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

A hallway in La Follette High School in Madison. (Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin Superintendent Jill Underly faced more criticism from lawmakers on Wednesday as the Joint Legislative Audit Committee reviewed the findings of a financial reporting audit and launched an audit of the agency’s licensing procedures.

During the first three hours of the committee hearing, Underly’s absence was a major discussion point for lawmakers on the committee as they reviewed the financial audit. She has also faced criticism for being absent about two weeks ago at the Assembly Government Oversight Accountability and Transparency committee meeting when she was in Indiana to accept an award. 

“This body is extremely disappointed that right now, when we’re going over an audit that probably impacts over $12 billion in what’s spent by our educational legal entities, that Dr. Underly is not joining us,” Rep. Robert Wittke (R-Caledonia) said, adding that the committee provided details on the meeting weeks in advance.

Wittke said Underly is the only agency head who has not come before the committee when it is discussing an audit. 

“You don’t get the governor out of every hearing, do you?” Superintendent Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy said. “Dr. Underly is an elected official and has dispatched us to manage parts of these duties, and that is why you have me at these, because she does take it very seriously and is staying deeply briefed.” 

“It’s interesting, you say that she’s an elected official, but when I had an audit before us that included the Department of Justice, it appeared that Attorney General [Josh] Kaul could be in front of us and comment on that,” Wittke said. “Constitutionally, she supervises the educational system here, whether elected or not, and… so, I would think that it would be something that she would want to address.”

Wittke quipped that maybe McCarthy should be signing off on the audits instead of Underly. 

Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto) said he found it “very concerning” that Underly was not at the hearing to discuss the first audit and her absence is a sign of “cowardice in a leader.” 

“To send the people who work for you in to take heat and not take it yourself would make me have a lack of confidence in my leader. I wouldn’t expect Superintendent Underly to have all the answers. Oftentimes an executive leader does not. They’re managerial… to defer to you to answer is quite different than not being available to be held accountable,” Wimberger said. 

The committee launched the audit into the financial reporting and the agency’s process for reviewing audited financial statements following a financial reporting scandal at the Milwaukee Public Schools last year. 

MPS faced significant criticism from lawmakers especially as the information came to light shortly after the district passed a $252 million operational referendum.

“The problem was recurring and compounding to a point where DPI was having difficulty appropriating funding accurately. That information was hidden from the public until after MPS convinced voters locally to approve a $200 million referendum,” Wimberger said during the hearing. “I’m sure voters would have had a different opinion of whether MPS needed money if they knew the district was so unaware of their internal finances.” 

In accordance with state statute, DPI monitors financial school districts’ financial statements  with a requirement that schools submit annually. Schools must contract with a certified public accounting firm, which submits the audited financial statements to DPI. 

Financial information from public schools and independent charter schools is required to be submitted by Dec. 15, under DPI policies. Voucher schools are required to submit financial information by Oct. 15 each year.

MPS was a recurrent discussion point during the hearing, though the audit found that MPS is not the only district with difficulties submitting documents on time.

Among schools’ 2022-23 audited financial statements, the Legislative Audit Bureau found that 77% were submitted on time and 22% were submitted late. For school districts that submitted on time, the agency took on average 87 days to complete its review of those audited financial statements.

Of those submitted late, 70% were submitted at least 29 days late. 

The audit looked at a sample of 18 school districts that submitted their statements late, finding that the agency contacted those districts 47 days after the Dec. 15, 2023 deadline. 

Milwaukee Public Schools’ audits for that year were submitted on Dec. 20, 2024, about a year after the due date —  the latest among all 421 school districts.

McCarthy said Milwaukee Public Schools had been historically late in turning in the district’s  annual audit, but it typically came with communication about why they were late and a commitment that the district would have the audit submitted in the following weeks. 

“That was not a normal year of being late for them,” McCarthy said of December 2023. 

When the lateness of the school district’s reports came to public attention, DPI said it had been meeting with MPS quarterly since April 2023, monthly since February 2024, weekly starting in March 15 2024 and then daily in May 2024 to get the district to submit its reports. The agency has since placed the district under two corrective action plans and withheld over $50 million from Milwaukee schools. Gov. Tony Evers has also launched separate audits of the district.

