Wisconsin Senate Bill SB1167

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/19/26
• Refer: 3/19/26
• Failed: 3/23/26

Caption

An Act to repeal 121.91 (4) (o) 4.; to renumber and amend 121.91 (4) (o) 1.; to create 121.91 (4) (o) 1. c. of the statutes; Relating to: the school district revenue limit adjustment for energy efficiency projects. (FE)

Impact

If enacted, SB1167 will significantly expand the capabilities of school districts to secure funding for essential energy efficiency projects. By enabling school boards to adopt resolutions to exceed revenue limits for energy conservation measures, the bill may lead to an increase in investments directing towards infrastructure improvements that could lower operational costs over time. Additionally, qualifying projects would include alterations aimed at improving energy efficiency, conserving water resources, and enhancing metering accuracy, thereby contributing to both financial and environmental benefits for the districts.

Summary

Senate Bill 1167 aims to amend the current framework governing school district revenue limits concerning energy efficiency projects. Under existing law, school districts are permitted to exceed their revenue limits to fund energy efficiency initiatives; however, these exceptions are limited to resolutions adopted before January 1, 2018, or after December 30, 2018. SB1167 seeks to remove this timeline restriction, allowing school districts greater flexibility in raising their revenue limits to fund energy efficiency improvements regardless of the resolution's adoption date. This change is intended to encourage more school districts to invest in energy-saving measures.

Contention

Notably, there may be discussions surrounding the financial implications of allowing such adjustments to the revenue limit. Supporters argue that promoting energy efficiency can lead to long-term savings that benefit both the school districts and the communities they serve. Opponents might raise concerns regarding the potential for increased reliance on state funds and the long-term sustainability of such initiatives. They may question whether the removal of the timeline restriction is in the best interest of fiscal responsibility, suggesting that long-term benefits must be weighed against possible short-term financial impacts.