Proposed legislation would penalize the Milwaukee Public Schools if the district cancels plans to place police officers inside school buildings. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)
Republican lawmakers are proposing a law that would financially penalize the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) and the city of Milwaukee if they stop complying with a state law that requires police officers in schools.
The bill, coauthored by Rep. Bob Donovan (R-Greenfield) and Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), comes after months of noncompliance with state law by the school district. Wisconsin Act 12, which provided a boost in funding to local governments, included requirements that Milwaukee Public Schools place 25 school resource officers — sworn police officers assigned to schools.
The law took effect in 2023, and officers were supposed to be in MPS schools by Jan. 1, 2024, but the district missed the deadline. On Tuesday, the city and the school district voted to approve an agreement to install the officers in response to a lawsuit.
Donovan said during an Assembly Criminal Justice and Public Safety hearing Wednesday that it’s “unconscionable” the district took so long to follow through on the requirement.
“The biggest district, the one in my estimation that could benefit the most, has, along with the city, dragged their feet for 400 days. It’s absurd and the safety of our kids is at jeopardy,” Donovan said.
Citing a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel report found MPS averaged 3,700 police calls each year over 11 years, Donovan said the calls were “pulling officers from street patrols to respond.” He added that “SROs trained specifically for school incidents can handle many of these situations quickly, leaving officers to stay in our communities.”
The school resource officer requirement was controversial when Act 12 was passed. Officers had not been stationed inside Milwaukee schools since 2016, and the district ended its contract with the Milwaukee Police Department in 2020 in response to student and community opposition to the practice. At Wednesday’s hearing, Wanggaard blamed the district’s contract cancellation on a “fit of anti-police bias.”
Many advocates opposed to police officers in schools have pointed to potential negative impacts.
A Brookings Institution report found that the presence of school resource officers has led to increases in use of suspension, expulsion, police referral and arrest, especially among Black students and students with disabilities.
The agreement that the Milwaukee Common Council and Milwaukee School Board both voted to approve Tuesday was in response to a lawsuit against the district.
In October 2023 the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) sued MPS and the city of Milwaukee on behalf of Charlene Abughrin, a parent in the district, arguing the district’s noncompliance presented a “substantial risk to her and her child’s safety.”
Last month a judge ordered the district and city to comply with the state law and instructed the district and the city to split the cost for the officers evenly.
According to the agreement, officers in schools will have to be properly vetted and required to attend state- and city-mandated training, including a 40-hour National Association of School Resource Officers course. The agreement also specifies that officers will not participate in enforcing MPS code of conduct violations and that school conduct violations and student discipline will remain the responsibility of school administrators, not police officers.
Despite the agreement, the bill’s authors said Wednesday that a law is needed to serve as an enforcement mechanism and address potential future noncompliance.
“If that agreement is terminated, this legislation provides a similar compliance framework to ensure that both remain in compliance with Act 12,” Donovan said. “To prevent the ongoing and future non-compliance, consequences must be in place.”
If the agreement is terminated, the bill would implement a timeline requiring a new agreement within 30 days, another 30 days for the city to certify with the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee that officers are trained and available. The district would then have 30 days to certify with the committee that officers are present in schools.
If there is noncompliance, 10% of the city’s shared revenue payment will be withheld by the state and 25% of the school district’s state aid payments would be withheld.
Under the bill, MPS would be responsible for paying 75% of the cost for the school officers program, while the city would be responsible for the remaining 25%.
Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) asked about the discrepancy between the 50-50 payment implemented by the judge and the one in the bill.
Wanggaard said that bill assigns a larger share of the cost to the school district because “it was MPS that made the schools less safe by not having officers in the school, not the city, and based on these factors and other conversations I’ve had, I believe MPS was the major cause of delaying returning officers to the schools.” However, he appeared open to amendments, noting that the bill is still pending.
MPS is opposed to the bill, in part because of the difference in how it apportions the cost.
The district said in written testimony that school officials have been working on getting a memorandum of understanding with the city for over a year, sought the selection and training of police officers, and worked to negotiate a fair apportionment. The statement noted that the district has no authority to train or hire officers.
The district statement endorsed a plan proposed by Gov. Tony Evers, which assigns 75% of the costs to the city and 25% to the district. The statement said that because “the school resource officers were part of a legislative deal negotiated without the participation of MPS and that provided hundreds of millions of dollars to the City of Milwaukee, the Governor’s proposal appears as the fairest.”
The district statement also called for the state to reimplement a law in the 2009 budget that allowed districts to use generated funds to “purchase school safety equipment, fund the compensation costs of security officers, or fund other expenditures consistent with its school safety plan.”
“Whatever the apportionment, there should be no debate that school safety costs be adequately funded,” the district statement said.
The Wisconsin Police Association and WILL support the bill, according to the state’s lobbying website.
Assembly members being sworn in in January 2025. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner
Wisconsin Assembly committees look different this session with new committee names and several old committees now made up of fewer members. The differences will affect the way legislation is shaped.
Each session the Assembly Speaker has the responsibility for determining the number of members per committee, unless a rule specifies otherwise. The Speaker also determines the ratio of majority to minority members on each committee. The committees are essential to the lawmaking process given that they are where bills are first moved to be discussed after being introduced, where bills receive public input and are debated by lawmaker before ever being considered for a vote by the full body.
Democrats have complained about losing members on committees despite winning additional seats in the full body. Despite Republican’s narrower majority this session, in some cases Democrats make up a smaller proportion of members on committees than they did in the last session.
“Unfortunately, Assembly Republican Leadership has chosen to begin the legislative session in a highly partisan fashion, reducing Democratic positions on the vast majority of committees despite the people of Wisconsin choosing to replace ten incumbent Republican legislators with Democrats in the last election,” Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) said in a statement announcing Democratic committee membership. “I hope my Republican colleagues will choose to shift course and join Democrats in putting the people of Wisconsin over partisan politics in the coming legislative session.”
Neubauer’s staff said they were not consulted by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) about the committee sizes or ratios.
Rep. Robyn Vining (D-Wauwatosa) said there was a “general understanding” that with more members in the house overall, Democrats were expecting that to be reflected in committees. Democrats picked up 10 additional seats in the Assembly, making the body about 55% Republican and 45% Democratic.
Instead Republicans and Democrats both lost seats on some committees, but the losses were exaggerated for Democrats, who now make up a smaller percentage of representation on several committees. For example, the Campaigns and Elections Committee last session had six Republican members and three Democrats. This session the committee is made up of five Republicans and two Democrats — or a 71% Republican to 29% Democratic makeup.
Vining described the change to committee membership as a punishment.
“We were penalized for maps that the Republicans actually passed themselves…,” Vining said. “They're penalizing us for having more seats and I think that's unfair to Wisconsinites.”
Vining said having diverse representation on committees matters because of how it shapes the way legislation turns out.
“Our job in committee is to vet bills. We're supposed to bring our perspective to the room and bat it around and figure it out… We need voices in the room,” Vining said. “When you have less voices in the room, I would argue that there's less there to vet a bill, to put a bill into the best form that it could possibly be in for the Wisconsin people.”
Vining is the ranking member on the Assembly Mental Health and Substance Abuse Prevention Committee this session. She also sits on the Children and Families, Health Aging and Long Term Care and Small Business Development committees.
The Mental Health committee is one where Democrats lost representation. The committee last session had eight Republicans to four Democrats — meaning Democrats made up 33% of the committee. This session the committee includes seven Republicans and three Democrats — bringing Democrats to only 30% of the committee.
One Democrat not returning to the Mental Health committee, Vining noted, is Rep. Supreme Moore Omokunde (D-Milwaukee).
“I have one less member, which means I have one less microphone around the state of Wisconsin,” she said, “one less community that's represented on the mental health committee and one less person going out to destigmatize mental health, so yeah, that's a loss.”
Rep. Robyn Vining (D-Wauwatosa). Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner
Vining said Omokunde’s absence is also notable given that one of the goals of the committee this session will be to discuss the issue of male loneliness. She noted that he has done a lot of work within the Black Caucus on Black mental health, including Black men's mental health.
“We'll find another way to keep that conversation going and I'm sure he will because he is fantastic at that,” Vining said. Still, she said that it is important to have ethnically diverse representation and gender representation on committees.
“Something I'm very aware of is we have two wonderful women who are joining me on the mental health committee but all the Democrats are women,” Vining said.
It’s not just Democratic lawmakers who have expressed disappointment about committee memberships this session.
Rebecca Aubart, executive director of Ladies of SCI, a nonpartisan prison reform advocacy group, said the situation is upsetting to the group. The group has been working to improve the state’s correctional system, including by advocating for an ombudsman to serve as a watchdog.
“This isn't what Wisconsin voted for. We voted for more fair representation. We voted for both of the sides to have to come together because it was going to be more fair representation,”Aubert said. “This seems like such a power struggle that just makes me sick.”
Aubert said the group had been waiting for several months to see how committees would turn out this session given the new legislative maps, and so they could return to their advocacy work. She said she was looking forward to there being new discussions with fresh ideas this session, and feels like that may not end up being the case.
“Most of our meetings are between 65% and 68% Republican, because that is who has been in control, but the Democrats have really good points too and are very sympathetic and their voices aren't heard,” Aubert said. “They have a lot of good ideas that would help straighten out corrections, but their voices are still going to go unheard.”
“If we want new legislation to come through, everything comes through the committee first, and then it goes to everybody else. I just don't think the people of Wisconsin are aware that even though our votes changed a lot in the Assembly, it actually didn't change anything because of how these committees are picked.”
Aubert said that she thinks there should be rules that the Speaker should have to follow, including that the partisan balance on committees should match the Assembly as a whole.
Vining noted that she encouraged her Republican colleagues in a public statement to push back on the decision made by their leadership.
Vos did not respond to requests for comment from the Examiner.
Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) is leading the newly formed Government Operations Accountability and Transparency (GOAT) committee and also serves as vice-chair of the Assembly Colleges and Universities committee. In an interview discussing her new roles this session, Nedweski said she didn’t think the fluctuation in the committee memberships were intentional or political.
Nedweski said having fewer people on committees isn’t a disadvantage given that the committee process is public and anyone is still welcome to show up to committee meetings.
“People who are interested in being on that committee are there and, you know, if there's legislation that comes before the committee that people who are not on the committee are interested in, they can always come and testify and you know, be a part of discussion,” Nedweski said. “No one's being locked out of anything.”
New committees highlight Assembly priorities
Other changes this session include several new and revived Assembly committees, highlighting some of lawmakers’ priorities in the coming months.
Vos put a special emphasis on the GOAT committee this session. In a statement, he said the committee — with Nedweski at the helm — would help the caucus’ focus on its “renewed goal of identifying and addressing government inefficiencies.”
Nedweski said the committee is the result of “demands from the people” and a “mainstream interest in fiscal conservatism and government efficiency.” She said part of the interest in having Wisconsin lawmakers take on the work was driven by President Donald Trump announcing the creation of a federal Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). While a committee existed last session focused on government operations and accountability, Nedweski said it wasn’t very active and the new committee will be.
Rep. Amanda Nedweski. Photo courtesy of her office.
“We had so many people reaching out saying ‘Who's going to be the state DOGE?’” Nedweski said. “I think there are opportunities around every corner to find quick and easy ways for improvement for some things and then certainly there are much bigger problems that could take solutions that are multi-year.”
Nedweski said her background in corporate finance and doing work that involves finding efficiencies inspired her to want to take on the role of chairing the new committee.
“In the private sector, there are natural forms of accountability driven by bottom lines, and government just doesn't have those built in, but we should,” Nedweski said.
The committee is still exploring what exactly its work will include, but Nedweski said it will focus on issues big and small. Ultimately, she said she wants to ensure that the state is using the taxpayers’ resources efficiently and effectively.
One issue she said the committee will likely look at is the number of state employees who are working remotely, which has been a contentious issue over the last several years.
“Are we getting the most productivity out of those people who are working from home? How do we measure that, and if we're seeing that it's not the most productive situation, why aren't those people back in the building?” Nedweski said. “Maybe they are productive, maybe that's the best situation for them, but then what do we do with that physical building? If the solution is we don't need in-person employees, then we don't need to pay for the space either, and I think we have a responsibility to the taxpayer to make sure that we're not wasting.”
Nedweski said other committees could also bring issues to GOAT to explore.
“Our intention is to have the entire body involved in this process where maybe… we're going to maybe do a joint hearing with the education committee, or the college's committee,” Nedweski said. “How do we use our resources within GOAT to help them further explore some of the areas that they identify for us that are in need of oversight, transparency, accountability or efficiency?”
Another issue Nedweski mentioned as an area of interest is “administrative bloat” in Wisconsin’s K-12 schools and in the University of Wisconsin system.
She also mentioned looking at programs and laws as they sunset. She noted that Texas has a Sunset Advisory Commission, a mission that the GOAT committee takes on.
“There's all these statutes on the books that maybe there's appropriations tied to, and sometimes things fly under the radar and are there any circumstances — and I can't say that there are — are there any circumstances where we have continued to fund something that was supposed to end? Maybe GOAT has an arm of that... where we're diving into the weeds and looking at where we spend money and should this have ended five years ago?”
One revived committee this session is the Assembly Small Business Committee. Last session, it became part of the Jobs, Economy and Small Business Development Committee.
Vining said she commends Vos for bringing the committee back because it gives a greater opportunity to speak about the issues affecting Wisconsin small businesses.
“Ninety-nine percent of Wisconsin businesses are small businesses. We're a small business state. We should have a small business development committee. We should be talking about how access to capital is more difficult for women and people of color,” Vining said.
The Assembly is also reviving the Assembly Urban Revitalization Committee this session with Rep. Bob Donovan (R-Greenfield) serving as its chair. Donovan, who served as a Milwaukee alderman for about 20 years, said he is excited about the opportunity.
“It's certainly fair to say that Milwaukee has some neighborhoods that are very challenged, and we need to work on that, but I suspect other cities around the state may be suffering from the same challenges, so I'm hopeful that we can work a number of initiatives to help revitalize those struggling neighborhoods,” Donovan said.
Donovan said that the “sky's the limit” when it comes to the issues the committee may look at, but that public safety concerns, educational issues and housing, including more home ownership, are some areas that he is interested in exploring.
As the committee’s work is only just starting, Donovan said that he has requested that the Legislative Reference Bureau provide the committee with some information about revitalization efforts that have gone on in other cities across the country as well as about what the 2017 committee did.
“I've always believed we don't need to reinvent the wheel. If something is working in another community, I see no reason why we couldn't make it work here in Wisconsin,” Donovan said.
Donovan said that he is prepared to communicate with local leaders in Milwaukee and other cities. He said he already had a “very good” conversation with Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley about some concerns at the county level when it comes to parks and other services.
“[I] just wanted to open up or continue the lines of communication,” Donovan said.
Other new committees include the Commerce Committee, the Constitution and Ethics Committee, the State and Federal Relations Committee, the Public Benefit Reform Committee and the Science, Technology and AI Committee.