Wimberger expressed concern that MPS was given a “two-year grace period.” 

McCarthy said he believed the agency was “pretty strict” with the district. 

“If you consider withholding $51 million to be grace, I’ll call you next time we have a problem,” McCarthy said. 

“We used the tools and authority that we had at our disposal to compel the district through two separate corrective action plans, stood shoulder to shoulder in trying to clean up some of the local aspects of what’s going on, and I think the current superintendent has been deeply engaged in committing resources and staffing to making sure that this does not happen again,” McCarthy said. 

McCarthy said the situation with MPS has been a “long, painful journey that we don’t ever want to repeat with any other district.” 

The legislative audit found that DPI does not have a requirement that agency staff contact schools that haven’t submitted financial statements and audits on time. 

The Legislative Audit Bureau made 22 recommendations to DPI to improve its processes. 

Those recommendations included establishing written policies to require that it contact school districts within one month if their documents aren’t submitted by the deadline and regularly contacting schools until those audits are submitted. It also recommended that the agency establish a written policy that implements a deadline for starting its review of audited financial statements and completing those reviews. 

The audit bureau  made similar recommendations for DPI in overseeing private voucher schools and for the Department of Administration in overseeing the financial information for independent charter schools. 

McCarthy said that the agency is taking the audit bureau’s recommendations into consideration. That includes putting in writing all communication with district administrators and school boards as late reporting occurs.

McCarthy also noted that the agency has launched a school financial transparency dashboard that allows people to “dive in and look at any district” including reviewing records of compliance for reporting. 

“I’m glad you’re moving forward to try and crack the systemic problem, in my opinion, that deceived the public in the passing referendums without understanding the true financial situation of their respective district,” Wimberger said. 

Licensing and sexual misconduct audit

Underly was present during the latter half of Wednesday’s hearing, testifying on the agency’s licensing policies and changes it plans to make, especially  to investigations into educators accused of sexual misconduct and grooming. 

“Where were you this morning?” Wimberger asked.

“I was at the DPI,” Underly replied. Wimberger did not push the point. 

Underly repeated much of her testimony from the Tuesday Senate Education Committee including laying out some of the steps the agency is taking, launching a new webpage with the list of educators who have surrendered their licenses or had them revoked, as well as the changes she wants to see lawmakers work on, including providing additional resources for the agency’s licensing responsibilities and closing the loophole that allows unlicensed teachers to work in private schools.

The Joint Legislative Audit Committee voted unanimously to launch an audit into DPI’s policies and processes for educational licensure revocation, suspension, restriction and investigation. The audit will look at trends in the DPI’s investigations, its policies and how Wisconsin compares to its midwestern neighbors.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

“It's been deeply disappointing to see attempts to turn this serious issue into yet another partisan political sideshow. Our kids deserve better than that. Wisconsin families deserve better than that,” Underly said at a press conference. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

State Superintendent Jill Underly said allegations of mishandled sexual misconduct and grooming by teachers have been turned into a “partisan political sideshow” as she announced that her agency is launching a database to list the names of teachers  who have surrendered  their licenses or had them revoked. She also laid out other actions that could be taken to improve the current system for responding to allegations.

It was the first time that Underly spoke to the public in person since the publication of a CapTimes report that found there were over 200 investigations into teacher licenses due to allegations of sexual misconduct or grooming from 2018 to 2023. The investigation led to an outcry from lawmakers, who said they want action to ensure students are safe. 

Underly was absent from the first informational hearing on the subject held in the Assembly Government Oversight, Accountability and Transparency (GOAT) committee about two weeks ago. She was out of state to accept an award from her alma mater Indiana University. 

Underly told reporters at a press conference ahead of the hearing Tuesday in the Senate Education Committee that she was interested in “protecting Wisconsin’s children” whether they are in public, private or charter schools and she called on policymakers to work towards solutions and stay away from “finger pointing” and “political theater.” 

“It’s been deeply disappointing to see attempts to turn this serious issue into yet another partisan political sideshow. Our kids deserve better than that. Wisconsin families deserve better than that,” Underly said. “But we won’t be distracted or deterred, and our focus remains exactly where it belongs on protecting kids.” 

Underly’s comments come after U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, a Republican gubernatorial hopeful, who stood alongside state Republican lawmakers, suggested during a press conference that Gov. Tony Evers needed to “call on Jill Underly to either do her job or step aside” and connected the issue of sexual misconduct and grooming to “indoctrination” through liberal curriculum in schools. Washington County Executive and gubernatorial hopeful Josh Schoemann outright called for Underly’s resignation. 

Underly told reporters that calls for her resignation are “preposterous.” 

Underly said she will also attend the Joint Audit Committee hearing on Wednesday where lawmakers plan to launch an audit into the educational licensure revocation, suspension, restriction and investigation at DPI. 

During both the press conference and the committee hearing, Underly rejected claims that the agency is shielding information from the public, but said there is more work that can be done to strengthen the agency and the state’s current processes.

“The department does not cover up misconduct. We do not shield information from the public. We do not ignore allegations. We do everything in our power to remove those who harm children from classrooms, and we do it urgently and decisively,” Underly said. “Unfortunately, some have chosen to use this deeply sensitive issue to score political points and that doesn’t protect children. It distracts from real solutions.”

Sen. John Jagler (R-Watertown), who chairs the Senate Education Committee, opened the Senate hearing by saying that the response by DPI, including Underly’s absence from the GOAT committee hearing, was “disturbing” to him.

“The bottom line is kids’ safety needs to be the No. 1 priority, full stop, and I believe that’s what we hope to investigate today and look into how we can help make this a better situation for our kids,” Jagler said. 

Underly said there are several “practical” and “achievable” steps her agency is taking and Wisconsin policymakers could take to bolster safety for students.

Defining grooming 

One of the top steps that Underly identified is for the state to define “grooming” in state law. She said that the agency already investigates and pursues license revocations for teachers accused of grooming students for sexual exploitation and for predatory behavior, but clarifying a definition could help ensure consistency. 

“Grooming and predatory behaviors are not just school issues. They are societal issues that happen in every corner of our communities, and that’s why we need to do more as a state to prevent, identify and address these behaviors wherever they occur,” Underly said. “Without stronger laws and clear definitions, the referrals we receive can be inconsistent. Wisconsin urgently needs to clarify grooming and define it as a crime so that law enforcement can act swiftly and consistently, no matter where it happens.”

A bill, coauthored by Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) and Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp), would define “grooming” in state statute and make it a felony to engage in grooming a child for sexual activity.

Underly said she welcomes conversations about the bill.

Under the bill, “grooming” would be defined as “a course of conduct, pattern of behavior, or series of acts with the intention to condition, seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child for the purpose of engaging in sexual intercourse or sexual contact, or for the purpose of producing, distributing, or possessing depictions of the child engaged in sexually explicit conduct.” 

It also lists examples of behavior that would constitute grooming including verbal comments or conversations of a sexual nature directed at a child; inappropriate or sexualized physical contact; written, electronic and communication over text and social media to lure or entice a child; promising gifts, privileges, or special attention to lower a child’s inhibitions or create emotional dependence; and acts intended to isolate a child from family or peers. 

The authors of the bill said in a memo that the bill builds on the state laws on grooming that exist in Florida, Texas, Ohio and Illinois. 

A person convicted of a grooming charge would be guilty of a Class G felony, that would increase to a Class F felony if the person is in a position of trust or authority, and to a Class E felony if the child has a disability and to a Class D felony if the violation involves two or more children. A convicted person would also need to register as a sex offender.

Other agency and legislative steps

Lawmakers on the committee also asked about the number of staff dedicated to investigating allegations. 

Underly said they have 1.5 employees working on license investigations and those employees have access to the agency’s team of attorneys. 

Jagler asked whether that was sufficient. 

Underly said it would be helpful to have more resources, though she emphasized that providing subpoena power to the agency would help speed investigations along. 

“We need to strengthen our investigations today. The DPI lacks subpoena power during investigations, meaning we rely on voluntary cooperation of witnesses, district officials, and others to gather critical information,” Underly said. “Even limited authority would allow us to gather evidence more efficiently and act faster to protect kids.” 

Deputy State Superintendent Tom McCarthy noted during the hearing that the agency can become involved in any stage of the process of dealing with allegations, but it is not typically the primary investigator in cases. 

“Most of the time, we are being notified by law enforcement, by county child welfare, by a district who has subsequently said, ‘Hey, we have a teacher who is being investigated by law enforcement or there’s a scenario over here.’

The agency’s role focuses on investigating whether an educator’s license should be removed or whether they should seek a voluntary surrender from someone under investigation. During investigations, McCarthy said the agency typically relies on gathering credible information from law enforcement, school districts, local partners and others. He said even if there isn’t information readily available to be shared with the agency they are still working to “go after these people.” 

“What’s happening with the 1.5 staff is, they’re often following up, saying, ‘Hey, sheriff’s department, have you completed this? Hey, school district, are you done with this particular investigation.’ Without subpoena power, we’re doing that in a voluntary fashion with them. Sometimes they tell us to pound sand, and we have to wait and we have to wait and wait and wait. Sometimes we get tired of waiting and actually, just move into a voluntary surrender or revocation action, but it would be way better for the system if we weren’t always way delayed in the back seat of this entire process so that we could take swifter action.”

Underly said the agency is also working on a statewide code of conduct, which will soon be published for public comment through administrative rules and will serve as a guide for school boards developing policies on professional boundaries. 

DPI has a model policy on its website for school districts, but it isn’t mandatory. 

“That’s something you all would have to talk about as to whether you want that to be more than just recommended on the website,” said Jennifer Kammerud, who serves as DPI’s educator licensing director.

Another step, Underly said, includes the launch of a new online database to allow the public to view licenses that have been revoked or surrendered. She said the new tool will create more transparency by expanding on the current teacher license lookup tool. 

Currently, the public can see the status of a teacher’s  license on the primary database, a teacher’s name is required to check a license status. The new database lists names of individuals in alphabetical order who have voluntarily surrendered or had their licenses revoked. 

McCarthy said it would be a little while before the website is updated with information about the reasoning behind license revocation or surrender because the information is not electronic yet. He said DPI must locate individual revocation orders and will add the information as it is gathered.

In addition, Underly said that the state needs to modernize the licensing system used for educators, but the agency needs resources to get it done. She said that allowing DPI to keep 10% of licensing fees, which is currently diverted away from the agency, would allow investments in licensing improvements and investigations. 

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

During the hearing Republican lawmakers questioned why Underly hadn’t come specifically to them with her requests. (During the most recent budget process, the Joint Finance Committee, which typically hosts agency heads to explain their budget requests, declined to invite Underly or DPI to make a presentation.)

“Obviously, I’ll never tell you how to do your job, Superintendent, but you mentioned requesting for funding — how [Joint Finance Committee] has never asked you to come talk to them. I guess in my experience [Department of Safety and Professional Standards] Sec. Dan [Hereth] was in my office asking and explaining those things,” said Sen. Romaine Quinn (R-Birchwood), who is a member of the Joint Finance Committee. “I would just say no one is going to ask you to come in and ask for more money.” 

Underly also said the state needs to close loopholes for private schools. Educators employed at private schools in Wisconsin are not required to hold a DPI license, meaning staff at those schools fall outside of the agency’s investigative authority. The agency is only able to investigate and keep individuals out of schools via the licensure system.

Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) emphasized that he wanted discussions about improving the process to cover students in public, private and other schools. 

“I would hope that as we focus our attention on what is happening in the public domain, and what information is publicly available and was pulled off of a public website, and then publicly reported, that we don’t pretend that because things are private and happening in private schools and behind closed doors that the 125,000 students who are in classrooms where there is not a required licensure and where there is not required reporting and where information is not public, that we pretend that there are not problems that exist there,” Larson said. 

At one point during the committee hearing, Larson asked his colleagues whether they would want to work to help close the loophole. Sen. Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi) nodded.

“It’s a dangerous loophole and we need to close it,” Underly said.

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

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

The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) released its 2025-26 general school aid data this week, showing that 71% of public school districts will receive less general school aid this year, while over $350 million in general aid will be diverted to voucher schools.

Each year DPI is required by state law to release the certified aid figures by Oct. 15. The data for the 2025-26 school year shows that of 421 districts, 111 — or 26% — will receive more aid, while 301 districts — or 71% — will receive less. The numbers replace those from the estimate released in July, which had shown a projected 65% of schools would receive less aid. 

DPI noted in a release that the state’s total general aid remained flat this year at $5.58 billion. The Republican-led Legislature decided during the recent state budget process not to provide additional general aid to public school districts.

The distribution of general aid funds is determined by a formula that considers property valuation, student enrollment and shared costs. When school districts lose state aid, they do not lose school revenue authority, meaning many school districts will be left to decide whether to increase local property taxes to make up the difference or make more budget cuts. 

Democratic lawmakers, who have repeatedly called for increasing general school aid, blamed their Republican colleagues for the numbers during a virtual press conference Thursday morning.

Sen. Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick) said that data “provided a harsh reality check for school districts that their state Legislature, specifically the Republican-controlled state Legislature, which they have controlled for 30 out of the last 32 years, does not view them as a priority.” 

“When Democrats win a majority in the state Senate, our schools will not have to fear this Oct.15 date,” Smith said, adding that Democrats are “committed to investing in the future of Wisconsin children and re-establishing our state as one of the leaders in K-12 education as it once was.”

“This system that our state has been forced to adopt is not sustainable,” Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D- Whitefish Bay) said. In lieu of state funding, school districts in Wisconsin have turned to raising property taxes through referendum, which must be approved by voters, in order to meet their financial obligations, including paying staff salaries, purchasing educational materials and building costs.

After the state budget was signed, some school leaders warned that the trend of relying on property taxes would continue without a state general aid increase. 

“Due to the Legislature’s failure to fund our schools, Wisconsin already has one of the highest property tax rates in the country, and if our communities continue to be forced to referendum, those tax rates will continue to rise, making our state even more expensive than it already is. Wisconsin residents are depending on their elected officials to rein in the skyrocketing costs of living in our state,” Habush-Sinykin said. “Yet, the Republican-controlled Legislature has no problem forcing their constituents to suffer under continuously rising property taxes.”

Viroqua School Board President Angie Lawrence said during the press conference that the system is bolstering inequity in Wisconsin schools. 

“The school districts and areas of high poverty are generally failing when trying to pass a referendum and the wealthy districts generally are passing their referendum when going to their communities… Is this who we really want to be?” Lawrence asked. “Don’t you think that our tax dollars should be supporting every student equally so that each student has a path to academic excellence, and we shouldn’t have to go to referendum in order to provide a high quality education for our students?”

School voucher programs grow

Alongside funding for public schools, the DPI also released data on the costs of the state’s school voucher programs, which use taxpayer dollars to cover the cost of tuition for students who attend private and charter schools.

The estimated annual cost for the state’s voucher programs in the 2025-26 school year overall is about $700.7 million.

According to the DPI data, $357.5 million will be reduced from general school aid to go towards private voucher schools in 2025-26. This includes $260.9 million for the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program, $44.4 million for the Racine Parental Choice Program and $52.2 million for the Special Needs Scholarship Program. 

The rest of the $700.7 million going toward voucher schools will come from the state’s general purpose revenue to fund students in the Milwaukee voucher program as well as for students in the Racine voucher program who enrolled before the 2015-16 school year. The Milwaukee program is estimated to cost $336 million.

Enrollment in all four of the state’s school choice programs rose by 2,349 students in the 2025-26 school year, reaching a high of 60,972 students. 

The Milwaukee program grew by 235 students, the Racine program shrank by 14 students, the statewide program grew by 1,814 students and the special needs program grew by 419 students. 

Organizations that support school voucher programs had mixed reactions — celebrating the growth, but also cautioning that it was modest compared to previous years.

“Lawmakers in Madison should continue to prioritize protecting these private-school options for all students,” said Carol Shires, vice president of operations for School Choice Wisconsin. “This milestone validates the strong support from Wisconsin’s political leaders for strengthening the financial foundation of parental choice programs.”

School Choice Wisconsin, the largest school choice lobbying group in the state, also noted in its press release that the growth comes as an enrollment cap on the statewide Wisconsin Parental Choice Program is set to expire in the 2026-27 school year. 

“[The caps coming off] will allow more families – including those now on waiting lists – to benefit from the nation’s longest-standing program committed to educational freedom,” School Choice Wisconsin said.

Caps on school voucher program participation, which limits the percentage of students in a district who can participate, have been increasing by 1% per year since 2017 and reached 10% of a school district’s enrollment in the 2025-26 school year. When the nation’s first school voucher program launched in Milwaukee in 1990, enrollment was limited to no more than 1% of the Milwaukee Public Schools student population. When the statewide program launched in 2013, enrollment was limited to just 500 students and no more than 1% of a district’s enrollment. 

According to the Institute for Reforming Government, a conservative think tank, this year’s numbers represent stable growth for the Milwaukee, special needs and independent charter school programs, but the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program had its lowest growth since 2017-2018.

Quinton Klabon, the organization’s senior research director, urged supporters of school choice to not be complacent. 

“Informing parents, expanding high-quality schools, and protecting schools from hostile red tape are high priorities. Otherwise, the baby bust will close choice schools,” Klabon said in a statement.

The total number of schools participating in the statewide program has risen from 403 schools in 2024-25 to 415 schools in 2025-26.

Republicans have introduced some legislation this year to support enrollment in voucher programs. AB 460 from Rep. Cindi Duchow (R-Delafield) would change state law to ensure that siblings of a student who participated in a voucher program would be eligible for enrollment. AB 415, coauthored by Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) would prohibit DPI from requiring documents to verify a student’s residence unless their residence has changed from a previous verification. 

Democratic lawmakers and public education stakeholders expressed concerns about what the school voucher enrollment numbers will mean for the state’s public schools.

Lawrence of Viroqua called attention to the amount of money going to the Academy of Excellence, a Milwaukee virtual private school that has been criticized for misusing public funds and for blurring the line between homeschooling and voucher schools. Students who are homeschooled in Wisconsin aren’t supposed to receive public funding under state law.

“The Academy of Excellence is not excellent,” Lawrence said. “It is not meeting the requirements of high standards of public education, and yet it received over $40 million in tax dollars from the state of Wisconsin [in the 2024-25 school year]… They are funding families that choose to homeschool without the cost of bricks and mortar, or the transparency of how they’re spending the tax dollars they receive. If our state wants to make improvements in education for our students, let’s put our money where our mouth is and spend our tax dollars to improve public education so we can provide the highest academic outcomes for each child.” 

The Academy of Excellence is estimated to receive over $50 million in 2025-26 from the state with over 4,000 students enrolled. Those enrollment numbers include students in various voucher programs throughout the state — 808 students from the Milwaukee program, 200 from the Racine program, 3,340 from the statewide program and 63 who are enrolled in the special needs program.

Democratic lawmakers in recent months have introduced an array of bills aimed at limiting voucher school programs and increasing transparency surrounding the costs. 

This week Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) is circulating draft legislation that would bar virtual schools from being able to participate in the voucher program. 

Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) has introduced AB 307, which would eliminate the sunset on the voucher program caps, leaving them at 10% into the future, and AB 496, which would require an annual verification of the income of voucher students’ families. (Currently, there is an income cap to enroll in the programs of 220% for the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program and 300% for the Milwaukee and Racine programs. If a student is continuing in a program or was on a waiting list, they are not required to meet income limits.) Lawmakers have also proposed legislation to disclose voucher costs on property tax bills across the state.

Habush-Sinykin said on the call that the voucher program caps coming off is a “crisis” facing the state’s education system. However, she said advancing bills that would change the state’s trajectory will likely take new leadership in the Senate and Assembly. 

“It’s really up to all of us to explain how important it is to have a change in the legislative leadership so that we can have bills… like keeping caps on vouchers, etc., be heard and voted on,” Habush Sinykin said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE