With an education background, Appleton parent and education advocate James Bacon knows what his kids’ teachers face.
He has two sons in elementary school. They’re thriving, largely because of their teachers, he said. But, should he need to advocate for more support, he worries about the additional strain that could place on the already overburdened teachers and systems.
Bacon’s concern has driven his advocacy work. When the Appleton School District voted to go to an operational referendum for $15 million in the spring 2026 election to balance its budget and add student supports, Bacon helped organize a group of volunteers to get the word out. Many in the group were parents who had to rearrange busy schedules, he said.
Sign up for Northeast News, our free email newsletter focused on northeast Wisconsin.
In the weeks leading up to the election, the group’s Facebook page posted multiple times a day. They set up presentations, printed yard signs and connected with residents, urging them to vote and to invite a friend along.
While he was talking to voters, Bacon said two concerns stood out to him. On one side, people were worried about increasing the strain on their own pocketbooks through property taxes, especially in Grand Chute, where homeowners just had their property reassessed. On the other, some thought the district wasn’t asking for enough help for their students; some supported going as high as $17 million instead.
Ultimately, the referendum in Appleton was successful, passing with about two-thirds of the vote from over 26,000 people. But across the state, more than a third of all school referendums failed during the same election, according to data from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
The conflict between higher property taxes and increased school funding has been over three decades in the making, according to researchers, administrators and advocates. Any potential solution may mean rethinking a school funding situation that has been in place for that long.
The November elections for state Assembly and Senate will influence who is part of that solution, as the new Legislature will begin work on the next biennial state budget in January.
How does Wisconsin fund its public schools?
Wisconsin has 421 public school districts, each with taxing authority. Districts receive money from four sources: state aid, property taxes, federal aid and other local non-property tax revenues (such as fees and interest earnings).
The state-provided aid generally falls into two buckets:
- Equalization aid, distributed through a formula based on a district’s equalized property value per pupil.
- Categorical aid, meant to partially fund programs like special education and student transportation services.
Wisconsin school districts are capped when it comes to the total funding they can spend, called the revenue limit. It is the amount districts can collect from equalization aid and property taxes. Categorical aid and federal funding don’t count against the limit. The revenue limit for each district is calculated using a school district’s total enrollment and the revenues it collected in previous years.
The state Department of Public Instruction calculates the total revenue limit using a formula, but revenue limits are often expressed as a per-pupil dollar amount.
The revenue limits have been in place since the 1993-94 school year. Until the 2008-09 school year, districts’ revenue limits were indexed to inflation. From that time until the 2023-24 state budget, changes to revenue limits had to be approved year over year by the state Legislature. In six of those school years, districts received no increase at all, and in 2011-12, the revenue limits actually decreased by an average of $554 per student. Gov. Tony Evers’ partial veto of the 2023-25 biennial budget set revenue limits’ annual increase to $325 per student per year.
However, even with that increase, Wisconsin school funding hasn’t kept pace with inflation overall and has fallen relative to other states.
Wisconsin Policy Forum reported that Wisconsin’s per-pupil funding per student in 2003 was 11th in the nation. In 2023, it was 26th.
Wisconsin’s approach to school funding differs from many other states, said Sara Shaw, a researcher from the Wisconsin Policy Forum.
Illinois, for example, uses “evidence-based funding,” where the state aims to fund its districts at an “adequacy target.” That level is determined by the estimated cost to educate students and the local resources on hand.
Many other states, like Minnesota, use a weighted system; each enrolled student is funded at a basic per-pupil amount, but the state increases funding based on the number of students who might need additional support, like English language learners, students in smaller school districts and students who qualify for free and reduced lunch.
Wisconsin’s equalization aid formula, Shaw said, isn’t based on need but local property wealth. While local property values and student need can align, she said that’s not always the case. She gave vacation and tourism communities as an example: While local property values in those communities might be high, residents’ socioeconomic status might be lower. In the Sturgeon Bay School District, for example, property taxes will support over 60% of its general fund in 2025-26, partly due to rising property values. But nearly half of the district’s students were considered economically disadvantaged in the 2025-26 school year, according to data from DPI.
How do school districts manage their budgets?
For the first quarter of the fiscal year, from July 1 to Oct. 15, school administrators and financial professionals are working off of an estimate for how many students they’ll have.
Holly Burr, finance director for Appleton’s public schools, said that budgeting is “an ongoing project,” but that twice a year her department examines every single class and building in the district to see where staff are most needed. The department does this in the winter and summer in order to set staffing levels for the beginning of the next school year.
It’s “kind of backwards from how you think of budgeting,” she said, because the district must hire staff before it knows the exact amount of funding it’ll have for the school year. Districts count their students on the third Friday of every September, and their revenue limit information is released in the middle of October. Budgets are typically set by the end of October.
Districts also look for ways to increase revenue and decrease costs. For example, enrollment in summer school increases student counts for the revenue limit. If a district finds ways to attract more students through open enrollment than it loses, that increases the head count as well.
For lowering costs, Burr said the Appleton School District bids annually for property and liability insurance and tries to keep employee health care costs down without burdening staff. Three years ago, the district moved to self-funded health insurance and is part of an in-house clinic co-op with another district and the city of Appleton, Burr said.
District spending bound by student needs and the law
Student needs are one of the main drivers of school budget decisions.
For the 2026-27 school year, Burr said the district hired more counselors, psychologists and social workers with the money from the referendum because it saw students needed more mental health support after the COVID-19 pandemic. It also added three positions to assist with about 1,500 English language learners, one of which doubles as a social worker.
School budgets are also bound by mandates from the state and federal government — and help covering the costs of those mandates is limited. Special education students are entitled to a free and appropriate public education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires schools and districts to help English language learners overcome language barriers in their education.
Giving these students support usually means hiring more staff, like paraprofessionals, physical and occupational therapists, interventionists and interpreters. But districts get limited help paying back the extra costs.
During the 2025-26 school year, the state reimbursed 35% of the money used for special education, despite 42% being promised in the 2023-25 state budget. According to DPI, the reimbursement is paid from a fixed pot of money determined by the Legislature; if more claims come in, then the rate drops.
In 58 districts that qualified for aid for English language learners, the state reimbursed only about 8% of the costs in 2024-25.
Any money that the state doesn’t reimburse for those costs must be taken from districts’ general fund. In the 2025-26 school year:
- Milwaukee Public Schools transferred about $163.6 million from its operating budget to its special education fund.
- Madison schools transferred $61.9 million.
- Green Bay schools transferred $32.4 million.
- Appleton schools transferred $28.7 million.
And while overall student population declines, the number of students needing special education services has been increasing.
The student population declines are largely driven by an overall decline in the birth rate. However, more families are also choosing other educational options for their students, like homeschooling or using one of Wisconsin’s voucher programs, which pay qualified students’ private school tuition using state funds.
School districts turning to operational referendums to balance budgets
As Burr looked ahead to the task of balancing Appleton’s budget for 2026-27, she said the cost of employee health insurance has been increasing by double-digit percentages every year. For the 2026-27 school year, she also anticipates increased student transportation costs partly because of the rising cost of diesel.
Due to budgetary pressures, school districts are increasingly turning to their main mechanism to increase their budget: asking their communities to increase their taxing authority by going to referendum.
School districts typically go to either capital or operational referendum:
- Capital referendums are meant to address building needs in a district.
- Operational referendums are meant to help districts balance their budgets.
In Little Chute, the school district is opting for both in the November election.
The capital referendum would authorize the district to collect more money for building maintenance and repairs, including fixing the roof, which would extend its warranty for 20 years. Its operational referendum is meant to supplement the district’s technology budget, which would allow it to keep offering one-to-one devices for most students and provide cybersecurity upgrades.
District Superintendent Heidi Schmidt said that while Little Chute has saved money where it could, these costs are beyond the district’s ability to pay within its revenue limits.
With only about 1,600 students enrolled, the Little Chute district is the smallest in the Fox Cities. Schmidt said she wants to ensure her students have the same opportunities as students in bigger districts.
At the same time, the cost of that technology keeps rising, which is part of the reason Little Chute is going to an operational referendum for the third time since 2007.
Besides the stakes of going to referendum, the process also takes time and work from school district leaders. Schmidt said a top priority for her was showing the community that the district is using taxpayer money wisely. She’s leading three information sessions in October and expects to spend up to 10 hours before Election Day getting information out to the public.
Burr said going to referendum is a last resort for most districts looking to balance budgets, and districts typically will consider referendums when they believe further budget cuts will impact student learning.
“It is a significant amount of work,” Burr said. “Nobody likes to go to their taxpayers and say, ‘We can’t live on the money that the state is giving us.’”
Schools face consequences for budget shortfalls
In schools, a lack of funding can mean closing school buildings, laying off staff, increasing class sizes, shutting down programs and even dissolving the school district altogether.
Several northeastern Wisconsin districts will go to their communities to balance their budgets this fall:
- Seymour schools are going to referendum in November to maintain their programs and facilities.
- Green Bay has closed seven schools in the past five years and will go to an operational referendum this fall.
- Gillett school leaders warned a failed operational referendum in November could lead to stopping courses not required by the state, like tech ed, band and choir.
Other districts have had to deal with the consequences of failed referendums throughout 2026:
- Fond du Lac has had to lay off teachers and library media specialists.
- Southern Door County has laid off staff, cut programs and changed its employee health plan.
- After a failed spring referendum, the Hustisford School District is taking steps to dissolve, with the final decision in the hands of the DPI’s boundary appeals board as of July 20.
More schools are going to referendum as fewer voters indicate they want to support them. According to a Marquette University Law School poll from February, a record number of voters, 60% to 40%, said that lowering property taxes was more important than increasing funding K-12 for education. At the same time, the Wisconsin Policy Forum also found that 2025’s 94 referendum questions were the most in an odd-numbered year since 2007 and that almost 40% of these questions were “retries” — where voters rejected a referendum question, and a district goes back to the voters to try to pass the measure again.
Shaw said that while school referendums were originally meant as a way for communities to exercise local control, it seems to be contributing to funding gaps between districts. According to another report from the Wisconsin Policy Forum, the gap in per-pupil funding between the top 90% and the bottom 10% of districts has grown in the past 20 years from 24.6% in 2005 to 37.6% in 2025.
Efforts made to explore potential funding solutions
The Legislature has examined school funding before, and in 2017, the bipartisan Blue Ribbon Commission on School Funding began examining ways to adjust school funding in Wisconsin.
The commission, which included lawmakers, district administrators and other stakeholders, published its report in 2019, along with 20 policy recommendations. Among other potential actions, it recommended:
- Increasing per-pupil aid and matching those increases to inflation.
- Gradually increasing special education reimbursement to 60%.
- Changing how English language learners and students from lower-income households are counted for the revenue limit.
- Adding support to low-enrolling rural districts.
- Providing additional funding for Head Start and school-based mental health services.
In May, Evers and a group of Republican lawmakers tried using the budget surplus to give schools more than $617 million by increasing the special education reimbursement and general school aid. While the plan had broad support from voters, it failed when Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Tiffany and Democratic lawmakers opposed it.
A group of superintendents from the top five school districts in Wisconsin, as well as the Wisconsin Association of School Boards, expressed disappointment the deal failed in separate statements. However, the Wisconsin Public Education Network said that the deal didn’t do enough because the general school aid would have fallen under revenue limits — meaning it would have delivered property tax relief but not actually given districts any extra funding.
‘This is not sustainable, point blank’
Meanwhile, groups of education professionals and advocates believe the current state of Wisconsin school funding is inequitable enough to violate the state Constitution — and they’ve taken the state Assembly to court to force a solution.
The lawsuit was filed in April by Law Forward and the Wisconsin Education Association Council. The plaintiffs are the Wisconsin Public Education Network; the Wisconsin PTA; the Necedah, Adams-Friendship, Beloit, Green Bay and Eau Claire school districts; and other education associations and individuals. They are asking the court to rule the current school funding formula unconstitutional.
“We’ve exhausted every opportunity that democracy affords us in this work, and it seems to fall on deaf ears,” said Heather DuBois Bourenane, a Sun Prairie-based parent and director of Wisconsin Public Education Network. “If our lawmakers aren’t going to do their job, it’s time for the courts to hold them accountable for doing it.”
The group’s position is that the state needs to “align its spending priorities with the priority needs of our children,” DuBois Bourenane said
She called the current funding system “antiquated and deeply broken” and “picking winners and losers” among students.
“We have a school funding system that’s based more on property tax relief than it is on meeting the needs of kids,” she added, saying that Wisconsin has fallen short with students with disabilities, English language learners and students from lower-income households.
In response to the initial suit in April, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in a statement, “This complaint is another meritless attempt by liberal activists to defund the state’s highly successful school-voucher program and interfere with the Legislature’s authority to fund public schools. We will vigorously defend against this suit and are confident that the courts will soundly reject it.”
Lawsuits related to school funding have had mixed success in court across the country. In 2000, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the state’s funding formula was constitutional, but left the door open for the current case to be brought.
As the lawsuit plays out, Shaw sees the next election as an opportunity for voters and their representatives to consider their priorities — and to envision “what equitable planning and adequate funding looks like” for their schools.
But until a solution is found, school administrators’ warnings have become increasingly dire. Burr said school districts across Wisconsin find “their backs against the wall.”
“This is not sustainable, point blank,” she said.
Kevin Dittman, Kayla Huynh, Nadia Scharf, and Alec Johnson contributed to this report.
Rebecca Loroff is a K-12 education reporter for the USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin. She welcomes story tips and feedback. Contact her at rloroff@usatodayco.com.
This story was produced as part of the NEW (Northeast Wisconsin) News Lab, a consortium of five news outlets.
