SUN PRAIRIE RISING

Either vote again or make sure everyone shares the sacrifice

by Andy Schoenherr
Editor, Sun Prairie Rising

---

Let’s take a look at 2 different statements regarding Sun Prairie’s City budget in the coming years:

You’re reading that right. Sun Prairie voted AGAINST adding more staffing for police and fire, but city leaders are recommending to go ahead and do it anyway.

It’s one of many head-scratchers presented at last week’s Committee of the Whole meeting, laying out possible budget cuts in the wake of the failed April referendum vote.

At the meeting, the people of Sun Prairie who care most deeply about our community showed up or submitted comments to speak about the proposal.

Every single person who spoke opposed the recommendations.

Not one resident appeared to defend the cuts. Not one person argued the proposal reflected the community’s priorities. Not one person said balancing the budget on the backs of vulnerable residents was the right path forward.

Because what the Executive Leadership Team presented was not reflective of what Sun Prairie cares about. Instead, they recommended a budget strategy that protects the largest and most politically insulated parts of city government while taking away from programs and services that support the people with the least power and the fewest resources.

If we’re going to make cuts, then everyone should share in the sacrifice.

A Flawed Process Produces a Flawed Budget

The proposal’s methodology rests on three guiding principles, and each deserves scrutiny. One of them is “Use Data Wisely” and references the community survey from last fall.

For some reason, the city administration continues to rely on the results of this failed survey. Members of the City Council have spoken about it’s flaws on multiple occasions — from the way questions were framed to whether the sample accurately reflected the community. Those concerns are still being dismissed in favor of a biased process with ugly outcomes.

Bad data leads to bad decisions.

If city leaders want residents to accept painful cuts, then the process behind those cuts needs to inspire confidence. This one doesn’t.

Who Is Really Being Asked to Sacrifice?

The second principle cited is “Minimizing impact to residents and employees.”

We should be asking…why?

Nearly 60% of voters rejected the referendum. They were explicitly asked whether they were willing to pay more to maintain city services and expand staffing in police and fire. The majority said no.

So why are city leaders now trying so hard to shield residents from the consequences of that decision?

How can taxpayers ever understand the value of city services if they never directly experience what happens when those services disappear?

Instead, the proposal targets programs that are easier to dismiss because they serve smaller populations or operate quietly in the background. But those are often the services with the greatest impact.

It’s the struggling mother who turns to Neighborhood Navigators for diapers or medication assistance. It’s the hungry family relying on Sunshine Place and the food pantry. It’s working parents depending on affordable after-school programming through Recreation and Community Schools.

These aren’t luxuries. They are investments that stabilize families, strengthen neighborhoods, and prevent larger problems before they begin. They ease the burden of the police department we’re so desperate to staff.

And the cuts don’t stop there.

The proposal also asks city employees to absorb smaller raises, higher insurance costs, and increased workloads as vacant positions disappear. These are talented public servants who often could earn more in the private sector, but chose careers dedicated to serving the community.

Now they’re being told to do more with less while leadership protects its own structure.

Protecting ‘Core Services’ — But at What Cost?

That brings us to the primary stated priority: ‘Protecting Core Services.’

Again, the obvious question is: why?

The referendum specifically emphasized additional staffing for police and fire. Voters rejected it.

Yet city leadership is still wants to add a police officer and firefighter while avoiding meaningful reductions to the departments that already consume the largest share of the city budget.

To be clear: I wholeheartedly support our police officers, firefighters, EMTs, and public works employees. They do difficult and important jobs, and I want them fully staffed and fully funded. I voted YES on the referendum.

Unfortunately, the majority of Sun Prairie voters disagree with me.

If the city is truly respecting the outcome of the election, then why are those departments almost entirely insulated from sacrifice while social services, recreation, library funding, sustainability programs, and nonprofit partnerships are put on the chopping block?

Are we really supposed to believe there isn’t a single place where police, fire, EMS, or public works can tighten their belts?

And let’s acknowledge another uncomfortable reality: almost none of the areas represented on the Executive Leadership Team proposed eliminating their own staff or reducing their own departmental budgets.

Apparently sacrifice is for everyone else.

Maybe the Voters Haven’t Actually Spoken Yet

What makes this especially frustrating is that there is still another option available.

Former Mayor Paul Esser, who has always had a strong sense of the political winds of the city, was among those who spoke at last week’s COW meeting. He urged the council to place another referendum on the November ballot, when turnout will be dramatically higher.

“Common logic may say that the failed April referendum said all there was to say about city finances,” Esser said. “But I think that answer is too quick. And I say that because most people have not been heard from. The November 2026 election is going to bring out a much higher percentage of voters than April did. And those November voters need to be heard. So I ask you to create a referendum for the November ballot.”

He’s right.

April elections draw a narrower slice of the electorate. November elections reflect the broader community. If city leaders genuinely believe maintaining services matters, then they should trust voters enough to ask again — this time with clearer language and a more honest explanation of the stakes.

Emily Lindsey, President of the Library Board, highlighted another major problem with the failed referendum: many voters didn’t fully understand what they were voting on.

“I am going to ask you this evening to vote to do the referendum again in November,” Lindsey said. “I heard from many people in the community who asked me, ‘Hey Emily, how are you going to vote on the referendum?’ And I said, ‘Well, I’m going to vote yes.’ And they said, ‘But it sounds like it’s really just about adding police officers and I don’t want to do that in my community.”

I’ve talked to many people who said the same thing, or expressed similar thoughts online.

The Sun Prairie Police do a great job, but between Flock cameras and recent national incidents involving ICE and police violence, there’s a large segment of the population that’s reluctant to give more money to law enforcement at any level.

It’s now clear the referendum was never just about police and fire staffing. It was about the city’s overall ability to maintain services and quality of life.

Some residents complained about the city’s “scare tactics.” In reality, we never had a fully informed public debate about what was at stake.

Instead, an unlikely coalition of enough anti-tax conservatives and “defund the police” liberals came together to defeat the referendum. Neither of those extremes represent the majority of Sun Prairie.

Leadership Means Making Hard Choices

Several of the proposed recommendations are reasonable. Cuts do need to happen somewhere. Difficult decisions are part of governing.

But leadership also means making sure those sacrifices are shared fairly and honestly.

Right now, this proposal asks the most vulnerable residents, nonprofit partners, community programs, and rank-and-file city employees to absorb the pain while the city’s largest departments and leadership structures remain largely protected.

That isn’t balanced leadership. It’s CYA politics.

But here’s the good news: there is still time.

Time for the mayor and city council to push back. Time to revisit priorities. Time to ask whether this budget actually reflects the values of Sun Prairie residents.

Several Alders have already scheduled a Town Hall session for 6:00 pm on Wednesday, May 13th at City Hall. You should show up and be heard.

There are working groups scheduled over the summer to review and revise proposals before anything is adopted this fall.

Bottom Line: Vote again, or share the burden

If city leaders truly want an accurate accounting of where the community stands, then they should put the question back in front of voters in November.

If not, then they need to drastically rethink how they approach providing city services, and make sure ALL of the community shares in the sacrifice, not just the neediest few.

Because balancing the budget by hollowing out the programs that bind us together may solve a spreadsheet problem in the short term.

But it risks shaking the foundation of who we are as a community — the neighbors we care about, the values we claim to share, and ultimately, the city we all call home.

Click here for More Info on the Proposed Budget Cuts

Link to the Summary of Recommendations from the ELT

OPINION: Sun Prairie’s Budget Proposal Protects Power While Vulnerable Residents Pay the Price