Assembly Bill 24
Relating to: county sheriff assistance with certain federal immigration functions.
Ayes: 3 - Senators Kapenga, Jacque and Nass.
Noes: 2 - Senators Carpenter and Larson.
Senate Bill 57
Relating to: county sheriff assistance with certain federal immigration functions.
Ayes: 3 - Senators Kapenga, Jacque and Nass.
Noes: 2 - Senators Carpenter and Larson.
Ayes: 3 - Senators Kapenga, Jacque and Nass.
Noes: 2 - Senators Carpenter and Larson.
CHRIS KAPENGA
Chairperson
_____________
The committee on Transportation and Local Government reported and recommended:
Senate Bill 285
Relating to: talent recruitment grants.
Ayes: 3 - Senators Tomczyk, Hutton and Wanggaard.
Noes: 2 - Senators Carpenter and Spreitzer.
CORY TOMCZYK
Chairperson
_____________
Petitions and Communications
hist205604Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Senator Spreitzer added as a coauthor of Senate Bill 12. hist205663Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 268. hist205658Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 292. hist205657Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 293. hist205660Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 294. hist205661Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 297. hist205659Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 298. hist205662Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 301. hist205587Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Maxey added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 302. hist205655Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 319. hist205672Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 320. hist205673Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Bill 324. hist205656Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Joint Resolution 61. hist205654Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Joint Resolution 62. hist205674Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Haywood added as a cosponsor of Senate Joint Resolution 68. _____________
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Senate Majority Leader
June 12, 2025
The Honorable, the Senate:
Pursuant to Senate Rule 20 (2)(a), I am making the following appointments to the 2025-26 joint committees: Joint Legislative Council
• Senator Testin (remove Senator Feyen)
Sincerely,
DEVIN LEMAHIEU
Majority Leader
_____________
State of Wisconsin
Claims Board
June 12, 2025
Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 16.007 (5), attached is the report of the State Claims Board covering the claims considered at the May 16, 2025, meeting of the Board. This report is for the information of the Legislature, The Board would appreciate your acceptance and publication of it in the Journal to inform the members of the Legislature.
Sincerely,
JENNIFER L. VANDERMEUSE
Secretary
STATE OF WISCONSIN CLAIMS BOARD
On May 16, 2025, the State of Wisconsin Claims Board met in the State Capitol Building and via Zoom to consider the claims listed below:
Hearings were conducted for the following claims:
Claimant Agency Amount
11. Lucas Litzau Corrections $679,385.00 The following claims were decided without hearings:
Claimant Agency Amount
22. Nathan Kivi Corrections $204.00 33. Rahim Jackson Corrections $2,413.00 44. Jared Andrews Corrections $123.76 55. Brian Grashel Corrections $2,641.50 66. Nicholas Aranda State Fair Park $3,511.64 77. Kenneth Kingsby Transportation $18,640.82 88. Golf Construction Administration $501,900.00 With respect to the claims, the Board finds:
(Decisions are unanimous unless otherwise noted.)
1. Lucas Litzau of Andover, Minnesota claims $679,385.00 for lost wages and other compensation for a five-year period that Claimant was incarcerated, during which time he asserts he should have been in the community on probation. Claimant contends that the five-year imprisonment resulted from multiple errors by DOC -- wrongly interpreting the court’s sentencing order, wrongly revoking probation, and failing to recognize and correct the error.
In Polk County Case No. 12-CF-465, Claimant pled guilty and was convicted of the following: Count 1 (felony bail jumping) and Count 4 (receiving stolen property). He was sentenced on July 9, 2014. (This was a re-sentencing, but that is not relevant to this claim.) The court made the following statement at sentencing:
As to Count 4, felony bail jumping, repeater, on that I’m sentencing you to ten years; five years initial confinement, five years of extended supervision. I am staying that and placing you on probation. Probation is for a period of four years, but that period of probation is consecutive to the sentence in Count 1, which means once you’re done with the time in Count 1 you will begin your probationary period of time.
Claimant asserts it was clear that Count 4 probation would be consecutive to the sentence imposed on Count 1. Claimant notes that DOC interpreted the court’s order correctly on January 13, 2015, at which time Claimant was serving a term of extended supervision on Count 1. In a letter dated January 13, 2015, DOC Offender Records Supervisor Alderson wrote to the court inquiring about the sentence credit to which Claimant was entitled, wherein she noted that in Case No. 12-CF-465 Count 4, Claimant was sentenced to “4 years probation consecutive to Count 1.”
Approximately seven months later (in 2015), Claimant allegedly violated terms of supervision and DOC moved toward revocation. Claimant contends that Agent Nutter incorrectly stated on the revocation paperwork that Claimant was simultaneously serving supervision on Count 1 and probation on Count 4. As such, it was represented that Claimant could be revoked from both supervision on Count 1 and probation on Count 4.
DOC subsequently issued a Revocation Order and Warrant in Claimant’s case on December 2, 2015, adopting Agent Nutter’s representation and ordered Claimant’s Count 4 probation revoked along with his Count 1 supervision. Claimant notes that the errant revocation of Count 4 probation meant that until and unless DOC recognized the error, Claimant would automatically serve his imposed and stayed five-year initial confinement on Count 4.
Claimant asserts that DOC staff are required to review sentence calculations when someone arrives at prison and upon each transfer to a different facility. He understands that process to require DOC staff review of judgments of conviction and sentencing hearing transcripts. Claimant asserts it is not uncommon for DOC to reach out to courts with questions. Claimant contends that DOC had the opportunity to discover and correct the error on, at least, the following occasions:
• December 7, 2015: Claimant’s arrival Dodge Correctional Institution.
• February 12, 2016: Transfer to Green Bay Correctional Institution.
• January 11, 2019: Transfer to Fox Lake Correctional Institution.
• January 2019: DOC was notified of an outstanding warrant in Michigan. As part of the interstate detainer process, the FLCI Warden signed paperwork indicating Claimant was imprisoned on his 5-year term of imprisonment on Count 4.
