensure the University of Wisconsin System can survive and thrive without having to frequently rely on raising tuition or increasing various fees for students and families,” Evers said.

GOP health care bill vetoed 

SB 214 would have allowed out-of-state health care providers to provide telehealth care services in Wisconsin if they possess a credential as a health care provider issued by another state. 

Lawmakers who supported the bill said it would help Wisconsin by increasing the number of health care providers able to help Wisconsinites. Evers said in his veto message, however, that he was concerned about allowing providers to practice in Wisconsin if they are licensed in another state that has lower standards.

“[The bill] fails to address the fundamental concern I have that out-of-state licensing requirements may not be as rigorous and thorough as the standards we have in Wisconsin,” Evers said. “I object to having out-of-state health care providers potentially bypass the high standards we have for instate licensed health care providers to protect patients and families.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE