“Frankly, Robin Vos’ move to prevent us from circulating this petition and his refusal to bring this bill to the floor is pathetic," Assembly Minority Greta Neubauer (D-Racine). (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

The Wisconsin Assembly met for its final floor session of 2025 Wednesday, where Democratic lawmakers sought to pass a bill that would extend Medicaid coverage for new mothers for one year after the birth of a child, though Republicans blocked it. Bills to encourage school district consolidation and make changes to elections laws passed.

Republicans block Democratic efforts to get a vote on postpartum Medicaid bill 

Wisconsin is one of two states in the U.S. that have not taken the federal government’s postpartum Medicaid expansion, and Democratic lawmakers hoped to begin the process of changing that during the floor session. 

The bill, which passed the Senate in April on a 32-1 vote, would allow eligible mothers to keep their Medicaid coverage for a year postpartum. Currently in Wisconsin, mothers only get 60 days of coverage if they don’t otherwise qualify for Medicaid.

Assembly Democrats planned to employ a rarely used Assembly rule to pull the bill out of committee and bring it up for a vote. Under the rule, if 50 lawmakers sign a petition, a bill can be brought to the floor. Democratic lawmakers hoped to have the chance to convince some of the Republican cosponsors of the bill to sign on.

Before that could come to fruition, however, the Assembly clerk notified Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) of the plan, Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) told reporters. 

Republicans moved the bill from the Assembly Rules Committee, where it had sat since May, to the Assembly Organization Committee — triggering a rule that says a  withdrawal petition on the bill cannot be circulated for 21 days. 

“This is a great effort by the Speaker to prevent this important bill from getting a vote on the floor,” Neubauer said. 

Neubauer said she didn’t know why the clerk notified the Assembly Republican leaders.

“There had been some conversation with staff about the timeline for [the petition], but I’m not really sure why it happened the way it did,” Neubauer told reporters. She said that Rick Champagne, director of the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau, told the lawmakers that notification should have happened when they turned the petition in with the 50 signatures, not prior to the petition circulating.

All 45 Democratic lawmakers are cosponsors of the bill as are over 20 Republicans, but the bill has been hung up in the Assembly due to opposition from Vos, who has said in the past that he doesn’t support expanding “welfare.” The bill only needs a simple majority of 50 votes to pass the Assembly.

Neubauer read out the names of the Republican cosponsors during the press conference. 

“These are legislators who believe that this bill should become law, so they say, but they have been bullied by their speaker into not pushing for a vote on this bill on the floor,” Neubauer said. “Frankly, Robin Vos’ move to prevent us from circulating this petition and his refusal to bring this bill to the floor is pathetic, and when moms in Wisconsin and their babies are put at risk, their health and well-being is put at risk, because they do not have adequate health care in the year after they have given birth, it will be Robin Vos’ fault.” 

The Republican lawmakers on the bill include Reps. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston), Jessie Rodriguez (R-Oak Creek), Scott Allen (R-Waukesha), Elijah Behnke (R-Town of Chase), Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc), Bob Donovan (R-Greenfield), Cindi Duchow (R-Delafield), Benjamin Franklin (R-De Pere), Rick Gundrum (R-Slinger), Nate Gustafson (R-Omro), Dean Kaufert (R-Neenah), Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay), Rob Kreibich (R-New Richmond), Scott Krug (R-Rome), Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc), Dave Maxey (R-New Berlin), Paul Melotik (R-Grafton), Jeff Mursau (R-Crivitz), Adam Neylon (R-Pewaukee), Todd Novak (R-Dodgeville), Kevin Petersen (R-Waupaca), David Steffen (R-Howard), Rob Tusler (R-Harrison), Chuck Wichgers (Muskego), Rob Wittke (R-Caledonia), Rob Summerfield (R-Bloomer), Calvin T. Callahan (R-Tomahawk), Clint Moses (R-Menomonie) and Joy Goeben (R-Hobart). 

Democratic lawmakers also tried to introduce amendments to a bill on the floor that would have extended postpartum Medicaid coverage, but those were also blocked by Republicans.

“It shouldn’t be this hard to get Republicans to do the right thing. Wisconsin women deserve access to quality, affordable health care and that includes postpartum care,” Vining said before she was cut off by Speaker Pro Tempore Kevin Petersen who said she wasn’t on topic.

“This is a disgrace,” Vining yelled out.

School district consolidation 

Democratic and Republican lawmakers split over a package of bills that would encourage school districts to consolidate. Republican lawmakers argue the bills are necessary due to falling enrollment, which they say is the reason for school districts’ financial struggles. 

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) said at a press conference that the bills would address declining enrollment and the cycle of repeatedly going to referendum to raise money from local taxpayers that school districts are in. Schools in Wisconsin have seen a drop of about 53,000 students over a decade, from the 2013-14 to 2022-23 school years.

Of Wisconsin’s 421 school districts, about two-thirds are struggling with declining enrollment with preliminary numbers from the Department of Public Instruction showing that enrollment for public school districts in the 2025-26 school year fell by about 13,600 students. Total enrollment across Wisconsin school districts is about 759,800 this year. 

“Districts with declining enrollment receive less in state aid and to make up for that revenue loss. We’ve seen a growing cycle of constant referendums with varying degrees of success,” Nedweski said. “Wisconsin taxpayers are frustrated with our public school system… They are frustrated with districts continuously asking them to raise their own taxes, frustrated that their generous investments have not produced matching results.”

Democrats blamed Republicans for school districts having to go to referendum, noting that state aid has not kept pace with inflation in nearly two decades. They also said Wisconsinites have not been asking to close schools. Neubauer said Republicans were “proving how disconnected they are from our constituents.”

“Wisconsinites do not want to close school buildings, break up their communities, force their kids to ride on the bus for hours a day, or lose their local sports teams. Wisconsinites want us to fund our public schools,” Neubauer said. “Republicans’ push to close schools misses the mark completely, and Wisconsinites deserve better… Don’t close schools, fund them.”

According to the Department of Public Instruction, Wisconsin is spending the least, proportionally, in state revenue that it has ever spent on schools under the current funding formula. About 32.1% of state general purpose revenue goes to state general aid to schools, while that percentage used to be around 35%.

Rep. Angelina Cruz (R-Racine) noted during floor debate that many school districts lost state aid this year. Data from DPI for the 2025-26 school year shows that of 421 districts, 71% — or 301 districts — will receive less state aid this year compared to the prior year and 26% will receive more.

“For 15 years, Wisconsin has intentionally divested in our public schools while expanding privatization through voucher schemes,” Cruz said at a press conference, adding that Racine Unified School District has felt the loss of revenue acutely.

According to DPI data, about 15% of Racine’s revenue limit — or $43 million — goes to pay for voucher program participants.

“Since 2011, our community has gone to referendum three times —  in 2014, 2020 and 2025 — asking residents to raise their own property taxes to provide what the state has refused to fund,” Cruz said. “Even after those referendum paths, our district has been forced to close and consolidate schools including… the school where I grew up as a teacher. This is not about a lack of community commitment. It is about the state failing its constitutional obligation to provide free and as nearly uniform as practicable schools to children… Let me be clear, if there is money to close public schools, there is money to fund public schools.”

Rep. Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay) rejected claims that the choice program is to blame.

“That’s a tiny little percentage of this,” Kitchens said. “It’s happening because of declining birth rates, of people choosing to have less kids, waiting long to have kids. I can’t imagine how anybody can look at our 421 school districts that we have right now and think that in 30 years, that’s going to be sustainable.”

Kitchens also emphasized that the bills are voluntary.

“Let’s trust our communities to work through these things and decide for what’s best for themselves,” Kitchens said. 

Republicans also rejected Democratic lawmakers’ insistence that the state needs to invest more money in its public schools. 

“[Democrats] want us to believe that if we simply spend more on K-12, people will flock to Wisconsin and increase enrollment,” Nedweski said. She compared Wisconsin to New York, which according to the New York Focus spends more per public school student than any other state. “Their outcomes are no better than ours, and they are losing students even faster than Wisconsin. As they elect more communist leaders like [New York City Mayor-elect] Zohran Mamdani, I suspect more New Yorkers will rapidly leave tax-and-spend Democratic Socialist policies. More spending is not a strategy, it’s denial.”

Nedweski said the bills are a “lifeline” for school districts that can use it and will encourage savings and “invest in increasing opportunities for students who may not otherwise have access to things like AP classes, world languages, advanced tech ed and specialized learning services.”

The six bills in the package:

• AB 644 would increase additional state aid to schools that consolidate in 2027, 2028 and 2029 to $2,000 per pupil in the first year. Under current law, school districts receive additional aid when they consolidate. For the first five years after consolidation, a consolidated school district gets $150 per pupil. In the sixth year, the aid drops to 50% of what the school district received in the fifth year and in the seventh year, the aid drops to 25% of the fifth year. It passed 53-44 with Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) joining Democrats against the bill. 

• AB 645 would provide grants of up to $25,000 to groups of two or more school district boards for the costs of a feasibility study for school district consolidation or whole grade sharing agreements. It passed on a voice vote.
• AB 646 would launch a study of Wisconsin’s school districts, looking at current school district boundaries, potential school district consolidations, existing school district facilities, staffing levels and salary scales, the population of school-age children in each school district, and revenue limits and current overall spending. It passed 54-43 along party lines.

• AB 647 would create a four-year grant program for school districts that enter into a whole-grade sharing agreement, agreeing to educate students at one location. School districts would get up to $500 per pupil enrolled in a single grade. It passed 54-43 along party lines.

• AB 648 would help create new supplemental state aid for consolidated school districts to  address differences in school districts’ levies when they merge. The measure is meant to address concerns of higher property taxes for residents of low-levy districts when a consolidation takes place. It passed 54-43 along party lines.
•  AB 649 provides the funding for the bills, including $2.7 million for grants to schools that enter whole-grade sharing agreements, $3 million to provide state aid to offset levy limit differences and $250,000 for feasibility studies. It passed 54-43 along party lines.

Vote on online sports betting bill delayed

After being fast tracked through the public hearing process, a vote on a bipartisan bill that would legalize online sports betting in Wisconsin was postponed. 

The Wisconsin Constitution requires that gambling in the state must be managed by the state’s federally recognized Native American tribes. Following that requirement, sports betting has been allowed in Wisconsin since 2021, but bets have had to be made in person at tribal casinos. 

AB 601 would expand this to allow for online sports betting anywhere in the state by placing servers running the betting websites and apps to be housed on tribal land; this is known as a “hub and spoke” model. It was introduced in October and received hearings in the Assembly and Senate earlier this month. 

Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August (R-Walworth) said that he still would have had the votes on the bill if it had come up for a vote, but he had conversations with members of his caucus over the weekend that brought new issues to his attention. He would not provide details on what the concerns were, though he said they didn’t deal with issues of constitutionality.

“I’m not going to get into the details of the conversations that I’ve had with members,” August said. “We’re just working through some of that right now, and I’m confident that there’s no rush on this. It’s the right thing for the state, and I’m confident that we’ll get there.”

Neubauer said she planned to support the bill. 

“We know that our tribes in Wisconsin have the right to control gaming in our state, and right now, that’s not happening with online sports betting,” Neubauer said. “I do hope that we pass a bill that puts control of that industry back in their hands.”

The Assembly passed and concurred in a total of over 50 bills. Others include:  

• AB 596 and AB 597, which passed unanimously, would direct $1.9 million to be used for a state grant match program for veterans’ housing. A nonprofit group would need to be participating in the federal program, which currently provides about $82 per day per veteran housed to groups that offer wraparound supportive services to homeless veterans, to be eligible for a state matching funds of $25 per day per veteran. While no one voted against the bills, Democratic lawmakers expressed concerns that the bill would not fill the gaps that currently exist due to the closure of two Veterans Housing and Recovery Program sites earlier this year. 
• AB 602, which would instruct Evers to opt into a federal school choice program, passed 54-44 along party lines. 
• A pair of bills meant to help address students who are disruptive in class passed in 54-43 votes. AB 613 would require principals to provide written notification to parents every time a student is removed from a class and “the quality or quantity of instructional time provided to the pupils in the class is diminished.” AB 614 would add language into state law to say that teachers are allowed to maintain order in the teacher’s classroom, establish and enforce classroom rules, call 911 in an emergency, take immediate action if a pupil’s behavior is dangerous or disruptive and request assistance from school administrators during a disruptive or violent incident.
• AB 207, which would provide information about constitutional amendments to voters including their potential effects, passed on a voice vote.
• AB 312  passed on a voice vote. It would require absentee voting sites to be open for at least 20 hours during the period for voting absentee in-person.
• AB 385 passed in a 55-42 vote with Rep. Lori Palmeri (D-Oshkosh) joining Republicans in favor. The bill would prohibit a political committee, political party or conduit from accepting contributions that are made with a credit card online unless the contributor provides their credit card verification value (CVV) or code and the billing address associated with the card is located in the United States. Republican state lawmakers introduced the bill following efforts by Republicans and the Trump administration to target ActBlue — a Massachusetts-based platform that processes donations to Democratic campaigns.
• AB 617 passed 53-44. Rep. Paul Tittl joined Democrats voting against the bill. It would make a number of changes to elections law, including requiring that alternate absentee ballot sites must be in a building or facility constituting a fixed location and requiring absentee ballots with faulty or missing certifications be returned to voters if they are received seven days before the election. It is similar to a bill introduced last session, but it does not include a provision that would have allowed for Monday processing of absentee ballots. Rep. Scott Krug (R-Rome) said that he is speaking with the Assembly Elections Committee chair about potentially having an informational hearing on Monday processing.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

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

Wisconsin lawmakers are exploring ways to make it easier for school districts to consolidate as they face  declining enrollment and financial difficulties.

There are 421 school districts in the state of Wisconsin and about two-thirds are struggling with declining enrollment. According to preliminary numbers from the Department of Public Instruction, enrollment for public school districts in the 2025-26 school year fell by about 13,600 students, representing a nearly 2% decrease from last year’s estimate. Total enrollment across school districts is about 759,800 this year. 

Reps. Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay), Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) and Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) said during an Assembly Education Committee public hearing Tuesday that declining enrollment is to blame for the financial troubles that schools are facing.

“The districts that are going to referendum all the time. It’s almost always because of declining enrollment. It just gets more expensive per student to educate those kids as the districts become smaller,” Kitchens said. “We’re not telling districts this is what you have to do or what you should do. We’re telling them this is an option for you to consider.” 

Schools in Wisconsin have seen a drop of about 53,000 students over a decade, from the 2013-14 to 2022-23 school years. Kitchens pointed to estimates from the Wisconsin Department of Administration that the population in Wisconsin is projected to drop by 200,000 by 2050, noting it will be largely due to the state’s declining birth rate.

Wisconsin’s school funding system is based in part on per pupil numbers, meaning that if fewer students are enrolled schools receive decreased funding from the state, even if a district’s overall costs may not fall. 

Kitchens said that having 421 school districts is not going to be sustainable in the long term in Wisconsin and questioned whether there is another state that “on a per capita basis has that many” school districts. 

Kitchens said the issue shouldn’t be partisan. He noted that school consolidation is something that the 2019 Blue Ribbon Commission on Wisconsin school funding supported through its  recommendations.

“Many districts have used the referendum process to increase the property tax burden on the local residents to backfill the loss in state aid revenue,” Nedweski said. “Many others have seen them repeatedly fail as property taxpayers are unwilling to raise their taxes to increasingly fund empty schools.” She noted that a recent Marquette Law School Poll found that 57% of participants said they would vote against a referendum request. “There is no referendum that can be passed or law that can be signed to single-handedly reverse decades of birth rate declines to alleviate the stresses of declining enrollment in our schools. It’s clear that a more long-term solution is needed to address these demographic challenges because the status quo is not sustainable.” 

Wisconsin has had a record number of school districts go to referendum to help meet costs. But beyond declining enrollment, public school advocates say the burden on local taxpayers asked to fund their schools through referendum has grown mostly due to the fact that state investments in public schools have not kept pace with inflation for almost two decades. In the most recent state budget, Wisconsin lawmakers provided additional special education funding, but opted not to provide any increase in general aid, leaving increased costs to fall on property taxpayers.

State Superintendent Tom McCarthy noted during the hearing that Wisconsin is currently spending the least, proportionally, in state revenue that it has ever spent on schools under the current funding formula. He noted that about 32.1% of state general purpose revenue goes to state general aid to schools, and that percentage used to be around 35%. He also said the conversation about declining enrollment and costs had to include the acknowledgement that school districts’ revenue limits have been frozen at different points over the last decade, prohibiting school districts from raising more funds unless they go to referendum to ask voters.

Nedweski said the bills would be useful tools and incentives for districts facing decisions about whether to consolidate.

“Buildings do not educate kids, teachers do,” Nedweski said. “By finding efficiencies through voluntary consolidation, districts will be able to reduce overhead and direct resources to the classrooms so that our students can continue to receive a quality education, while taxpayers receive relief on their property tax bills.”

The package of bills would take a number of steps to encourage districts to explore consolidation, including providing financial incentives.

School districts already receive additional aid when they consolidate. For the first five years after consolidation, a consolidated school district gets $150 per pupil. In the sixth year, the aid drops to 50% of what the school district received in the fifth year and in the seventh year, the aid drops to 25% of the fifth year. 

AB 644 would increase that additional state aid to schools that consolidate in 2026, 2027 and 2028 to $2,000 per pupil in the first year. The last six years would be the same as under current law. 

Kitchens said that he thought most school districts would be able to decide within a year whether consolidation is something that they want to pursue. 

“I’m very open in the future to extending that deadline, but I think to get it passed, we need to put a sunset on it, so we’re doing three years,” Kitchens said. 

Dee Pattack, executive director of the Wisconsin School Administrators Alliance, noted that the inclusion of 2026 won’t really be useful for school districts since districts that want to consolidate have missed the opportunity to do so if they haven’t decided by now for next year. She also suggested that lawmakers look at spreading out  the additional aid more gradually, saying that dropping aid from $2,000 to $150 per student creates a cliff.

Kitchens said he would look at amending the timeline included in the bill. 

Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison) noted that decisions about consolidation can be emotional and personal for communities. 

“Public schools are the heart of our communities, oftentimes in rural communities, especially. They’re one of the largest employers. It’s where you have the most celebrations. There’s athletic events that are important to everyone in the communities and so this decision of consolidation is deeply complex. It’s personal for a lot of school districts,” Hong said. 

Hong, who is running in the Democratic primary for governor, questioned whether lawmakers had considered just leaving the decisions on consolidation up to local communities altogether, noting that Wisconsin law favors local control of schools. 

“That’s why it’s voluntary. That’s why we’re offering these tools. It is not mandatory. We know it’s going to be difficult,” Kitchens said, adding that Door County used to be full of one-room school houses until there was a consolidation in 1960. “When they consolidated that and formed Southern Door [County] School District, people were out there with pitchforks. It’s always going to be difficult, but we have to look at the future and what it’s going to be.” 

Kitchens noted that districts are not “clamoring” to consolidate and that the option exists as a last resort for most. 

“There are a few that are, and you’ll hear from at least one of them today that really have reached that point where they know it’s necessary,” Kitchens said. “We’re not hearing districts begging for this.” 

Joe Green, district administrator and director of special education for the Greenwood School District, and Chris Lindner, district administrator for the Loyal School District, testified about the rural school districts’ journey of consolidation, which their school boards are focused on getting done by July 1, 2028. They said it has been an emotional journey as people are attached to their schools and communities, but that it could be the best option for them. 

“It might be the thing that gets us over the hump to consolidation,” Green said of the new legislative proposal. “It might be the funding that our two districts need to put a good plan in front of our communities. It might allow us to do some small projects to make consolidation smoother. There may be small construction, or things that we need to do to retrofit buildings, if that’s the way that our facility studies go. There’s a million different scenarios out there on what consolidation can look like. But without that funding, I mean, honestly, with our two districts $150 bucks a kid is $100,000 — not gonna do much with that… it’s just not going to do much.”

Green said the districts already share bus service and that 50% of their co–curricular activities are shared. They said that the schools began sharing students and staff due to their difficulty finding adequate staff to deliver instruction in rural Clark County in central Wisconsin. 

Lindner said that consolidation could help open up more opportunities for students. “We do drama together. If we did not, we would have five to six students that would not be able to do drama because, you know, can’t do it with five or six kids,” he said. 

Lindner said consolidation could also help save money.

“Our taxpayers are paying a lot of money for our operating referendums,” he said. “We tell communities if we do not start working together more, then we will be losing.”

AB 645 would instruct DPI to provide grants of up to $25,000 to groups of two or more school district boards for the costs of a feasibility study for school district consolidation or whole grade sharing agreements. 

Another bill, AB 647, would have DPI provide four-year grants of up to $500 per pupil enrolled in a single grade to school districts that enter into a whole-grade sharing agreement, agreeing to educate students at one location. 

Felzkowski said that whole-grade sharing is a step before consolidation.

“It lets them test the waters if they ever want to move to full consolidation,” Felzkowski said, adding that middle and high schools may be able to provide more class offerings, including advanced coursework, to students with grade sharing.

AB 648 would help create new supplemental state aid for consolidated school districts to  address differences in school districts’ levies when they merge. The measure is meant to address concerns of higher property taxes for residents of low-levy districts when a consolidation takes place.

AB 649 provides the funding for the bills, including $2.7 million for grants to schools that enter whole-grade sharing agreements, $3 million to provide state aid to offset levy limit differences and $250,000 for feasibility studies. 

McCarthy of DPI noted at the hearing that there are already several legal and mechanical supports in place to encourage consolidation, and that even with those, the last major consolidation that took place was on July 1, 2018. Two K-8 districts merged to become the Holy Hill Area School District in Richfield. 

McCarthy of DPI said the slate of bills being proposed are “largely building from past efforts to support and to incentivize consolidation” and that the agency doesn’t view them as “a brand new door that’s being opened up” to solve problems.

The final bill in the package, AB 646, would study what changes should be made to Wisconsin’s school districts. Under it, DPI would hire a contractor to conduct a study of Wisconsin’s school districts that looks at current school district boundaries, potential school district consolidations, existing school district facilities, staffing levels and salary scales, the population of school-age children in each school district, and revenue limits and current overall spending. 

McCarthy said the agency is most excited about this final proposal.  He said it is similar to what Vermont has done and addresses some of the factors that are important to consider when consolidating. 

