Pulse of the Bay – Romaine Quinn – Episode 7

Summary

In this episode of Pulse of the Bay, host Fred Clark speaks with Senator Romaine Quinn about his political journey, the dynamics of the newly redrawn 25th Senate District, and his role on the Joint Finance Committee. They discuss the complexities of the state budget process, the potential for bipartisanship, and the pressing challenges surrounding school funding, particularly in light of federal funding uncertainties. Senator Quinn emphasizes the importance of community growth and the need for equitable funding across school districts. 

In this conversation, Romaine discusses the complexities of navigating budget uncertainties, the importance of long-term accountability in fiscal planning, and the challenges facing higher education in Wisconsin. He emphasizes the need for targeted funding to address specific issues within the university system and the importance of stewardship in conservation efforts. The discussion also covers the pressing housing crisis and innovative approaches to forestry and sustainable practices, highlighting the interconnectedness of these issues and the need for collaborative solutions.

Takeaways

• Senator Quinn has a long history in local politics, starting from a young age.
• He emphasizes the importance of citizens being involved in political discussions to make a difference.
• The 25th Senate District is diverse and covers multiple counties.
• Senator Quinn serves on the Joint Finance Committee, crucial for state budget decisions.
• The budget process aims to be completed by July 1st, despite uncertainties.
• Bipartisanship is essential for passing a state budget.
• School funding is a significant concern, especially with declining enrollment.
• Federal funding cuts could impact local schools, but the extent is uncertain.
• Community growth is vital for sustaining school populations.
• Equitable funding across school districts is necessary for fair education opportunities. 
• We have as many students in the UW system as we did in the early 90s, but 6,000 more staff.
• We need investment in our state parks.
• Housing is definitely on the forefront because it affects everything.
• We need to address housing stock.
• Wisconsin has a surplus of products in forestry.
• Caregiver indicator bill is being drafted based on constituent input.

Resources 

Wisconsin Senator Romain Quinn Website 

Joint Committee on Finance Public Comment Website 

Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau 

The Wisconsin Budget in Brief 

Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program

LIHTC program

Show Transcript

Fred Clark

Well, good afternoon and welcome to Pulse of the Bay, the news and public affairs show from 97.7 FM WVCB LP Ashland, Wisconsin. We are the voice of Chequamegon Bay. WVCB FM is community radio. It’s our programming of music, news, documentary and discussion strengthens our sense of place and connection among the communities along the south shore of Lake Superior. You can check us out at wvcb.org.

I’m Fred Clark, one of your hosts for Pulse of the Bay. And I’m excited to be here today, I should say talking remotely today with Senator Romaine Quinn, who represents Wisconsin’s 25th Senate District. Senator Quinn, welcome to WBCB radio and Pulse of the Bay.

Romaine Quinn

Thank you for having me, Fred.

Fred Clark

You bet. Senator Quinn’s down in his Madison office on a Tuesday afternoon, April 15th, with lots of state business to attend to. So the magic of remote radio. So you are midway through, I think you’re beginning the second half of your first term as a state senator for the 25th Senate district. Prior to that, you served three terms, I think, in the state assembly representing the area around Rice Lake and parts of Barron County. 

Good to have you here with us today. Now you’re representing a newly redrawn 25th Senate district, but before we get to that, I like to ask all of our guests. You’ve had quite a history in local politics and I wonder if you would just take us a minute and walk us through where you came from and a few of your steps along the way to get to where you are now as our state senator?

Romaine

Yeah, absolutely happy to do that. Especially for those listeners that may not know who I am. So born and raised in the Barron County, Southern Washburn County area, you know, always called Rice Lake my home between the Rice Lake and, and Birchwood area, both sides of my families have resided for many generations. And so I got my start in politics quite young. I’ve always been interested in it. There was never a catalyst moment that piqued my interest. I just always remember growing up sitting on my grandpa’s lap, watching the news with them.

Just wanted to know what was going on. And that kind of snowballed into my senior year in high school running for city council. So there were two seats open, four of us ran, and I was fortunate to be elected alongside my college professor who I was taking courses from while I was in high school at UW Baron County. So we both got to fulfill a partial term on that. And so enjoyed that very much being in the know. I learned a lot.

And that’s when during that course of the process, I realized I didn’t always agree on every issue with the current mayor at the time. And folks were looking for someone to run. So I thought, what the heck? I’m 19 now. So I’ll grow up and take a shot at it. And we campaigned. No one thought we’d win, but all you need is one more than half. And that’s exactly what we got, 51% of the vote. And the rest is history. So I enjoyed that very much, it’s been two years.

Fred Clark

Congratulations.

Romaine

As mayor of Rice Lake continuing my education at UW Barron County, well now it’s ECBC at the two-year campus.

Fred Clark

Were you the youngest mayor of Race Lake ever elected? Yeah? 

Romaine

That I was. Yep. And yeah, I enjoyed that very much. And that’s where I found out that, you know, I really do love politics. I love being in the know, you know, on the inside of the room when the conversations are being had. Everyone can make a difference. But when you’re in the room, you can make a heck of a lot of a bigger difference. And so I knew I needed to be in the room when these conversations are happening. So I did that for two years. UW-Barron County didn’t have a four year program then. And so I chose not to rerun. 

Finished my schooling. did a year in Eau Claire, moved back home and then finished online through UW-Green Bay. So I graduated in May, working with my student advisor from UW Baron County, asking her to help me find a way to get my degree done in time because I need to get my diploma and announce my candidacy for the state assembly. So we did that, working full time. I still remember my first assembly campaign like it was yesterday, working our tails off.

You know, I was working full time and then knocking doors every night till dark, not too dark so you don’t scare people! But every night of the week and weekends except Sunday and yeah, we won. And so I’ve enjoyed that time in the assembly. I served for three terms, six years in the 75th assembly district, which was predominantly all of Barron County and the southern third of Washburn County. And then I chose to leave office willingly. We were looking at starting a family. My wife and I were recently married.

I did dabble in a little bit of banking and real estate. And then I realized there’s an opportunity to, at least on my side of the aisle, to flip the 25th Senate district. And at that point would have given us a veto proof majority in the Senate. And so I jumped back in. So I still maintain my real estate license. Pretty busy doing that when I can be. Not as much anymore being back in office. But yeah, so now I’m halfway through my first term in the Senate. So the evil Senate that was

the bane of our existence in the assembly, and now I’m one of them. But it’s not as bad over on this side as we used to think.

Fred Clark

Congratulations, it’s quite a long road to get there. And you still work as a real estate agent, is that correct, or a broker? 

Romaine 

I do. 

Fred Clark

Yeah, and that’s one of those careers, attorneys, real estate, farming, a lot of different hats you can wear when you’re a legislator. 

Romaine

Yes, it’s got to be flexible.

So tell us about the 25th Senate District. It’s a newly created district. It looks quite different than the one that you started in two years ago, I think. What’s it look like today?

Romaine

Yeah, the 25th has been pretty much the same for the most part over the last few decades and even the map drawing. So this time the change, you know, putting my partisan hat on, I think it was intentional. They swapped out Barron County and Polk County to get me out of it, but I moved. So I’m in Birchwood now to maintain that seat. But yeah, so the 25th now, it’s almost the same as it was two years ago. They just kind of swapped Polk County and Barron County out.

Fred Clark

Okay.

Romaine

And then it picked up all of Sawyer County. So tightened it a little bit, but Polk County kind of fingers down there to the south and to the west. So it’s still, I believe, the biggest Senate district. It certainly was two years ago. Senate President Felzkowski kind of rivals us as the second largest to our east. So I always say it’s the biggest, most diverse, most beautiful district, I think, in the state.

Romaine

You know, we get to live where everyone else wants to vacation. So what’s better than that? So I always say – heavy on ag,  heavy on forestry, we’ve got the Great Lakes, the boundary waters there, we go from the Minnesota border to the UP. And so we just have a real rich diversity that really no other district has. And we’re very unique. And I think we’re really blessed on that front.

Fred Clark

Well, we need you as a cheerleader for that or a champion for it. And that’s great. And as one of the biggest districts, if not the biggest, you’ve got, is it part of nine counties? 

Romaine

Yeah, so it changed a little bit, yeah, but I don’t have the new count of towns yet, but it’s massive. But yeah, you’ve got Polk County, Burnett County, Washburn County, Douglas, Bayfield, Ashland, and Sawyer. So we lost Price County as well, but I still go to Price County a lot because you maintain those relationships even though they might not be in your district.

Fred Clark

Sure. And then in addition, as you said, the towns, municipalities, the school districts, that’s a lot of meetings to go to. Yeah. So in your role as Senator, you are now serving on the Joint Finance Committee, the powerful Joint Finance Committee in the state legislature. And you have one of the most important roles, at least for the next six months or more. Tell us about that work and what will your specific role on Joint Finance be this year?

Romaine

Yeah, and for those folks that don’t know, the Joint Finance Committee is made up of members of both houses and both parties, and they are the committee that’s actually responsible for doing the up and down votes on what goes in or what comes out of the state budget. 

And so other members that aren’t on Joint Finance are assigned to us, so-called budget buddies, and they make their requests through us that we go to fight within our caucuses in our respective sides of the Joint Finance Committee in hopes to maintain, either add or get rid of funding for any particular area of concern for that legislator. like I said, if I’m going to do this job, 

I want to be in the room and there’s no other room that’s more important to be in than on the Joint Finance Committee where we’re actually fighting for the issues that we want or that I want and that hopefully reflect the needs of the district. So it’s early right now. We do the public listening session. So upcoming yet, April 28th and 29th, there’ll be a listening session from the committee in Hayward and then in Wausau the following day.

And so an opportunity for folks to address the entire committee directly. So instead of just calling my office, that’s great. We probably agree. I’m probably going to fight for that issue. Folks from other parts of the state on the committee can hear from you directly if you choose to take your two minutes and address the body. So once that wraps up, then we’ll start moving into actual up and down votes on probably the smaller departments first. How are we going to fund different things and begin the actual crafting of the state budget that then eventually will go before the full body of each house of the legislature.

Fred Clark

Yeah, sounds good. And if you had to guess, do you think our budget process is going to be about on the same track as it’s been in years past or is some of the uncertainty around federal funding and other things going to likely drag it out this year?

Romaine

I think our goal is still to have it done by July 1st. But I would have to say, just not so much even the federal questions, but the court cases that impact what the state budget can look like, what joint finance is even allowed to do or not to do anymore. You know, there’s court cases questioning our authority as the Joint Finance Committee as well. 

So a perfect example, the governor’s $400 a year veto of school funding. You know, that’s going to determine a lot of “what else we do for schools or not” going forward. If the 325 per pupil is set in stone in perpetuity, how much of that are we going to fund or allow to fall on property taxpayers? And then that’ll determine what else we do. But until we know the outcome of that court case, how do you craft a budget, right? How do you do that, with so many unknowns? So that a lot of those things just simply have to play out. So I hope the court, if they’re willing to take these cases, they’re willing to do them in a timely manner.

You know that respects the timeline the legislature is ultimately on and trying to get this done.

Fred Clark

Okay. So, a lot of us watched the governor’s budget address. And of course, in Wisconsin, our process is that the governor takes most of the late year before the biennium starts and develops his own budget or her own budget and introduces that first and sort of has the first kick at what the governor would like policy to be. And then it’s all up to you all in the legislature to actually develop a budget that…will ultimately get to his desk. 

And watching the budget address this year, I didn’t see any times that I could notice that both sides of the aisle applauded for any of the governor’s remarks or the investments or the provisions in his budget. I’m just wondering what’s your sense of, is there going to be any bipartisanship in this budget? Is there anything in what the governor proposed that you believe your side of the aisle will accept or be able to work with?

Romaine

Well, I think the governor has been in for a while now. And every time he’s assigned a budget, right. So there’s been enough bipartisan compromise to move the ball down the road and to continue having a budget, unlike the federal government that can do continuing resolutions and never actually pass a budget. So I would say there’s always going to be the opportunity for bipartisanship. And I would say for those folks that tune in and listen, a lot of that is pomp and circumstance, right? You see it at the federal level, too. It’s kind of very ceremonial and one side gets up and cheers and yells and the other side sits down with their hands on their butt and vice versa. 

So I wouldn’t read terribly too much into that, but I would just say in totality, there’s going to be a lot of commonality, right? There’s going to be an increase for K through 12 education, but what does it look like in what form and how much? There’s both sides, no matter what, we’re funding the cost to continue for Medicaid. What do we do with prisons? What do we do with all the other asks within DOT?

So if the governor signs a budget, there is a bipartisan compromise and I think we’ll have a budget. My only concern I would say on face value, for those that reach out and say, why not just adopt the governor’s budget? It puts us in a precarious fiscal situation, not too far down the road. And in my opinion, personally, for me, it makes me uncomfortable. Even if we adopted the budget, the governor proposed, and we include all the tax increases, we still have a 2.5 to 2.4 ish billion dollar deficit three years out. Now that’s assuming no growth. 

Obviously we’re going to have growth. But if you’re concerned about tariffs, if you’re concerned about President Trump, if you’re concerned about the uncertainty, then you would assume we’re not going to have a lot of growth, right? And even if we have an average 2% and 2%, we’re still a billion and a half short to maintain the obligations we’d be voting for today. And that’s just not something the situation that we’re willing to put the state in. So again we’ll see what the uppers look like but that is why the legislature is going to be building a budget from base meaning where are at today, what are the revenues tomorrow, and what can we afford ongoing.

Fred Clark

And so, one of the things that the Legislative Fiscal Bureau does, as you pointed out, is projects the revenue for the state for the biennium. And I think you’re correct in noting that this is going to be a difficult couple of years to predict what the economy is going to do, given all the uncertainty, in Washington and globally with tariffs and other things that our federal government’s doing.

With that, let’s dive into the school funding, which you’ve already mentioned. And certainly the governor has proposed a significant increase in funding for schools. I think one thing that I hear a lot and that we hear a lot in this region is concern about, one, the impact of the private school system, the voucher schools and the independent charter schools and the funds that those siphon off from the public school funding. And just looking at the number of districts that are

going to referendums routinely. I think I looked it up, there were something like 240 districts, more than half the districts in this state went to referendum last year alone. Does that maybe suggest that we need to make a bigger state investment in public education to take some of that burden off property taxpayers?

Romaine

Well, I would say two things on that. One, if they’re capital referendums, the state really has no involvement in that, right? So whatever you choose to build, expand, close down, add on, that fits your local community, that’s really all on you, the local community. Now, operational referendums, that’s a different ballgame because that means you’re trying to find more money to cover your operational costs. So I would say school districts, they’re certainly not immune from the effects of inflation either. You felt it in your family budget, you felt it as a business owner and certainly schools have those similar costs, healthcare costs continue to go up by double digit increases, the cost of utilities, just keeping the lights on, heat, et cetera, food service. 

And then of course, trying to give your staff raises, obviously that can’t keep up with inflation, but at least something to keep them afloat as well. And all of that adds up a lot and it doesn’t always keep up with the funds that are being allocated, especially when you have declined enrollment. Our biggest problem in our district, looking forward, we’re looking as a state at about a seven and a half percent decline in the K through 12 population over the next decade. And a lot of that we bear the brunt of. And so when you have a system that’s funded based on your property value and a per pupil allocation behind that, it gets very difficult when the pool of payers is shrinking, right? 

You know, you’re graduating a hundred kids every year and the preschool, kindergarten class is 80. It’s a trajectory that’s not going to be good. And so how do you fix that? I think there’s a number of things the state can certainly add more money to, which we do, which we have every year and will continue to do. 

But we have to find ways too to try to keep growing our communities. A lot of that’s with housing, right? So we’re very fortunate. We’re lucky that finally the city of Washburn was awarded the LIHTC award to build 52 units or 54 units in the city of Washburn. So that’s a game changer, right? What if that attracts, let’s say 10, 15 new families that otherwise couldn’t find housing that would love to move to Washburn and move into Bayfield County. And they all bring two kids a piece with 12, 13, $14,000 a pop, some growth finally. So like those kinds of things can change the trajectory of a community and of a school district. 

But I would say a lot of it too, again is how the state funds it. So I’ve always been a proponent of raising the low revenue ceiling for our districts, especially those on that low end. So you think of the Drummond’s and Maple Northwestern, even the city school district of Superior was a low revenue district. And so wanting to even the playing fields for those that we hold to account to compete with their peers, but they’re not funded the same as their peers. 

Fred

And so that they’re stuck at that low spending limit where they can’t raise the revenue that their peers can. 

Romaine

Exactly. And so if we want to compete apples to apples, it has to actually be apples to apples. And so that’s where we raised that for my days in the assembly up to $9,000. And now this last budget, we got them up to $11,000 and everyone should be around $11,325 because of that people allocation upper as well. So there’s going to be investment. I always said, it’s that some people do it because they want the property tax reduction. Some people do it because they want to solve problems in the school districts.

And then some want to give schools nothing because they go down to Verona and they’re building schools and gyms and pools, while we’re still just trying to replace the windows. So the disparities between districts and legislators is huge. And so our opinions are vastly different on what schools should look like. So this budget is going to be an upper, no doubt about it in my mind, just what will that look like and how much and how do we spend it? 

Because like I said, you could put it all in the general formula, but if there’s no revenue limit authority, it’s not spendable dollars. It’s just property tax reductions. You know, if you just do flat per pupil allocations across the board, is that fair to a Drummond and a Superior when someone else is already spending 13, $14,000 a kid and they’re at 11 and everyone is getting the same. Is that fair? So I think we can be smart with the resources we allocate and to see that our schools continue to be viable.

Fred Clark

Well, and ultimately there’s lots of ways to measure fairness and that’s where the tough choices come in, how to make a level playing field with so many different environments. And I think, as you said, families moving to this area for the new job that they’re able to now afford a home for and the new development in Washburn. And one of the most important things they’ll be looking for is a strong public school for those kids. Yeah, so there’s a new wrinkle now in the budget this year and I don’t envy you all. And that’s the future of federal funding.

Romaine

Right.

Fred Clark

You’ve probably seen the DPI has put up a website now where you could look at all the 420 some districts in the state and see what the impact of loss of USDA funds would be. And I believe that that’s school lunch, but you could correct me if it’s something else and Department of Education funds, which are both being talked about as possible federal programs to be cut. What happens if we lose those resources that in some cases amount to 10% or more of a school’s budget. And do you all have strategies in mind for how to prevent that or how to act on that?

Romaine

Yeah, we’ll take it as it comes. Like an example, I’ve talked to our school districts, and asked “have you seen actually any reduction in any federal aid”? And the answer is no, right? So these conversations are going on. Obviously there have been staff at the federal level and the Department of Education that have been laid off. And yes, I think it’s important to be aware of the impact of what federal aid does for our schools. Putting the number out, let’s say there even is a cut to federal support of schools locally here in Wisconsin. You know, it’s not going to be all the money, right? So, I mean, we can put out graphs that show all the money we get and say, wow, look how detrimental this will be.

 Well, cutting staff at the federal level doesn’t mean you’re going to get less money being reimbursed for the cost of that special education kid. I think it’s good to quantify how big the impact would be if it all went away. But there’s no talk of it even all going away. So I think it’s really important to try to maintain perspective to try to maintain conversations with our federal delegations. I talked to Congressman Tiffany on a weekly basis and just to keep those situations on our forefront and be aware. And I think that’s why it’s all the more important to not spend every dollar we have right now and then some going forward before we even know the ramifications of potential issues we need to fix, right? 

So that’s my other concern, it’s either the budget’s going to be bad, there are going to be cuts and the economy is going to tank or it’s not, right? But we can’t spend like everything’s going to be great. So that’s the catch-22. Like you either think it’s going to be slow growth and there’s going to be cuts. And if so, we can’t overspend ourselves, right? Or we should wait and see what are those cuts? Could they be? And then how do we turn around and have money set aside to leverage the difference there to make sure we keep certain things harmless.

We’ll get creative. I mean, I don’t see a scenario where anyone wants to kick people off the IRIS program and Medicaid, and lose their independence because frankly, it’ll cost the state more money if we have disabled folks who are at home now going into a nursing home. So we just got to be smart about it. We can’t overspend out of the gate, which I believe some want to do. And we’ll just watch as these things come down the pike and we’ll respond accordingly.

Fred Clark

Well, it does seem that there’s a degree of uncertainty for that reason this year with the budget process – that’s probably a really unique factor. 

Romaine

Yeah, and I think there’s ways that we can even buffer ourselves too. So for instance, there’s a recent plan we’re floating around with the hospital association. So as we talk about Medicaid funding or Medicaid reimbursement rates for hospitals and not knowing what that looks like, there’s a potential plan out there where we could leverage nearly an additional billion dollars in federal money just by assessing our hospitals, drawing down a larger match, and then turning around and deploying those monies into our health care system.

You know, as a buffer to potentially any cuts that come down the pike. And so, do we find different ways to pivot, to attract other funds, to fill potential gaps? But I would say, again, they’re all potential. And I would say even back to 2010, when Governor Walker came in, or even now, it’s very easy to be mad at the people who are trying to do the change, right? 

But I always say, why don’t we look back even further? If there was no budget deficit, there would have been no Scott Walker, there would have been no Act 10, right? If there were no trillion dollar deficits, there wouldn’t be a Donald Trump. I always say, I get mad at the people who put us in the spot where we even have to talk about this stuff. No, I’m not saying one way is right or wrong. What is the best way to handle some of these issues? But we should be more mad about the people who were not thinking long-term that gave us those moments where people captured it and won their election based on a potential crisis. Why do we have that crisis in the first place? And so I think it’s incumbent upon all of us to hold ourselves accountable ahead of the crisis, so we don’t ever actually have to face that problem.

Fred Clark

And you will acknowledge right there in 2008, America faced a recession and economic crisis that was largely a result of national decisions about home mortgages that ultimately tanked the economy for the entire country. And every state in the country faced similar challenges.

Romaine

Absolutely. Going forward, how do we deal with those, right? That is the question.

Fred Clark

Yeah, you bet, you bet. Fiscal responsibility and maintaining the investments that we all benefit from.

Romaine

Were you in office during that fun time where the state was broke? I can’t remember what years you served.

Fred Clark

I was, that was my first term in the assembly was 2009 and that was a horrible year to try to write a budget. Yeah. Yeah. Tough times for everyone. 

Romaine

Sure. So it’s your fault. Good job. No, I’m kidding.

Fred Clark

So tell us about the university system. Similarly, they’re declining enrollment, especially with the two year colleges. Something like seven of our 13 two year colleges have

closed in the last five years. You represent obviously a number of elements in the UW system, including UW Superior, UW Baron, and others. What do you think needs to happen there?

Romaine

So a number of things. When you look at the closures of some of the two-year campuses, I think the writing was on the wall for a while. Nothing to do with funding, but just student population. why, as we have, it’s always been absurd to me that why are we sending kids to four-year institutions that cost more when they have to take remedial courses, because they’re not up to snuff, right? So now the stuff they should have gotten out of the K through 12 system, we can talk about why it did or didn’t happen. 

But then we let them walk into a four-year [university] and spend money they don’t have, take out the loan, to take courses that they should have already known, where maybe they could have gone to a two-year, much cheaper, sometimes half the cost of some of our four-year institutions, and done those courses there. So I took that route, right? I spent two years at UW Baron County. Now I certainly could have gone straight into Eau Claire or River Falls or La Crosse. had my, I could have had my pick of the litter on where I wanted to go and all my friends did and it was great.

They looked like they were having fun. While I was home working and paying less for college and taking less out on loans. And then they come out with more debt. And I’m like, well, you didn’t have to do that. You didn’t even know what you wanted to do your first two years. You just decided to go straight into that four year when we had an opportunity at home for half the cost. You would have had no room and board. You could have stayed home. You could have still worked part time. And so I think we should be leveraging our two year campuses for how efficient and affordable they are.

I know some colleagues want to close them to gain efficiencies because we could fit all those students into our four years, no problem. And I get that, but in the greater conversation of student loan debt, I think it’s a missed opportunity. Now I might be in the minority on that issue, but I would say overall, you know, the UWs have to continue to justify themselves, to be nimble, to, you know, almost exist similar to the technical college system where they pivot to what the needs are of the communities and the businesses they represent.

And I think a lot have done that, have done a good job at that. And part of it, they’ve been forced to do that because of budget freezes, forcing them to spend on their reserves, really take hard looks at their programs and kind of right the ship in terms of serving the needs of today and hopefully forward looking into tomorrow. So I would say the large request by President Rothman and the UW system, I think frankly is not swallowable in terms of the overall budget. But of course there are costs we have to look at.You know, staff need raises, we have to be competitive. We have to make sure that, you know, the programs can continue to exist because they have the staff that aren’t getting poached from Minnesota or Michigan. So there’s a lot of conversations around UW. You know, an important point to note is we have as many students in the UW system as we did in the early 90s today. 

But we have 6,000 more faculty across our UW system than we did in the early 90s. And so are they instructional? Are they not? Are they administrative? So I think there’s a lot of deep dive we can do within the UW. And when I have discussions with chancellors about the budget proposal, I said, if we pass exactly what UW is asking for and Jay is asking for the 845 million, what does that do for you? 

And they don’t know because there’s some weird old calculation on how funds are distributed and no one knows even out of that what they’re going to get. So if we do uppers for the UW, I want to see them targeted, right? Show me the programs where there’s bottlenecks. You know, there’s no reason that we should have a shortage of nurses in this state and a waiting list to get a nursing program. You know, if you need 20 million to add staff to reduce that bottleneck on people who are waiting today, let’s do it. Hire the professors. What do we need to pay them? 

You know, come to us and say, here’s how we produce more engineers, nurses, doctors. You know, I’ve been supportive. You know, I wrote legislation to expand rural residency for physicians in our areas. You know, let’s target those funds. That stuff sells, Republicans and Democrats. It solves problems. It’s not, doesn’t appear to be just a large general ask. You know, obviously there’s fixed costs and things go up. got to support, but we should be targeting funds to solve problems that people with both sides can say, yeah, that makes sense.

Fred Clark

Yeah. And so with the Tech College systems and the two-year campuses of the UW system, are you seeing more overlap there than we should have? Is it confusing people or causing competition or too much capacity, almost, in some programs?

Romaine

That’s the fear for some. And if you look, our campuses, well, my former campus, I still considered Barron County in my district, even though technically it’s not on paper. But the technical college and the UW ECBC campus, they share the same footprint. You know, they border each other on similar grounds, right? And so some of my colleagues will be critical and say, you know, why are their general courses being offered at both institutions? Why are these credits just not naturally transferable? 

Or why are we trying to do the same job? And I would say their missions are different. They’re not all exactly the same and the UW frankly does need to do a better job at transferability. No doubt about it. If the syllabus is the same for the class, why in the world does this credit not go from one institution to the other? But I would say they do serve different purposes and I think sometimes they serve different populations as well. But that’s a conversation we have to ask ourselves. I mean at what point are you know, is the census too low to maintain what it is. For instance, that campus, they’re doing a great job at trying to figure out how to utilize all the infrastructure there. So there’s a childcare center that’s going to be going up in one of the buildings. The school district is utilizing one of the gyms, I believe, as well. So there’s a lot of cross sharing of services and infrastructure, which I think needs to happen as we try to reflect our demographic challenges that we have across northern Wisconsin.

Fred Clark

All right, thanks for that assessment. We’ll stay tuned. So let’s shift gears a bit. Let’s talk about another area where courts have been involved and that’s the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program. You’re very familiar with it, no doubt. It has a 40 year history, I think, in the state of protecting conservation lands. The governor’s proposed a big upper for the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program for this budget. I believe the governor, correct me if I got this wrong, but went to court and asked for basically what he believed was his rights as the executive were being overstepped by the Joint Finance Committee. That’s the governor’s position. So what do you think is gonna happen there and what do you expect the support for stewardship will look like in this budget?

Romaine 

So I would back it up to when I first got in the assembly. Like every program, there’s got to be a balance. So, you know, there’s some in our caucus that think there’s already enough public land or there’s already enough public land, especially in Northern Wisconsin, when you add up state land, you know, federal, county, municipal, so on and so forth. So there’s a whole wide range of views on stewardship and what it should look like. And obviously stewardship does a lot more than just land purchases. You know, it’s…certain infrastructure needs that stewardship addresses, boat landings, other things like that. 

So everyone’s got their pieces of stewardship they like, maybe they’re concerned with. But I would say the overall debt of the program was my concern back in 2015 and 2016, which under the Walker years, we sold off about 10,000 acres of public land. We instructed DNR to go find the least valuable to the mission, right? You know, one off 40s somewhere that weren’t connected to a large swath of land and use those sale proceeds to pay down the debt. when I first came in, mean, stewardship was running like a $75,000 a day interest just on the debt that had already been accumulated. 

And so that’s when we started to ratchet back instead of doing a hundred million a year, we were doing like $30, 35, 38 million a year over the biennium, just to try to bend that, that trajectory of getting a handle on the stewardship debt, the interest, and the principal payments on that. Not because no one supported it, but because it had to afford it. So now we’ve been to the curve. I think we’re in a better spot. I think our interest payments are only $50,000 a day now, not $75,000 a day. And so we’re carrying about $415 million in debt today, just in stewardship. And so any reauthorization of stewardship, I think, has to be at a level where we’re paying down debt faster than we’re accumulating it. And so I don’t know what that number is. The fiscal bureau, I’m sure will run us numbers. But it’s not going back to $100 million a year, I think at least until we know we’re on that projection of eliminating some of that principle. And also, people can say, you know, public land is like roads, you get a 50-year lifespan, you should be able to bond for it. Yes, but we still have to be able to make payments, especially if rates start to go up. So I don’t know the future of it right now. 

There’s a lot of my colleagues I think that are willing just to walk away from it because if they don’t have oversight they don’t want to authorize anything. I think there’s a lot of misunderstanding again of what stewardship does. It’s not just land acquisition, and so it’s funny right after this program I’m doing with you I actually have a meeting over a beer with some lobbyists that are trying to find a path forward on what stewardship could look like whether we call it stewardship or not or or what the level of funding is, what guardrails could be put in that make legislators comfortable instead of just giving the DNR a blank check. So I think there’s a path forward. I don’t know what it is yet, so I can’t tell you the answer to that. But I am certainly not in the necessarily the “kill it” camp. I think there needs to be some kind of a compromise going forward and we’ll kind of see what that looks like.

Fred Clark

We’re glad you’re having those conversations. a program that’s 40 years old should be re-looked at periodically. And there’s new needs and new priorities that emerge. One small example, well, it’s not a small example. An important example is our state park system. And as you know well, going back to 2010, state parks were taken off of general GPR support and basically are mostly funded by user fees right now.

We live near the Minnesota border, and if you want to take a drive over to a Minnesota State Park and compare that to your nearest Wisconsin State Park, it often looks very different because of the level of investment that Minnesota is able to make that we’re not. What do you see there? Do you see opportunities to use stewardship to do things like improve our parks program?

Romaine

So last budget, specifically, I drafted budget motions to spend, I think about $2 million a piece, both at Paterson and Amnicon Falls State Park, because we know that we need investment, right? Pavilions get old, fences get old, barriers get old, all that stuff. Disappointed, know, politics got in the way, that was vetoed out and it was sent to another state park or other state parks in other parts of the state. So we’ll be looking at doing something similar to that again. 

You know, at some point, I’d have to look at the revenues. know, what do state parks generate now? You know, we’ve upped the fees, you know, it’s that delicate balance of, you know, competing with private campgrounds that offer somewhat similar experiences that if on water or something somewhere, obviously different, and to be competitive, not overpriced. We still want people to come. but we still want, you know, I’m supportive of user fees, right? If you use it, pay for it. No different than the gas tax. You know, you drive a lot, pay for the roads. And so I think we’re at the point where users of the parks are paying for it. And now let’s look at what revenues are generated compared to what the need is. And stewardship did supplement some of that, right? It’s refreshing and enhances a lot of that infrastructure. So that’s where I think stewardship can survive. There’s people that want to invest more in state parks, but maybe not buy more public land, or they want to invest more in boat landings, access to those natural waterways for folks that we all are constitutionally allowed to enjoy. But maybe not a different aspect of it, right? 

So my concern too with the expansion of taking on potentially more state lands, we’re not doing a good enough job maintaining what we already have. And so I think finding ways, you know, maybe for the next couple of years, we retool stewardship to really reinvest in what we’ve been neglecting for a while and try to play catch up and then go back to how can we acquire new unique pieces of property that bird watchers and bear hunters both can enjoy, right? All those constituencies that we have to respond to.

Fred Clark

Well, you can certainly make the case for greater investment in what we have. And so the beer you’re going to walk across the street and have shortly sounds important. So you’re the chair of the committee that told me, if I’ve got it right, the committee on insurance, housing, rural issues and forestry. 

Romaine

Yes it is.

Fred Clark

That’s a pretty big purview. Any priorities in that committee that you’re seeing right now?

Romaine 

So last session, the biggest emphasis as a real estate agent as well is the housing aspect. We have a housing shortage, a housing crisis, I would actually label it, of affordable housing and it’s national, it’s not just Wisconsin. But we’re such a unique spot where if we build it, they will come and it’s just who’s going to build it first. And so that’s why we passed a historic $550 million, over half a billion dollars, targeted towards workforce housing affordability. 

So helping with the cost of infrastructure to buy down the cost of creating new lots. Making sure communities actually follow through and approve projects when they’ve already set up their own comprehensive plan that would allow that project, right? We cannot afford, we’re out of time. We can’t afford the NIMBY arguments anymore. 

You know, if your comprehensive plan that you voted for allows for this, you have to approve the development, not something that doesn’t fit your community, but something that does reflect the will of the people. have to say yes when the developer comes to town. And revitalizing our downtowns, main street apartments, nd then of course, there’s also legislation. We got to stop the bleed. How do we refurbish older housing stock? So as we add stock, we can’t lose the stock we have. And we know in Superior in Northern Wisconsin, we have some of the oldest housing stock in the state and in the country, frankly. And so we got to stop the bleed as well. So that was great, a huge emphasis on housing. We’re doing that again this session. We’ve got trailer bills. I have a hearing this Thursday on making sure those programs are actually working the way they were intended. And there’s one bill that didn’t make it that I’m hoping that we can get done is the changing of the LIHTC program. And so that project in the city of Washburn is a LIHTC project. They’re tax credits for developers to build these and then hold down the cost of the rents so people can actually afford to live in these apartments.

Fred Clark (41:49.902)

Tell us what LITECH means.

Romaine (41:51.37)

Yeah, it’s the low income housing tax credit program. And so it’s not voucher housing. It’s not section eight or any of that. They’re beautiful, nice new buildings that people can afford. They’re not market rates. There will be a mix of some market rate, but you don’t get the tax credits unless you make it affordable based on the income of the County where they’re located. And so we want to raise that threshold and we want to make sure at least 35% of that program is going to rural areas, which I have a unique challenge to get developers to even look at us, especially in the Northern part of Wisconsin, let alone rural Wisconsin. 

So there’s going to be an emphasis on that. Housing is definitely on the forefront because it affects everything. Schools, you know, I’ve got communities that hire a police chief who literally can’t move to town because there is not a house that they can afford or that they can even find. And so there’s a whole host of problems that happen with housing. And then this session.

You know, with the budget, at least we’re going to take a greater look at those forestry aspects. We’ve got a number of asks from our county forest administrators. We’ve got a bill out right now that, you know, tweaks the education requirements to allow more flexibility for our counties to hire those professionals. I’ve got a particular bill. It’s a tax credit for short line rail in this state. How do we refurbish and re-energize our short line railroads to allow access for their products to market, not only for forestry, but ag, but predominantly Northern Wisconsin, you know, our industry has really lost that rail access. 

And then, innovatively, we have a separate bill. It’s a tax credit, for funding sustainable aviation fuel. And that can be done with any renewables. So that includes forestry. So we talked offline about the need, how do we offload, our pulp, woods that really have no markets right now. 

So we’ve got standing timber we can cut, and we’ve got timber laying in the woods where there’s no market that we’re allowing to go to waste because the industry has not been able to adapt to the future markets. So we know sustainable aviation fuel is a booming market. Europeans are requiring it. We have a unique opportunity here in Wisconsin to capture basically the market on this. And there’s projects being whispered right now publicly and privately. German companies are looking to invest in Northern Wisconsin because we have the fuel they need. We have more than we need. And as you know, in the forestry industry, you know, we are planting trees faster than we’re cutting them. And so we have a surplus of products. So if we can totally transform that, it would be huge. So it’s a matter of getting the incentives in place now to capture that market when it does finally come.

Fred Clark

Well, that’s no more important investment than one of our greatest natural resources and biggest parts of our economy. So we’re glad that you’re working on that and that you’re serving on the Council on Forestry and helping lead that.

Romaine

A $14 billion industry that frankly we just don’t talk about and even though those targeted investments, you know, $750,000 for a long range plan of our forestry industry. mean, that is peanuts for how big of an impact to map out one of our largest industries in the state, right? And unfortunately, I think forestry gets lost behind manufacturing and the dairy and egg industry, which are also critical. But we have not really been looking hard at forestry and how to make sure that this industry is stable and thriving for the next 100 years like it was the previous 100.

Fred Clark

That is music to a lot of people’s ears. Thank you. So we got a whole 45 minutes into this. I know your time is short. We haven’t talked about wolves and we don’t have to. But is there anything else you’d like to talk about before we sign off today?

Romaine

Hahaha.

Romaine

Yeah, I would say, a lot of what’s happening in DC right now is the rhetoric is very high. It’s very partisan. But I would say at the state level, you know, we’re obviously going to have that too, but the work we’re doing is not nearly as hyper-partisan. And I would probably bet the issues we’ve talked about without my little plugs here and there, most of your listeners probably wouldn’t know if I’m a Democrat or a Republican, right? 

So I would say there’s a lot of issues that, you know, childcare, public education, and just the challenges that we have inherently as rural people really transcend party lines. So I would encourage listeners to always reach out, even if we don’t agree on some of the divisive issues, there’s probably a lot more we do agree on. And I don’t know how to fix problems if you don’t reach out and tell me you have a problem. 

So real quick, perfect example, we got a call from Linda Hand is the ADRC director in Washburn County. And she has someone that works closely with that population that was a caregiver. And so right now, because of that conversation, we’re drafting a bill because imagine if you’re a caregiver and you get in an accident and your loved one is at home and you don’t come home because you’re in the hospital for three days. But you’re the only one that knows someone’s at home is waiting for you. And what do you do when your loved one, maybe with dementia or Alzheimer’s or just a disability you’ve always dealt with is stuck in that situation where no one’s coming. There is no help because no one knew. So we’re drafting legislation that puts it right on your registration. 

So when you’re in an accident, you’re pulled over, maybe you went to jail or whatever the situation is, that officer, that EMT, whoever’s running your information, there’ll be an indicator on there that says you’re a caregiver. So someone knows they have to do a check. Someone at home is waiting for you and that needs to be checked on. So again, perfect example, I’m not a personal caregiver. You know, we grew up taking care of my grandparents when they got sick and older.

But there is always someone to check on them. But a lot of people don’t have those extended families. So if you don’t tell us the situation you’re in, we don’t know the problems and we can’t help you. So just continue to tell your story and continue to do the best we can to solve the problems that you care about.

Fred Clark

Well, as you pointed out, many of the things that come through the state legislature are bipartisan in nature. And so you represent three assembly districts, one of them, the representative who serves this listening area is Angela Stroud, a Democrat. You’re a Republican. Are there any particular areas where you two are working together?

Romaine

We actually have a meeting on April 16, talking about the Blatnik bridge closing. We were able to secure the last budget, the state’s share of I think four to $500 million. It’ll be the one of the largest state projects in history that we’re partnering obviously with the state of Minnesota and the federal government on. but it’s a five year project. So when we talk about the beating our main streets take when we redo a main street project, right? You don’t have the foot traffic.

It’s tough to hold on economically through that project. But imagine doing that for five years. That’s how long this bridge is going to be closed. And so, not even just the business side, but, you know, how do you get a patient from Ashland to Duluth now, in a timely manner, if you’re not flying them when the Blatnik’s down and you only have the Bong Bridge, which now has 50% more travelers on it every day. So, working through those logistical issues.

So the meeting we’re having together is – are there opportunities to keep businesses alive? You know, we know, there’s no doubt about it. We’re going to lose businesses in Superior no matter what we do because of the change in flow of traffic. But what can we do to help mitigate some of those losses? So there’s an example that’s not partisan. It’s the issue that’s unique to our district. And how do we figure out a way that we can pass something to help our businesses thrive through that time?

Fred Clark

Those are people you both represent. Glad to hear that you’re working together on things like that. 

Well, Senator Quinn, we really appreciated your time today. I very much hope that we can get you back again in the near future, especially as our budget process comes to more full fruition. And in the meantime, we’re going to sign off. This is April 15 and this [episode] will probably air about this time next week. 

But special thanks to our producer, Corey Scribner, and the many other volunteers working hard to establish this small community radio station, WVCB. And Senator Quinn, thanks for your time today. We wish you luck in the weeks and months ahead. 

And until next time, let’s all remember to do our part to keep our community strong, take care of our lands and waters, and be kind and caring to the people around us. Thank you. Absolutely.

Romaine

Thanks for having me.