The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) told lawmakers on Wednesday that it did not violate open meetings law during a 2024 standards setting meeting and that additional staff would help fulfill open records requests.

Republican lawmakers and conservatives have continued to scrutinize the agency over new state standards that were adopted in 2024. Recently, they have turned their attention to a four-day meeting held in June 2024 at Chula Vista, a water park resort in the Wisconsin Dells. The purpose of the meeting was to set new state testing standards for the Forward Exam, the standardized test that Wisconsin third graders through eighth graders take each year. The event brought together 88 educators and DPI staff to discuss and help set the new standards.

Republicans on the Assembly Government Operations, Accountability and Transparency Committee (GOAT) called the informational hearing to ask the agency about its policies, procedures and compliance regarding open meetings laws and open records laws as well as the standard-setting and benchmarking process for the Forward Exam.

The hearing was scheduled one day after the Institute for Reforming Government (IRG), a conservative-leaning nonpartisan think tank, filed a complaint in Adams County, alleging that the state agency violated open meetings law with the 2024 meeting. The suit asks that the Adams County district attorney bring charges against DPI and seek a declaration that they repeatedly violated Wisconsin’s open meetings law. The DA has 20 days to decide.

Rep. Nate Gustafson (R-Omro) said there appeared to be “a lot of fog” around the meeting.  

“You have this meeting that happened that we have no records of other than a private vendor worked with DPI on standardized testing,” Gustafson said. “Then we have the superintendent come out and lower standards across schools, and there is this cost with no record of what the standard is.”

Andrew Hoyer-Booth, DPI legislative liaison, told lawmakers at the start of the hearing that it’s a “distraction” from DPI’s work.

“Modernizing our standards and assessments to align with the education landscape in Wisconsin and meet the needs of our students was a multi-year effort,” Hoyer-Booth said. “While those who don’t like the outcome seek to attack the process, the DPI is focused on the pressing issues of school funding, student academic achievement, educator recruitment and retention and student mental health.” 

Lawmakers were prompted to look into the waterpark meeting by a report from Brian Fraley for the Dairyland Sentinel and complaints that the paper’s open records requests weren’t fulfilled for more than a year by DPI.

“I just think the public expects that when a record is requested that they do receive it in a reasonable amount of time, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people to think that this amount of time is an unreasonable amount of time,” Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August (R-Walworth) said. 

Rich Judge, an assistant state superintendent, said Data Recognition Corporation (DRC), the vendor DPI works with each year to update the assessment and ensure it is valid and up to date, is a private company not a governmental body subject to Wisconsin’s open meeting laws.

“DRC is not a government body. It is a private contractor in the same way that Microsoft is not a government body, Apple’s not a government body. People who do business with the Department of Public Instruction — those are contractors who perform a service for it,” he said.

Judge compared the work DRC did for DPI to the Legislature hiring lawyers to help with  redistricting or state agencies contracting with engineering firms or software companies. 

Judge likened the meeting to “a lot of middle-aged people taking the SAT for an entire day or two.” He said the content of the meeting was confidential because it involves evaluating real test questions that could go before students. 

“The standard-setting information is all public information, and it’s all readily available information, and it gets reviewed regularly, but as it relates to the specific meeting or this specific part of that conference, that was not a public meeting,” Judge said. 

Rep. Mike Bare (D-Verona) said he didn’t see a reason for the committee hearing. 

“It seems to me the motive behind this hearing — and the complaint  — is it fits the majority’s ongoing and systematic efforts to dismantle public education,” Bare said. 

“You’re required by a statute to do this work,” Bare told DPI representatives.  It’s in the public interest that you do this work. I think we appreciate that you do this work and just like all state government entities, you do value openness, complying with those statutes, complying with open records, complying with open meetings where it’s appropriate, where it makes sense. You gave a good argument for why, in this case… those laws don’t apply.”

DPI paid more than $368,000 for the meeting and work by the contractor. 

The meeting, according to DPI, cost about $219,000, which included lodging, meals, travel reimbursement, meeting expenses, laptops and hotspots. The remaining cost was for the work done by DRC included planning, facilitating the meeting and writing a final report.

Nedweski said the amount is “pretty mind-blowing.” DPI said, however, that the cost is less than what other states pay for similar efforts.

DPI said the total cost of the standards-setting work was about $30,740 per grade and subject. Similar work done by DRC for other states has ranged from $48,500 to $94,000 per grade/subject, according to DPI. 

Judge noted that the “distinguished” co-chair of the Joint Finance Committee Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) found the meeting to be a “routine conference.” Lawmakers on the Joint Finance Committee delayed the release of funds for the agency so they could review the spending for the conference after the Dairyland Sentinel report. Born made the comments after the committee decided to release the funds to the agency. 

“All due respect to my esteemed colleague, I’m in disagreement with him on this being an appropriate amount to spend,” Nedweski said. “Only one-third of the kids in the state can read at grade level. What are we getting for this?”

Judge said he thought Nedweski was making a “political argument” that was out of the scope of the hearing’s purpose. He added that there are only about two contractors in the U.S. who do the type of standards-setting work needed.

“There are plenty of folks who think that assessments are not appropriate, but this legislative body is not one of them. They have regularly required that we have state assessments. It certainly would be in your power as a legislator to say we’re not going to do standardized testing anymore,” Judge said.

When it comes to timing on fulfilling requests, Hoyer-Booth said the agency is in compliance with state law, but noted that DPI has received over 1,000 open records requests between Jan. 1, 2023 and April 2026. He said there are two factors that affect response times: the simplicity of the request and the agency’s finite staff. There are no staff members dedicated to fulfilling these requests.

“The same staff responsible for investigating teacher licensing and educator misconduct are the same individuals tasked with fulfilling open records requests,” Hoyer-Booth said. “DPI believes firmly that our agency must prioritize urgent matters, particularly investigations involving student safety. We hope the committee does that as well.”

Bare suggested that lawmakers advocate for additional staffing resources for the agency to fulfill requests in a more timely manner. 

“If you’re interested in pushing in the next budget for DPI to have the resources that they need to be responsive in a more timely way. Would you be interested in a bill now to get them attorney positions, records specialists to get them what they need to be more timely compliant?” Bare asked Nedweski. “Are you willing to commit to that?”

“The taxpayers are getting more and more frustrated because they’re not seeing outcomes. We’re spending more and more per student, and we have less outcomes —  we’re not going to talk about that,” Nedweski said.

“That’s what the hearing’s about,” Bare said. 

“I think that they have plenty of resources. One of the things they could do is probably bring people back to work in the office,” Nedweski said. “They have so many people working remotely.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

There were over 70 school referendum questions on ballots across Wisconsin Tuesday, and according to preliminary results, about 62% passed and 38% failed.

The results determine whether school districts can keep up with costs, will need to make difficult decisions about cuts or even put themselves on a path to consolidation or dissolution. April ballot measures are just the latest round of school funding requests as school districts continue to struggle under the state’s current funding system.

Department of Public Instruction (DPI) Superintendent Jill Underly said in a statement that the slate of referendum requests this spring is a “clear signal” that the state is falling short of providing every child in Wisconsin with a quality education. 

“Years of chronic underfunding from the state, combined with rising costs, have pushed too many districts into an unsustainable cycle, forcing communities to repeatedly turn to voters just to meet simple, basic needs like keeping schools staffed and the lights on,” Underly said. “This is unfair to students, educators, and taxpayers alike, and it is placing an increasing strain on communities across our state.”

Underly called on the state to reinvest in students and the state’s public schools to ensure districts can “deliver the high-quality education students deserve, without being forced to rely on repeated referendums to survive.”

School districts in Wisconsin go to referendum in order to exceed state-imposed revenue caps by getting approval from voters. The practice became a part of Wisconsin’s school funding equation in the 1990s when lawmakers put caps on school revenue as part of an effort to control local property taxes. School districts’ revenue limits used to be tied to inflation, but that ended in the 2009-11 state budget, instead leaving increases up to state lawmakers and the governor, who have not provided predictable increases budget to budget. 

As a result, school districts have increasingly gone to referendum to secure funding through local property tax increases.

There were 56 nonrecurring operational requests on the ballot in April, which are revenue limit increases with an end date. In addition, there were six recurring operational requests, which do not have an end date — totaling over $1 billion in requests.

Of the nonrecurring requests, 32 passed and 24 were rejected. Of the recurring requests, five were successful and only Sauk Prairie School District’s request was rejected. 

There were 12 capital funding requests this April. Nine passed, including Howard Suamico’s $147 million funding request, and three failed, including Whitefish Bay School District’s $135 million request. 

The passage rate is a slight increase from the last election year and comes as Wisconsinites have become more concerned about property taxes, according to recent polling. In the spring of 2024, there was a passage rate of 60.2% with 103 requests on ballots. A Wisconsin Policy Forum report notes that passage rates tend to be higher amid the higher voter turnout of presidential and midterm election years. 

Some districts’ results were decided by thin margins. Butternut School District’s $2 million nonrecurring referendum request passed by one vote. Lena School District’s $6 million nonrecurring request failed by 17 votes. The Hustisford School District sought a two-year nonrecurring referendum for $1.875 million each year. It failed by about 200 votes and now the district is looking at possibly dissolving. 

A third attempt for an operational referendum by Dodgeville School District, one of three districts the Examiner profiled before the election, was rejected in a 1,680 to 1,619 vote. 

District Administrator Ryan Bohnsack said in a Facebook post that the failed referendum is not the “end of the conversation.” He told the Examiner ahead of Election Day that the district was already looking at going to referendum in November if the April request was rejected, and the request then will likely be higher. 

“It is a continuation of our next steps together,” Bohnsack wrote. “The financial challenges we face remain, and we will need to continue working through them thoughtfully and responsibly. Our focus will be on developing a plan that prioritizes our students and our staff.” 

Bohnsack also encouraged community members to advocate at a statewide level as Dodgeville’s challenges aren’t unique. 

“I encourage you to stay in contact with our state legislators and continue to ask for clear communication, transparency and long-term solutions to how schools are funded in Wisconsin,” Bohnsack wrote.

In February, a group of Wisconsin teachers, parents, students and other stakeholders represented by progressive firm Law Forward and the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the state’s largest teachers union, sued the state Legislature over the school funding formula in Eau Claire County Circuit. The lawsuit argues that the current system is unconstitutional because it does not meet the state’s constitutional obligation to provide educational opportunities to all students.

Voters rejected the $5.8 million four-year nonrecurring request by Necedah Area School District, one of the parties to the lawsuit, that was aimed at replacing the district’s last nonrecurring referendum which was first approved in April 2022 and was expiring. The request would have allowed the district to access $1.2 million in the first year, $1.4 million in the second year and $1.6 million in the third and fourth year.

Tanya Kotlowski, who has served as superintendent of the district for nine years, told the Examiner that the district has been “blessed” to pass two referendums in the past, but the recent result is “disheartening.” 

“To have this one fail after that kind of devotion we’ve tried to create, it’s hard, it’s heartbreaking, but I also am very aware of the burden that we’re placing on our taxpayers because of how schools are funded,” Kotlowski said. 

Kotlowski said the school board has not had a conversation about whether they will try again, but that cuts are likely.

“We do not have enough fund balance or enough savings to offset the costs that we’re going to have the next two years, so if, you know, if our board doesn’t have that, and we can’t run a deficit budget because we don’t have enough money in our savings account to run a deficit budget, it forces them to have to make decisions, so they will be in that position, for sure,” Kotlowski said. “Certainly we will have that conversation in April and beyond when we’re talking reductions and what the next game plan will be.”

Kotlowski said her district’s previous referendum was helping cover the full costs of special education, which are federally mandated services. The state currently picks up a little over a third of special education costs for public schools, despite promises during the state budget cycle to cover 42% this school year.

Even with the referendum, Kotlowski said her district will need to pull some money from savings to balance the budget. Now that the referendum has failed, the district will be looking at cuts, including to staff and programming. 

“We’re going to come up with as much as we can,” Kotlowski said. “If we came up with $1.4 million in one year of reductions, it would be pretty devastating, so we will come up with what we can. We’ve had conversations already today… I can say with certainty, everybody’s going to be impacted in our community.”

Kotlowski said the referendum result and the school district’s circumstances are one example of why the state’s funding formula is unsustainable and why the lawsuit is needed. 

“We’re really trying to figure out a path to financial stability, where we can anticipate and plan and predict adequate funding for the needs that we have of children within our school district,” Kotlowski said.

Wisconsin has fallen to 26th in the nation in per pupil K-12 education spending and is spending 10% below the national average, according to 2023 census data. In 2002, the state was ranked 11th and spent 11% above the national average.

“For our Necedah School District, when you look at our revenue limit, which is the authorized revenue we can bring in annually based on state law, when you look at the percentage our local taxpayers pick up and what percentage the state picks up, we have a significant gap. Our taxpayers are picking up almost 80% and the state’s picking up 20[%],” Kotlowski said. “Is it a state responsibility or local taxpayer responsibility?”

Kotlowski said that since the announcement of the lawsuit, a group of about 40 residents in the county have formed a taxpayer advocacy group. She said she thinks that the residents, who will show up to vote in November, will have a louder voice when it comes to advocating for a change in the way the state funds schools. In November, Wisconsin voters will decide who should fill the governor’s office as well as who should control the state Assembly and Senate.

“I had a taxpayer who said to me, ‘My first question for anybody who’s running for office is, How are you going to change the formula for how you fund public schools?’ That’s their first question, and depending on your answer, will decide if I vote for you,’” Kotlowski said. “We are at a breaking point, and if our community doesn’t represent that … I don’t think there’s any story that can express the lack of tolerance we have right now to fund schools the way that we have done it now for decades.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: 6 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• In most states, career and technical education programs have received increasing bipartisan support and financial investments. That includes lawmakers creating funding flows in several states that previously lacked them.

• But Wisconsin hasn’t done the same, despite efforts from some state leaders. 

• As a result, access to these courses is uneven across the state, and the programs rely on federal funds many school leaders say are insufficient.

• Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction Jill Underly said she’ll continue to press the Legislature to fund career and technical education programs in the next budget cycle.

Watch a video version of the story here.

As Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction Jill Underly traversed the state last month to visit classrooms, she saw students harvesting and selling farm-fresh food, managing coffee shops and learning in wood shops, among other hands-on training. 

Through career and technical education programs, high school students can take unconventional classes like these that train them for in-demand jobs. The classes are popular among students, and schools want to offer more of them.

“Kids’ imaginations and their talents completely jump to life when they’re immersed in these settings and in these classrooms,” Underly said. 

But whether students can access classes like these largely depends on if their school district can cobble together the funding. That’s because Wisconsin is one of just five states that don’t dedicate state funding to public schools for career and technical education programs. 

In most states, programs teaching students hands-on job skills have secured increasing bipartisan support and financial investments in recent years, with lawmakers creating funding flows in states that previously lacked them. 

Wisconsin hasn’t done the same, leaving access to career and technical education uneven across the state. The programs rely mainly on federal funds many school leaders call insufficient. 

During Wisconsin’s most recent budget process, Underly requested $45 million for schools to spend on career and technical education. But as other issues took precedence, lawmakers rejected that proposal, likely leaving schools without guaranteed state funding for at least another two years. 

“I want to make sure that every kid has these opportunities, and if we were to have dedicated state funding, we can make sure that they do,” Underly said. “Otherwise, we’re just leaving it up to districts. And sometimes whether a district can pass a referendum or not is going to be the difference of if they offer these programs.”

Schools and state education leaders say the federal funding schools get right now falls short of covering these programs, which are often pricey and require high-tech tools and teachers with field experience. 

To make up the difference, schools often rely on piecemeal funding such as grants and donations, or ask voters to approve tax increases to fund new programs. The state has offered more piecemeal grants in recent years, but those funds are unpredictable.

“Career and technical education programs are among the most effective tools we have to keep students engaged, prepare young people for good-paying jobs, and address Wisconsin’s ongoing workforce shortage … Wisconsin employers are already facing serious labor shortages, and failing to invest in our workforce pipeline only makes that problem worse,” state Sen. LaTonya Johnson, D-Milwaukee, a member of the Joint Finance Committee, wrote in a statement to Wisconsin Watch.

Wisconsin an outlier

Early hands-on job training for students has emerged as a popular solution for nationwide skilled worker shortages.

States passed 90 policies bolstering high school career and technical education in 2024, illustrating its increasing political support. 

Advance CTE, a nonprofit representing state career and technical education leaders, reported in 2023 that state funding for high school programs was increasing, while Wisconsin was among a handful of states with no such funding formula.

States have since continued to increase funding, and at least one — Nebraska — has created a funding formula.

Underly made her $45 million request during the 2025-27 biennial budget process. Gov. Tony Evers then suggested a pared-down version – dedicating $10 million – which was scrubbed by the Republican-controlled Joint Finance Committee and not included in the final bill. 

Underly believes lawmakers rejected her request due to widespread pressure to boost funding for the special education services schools are legally required to provide. 

“I do think, though, that our Legislature values these programs,” Underly said. “They’re very proud of the programs that they have in their school districts, but it’s one of those things where it’s just, ‘What’s the most pressing need right now?’”

Wisconsin Watch asked all 16 lawmakers on the Joint Finance Committee why these funds were not included in the budget. Just three responded. Two Democratic lawmakers pointed to the lack of bipartisan communication during the budget process, making it impossible to know why the funding didn’t make the cut. 

“There is no discussion. It is not like we’re having a Mr. Smith goes to Washington, kind of a debate,” said state Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison. “There’s no WisconsinEye footage where I can point to them, where Democrats say, ‘Well, we should do this,’ and Republicans say, ‘Well, actually, we don’t want to do that.’”

Continuing the status quo?

The number of Wisconsin students enrolled in career and technical education courses has remained stagnant over the past few years, the most recent state data shows. 

Roughly 64% of Wisconsin high schoolers have taken one of these classes, while just 25% have taken more than one career-focused course. 

Wisconsin gets $25.5 million in federal funds for career and technical education, $8.3 million of which is appropriated to high school programs. Schools have used these funds to “keep the lights on,” said Sara Baird, the Department of Public Instruction’s career and technical education section director. In fact, 23 states give more in state dollars than they receive in federal funds, said Laura Maldonado, senior research associate for Advance CTE.

In the meantime, Wisconsin has allocated career and technical education grant money to schools. Rather than directly funding programs, the funds are “incentive grants,” meaning they give schools money after students graduate from a career and technical education program and earn a certification in a high-need industry. In the 2023-25 biennium, lawmakers bumped the pot from $6.5 million to $8 million, where it stayed in the 2025-27 budget. 

In a response to Wisconsin Watch’s request for an interview, Joint Finance Committee Co-Chair Mark Born, R-Beaver Dam, didn’t say why the committee denied the request for career and technical education funding. He pointed to the incentive grants as proof the Legislature “has consistently supported career and technical education by investing in workforce focused programs.” 

Advance CTE advocates for states to have dedicated funding because it expands access to more students, lends stability and allows flexibility as workforce needs change, according to Maldonado. 

“You’re trying to keep up with that labor market demand, and oftentimes it’s harder to do that with the federal funding,” Maldonado said. “You want to have that more flexible state funding source to be able to adjust that. So I think the main thing is that (federal funding) is often insufficient.”

In December, Wisconsin Watch reported on an Appleton technical charter school that struggles to manage high program costs and secure donations to stay afloat. The school received state grant funding to open, but a decade later, after those initial funds dried up, staff must chase down donations from local businesses.

Underly, whose term ends in July 2029, said she’ll continue to press for the creation of a state funding mechanism in the next budget cycle. 

“If it was up to me … It wouldn’t be $45 million, it would be a lot more,” Underly said.

Miranda Dunlap reports on pathways to success in northeast Wisconsin, working in partnership with Open Campus. Find her on Instagramand Twitter, or send her an email at mdunlap@wisconsinwatch.org.

Nearly every state funds hands-on job training in high schools. Why not Wisconsin? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.