Saturday, October 17, 2026

$3.3 billion in state's bank for FY 26, and Tiffany, WisGOP raised school prop taxes vs using it

Mid-October is always a big week for Wisconsin budget news, as we get the state's Annual Fiscal Report (AFR), which shows the final numbers on how much the state spent and took in for the previous Fiscal Year, and how much money was in its General Fund.

And we ended up pretty much where we thought we might be when we found out in late-August that the state took in more tax revenues for FY 2026 than what was expected in the 2025-27 budget. These 2026 revenue projections were revised up by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau back in May, and ended up even better than those expectations when the final numbers came in. I also am assuming the same amount of % of revenue growth that the LFB did for FY 2027 from that higher number.

Then in the AFR, we got the final numbers for expenses in FY 2026, which were a few million above projections, but nothing of significance. Put those together, and then assume that FY 2027 has expenses at budgeted levels, and you'll see that the state of Wisconsin is projected to spend more than it takes in, but not by much.

But given that the state carried over $4.6 billion in its General Fund in this current budget, there was still a bit over $3.3 billion in the bank on July 1 of this year, and there is projected to be a bit less than $3.2 billion left over when the new budget cycle begins next July 1.

Know what also got released on October 15 in Wisconsin? The final figures for General Aids to K-12 public schools. And a lot of community school districts are getting less from the state than they did last year.

That's 61% of districts seeing less money in this school year, but amazingly, that's a lower percentage than the 71% that got a cut in state aid for last year. And that was a conscious choice by the GOP Legislature to not increase K-12 school spending in either of the last two years, and have most Wisconsin homeowners face significantly higher property taxes to make up the difference for the declining amount of state aid their local districts are getting.

By comparison, Gov Evers' budget would have used state aid to stop most of the projected property tax increases for schools in the next two years. That included a total General Aid increase of nearly $1.2 billion ($494 million in year 1, $700 million in year 2). If the Legislature had merely given an additional 3.3% a year in state aids (which is approximately the annual rate of inflation between October 2024 and this week reading for Sept 2026), the increase would have been $184 million for 2025-26, and a $190 million increase for this year. Given that the $184 million first-year increase is counted twice vs base spending, that would be a total increase in state aids of $558 million.

Now let's look at the $3.3 billion that's in the General Fund right now and the $3.17 billion that's projected to be there at the end of FY 2027. If you gave that 3.3% increase each year, we would be projected to still have more than $2.6 billion to carry over into the next budget.

This relatively small amount of state aid increases would also have paid for the majority of what Tom Tiffany and WisGOPs claim is a "400-year property tax increase" resulting from Gov Evers 2023 veto that allowed $325 a year in additional revenue limit increases for K-12 schools. We know this because the LFB included this item as part of the K-12 funding and tax cut deal that went down in flames this Spring.
The bill would create a new first draw school aid that would be paid from the existing general school aids appropriation, and increase that appropriation by $302.5 million GPR beginning in 2026-27. Aid would be distributed using a formula under which 25% of the amount allocated would be divided by the average number of pupils enrolled statewide in the previous three school years and distributed to school districts proportionately based on the district's average number of pupils enrolled in the previous three school years. The remaining 75% of the amount allocated would be divided by the average number of pupils enrolled statewide in the current and previous two school years and distributed to school districts proportionately based on the district's average number of pupils enrolled in the current and previous two school years....

Payments from the general aid appropriation are under revenue limits, so the additional aid would provide property tax relief but not additional resources for school districts. Based on current enrollment, it is estimated that the payment would be equal to approximately $387 per pupil.
So using the LFB's math, it would have cost $254 million a year for the GOPs in the Legislature to turn Evers' "400-year tax" to ZERO. The WisGOPs chose not to do that, and that should be repeated every day.

Also, let's not forget that Tom Tiffany opposed that deal back in May because he wanted schools to have even fewer resources, and the suplus should be used for even more tax cuts.


Fuck them kids and teachers, my donors need more tax cuts.

Given that our one and only Governor's debate happens on Tuesday, and that you don't have to worry about a Brewers game getting in the way because they don't play UNTIL THE WORLD SERIES STARTS ON FRIDAY! (sorry, but definitely not sorry), keep these numbers and realities in the back of your mind.

And remind yourself and others that Tom Tiffany and the GOP chose to allow for property tax increases now and contunued underfunding of our community schools in an attempt to kick back more of the $3 billion in the bank to the same people that already have mega-millions to give to their campaigns.

1 comment:

  1. And here's the list of what got taken from K-12 public schools to pay for school vouchers, a total of $338.25 million.

    And here are the districts who paid for the $60.27 to give special ed aids to voucher schools that total 90% of costs - double what public schools get covered.

    This means property taxes can be raised nearly $400 million to make up the difference with these aid reductions. Maybe we should make the state pay full cost of these vouchers and stop taking money from the districts and dumping the burden onto property taxes? Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete