>> THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS A
PBS WISCONSIN ORIGINAL
PRODUCTION.
>> THREATS OF IMPEACHING STATE
SUPREME COURT JUSTICE JANET
PROTASIEWICZ LOOMS AS THE
STATE'S HIGH COURT BEGINS TO
HEAR CASES.
AND IMPORTANT POLLINATORS SEE AN
EXISTENTIAL THREAT.
GOOD EVENING, I'M ZAC SCHULTZ
FILLING IN FOR FREDERICA
FREYBERG.
TONIGHT ON "HERE & NOW," FORMER
WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
JANINE GESKE WEIGHS IN ON G.O.P.
TALK OF IMPEACHING THE LIBERAL
JUSTICE WHO JUST TOOK OFFICE.
ADVOCATES WANT EVICTION RECORDS
CLEARED AFTER ONE YEAR.
LANDLORDS SAY THAT'S WAY TOO
SHORT.
AND BEE POPULATIONS ARE
SUFFERING.
THESE WISCONSINITES ARE STEPPING
IN TO REVERSE THE DECLINE.
IT'S "HERE & NOW" FOR SEPTEMBER
2022.
SEPTEMBER 22.
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE & NOW" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.
>> WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT
JUSTICE JANET PROTASIEWICZ
REMAINS UNDER THE THREAT OF
IMPEACHMENT BY ASSEMBLY SPEAKER
ROBIN VOS WHO HAS NOW CREATED A
SECRET PANEL OF FORMER SUPREME
COURT JUSTICES TO STUDY THE
LEGAL ISSUES SURROUNDING THE
PROCESS OF IMPEACHMENT.
WE ARE JOINED NOW BY FORMER
JUSTICE JANINE GESKE.
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
>> HAPPY TO BE HERE.
>> WE SHOULD START BY
ACKNOWLEDGING, YOU ARE NOT ONE
OF THE FORMER JUSTICES RECITE BY
THE ASSEMBLY SPEAKER, BUT WOULD
YOU HAVE JOINED THIS PANEL IF HE
HAD ASKED FOR YOUR INPUT ON THIS
ISSUE?
>> NO.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW SUPREME
COURT JUSTICES OUGHT TO BE
GIVING AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER
ONE OF THEIR FORMER COLLEAGUES
SHOULD BE IMPEACHED.
IT'S A VERY BIZARRE PROCESS AND
I WOULD NOT HAVE CONSENTED TO
THAT.
>> NOW, THIS HAS TO DO WITH
COMMENTS THAT JANET PROTASIEWICZ
MADE BEFORE SHE WAS ELECTED
WHERE SHE CALLED THE CURRENT
ELECTORAL MAPS RIGGED.
AND APPARENTLY, THE LINKAGE THAT
WE'RE SUPPOSED TO MAKE IS
REPUBLICANS ARE SAYING IF SHE
AGREES TO HEAR A REDISTRICTING
CASE BUT DOES NOT RECUSE
HERSELF, THAT THAT WOULD
CONSTITUTE CORRUPT CONDUCT IN
OFFICE.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE READING IN
TERMS OF WHAT THEY NEED TO DO TO
REACH THIS THRESHOLD FOR
IMPEACHMENT?
>> I THINK THAT'S THEIR VERSION
OF THE ARGUMENT, YES.
>> SO WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT?
HOW DO WE DEFINE CORRUPT CONDUCT
IN OFFICE?
BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT
A CRIME OR A MISDEMEANOR, WHICH
ARE THE OTHER ELEMENTS OF P.P.E.
IMPEACHMENT.
>> LET ME PEEL THIS BACK.
THE FIRST THING IS WHETHER OR
NOT IT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR HER
TO MAKE THOSE STATEMENTS DURING
THE CAMPAIGN AND THERE IS A
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CASE
THAT'S NOT VERY OLD, IT IS
ABSOLUTELY ON POINT, THAT SAYS A
JUDICIAL CANDIDATE CAN OFFER HIS
OR HER OPINIONS ON POLITICAL AND
LEGAL ISSUES.
THAT CASE, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH,
WAS BROUGHT BY THE REPUBLICAN
PARTY OF MINNESOTA AND WRITTEN
BY THE CONSERVATIVES OF THE U.S.
SUPREME COURT.
BUT ANYWAY, SO THERE'S NOTHING
APPROPRIATE IN WHAT SHE SAID.
SO THEN THE QUESTION IS, CAN SHE
RECUSE -- SHOULD SHE RECUSE
HERSELF ON THE CASE.
WELL, RECUSAL IN WISCONSIN IS
DIFFERENT THAN A LOT OF OTHER
STATES BECAUSE OUR COURT, A
COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, ENACTED A
STATUTE OR A RULE THAT SAYS
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS, FIRST OF
ALL, CANNOT BE REASON TO HAVE TO
RECUSE HERSELF.
AND SECONDLY, A JUDGE DECIDES
HIMSELF OR HERSELF WHETHER OR
NOT THEY OUGHT TO RECUSE
THEMSELVES.
SO THERE'S NO WEIGHT OF ANY
CORRUPT CONDUCT IN THIS, EVEN IF
SHE DECIDES TO SIT ON THE CASE.
>> SO FORMER JUSTICE DAVID
PROSSER IS THE ONLY JUSTICE TO
PUBLICLY SAY THAT THEY ARE A
PART OF THIS PROCESS.
DO YOU TRUST THAT HE'LL BE ABLE
TO DELIVER A REPORT BASED ON HIS
READING OF THE LAW?
OR WHAT SHOULD WE MAKE OF
ANYTHING THAT COMES OUT OF THIS?
>> WELL, I HAVE RESPECT FOR
JUSTICE PROSSER.
HE AND I SERVED TOGETHER.
YOU KNOW, BUT PART OF IT IS THE
APPEARANCE.
RIGHT?
THAT'S WHAT'S IMPORTANT AT THE
SUPREME COURT AND IMPORTANT IN
THIS PROCESS, AND, YOU KNOW,
JUSTICE PROSSER CLEARLY WAS
ALIGNED WITH THE REPUBLICAN
PARTY AND, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF
ALL, I DON'T THINK THE JUSTICES
SHOULD BE DOING THIS,
NECESSARILY, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT
WOULD BE NICE TO PICK SOMEBODY
LIKE LOUIS BUTLER, WHO IS ON THE
OTHER SIDE OF THE SPECTRUM.
I DON'T KNOW WHO -- I'VE GOT TO
GUESS AS TO WHO THE SECOND
PERSON IS AND DON'T KNOW WHO THE
THIRD PERSON IS, BUT I SUSPECT
THEY'RE GOING TO BE ALL ALIGNED
WITH SORT OF THE SAME
PHILOSOPHICAL VIEW AS THE
REPUBLICAN PARTY.
>> SO WITH THIS VAGUE CONCEPT OF
CORRUPT CONDUCT IN OFFICE AND
THIS IMPEACHMENT ELEMENT HAS NOT
BEEN TESTED IN THE COURTS IN
PASS FAKE, OBVIOUSLY, FOR MORE
THAN A CENTURY, SO IS IT LIKELY
THAT ANY ATTEMPT BY REPUBLICANS
IN THE LEGISLATURE TO BRING THE
IMPEACHMENT PROCESS FORWARD
WOULD END UP BACK BEFORE A
COURT?
WE'VE ALREADY SEEN ONE LAWSUIT
REGARDING THAT.
COULD THIS BE A FEDERAL COURT
ISSUE ABOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT
RIGHTS?
HOW DOES THIS GET RESOLVED?
>> WELL, THIS IS WHAT I FEAR.
I FEAR THAT THEY WILL VOTE ON
IMPEACHMENT, AND WHEN YOU ARE
IMPEACHED UNDER OUR
CONSTITUTION, THE JUSTICE CAN NO
LONGER SIT ON CASES UNTIL
THERE'S A VOTE WHETHER TO ACQUIT
OR CONVICT.
AND I FEAR THAT THEY MAY DELAY
THAT VOTE AND THERE BE KNOCKING
HER OFF THE COURT AND HAVING
ONLY SIX MEMBERS OF THE COURT.
THAT'S WHERE I THINK THERE --
THERE IS AN INFRINGEMENT FROM
THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH ON THE
JUDICIAL BRANCH.
THEY'RE TRYING TO IMPACT A
PARTICULAR CASE WHEN TAKING
THESE ACTIONS.
IF THEY WOULD BE SUCCESSFUL AT
IMPEACHING HER, THEN THE
QUESTION IS WHETHER THEY GET A
TWO-THIRDS VOTE TO BE ABLE TO
CONVICT HER.
YOU KNOW, IF THEY CONVICTED HER,
THEN IT WOULD HIT THE COURTS,
BUT ULTIMATELY COULD ALSO GO TO
THE SUPREME COURT BECAUSE IT
INVOLVES FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
SO I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO
GET THAT FAR.
I THINK THE REPUBLICAN
LEGISLATURE WANTS TO GET HER OFF
THAT CASE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER
AND THIS IS THE MEANS THAT
THEY'RE USING.
>> SO WE'VE GOT LESS THAN A
MINUTE HERE, BUT NO MATTER, WHAT
IT TIES THE REPUTATION OF THE
COURTS EVEN CLOSER TO THE
POLITICAL PARTIES.
WHAT IS THE OUTCOME IN TERMS OF
VOTERS VIEWING THE SUPREME COURT
AS INDEPENDENT TODAY?
>> WELL, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL,
JUSTICE PROTASIEWICZ OBVIOUSLY
WON HER ELECTION HANDEDLY, HAD
11% ABOVE HER OPPONENT, AND I
THINK, YOU KNOW, NOW THE PEOPLE
ARE SAYING, WHY CAN'T SHE SIT ON
A CASE WHEN WE JUST ELECTED HER
TO THE POSITION.
BUT THE PROBLEM IS, WE ARE
MISSING -- MESSING WITH
POLITICAL PARTIES AND PARTISAN
VIEWS ON THE COURT AND IT IS
IMPORTANT THAT THE COURT
CONTINUE TO APPEAR UNBIASED,
IMPARTIAL, AND NON-POLITICAL
WHEN IT MAKES ITS DECISIONS.
>> ALL RIGHT.
JUSTICE GESKE, THANK FOR YOUR
TIME TODAY.
>> YOU'RE WELCOME.
>> EVICTION RECORDS COULD GO
FROM FOLLOWING A PERSON FROM 20
YEARS TO JUST TWO YEARS.
PETITION TO THE SUPREME COURT TO
MAKE A RULE CHANGE THAT ORDERS
EVICTION RECORDS TO BE REMOVED
FROM THE STATE'S ELECTRONIC CASE
SEARCH AFTER ONE YEAR.
THE PETITIONERS, LEGAL ACTION OF
WISCONSIN, ARGUE STATE LAW SAYS
DISMISSED EVICTION CASES ARE TO
BE REMOVED FROM A RECORD AFTER
TWO YEARS, BUT EVEN IF AN
EVICTION IS NOT GRANTED, THE
RECORD OF THE EVICTION FILING
REMAINS FOR UP TO 20 YEARS, THE
SAME AS SOMEONE WHO WAS
EVICTING.
FOR MORE, WE'RE JOINED BY
HOUSING PRIORITY COORDINATOR AND
STAFF ATTORNEY AT LEGAL ACTION
OF WISCONSIN.
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> SO SUM UP YOUR ARGUMENT FOR
ME.
WHY DO YOU THINK THIS RULE
CHANGE IS NECESSARY FOR RENTERS
AROUND THE STATE?
>> SO PARTICULARLY THE ISSUE OF
HOUSING IS ONE THAT IS A BASIC
HUMAN -- ALL OUTCOMES ARE
DETERMINED BY WHETHER OR NOT
YOU'RE PROPERLY HOUSED.
WE THINK THAT HAVING THESE
EVICTION RECORDS FOLLOWING
PEOPLE FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF
TIME, IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO
GET REHOUSED.
ONE OF THE MAIN TOOLS THAT
THEY'RE USING NOW TO DETERMINE
WHETHER OR NOT AN EVICTION IS ON
THE RECORD IS OUR COURT ANIMATED
SYSTEM.
IF THEY GO ON, THEY'RE NOT
LOOKING AT THE OUTCOMES OF WHAT
THEY SAY THESE CASES ARE --
WHERE THEY'VE GONE, WHAT THE
UNDERLYING ISSUES WERE.
SOMETIMES THEY WERE IMPROPERLY
FILED, BUT THIS RECORD FOLLOWS
THEM AND THERE'S NOT EVEN A DEEP
DIVE INTO WHAT'S GOING ON WITH
THAT RECORD AND PEOPLE ARE -- A
YEAR WE THINK IS REASONABLE
BECAUSE ANY COURT OUTCOME CAN BE
CONCLUDED WITHIN A YEAR AFTER
THE FILING AND WE THINK IT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT THAT PEOPLE
HAVE A FRESH START, SO HAVING
THESE RECORDS REMOVED WILL MAKE
IT SO THAT MAYBE THERE'S SOME
HOPE FOR GETTING PEOPLE REHOUSE
IN SAFE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
>> SO THIS ISSUE GOES BEYOND
RENTERS IN CITIES BECAUSE
THERE'S RENTERS ACROSS THE
STATE, RURAL WISCONSIN,
MEDIUM-SIZED RENTERS, THEY'RE
EVERY FACING SOME OF THESE
ISSUES.
RIGHT?
>> YES.
THIS WILL MAKE IT AN EVEN
PLAYING FIELD ACROSS THE BOARD.
WE THINK THERE SHOULD BE A
UNIFIED RESPONSE.
RIGHT NOW IT COULD BE SOME
PEOPLE ARE HAVING THEIR RECORDS
REMOVED AFTER TWO YEARS, SOME
REMOVED AFTER 10 YEARS, BUT THE
MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IS
THERE'S SOME FORM OF JUDGMENT
THAT'S FILED AND SO 20 YEARS IS
THE TYPICAL TIME.
AND THINKING ABOUT SOMETHING
FOLLOWING YOU FOR 20 YEARS,
MAYBE THERE WAS AN ISSUE WHEN
YOU WERE IN COLLEGE, OUTCOLLEGE
HOUSING -- YOU HAD COLLEGE
HOUSING, YOU DIDN'T KEEP UP WITH
YOUR RENT, YOU GOT A JUDGMENT
AGAINST YOU.
PROBABLY WHAT YOU DID 20 YEARS
PROBABLY IS NOT THE MATURE ADULT
YOU ARE NOW AND WHY SHOULD THAT
HAVE TO FOLLOW YOU AND KEEP YOU
FROM BEING ABLE TO BE HOUSED.
>> SO THE LANDLORDS AGAINST THIS
SAY THIS WILL DRIVE UP THE RENT
FOR EVERYONE, BOTH FOR THOSE WHO
FACED EVICTION AND THOSE WHO
HAVEN'T, THROUGH EXTRA FEES AND
COSTS.
WHAT'S YOUR RESPONSE THAT THIS
WILL RAISE COSTS FOR EVERYONE.
>> THE MARKETS ARE VERY TIGHT.
THERE'S A LIMITED AMOUNT OF
HOUSING AVAILABLE TO THOSE WHO
CAN AFFORD IT.
SO THE IDEA THAT SOME HOW SOME
RULE THAT COULD POTENTIALLY
REMOVE A RECORD AFTER A YEAR
WOULD DO THAT IS, TO ME,
DISINGENUOUS TO MAKE THAT
ASSERTION.
THESE THINGS ARE HAPPENING EVERY
MONTH, EVERY YEAR.
AND ALSO, THERE'S ACCESS TO THIS
INFORMATION OUTSIDE OF A COURT
RECORD THAT'S FREE TO THEM.
RENTERS NOW ARE PAYING
APPLICATION FEES OF UPWARDS OF
50 TO $200 FOR THEM TO DO THESE
BACKGROUND CHECKS, AND A LOT OF
TIMES THAT MONEY JUST THROWN
AWAY BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT EVEN
USING THOSE SERVICES, THEY'RE
SIMPLY RELYING ON A RECORD
ON-LINE THAT'S FREE.
>> WE HEARD FROM COUNTY CLERK OF
COURTS ARGUE THAT MANY RENTERS
ALREADY FILED MOTIONS TO EXPUNGE
EVICTION RECORDS AND THAT THIS
COULD CREATE MORE WORK FOR THE
COURTS.
HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO SOME OF
THOSE CONCERNS?
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THESE
TYPES OF FILINGS ARE ONLY
HAPPENING IN CASES WHERE
PRIMARILY THERE'S AN ATTORNEY
LINKED TO THEM.
MOST PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING
THROUGH EVICTION CASES DON'T
ACTUALLY HAVE THE BENEFIT OF
HAVING COUNSEL.
MOST PEOPLE THAT ARE FACING
EVICTION DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO
STAY IN THEIR APARTMENTS, LET
ALONE HAVE AN ATTORNEY PROVIDED
TO THEM.
WE ARE ONE OF THE FEW ADVOCATE
OPPORTUNITIES BECAUSE WE DON'T
CHARGE CLIENTS FOR OUR SERVICES
AND THERE'S A LIMITED AMOUNT OF
ATTORNEYS IN GRANT FUNDING, SO
WE'RE NOT IN ANY WAY HELPING THE
MAJORITY OF PEOPLE FACING THESE
EVICTIONS.
THE IDEA THAT THESE ARE GOING TO
BE REMOVED AFTER A YEAR WILL
PROBABLY DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF
FILINGS THAT YOU'RE SEEING,
RATHER THAN INCREASE IT, SO WE
THINK IT'S A LARGER BENEFIT,
ESPECIALLY TO THOSE THAT DON'T
HAVE COUNSEL.
>> NOW, THIS POLICY COULD BE
CHANGED THROUGH A BILL FROM THE
LEGISLATURE, BUT YOU'RE GOING
THROUGH THE SUPREME COURT TO
CHANGE IT AS A RULE.
IS IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T THINK
THE LIVER WILL BE RESPONSIVE?
OR WHY THIS ROUTE?
>> WE THINK THAT THE COURT
PROCESS SHOULD BE OVERSEEN BY
THE COURTS THEMSELVES.
WE THINK IT SQUARELY FALLS
WITHIN THE PREVIEW OF WHAT THE
COURTS HAVE CONTROL OVER.
WE THINK THEY'RE MOST ABLE TO
COURTS SHOULD RUN THEIR OWN
COURTS.
WE DON'T THINK THE LEGISLATURE
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE HAS THE
HIGHEST AUTHORITY SO WE ARE
GOING TO THE INDIVIDUALS THAT
HAVE THE MOST INVESTED AND KNOW
MOST ABOUT THE ISSUE ITSELF.
>> IF THIS HAPPENS, WILL YOU SEE
PEOPLE LESS LIKELY TO BE IN
SHELTERS?
OR WHAT WILL CHANGE IN HOUSING
FOR SOME OF THESE PEOPLE?
>> SO WE THINK IT WILL CLEAN THE
SLATE.
WE DO THINK THAT PEOPLE WILL BE
REHOUSED FASTER.
WE THINK IT WILL DECREASE THE
AMOUNT OF PEOPLE GOING INTO
SHELTER AND STAYING IN SHELTER
LONG-TERM.
IT MIGHT BE A SHORTER
TURN-AROUND IF PEOPLE DO NEED A
STAY, AND WE THINK IT WILL
REFLECT ADEQUATELILY WHEN PEOPLE
ARE GET BACK ON THEIR FEET AND
BE READY TO RENT AGAIN.
>> THANKS FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
>> I APPRECIATE YOU.
THANK YOU FOR AIRING THIS ISSUE.
>> FOR THE OPPOSING VIEWPOINT,
WE'RE JOINED BY CHRIS MOKLER,
DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
FOR THE WISCONSIN REAL ESTATE
INVESTORS ASSOCIATION.
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME ON.
>> SO WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT
OF THIS RULE CHANGE FOR
LANDLORDS?
>> WELL, THE BIGGEST THING THAT
THIS DOES IS IT CREATES MORE
WORK FOR THE LANDLORDS AND IT
ALSO HARMS OTHER TENANTS, OTHER
GOOD TENANTS.
I'LL EXPLAIN THE SECOND ONE
FIRST.
IF THIS RULE WERE PUT INTO
EFFECT, GOOD TENANTS WHO PAY
THEIR RENT ON TIME ARE NOW GOING
TO BE EQUAL IN THEIR FOOTING ON
THEIR APPLICATIONS WITH TENANTS
THAT HAVE HAD EVICTIONS.
A LANDLORD, FOR THE FIRST PART
OF MY ANSWER, WAS THE LANDLORD
IS GOING TO HAVE TO DO MORE
RESEARCH, BECAUSE A LANDLORD
OWES A DUTY TO NOT ONLY OTHER
TENANTS OF THE BUILDING BUT
NEIGHBORS TO THE BUILDINGS IN
THE CITIES BECAUSE IF THERE'S A
PROBLEM, THOSE ARE THE FIRST
PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE
UPSET, WHICH IS GOING TO BE
POLICE CALLS, IT'S GOING TO BE
PROBLEM WITH CITY LEADERS AND
HAVE TO BE DEALT WITH AND NOBODY
LIKES THAT.
>> WHAT PERCENTAGE OF LANDLORDS
USE WISCONSIN'S ELECTRONIC CASE
SEARCH TO RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE
RENTERS?
IS IT NEARLY ALL WILL DO SOME
CURSORY SEARCH?
>> I WOULD ASSUME THAT.
THERE'S NO WAY FOR ME TO HAVE A
NUMBER.
IT'S AB AVAILABLE SERVICE TO
JUST LIKE A BANK AND WHEN IT'S
GIVING YOU A LOAN, THEY LOOK AT
YOUR CREDIT REPORT.
THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST WAYS A
LANDLORD CAN LOOK AND BE SURE
THEY'RE PUTTING A GOOD TENANT IN
THEIR BUILDING.
>> DO YOU THINK ALL OF THOSE
LANDLORDS UNDERSTAND THAT SOME
OF THOSE EVICTION NOTICE MAY
HAVE BEEN FILED INACADEMICALLY
OR WEREN'T ACTUALLY RUTTING IN A
FULL EVICTION AND THERE'S A
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT AND A
FULL EVICTION, AND SHOULD THERE
BE A DIFFERENCE?
>> WE'VE BEEN PROMOTE THAT GO TO
OUR LANDLORDS, JUST DON'T LOOK
AT THE FIRST PAGE THAT LOOKS AT
EVICTIONS AND DIG INTO IT AND
LOOK AT IT.
SOME MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN A
STIPULATED DISMISSAL WHERE THEY
CAME TO AN AGREEMENT AND THAT
AGREEMENT IS PUT IN WRITING AND
SIGNED AND THE JUDGE SIGNS OFF
THE ON IT.
THERE COULD BE LOTS OF REASONS.
WE CERTAINLY TEACH TO DIG INTO
IT.
A LOT OF LANDLORDS WILL RENT TO
PEOPLE WITH EVICTIONS BUT THEY
WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE SITUATION
WAS WITH EVICTION.
>> WITH THIS TIGHT HOUSING
MARKET, WHAT ARE NUMBER OF
PEOPLE APPLYING FOR AN APARTMENT
OR A UNIT SOMEWHERE?
>> WELL, OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE
GETTING A LOT OF PEOPLE APPLYING
FOR UNITS.
IT'S MAYBE SLOWING DOWN A LITTLE
BIT NOW.
RENTS ARE BECOMING A LITTLE BIT
MORE LEVELED OFF AND NOBODY AND OBVIOUSLY
THERE'S BEEN MORE APARTMENTS
BUILT IN THE LAST COUPLE OF
YEARS, NOT ENOUGH, WE STILL NEED
HOUSING IN WISCONSIN, NOT ONLY
SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, BUT
APARTMENTS.
SO IT'S BEEN WORKING OUT AND,
YEAH, THE LANDLORDS GETTING A
LOT OF APPLICATIONS SHOWING
THEIR APARTMENT A LOT OF TIMES.
WHEN I LEAVE HERE, I'M GOING TO
BE SHOWING AN APARTMENT TWO
TIMES.
>> SO THE TENANT ADVOCACY GROUPS
ARE SAYING THAT THESE RECORDS
SHOULD BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY
BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT
HOUSING IS A HUMAN RIGHT.
SHOULD THAT PLAY INTO THIS
ARGUMENT BEFORE THE SUPREME
COURT?
>> HOUSING IS A HUMAN RIGHT,
PERHAPS, BUT IT'S UP TO SOME
TENANTS THAT HAVE EVICTIONS AND,
UNFORTUNATELY, REPEATED
EVICTIONS.
LANDLORDS AREN'T GOING TO
AUTOMATICALLY NOT TAKE YOU JUST
BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN EVICTION.
THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE
SCENARIO.
BUT WHEN YOU HAVE SEVERAL
EVICTIONS, OWING A LOT OF MONEY
AND NO EFFORT FROM WHAT WE CAN
TELL TO PAY IT BACK, THEREFORE,
IT GETS TO BE A PROBLEM OF WHY
SHOULD YOU RELY ON A MOM AND POP
OPERATION THAT MAY ONLY OWN A
COUPLE OF UNITS, LIKE MOST
LANDLORDS IN WISCONSIN DO, TO
RISK THEIR FINANCIAL FUTURE,
OFTENTIMES THESE LANDLORDS HAVE
ANOTHER JOB AND THEY'RE DOING
THIS ON THE SIDE AND, YOU KNOW,
THEY'VE GOT TO MAKE A BANK
PAYMENT.
ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, ONLY
ABOUT 7 CENTS, MAYBE A LITTLE
LESS FOR SMALL LANDLORDS, OF
EVERY DOLLAR OF RENT, ASSUMING
THAT THE RENT IS PAID IN FULL,
ACTUALLY GOES TO THE LANDLORD.
SO ONE LITTLE HICCUP AND THE
LANDLORD'S NOT MAKING ANY MONEY.
THEY HAVE TO PAY THE TAXES AND
THE UTILITIES, ALL THAT STUFF.
>> THIS RULE CHANGE IS LOOKING
TO MAKE A CONSIDERABLE TIME LINE
CHANGE, FOR UP TO 20 YEARS FOR A
RECORD FOLLOWING SOMEONE ON-LINE
VERSUS JUST ONE YEAR.
IS THERE A HAPPY MEDIUM?
LIKE HOW VALUABLE IS AN EVICTION
RECORD FOR 20 YEARS AGO VERSUS
ONE FROM TWO OR THREE YEARS AGO?
>> WELL, IN ACT 317 FROM I
BELIEVE IT WAS 2021, 2020, I'D
HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK, WE
ACTUALLY PROPOSED THE RULE
CHANGE THAT THE STATE IS NOT
CURRENTLY FOLLOWING, AND I CAN'T
GET INTO -- THERE'S A LOT TO IT,
WHICH WE DON'T HAVE TIME FOR,
BUT THERE'S A TWO-YEAR LIMIT ON
CERTAIN EVICTIONS THAT CAN BE
REMOVED FROM C-CAP, THE
AUTOMATION PROGRAM, THAT WE
ACTUALLY PROPOSED, AND THEY WANT
TO CHANGE THAT TO ONE YEAR.
WE JUST THINK THAT'S TOO TIGHT.
>> SO WE HAVE ABOUT A MINUTE
LEFT HERE.
WHAT HAVE THE COUNTY CLERK OF
COURTS SAY THAT THE AMOUNT OF
RENTERS ASKING JUDGES TO
EX-EXPUNGES THESE RECORDS
IMMEDIATELY AFTER AN EVICTION IS
FILED OR CLOSED IS ON A DRAMATIC
UPTICK, THAT MORE AND MORE
PEOPLE ARE DOING THIS.
SO WOULD A MORE UNIFORMED POLICY
MAKE SENSE IF SOME PEOPLE ARE
MORE EASILY ABLE TO GET THEIR
PERSONAL EVICTION RECORDS ERASED
WHEN SOME PEOPLE AREN'T?
>> UNIFORM POLICY -- YOU SEE
THIS HAPPENING A LOT IN
MILWAUKEE AND PERHAPS IN
MADISON.
OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LOT MORE MORE
TENANTS THERE.
WHEN IT COMES TO GETTING IT -- I
THINK THE CURRENT LAW SHOULD BE
FOLLOWED, WHICH IN SOME CASES,
WE DON'T THINK IT IS AS FAR AS
EXPUNGEMENT.
THERE'S CERTAIN CASES WHERE
EXPUNGEMENT IS GOOD AND OTHER
CASES WHERE IT'S NOT OPEN
RECORDS FOR ALL TO SEE LIKE WE
DO HERE IN WISCONSIN.
>> ALL RIGHT.
CHRIS MOKLER, THANKS VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
>> THANK YOU.
HAVE A GREAT DAY.
>> THE MILWAUKEE BREWERS ARE A
COUPLE WINS AWAY FROM CLINCHING
A SPOT IN THE POLICE PLAYOFFS AND A FEW
VOTES AWAY FROM $700 MILLION TO
FIX UP AMERICAN FAMILY FIELD.
EARLIER THIS WEEK, LEGISLATIVE
REPUBLICANS INTRODUCED THEIR
PROPOSAL TO KEEP THE BREWERS IN
WISCONSIN THROUGH THE YEAR 2050.
THE DEAL WOULD INCLUDE $600
MILLION IN STATE AND LOCAL TAX
DOLLARS FOR STADIUM MAINTENANCE.
AND THE TEAM WOULD BE REQUIRED
TO PAY A HUNDRED MILLION.
LAST SPRING, REPUBLICANS
DISMISSED A PROPOSAL FROM
DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR TONY EVERS
THAT WAS IN HIS BUDGET THAT
WOULD HAVE INVESTED ONE-TIME
FUNDS TO FULFILL STATE'S
OBLIGATION TO MAINTAIN THE
STADIUM.
THE DEMOCRATIC RESPONSE TO THE
REPUBLICAN BILL THIS WEEK WAS
SOMEWHAT NEUTRAL, SAYING IT
WASN'T AS GOOD AS THE GOVERNOR'S
PLAN BUT THEY HOPE TO AMEND THE
BILL IN ORDER TO GAIN BIPARTISAN
SUPPORT.
TURNING TO THE ENVIRONMENT,
EXPERTS HAVE LONG FEARED THE
DECLINE IN BEE POPULATIONS.
THEY SAY SMALL INSECTS HAVE A
HUGE IMPACT ON THE ECOSYSTEM.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, AGRICULTURE.
BUT THE NUMBER OF BUMBLEBEES IN
WISCONSIN IS UP, AND SO ARE THE
EFFORTS TO HELP THESE
POLLINATORS.
"HERE & NOW" REPORTER, STEVEN
POTTER, HAS THIS STORY.
>> THE POPULATIONS HAVE DECLINED
AT AN ALARMING RATE.
SOME SPECIES, OVER 90%.
WHY HAVE NATIVE BEE POPGHTSZ IN
WISCONSIN AND AROUND THE WORLD
DECLINED AT SUCH A HIGH RATE?
>> CLIMATE CHANGE, LAND USE
CHANGES, HABITAT LOSS, AND
PESTICIDES ARE ALL PLAYING A
ROLE, AND EACH ONE OF THOSE KIND
OF STRESSES OUT THE BEES A
LITTLE BIT AND THEN WHEN YOU
COMBINE THEM ALL TOGETHER, IT'S
AN AWFUL LOT FOR THEM TO HANDLE
AT ONCE.
>> EXPERTS LIKE ELIZABETH BRAATZ
SAY THIS LOSS OF BEES IS A
SERIOUS THREAT TO GLOBAL FOOD
SYSTEMS BECAUSE OF THE ROLE THEY
PLAY IN POLLINATION.
HERE IN WISCONSIN, NATIVE BEES
HELP POLLINATE CRANBERRIES,
APPLES, AND A NUMBER OF OTHER
FRUITS AND VEGETABLES.
ONE IMPORTANT PART OF HELPING
THE STATE'S NATIVE BEES IS
TRACKING AND MONITORING THEIR
LOCATIONS.
STATEWIDE GROUP OF VOLUNTEERS,
KNOWN AS THE BUMBLEBEE BRIGADE,
HAS BEEN DOING JUST THAT FOR
YEARS.
>> WHEN THEY'RE DIPPING DOWN
LIKE THAT, THAT'S WHEN THEY'RE
GATHERING NECTAR.
>> THE BUMBLEBEE BRIGADE IS A
PARTICIPATORY SCIENCE PROGRAM
WHERE ANYONE WHO HAS GOT A
CAMERA ON THEIR CELL PHONE OR
ANY OTHER KIND OF CAMERA CAN
TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS OF BUMBLEBEES
WHEN THEY'RE OUT IN THEIR GARDEN
OR OUT ON A WALK AND SUBMIT
THOSE PHOTOS TO THE WISCONSIN
DNR WEBSITE.
AND THAT INFORMATION IS
INVALUABLE AND IT GETS USED BY
RESEARCHERS.
>> BEGINNING IN 2018, THIS
EFFORT NOW COVERS MOST OF THE
STATE WITH HUNDREDS OF
VOLUNTEERS WHO CATALOG THE
NUMBER OF BEES SPOTTED, THEIR
TYPE AND LOCATION.
DESPITE THIS SUMMER'S DROUGHT,
THE NUMBERS ARE PROMISING.
OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, THE
DIFFERENT TYPES OF BUMBLEBEES
FOUND HAS INCREASED AND THE
FREQUENCY OF SIGHTINGS HAS MORE
THAN TRIPLED.
>> FINGERS CROSSED FOR THE REST
OF THE SEASON.
WE'RE SEEING LARGER NUMBERS OF
THEM AND, OVERALL, I THINK THAT
THERE'S HOPE FOR WISCONSIN.
>> THERE ARE ABOUT 20 SPECIES OF
NATIVE BUMBLEBEES IN WISCONSIN
BUT THERE'S ONE IN PARTICULAR
THAT VOLUNTEERS AT THE BUMBLEBEE
BRIGADE ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR.
WE HAVE RUSTY PATCH BUMBLEBEES
THEIR AND THE POPULATION OF
RUSTY PATCH BUMBLEBEES HAS
DECREASED BY 90% IN THE LAST 20
YEARS.
WISCONSIN IS, I THINK, THEIR
LAST BEST HOPE FOR SURVIVAL.
>> THE RUSTY PATCH BUMBLEBEE WAS
THE FIRST BEE EVER PUT ON THE
FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST
BACK IN 2017 AND IS REGARDED AS
A GOOD BAROMETER FOR OVERALL
BUMBLEBEE HEALTH IN THE STATE.
IN WISCONSIN, IS A STRONGHOLD
LEFT FOR THE POPULATION, SO WE
CAN FIND THEM ACROSS THE
SOUTHERN HALF OF THE STATE.
BUT ACROSS THEIR ENTIRE RANGE,
FROM MAINE TO THE DAKOTAS, DOWN
TO OHIO AND INDIANA, THEY'VE
DISAPPEARED FROM MOST OF THOSE
AREAS.
>> IN RECENT WEEKS, THREE
BRAND-NEW NESTS FOR THE
BUMBLEBEE HAVE BEEN DISCOVERED
HERE.
TWO WERE DISCOVERED THIS SUMMER
IN SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN.
A THIRD NEST WAS FOUND IN A
LARGE PLOT OF LAND OWNED BY THE
ARIENS, SNOWBLOWER AND LAWN
MOWER MANUFACTURING COMPANY IN
CALUMET COUNTY.
THE ARIENS COMPANY IS TURNING
MORE THAN 200 ACRES INTO WHAT
THEY CALL A POLLINATOR PRAIRIE.
>> SO WE HAVE A BUTTERFLY
PROJECT AND A BUMBLEBEE PROJECT
THAT ARE BOTH MAINLY BUILT ON
THE PRAIRIE OAK SAVANNA.
WE'RE PROVIDING A LOT OF -- I
BELIEVE IT'S OVER 140 SPECIES OF
NATIVE PLANTS WE'RE PROVIDING
NOT ONLY FORAGE FROM APRIL TO
OCTOBER IN THE FORM OF FLOWERING
RESOURCES, BUT WE'RE ALSO
PROVIDING OVERWINTERING HABITAT
AND NESTING HABITAT.
>> THESE EFFORTS TO CREATE
HABITAS FOR BUMBLEBEES ARE
PAYING OFF.
>> IT'S A LOT OF AREA, BUT WE
HAVE 11 DIFFERENT SPECIES OF
BUMBLEBEES FOUND HERE, INCLUDING
THE YELLOW BUMBLEBEE AND THE
AMERICAN BUMBLEBEE, WHICH ARE
BOTH STATE SPECIES OF SPECIAL
CONCERN AND WE ALSO HAVE FOUND
THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED RUSTY
PATCH BUMBLEBEE HERE AND NOW WE
HAVE A NEST, SO I WOULD SAY THE
PROJECT HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL
SUCCESSFUL.
WE SEE A LOT OF BUMBLEBEES ALL
THE TIME.
THEY'RE ALWAYS OUT HERE.
>> STATE LAWMAKERS ARE ALSO
WORKING TO PROTECT NATIVE BEE
POPULATIONS.
>> I'M SO PASSIONATE ABOUT
POLLINATORS AND POLLINATOR
PROTECTION THAT I RECENTLY GOT A
TATTOO ON MY SHOULDER.
IT IS A RUSTY PATCH BUMBLEBEE.
>> APPLETON STATE REPRESENTATIVE
SNODGRASS HAS TWICE INTRODUCED
BILLS TO HELP WISCONSIN AS
POLLINATOR POPULATIONS SAYING
WISCONSIN IS LAGGING BEHIND
OTHER STATES.
>> UNFORTUNATELY, WISCONSIN IS
BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL WHEN IT
COMES TO THIS AND ESPECIALLY
OTHER STATES IN THE MIDWEST.
OTHER STATES HAVE ALREADY PUT
THINGS IN PLACE TO PROTECT
POLLINATORS.
>> SNODGRASS HAS A BILL THAT
WOULD PROHIBIT THE DNR FROM
USING ONE PARTICULAR PESTICIDE.
>> NEONICS ARE A CLASS OF
INSECTICIDES THAT ARE
PARTICULARLY HARMFUL TO
POLLINATORS.
THEY REALLY INTERFERE WITH THE
NEUROLOGICAL SYSTEM, BEES IN
PARTICULAR.
IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR THEM
TO FIND THEIR WAY BACK TO THEIR
HIVES.
>> SHE ALSO ALSO RAISING FUNDING
FOR POLLINATOR HABITATS AND
MANDATING THAT STATE AGENCIES
USE NATIVE PLANTS THAT
POLLINATORS PREFER.
SHE SAYS IT'S AN ENVIRONMENTAL
AND ECONOMIC ISSUE.
>> WITHOUT POLLINATORS,
WISCONSIN REALLY WOULD NOT HAVE
AN AGRICULTURE ECONOMY.
OUR CROPS ARE INCREDIBLY
DEPENDENT ON POLLINATORS.
WE HAVE OUR APPLE PRODUCERS, OUR
HONEY PRODUCERS, OUR CRANBERRY
PRODUCERS, ALL OF THEM WOULD SEE
70, 60, 50% DECLINE WITHOUT
POLLINATORS.
>> AS TO WHAT INDIVIDUALS CAN DO
TO HELP THE NATIVE BEE
POPULATION SURVIVE AND THRIVE IN
WISCONSIN, THE BUMBLEBEE BRIGADE
PROMOTES PLANTING PERENNIALS
LIKE THE PURPLE CONEFLOWER.
PROBABLY ABOUT 25% OF BEES ARE
SOME LEVEL OF A THREATENED
STATUS RIGHT NOW.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF LOSS OF
BUMBLEBEES.
>> I'M GOING TO DO WHAT I CAN DO
TO HELP, AND WHAT I CAN DO IS I
CAN PLANT NATIVE FLOWERS IN MY
YARD, I CAN PROMOTE MY NEIGHBORS
PLANTING NATIVE FLOWERS.
I THINK THERE IS HOPE AND IT'S
SOMETHING EVERY SINGLE PERSON
CAN DO TO MAKE THINGS BETTER FOR
THE BUMBLEBEE.
>> REPORTING FROM CALUMET
COUNTY, FOR HERE AND NOW, I'M
STEVEN POTTER.
>> FOR MORE ON THIS AND OTHER
ISSUES FACING WISCONSIN, VISIT
OUR WEBSITE AT PBS WISCONSIN
DOT-ORG AND THEN CLICK ON THE
NEWS TAB.
THAT IS OUR PROGRAM FOR TONIGHT.
I'M ZAC SCHULTZ.
HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND.
(CLOSED CAPTIONING BY RIVERSIDE
CAPTIONING COMPANY)
>> FUNDING FOR "HERE & NOW" IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOCUS FUND FOR
JOURNALISM AND FRIENDS OF PBS
WISCONSIN.