The study would culminate in recommendations for changes to school district boundaries, a survey on the conditions of school district facilities across the state, information on the current and 10-year projection of the population of school-age children in each district and recommendations for school district consolidations that promote efficiency, are geographically feasible and economically viable. 

“We probably owe it to our school partners to take a long look at what are the right geographical boundaries here,” McCarthy said. “As we’re thinking about how to manage this stuff, it might be a good moment in time to slow down and think about how do we sync some of these things up to be a more effective patchwork of schools that are serving our communities?”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Underly was invited by the committee to deliver testimony and answer questions last week, but she sent other representatives, including Deputy Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy, for the agency in her stead on Thursday. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Exmainer)

State Superintendent Jill Underly didn’t show up to answer questions from Wisconsin lawmakers about the process the Department of Public Instruction uses for investigating reports of sexual misconduct by educators and for determining licensing.

Underly was invited by the committee to deliver testimony and answer questions, after a report from The Capital Times last week found that DPI investigated over 200 cases of Wisconsin teachers, aides, substitutes and administrators accused of sexual misconduct or grooming behaviors toward students from 2018 to 2023. Underly sent other representatives for the agency in her stead on Thursday. According to WisPolitics, Underly was out of state to accept an alumni award from Indiana University. 

The conversation surrounding the agency’s handling of sexual misconduct and grooming allegations and licensure was sparked by the CapTimes report, which  detailed a number of questions related to the system the agency uses to track data on cases, suggested the agency wasn’t making information readily available to the public and noted the few resources that the agency has to investigate cases and track information. 

In a YouTube video posted Thursday, Underly said lawmakers, law enforcement, educators and families would need to come to the table to build a “stronger system that protects every child and respects the rule of law.”  

“Let me be absolutely clear: the safety, dignity, and well-being of Wisconsin’s children is — and will always be — our first and most important responsibility,” Underly said. “We investigate every single complaint we receive. These investigations are conducted thoroughly, professionally, and within the legal authority given to us. Licensure actions — whether it is a suspension, revocation, or voluntary surrender — are not made lightly. They are based on evidence, not speculation; on due process, not headlines.” 

Last week, Underly called the report “misleading” in a letter and requested a retraction or correction from the CapTimes. In response, CapTimes Editor Mark Treinen said the paper  stands by the reporting. 

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) announced that she is working on a set of bills in response to the article. 

One bill focuses on implementing a criminal penalty for “grooming” of children by sexual predators in state statute. Nedweski also said she is drafting a bill to require school districts to adopt clear policies outlining appropriate communication boundaries between staff and students and a bill to prohibit DPI  from allowing teachers under investigation for sexual misconduct to surrender their teaching license to avoid further scrutiny. 

Lawmakers expressed concern at Underly’s absence, noting the seriousness of the issue. 

At the start of the hearing, Rep. Mike Bare (D-Verona) said he was “disappointed” by Underly’s absence. 

“I am deeply, deeply disappointed that Superintendent Underly could not bring herself to the meeting,” Nedweski, who chairs the committee, said. “These are very, very serious issues.” 

Nedweski said she had a meeting with DPI staff on Monday, but the Underly never reached out to her to ask to reschedule the hearing. She said she would have gladly accommodated a different date.

“I guess she just couldn’t find it important enough,” she added.  

At a press conference after the hearing, Nedweski, Sen. John Jagler (R-Watertown) and U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who is running for governor in 2026, criticized Underly for her absence. 

“I would call on [Gov. Tony Evers] at this point… do you find this acceptable? Is this acceptable what has gone on here in the state of Wisconsin?” Tiffany asked. “I think it’s time for the governor to call on Jill Underly to either do her job or step aside.”

Tiffany said he would ensure proper investigations and create a public dashboard showing why teachers lose their licenses if he is elected governor. 

DPI representatives and law enforcement discuss lack of “grooming” statute

The hearing began with testimony from Kenosha Chief of Police Patrick Patton, Deputy Chief of Police Joseph Labatore and officer Kate Schaper, who addressed  the difference between investigations conducted by law enforcement and the role of the DPI. 

DPI Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy delivered testimony and answered questions on behalf of Underly and the agency. He was joined by Rich Judge, who serves as DPI’s assistant superintendent of government and public affairs, and Jennifer Kammerud, who serves as the educator licensing director. 

McCarthy began his testimony by laying out the role of the agency in handling sexual misconduct and grooming allegations. He said the agency’s main role is in the state’s licensing system, which is how they can draw attention to people who shouldn’t be in the classroom. 

“When we hear about allegations … we are deadly serious,” McCarthy said. “We use all of the tools that we have available. We do not have subpoena power, but we do attempt to get information from anybody that can support a license investigation case, and given how sensitive these things are, we try to work as thoroughly and quickly as possible.” 

McCarthy noted that DPI typically receives accusations from law enforcement agencies, required reporting from local school districts, complaints from members of the public and from news media reports, which McCarthy said the agency scans frequently. 

Both McCarthy and the law enforcement officers spoke to concerns about the lack of a definition for grooming in Wisconsin state statute.

According to RAINN, grooming is the “deliberate act of building trust with a child, teen, or at-risk adult (such as an adult with a cognitive impairment) for the purpose of exploiting them sexually.”

DPI recommended in its testimony that a definition for grooming should include patterns of flirtatious behavior, making any effort to gain unreasonable access to or time alone with any student with no discernable educational purpose, engaging in any behavior that can reasonably be construed as involving an inappropriate relationship with a student and engaging in any other special treatment not in compliance with generally accepted educational practices.

McCarthy said lawmakers should consider requiring an annual training should they adopt a definition of grooming.

“We need to be reminding folks of the types of behaviors and things that we expect from them. It doesn’t matter what type of school,” McCarthy said. 

Questioning by lawmakers was tense and combative at times. 

Nedweski said she was unclear about why there is confusion over whether grooming can be used to remove a teacher’s license.

Current state law says that a teacher’s license can be revoked due to “immoral conduct,” which is defined as “conduct or behavior that is contrary to commonly accepted moral or ethical standards and that endangers the health, safety, welfare, or education of any pupil.” 

“Do we have to explicitly write the word ‘grooming’ in this law to spell out that grooming is not commonly accepted moral at ethical standards? I tend to believe that most Wisconsinites would think the law is comprehensive. Any kind of behavior that resembles grooming in any definition is already covered there,” Nedweski said. 

McCathy said the statute right now is “vague and ambiguous.” 

“When we find these things we go after them,” McCarthy said. “The department is using all of its authority to put its foot down in the spaces and revoke licenses. We’re doing that in a space right now where the authority doesn’t necessarily back us in every instance.” 

The Assembly Government Oversight, Accountability and Transparency (GOAT) committee voted unanimously to approve a motion to request that Attorney General Josh Kaul provide an opinion on two questions: whether grooming is “contrary to commonly accepted moral or ethical standards” and does grooming “endanger the health, safety, welfare or education” of a pupil. 

Voluntary revocations and information on license status

McCarthy also told lawmakers that they view voluntary surrenders as an important tool for them. He said they will ask educators under investigation to do so throughout the process. 

The agency has noted that it often gives several opportunities for teachers to voluntarily surrender their licenses.

McCarthy said that voluntary surrenders related to a sexual misconduct investigation are most often lifetime surrenders, meaning that in a legal agreement they won’t be able to apply for an educator’s license again.

Revocations and voluntary surrenders are also reported to the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) — a national database that state education agencies can access that includes information about the misconduct. That database is not accessible to the public. 

McCarthy noted that information is available on the DPI website on the status of a teacher’s license, though one needs to know a licensee’s name in order to check. The information will say whether an educator’s license is under investigation, has been revoked or voluntarily surrendered, though it doesn’t include information on why. He said the agency is working with old, rigid software that makes it difficult to add additional information. 

Nedweski said she didn’t “buy” the explanation that the agency was giving.

“It’s remarkable because the Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services can show you the reason for a license revocation for anyone,” Nedweski said, including explanations for manicurists. “It’s easier for me as a member of the public to find out why a cosmetologist lost their license and why it was revoked than it is for me to find out why a teacher license was revoked… Why is it so hard for us to find out critical safety information?” 

The agency requested $600,000 in the most recent state budget process to modernize its online background checks and licensing platform — a request that was rejected by the Republican-led Legislature.

The agency also suggested that lawmakers consider increasing reporting requirements to all school types and all individuals who are present in schools. McCarthy noted that the agency doesn’t have the ability to revoke licenses of people that don’t have to be licensed — including paraprofessionals and teachers in taxpayer-supported private schools. 

Lawmakers said they plan to provide Underly with other opportunities to speak in public forums about the issue. 

Jagler said the Senate Education Committee, which he chairs, will have an informational hearing on Nov. 4 where Underly will be the only invited speaker.

The Joint Audit Committee also noticed a hearing on Nov. 5 to launch an audit of educational licensure revocation, suspension, restriction and investigation at DPI.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Bascom Hall, University of Wisconsin-Madison. (Ron Cogswell | used by permission of the photographer)

University of Wisconsin campuses could be limited in their ability to raise tuition under two Republican bills that received a hearing in the Senate Universities and Technical Colleges committee. One would leverage tuition freezes on campuses as a penalty for free speech violations, while the other would aim to help with affordability for students and families by capping tuition increases.

With the conclusion of the budget process over the summer and a $250 million investment in the UW system, Democratic and Republican lawmakers have recently turned their attention to potential policy changes that could be made to the higher education system in Wisconsin. Democratic lawmakers announced their own proposals for helping with higher education costs last week.

Implementing financial penalties on UW, technical colleges for free speech violations

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) said her bill would enshrine the principle of current University of Wisconsin system policy in law to clarify and protect the First Amendment rights of students, staff and visitors. 

Current UW system policy includes its commitment to freedom of speech and expression along with some accountability measures including conduct and due process mechanisms to address violations. 

A similar bill passed the Assembly in 2023, but failed to receive a vote in the Senate. Earlier versions of the policy were introduced after a controversial survey of UW campuses that found that a majority of students who responded said they were afraid to express views on certain issues in class. The survey had an average response rate of 12.5% across all UW System campuses. 

The latest iteration of the bill was introduced just six days after the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, who has become a recurring point of discussion and debate. Lawmakers passed a resolution this week to honor his life.

Nedweski noted that another survey by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) that found that 35% of students say using violence to stop someone from speaking on campus is acceptable at least in rare cases. The survey included responses from 423 people. 

“It’s clearly even more chilling in light of the recent political assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk on a college campus. When we accept the false premise that speech is equivalent to violence, we allow violence to replace speech as a means of debate… We’ve seen many of our college campuses devolve into marketplaces of fear of certain viewpoints,” Nedweski said. “While Charlie Kirk’s assassination on the college campus is the most extreme example of this, it is not the first time conservatives on campus have been threatened or intimidated for their views.” 

Nedweski said the bill would help restore trust.

“The breakdown in public trust is real. It will only get worse unless our colleges and universities get serious about restoring intellectual diversity on campus, I believe,” Nedweski said. 

SB 498 would bar UW institutions from restricting speech from a speaker if their conduct “is not unlawful and does not materially and substantially disrupt the functioning of the UW institution or technical college.” It would also restrict enforcement of time, place and manner restrictions on expressive activities in public forum spaces, designating any place a “free speech zone,” 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.” 

If an institution is found to violate the provisions by a state or federal court, then it would receive a notice and a person whose expressive rights were violated would be able to bring action against the UW Board of Regents or a technical college board. A plaintiff could be awarded damages of at least $500 for the initial violation plus $50 for each day after the complaint was filed and the violation continues up to $100,000. A plaintiff could also be awarded court costs and reasonable attorney fees. 

Students, employees and campus organizations would have a due process guarantee under the bill. If the due process provisions are violated more than once in a five-year period, a campus would be required to freeze tuition for all students for the following two academic years.

Nedweski said she hadn’t spoken with the UW system about the legislation this session, but she is open to conversations. 

“I’ve expressed it from the start of the session for the UW to come and work with us on this to get to a place where they can be a thumbs up, but I haven’t heard from anyone,” Nedweski said. “They will express some concerns about certain language in the bill and definitions, and I’d like to say today that, of course, the door is still open.”

UW Interim Vice President of University Relations Chris Patton that the system’s concerns with the bills center on the penalties. 

Patton said the penalty of freezing state funding would put the system’s financial health at risk — and potentially compromise the system’s ability to carry out its mission of being a “marketplace of ideas.” 

“Freedom of expression and free speech is not just a constitutional principle. It’s at the very core of what makes our universities thrive,” Patton said. “The First Amendment guarantees this right, and our institutions take seriously our responsibility to uphold it for all students, faculty, staff, visitors and stakeholders at the Universities of Wisconsin. We already have really robust policies and procedures in place.”

Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton), a coauthor on the bill, urged lawmakers to “please understand” that the bill is “not to punish any of our institutions,” but is to “ensure that they’re following what’s already in the Bill of Rights.”

Sen. Chis Larson (D-Milwaukee), the top Democrat on the committee, expressed concern about the aims of the legislation, whether free speech was a top concern that was widespread on campuses and whether the bill could bolster harmful language. 

“I appreciate you guys coming up here to embrace DEI for Republican viewpoints, which this seems to be what this bill is all about — making sure that Republican viewpoints are more represented and encouraged and being inclusive to that,” Larson said. 

“You can call it DEI for conservatism, but there’s nothing in the bill that addresses anything specific to conservatives, liberals, Republicans, Democrats,” Nedweski replied. “It’s free speech protections for everyone.”

Larson noted that he represents the UW-Milwaukee campus and often speaks with students about their concerns and free speech is typically low on the list. He said he hears concerns about affordability and safety more frequently. 

“Other concerns include safety, especially for students who are LGBTQ, students who are of a different race than Caucasian, of their safety on campus, of being targeted with hate crimes,” Larson said. 

Larson also brought up a recent Politico article, which exposed racist messages sent into a group chat of Young Republicans, to ask whether lawmakers thought their bill could encourage that type of speech. 

Larson said he wasn’t concerned with self-censorship that discouraged people from “saying these racist, homophobic, xenophobic, glorification of rape things out in the public, because that is something that in a free and open society should have consequences associated with it.”

“We do not have the exemption for hate speech in our laws and in the First Amendment. It does not exempt hate speech,” Larson said. “It seems to me that this [bill] would pave the way to be able to say, yes, that would be something that is not only allowed on campus, but encouraged.” 

Nedweski said she was not concerned that the bill would “further unhinge people.” 

“We’re all concerned about the political temperature that has risen so high in this country,” Nedweski said. “I don’t have concerns this bill is going to push anybody overboard. The intent is to protect people whether I agree with what their ideas… are or not. I have no association with the group that you’re talking about. I don’t agree with the things that they said. It’s unfortunate that that happened.”

Capping tuition increases

Under SB 399, the UW Board of Regents would be prohibited from increasing undergraduate tuition by more than the consumer price index increase in a given year. 

The bill, coauthored by Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken) and Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Hortonville), was introduced this year after the UW system adopted its third consecutive tuition increase in July. The increases were a maximum of 5% for each campus and were implemented after the recent state budget did not reach the requests the system said would be needed to avoid a hike. 

“With the continued rising prices in almost every area of the economy, some increase in resident tuition is to be expected but we must set common sense guardrails so that any price increases are reasonable, ensuring the UW system remains a cost-effective option for Wisconsin families,” Jacque said. 

Jacque said the recent hike “might be the impetus for the timing this session” but he has seen it as a “reasonable policy” for a while, noting that versions of the bill have been proposed in previous years.

Murphy said he thought the legislation would make it so that lawmakers don’t “have to always be looking” at tuition.

“It’s just up and down and up and down and up and down,” Murphy said. The bill, he added, would help provide a semblance of predictability down the line. “If you have a youngster in the K-12 system and you’re looking at what college is going to cost in the future, you could probably have a good idea of where it is going to go.”

Larson said he found it “noble” what the Republican lawmakers were trying to accomplish with the bill, but asked about why there wasn’t any state contribution included in the bill.

He noted that the portion of state funding that makes up the UW system’s budget has been decreasing over many years. 

“It’s like the cost of groceries,” Larson said, comparing it to “shrinkflation,” a form of inflation where the price of a product stays the same but the size or quantity of a product is reduced. “We’re gonna freeze the cost of a loaf of bread, and then year after year, you’re going to get one slice less, one slice less, one slice less. It will still be the same cost, but you’re getting less. I worry… if you freeze it, we’re going to be getting the equivalent of one slice less every single year in terms of what the deliverable is from the University.” 

Murphy noted that the legislation would just cap increases, not freeze tuition. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A bill restricting referendum proposals comes as school districts continue to rely on funding raised from property taxes through referendum requests, requiring voter approval. A rally calling attention to schools' reliance on referendums in the Capitol in 2025. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.

Wisconsin Republicans want to restrict school districts’ ability to seek referendums if they haven’t turned in financial reports to the Department of Public Instruction on time. 

At a public hearing Thursday, the Assembly Education Committee Thursday heard testimony on a bill drafted in reaction to the historic referendum that voters approved for the Milwaukee Public Schools last year, and that was followed by the revelation that the district was months late in submitting financial documents to the state.

The school district’s tardiness has led to upheaval throughout the district, including the decision to replace the MPS superintendent and additional audits ordered by Gov. Tony Evers.

The education committee also took testimony on a bill that would allow education students to complete their student teacher requirements during the summer and a bill to change curriculum requirements for human development classes if districts offer them. 

Rich Judge,  assistant state superintendent in the Division of Government & Public Affairs for the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI), registered against each bill, but did not provide testimony. The agency has not yet responded to a request for comment from the Wisconsin Examiner about its opposition to the bills.

AB 457, coauthored by Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) and Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), would require DPI to certify schools are in compliance with all applicable requirements to submit financial information to DPI. 

If a district is not in compliance, the school board would be prohibited from adopting a resolution to hold  a referendum. A resolution adopted or a referendum passed without the certification would be void.

“If a district cannot even meet its minimal statutory reporting duties, how can voters trust them to be responsible?” Nedweski asked rhetorically during her testimony. “This bill places no additional cost or burdens on school districts. It simply reinforces accountability and transparency… Trust is the foundation of strong schools and strong communities, and AB 457 helps ensure that that trust is never taken for granted.” 

MPS sought a $252 million recurring operating referendum in April 2024 to assist with staff pay and educational programming costs. The measure passed narrowly, and by the end of May 2024, DPI announced that the district was months late in submitting required financial reports. 

The DPI was still withholding about $42 million from the district as of June of this year due to its late financial reports. 

Nedweski said she didn’t know how many other districts might be late in their financial reporting to DPI. School districts need to be in compliance before they seek a referendum so that voters have adequate information, she said 

“If you’re going to pass a $252 million dollar recurring referendum, I think you should be able to make an informed decision,” Nedweski said.

The legislation comes as school districts continue to rely on funding raised from property taxes through referendum requests, requiring voter approval.

Democratic lawmakers on the committee expressed concern about the potential barrier the legislation could pose.

Rep. Angelina Cruz (D-Racine) noted that there have been a record number of referendum requests t in recent years and that the state Legislature opted not to provide any additional general aid in the 2025-27 state budget. School district leaders have said the lack of state aid will put them in tough positions when it comes to funding, even with the additional aid that the state is providing for special education costs. 

“With the state Legislature putting zero dollars in state [general] aid forward in this last budget to local school districts, we’re going to see that pattern of referendum continuing,” Cruz said. “I’m just concerned that we are creating another barrier in terms of our local public school districts having access to choosing to… fill the gaps that the state is intentionally creating.”

Even with the recent referendum, MPS is still looking at a $100 million budget shortfall and newly hired Superintendent Brenda Cassellius is looking for ways to tighten its budget.

This is not the only bill lawmakers have introduced that would place additional barriers and limitations on school districts seeking referendums. A bill introduced in March would eliminate the ability for school districts to seek recurring referendums, which are ongoing into the future, in part due to Milwaukee’s referendum. 

“Are you saying that people shouldn’t have access to the financial data for school districts before they make a decision to raise their own taxes?” Nedweski replied. 

“Absolutely not,” Cruz said. “I’m seeking clarity in terms of are we trying to create an additional barrier for public school districts, local communities to fund their schools? [The financial reports are] already a requirement by law.” 

Changing human development requirements 

The committee also took testimony on AB 405, also authored by Nedweski, which would change requirements for school districts that offer human development education.

Wisconsin doesn’t require public schools to teach human growth and development, or sex education. If they opt to do so, the state makes recommendations for the curriculum and state law imposes some requirements. Those include presenting abstinence from sex as the preferred choice of behavior for unmarried students, providing instruction in parental responsibility and the socioeconomic benefits of marriage for adults and their children, and explaining pregnancy, prenatal development and childbirth. 

Nedweski’s bill would add to those requirements. If it is enacted, students would have to be shown a “high-definition ultrasound video that shows the development of the brain, heart, sex organs, and other vital organs in early fetal development” and a “high-quality, computer-generated rendering or animation that shows the process of fertilization and every stage of fetal development inside the uterus and that notes significant markers in cell growth and organ development for every week of pregnancy until birth.”

Nedweski said that allowing students to “actually see the real life process of fetal development in action will be more tangible to them than simply reading in a textbook or seeing it in the still diagram or drawing.” 

“We have the resources at our disposal to bring this science into the classrooms, and we should use it to our advantage to give students a stronger educational experience,” she added. 

Nedweski’s bill would also require schools to include a presentation on each trimester of pregnancy and the physical and emotional health of the mother if they opt into teaching on recommended topics. She said this would help address mental health concerns.

“This bill simply builds off of those existing requirements to incorporate more scientific resources, such as the ultrasound video as well as lessons pertaining to the mental and physical health of the mother,” Nedweski said. “This bill is not a mandate because school districts are not required by law to offer human growth and development instruction. It merely makes modern enhancements to the topics required of districts that choose to teach it.” 

Nedweski was the sole person to testify on the bill. 

Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison) asked Nedweski whether she consulted public health officials, noting that the Wisconsin Public Health Association and Wisconsin Association of Local Health Departments and Boards are registered against it, according to the Wisconsin Ethics Commission lobbying website.

Nedweski said she didn’t speak to any public health officials or either statewide group in the process of authoring the bill, but spoke to a member of one of the local health departments in her district. 

Cruz asked about how much the curriculum would potentially cost. 

“There are all kinds of free materials available to any school district that would be wanting to utilize the video portion or the high resolution animation,” Nedweski said. She added that the curriculum decisions would ultimately be made at the local level.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE