Distinguishing Among Candidates in the Busy Race for Governor

We provide these full responses, as well as a two-part summary of positions, from candidates to our policy questionnaire as a helpful resource for voters and advocates across the state.  

Please note that the Wisconsin Bike Fed engaged with all gubernatorial candidates from both parties regarding the policy questionnaire. The responses provided are from the candidates who agreed to participate and then followed through. We hope this is helpful for voters and advocates across the state, and we hope to expand and refine this practice in future election cycles.

---

---

Part One of the Two Part Series – June 3, 2026

Our Goal

Earlier this spring, the Wisconsin Bike Fed asked all Gubernatorial candidates, from both parties, if they would be willing to participate in a policy questionnaire related to cycling, recreation, and active transportation. In this two-part write up, the objective is to share where candidates are alike and where they are different.

If a current candidate is not included in this analysis, it could mean a couple things. First, it could mean their campaign did not respond to our request to participate. Second, it could mean that they agreed to participate, the Bike Fed sent the questionnaire, and the candidate did not respond. To be clear, nobody was excluded from participating in this questionnaire, and the Bike Fed can only share responses from those who took the time to reply. Those who replied include Mandela Barnes, County Executive David Crowley, Representative Francesca Hong, and Senator Kelda Roys.

The Bike Fed encourages you to contact your favorite candidate’s campaign if their positions are not contained within. On to the results…

What We Learned

The candidates have a lot in common. In this edition, we will focus on those commonalities. For anyone with an interest in active transportation and outdoor recreation, these are encouraging statements.
The first question we asked was whether or not they supported proposed legislation that would restore Wisconsin’s Complete Streets law. Candidates Barnes, Crowley, Hong, and Roys all supported restoring complete streets with current Senator Kelda Roys pointing out that she is a co-author of the bill. County Executive Crowley and Representative Hong support complete streets with the caveat that it provides flexibility and agency for individual communities to make decisions that work for them.

As current Wisconsin law prohibits the use of eminent domain for the purposes of a bike/pedestrian path, last fall there was a proposal in the legislature to restore eminent domain for that purpose. Again, all of the candidates generally support this. Senator Roys, again, is a co-author of this proposal. A common theme among the candidates is concern for the property owners. Although the candidates wish to restore eminent domain for this purpose, they also emphasize the need for transparency, just compensation, and making sure that eminent domain is used when it reflects the transportation needs of a community.

Another similarity among all respondents is related to the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Fund. All of the candidates recognize the statewide popularity of this program and support reauthorization. Mandela Barnes responded that he would aim for “permanent, sustained funding” of the program. Senator Roys aims to “preserve and expand” Knowles-Nelson, and Representative Hong will look to “reauthorize and strengthen” it.

What’s Next

While all of these responses are good for Wisconsin cyclists, it may not help us determine who our preferred candidate is. In the second part of this report, we’ll look at some of the more nuanced differences among the candidates. Our questionnaire also covered topics like traffic safety cameras, the possibility of replicating something like Minnesota’s Legacy and Trust Fund, and of course, e-motos. Check back for Part II of our candidate comparison.

* Although the Sara Rodriguez Campaign did not submit responses in time to be included in this original post, we can summarize that she supports the use of eminent domain, with just compensation, as a last resort for building bike/ped pathways. She also supports complete streets legislation and aims to build it once and build it right. Complete streets means fewer crashes and fewer preventable deaths. Finally, she sees Knowles-Nelson in need of long term funding and views what happened as a casualty of caucus infighting.

---

Part Two of the Two Part Series – June 12, 2026

The Picture Gets Clearer, We Hope

It’s time for Part Two of the Bike Fed’s candidate analysis. Last week, in Part One, we learned that the candidates were largely aligned on three issues. This week we will look at new policy issues and how the candidates differ. Please remember that the Bike Fed solicited participation from all Republican and Democratic candidates. Those who are not included in this report did not respond to our request. We can only provide information about those who agreed to participate, and then followed through with a response.

Issues

Perhaps the reason we start to see some differences is due to the nature of these policies:

• Traffic safety cameras are proven to keep people safe, but privacy is a concern. 
• Emotos, and other high speed electric micromobility devices, are certainly viable transportation alternatives, but they seem to be incredibly dangerous, ridden in an unsafe manner, or ridden on paths reserved for nonmotorized transportation.
• The DNR is known to be underfunded, but the question of how to fund it shows differences especially when considering something like Minnesota’s Legacy Trust Fund as a model. 
• Because the Bike Fed is a regular participant in the Governor’s Bicycle Coordinating Council, we asked what the role of that council should be. 

Ultimately, all participating candidates agree that citizens should be safe and have a right to transportation, and they also agree that the method for funding the DNR needs to be addressed, but it’s how we get to those end results that makes the candidates different.

Important Distinctions

On Traffic Safety Cameras

Automated Traffic Safety Cameras for the City of Milwaukee were proposed to the state legislature in AB 371 and SB 375. The Bike Fed asked the candidates if they supported legislation like this, and these responses are where it becomes easier to see the specifics of their positions. For context, the bill seeks to add 75 red light and high speed detection cameras for the City of Milwaukee to be evenly distributed with five cameras going to each of the 15 aldermanic districts. The cameras come at no cost, as the fines and penalties collected go toward the cost of the project. Once that dollar amount is reached, any revenue generated would go toward traffic calming measures. The bill also includes a 5-year sunsetting clause.

Candidate Mandela Barnes was straightforward with his response saying, “I’ll look to create and enforce laws that bring down traffic accidents and fatality rates, including commonsense steps like adopting safety cameras that enforce red-lights.” For County Executive David Crowley, this type of legislation might be a bit more personal, as this is his county and his city. On this legislation, he said, “Traffic safety cameras should be narrowly focused on public safety goals, used transparently, and paired with clear standards around privacy, signage, data retention, and accountability. My view is that these systems should be designed to change dangerous behavior and save lives, not generate revenue.”

Senator Kelda Roys was most aligned with County Executive Crowley. She said, “I support automated traffic enforcement as a mode of ensuring public safety for everyone, especially our kids. I want this to be allowed in Madison and other communities as well as Milwaukee, but there must be stringent privacy protections in place that prevent the retention, use, sale, transfer, or storage of any data.” Finally, Representative Francesca Hong was clear to state she thinks there’s a better way saying, “I’m more immediately interested in other approaches to road management: traffic-calming street design, investments in public transit, and increased impoundment of repeat offender vehicles.”

On Emotos

Emotos have become a hot topic in recent months. These high speed devices, that do not meet the state or federal definition of an ebike, have been at the heart of several big stories across the country. In Wisconsin, local municipalities are taking action and creating their own emoto ordinances. The result is a patchwork of disjointed and dissimilar policies even among neighboring communities. The Bike Fed asked candidates about what Wisconsin can do, as a state, to address the growing proliferation of these electric vehicles.

To be clear, all the candidates recognize the need for statewide legislation on the matter. These electric vehicles are clearly not ebikes, and should be legislated as something different. Mandela Barnes would support, “Clear, statewide definitions that treat high-speed e-bikes the same as mopeds and motorcycles with the same licensing requirements and safety standards.” Milwaukee County Executive Crowley recognizes that it’s not just about the definition but also regulation. He said, “Any statewide framework should balance safety, enforcement, and responsible recreational use. I would support reasonable regulations around sales, age requirements, speed capabilities, helmet use, and where these vehicles can legally operate.”

Representative Hong, while recognizing the need for this type of legislature, also made a point to say that her goal is, “not to ban emerging mobility options, but to make them safer, more predictable, and easier to manage.” To do so, she would support, “avoiding a one-size-fits-all mandate and instead giving communities the tools, guidance, and flexibility to permit, regulate, or restrict these vehicles based on their own context.” Senator Kelda Roys tied the issue to the need for a complete streets policy saying, “I recognize that OCEV drivers are often scared to drive on our roads, but their speed and weight pose a safety threat to pedestrians, kids, and bikers using shared paths and sidewalks. This is another reason to make our municipal roads safer and more inclusive for local, motorized traffic, so that mopeds, e-motos, and small automobiles are safe, as well as the pedestrians and cyclists, and share our roads and intersections.”

On the DNR and Long Term Funding Solutions

It’s no secret that the Department of Natural Resources is underfunded. Facilities are understaffed, in need of maintenance, and generally failing to keep up with an uptick in visits and usage. All the candidates who responded to the questionnaire fully support increasing funding for the DNR, but there are some reservations when it comes to how and who should pay for it.

Barnes, “Will restore the funding needed to keep Wisconsin’s lakes and forests intact for hunting, fishing, and recreation for generations to come, but believes that, “the funding mechanism should not raise taxes on middle-class families.” County Executive Crowley’s view was similar and in support of, “a balanced approach that includes continued stewardship investments, dedicated conservation and recreation funding, and ensuring user fees remain affordable and accessible so families are not priced out of enjoying public lands.” Crowley also proposed a Blue Ribbon Commission of various stakeholders to evaluate how Wisconsin raises and distributes (tax) revenue.

Representative Hong also said that, “I will work to ensure the DNR has the resources it needs to maintain safe, accessible, and well-managed parks and trails. That means addressing staffing shortages, modernizing facilities, and supporting the expansion and upkeep of the statewide trail network.” Looking to the future, Hong sees value in what is happening in neighbor states. “As governor, I would support a serious, statewide conversation about long-term funding for conservation, parks, trails, and cultural heritage, including models like Minnesota’s. My administration would work with communities, tribal nations, conservation partners, and the public to identify the best path forward  for Wisconsin.”

The perspective of Senator Roys is similar. “As governor, I will increase funding for state parks, including tackling the backlog of deferred maintenance that has led to significant deterioration of the user experience even as park utilization continues to grow. I appreciate the broad mission of the (Minnesota) Legacy and Trust Funds. I support a similar effort in Wisconsin.”

Lieutenant Governor Sarah Rodriguez was not included in Part One of this story, but her response to DNR and conservation funding deserves mention, however, because it is unique. She said, “Wisconsin asks more of its state parks every year and gives them less. I’ve proposed Wisconsin look hard at Michigan’s Recreation Passport model: a small, optional fee at vehicle registration that gets you into every state park and trailhead all year, with the revenue dedicated by law to park and trail maintenance and protected from diversion.a passport is a complement to state investment, not a substitute for it.”*

On the Governor’s Bicycle Coordinating Council

The Governor’s Bicycle Coordinating Council (GBCC) was established in 1977 by then Governor Patrick Lucey. The Wisconsin Bike Fed attends the council’s quarterly meetings in spite of not officially being appointed to the council. The Bike Fed asked the candidates what they believed the mission and purpose of the Council should be. Their answers see different purposes for the council.

Mandela Barnes first identified a problem and sees the council as a solution. “Wisconsin ranks 44th in the country in per-capita spending on biking and walking. That’s embarrassing, and the Bicycle Coordinating Council exists to change that by keeping bike infrastructure on the radar when roads are being planned and when budgets are being written.” The County Executive said, “The mission of the Governor’s Bicycle Coordinating Council should be to improve safety, access, and connectivity for bicyclists across Wisconsin while helping shape transportation policy that works for communities of all sizes.”

Representative Hong said, “I support rethinking and strengthening the Council, but I believe its mission should be modernized to reflect the realities and opportunities of today.” “I would charge a renewed Council with helping Wisconsin build a transportation system that works for everyone…this is about giving every community the tools and support they need to create safe, connected, and accessible places to live, work, and play.” Senator Roys also sees the Council as a tool to help shape policy. “This council can and should be advocating for policies and funding to help all Wisconsinites enjoy and benefit from cycling – from infrastructure to education to programs to policy. The GBCC can engage with the public and facilitate interagency and intergovernmental cooperation on matters of importance to cyclists.”

Lt Governor Rodriguez said of the GBCC, “I see its mission as three things: advising the governor and agencies on policies that make biking safer and more accessible; connecting state decisions to the local advocates and officials doing the work on the ground. As governor, I’ll work to see every seat filled, including pressing legislative leaders to appoint their members, appoint people who ride, who advocate, and who represent every corner of the state, and treat the Council’s recommendations as input to real decisions.”

Conclusion

The Wisconsin Bike Fed conducted this questionnaire as a way for our readers to learn more about the candidates who will be in the August primary. The purpose is to educate, not persuade. Wisconsinites will make an important decision in both the primary and the general election. The Bike Fed hopes that our questionnaire helps you make a more informed decision, and we hope that this helped in some small way.

*  It should be noted that Lieutenant Governor Rodriguez did respond to our questionnaire, but it was after the Bike Fed had already gone to publish Part One. An addendum has been included to last week’s article. If you are interested in the rest of those positions, please refer to Part One of this series.