Federal health officials temporarily froze Title X family-planning funds for some Planned Parenthood clinics, which provide reproductive health services ranging from birth control to STI testing, across the nation this week. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
More than 1 million people seeking care such as contraception or testing for sexually transmitted diseases and cancer could be affected by the Trump administration withholding more than $27 million in Title X funding to Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide, according to estimates from the Guttmacher Institute.
Planned Parenthood state affiliates said they were notified that the funding they receive under the Title X family-planning program would be temporarily frozen, Politico first reported Monday night.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which is responsible for managing and distributing Title X funds, told States Newsroom via email that it is reviewing all Title X grant recipients to make sure they comply with federal law and President Donald Trump’s executive orders. The department is concerned about “the compliance of several awardees” that together receive $27.5 million, according to an HHS spokesperson, who added, “HHS expects all recipients of federal funding to comply with federal law.”
Letters received by some affiliates detailed possible violations of federal civil rights laws and executive orders recently issued by Trump, including the administration’s efforts to prohibit diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and provide care regardless of a person’s immigration status.
“It is difficult to overstate how ridiculous it is that the administration is premising this funding freeze on a ‘DEI review,’” said Amy Friedrich-Karnik, Guttmacher’s director of federal policy, in a statement. “The entire point of the Title X program is to address disparities in access to contraception and other sexual and reproductive health care, including serving people with low incomes and those from other historically underserved communities. We need to see this for what it is — a direct attack on health equity.”
The Title X program was established in 1970 to provide reproductive health care for anyone who needs it. Federal law prohibits use of federal funds for abortion. Planned Parenthood clinics offer a broad range of non-abortion services.
No final decisions have been made regarding Title X funding for Planned Parenthood.
Affiliates in Alaska, California, Idaho, Hawaii, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah and others reported receiving the notification, representing thousands of people served at each clinic every year and millions in funds. Guttmacher’s data shows that 83% of people who visited Title X-funded clinics in 2023 had family incomes at or below 250% of the federal poverty level.
In Missouri and Oklahoma alone, Title X funding totals nearly $8.5 million, according to a news release from Missouri Family Health Council.
“Withholding these critical funds, even temporarily, threatens the essential sexual and reproductive health care communities depend on,” said Michelle Trupiano, executive director of the council.
Kat Mavengere, spokesperson for Maine Family Planning, said the agency also received notice of a freeze affecting $1.92 million in funds. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England is a sub-grantee of Maine Family Planning. Mavengere told States Newsroom the notice from HHS identified two items on their website “related to documents that detail our commitment to health equity” as reasons for the funding review.
Nicole Clegg, CEO of the Northern New England Planned Parenthood affiliate, said it receives about $900,000 in funds between Maine and New Hampshire from the family-planning organization.
If people can’t seek basic reproductive health services at no cost, including wellness exams, Clegg said they go without.
“We’ve seen that. When Planned Parenthoods leave communities, the data just speaks to increases in STI transmission, increases in unintended pregnancy … there are very real consequences to a community when we’re no longer there,” Clegg said.
A recent poll conducted by Perry Undem showed 77% of respondents were opposed to the idea of the Trump administration cutting funding for services like birth control for people with low incomes.
During his first term, Trump also cut Title X funds to clinics that provided abortions or referred people for abortions in 2019, causing one-third of participating providers to leave the program, according to KFF. The Biden administration reversed the policy two years later.
The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments Wednesday in a case that will determine whether South Carolina government officials can remove Planned Parenthood clinics from the state’s Medicaid program because the organization provides abortions. If the court rules in South Carolina’s favor, other states that have tried to drain the organization’s funding for decades may follow suit.
Anti-abortion organizations celebrated the news of the Title X freeze for some Planned Parenthood clinics on Tuesday, including Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which has been pushing efforts to “defund” Planned Parenthood in recent weeks in its fundraising emails. SBA was also involved in the drafting of the Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for the next conservative presidency, Project 2025, and identified this action as a priority.
“This is a big step in the right direction,” President Marjorie Dannenfelser told States Newsroom in a statement. “We thank President Trump for this bold action and urge further steps to eliminate all taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood.”
Though she doesn’t have her CDL (this photo was staged for the magazine), Crystal Hill took the figurative steering wheel as superintendent of Charlotte- Mecklenburg Schools in the summer of 2023 and hasn’t looked back. Cover design by Kimber Horne Photo courtesy of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools
The cover story this month features Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools superintendent Crystal Hill as she discusses what it takes to drive an entire district towards success. Read more about the new GM and VP of IC Bus as well as articles on technological upgrades, AI & predictive technology, benefits of using a third-party contractor plus more on the unclear future of electric school buses and clean energy funding.
Breaking Barriers & Navigating Uncharted Territory
Crystal Hill, the superintendent of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools in North Carolina, shares how she started her career in education, her perspective on the importance of student transportation, and the potential impacts of cuts in federal funding.
Features
Seeing Into The Future
AI and predictive technology hold many promises for student transportation professionals, especially those in charge of servicing school buses and ensuring optimum uptime.
The Steps To A Technology Upgrade
Upgrading technology comes with many questions such as staying with the same provider and looking at expanded features. Directors weigh in on the items and processes they value most.
Who, What, When, Where and Why?
While contracting operations isn’t for every school district, those that use third-party services discover the benefits of technology and safety equipment adoption, cost savings and vehicle variety.
Special Reports
Passing the Torch
Charles Chilton has big shoes to fill as the new GM and VP of IC Bus. But his experience as a school bus driver and engineer are proof he is more than up to the task.
Clean School Bus Program
School districts are left wading in the deep end of regulatory and funding uncertainty, especially when it comes to purchasing new electric school buses under the EPA’s Clean School Bus program.
A yard sign urging voters to vote 'Yes' on a referendum request for Ashwaubenon School District in 2024 when a record number of schools went to referendum. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.
As Wisconsin school districts seek permission this week from voters to spend more than $1.6 billion for operational and building costs, state lawmakers are looking for ways to address the issue of schools’ growing reliance on referendum requests.
Voters across the state are deciding this spring on a total of 94 referendum requests including some in February and many in the upcoming April 1 elections. According to the Wisconsin Policy Forum, it’s the most ever between January and April in a non-presidential or midterm election year and it’s the continuation of an ongoing trend.
Republicans have introduced three proposals for new limitations on the referendum process in reaction to Milwaukee Public Schools’ successful request last year, with lawmakers saying the proposals would increase fairness and transparency for voters and taxpayers. However, one Democratic lawmaker and other stakeholders said the proposals would limit local control and don’t address the structural financial issues that drive school districts to go to referendum.
Eliminating ‘recurring’ referendum requests
A bill coauthored by Rep. Cindi Duchow (R-Town of Delafield) and Sen. Chris Kapenga (R-Delafield) would eliminate referendum questions that allow permanent operational funding increases and would limit other referendum requests to cover no more than a four-year period.
Duchow said in an interview with the Wisconsin Examiner that she doesn’t think there is a problem with school districts going to referendum and called them the “perfect tool” to allow local residents to make funding decisions. But she doesn’t think funding increases sought through a referendum should be permanent — or, in legislative terminology, “recurring” year after year.
The referendum option was created for schools in 1993 as a part of legislation that put limits on schools’ ability to raise revenue by increasing property taxes.
Anne Chapman, research director for the Wisconsin Association of School Business Officials Association (WASBO), said in an interview that the idea behind the legislation was that property taxpayers would be protected and the state would take care of school districts financially in return. From 1993 to 2010, revenue caps — the limit on how much districts could raise without voters’ permission — were tied to inflation. The inflationary increases were eliminated in 2009 and state funding has not filled the gap to give schools an inflationary increase.
According to WASBO, general school district revenues have lagged the rate of inflation for a decade and a half. If funding had kept up with inflation, districts would be getting $3,380 more per pupil in 2025.
Wisconsin schools also only receive funding for about a third of their special education costs and many are drawing from their general funds to keep up with providing expensive federally and state mandated services to students with disabilities. Districts are also dealing with declining enrollment, which results in lower funding for a district as there are fewer students even if fixed costs such as maintaining facilities may not fall.
School officials and advocates have pointed out that many districts are relying heavily on referendum requests to meet costs (even to keep schools open), saying the trend is untenable. Mauston School District is one example as school leaders were considering dissolving the district after two failed referendum requests until voters finally approved a request in February.
Chapman noted that when a referendum fails it can result in a school deferring maintenance, increasing class sizes and cutting staff, AP programs, language, support staff for special education, nurses, librarians, athletics and “all the things that kids need to kind of stay engaged in school.”
Dale Knapp, director of Wisconsin-based research organization Forward Analytics, said in 2023 that he didn’t “think the lawmakers who created this law envisioned referenda being relied on this much.”
“Maybe the answer after 30 years of the limits is an in-depth review of the law to see how it can be improved to continue protecting taxpayers and ensure adequate funding of our schools,” Knapp said.
Duchow, however, said that the state is providing “plenty of money” to schools.
“If they want a new gym, that’s on them. I’m not here to build you a new gym. The people who live in that community should make that decision,” Duchow said. She also said there are some schools that probably need to consolidate and others that need to close.
While school districts do go to voters to fund building costs, many are also going to referendum for “operational” (and often recurring) costs and as a way to keep up with staff pay, afford educational offerings and pay utility bills.
Duchow said recurring referendum questions are unfair. She said lawmakers in the caucus have been discussing changing the policy for a while. A similar proposal was introduced in 2017.
“We are looking at declining enrollment around this state, and how do we know what we really need 10 years from now?” Duchow said. “The Milwaukee referendum never goes away, so 10 years from now, we have less students in Milwaukee and we need the same amount of money? We have more technology coming in, which means we probably need less teachers.”
Duchow said Milwaukee’s $252 million operating referendum, which was the second largest school operating request in state history, was the “catalyst” for her bill.
Republican lawmakers and other state leaders have been highly critical of the request, which the district said was needed to fund staff pay and educational programming and voters narrowly approved. The criticism grew louder after the district’s financial crisis that resulted in the resignation of the superintendent and audits launched by Gov. Tony Evers.
“Enough is enough. MPS is a disaster. We have the worst reading scores in the nation, and all they do is scream they need more money,” Duchow said. “Money is obviously not the answer.”
Even with declining enrollment, the Milwaukee Public School District is the largest district in the state with 65,000 students enrolled, according to the 2024-25 enrollment data from DPI. This is over 2.5 times as many students as the next largest district in Wisconsin, Madison Metropolitan School District.
MPS students are also more likely to face significant challenges. More than 20% of students in the district have a disability, more than 80% are economically disadvantaged and 17.5% are English language learners. Statewide about 40% of students are economically disadvantaged, 15.7% are students with disabilities and 6.92% are English language learners.
Chapman said students with higher needs often incur higher costs for districts.
Duchow said that putting a four-year limit on referendum requests for recurring funds gives communities the ability to react to changing circumstances and that school districts should justify to voters why they need the funds. She said she would be open to discussing a different limit when it comes to nonrecurring referendum requests.
“It’s also not fair that everybody could vote for that referendum and then decide, hey, this is really too expensive. I can’t afford these property taxes and then they move out, and I’m still there paying the referendum,” Duchow said.
Duchow said she hadn’t yet spoken with any school district leaders when she was interviewed by the Examiner in early March, but planned to reach out before a public hearing on the bill.
“I’m sure I can already tell you how the schools are going to feel. The schools are going to feel they want their recurring referendum, just like we want your boss to give you a 20% raise every year without you justifying why you should get it,” Duchow said. “That’s what the schools want, too. I don’t blame them. I would, too, but we can’t do that to our taxpayers.”
According to the Wisconsin Eye on Lobbying website, the Wisconsin Education Association Council has registered against the bill, while the Wisconsin REALTORS Association has registered in favor.
Lawmakers have added new restrictions to school referendum requests before. The 2017-19 state budget limited scheduling of a referendum requests to only two per year and only allowed them to be held on regularly scheduled election days.
“It used to be that referendums could be called by a school district at any time, but the Legislature said… we don’t want you to have the option to run so many referendums,” Chapman said.
Chapman noted in an interview that recurring referendum requests pass at lower rates than other types because it is harder to convince taxpayers. She said voters “know how to handle this” and lawmakers shouldn’t further reach in to restrict district’s options.
“Some districts and some communities want a recurring referendum,” Chapman said. “School districts have the option of asking for recurring and sometimes they do and voters sometimes approve them because they’re asking to fill structural budget holes that are never going to go away. They’re asking for basic operating dollars that they’re going to need in four years.”
A recent Marquette Law School poll found that Wisconsinites are becoming increasingly concerned with holding down property taxes since 2018 and less favorably inclined toward increasing funding for K-12 public schools.
Chapman noted that districts also often make nonrecurring referendum requests for recurring costs because they are an easier ask, though this places districts in another difficult position.
“As soon as you go to nonrecurring referendum in this environment with grossly inadequate state funding and state policies to support schools financially, you are now going to be in your own personal fiscal cliff,” Chapman said. “You’re going to have to go again, and probably for more, because your costs have gone up and funding does not keep up with inflation.”
Bills meant to provide ‘fairness,’ ‘transparency’
Lawmakers, concerned about the MPS referendum, requested a Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo last year that found some school districts in Wisconsin could see a decrease in state aid after the MPS referendum due to the way that equalization aid is calculated.
Equalization aid acts as a form of property tax relief, according to the Wisconsin School Business Officials Association. The amount of aid a district receives from the finite pot of money distributed by the state is determined by a formula that depends on a district’s property wealth, spending and enrollment.
Spending triggered by referendum requests is one factor in determining districts’ equalization aid, and Milwaukee — like other districts with low property wealth per pupil compared to the rest of the state — will receive more state aid per pupil than other districts with higher property wealth per pupil as a result of its increased spending from the referendum.
Chapman noted, however, that all 148 referendum requests for operating expenses in 2024 affect the share of equalization aid districts receive. She also emphasized that it’s not the only factor affecting the amount of aid districts get.
“Some districts have increasing enrollment, which means they’re going to pull more money away from Milwaukee.” Chapman said. “There’s all of these factors that affect every single district, and they intertwine with each other.”
Republicans viewed Milwaukee’s referendum as taking too much from other districts.
“Is it fair to the students, parents and taxpayers in Waukesha, Madison, Wautoma and others suffer without having the right to cast a vote?” the bill authors Rep. Scott Allen (R-Waukesha) and Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin) asked in a memo. “Local school referendums should not have a significant negative impact on other districts. Simple fairness demands this type of thinking.”
The lawmakers’ bill would exclude any district referendum request worth more than $50 million from being considered when determining equalization aid. The effect of the bill would be that districts that pass a large referendum would have their aid eligibility reduced, leaving local taxpayers to pay more of the cost. The bill would only apply to districts below a certain property wealth value.
Chapman said the bill would penalize districts for being larger and having lower property wealth and is an example of lawmakers trying to micromanage local entities.
A final bill introduced by Allen and Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton) would require that tax impact information be added to ballots. Currently, referendum ballot questions are required to include the dollar amount of the increase in the levy limit.
Under the bill, referendum questions would also need to include the estimated interest rate and amount of the interest accruing on the bonds, any fees that will be incurred if the bonds are defeased and a “good faith estimate of the dollar amount difference in property taxes on a median-valued, single-family residence located in the local governmental unit that would result from passage of the referendum.”
Proposal criticisms
Freshman Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) said he wasn’t inclined to support a ban on recurring referendum requests given the inconsistency in state funding.
“We go through this sort of toxic [state] budget cycle every two years and districts have to levy, and they don’t even know what to plan for, so recurring referendums are obviously a response to that,” Phelps said.
Phelps said the question of fairness is relevant when talking about the referendum process, but the framing of the Republican proposals is misguided, given the state’s over $4 billion budget surplus.
“It is not fair to taxpayers that, depending on what school district you live in, you might have an astronomical property tax bill just to keep that district running. That’s not fair,” Phelps said. He said the state of Wisconsin is “underfunding public schools and not using the taxes people already paid.”
Derek Gottlieb, an associate professor at the University of Northern Colorado and senior research director for School Perceptions, an education research firm, said Republicans appear to be “operating on behalf of the taxpayers across the state who have voted no on school referendums and yet lost and so had their taxes raised anyway.”
“Suddenly, because so many [referendum requests] are passing, homeowners, taxpayers who don’t want to have their taxes raised are saying that this is unfair or we shouldn’t have to have our taxes raised just because everybody in our community wants to raise our taxes and Republicans are coming to the defense of those folks,” Gottlieb said.
According to the Wisconsin Policy Forum, while the number of requests continues to rise, approval rates have started to decline with the 66.2% approval rate in 2024 being the lowest in a midterm or presidential election year since 2012.
Gottlieb said some of the concerns raised by lawmakers are valid. For example, he said the current terms used to describe referendum questions are “obscure” and unclear.
“Why not just say a permanent referendum and a temporary referendum?” he asked. “You could do a lot to increase the transparency of what people are voting on if you made that little language change.”
Gottlieb also said that he does have “sympathy” for those who don’t think there should be permanent funding requests, but acknowledged that this would have consequences for districts because it removes predictability in planning.
However, he said he doesn’t agree that the potential for people to move out of a community or into a community in the future should be the deciding factor in funding decisions.
“That’s a basic feature of any community anywhere,” he said.
The argument that “it is not a legitimate exercise of public governmental power to make a decision for a community, given the fact that the community will change in the future…is ridiculous,” Gottlieb said. “If that were the case, it would make all public decisions fundamentally illegitimate.”
The increasing number of referendum requests, Gottlieb said, is a sign that revenue limits are set too low, at an amount that is unacceptable to community members. He noted that when operational referendum requests fail, the schools typically cut theater arts, advanced placement coursework, second language instruction, foreign language instruction and other programs that aren’t required by the state.
Chapman called the proposals a “BandAid” on the issues districts are facing that “isn’t even really fixing the problem.”
“[If] legislators really wanted to protect taxpayers and make sure schools have what they need, they would do something like keep revenue limits inflationary [and] significantly improve the funding for special education, which would help every single kid,” Chapman said.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order March 14, 2025, imposing dramatic cuts on seven federal agencies, including the Institute of Museum and Library Services. (Catherine McQueen/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s move late Friday to dismantle the agency that serves as the primary federal funding source for libraries and museums nationwide prompted questions over the weekend about how the agency can continue to carry out its core work.
After Trump signed an executive order Friday that called for severe reductions in seven federal agencies, including the Institute of Museum and Library Services that provided $266.7 million in grants and other awards last year, groups representing museums and libraries across the country called on Trump to reconsider the move and asked Congress to intervene on their behalf.
“By eliminating the only federal agency dedicated to funding library services, the Trump administration’s executive order is cutting off at the knees the most beloved and trusted of American institutions and the staff and services they offer,” the American Library Association, the oldest and largest library association in the country, said in a statement over the weekend.
The Friday order, titled “continuing the reduction of the federal bureaucracy,” called for eliminating “to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law” listed agencies’ functions that aren’t statutorily mandated. It also called for reducing the “performance” of agencies’ mandated functions and “associated personnel” to the legal minimum.
The Institute of Museum and Library Services, which Congress established in 1996, has a mission to “advance, support, and empower America’s museums, libraries, and related organizations through grantmaking, research, and policy development.”
The states that received the highest total awards from the agency in 2024 were California at $26.4 million, New York at nearly $20 million, Texas at $15.7 million, Florida at $11.4 million and Illinois at $11.3 million, according to data from the agency.
The order to downsize the agency is part of Trump and billionaire White House adviser Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service’s initiative to slash federal government spending and go after what they deem unnecessary.
“The American people elected President Trump to drain the swamp and end ineffective government programs that empower government without achieving measurable results,” a White House fact sheet accompanying the order read.
The other agencies affected are the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, the U.S. Agency for Global Media, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in the Smithsonian Institution, the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund and the Minority Business Development Agency.
Library, museum organizations react
The American Library Association said the order would decimate services such as early literacy development and reading programs, high-speed internet access, employment assistance, homework and research resources and accessible reading materials.
The organization called on Trump to reconsider his “short-sighted” decision and encouraged lawmakers to “visit the libraries that serve their constituents and urge the White House to spare the modest federal funding for America’s libraries.”
EveryLibrary, an organization dedicated to building support for libraries, said in a Saturday statement the group is “extremely concerned” the wording in Trump’s executive order “could result in cuts to the core functions” of the agency.
The organization said the agency’s “statutory obligations to state libraries include federal funding through the Grants to States program, the National Leadership Grant program, and all current contracts, grants, and awards” and that “this core work cannot be disrupted or dismantled by DOGE.”
In a statement shared with States Newsroom on Monday, the American Alliance of Museums, which includes 35,000 museums and museum professionals, said Trump’s effort “threatens the critical roles museums and museum workers play in American society, and puts jobs, education, conservation, and vital community programs at risk.”
“Museums are vital community anchors, serving all Americans including youth, seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans,” the statement read. “Museums are not only centers for education and inspiration but also economic engines — creating jobs, driving tourism, and strengthening local economies.”
Neither the Institute of Museum and Library Services nor the White House responded to a request for comment Monday.
CONCORD, N.C. — More questions than answers currently exist on what the funding future of clean school buses will look like, following program cuts, elimination of EV mandates, and executive orders from the Trump administration.
Joe Annotti, the vice president of incentives for TRC Clean Transportation Solutions, attempted to provide some clarity in “an era of deregulation” on Sunday during STN EXPO East in Charlotte. He noted that despite the belief stated by media that President Donald Trump is making unprecedented changes and reevaluations of agencies and programs, the actions are normal. Annotti relayed that presidents come in all the time, stop and relook at programs, before funds get flowing again.
He referenced 2005, when former President Goerge Bush altered federal grant structures to states by moving to “blocks,” and when former President Barack Obama immediately cut 5 percent of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) operating budget.
What is unprecedented, however, is the amount of funding being allocated to school buses, primarily clean school buses. That, by way of the Clean School Bus Program, is now in peril.
Meanwhile, Annotti said there are currently over 700 clean transportation state and local incentive programs. Of those, 124 could fund school bus projects, whereas 26 prioritize or exclusively fund school bus projects. He said $3 billion is available from the combined 124 programs, yet more than half of that ($1.8 billion) funds the 26 school bus eligible programs.
In his opinion, he said those 26 programs are the ones on the Trump administration’s chopping block.
“Gone are the days for the flat rate voucher incentives,” he said, adding there’s a renewed focus on cost-effectiveness. Federal programs covering 80 percent of the cost of the bus is probably a thing of the past.
Of the 124 programs that could fund school buses, 25 are exclusive to battery-electric and 50 of them are located in California, he added.
He discussed expectations, such as federal agencies may terminate award programs that no longer effectuate goals or agency priorities. He noted that multiple grant programs across agencies are cancelled or modified or modified.
Annotti answered attendee questions and said that in terms of the EPA Clean School Bus Program funding, rounds 3 and 4 are where he sees disruptions. Round 1, he said, is done. Round 2 awards were issued, and most are under a contractual agreement, which he said leads him to believe they are safe.
Round 3 has not yet been awarded, and the EPA has not yet issued funding decisions, which may never happen, he noted. He said Round 4, which was supposed to be announced later this year or early next, is not on his funding calendar at all.
He clarified that if the program is cut, projects would be funded up until the day that announcement is made. Any purchases made prior to a decision would still be funded.
As for the possibility of manufacturers raising their school bus prices due to the impending Trump tariffs, he said the EPA won’t allocate more award funds than called for in the original contract agreement.
Annotti advised attendees to assess what stage in the federal reward process they are in, whether they’ve actually won award, if they’ve spent federal money, or they’re in the process of purchasing. He advised fleets to act cautiously, as money is not guaranteed, adding that when writing grants fleets need to recognize the changed priorities and tailor their message to the audience.
“Change your tune when asking for funding,” he said, noting that attendees need to consider how their proposed project is benefiting the EPA’s latest priorities. “Match with what they need to hear, not what you want to say.”
He said current unpopular topics with the feds include: Regulations, DEI/community engagement, and renewable energy. Popular topics include: Tariffs, deregulation, economic development and fossil fuels.
TRC is hosting the Advanced Clean Transportation Expo next month in Anaheim, California. School Transportation News is an official media sponsor of the event.
U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon said an attempt by President Donald Trump to shut down the Department of Education will not cut off funds “for those who depend on them,” namely children protected by the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) and other “essential programs.”
She issued the statement Thursday following Trump’s signing of the executive order to make make good on his campaign promise to dismantle the Department of Education, which Congress created in 1979. Trump’s order would need congressional approval to move forward.
It directs McMahon and her staff “to take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return education authority to the States, while continuing to ensure the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs and benefits on which Americans rely.”
“Closing the Department does not mean cutting off funds from those who depend on them— we will continue to support K-12 students, students with special needs, college student borrowers, and others who rely on essential programs,” McMahon said in a statement Thursday. “We’re going to follow the law and eliminate the bureaucracy responsibly by working through Congress to ensure a lawful and orderly transition.”
The Education Department oversees programs and funding enacted by Congress. If the House and Senate eventually approved its closing, these programs would need to be moved to another cabinet-level department. McMahon suggested during her Senate confirmation hearing that IDEA could reside in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Prior to the Education Department’s creation by Congress in 1979, IDEA and other education law resided in the Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
Other programs that would require continued oversight are Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, Title IX of the 1972 education amendments, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Trump’s executive order also prohibits Education Department programs or activities that receive federal education funds from advancing DEI or gender ideology.
“I can’t react to a non-concrete plan, so first I want to wait and see how transparent is Secretary McMahon going to be about the process that she’s going to use,” commented Noelle Edgerson Ng, associate executive director of policy and advocacy for AASA: The Superintendents Association. “As she’s cutting and gutting, is she using a mallet or a scalpel? What data is she using to inform what changes she makes? The approach they take informs the pushback or the response. And we don’t know that yet, so we’re going to take a breath.”
The National Association for Pupil Transportation issued a statement Friday afternoon.
“During this transition to a reduced department, we are eager to learn how IDEA funding and programs will be administered,” NAPT wrote. “IDEA funding is important to the ability of our members to safely transport children with disabilities.”
The statement also said NAPT looks forward to collaborating with the Education Department “to ensure safe and efficient transportation of America’s students.”
NAPT added it believes the Trump administration’s attempt at “examining and ending bureaucratic excess in all areas of the federal government” will extend to other NAPT partners such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and the National Transportation Safety Board.
Meanwhile, Trump’s executive order also targets “Dear Colleague Letters” that are issued by the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights and Office of Special Education Programs. Several have addressed transportation of students with disabilities and preschoolers. Trump’s order states these letters “have forced schools to redirect resources complying with ideological initiatives, which diverts staff time and attention away from schools’ primary role of teaching.”
AASA’s Edgerson Ng added the executive order makes any work being done by the Office of Civil Rights without a statutory mandate easier to be rescinded.
“That doesn’t mean that the Trump administration might not try to cut and gut programs that have a statutory base, but those will face a much more solid challenge because many of these programs existed before the Department of Ed, and so they’ll continue to exist after whatever [the executive order] is. They exist in law, so they have to exist in implementation,” she said.
Earlier this month, the Education Department announced layoffs affecting half the workforce, another attempt to dismantle the agency. A coalition of 20 Democratic-led states responded with a lawsuit last week against the Trump administration seeking an injunction. A U.S. district court issued a temporary restraining order to stop the firings and reinstate thousands of probationary employees.
“I think it’s feasible to anticipate that the Department of Ed, under Secretary McMahon’s cut and gut, do they over-cut and then find that they’re not able to meet the intent of Congress? And then, somehow, they set a middle ground where some people are brought back? Sure,” Edgerson Ng said. “But what that looks like again depends on the approach they take to cutting people and cutting programs.”
McMahon, the former executive for WWE and wife of founder Vince McMahon, drew the ire of many educators nationwide—including several student transporters spoken to on background for this article—when she was unable to say what the IDEA acronym stands for during a March 11 interview with Fox News commentator Laura Ingraham.
“This is my fifth day on the job. I’m trying to learn very quickly,” McMahon said.
Yellow continues to go green as school districts across the country modernize fleets with the latest alternative fuel technologies, to support cleaner air for students and the neighborhoods where they live. Through expanded offerings in bio- and renewable diesel, ultra-clean propane and natural gas, and battery electric offerings that eliminate tailpipe exhaust, owners and operators have options to support their sustainability initiatives in an economic fashion.
From traditional bus manufacturers to startups and new market entrants, manufacturers are offering near- or zero-emission school buses and showing no signs of slowing down. Shifting incentives and regulatory landscapes have not dimmed the prospect of the school bus industry’s clean transportation future.
The Changing Chess Board of School Bus Manufacturers
Original equipment manufacturers like Blue Bird, IC Bus, Thomas Built Buses, Collins and Micro Bird offer diversified product portfolios, including options for near-zero and zero-emission school buses. Market competition, specifically in the all-electric space, has increased with companies like RIDE, GreenPower Motor and others entering the market with zero-emission solutions.
Up until last year, trends showed that the silver bullet solution of zero emissions would be the favored choice for the school bus market. Indeed, many schools have successfully deployed battery electric fleets and are having favorable operational results. However, recent economic, political and customer demand changes have started telling a different story — diversified product lines give consumers the flexibility to find the right solution.
One of the most telling signs for electric vehicles was the slate of bankruptcy announcements, from onetime industry darlings like Lion Electric on the school bus side and Nikola Corporation on the heavy-duty truck side. Further, the fate of unprocessed orders and recently delivered assets — and the deleterious impacts of grant funding pauses — would seem to indicate that a diversification in product offerings could be a viable risk mitigation strategy during times of market uncertainty.
Incentive Structures Expected to Change for School Buses
The EPA’s Clean Schol Bus (CSB) Program has served as the primary incentive for alternative fuel school buses over the last three years. Indeed, since 2022, CSBP funding has supported over 1,300 school districts to deploy over 9,000 alternative fuel school buses. The Diesel Emissions Reduction Program (DERA) has also funded more than 3,000 clean diesel and alternative fuel school buses since 2012.
Though many diesel replacement funding programs across the country use cost-effectiveness to evaluate projects and funding levels, the school bus market has often seen a flat rate or voucher-style incentive. Most recently, the EPA set the voucher for battery electric buses at more than $300,000 per unit. With increased scrutiny on federal incentives and their effectiveness, the incentives landscape will likely move away from these flat rate structures.
Beyond the EPA’s initiatives, several states have prioritized the transition to diesel alternatives by creating grant programs that offset the upfront investment for the buses and required infrastructure. California’s most recent incentive, the Zero Emission School Buses and Infrastructure (ZESBI) Program, aligns with similar initiatives in Colorado, New Jersey, and New York that promote all-electric options. Michigan, too, prioritizes clean school buses, though its program includes eligibility for all-electric and near-zero emission options. In total, these state-level programs may drive as much as $1 billion in aggregate incentives to the alternative fuel school bus market.
Aligning with President Donald Trump’s executive orders and the focus on domestic energy, several alternative fuels seem primed to gain (or perhaps regain) momentum — renewable diesel/biodiesel, natural gas, and propane. Hardly a new technology, propane in particular has served as a clean transportation industry stalwart for decades, lauded by its fleet adopters for its ability to provide affordable, efficient, and accessible clean transportation. More and more school districts, businesses and transit agencies may review the viability of these domestically produced alternative fuel options as a means of affordably diversifying fuel supply.
Shifting the Lens: Finding Market Drivers in a New Administration
The slate of recent executive orders has introduced a new set of agendas, initiatives and motivators. While the market continues to absorb and assess the potential implications, one element stands out in stark contrast, the short-term funding landscape holds plenty of uncertainties. From the status of existing EPA programs to the planned use of funds from the Investing in Infrastructure and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act, there is still much to understand about where future federal funding may come from for alternative fuel school buses. However, as noted above, state funding programs offer a viable solution.
Beyond incentives, additional motivators for going green include regulatory mandates and carbon credit programs. In California, Assembly Bill 579 requires school districts to purchase zero-emission buses starting in 2035, and other states such as New York and Washington have proposed or approved similar measures. The portfolio of states with carbon credit programs grew from three to four with the addition of New Mexico.
Now, New Mexico as well as California, Washington and Oregon are generating revenue for fleet operators and creating additional interest in battery electric projects.
Final Thoughts
America’s yellow school buses have made considerable strides to improve performance, air quality and safety, and these trends are expected to continue well into the future. Challenges and opportunities abound though, as market drivers, political and policy motivations, and sustainability trends continue to shift. Upcoming announcements at the Federal and state levels will be telling as to how the school bus market will need to adjust priorities and continue the adoption of alternative fuel technologies.
Upcoming Events
Trying to stay on top of the changing policy and funding landscape? Look to STN’s events over the next few months as well as ACT Expo as critical opportunities to hear directly from funding agencies, fellow school districts deploying alternative fuel buses, and manufacturing partners. ACT Expo, the largest advanced commercial vehicle technology showcase in North America, offers just that, a four-day conference bringing together the leading alternative fuel manufacturers, infrastructure providers and fleet operators. Editor’s note – School Transportation News is an official media sponsor of ACT Expo.
ACT Expo, which returns to Anaheim, California, this spring, will host a school bus sector session on April 30 for transportation directors to learn more about this ever-changing landscape. STN EXPO’sGreen Bus Summits, occurring in Charlotte, North Carolina on March 23-24 and in Reno, Nevada on July 13-14, offer similar content around policy and incentives.
Joe Annotti, VP of incentives for TRC Clean Transportation Solutions, speaks during the 2019 ACT Expo.
Joe Annotti is the senior vice president of incentives for the TRC Clean Transportation Solutions, the organizer of ACT EXPO. He presents the session “State of Green Schools Buses” at STN EXPO East in on March 23.
The rally in the rotunda of the Wisconsin State Capitol was a chance for speakers to share their experiences of going to referendum. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.
Prentice School District, a rural district in the northern part of Wisconsin, will ask voters on April 1 to raise their property taxes and provide the district $3.5 million over the next four years for operational costs. It’s one of the smaller requests among the over 80 ballot measures — totaling $1.6 billion in requests — that will go before voters across the state next month.
Denae Walcisak, a member of a team campaigning to pass the referendum, drove three and a half hours from the Northwoods to attend a Friday rally at the Capitol organized by the Wisconsin Public Education Network (WPEN). She spoke about her district’s third time trying for a yes and described the lengths community members are going to for students in her district.
Her dad, who is a school board member, put off knee surgery for almost a year, Walcisak said, while he donated his time and money to fill in as a school bus driver in the rural district and to transport students to field trips and games.
“Teacher organizes fundraisers for the art club to pay for basic supplies… Our band teacher also teaches sixth grade reading. We have a part-time elementary gym teacher who is 82 years young. Our tech ed teacher bought a welding machine for his students with his own money… My son needs speech therapy. The school has tried twice to hire this year, but who wants to take a job at a school whose future is uncertain?” Walcisak said.
Even with the funding from the referendum, Walcisak said the district will continue to just scrape by. She called for more funding from the state.
“The lack of funding is affecting our whole community and our way of life. I ask you from the people of Prentice, please don’t let us fade away,” she said.
The rally marked the end of Public Schools Week, an annual recognition of Wisconsin’s public schools and a time advocates use to call for supporting and investing. Gov. Tony Evers issued a declaration on Monday reminding Wisconsinites that public education is a right and that public schools need support and investment from elected officials.
The rally in the rotunda of the Wisconsin State Capitol was a chance for speakers to share their experiences of going to referendum — the stress of repeatedly asking for them and consequences of failure — and to call for the state to make greater investments in schools.
A rally goer rolls out a scroll with the names of every school district that has gone to referendum since the last state budget. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.
WPEN Executive Director Heather DuBois Bourenane said the use of school referendums is an “overwhelming,” “expensive” and “incredibly disequalizing” way of funding schools. A scroll with the names of every school district that has gone to referendum since the last state budget was rolled out and suspended from the third floor of the building, reaching down to the ground floor.
“Not all of these referenda passed… Some of them had to go more than once, and still didn’t pass. Some of them had to go again and again and keep asking for less,” DuBois Bourenane said. “When we fund our schools like this, our gaps get wider and wider.”
State Superintendent Jill Underly, who is running for a second term in office against school choice advocate Brittany Kinser, said the underfunding of Wisconsin’s schools has reached a “critical point.”
“With the next state biennial budget, we have a chance — a real chance — to finally catch your school districts up and to give them what they need to thrive,” Underly said.
The pleas from rallygoers come as the budget writing process picks up in the state Capitol. Evers introduced a state budget proposal last month that would invest an additional $3 billion in K-12 education, and Republican lawmakers, who have said Evers’ proposal costs too much and therefore isn’t serious, are preparing to write their own version.
Jeff Pressley and Joni Anderson, members of the Adams-Friendship School Board, and Tom Wermuth, the district’s school administrator, spoke to the repetitive and divisive nature of the school referendum process.
“We’re on the treadmill for referendum endlessly. We live literally paycheck to paycheck or referendum to referendum,” Pressley said, adding that the state’s funding formula is the problem with school funding.
The state’s complex school funding formula takes into account a combination of state, federal, and local aid. Of the funding, local property taxes and state aid are the two largest sources of revenue for schools, but school districts are restricted in how much they can bring in by state revenue limits.
Revenue limits were adjusted for inflation until 2010 and since then, lawmakers have only sometimes provided increases. Currently, school districts receive a $325 increase annually in their per pupil revenue limits.
Referendums are a way for districts to exceed their revenue limits, and schools have begun relying on them increasingly to meet costs. Last year, a record number of school districts went to referendum.
Adams-Friendship Area School District school administrator Tom Wermuth said his district can’t get off the referendum “treadmill.” Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.
“The funding formula in the state of Wisconsin worked significantly better from 1993 to 2010. During that time period, school districts were provided inflationary increases to the revenue limit…” Wermuth said. “Right now, we’re operating on a $3 million a year referendum. We’re in the second year of a four-year, non-recurring referendum… even with our referendum, we’re about $1.2 million dollars behind inflation. Like most districts, we can’t get off that treadmill.”
Pressley said lawmakers have made school boards and districts the “villain” by forcing districts to have to go to voters to meet costs.
“We have a lot of retired people on fixed incomes. Almost 50% of our funding for our schools comes from local property taxes. So, who’s the bad guy? It’s not the people in this building, it’s the people at the school district because you raised our taxes,” Pressley said.
Wermuth said he practically isn’t an educational leader anymore.
“I am a financial expert. I study spreadsheets and cannot get off selling referendums to the public,” Wermuth said. He added that the process is “incredibly divisive” and that “at some point in time, the tolerance is just not going to be. It’s not going to exist, regardless of what we try to do.”
Freshman Rep. Angelina Cruz (D-Racine) said that the problems facing school districts aren’t “unsolvable.” She said the state’s estimated $4 billion budget surplus could be used to help fund school districts, that the state could tax its wealthier residents to help afford costs and stop funding private school vouchers at the expense of public schools. She said that the recent budget proposal from Gov. Tony Evers was a good starting point as it includes raising the special education reimbursement to 60%, increasing per-pupil revenue and investing in student mental health services, universal free school meals and literacy education.
Cruz called on people to continue to speak up for better school investments — even as Republican lawmakers are likely to throw out all of Evers’ proposals.
“There is an appetite to fully fund our schools, and when the proposal comes back to not do that, you need to continue to show up, and use your voices to advocate for our kids,” Cruz said.
A recent study conducted for the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) claims that electric school buses (ESBs) are not only viable but also advantageous in Montana’s harsh winter conditions.
The study published last September by clean energy nonprofit VEIC evaluated all 17 ESBs that are currently operating across six school districts: Bigfork, Billings, Clinton, East Helena, Fairfield, and Havre. The findings indicate significant fuel cost savings, reliable performance in subzero temperatures, and positive feedback from both drivers and transportation managers.
A Montana DEQ spokesperson told School Transportation News the agency partially funded 11 of the 17 ESBs studied. The EPA Clean School Bus Program also provided funding.
One of the primary concerns regarding electric vehicles in Montana is their performance during severe winter weather. The study found that ESBs operated effectively even when temperatures dropped to 25 degrees below zero. While vehicle efficiency decreased by up to 40 percent in such extreme cold, the buses consistently met the required daily route distances. Notably, the study said ESBs demonstrated more reliable start-up performance compared to diesel buses, which often face challenges like fuel gelling in low temperatures.
Brian Picariello, the principal consultant and clean transportation lead at VEIC, emphasized the efficiency of electric school buses in extreme weather.
“One major takeaway from the study was that, on average, the electric school buses were almost four times more efficient than the diesel alternative,” he told STN. “The buses also had sufficient range to complete their assigned routes, even under extreme cold and hot conditions. In fact, during a significant cold front, the temperature dipped more than 20 degrees Fahrenheit below zero, and the diesel buses at one agency had to be taken out of service while the electric buses continued operation, albeit with a 30- to 40-percent range reduction.”
Havre Public Schools near the U.S-Canada border launched its electric school bus program in late 2022, putting two Lion C electric buses into service by early 2023. Allen “Woody” Woodwick, the district’s fleet manager, said skepticism was high at the start of the program.
“There was a lot of people that said you couldn’t run electrics up in Montana, so that was somewhat of a challenge,” Woodwick told Montana Public Radio earlier this month. “And it looks like we’ve been proving the simple fact is yes, we can.”
He shared with STN that the Lion ESBs “have been largely problem-free,” but he added that obtaining parts and service has been an ongoing issue, largely due to Havre’s remote location in north-central Montana.
“The few service techs they had were nowhere near Montana. They were expecting to expand but other issues arose,” Woodrick continued. “So, we plan on running the buses as we have been and figure out the challenges as they come, and source our parts from the suppliers or manufacturers.”
Other Montana school districts that participated in the study include Bigfork (one Lion C), Clinton (two Lion Cs) East Helena (one Lion C), Fairfield (three Lion Cs), and Billings (eight IC Bus CEs), with all buses deployed between January 2023 and January 2024.
The transition to electric buses has also resulted in notable cost savings. Each ESB averaged $1,575 in annual fuel savings compared to traditional diesel buses. Additionally, maintenance costs are expected to decrease over time due to the simpler mechanics of electric drivetrains, which have fewer moving parts and do not require oil changes or exhaust system repairs, the study noted.
However, the study highlighted that per-mile energy costs could vary, with fleets subject to utility demand charges seeing energy costs twice as high as those without such fees. This discrepancy emphasizes the role of local utility pricing structures in determining the overall cost-effectiveness of ESBs. According to VEIC’s full report, understanding these factors is critical for districts considering electrification.
Beyond economic advantages, the adoption of electric buses contributes to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants. ESBs produce zero tailpipe emissions, leading to improved air quality for students and the community. Even when accounting for emissions from electricity generation, the overall environmental footprint of ESBs is significantly smaller than that of diesel buses.
Picariello noted that even with the use of auxiliary diesel heaters in winter months, ESBs significantly reduced emissions compared to diesel buses.
“The buses in this study with auxiliary heaters, maintained efficiency and range during winter months better than buses in previous studies,” he explained, citing the example of NREL’s 2022 report on electric transit buses in Duluth, Minnesota. “Although the significance was not assessed directly, it does seem likely that the auxiliary fuel heaters allowed the buses to continue operating efficiently at extreme temperatures compared to buses that use electric resistance elements for cabin heating.”
Meanwhile, transportation managers and drivers have reported positive experiences with the new electric buses, according to the study. Drivers noted better acceleration and quieter operation, enhancing the overall transportation environment. Despite a slightly lower top speed compared to diesel buses, the performance of ESBs has met the daily operational needs of the districts.
Picariello emphasized the enthusiasm among drivers and school managers.
“We were also pleasantly surprised to hear how much drivers and school managers loved the experience once they were trained and got used to the new equipment,” he said. “It’s promising to hear that on-road performance across driving conditions met or exceeded that of internal combustion alternatives. It was also encouraging to hear all the folks who manage these fleets year after year would recommend them to other districts in the area.”
Regarding reliability, the study reported that ESBs were available for route service 82 percent of the time, compared to 94 percent of the time with diesel buses. The study noted that 72 percent of the out-of-service days for ESBs occurred in a single district. Excluding that district, the remaining ESBs had an availability rate of 93 percent. The primary causes of downtime were related to components outside of the electric drivetrain, highlighting the need for comprehensive maintenance training and support.
While funding is often cited as the primary barrier to widespread ESB adoption, Picariello pointed out additional challenges.
“Funding aside, the main barriers for schools are split in two categories: Infrastructure improvements and change management,” he explained. “Schools often need to work with a local electrician, charging manufacturers, and their utility to make the necessary electrical upgrades for more capacity and install charging equipment, all of which takes a lot of coordination and time and potentially cost.”
Picariello added that early collaboration with utilities is key to overcoming these challenges.
“The sooner a district can engage their local distribution utility to discuss the scope of the work, the better. From there, fleet managers, technicians and drivers need access to expert-level training and support services to help their teams get comfortable with the electric buses and charging infrastructure, like any new technology.”
He emphasized that ensuring contracts with vehicle OEMs and charging manufacturers include sufficient training and support can help districts confidently transition to electric fleets.
Gov. Tony Evers speaks to a group in Port Washington on Tuesday, Feb. 25, about highlights in his proposal for the state's 2025-27 budget. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)
PORT WASHINGTON — Holding forth for a crowd of more than two dozen people gathered upstairs from a local coffee shop, Gov. Tony Evers recapped his budget pitch Tuesday for a friendly audience.
The governor highlighted his proposals to hold down or cut taxes for the middle class, increase school funding with particular attention to special education, and make a sustained investment in child care providers.
Evers is touting his budget for providing $2 billion “in tax relief — and it’s all everyday stuff,” he said.
Boosting state investment in public education and in shared revenue with local governments, he added, will in turn make it possible for school districts and municipalities to hold the line on property taxes.
Evers also made a pitch — to willing ears — for the budget’s $480 million in child care support.
“That is something that, if you agree with me, you really have to work on this issue,” he said.
The governor’s 2025-27 budget is replete with big proposals, just like each one he’s proposed since taking office in 2019, including provisions for new agencies and vows to invest in sectors that have long complained of underfunding.
And as with each of Evers’ budgets, the Republican leaders of the state Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee dismissed the governor’s proposals the night he announced them and promised to follow up by stripping all of them from the budget draft on the first day of deliberations. Every biennium since Evers was elected in 2018, they have then built the budget “from the base” — in other words, from the spending plan as enacted in the last budget cycle.
Last week they announced minutes after Evers’ budget address they would follow the familiar script.
Reaching out to voters, supporters
Tuesday’s round table with local officials, small business owners, teachers and residents of the Ozaukee County city was the second in a series that Evers began on Monday with stops in Wausau and Superior.
Evers opened the session with a brief account of his recent visit to Washington, D.C., where he and other governors met with President Donald Trump, and where “people are on pins and needles” amid the drastic changes taking place in the federal government since Trump took office.
The governor emphasized the impending tariffs Trump has vowed to impose — 25% on goods from Canada and Mexico, among others — are “going to be a big deal,” potentially costing the average Wisconsin consumer $1,200 a year.
With that image as the scene setter, Evers went down a partial list of his budget’s tax proposals. He’s proposed eliminating the sales tax on medicine, utility bills, and cash tips for workers such as restaurant servers and others who are paid gratuities. Tips added to a credit card payment would not be included.
Part of the budget’s claim to $2 billion in tax relief reflects putting more state funds into education, shifting the burden for funding schools off local taxpayers.
“We will be investing heavily in public education, and that includes about $3.15 billion for K-12 schools, $800 million for University of Wisconsin System and a $60 million increase in the technical college system,” Evers said. The K-12 education money includes increasing the state’s share of special education funding, now about 30%, to 60%.
His proposal also would nearly double the personal exemption under the state income tax to $1,200 from $700. For low- and moderate-income state residents who qualify, the state would increase the earned income tax credit. Additional tax relief is aimed at veterans and surviving spouses.
Referring to a recent blockage in federal funding thathit Head Start providers across Wisconsin and nationwide before payments resumed, Evers questioned whether the 60-year-old federal child care and early education program for low-income families might meet an early demise.
“I’m not sure Head Start will survive the federal government” under the Trump administration, Evers said. “And that would cause things to be much, much more difficult” when it comes to child care.
Child care: ‘We’re going to lose providers’
Evers recapped how federal pandemic relief funds enabled Wisconsin to bolster child care providers under the Child Care Counts program. The monthly payments enabled providers to increase wages for child care workers without raising the fees parents pay for child care, but the last payments will end this summer.
“That money is gone, and now we have an industry that is struggling,” Evers said. “If we don’t do something proactive to support them — directly support them — we’re going to lose providers.”
But so far, he added, “I’m not sure the other side gets it.”
Laura Klingelhoets, who owns and is administrator of a child care center in the community of Belgium about 10 miles north of Port Washington, said staffing remains her biggest challenge.
Klingelhoets recalled a recent conversation with a father. His teenage children “can go to work,” he told her. “My toddler cannot go to work. I need the help now — and I need you to stay open.”
Bob Steffes, vice president and general manager at Allen Edmonds, the high-end shoe manufacturer that has its factory in Port Washington, offered Evers one example of how the struggle for child care hits employers: “We lose about 30% of our female [employees] that get pregnant,” he said.
Dana Glasstein teaches English as a second language and said she has seen “a lot of interrupted learning” for students who miss classes or put off taking them because they can’t get needed child care.
Klingelhoets said she’s had conversations with legislators on the Joint Finance Committee. “I have been very respectful in some of that lobbying,” she said, “but I have been told right to my face that women should not work — they belong at home, and child care isn’t a necessity in our state.”
School funding, lead pipes
Evers’ plan to increase the state’s contribution for special education would add “almost $3 million in our general fund for schools,” said Michael McMahon, superintendent of the Port Washington-Saukville School District. The district will hold a referendum April 1, asking voters to increase their property taxes to fund a new elementary school, replacing one built 70 years ago, McMahon said. The $59.4 million ask also includes money for deferred maintenance.
“We’ve been taking care of our facilities,” McMahon said. “We just have had to defer that to make sure we’re putting teachers in front of kids and keeping programming.”
Provisions in Evers’ budget proposal would replace sources of lead, from old paint in buildings to lead water pipes. It contains $100 million for renovations removing lead paint in schools, home and child care centers, $7 million to replace lead water lines for home-based child care providers, and $200 million to replace homeowners’ lead service lines.
In Port Washington about 800 lead water service lines need to be replaced, said Dan Buchler, the city’s water utility director. At $7,000 a line, the cost is the responsibility of property owners.
“We’re putting a huge burden on them,” Buchler said. “Just because you live in a house that has a lead line, you didn’t put that line in the ground. It’s not your fault.”
Urging voters to prevail on their lawmakers
Meeting with voters and urging them to let lawmakers know their concerns has been a standard political tactic for the Democratic governor as he’s confronted Republican majorities in both chambers of the Legislature.
“We need to have people engage with the [budget] bill,” Evers said in a brief interview after the session. “It’s important that people understand that.”
How this year’s budget deliberations unfold could offer a glimpse into the impact of the new legislative maps enacted in 2024 that are more evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats and resulted in a smaller gap between the parties in both houses after the November election.
“Some of Evers’ proposals frequently poll quite well, but a statewide audience has generally been irrelevant to the majority of GOP legislators who represent solidly red districts,” said John D. Johnson, a research fellow at Marquette University who has analyzed poll results and the state’s legislative maps, in an email message.
“However, since the 2024 redistricting, Republicans from safe districts no longer make up a majority of either chamber,” Johnson said. Evers may be “hoping that the Republicans representing swing seats will feel pressure to support popular policies he proposes.” Or perhaps, he added, Evers’ tactic could simply be “a rhetorical move made with an eye to the general election in 2026.”
The same dynamic works the other way, Johnson noted: “Of course, the flip side of this is that Republican legislators regularly try to pass bills they believe to be popular but which they know Evers will veto.”
Elon Musk and Donald Trump are busy smashing the state. Wisconsinites will have a chance to weigh in on candidates who support and oppose the anti-government crusade on April 1. | Getty Images Creative
The new Trump era is putting Republican nihilism to the test. In our closely divided swing state, the first official indication of whether Trump voters are developing buyers’ remorse will come, fittingly, on April Fool’s Day.
In the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, candidate Brad Schimel has received Elon Musk’s endorsement and is benefitting from a huge ad buy by Musk’s political action committee. And while some Republicans have expressed qualms about Trump and Musk’s assertions that they have unchecked power to ride roughshod over judges and the U.S. Constitution, Schimel has, notably, sided with Trump and Musk against the courts.
Last month, Schimel took to Vicki McKenna’s rightwing talk radio show to denounce the prosecution and sentencing of the Jan. 6 rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol after Trump lost in 2020, saying juries in Washington, D.C., were too liberal to deliver a fair verdict. Recently, on the same talk radio program, he criticized federal judges for blocking the ransacking of federal agencies by Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), accusing the judges of “acting corruptly” by daring to issue temporary restraining orders.
The race between Schimel and Democratic-backed candidate Susan Crawford will determine the ideological balance of the Court and, it seems, whether a majority of justices believe in the integrity of the court system at all.
Also on the April 1 ballot is the race for state schools superintendent, which pits a lobbyist for the private school voucher industry against a defender of public schools — an existential choice as the growth of schools vouchers is on track to bankrupt our state’s public school system and enrollment caps on voucher programs are set to come off next year.
The ideological struggle over the future of our state was on stark display this week as Gov. Tony Evers presented his budget plan — an expansive vision that uses the state surplus to boost funding for K-12 schools and the University of Wisconsin, health care, clean water and rural infrastructure, and leaves a cushion to help protect communities against what Evers called the “needless chaos caused by the federal government” under Trump.
In a familiar ritual, Republican legislators immediately shot down Evers’ plan, denounced it as “reckless spending” and promised to throw it in the trash and replace it with a stripped-down alternative based on austerity and tax cuts.
“Wisconsin voted for Donald Trump and his agenda to cut spending and find inefficiency in government,” Assembly Speaker Robin Vos declared.
But did they?
It’s not clear that most Wisconsinites wanted what Trump and Musk are delivering — cuts to health care and veterans’ services, the claw-back of infrastructure projects, mass firings at the park service and the chaotic suspension of promised federal funds for child care and other essential services in Wisconsin.
For generations, Republicans have complained about “red tape” and “big government” and promised “freedom” and lower taxes to constituents who liked the sound of all that. Under Trump, we are seeing anti-government ideology reach its full, unchecked fruition. Trump’s No. 1 private donor, the richest man in the world, is laughing all the way to the bank. He’s using his access to trillions of dollars in taxpayer funds to cancel food programs for poor children and to bolster federal contracts that enrich himself.
This, in the end, is what privatization is all about — taking the collective wealth of millions of people who contribute to maintaining a decent, healthy society and concentrating it in the hands of one very rich, self-interested man.
The long-term, existential struggle between private wealth and the public good in Wisconsin includes the fight over whether to fund public schools or give away money to subsidize the tuition of private school families. It includes whether to be the second-to-last state to finally offer 12 months of postpartum Medicaid coverage to new mothers — something even our Republican legislators support, minus Vos. The two sides of our divided government are locked in a battle over whether our universities, public parks, infrastructure, clean water and affordable housing are a boondoggle or something we ought to protect.
Given what’s happening to our country, Wisconsinites will have to think hard about which side they’re on.
Democratic U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan talks Wednesday morning about programs in Wisconsin that could be affected by Republican proposals to cut the federal budget. Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine), left, and Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton), right, also took part in the state Capitol press conference. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)
As the Republican majority in Congress begins work on legislation to renew and expand the 2017 federal tax cut, Wisconsin Democrats met with reporters Wednesday to argue that the measure will have a devastating impact on the public.
The U.S. House has begun work on a budget reconciliation bill — complex legislation that will encompass a broad swath of federal programs. President Donald Trumpendorsed the effort on X Wednesday.
Senate Democrats at a Washington, D.C., press conference, including Wisconsin Sen. Tammy Baldwin,warned of “massive cuts” to Medicaid on the horizon Wednesday if the package is enacted, notwithstanding Trump’s comments this week that Medicare and Medicaid “won’t be touched.”
In Madison, U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Town of Vermont) along with Democratic leaders in the state Legislature gathered in the state Capitol Assembly parlor, where they focused not just on Medicaid but on a host of other programs that they said were important to Wisconsin.
House Republicans are seeking a $1.5 trillion cut in spending over 10 years, Pocan said, while raising the debt ceiling by $4 trillion, with the goal of a $4.5 trillion tax cut over 10 years.
Calculations by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found thatsavings from extending the 2017 tax cuts enacted in Trump’s first term would favor the richest 1% of taxpayers most dramatically.
“So this is about a tax cut for the wealthiest,” Pocan said. “It’s about a transfer of money from programs that affect the middle class and those aspiring to be in the middle class to the wealthiest — so that the rich will get even richer.”
Budget reconciliation bill
Under the budget reconciliation process, Pocan explained, Republicans have assigned spending targets to U.S. House committees for the agencies in their purview. The House Energy and Commerce Committee alone has been instructed to find $880 billion in cuts, Pocan said — and Medicaid is the largest program under the committee’s jurisdiction.
“And you know, really the better way to describe Medicaid is — that’s funding for opioid treatment, that’s funding for mental health, that’s funding for nursing home care, for maternity and infant care, help for people with disabilities, and a whole lot more,” Pocan said. “So it’s really about programs that affect people in Wisconsin.”
Medicaid serves more than 1 million people in Wisconsin, Pocan said, including one-third of Wisconsin children, 45% of working age people living with disabilities and 55% of nursing home residents.
Proposals circulating in Washington would cut $230 billion from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). “That would result in about a 23% cut to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program [SNAP],” Pocan said. Some 702,000 Wisconsinites “benefit from the SNAP program, and it really is at risk.”
Pocan scoffed at the idea that a project to cut government spending, headed by Elon Musk, was intended to promote government efficiency. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is not an official federal agency.
“DOGE is something that was created to find waste, fraud and abuse in government,” Pocan said. “The reality is, that is a fraud. It is really about finding $4.5 trillion ultimately to have a tax cut.”
Lawmakers hear from anxious voters
Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) said she and her colleagues in the Legislature are hearing daily from constituents anxious about the prospect of federal cutbacks.
“We are getting calls from concerned Wisconsinites about whether they will lose access to their health care or housing,” Neubauer said. “We hear those stories every day, and we know that the actions that Trump is taking at the federal level have real impacts, and we are going to do everything we can to protect the people of Wisconsin from these attacks.”
Sen. Dianne Hesselbein, the Senate minority leader, said she’s heard from farmers, parents and Medicaid recipients, among others, worried about changes in Washington.
