Since the conclusion of the regular session in March, there has continued to be discussion among Governor Evers and Republican legislative leaders about a possible property tax and education package. This week, the Governor and GOP leaders announced a compromise package and hailed it as a bipartisan achievement. However, just a few days later, the deal fell apart when the Senate voted the package down 18-15, with all Senate Democrats voting no, joined by Republican Senators Steve Nass, Chris Kapenga and Rob Hutton.

The impetus for the deal was the projected $2.5 billion surplus expected at the end of the current 2025-27 biennium next June, 2027. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu have been pushing for property tax relief and returning surplus dollars to taxpayers since passage of the 2025-27 state budget last summer. Meanwhile, Governor Evers sought to secure a final major investment in public education as part of his legacy as the “education governor.” While many thought a post-session compromise was unlikely, perhaps the biggest surprise of the week was the unusual alliance that pushed back against it — and ultimately killed the package.

According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau (LFB) the proposed $1.8 billion “surplus compromise” included:

• $870 million to provide one-time payments of $600 for married joint filers and $300 for individuals.
• $315 million toward reimbursements for special education costs.
• $16.3 million more in per-pupil payments for pupils participating in choice, charter, special needs scholarship and open enrollment programs because of the increase in special education funding.
• $302.5 million for a new school aid payment beginning in 2026-27.
• $50 million to reduce property taxes collected by the state’s technical colleges.
• A state income tax exclusion for overtime compensation and tip income beginning in tax year 2026.

The Governor announced the package Monday morning, and legislators returned to the Capitol for the week knowing there was a possibility they could be brought back into session. By Tuesday, while the Joint Finance Committee voted on the bill, opposition to the package was already building from all sides. Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein and Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer came out against the proposal, voicing concerns both about the process and the fiscal responsibility of spending down the surplus given the Legislative Fiscal Bureau’s projected $2.9 billion structural deficit heading into the 2027-29 budget cycle. Following their announcements, several Democratic gubernatorial candidates also criticized the package as a short-term fix rather than a long-term fiscal solution.

At the same time, Congressman Tom Tiffany, who is running for governor, publicly criticized the proposal and urged Senate Republicans to reject it, arguing the package spent too much of the state surplus and expanded government spending beyond what conservatives should support.

By Wednesday, questions surrounding the Senate vote count had spilled into public view, with Senators Nass and Kapenga publicly denouncing the deal. It became increasingly clear there were not 17 Republican votes in the Senate to pass the package. Still, after numerous delays in both the Assembly and Senate, legislative leaders ultimately brought the bill to the floor for a vote.

Shortly after 9 p.m. Wednesday night, the proposal passed the Assembly 61-32, with 10 Democrats — most representing competitive districts — joining Republicans in support. Soon after, following several floor speeches both supporting and opposing the package, the Senate voted it down.

Governor Tony Evers sharply criticized the vote and also took aim at Tiffany for pressuring Senate Republicans to oppose the legislation. Meanwhile, Republican legislative leaders emphasized the property tax relief and education investments included in the proposal.

Despite the drama surrounding the negotiations and floor votes, the deal appears effectively dead and unlikely to be revived. However, the dynamics that played out exposed significant intraparty divisions within both parties heading into what is expected to be a highly competitive and politically charged election cycle in Wisconsin.