Wisconsin ranks 8th in the country for the highest property tax burden. A new proposal in the Wisconsin Legislature is sparking alarm among taxpayers and homeowner advocates, who warn it would raise property taxes in a state that already has some of the highest rates in the country. Senate Bill 181, sponsored by several Republican lawmakers, would allow local governments to bypass voter approval when raising property taxes to fund regional emergency medical service (EMS) systems.
Under current law, Wisconsin imposes strict local levy limits that cap how much local governments can raise in property taxes each year. If they wish to exceed those limits, they must ask voters through a referendum—a process with a strong approval track record, with nearly 70% of EMS-related referendums passing from 2022 to 2024.
Senate Bill 181 would carve out a new exemption: allowing cities, villages, towns, and counties to raise property taxes for regional EMS services without seeking voter consent. Regional EMS systems—defined as serving at least 232 square miles or eight municipalities—would be free from the existing caps, regardless of public input.
Critics, including the Wisconsin REALTORS® Association, say this bill undermines the will of voters and threatens housing affordability in a state already grappling with soaring housing costs. Wisconsin ranks 8th nationally in property taxes and second among Midwestern states in the percentage of homeowners who are “extremely cost burdened,” meaning they spend over 50% of their income on housing.
“Housing affordability is directly tied to property taxes,” the REALTORS® wrote in a statement opposing the bill. “Policies that increase the burden only make homeownership harder and hinder job growth. Voters have shown they are willing to support EMS needs—they should not be shut out of the process.”
Supporters, like the Wisconsin EMS Association, argue the bill is necessary to keep up with rising service demands and workforce shortages, especially in rural areas. They claim regionalization would improve efficiency and coverage. But opponents maintain that fiscal transparency and voter input must remain intact.
The proposal also changes eligibility for the state’s expenditure restraint incentive program, potentially penalizing communities that exceed limits—even for EMS spending—by disqualifying them from budget-based state aid.
While emergency services are critical, critics argue that permanently loosening levy limits to fund them sets a dangerous precedent—one that risks opening the floodgates to further property tax hikes without public approval.