“What happens in Congress over the next few weeks and months matters,” Hesselbein said. She urged Wisconsin voters to let their congressional representatives know about concerns they have.
“Contact Ron Johnson,” the Republican U.S. Senator from Oshkosh, Hesselbein said. “Let them know these real stories and what that’s going to mean to the people in our community. People are upset, they are worried. They’ve had enough, and we need to stop the madness.”
Impoverished students and veterans’ health
Speakers who joined Pocan highlighted the direct impact of other programs that have been targeted for reduction.
Title I funds go to school districts with a large number of children living in poverty, while the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provides additional aid to schools for teaching students with disabilities. Title I directs about $235 million a year to Wisconsin and IDEA about $271 million, Pocan said, and both have been targeted for reductions.
“Title I funding is a lifeline to my school right now, and for millions of students across America,” said Elizabeth O’Leary, a special education teacher in Madison. “These funds provide crucial support for instruction in reading, math, as well as special programs, after-school initiatives and summer learning opportunities.”
O’Leary described students with disabilities and students living in extreme poverty.
“Our school team works together to meet the basic needs of our students and also to teach them,” she said, adding that the school where she works has many students facing those and other difficulties.
“And while these students’ lives are difficult, they are so magnificent and they deserve the opportunity to learn and thrive,” O’Leary said. “Simply put, our students would not get the support they need, and staff would lose their jobs, without Title I funding.”
Other Trump administration actions outside the budget bill are also hitting Wisconsin, Pocan said, such as layoffs in the Department of Veterans Affairs health system.
Yvonne Duesterhoeft, a U.S. Air Force veteran, said the VA health system is a trusted health care provider for thousands of former service members.
“I wish everyone in America could have access to the type of efficient and comprehensive health care that I and many veterans have come to know in recent decades,” Duesterhoeft said.
Decades ago, she acknowledged, the system was underfunded and often indifferent to the needs of returning wartime veterans, but that has changed as Vietnam-era vets campaigned for, and won, important improvements in VA health care quality.
“We must guard against the recent and concerted fast-track effort to make VA health care terrible again,” she said.
Gov. Tony Evers delivers his 2025 state budget address. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)
Gov. Tony Evers unveiled a sweeping 2025-27 state budget proposal Tuesday evening that would come at the cost of $55.5 billion in state funds across the biennium — an increase of about 18%. The proposal lays out many priorities including investments in education and initiatives to protect the environment, tax relief for middle class Wisconsinites, tax hikes for the wealthy Wisconsinites and expansion of Medicaid access.
Evers’ address was his fourth budget address since taking office in 2019 and comes at the beginning of a state budget cycle when Wisconsin is expected to end the 2023-25 biennium with $4.3 billion in its general fund. The state had a record-high balance of $1.9 billion in its rainy day fund at the end of fiscal year 2023-24.
Altogether, with federal and other revenue, the state would have an operating budget of $119 billion over the next two years under Evers’ proposal and a total increase of about 20%. In addition to the funding, Evers’ budget would add about 880 state positions with federal funds for a total of about 75,613 state employees by July 2026. It would also add 1,302 positions, a total 36,766 positions, using state funds.
During his approximately 40-minute address to the state Senate and Assembly, Evers laid out major parts of the proposal to the standing applause of Democratic lawmakers and the seated stares of Republican lawmakers.
“The budget I’m proposing balances our priorities of investing in our kids and needs that have long been neglected while providing real and sustainable tax relief and saving where we can,” Evers said during his address. He declared that the budget would be the most “pro-kid” budget in state history.
Towards the end of his speech, Evers called on lawmakers to focus on “doing what’s best for our kids, delivering real solutions for real problems Wisconsinites face every day and doing the right thing.”
Republican lawmakers, however, said that most of Evers’ budget proposal would be “dead-on-arrival” and criticized him for trying to increase spending and grow the size of government.
Environment and water quality
Evers proposed more than $300 million towards eliminating lead from service lines, bubblers, schools, homes and child care centers. He also called for the state to invest $145 million towards combating PFAS contamination statewide and providing emergency resources, including bottled water for communities affected by water contamination.
The state allocated $125 million towards the effort in the last budget, but lawmakers and Evers never agreed on a bill that would allow the money to be used, so it remains unused.
“Addressing PFAS and other contaminants grows harder and more expensive with each day of delay,” Evers said. “Republicans and Democrats have to work together to finally get something done on this issue.”
Evers also proposed dedicating $100 million annually towards reauthorizing the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program for an additional 10 years — a total $1 billion investment aimed at supporting projects that improve the state’s water quality, protect key habitats and support investments in state and local parks and other public lands.
Adds $4 billion for K-12 and higher education
Building on his declaration in January of 2025 as ‘The Year of the Kid,’ Evers announced a vast education budget proposal that would invest $856 million for the University of Wisconsin System, nearly $60 million for the technical colleges and $3.15 billion in K-12 education across the state.
“Every Wisconsin kid should have access to a high-quality public education from early childhood to our K-12 schools to our higher education institutions,” Evers said. “I’m urging the Legislature to do what’s best for our kids by approving significant investments in public education at every level in Wisconsin.”
Evers acknowledged recent actions from the Trump administration and federal lawmakers affecting higher education. Most recently, the administration told universities to get rid of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives or risk losing funding. Universities, including UW-Madison, have also been grappling with the potential impacts of cuts to research funding.
“Politicians in Washington don’t know a darn thing about what’s going on at campuses across Wisconsin,” Evers said. “They don’t understand that our UW System has been part of Wisconsin since we first became a state — it’s enshrined in our state constitution. They don’t know how important our UW System has been to our state’s success or how important it is for our future.”
Evers’ UW System proposal would be one of the largest investments in the system in state history. He said the reinvestment in the UW System is necessary due to impacts of attacks and disinvestment over the last many years and the ongoing challenges that the state’s 13 campuses are facing.
“UW is facing campus closures and program cuts, students are facing tuition increases, and faculty and staff are facing layoffs, and with new federal efforts to cut higher education funding, things for UW could get a whole lot worse,” Evers said. “It’s up to us — each of us, together — to invest in our UW System, to defend it and to protect its promise for future generations.”
Some of the funding would include $128 million for financial aid; $308 million to support expanding access to schools through dual enrollment, direct admissions and transfer pathways; $56 million to support recruiting and retaining educators and staff; $22 million to support mental health services; $104 million to invest in innovative technologies and $166 million to increase wages.
He called on lawmakers and elected officials to help increase funding for public education, saying that many of them benefited from it when they were younger.
“Don’t tell our kids they don’t deserve to have the same opportunity you did,” Evers said.
Evers’ largest education investment proposal would be to the state’s K-12 schools, and he argued that the investments are necessary to help address student outcomes.
“I know some legislators have tried using student outcomes to argue against investing in our kids and our schools. Folks, you’ve got it backwards,” Evers said. “The outcomes we’re seeing are exactly why we must do more to do what’s best for our kids.”
The budget proposal includes $212 million towards raising per-pupil funding by $108 across the biennium, with additional support for economically disadvantaged students. He also wants to link the state’s per pupil revenue limits for school districts to inflation starting in fiscal year 2025-26. His budget projects that the change would raise limits by $334 per pupil in 2025-26 and $345 per pupil in 2026-27.
Evers called on lawmakers to approve his $147 million plan to provide free school meals to students, his nearly $300 million plan to invest in mental health support in schools and to ensure clean drinking water in schools.
“If the state isn’t committed to meeting our kids’ basic needs, then we can’t have serious conversations about improving outcomes,” Evers said. “It’s that simple.”
Evers also called for investing $80 million to support new literacy initiatives in the state, including literacy coaches and tutoring, that are meant to help improve reading scores statewide.
The proposed funding would include the $50 million to support a new literacy law enacted in the 2023-25 budget cycle, but after disagreements over implementation and a veto by Evers, most of the money remains stuck and unused. If it isn’t released by the end of the fiscal year in June, it will lapse back into the state’s general purpose revenue.
Evers also proposed dedicating $1.1 billion towards raising the state’s special education reimbursement to 60%. The current rate is about 30% for public schools.
The governor said the current system for funding schools isn’t working and called attention to the trend of districts asking taxpayers to raise their property taxes through referendum measures so schools can cover operational and building costs.
“This system isn’t sustainable — it creates winners and losers, haves and have-nots, but referendums are not inevitable,” Evers said. “Wisconsinites wouldn’t have to raise their own property taxes to keep school lights on and doors open if this Legislature invested in K-12 education from the get-go.”
Evers’ budget proposal also calls for making changes to Wisconsin’s voucher programs including the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, the Racine Parental Choice Program and the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program.
He wants to freeze the number of slots available to students, a proposal that comes as the caps on enrollment are slated to come off in 2026. He also wants to require participating schools to license educators by July 2028 and to require schools to allow students participating in the Special Needs Scholarship Programs to opt out of religious activities at written request. Evers also proposes putting the cost of Wisconsin’s voucher programs on people’s property tax bills.
Evers also wants to support the child care industry by investing $440 million in state funds to subsidize providers with the Child Care Counts program.
$2 billion in tax relief, raising taxes for wealthiest
Evers called for nearly $2 billion in tax relief and for raising taxes on the wealthiest Wisconsinites.
Part of the relief would be targeted at trying to limit further property tax increases. Property tax burdens across the state have grown in recent years in part because schools and local governments have turned to referendums as a way of securing funding.
“My budget would create a new incentive for local governments to freeze their local property taxes. If local governments agree not to raise local property taxes, they’ll get a direct payment from the state,” Evers said. “This will ensure local partners can still afford to pay for basic and unique local needs alike without property taxes going up.”
Under his proposal, about $1 billion would be directed towards aid for local governments that pause property taxes and direct property tax credits to taxpayers over the biennium.
His proposal would also increase the school levy tax credit by $375 million across the biennium.
Evers is also proposing eliminating taxes on tips — similar to a recent proposal from Republican lawmakers — and eliminating sales tax on electricity and gas for Wisconsin homes and on over-the-counter medications.
“Working to prevent property tax increases is a key part of my plan to lower costs for working families, but we can do more to reduce everyday, out-of-pocket costs for folks across our state,” Evers said.
One major proposal that went unmentioned in Evers’ speech would create a new, higher income tax bracket for high-income residents. The administration’s budget brief said the measure would “ensure millionaires and billionaires in Wisconsin pay their fair share.
Evers’ proposal calls for a new individual tax income tax bracket with a marginal rate of 9.8 % on taxable income above $1 million for single filers and married joint filers, and above $500,000 for married taxpayers who file separately. The current top tax bracket has a 7.65% rate and applies to single filers making $315,310 and joint filers making $420,420.
The proposal would bring Wisconsin an additional $719 million in the first year of the biennium and $578 million in the second.
Expand access to health care
Evers called for his fourth budget in a row to expand Medicaid to cover people up to 138% of the federal poverty level — a proposal that would expand eligibility to approximately 95,800 low-income individuals and allow the state to save $1.9 billion in state money and receive an additional $2.5 billion in federal funds over the biennium.
“Health care should not be a privilege afforded only to the healthy and the wealthy,” Evers said.
Wisconsin is one of 10 states to not expand Medicaid, according to KFF.
The budget also includes a proposal to extend Medicaid coverage for postpartum mothers to a year after the birth of a child. Wisconsin is one of two states that haven’t accepted the federal expansion.
“Nothing against Arkansas, but come on, folks. I’ve proposed this in every budget I’ve introduced as governor. There’s also a bipartisan bill to get it done that almost 90 legislators support,” Evers said. “One legislator should not be able to single-handedly obstruct a bill that’s supported by a supermajority of the Legislature.”
The comments got some of the loudest cheers from Democrats during the whole night.
Evers was alluding to Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), who held the policy up last session after the proposal passed the Senate and has said this session that he doesn’t support expanding “welfare” in response to questions about the policy. A bill that would accomplish this, with 23 Senate cosponsors and 67 Assembly cosponsors, recently received a hearing in the state Senate.
Evers also is proposing making Wisconsin the first state to start auditing insurance companies over denying health care claims. The state would provide a corrective action plan for insurers found to have too high denial rates. The plan would also create a “Public Intervenor Office” that would focus on helping Wisconsinites who have claims denied.
The governor said the measure would increase accountability and transparency for health insurance companies.
“If an insurance company is going to deny your health care claim, they should have a darn good reason for it. It’s frustrating when your claim gets denied and it doesn’t seem like anyone can give you a good reason why,” Evers said.
Preparing for Trump administration, potential tariffs
Evers’ budget would leave the state with about $646.3 million at the end of June 2026. Evers said this would be to ensure the state remains in a good financial position into the future and because of the unpredictability of the Trump administration.
“We must continue our work to be reasonable and pragmatic. The needless chaos caused by the federal government in recent weeks has already made preparing a state budget that much more difficult,” Evers said. “We prepared for the worst: popular programs that kids, families, schools, veterans, seniors and communities rely upon every day being drastically cut; resources and investments that Wisconsin is counting on and budgeted for, suddenly stalled or gutted; trade wars with Wisconsin’s largest export partners hurting our ag industries and our economy; costs for working families skyrocketing to the point they can’t make ends meet.”
Evers said that with the unpredictability, it wouldn’t have “been wise or responsible” to spend everything.
Evers also took aim at the Trump administration and the potential impact a trade war and tariffs could have on agriculture one of Wisconsin’s ’s largest industries.
The state, according to the USDA’s 2022 Census of Agriculture, has 58,521 farms with 13.7 million acres producing $16.7 billion in agricultural products.
Trump threatened to place 25% tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada in January, then paused implementing them for a month. While it was unclear which items would be included, fresh produce could be one category of goods.
“Wisconsin is on its way to becoming a top 10 state for ag exports — we can’t afford to lose our momentum because of tariff wars in Washington,” Evers said.
To help blunt impacts should the tariffs return, Evers proposed creating an agriculture economist position in the state government to help farmers navigate market disruptions and volatility caused by tariffs. He also wants to increase investments in the Wisconsin Initiative for Ag Exports and invest $50 million in the Agricultural Roads Improvement Program, which was created in the last budget to enhance roads, bridges and culverts in rural communities.
Lawmakers’ reaction
With Evers’ budget proposal introduced, the Republican-led Legislature’s 16-member Joint Finance Committee will go to work writing the state budget. The committee will hold some public hearings in the coming weeks.
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos says Evers’ budget is “dead on arrival.” (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)
GOP leaders were quick to throw cold water on Evers’ plan. “We are not going to let Wisconsin become Tim Walz’s Minnesota,” Vos said after the address.
JFC Co-Chair Sen. Howard Marklein said all the policy changes that Evers included would be stripped out and the next budget will be built from the current state budget, “the base.”
“We’re going back to base like we have for the last several budgets. We’re going to build a budget that’s fair, that’s sustainable into the future and doesn’t impact our businesses and our families adversely,” Marklein said.
Marklein also emphasized that the budget surplus is “largely one-time money” and said it should be used to support one-time spending, not ongoing programs.
JFC Co-chair Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) said that Evers budget was “bloated” and included “reckless spending.”
“Just finding ways to grow the government, making up all sorts of new agencies or sub-agencies or offices again tonight,” Born said. “We know we have to toss it to the side.”
Born said that instead, Republicans will focus on finding ways to shrink the size of government and find ways to support families and businesses “without the heavy hand of government.”
Republicans reiterated their intention to cut taxes, which they’ve repeatedly called a major priority.
Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu (R-Oostburg) said at a GOP press conference that the budget surplus only exists because Evers rejected the majority of their tax cut proposals last session. He called Evers’ tax relief proposals “gimmicky.”
“What we’re going to do is provide broad-based tax cuts to all taxpayers in Wisconsin, and that’s what we’re going to do before we send a budget to him,” LeMahieu said.
Vos and LeMahieu both said that President Donald Trump winning Wisconsin in November is a sign that voters don’t want increased government spending.
“Wisconsin voted for Donald Trump and his agenda to cut spending and find inefficiency in government,” Vos said. “Giving a 20% increase to the bureaucracy is the exact opposite of what people voted for.”
Vos said that Republicans would unveil specific tax cut proposals in the coming weeks.
In contrast to Republicans’ scorn, Democratic lawmakers called on their colleagues to get on board with Evers’ budget.
Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) said in a statement that the budget proposal would help “lower everyday costs for working people and improve the lives of residents across our state” and said it would do what is best for kids.
The budget, Hesselbein said, showed Evers’ “commonsense and comprehensive leadership on issues that matter to working people and families.”
“I hope my Republican colleagues put partisanship aside and do what is best for our state,” Hesselbein said.
Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) called the proposal “ambitious” and said it would “move our state forward, deliver good things for the people of Wisconsin and set our state up for long-term success.”
With less than two years remaining before school districts in New York are required to purchase only electric school buses, Gov. Kathy Hochul said she is open to delaying the mandate because of increasing challenges.
During a press conference on Wednesday, Hochul was asked by News10NBC if she is considering delaying the law she signed in April 2022.
“Absolutely,” Hochul responded. “We’ve been having many conversations about it. This is, aspirationally, we want this to happen. We also have to take into consideration that their circumstances have changed since this went into law.”
One of the circumstances she noted was the current inability of some school districts to acquire electric school buses, not to mention in 2027. She noted that already $500 million exists in a larger $4.2 billion environmental bond act to alleviate the costs of electric school buses and to help local school districts with the transition.
“This is not going to be a hard and fast rule because we have to deal with the realities that these school districts are facing,” she Hochul added.
There is already legislation, introduced on Jan. 24, that would alleviate some of the pressure. New York Senate Bill 3328 would authorize school districts to submit an opt-out waiver to the commissioner of education. Authorized districts would receive a permanent exemption from the mandate of zero-emission school buses. A bill died last year would have replaced the electric school bus mandate with a feasibility study.
The law already includes a one-time extension that would allow districts to be granted an additional two years to comply with the 2035 deadline of having fully electric fleets.
Perhaps most famously for this industry, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1971 with Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education to force school desegregation by using school buses. How exactly did we get to the most recent decision of the nation’s highest court that impacts student transporters, that being the hastened demise of TikTok, only for President Donald Trump to rescue the social media company on his first day back in the Oval Office?
Unlike with Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg, and at least a half-dozen other cases that dealt with race, due process and educational access, the TikTok ruling minimally impacted school district and bus company transportation departments, having more to do with balancing free speech with national security and the ability of other social media companies to potentially buy Chinese company ByteDance.
True, social platforms have become important and lucrative content creation tools used by school bus drivers and other student transporters to communicate and even promote their jobs. The rise of TikTok and other social channels demands employer oversight of and training for employees, to ensure posts are appropriate and safe, if even allowed.
Still, that decision was a mere sideshow to this spring’s apparent main event, which could result in long-lasting potential impacts on not only funding but student access to internet on school buses.
Though not scheduled on the docket as of this writing, SCOTUS is expected to deliberate on the constitutionality of the Universal Services Fund (USF) and, hence, the future of the federal E-Rate program administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). In addition to funding E-Rate, USF provides monthly subsidies to low-income earners for broadband and bundled broadband-and-voice service, support for areas with high costs for telecommunications services and support for healthcare providers in rural areas.
Last summer, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 9-7 ruling that USF is unconstitutional because it violates the so-called non-delegation doctrine. As Noelle Ellerson Ng, the associate executive director for advocacy and government at the American Association of School Administrators (AASA), explained in a July blog post, the judges said Congress delegated tax authority to the FCC. But the FCC then delegated that revenue raising power to a private company, the Universal Service Administrative Company, a nonprofit run by industry interest groups.
The National Association for Pupil Transportation sent an email to members in December signaling its support of the effort led by AASA to save USF because of the benefits to libraries, schools and, now, school buses. FCC said the USF provided E-Rate funding for 65,874 urban schools and 35,648 rural schools during the 2023 program year alone. All told, FCC said E-Rate has disbursed more than $50 million since it began in 1996. Student transporters last year and for the first time accessed E-Rate funds to reimburse 20- to 90-percent of the cost of installing and operating Wi-Fi hotspots in school buses, part of the FCC’s “Learning Without Limits” initiative.
In October, about two weeks before the presidential election, AASA recommended that USF and E-Rate needed protection, “to preserve equitable access to affordable broadband for disadvantaged communities, including schools.” But Trump’s Nov. 5 win further emboldened those who have had USF in their crosshairs for years.
It is noteworthy that three of the five FCC commissioners that pushed through ”Learning Without Limits” were Democrats. That power has shifted right. Already, Brendan Carr, a Republican, was named by Trump as the new FCC Chairman, replacing Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat and the chief architect of the initiative.
Last month, AASA filed its amicus brief in support of USF, with NAPT as one of the 20 supporting organizations. Additionally, a bipartisan group of 21 senators and eight representatives signed on.
Last summer, Ellerson Ng said the 5th Circuit Court decision could be applied nationally, meaning a halt to all USF programs. The decision could also be applied only within the 5th circuit, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. The third possibility: The decision is stayed pending appeal to the Supreme Court.
The justices could ultimately find in favor of USF. But as recent history and other decisions have shown, that is uncertain. If USF and E-Rate are struck down, program changes during the current fiscal year are not expected. But a decision to end USF and E-Rate would force school districts hoping to rely on funding for Wi-Fi hotspots on school buses to go back to the drawing board.
Editor’s Note: As reprinted in the February 2025 issue of School Transportation News.
OTTAWA, Ohio, – Endera, a rapidly growing technology and manufacturing leader in the electric bus market, announced today that it has secured $49 million in its latest funding round. The round includes a $36M equity investment led by Magnetar, a global multi-strategy alternative asset manager, with participation from Pulse Fund–whose founder, Tenzin Seldon, has joined Endera’s board of directors—and Endera’s longtime strategic partner, Pritchard Auto Company. The total also includes a $13M credit facility. This funding will enable Endera to scale manufacturing of its electric shuttle and school buses, expand its product line and create new American jobs at its world-class production facility in Ohio.
As the only vertically integrated American OEM of class 4 electric shuttles and school buses, Endera has built a reputation for delivering high-quality vehicles coupled with complete technology solutions. By leveraging its successful legacy internal combustion engine (ICE) manufacturing business, the company has transitioned into one of the fastest-growing leaders in the EV space, providing complete systems that address the growing demand for zero-emission specialty vehicles, particularly for the underserved government sector.
“This investment will accelerate our mission to revolutionize the specialty vehicle industry and accelerate the transition to clean mobility,” said Endera CEO and founder John Walsh. “At a time when America needs to prioritize domestic manufacturing and sustainability, Endera is leading by example creating jobs, driving economic growth and providing cost-effective solutions all while advancing American ingenuity.”
Endera offers fully customizable ICE and EV shuttles and school buses to achieve best-in-class reliability, safety, and quality, along with a proprietary powertrain that achieves the longest range and fastest charge time available. Endera has coupled this with an in-house fleet management software that features real time insights tailored to the transit sector, which includes a rider app and streamlined service response in one integrated platform. To date, the company has delivered the largest deployment of electric shuttles at a US airport and has been selected as a low-bid vendor for the CalAct contract, the largest state EV bus contract in US history.
“We see both commercial and climate value in Endera’s vertically integrated approach because it enables them to respond to customer needs with speed and precision,” said Tenzin Selden, Founder & Managing Partner of Pulse Fund. “By offering a holistic solution, they’re not just filling in gaps in the commercial EV market but solving challenges at every level. We’re excited to support their next phase of growth and contribute to the broader push for nationwide electrification.”
Endera, founded in California in 2019, made the strategic decision to manufacture in Ohio at its 250,000 square foot production facility, a former Philips plant, tapping into a skilled workforce and helping to revitalize the Rust Belt by creating sustainable, clean-energy jobs. The company has increased its production output 20-fold since acquiring the former Winnebago Metro Titan group in 2021.
About Endera:
Endera is a pioneering specialty vehicle company specializing in high-quality shuttle and specialty needs school buses, distinguishing itself as America’s only vertically integrated EV OEM. Endera is a technology company specializing in smart electric specialty buses, charging stations, and software solutions. As an end-to-end specialty vehicle maker, Endera provides vehicle design, manufacturing, and technology. Made in America, Endera delivers one of the lowest total costs of ownership over other commercial electric vehicles and provides sustainable solutions that rival its fossil fuel counterparts in price, technology, longevity, profitability, and service. For more information, visit: www.enderamotors.com.
About Pulse Fund:
Pulse Fund is a venture capital fund investing in high-growth climate companies. The team brings together a unique blend of investment and climate science expertise to identify long-term opportunities that drive capital, innovation, and tangible climate progress.
A year after the Ohio School Bus Working Group issued its final recommendations on school bus safety, a bill introduced in the state House seeks to increase fines of illegally passing motorists and to create a safety fund that would award school districts grants for updating their fleets with safety features.
Two recommendations are specifically addressed in the new bill. The first is, “The Ohio Department of Public Safety should work with the Ohio General Assembly to strengthen penalties for drivers who violate traffic laws in school zones and around school buses.”
The Ohio School Bus Safety Act (HB3), introduced on Jan. 23, would increase the penalties for drivers passing a stopped school bus. The bill states that anyone found guilty of passing a stopped school bus would be issued an unclassified misdemeanor and could receive a fine of no less than $250 and no more than $1,000. Repeat offenders will face greater fines and would need to attend a school bus safety course.
The second recommendation addressed is, “The Ohio Department of Education and Workforce should work with the Ohio General Assembly to develop and fund a grant program to help school districts invest in school bus safety features such as, but not limited to, seatbelts. The grant program should be needs-based.”
School Bus Safety Features Included in the Ohio School Bus Safety Act:
– External school bus cameras
– Crossing arms
– Lane departure warning systems
– Electronic stability control
– Lighted crossover mirrors
– Colorado rack test-approved bus frames
– Fully illuminated stop arms located at the front and rear of a school bus
– Fully illuminated “school bus” signs
– Collision avoidance systems
– All light-emitting diode lights
– Ground wash lights
– Reflective chevron
– Occupant restraining devices that conform to the school bus seat belt requirements
– Additional safety features that become available through advancements in technology and that are approved by the department of public safety and the department of education and workforce.
The school bus safety fund would consist of “money appropriated to it by the general assembly and the criminal fines collected for violations,” the bill states, adding that the fund would be used to make grants available to school districts to improve safety features on school buses, as well as to be used to support the department of education and workforce and the department of public safety in educating the public regarding the laws around school buses.
The bill adds that grants would be awarded to eligible applicants for the purchase and installation of school bus safety features. School districts would be able to purchase and install school bus safety features to replace old, broken or outdated safety futures, and to purchase additional school bus safety options when specifying new school bus orders.
The legislation adds that the director of education and workforce at the Ohio Department of Education would be tasked with establishing procedures and requirements necessary to administer the grant, including procedures and requirements regarding the grant applicants and grant award processes and amounts. Grant awardees would need to spend the funds within two years after they were distributed.
A sign in Madison, Wisconsin touting a municipal well project funding by President Biden's bipartisan infrastructure law. | Photo by Ruth Conniff/Wisconsin Examiner
In the last days of the Biden administration, just before Trump’s triumphant return and swearing-in on the site of the violent Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection, I happened across a sign touting federal investment in an infrastructure project on Madison’s east side.
Next to a strip mall, set back from the road and barely visible from busy East Washington Avenue, the sign touted PFAS treatment and upgrades to a municipal well. In large type it declared: “Project Funded by President Joe Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.”
Too little, too late, I thought. The sign, practically hidden on a scruffy corner where few eyes can see it, seemed like a metaphor for the Biden administration’s failed effort to take credit for all the good it did. Through federal investments it paved roads, repaired bridges, shored up the economy and set us on a path to recovery from a global pandemic. By the end of 2024, wages, job growth, employment, even consumer prices that had spiked worldwide after COVID hit, apparently driving voters in this country to elect Trump, are all in good shape. In the third quarter, real GDP hit its highest level of 2024 at 3.1%. Consumer spending was up. Unemployment was 4% nationally and 2.9% in Wisconsin. And everywhere across Wisconsin, federal investments have boosted the economy and improved lives.
As Erik Gunn reports, the Biden administration touted $9.2 billion in federal infrastructure investments in our state, including $1 billion for desperately needed repairs to the Blatnik Bridge connecting Superior to Duluth, Minnesota. There were also hundreds of smaller projects like PFAS remediation in that municipal well on Madison’s east side, which was shut down in 2019 and will be operational again by the summer.
Because of the Biden administration’s efforts, about 300,000 Wisconsin Medicare recipients are saving an average of $475 per year in prescription drug costs, which were capped under the Inflation Reduction Act. And the Department of Education projects that 62,000 Wisconsinites have had over $2.4 billion in student debt canceled thanks to Biden’s student debt relief efforts.
These are just a few of the highlights in a long list of Biden administration accomplishments put out by the Democratic National Committee as the former president bade farewell.
Wisconsin lost 83,500 jobs during Trump’s first term. During Biden’s four years in office, it added 186,800 jobs, as we bounced back from the pandemic. Federal pandemic relief funds allowed Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers to shore up schools, infrastructure, child care and health care in our state, even as Republican legislative leaders tenaciously blocked every effort to use the state’s historic multibillion-dollar surplus to fund any of those priorities.
Now Biden is gone and Trump’s MAGA Republican party has taken over every branch of the federal government. Here in Wisconsin, as across the country, MAGA loyalists are repeating Trump’s counterfactual talking points about how terrible Biden was for the economy and how government must be cut back in order to unleash a new era of American prosperity.
The battle between those who want to harness the power of government to help people and those who would rather drown it in the bathtub has been going on for decades. But the contrast between those ideologies has grown sharper. It’s more important now than ever to recognize what’s at stake.
At the start of the new legislative session, Wisconsin Republicans pledged to ignore Evers’ budget requests and focus exclusively on giving away the state surplus in the form of tax cuts.
“The money that we set aside for that tax cut will not be spent by this Legislature on other wants,” Assembly Speaker Robin Vos declared, “no matter how many special interests or tax-and-spend politicians apply pressure to get it out of the treasury’s hands.”
“More than $4 billion of taxpayer money is sitting in a bank account here in Madison, while rising prices impact the families who sent us here to serve them,” Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu concurred. “[Evers] wants to use that money to grow the size of government and send Wisconsin backwards.”
Even a state effort to curb school shootings, through Evers’ office of violence prevention, which he announced after the Abundant Life school shooting in Madison, came in for scathing cynicism from Republican legislative leaders.
“It takes a bureaucrat to think that another government agency is actually going to be effective,” Vos spat, summing up the effort as “a whole bunch of touchy-feely bureaucrats that are going to go around wasting time, wasting money.”
At the federal level, Republicans are singing the same discordant tune.
Scott Bessent, the hedge fund manager Trump nominated to lead the U.S Treasury Department, said during his confirmation hearing that extending Trump’s 2017 tax cut which disproportionately benefited the very wealthy is “the single most important economic issue of the day.”
“If we do not renew and extend, then we will be facing an economic calamity,” Bessent said. When Georgia Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock pressed Bessent on whether people who make more than $10 million per year really need a tax cut, Bessent replied, “There is no income level that I don’t think we should continue the [tax cut] as it was.” On the flip side, he endorsed deep cuts to federal spending that benefits less fortunate Americans. “We do not have a revenue problem in the United States of America; we have a spending problem,” Bessent said.
The real economic calamity is shaping up as the incoming Trump administration eyes deep cuts to Medicaid and other cuts that will fall most heavily on poor families. For good measure, Bessent also said he opposes raising the federal minimum wage above $7.25 an hour.
Ever since Ronald Reagan championed trickle-down economics in the 1980s, Republicans have promised that cutting taxes on the wealthy and reducing the size of government will benefit most Americans. But it hasn’t worked out that way. “Cutting taxes for the rich over the past 40-plus years has had a huge impact, leaving less money for public programs that benefit millions of Americans while enriching a tiny percentage of the population,” the Center for Public Integrity reports. Income inequality skyrocketed: “As more money flowed upward, the gap in accumulated wealth widened,” the Center reports. “In 2019, the top 10% of Americans had three times the wealth of everyone else in the country combined.”
It comes down to this: Do you believe it’s better for rich people to get tax cuts and for all of us to pay more to meet basic needs — getting only the health care, education, infrastructure – even firefighting — we can afford to pay for out of pocket? Or do you think we can, as a society, create a world where there is a baseline level of wellbeing, decent education, food, shelter and security for all?
Republicans have been arguing for a long time that government is broken, should be “drowned in the bathtub” — that no one should be required to chip in to support things like public schools or provide decent housing and health care and education to all, including children born into families that can’t afford all these things on their own.
Now we face an aggressive push by the incoming Trump administration and the Wisconsin Leislature’s majority to destroy programs that benefit poor kids, poor families and society as a whole
After years and years of underfunding Wisconsin’s public schools and our once-great university system, Republican legislators now say there’s no point throwing good money after bad, using the struggles of an underfunded system as an excuse for further cuts.
If we can’t remember what it’s like to have a functional society, it’s easy to become cynical and give up on the idea of a healthy public sphere.
Now, as we enter the era of Trump 2.0, it’s important to remember what we had, what we lost, and what we need to fight like hell to hang on to.
A joint U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Treasury webinar shared ways electric school buses could be more affordable using new tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act.
45W credit amount for the lesser amount of either 30 percent of basis of the qualified vehicle, or the incremental cost of the vehicle up to a credit maximum of $40,000, in the case of a vehicle with a GVWR of 14,000 pounds or more. The incremental cost is the excess of the purchase price of a clean vehicle compared to a comparable gas or diesel internal combustion engine. The 45W Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would provide pathways for taxpayers to determine the incremental cost.
In order for the vehicle to qualify, it must be made by a qualified manufacturer (a list of qualified manufacturers is on the IRS website), is acquired for use or lease, treated as a motor vehicle for use on public roads, has a battery capacity of at least 15 kWh, used predominantly in the 50 states plus Washington, D.C., and be either electric, plug-in hybrid or hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.
Meanwhile, Alternative Fuel Vehicle Refueling Property Credit (30C), published in the Federal Register in September 2024, allows an income tax credit equal to 30 percent for individuals and up to 30 percent for businesses for the purchase and installation cost of any qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling property that was placed into service by the taxpayer during the taxable year. This applies to all aspects of electric charging infrastructure as well as CNG, propane or hydrogen fueling centers.
Each charging point is considered a single item and therefore the credit is limited to $100,000 per business use property and $1,000 for personal use property. Electric panels, conduit/wiring, smart charge management system installed in different tax years are only credible in the year the functionally interdependent or integral part property is placed into service.
The webinar explained a special section of the tax credit rule, which relates to vehicles funded by grants and forgivable loans. The webinar noted, “if an investment-related credit property is funded by a tax-free grant or forgivable loan, entities get the same value of eligible tax credit as if the investment were financed with taxable funds, provided the credit plus the restricted tax-exempt amounts do not exceed the cost of the investment.”
This means if a school district receives a tax-exempt grant of $300,000 to purchase an electric school bus, in which the total cost of the bus came out to $400,000, the 45W credit is $40,000. Since the amount of the grant and the credit ($340,000) is less than the cost of the school bus, the credit is not reduced.
One attendee asked if these credits are at risk from the presidential administration change. A Department of Treasury representative noted that they will remain in effect unless changed by Congress.
Login
