Assembly Bill 903
Programs for gifted and talented pupils. (FE)
Vetoed by the governor
Both chambers passed it, and the governor vetoed it on Apr 8, 2022. Lawmakers did not , so it stands.
-
Introduced, passed
Jan 21, 2022
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Assembly vote, passed
Passed Feb 22, 2022
-
Senate vote, passed
Passed 20 to 12
-
Governor, stopped here
Vetoed Apr 8, 2022.
-
Law, not reached
Latest entry in the official record, May 17, 2022: “Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82”
Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.
Terms on this page
Veto override
Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
What it would have done
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
Under current law, each school board must ensure that pupils who have been identified as gifted and talented have access to a gifted and talented program. For purposes of this requirement, current law defines a “gifted and talented pupil" as a pupil enrolled in a public school who gives evidence of high performance capability in intellectual, creative, artistic, leadership, or specific academic areas and who needs services or activities not ordinarily provided in a regular school program in order to fully develop such capabilities.
Under the bill, each school board must submit an annual report to the Department of Public Instruction that indicates whether the school board employs a gifted and talented program coordinator and, if it does, the amount of time the coordinator spends on the school board's gifted and talented program; the number of gifted and talented pupils enrolled in the school district who received services under a gifted and talented program; and certain demographic information for those pupils. The bill also requires DPI to annually post on DPI's Internet site all of the following information:
Read the full summary Show less
1. For each school district: a) the number of pupils who were evaluated for and identified as a gifted and talented pupil; b) the number of pupils who received services under a gifted and talented program and certain demographic data regarding those pupils; c) whether the school district has complied with its duty to provide access to a gifted and talented program; d) the services and activities provided to pupils under the school district's program for gifted and talented pupils;
and e) whether the school district employs a gifted and talented program coordinator and, if it does, the amount of time the coordinator spends on the gifted and talented program.
2. For each gifted and talented program grant recipient, the services and activities that the entity provided to gifted and talented pupils.
3. The statewide pupil participation rate in advanced placement courses.
DPI also must notify the appropriate standing committees of the legislature that the information is available on DPI's Internet site.
Additionally, under the bill, DPI annually must audit at least 10 percent of school districts, which must be selected at random, for compliance with the requirements under current law and the bill. Finally, DPI must include in the school and school district accountability report, commonly known as school and school district report cards, DPI's determination of whether or not a school district complied with the state law requirements related to programs for gifted and talented pupils.
Under current law, the Department of Workforce Development awards workforce training grants, under what is commonly known as the Fast Forward Program, for various workforce training purposes. One of the purposes under current law is to provide grants for programs that train teachers and that train individuals to become teachers. This bill expands that purpose to explicitly include grants for providing professional development to teachers who serve gifted and talented pupils.
Who's behind it
8 lawmakers are its . All 8 are Republicans.
4 more lawmakers .
See all 12 names Hide the names
Authors (8)
- Dave Armstrong · Republican, Assembly
- Calvin Callahan · Republican, Assembly
- Barbara Dittrich · Republican, Assembly
- James Edming · Republican, Assembly
- Jesse James · Republican, Senate
- Scott Krug · Republican, Assembly
- Todd Novak · Republican, Assembly
- Warren Petryk · Republican, Assembly
Signed on in support (4)
- Kathleen Bernier · Republican, Senate
- Alberta Darling · Republican, Senate
- Mary Felzkowski · Republican, Senate
- Chuck Wichgers · Republican, Assembly
What it would cost
State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.
How lawmakers voted
There were 3 votes on this bill.
Assembly Committee on Education vote to recommend it
Passed, 8 to 4 · Feb 17, 2022
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report passage recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 8, Noes 4”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate Committee on Education vote to recommend it
Passed, 4 to 3 · Mar 4, 2022
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report concurrence recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 4, Noes 3”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote to pass it
Passed, 20 to 12 · Mar 8, 2022 · 1 didn't vote
See how each of the 33 senators voted Hide the names
D: Democrat, R: Republican
Yes (20)
- Alberta Darling (R, 8)
- André Jacque (R, 1)
- Chris Kapenga (R, 33)
- Dale Kooyenga (R, 5)
- Dan Feyen (R, 20)
- Devin LeMahieu (R, 9)
- Duey Stroebel (R, 20)
- Eric Wimberger (R, 2)
- Howard Marklein (R, 17)
- Jerry Petrowski (R, 29)
- John Jagler (R, 13)
- Julian Bradley (R, 28)
- Kathleen Bernier (R, 23)
- Mary Felzkowski (R, 12)
- Patrick Testin (R, 24)
- Rob Cowles (R, 2)
- Rob Stafsholt (R, 10)
- Roger Roth (R, 19)
- Steve Nass (R, 11)
- Van Wanggaard (R, 21)
No (12)
- Bob Wirch (D, 22)
- Brad Pfaff (D, 32)
- Chris Larson (D, 7)
- Janet Bewley (D, 25)
- Janis Ringhand (D, 15)
- Jeff Smith (D, 31)
- Jon Erpenbach (D, 27)
- Kelda Roys (D, 26)
- LaTonya Johnson (D, 6)
- Lena Taylor (D, 4)
- Melissa Agard (D, 16)
- Tim Carpenter (D, 3)
Didn't vote (1)
- Joan Ballweg (R, 14)
Official motion: “CONCURRENCE”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
May 17, 2022
The veto stood. Lawmakers didn't override it.
-
Apr 8, 2022
The governor vetoed it.
-
Apr 4, 2022
Sent to the governor.
-
Mar 8, 2022
The Senate passed it too, 20 to 12.
-
Mar 4, 2022
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 4 to 3.
-
Mar 2, 2022
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Feb 24, 2022
Sent to the Senate Committee on Education.
-
Feb 22, 2022
The Senate received it.
-
Feb 22, 2022
The Assembly passed it.
-
Feb 17, 2022
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.
-
Feb 17, 2022
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 8 to 4.
-
Feb 2, 2022
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Feb 1, 2022
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Jan 31, 2022
1 more representative signed on in support.
-
Jan 21, 2022
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Education.
-
Jan 21, 2022
Introduced in the Assembly.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Jan 21, 2022 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Petryk, Armstrong, Callahan, Dittrich, Edming, James, Krug and Novak; cosponsored by Senators Bernier, Darling and Felzkowski
- Jan 21, 2022 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to Committee on Education
- Jan 31, 2022 · Assembly
Representative Wichgers added as a coauthor
- Feb 1, 2022 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Feb 2, 2022 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 2, 2022 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 10, 2022 · Assembly
Executive action taken
- Feb 17, 2022 · Assembly
Report passage recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 8, Noes 4
- Feb 17, 2022 · Assembly
Referred to committee on Rules
- Feb 17, 2022 · Assembly
Placed on calendar 2-22-2022 by Committee on Rules
- Feb 22, 2022 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Feb 22, 2022 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Feb 22, 2022 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Feb 22, 2022 · Assembly
Read a third time and passed
- Feb 22, 2022 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Feb 22, 2022 · Senate
Received from Assembly
- Feb 24, 2022 · Senate
Read first time and referred to committee on Education
- Mar 2, 2022 · Senate
Public hearing held
- Mar 4, 2022 · Senate
Executive action taken
- Mar 4, 2022 · Senate
Report concurrence recommended by Committee on Education, Ayes 4, Noes 3
- Mar 4, 2022 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- Mar 4, 2022 · Senate
Placed on calendar 3-8-2022 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- Mar 8, 2022 · Senate
Read a second time
- Mar 8, 2022 · Senate
Ordered to a third reading
- Mar 8, 2022 · Senate
Rules suspended
- Mar 8, 2022 · Senate
Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 20, Noes 12
- Mar 8, 2022 · Senate
Ordered immediately messaged
- Mar 9, 2022 · Assembly
Received from Senate concurred in
- Mar 15, 2022 · Assembly
Report correctly enrolled on 3-15-2022
- Apr 4, 2022 · Assembly
Presented to the Governor on 4-4-2022 by directive of the Speaker
- Apr 8, 2022 · Assembly
Report vetoed by the Governor on 4-8-2022
- May 17, 2022 · Assembly
Placed on calendar 5-17-2022 pursuant to Joint Rule 82 (2)(a)
- May 17, 2022 · Assembly
Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82
Terms on this page
Veto override
Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source
Veto override
Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote