>> 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 NOB AND OBY 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 MO 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 POLI PLAYOFFS ANDW 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 SUCCES 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.