The property tax and school funding package negotiated between Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) passed the Assembly Wednesday night in a bipartisan vote, but died in the Senate after three Republicans joined all the Democrats in voting against the measure.

After the failed Senate vote, Evers criticized the legislators, and U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, the presumptive Republican gubernatorial nominee, for killing his deal.

“Wisconsin’s kids and schools aren’t going to get the investments they desperately need this year because Tom Tiffany and a few Republican and Democratic lawmakers chose to blow up a bipartisan plan to invest in our K-12 schools, lower property taxes, and help working families afford rising costs, all because they’d rather do what’s best for the next election than what’s right for the people of our state,” Evers said. “So many Wisconsinites feel left behind, frustrated, and disillusioned by politics these days because they think a lot of politicians in the Capitol are only here to serve themselves. And, today, they’re right.”

But Senate Majority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) said that if her caucus wins a majority in November, they will work to deliver relief to Wisconsinites with a better process.

“If Democrats are in the majority, I promise we’re going to steer a course to a Wisconsin in which our economy works for everybody, where schools are sufficiently funded and health care is affordable and accessible, and those decisions will be made out in the open,” she said. “And we will have robust discussions, and let’s be honest, arguments. What’s happening today is so reckless, so completely reckless. If we are in the majority, we will lead with compassion, strength, tolerance, collaboration and fiscal responsibility that brings security, not bankruptcy, to future generations.”

The late Wednesday night votes followed more than nine hours of deliberation. Although Democrats in both chambers had panned the bill, 10 Assembly Democrats voted yes when the roll call arrived, after an amendment by Republicans that included disaster relief funds for parts of the state damaged during last year’s August floods and expanded a property tax cut for disabled veterans. The final Assembly tally was 61-32.

Despite the amendment, however, the Senate, meeting more than six hours after it was initially scheduled to convene, voted 18-15 against the bill. Republican Sens. Rob Hutton, Steve Nass and Chris Kapenga joined the entire Senate Democratic caucus in opposition.

Assembly Republicans talk up deal

The  funding package announced this week by Evers, Vos and LeMahieu, all of whom are retiring this year, was held up for hours Wednesday afternoon while lawmakers worked to get enough votes in the Senate. 

During hours of debate in the Assembly Wednesday morning, Republicans were self-congratulatory about their bipartisan deal-making and appeared poised to pass the bill on a largely party line vote. But in the Senate, where Republicans hold a slimmer majority, Kapenga (R-Delafield) and Nass (R-Whitewater) signaled their opposition to the bill from the start, forcing the authors to try to persuade the two Republican holdouts or peel off Democrats.

Tiffany also opposed the bill and was in contact with state lawmakers about their votes this week.

Democratic lawmakers, frustrated that they were left out of the negotiating process while Evers made a deal that could give a lifeline to an Assembly Republican caucus — which polls show could be on the cusp of losing their majority  next year — criticized the deal-making process and complained that it was a “Band-Aid” solution for the structural problems facing the state’s schools and homeowners. 

“I know you’re all standing up and congratulating yourselves on giving more money to schools, and yes, that is good, but you don’t get a prize for boarding up a window that you broke in the first place,” Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay) said. “This proposal is a turducken. A turkey that was put together by a bunch of lame ducks, by a Republican Legislature that is too chicken to confront the structural affordability and education issues facing this state.”

Republicans meanwhile repeatedly touted the bipartisan nature of the deal, the special education funding and property tax relief that they say will return the state’s budget surplus to the people. Several of the chamber’s most vulnerable Republicans, including Reps. Todd Novak (R-Dodgeville), Pat Snyder (R-Weston), Bob Donovan (R-Greenfield), Benjamin Franklin (R-De Pere) and Shannon Zimmerman (R-River Falls), were repeatedly given the microphone to tout their support for the bill. 

“It is about compromise. It is about balance,” Zimmerman said. “This is balanced government that we’re witnessing here today. I applaud Gov. Evers for working with us to advance this, and what you’re hearing is, ‘but it’s not great.’ It’s not great today. I’ll take good.”

Republicans also frequently said the bills would help Wisconsinites manage the economic strains currently facing the state — without noting that the administration of President Donald Trump, through its tariffs and war in Iran, are largely the cause of that financial pressure. 

“I think that sometimes some of the arguments that I heard from the other side, people need to remember, we are not congressmen. We are not U.S. senators,” Franklin said. “We are state representatives. And the focus should maintain on the state of Wisconsin what we’re doing here.”

The legislation would have added $85 million to reimburse local school districts for the cost of special education in the current school year and $230 million for the 2026-27 school year. A Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo estimated the additional funding would raise the state’s reimbursement rate this year to 42.7% and for 2026-27 to 50%, but added that the actual rate “could be higher or lower,” depending on actual costs.

When Wisconsin’s 2025-27 budget was signed in July, schools were told they would get 42% of their special education costs reimbursed for the current year and 45% in 2026-27. But in November the Department of Public Instruction announced that special ed costs and enrollment had both increased, so the first round of payments would only cover 35%.

Along with the additional special ed funding, the bill increased state aid to public schools by $302.5 million. Because of state revenue limits on school districts, the new state aid “would provide property tax relief but not additional resources for school districts,” according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo.

The bill gave the state technical college system an additional $50 million in state aid starting in the 2026-27 school year, also to replace property tax revenue, not increase trade school budgets.

The legislation included a $300 state income tax rebate for individual taxpayers whose state tax bill was at least that much in 2024.

It also would have made tip income and overtime pay exempt from state income taxes, mirroring federal tax policies that have been enacted under President Donald Trump.

On the Assembly floor, Democrats argued that the package would turn the current surplus into a budget deficit within three years, that the tax rebates would barely be a drop in the bucket for struggling Wisconsinites and that the poorest residents of the state would get no relief. 

Rep. Angela Stroud (D-Ashland) noted that for the median homeowner in Wisconsin, the property tax relief would amount to just $8.91 per month. 

“That’s less than two gallons of gas today,” Stroud said. “Who knows how much gas will cost by then?”

Republicans repeatedly touted the bipartisan nature of the negotiations between Evers and Republican leadership, mocking the Assembly Democrats for not being kept in the loop while accusing them have having a “meltdown,” a “temper tantrum,” “Trump Derangement Syndrome” and putting a “knife” in Evers’ back for not supporting the deal. 

“Let’s find a consensus, because the people of Wisconsin expect us to do better than to just stand up and shake our fists,” Vos said. “Maybe today, some of [the Democrats] will be persuaded by their own governor. Believe it or not, I actually was, and I feel like I’m probably a more harsh critic than the people on the left. So if people on our side are willing to listen and compromise, why can’t you? Why can’t people on the left just one time put aside politics and say, ‘let’s do the right thing.’”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A group of former University of Wisconsin officials and one lawmaker said better communication is key to building trust among Wisconsinites and overcoming disinvestment in the university as federal and state funding declines.

“The challenges [the higher education system] faces are on multiple fronts: ideological, financial, social professional,” said Michael Bernard-Donals, president of Public Representation Organization of the Faculty Senate (PROFS) and a professor of English and Jewish Studies at UW-Madison. “Much of the public doesn’t trust higher ed anymore or at least doesn’t think it’s worth the price. Costs have increased. The economy is changing, and the job market is shifting and colleges are a useful political punching bag for populists. The compact between the federal government and the universities… has broken down, maybe irreparably, and all of this has made navigating the internal politics of the institution that much harder.”

A 2025 Gallup poll found that confidence in U.S. two- and four-year higher education institutions was up slightly to 42% from a record low of 36% in the previous two years.

During a Wednesday panel discussion featuring a Democratic state representative as well as two former UW employees, much of the conversation centered around how universities and colleges need to improve their communication with Wisconsinites and their political leaders in order to build investment. 

Rep. Angela Stroud (D-Ashland), who serves on the Assembly Colleges and Universities committee and formerly taught at Northland College, said that it has been “stunning” to her to see the politicization of universities, but it is important that they figure out how to “change the discourse on what higher ed means to the state.”

Stroud said she sees some lawmakers grappling with knowing the importance of higher education when it comes to jobs and economic development, while also making “politically useful” attacks on higher education. 

“Those two things don’t go together very well,” Stroud said. 

In recent years, the relationship between the Republican-led Legislature and the UW system has been marked by disagreements over cutting the system’s budget versus investing in it, debates over DEI and the First Amendment and most recently, the firing of the UW System President Jay Rothman.

Raymond Taffora, emeritus vice chancellor for legal affairs at UW-Madison and former chief legal counsel for Gov. Tommy Thompson, listed the issues that he views as most  affecting higher education including diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts, the cuts to federal funding that institutions are facing, changes to student visas due to the Trump administration, concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom and uncertainty over changes in leadership. 

Addressing the recent tumult over the Rothman firing, Taffora questioned “how could the Board of Regents… decide to remove the president of the university and not designate an interim president of the system?” After the firing, the regents announced that Chris Patton, UW’s vice president for university relations, would serve as acting executive-in-charge prior to the appointment of interim president. 

“It’s not the way to lead a university,” Taffora said.

Greg Summers, an employee of the Milwaukee-based marketing agency BVK and emeritus provost at UW-Stevens Point, said part of the challenge for colleges is that while colleges do well communicating internally, communication with the general public could be better.

“Lots of colleges do a really good job communicating with their stakeholders, but that communication is very narrow. It tends to be very transactional in nature,” Summers said. “Institutions like to talk about themselves. They like to talk about recruitment — getting students to enroll at those institutions, because that’s incredibly financially important. They also talk a lot about getting donors to donate to their campuses, but there’s not a lot of conversation as an industry about the public common good that higher ed brings to American life.” 

Summers said the field of higher education needs to come up with a strategy to speak to the American public with one voice. He said that is the goal of his ad agency’s campaign called “Why College Matters.” It is a free public service campaign, he said, that any college and university can use.

“The campaign that we have created we think resonates with exactly the stakeholders that we need to reach: rural Americans, people without college degrees and political conservatives,” Summer said, adding that those groups  have been among the most skeptical of higher education in the last 10 or 15 years. 

Summers said the campaign gets at the idea of communicating better with Americans about why faculty research matters to them.

“Higher ed cannot solve its problems and its trust issues with communication alone. That’s absolutely true, but higher ed has a real communication problem and has to get outside of its usual bubble and usual audience and to talk to people in different ways about the value that they bring to American life,” Summers said. 

Stroud, noting her prior research on concealed carry and her job as a Democratic lawmaker, said she understands how difficult it is to have conversations that don’t become partisan and divisive.

“I’m just a partisan hack now in many people’s minds. They’re just completely dismissive of the evidence on gun violence… It’s going to be challenging to figure out how to enter into these conversations without being seen as being reduced to just partisan hackery,” Stroud said, adding that walking that line is essential for these conversations. 

Taffora said UW faculty and staff could improve on putting their expertise to use out in the state and living out the “Wisconsin Idea.” He brought up Walter Dickey, a faculty member of the University of Wisconsin Law School who also served as the Wisconsin Department of Corrections secretary under former Gov. Tony Earl, as an example.

“There was a time when the University of Wisconsin faculty were not only noted for their expertise, but their expertise was deployed,” Taffora said. “The best way to showcase expertise is… to get busy and to lend your expertise.”

Taffora said the showcasing needs to extend to lawmakers and decision makers and it could be beneficial for the UW system to further expand its lobbying efforts. 

“If that was a private company, you’d have batteries of lobbyists that would descend on the Legislature to tell stories. Interacting with decision-makers is key” Taffora said. “The story is a good one to tell, but it has to be told with facts and it has to be told with a degree of humility, not condescension.”

Correction: This story has been updated to correct the name of the college that Rep. Angela Stroud taught at. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE