District staff summarizes state legislative activity and proposed K‑12 funding increases

A district staff member identified as Zach on the meeting record briefed the Stoughton Area School District board on several state and federal developments that could affect local schools, including proposed K‑12 funding, draft bills on classroom devices and curriculum, and a pending state supreme court review of a partial gubernatorial veto.

Zach said the governor proposed about $3.15 billion in new K‑12 investments in a budget proposal that emphasized equitable funding, mental‑health supports, literacy improvements and reduced family financial burdens. He described portions of that proposal as including roughly $1.2 billion in additional general equalization aid and about $1.1 billion proposed to raise special‑education reimbursement to 60 percent — “the highest level ever proposed,” he said.

Zach summarized a set of assembly bills under consideration (AB 1 through AB 6) and other measures. Highlights described to the board included: - A bill (AB 2) requiring school boards to adopt policies generally prohibiting wireless communication devices during instructional time, with enumerated device categories such as cellular devices, tablets, laptops and gaming devices; the presentation said school boards would be required to adopt such a policy by July 1, 2026. - A bill to require Department of Public Instruction (DPI) performance category language (“below basic,” “basic,” “proficient,” “advanced”) on state assessment reporting and technical changes to accountability reporting. - A bill to require school boards to make textbooks, curricula and instructional materials available for inspection by district residents within 14 days of a written request. - A proposal (AB 6) that would require school boards to spend at least 70 percent of operating expenditures on specified direct classroom expenditures, with mechanisms described to address shortfalls. - A bill related to access for military recruiters at secondary schools consistent with federal requirements; the presentation said the measure would also require access to common areas and school‑sanctioned events during the school day.

Zach also noted that Representative Kitchens had worked on a proposal related to releasing $50,000,000 for early‑literacy initiatives but that plans had changed and those funds might revert to the surplus while the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to a gubernatorial partial veto tied to whether the Joint Finance Committee improperly withheld funds.

Board members asked about impacts to district policy if AB 2 passes, given Chromebooks and other devices issued to students. Mia Coio (board member) raised the question; a staff exchange in the meeting noted that the district’s current policy “already complies with all the things that Zach had read off” and that many districts already have comparable rules. Zach said he would compile further information on how other districts are responding and on legal questions around related policies.

Members also discussed a recent WIAA (state interscholastic association) policy update on transgender athlete participation. Zach summarized the WIAA statement and said it affirmed compliance with federal directives as interpreted by the WIAA board; board members asked about legal congruency with other protections and said district leaders plan to follow up with the district legal counsel and in superintendent‑level meetings.

Zach noted federal budget negotiations and reconciliation activity that could affect federal education grants (Title I, special education and other programs) and highlighted upcoming elections that could influence state and federal education policy. The board did not take policy action at the meeting on any of the bills; Zach said he would return with updates as legislation advances.