« $10 Million State Violence Prevention Grant Program Announced | Home | Increased Tax Collections Announced »
When Property Tax Bills Arrive, It’s Important To Tell The Whole Story
By Wisconsin School Administrators Alliance staff | December 17, 2025
On short notice, the Assembly Education Committee is holding a public hearing today on several bills, including Assembly Bill 391. This proposal would eliminate the $325 per-pupil adjustment in the school district revenue-limit formula beginning with the 2027–28 school year. Given the heightened attention on rising property-tax bills now reaching taxpayers across the state, this legislation is likely to receive significant media coverage.
Taxpayers are understandably frustrated by increases they did not anticipate. In many communities, that frustration is being directed at local school districts, based on the assumption that higher property taxes are the result of increased school spending. At the same time, policymakers in Madison are publicly debating who is responsible.
What is often missing from this conversation is the impact of state policy decisions made in the 2025–27 state budget. Under Wisconsin law, school district spending authority is largely governed by state-imposed revenue limits, not unilateral decisions by local school boards. While districts were permitted a modest increase in revenue authority, that increase was below the rate of inflation for the 17th consecutive year and was not accompanied by any increase in state general school aids.
Historically, when the Legislature has allowed revenue limits to grow, it has paired that authority with corresponding increases in state aid to limit the impact on local property taxpayers. The 2025–27 budget broke from that long-standing practice. As a result, costs were effectively shifted away from the state budget and onto local property taxpayers—despite no change in local spending decisions.
These pressures have been compounded by continued underfunding of special education. The use of a “sum certain” appropriation has resulted in reimbursement rates falling well below promised levels, forcing districts to divert scarce general operating dollars to cover mandated special education costs. Together, these state-level decisions leave districts with limited options and place increasing strain on local budgets.
The outcome is predictable: higher property taxes, growing frustration in communities, and more frequent local referenda just to maintain basic educational services. If state leaders are serious about property-tax relief and predictable school funding, they must acknowledge that failing to fund authorized revenue increases with corresponding state aid is a core part of the problem.
It is important that the full story is shared. Finger-pointing in Madison only creates confusion locally and fails to provide an honest explanation of why tax bills look different this year. Please feel free to use this information in conversations with your community or as the basis for an Op-Ed. If you would like assistance, don’t hesitate to reach out.
Below are three latest news stories from dedicated school leaders and a myth-vs.-fact overview designed to help counter statewide commentary that seeks to shift responsibility for funding challenges onto local school districts.
Media Coverage
Southeast Wisconsin School Leaders: https://www.jsonline.com/story/opinion/2025/12/15/wisconsin-school-property-taxes-increase-pay-more/87702802007/?tbref=hp
Green Bay Area Public School: https://fox11online.com/news/crisis-in-the-classroom/green-bay-public-schools-expect-another-2-million-gap-due-to-lower-special-ed-funding
Commentary from Oconomowoc Superintendent: Beyond the numbers: Understanding the financial complexities driving OASD’s budget and lower mill rate or Link to PDF
Myth vs. Fact: School Funding and Property Taxes
Myth: School districts raised property taxes because they chose to spend more than inflation.
Fact: School districts can only raise revenue within state-imposed revenue limits. To spend more than those limits requires voter approval via operating referendum. The state authorized a per-pupil revenue-limit increase that was less than inflation but did not provide the state aid necessary to fund it, shifting costs to property taxpayers.
Myth: Schools received “record funding” in the state budget.
Fact: While the budget included increases, those increases did not keep pace with inflation or rising fixed costs, and key components, like special education aid, remain underfunded due to sum-certain appropriations.
Myth: Referenda are a sign of poor local fiscal management.
Fact: Referenda are often the only remaining tool districts have to address structural gaps created when state funding does not keep pace with mandated costs and authorized spending authority. When schools are only allowed spending increases that fall below the amount necessary to keep pace with inflation, they must either cut programs and services for students or seek referendum approval. Oftentimes, they resort to both.
Myth: Property tax increases would have happened regardless of state action.
Fact: Historically, when the state matched revenue limit increases with increased general school aid, property tax impacts were significantly reduced. On a statewide basis, property tax increases were held in check. The 2025–27 budget broke from that precedent.
Myth: This is a local problem.
Fact: This is a statewide policy decision with statewide consequences. Districts across Wisconsin—urban, suburban, and rural—are experiencing the same pressures because the revenue limits apply uniformly and the school aid formula applies to all school districts. Almost three quarters of Wisconsin’s school districts will receive less general aid than they did in the prior year. And the number of districts that lost so much aid they qualified for stop-gap hold harmless funding went up by nearly 30% compared to the previous year.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Comments are closed.