Fond du Lac School District's operational referendum denied by voters
Officials with the Fond du Lac School District (FDLSD) say the unofficial result of the referendum vote was 9,617 for 'no' and 8,452 for 'yes.'
$197.8 million referendum narrowly passes in Oshkosh
The proposed referendum funds would have allowed the District to maintain operations, cover maintenance expenses, and provide security upgrades. 'The District will be unable to move forward with the planned investments without the referendum funds,' FDLSD officials stated in a release.
The community provided us feedback on what they expect the District to do, and we will make necessary cuts to address our deficit. The reduction in operational dollars the District is facing will lead to changes in how we deliver education to our students. We have made incredible progress over the last four years, and we owe it to our students, families, staff, and the Fond du Lac community to provide the best educational opportunities for students. Without these funds, the District will need to make modifications and tough decisions, so we can continue to change outcomes for our students. Additionally, we will not be able to make the necessary security improvements at the high school.
Superintendent Dr. Jeffrey Fleig, Fond du Lac School District
Democratic-backed Wisconsin state schools chief Jill Underly wins reelection over G0P-backed rival
Fleig said the next step for the District would be to work with the Board of Education to make necessary cuts and determine how it can best serve its students and staff moving forward.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
8 minutes ago
- USA Today
What to know about President Trump's proposed new census and 2026 elections
The population survey helps decide how many congressional seats each state gets. Here's why a new one would matter. President Donald Trump announced his intention to "immediately begin work on a new" census, raising questions about whether the plan would be constitutional and how it would affect the partisan makeup of Congress. His announcement came amidst Texas Republicans' efforts to perform an unusual mid-decade redrawing of congressional maps, which are normally drawn after the census determines the number of seats in each state's delegation at the beginning of each new decade. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and the GOP-led state legislature hope to add up to five new seats for their party by redistricting, prompting proposals for Democratic states to redraw their congressional maps in retaliation. Trump's Aug. 7 social media post said a new survey should be taken "based on modern day facts and figures and, importantly, using the results and information gained from the Presidential Election of 2024," and that people "who are in our Country illegally WILL NOT BE COUNTED IN THE CENSUS." USA TODAY has reached out to the White House for comment. Neither the U.S. Census Bureau nor the Commerce Department responded to requests for comment. "I think you would have to see, at some point, do things start moving?" said Shawn Donahue, a political science professor at the University of Buffalo. "Is it something that is more of just a press release, or is there something that the Commerce Department is going to start doing?" How often is the census taken? The U.S. Constitution calls for the census to be conducted every 10 years, and in years that end in zero, most recently in 2020. The U.S. Census Bureau, part of the Commerce Department, carries out these resource-intensive surveys and hires temporary staff to conduct outreach to count as many people as possible. The survey results are used to decide how seats in the U.S. House of Representatives are distributed to each state based on its population, a process called apportionment. Those processes usually take place in the first two years of a decade. The survey results are also used to determine how much federal funding is distributed to states, and researchers widely cite the demographic research to understand the country. Who supports conducting a mid-decade Census? Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican from Georgia, announced a bill in July that would require a new census to be performed, counting only U.S. citizens, and then direct states to redraw their congressional districts based on the new numbers. "Americans don't feel like they're represented in Washington," she said. Hans Von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow for the conservative Heritage Foundation, said he thinks states should redraw their congressional districts every five years, as long as data is available, but it usually isn't. He said the United States has a mobile and constantly increasing population that a survey held every 10 years doesn't capture. He also pointed to a 2022 report from the U.S. Census Bureau that found 14 states had statistically significant differences between the bureau's count and the actual population. Six states — Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Texas — had undercounts. He said better data quality might have led to more congressional seats in Texas and Florida. Who opposes a mid-decade census? John Bisognano, president of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, criticized Trump's proposal as "a comprehensive campaign to flout the U.S. Constitution in order to predetermine election outcomes so he can consolidate his power and avoid accountability to the American people." Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, told National Public Radio that following through "would defy the Constitution, federal law, and settled precedent" and her organization "won't hesitate to go back to court to protect representation for all communities." Why would Trump want to conduct a new Census? "The Republicans are so desperate at this point to forestall what's likely going to happen in 2026," said Michael P. McDonald, a political science professor at the University of Florida. Democrats are widely expected to win seats in the House of Representatives in next year's congressional elections, because the party that occupies the White House usually does poorly. Trump also has low approval ratings. That blue wave could flip control of the House, in which Republicans hold a 219 to 212 majority. McDonald said if Republicans draw new congressional districts, they might be able to mitigate the number of seats they lose. For example, the Republican stronghold of Texas saw such rapid population growth when the 2020 survey came out that it gained two additional congressional seats. Republican-leaning states of Florida and Montana, Democrat-leaning Oregon and Colorado, and tightly contested North Carolina each gained one seat. The Democratic population centers of California, Illinois, and New York each lost one seat; so did Republican-leaning Ohio and West Virginia, and the swing states of Michigan and Pennsylvania. Are immigrants counted in the census? Yes. The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says Representatives shall be apportioned according to the "whole number of persons in each State." This ended the longstanding practice of counting three-fifths of enslaved people for purposes of representation. There is no language in the 14th Amendment that restricts these counts to citizens or people with legal presence in the country. During his first term, Trump attempted to add a question to the 2020 census asking if the person completing the survey was a citizen. The Supreme Court struck that down in 2019. The following year, Trump issued a memorandum saying undocumented immigrants should not be included in counts that determine congressional representation. Could Republicans gain more seats if a new census were conducted? Van Spakovsky said a mid-decade census could result in more congressional seats for Texas and Florida. Both are red states with rapidly increasing populations, and both were undercounted in the 2020 census. Texas, for example, was undercounted by almost 550,000 in 2020 and added another 2 million people by 2024. By comparison, an average of 760,000 people live in each congressional district. Within hours of Trump's statement, Florida House Speaker Daniel Perez, a Republican, said he's setting up a new redistricting committee. McDonald said the congressional maps are the fairest they've been in about 40 years, because of redistricting reform efforts across the country to prevent unfairly drawn districts. He said that the congressional maps are already drawn in a way that there are more Republican-leaning districts than Democratic-leaning ones, despite the practice of including undocumented immigrants in the count. McDonald pointed to South Florida, where he said the current lines place right-leaning Cuban Americans with high voter turnout rates in the same districts as lower-propensity, Democratic-leaning Hispanic voters. If the maps were redrawn to not include undocumented immigrants, as Trump has suggested, he said there would likely be only two congressional seats in the area. "Who's going to be on that game of musical chairs?" he asked. How would a new census affect 2026 or 2028? Reapportioning congressional seats affects two things: How many congressional seats each state has and how many electoral votes each state has, because electoral votes are equal to each state's total number of Senate and House seats. House terms last two years, and the elections take place in even years, with the next one coming in 2026. The next presidential election happens in 2028. But this doesn't mean that a new census will take place or that maps will be rejiggered by then. "It seems pretty unlikely that you could do this for 2026, just because it takes so long," said Donahue. The government also isn't allowed to speed up the process by basing its count on statistical sampling, he said, pointing to a 1999 Supreme Court decision that said people must be counted. "It's not something where you can snap your fingers and it's going to happen." Von Spakovsky suggested the U.S. Census Bureau update a form it already sends out regularly and use it to perform a mid-decade census survey. "You couldn't get it done this year, but I don't see any reason why you couldn't get it done next year," he said. Would Trump's order to do a mid-decade census go to court? "Absolutely," said Donahue. "The Constitution calls for a decennial census. It doesn't say that you can't (have more). But, I mean, it pretty much implies that you're only going to do one every 10 years." Donahue predicted that Democratic-leaning states would be most likely to challenge a mid-decade census in court. But the administration could argue that the requirement to do it every 10 years isn't a prohibition on doing it more often. "There's no legal bar in place that says you can't redistrict more than once every 10 years," von Spakovsky said. Contributing: Francesca Chambers
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Carville: Democrats have to add states, expand Supreme Court to ‘save democracy'
Veteran Democratic strategist James Carville on Thursday suggested Democrats should add two states to the country and expand the Supreme Court in order to 'save democracy.' 'They are just going to have to unilaterally add Puerto Rico and District of Columbia as states… They're just going to have to do it. And they may have to expand the [Supreme Court] to 13 members,' Carville said during a Thursday podcast episode. The proposal comes after the longtime commentator told party members to let the president ' punch himself out ' of the American public's good graces. Carville says conditions are drastic, citing the GOP push to add five additional House seats in Texas ahead of the 2026 midterms, and require a more forward approach if Democrats capture the White House and both chambers of Congress. 'Any of those things in isolation I would be skeptical about. I would be cautious about,' Carville said of his ideas. 'I would say, 'Well, I don't know if that's the greatest idea in the world, you're opening Pandora's Box.' If you want to save democracy, I think you got to do all of those things because we just are moving further and further away from being anything close to democracy,' he added. The process to increase the number of justices on the Supreme Court would be a steep climb, as the number has been in place since 1865. Congress would need to approve the move. Democrats introduced a bill in 2021 and 2023 seeking to expand the court, but both efforts failed. The argument for D.C. statehood remains a pressing conversation in Washington. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) serves as a delegate for the District but can only vote in committees and cannot participate in floor votes. The same guidelines apply to Puerto Rico Resident Commissioner Pablo Jose Hernandez (D). President Trump's recent qualms with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) and crime rates have frustrated local leaders who are seeking to ensure the city remains under its own authority instead of federal enforcement. Under the Home Rule Act, the president can take the helm of local functions, including D.C. police, if 'special conditions of an emergency nature exist.' And after an attack on a former government employee, Trump said he is evaluating a course of action. 'We're considering it yeah, because the crime is ridiculous,' Trump said when asked if he was considering federalizing the Metropolitan Police Department. 'We want to have a great, safe capital. And we're going to have it. And that includes cleanliness and that includes other things,' Trump added.
Boston Globe
8 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
‘That's a big tax increase': US businesses and consumers likely to pay most of Trump's tariffs
'Tariff is basically a euphemism for a tax,' said Boston College economist Brian Bethune, who equated it to state sales taxes. 'It's no different than any other tax on . . . products and services.' Advertisement The reality stands in stark contrast with Republicans' recent sweeping, party-line legislation, which they have touted for extending the 2017 tax cuts and adding several new breaks. But while a tariff acts the same as a tax economically, it doesn't carry the same negative baggage politically — at least not yet. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Trump has frequently incorrectly asserted that foreign countries, such as China, pay the tariffs. And he along with fellow Republicans have touted the tariff revenue as a financial windfall that helped produce Advertisement 'Working people need relief now. They've earned it,' In his wording, Hawley tacitly acknowledged that at least some of the tariff revenue was paid by consumers. Democrats are trying to hammer home that point directly, referring to Trump's tariffs as taxes that are increasing costs for a wide variety of goods. 'Let's be very clear: This misguided move will raise prices on everyday goods like food, clothing and housing, at a time when families are already struggling with high costs,' New Hampshire Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen said in a statement Thursday that referred to 'sweeping Trump tariff taxes.' 'President Trump's tariffs will squeeze small businesses and force many to close their doors, harm our standing in global markets and result in job loss across this country.' Representative Gabe Amo, a Rhode Island Democrat, said his party needs to continually refute Trump's assertions that foreigners pay tariffs. 'It's bringing in a ton of revenue, but from whom?' Amo said. 'This is essentially . . . one of the biggest tax hikes on the American people in history, and Congress didn't sign off on it at all.' After household $2,400 this year. Advertisement Some foreign companies might eat part of the tariff cost to keep US customers, but economists said most of the costs will be borne by US businesses and consumers. Tariffs have brought in about $125 billion since Trump took office, and with the new, higher rates, probably will generate more than $300 billion a year, said economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the conservative-leaning American Action Forum think tank. 'That's a big tax increase,' said Holtz-Eakin, who was director of domestic and economic policy for Republican John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign. 'It's going to show up as higher prices or slower employment growth, or both, and Americans will pay for it one way or another.' He said Trump's assertions about who pays the tariffs are 'flatly wrong.' 'They're saying the money is pouring in. That's just not true,' Holtz-Eakin said. 'The taxes are remitted by the importer. They write the checks.' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Thursday that the Trump administration is 'trying to rebalance trade in America's favor' by using tariffs to force businesses to manufacture more products in the United States. But when pressed on MSNBC's 'Morning Joe' about who actually pays the tariffs, Bessent acknowledged the US importer writes the check. 'Yes, and then, you know, the importer can pass it on or not,' Bessent said. Some businesses might decide to pass on only a portion of those costs to avoid raising prices too much, Bethune said. But that will cause a hit to their profits. Last week, noted that Advertisement 'Ultimately, they're going to find a way to pass that on to their customers,' Bethune said. Amo noted that a survey released in June of nearly White House spokesperson Kush Desai dismissed 'doom-and-gloom predictions of inflation and recession' from the tariffs. 'The administration has consistently maintained the cost of tariffs will be paid by foreign exporters who rely on access to the American economy, the world's best and biggest consumer market,' he said. But lower-income Americans are poised to take a big hit from the tariffs because they tend to shop at places such as Walmart and Costco that rely heavily on imported clothing and other goods, Bethune said. 'Given the discounted outlets typically source a disproportionate share of their products from places like China, then obviously that's going to have a differential impact there,' he said. Advertisement Taxes on what people buy are considered less progressive than income taxes because people with lower incomes spend a greater percentage of their money on day-to-day purchases. Trump has suggested tariffs could one day bring in enough money to eliminate the federal income tax. As a simply policy question, Holtz-Eakin, the head of the conservative-leaning think tank, said he opposes the idea because the tariffs are 'very regressive.' But he predicted there was no chance tariffs would replace the income tax because they would have to generate seven times the estimated revenue this year, which would require an unrealistic tariff rate of about 140 percent. But Trump still talks fondly about 'Oh to be president in 1890,' Holtz-Eakin said. 'That's what he's dreaming of.' Jim Puzzanghera can be reached at
