WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW & LIBERTY INC: Form 990, tax year 2014

View the entire original 990 at ProPublica ↗

Organization
WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW & LIBERTY INC (EIN 45-1606079)
Tax period
2014-01-01 to 2014-12-31
Filed
2015-08-11
IRS object ID
201532239349300833
Schema version
2014v5.0
Source
Download XML · Original 990 at ProPublica

Every field in the e-filed return. Faint text is the IRS element name, for citing.

Return header ReturnHeader

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Return2015-08-11T13:03:19-05:00ReturnTs
Tax Period End2014-12-31TaxPeriodEndDt

Preparer Firm PreparerFirmGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Preparer Firm EIN391210538PreparerFirmEIN

Preparer Firm Name PreparerFirmName

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Business Name Line1SCRIBNER COHEN AND COMPANY SC CPASBusinessNameLine1Txt

Preparer US Address PreparerUSAddress

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Address Line1400 EAST MASON STREET SUITE 300AddressLine1Txt
CityMILWAUKEECityNm
State AbbreviationWIStateAbbreviationCd
ZIP53202ZIPCd
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Return Type990ReturnTypeCd
Tax Period Begin2014-01-01TaxPeriodBeginDt

Filer Filer

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
EIN451606079EIN

Business Name BusinessName

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Business Name Line1WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW & LIBERTY INCBusinessNameLine1Txt
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Business Name ControlWISCBusinessNameControlTxt
Phone4147279455PhoneNum

US Address USAddress

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Address Line11139 E KNAPP STREETAddressLine1Txt
CityMILWAUKEECityNm
State AbbreviationWIStateAbbreviationCd
ZIP532022828ZIPCd

Business Officer BusinessOfficerGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
PersonRICHARD M ESENBERGPersonNm
Person TitlePRESIDENTPersonTitleTxt
Phone4147279455PhoneNum
Signature2015-08-06SignatureDt
Discuss With Paid PreparerYes (1)DiscussWithPaidPreparerInd

Preparer Person PreparerPersonGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Preparer PersonKELLY K MILLER CPAPreparerPersonNm
PTINP00562808PTIN
Phone4142711700PhoneNum
Preparation2015-08-06PreparationDt
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Tax2014TaxYr
Build TS2016-02-25 16:41:14ZBuildTS

Form 990 IRS990

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Principal OfficerRICHARD M ESENBERGPrincipalOfficerNm

US Address USAddress

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Address Line11139 E KNAPP STREETAddressLine1Txt
CityMILWAUKEECityNm
State AbbreviationWIStateAbbreviationCd
ZIP532022828ZIPCd
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Gross Receipts$1,611,698GrossReceiptsAmt
Group Return For Affiliates0GroupReturnForAffiliatesInd
Organization501c3Yes (X)Organization501c3Ind
Website AddressWWW.WILL-LAW.ORGWebsiteAddressTxt
Type Of Organization CorpYes (X)TypeOfOrganizationCorpInd
Formation2011FormationYr
Legal Domicile StateWILegalDomicileStateCd
Activity Or MissionTHE ORGANIZATION IS DEDICATED TO THE PROMOTION OF FREE MARKETS, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, AND A ROBUST CIVIL SOCIETY.ActivityOrMissionDesc
Voting Members Governing Body4VotingMembersGoverningBodyCnt
Voting Members Independent3VotingMembersIndependentCnt
Total Employee7TotalEmployeeCnt
Total Volunteers3TotalVolunteersCnt
Total Gross UBI$0TotalGrossUBIAmt
Net Unrelated Bus Txbl Incm$0NetUnrelatedBusTxblIncmAmt
PY Contributions Grants$906,928PYContributionsGrantsAmt
CY Contributions Grants$1,462,199CYContributionsGrantsAmt
PY Program Service Revenue$31,415PYProgramServiceRevenueAmt
CY Program Service Revenue$149,089CYProgramServiceRevenueAmt
PY Investment Income$204PYInvestmentIncomeAmt
CY Investment Income$410CYInvestmentIncomeAmt
PY Other Revenue$0PYOtherRevenueAmt
CY Other Revenue$0CYOtherRevenueAmt
PY Total Revenue$938,547PYTotalRevenueAmt
CY Total Revenue$1,611,698CYTotalRevenueAmt
PY Grants And Similar Paid$0PYGrantsAndSimilarPaidAmt
CY Grants And Similar Paid$0CYGrantsAndSimilarPaidAmt
PY Benefits Paid To Members$0PYBenefitsPaidToMembersAmt
CY Benefits Paid To Members$0CYBenefitsPaidToMembersAmt
PY Salaries Comp Emp Bnft Paid$568,411PYSalariesCompEmpBnftPaidAmt
CY Salaries Comp Emp Bnft Paid$697,929CYSalariesCompEmpBnftPaidAmt
PY Total Prof Fndrsng Expns$17,503PYTotalProfFndrsngExpnsAmt
CY Total Prof Fndrsng Expns$3,798CYTotalProfFndrsngExpnsAmt
CY Total Fundraising Expense$34,534CYTotalFundraisingExpenseAmt
PY Other Expenses$77,692PYOtherExpensesAmt
CY Other Expenses$89,981CYOtherExpensesAmt
PY Total Expenses$663,606PYTotalExpensesAmt
CY Total Expenses$791,708CYTotalExpensesAmt
PY Revenues Less Expenses$274,941PYRevenuesLessExpensesAmt
CY Revenues Less Expenses$819,990CYRevenuesLessExpensesAmt
Total Assets BOY$660,533TotalAssetsBOYAmt
Total Assets EOY$1,480,523TotalAssetsEOYAmt
Total Liabilities BOY$0TotalLiabilitiesBOYAmt
Total Liabilities EOY$0TotalLiabilitiesEOYAmt
Net Assets Or Fund Balances BOY$660,533NetAssetsOrFundBalancesBOYAmt
Net Assets Or Fund Balances EOY$1,480,523NetAssetsOrFundBalancesEOYAmt
Info In Schedule O Part IIIYes (X)InfoInScheduleOPartIIIInd
MissionTHE ORGANIZATION IS DEDICATED TO THE PROMOTION OF FREE MARKETS, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, AND A ROBUST CIVIL SOCIETY.MissionDesc
Significant New Program Srvc0SignificantNewProgramSrvcInd
Significant Change0SignificantChangeInd
Expense$294,726ExpenseAmt
Revenue$149,089RevenueAmt
DescWISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW & LIBERTY IS DEDICATED TO THE PROMOTION OF FREE MARKETS, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, AND A ROBUST CIVIL SOCIETY THROUGH EDUCATION, LITIGATION AND PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC DISCOURSE. AS A NON-PROFIT AND NON-PARTISAN ORGANIZATION, THE ORGANIZATION LITIGATES IN THE AREAS OF PROPERTY RIGHTS, THE FREEDOM TO EARN A LIVING, VOTING RIGHTS, REGULATION, TAXATION, SCHOOL CHOICE, AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. AS AN EDUCATION ORGANIZATION, THE ORGANIZATION STRIVES TO ADVANCE THE DEBATE CONCERNING LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY IN THESE AND OTHER AREAS.OTHER AREAS INCLUDE:OPEN RECORDS REQUESTS:WE HAVE ASSISTED MANY INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS WITH OPEN RECORDS REQUESTS, INCLUDING INDIVIDUAL ACTIVISTS, THE EDUCATION ACTION GROUP FOUNDATION, MACIVER, AND LOCAL JOURNALISTS. SUCH ASSISTANCE INCLUDES HELP DRAFTING REQUESTS, WRITING THREATENING LETTERS TO RECALCITRANT GOVERNMENT ENTITIES, AND PROVIDING ADVICE FOR WHAT DOCUMENTS TO REQUEST.SUPREME COURT ANALYSIS:ASSOCIATE COUNSEL TOM KAMENICK HAS PREPARED A REPORT ON THE EFFICIENCY AND VOTING PATTERNS OF THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT. THAT REPORT IS SCHEDULED TO BE PRINTED IN THE APRIL VERSION OF THE WISCONSIN LAWYER MAGAZINE, AND MAY BECOME AN ANNUAL FEATURE. A PRELIMINARY VERSION WAS RELEASED DURING LAST APRIL'S SUPREME COURT ELECTION TO COUNTER MISINFORMATION THAT THE COURT WAS "DIVIDED" AND "DYSFUNCTIONAL."SOCIAL MEDIA:SINCE THE LAST REPORT, WE HAVE EXPANDED OUR SOCIAL MEDIA REACH WITH A GROWING TWITTER FOLLOWING AND A RECENT YOUTUBE CHANNEL. WE CONTINUE TO MAKE USE OF OUR WEBSITE'S BLOG AND OUR FACEBOOK PAGE. ALL OF OUR ATTORNEYS HAVE BLOGGED ON VARIOUS TOPICS, INCLUDING OPEN RECORDS, SCHOOL CHOICE, EMINENT DOMAIN, EDUCATION POLICY, AND ECONOMIC LIBERTY. WE HAVE ADDED LINKS TO THOSE POSTS ON OUR FACEBOOK AND TWITTER ACCOUNTS, AS WELL AS USING THEM TO SHARE POSTS FROM LIKEMINDED INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS RIGHT WISCONSIN, THE GOLDWATER INSTITUTE AND THE INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE.MEDIA & LEGISLATIVE APPEARANCES:MOST OF OUR ATTORNEYS, AND ESPECIALLY SO FOR OUR GENERAL COUNSEL, RICK ESENBERG, HAVE MADE MEDIA APPEARANCES TO DISCUSS TOPICS AS BROAD RANGING AS ACT 10, PROPOSED LOCAL ORDINANCES, SUPREME COURT ELECTIONS, STATE NULLIFICATION, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, THE RULE OF LAW, AND THE "FAST & FURIOUS" SCANDAL. THOSE APPEARANCES HAVE RANGED FROM LOCAL RADIO STATIONS AND NEWSPAPER ARTICLES TO STATEWIDE AND EVEN NATIONWIDE PROGRAMS. RICK ESENBERG AND ASSOCIATE COUNSEL & EDUCATION POLICY DIRECTOR CJ SZAFIR HAVE ALSO TESTIFIED BEFORE WISCONSIN LEGISLATIVE HEARINGS ON VARIOUS PROPOSED BILLS.STATE BOARD APPOINTMENTS:TWO OF OUR ATTORNEYS HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER TO SERVE ON STATE BOARDS. CJ SZAFIR WAS APPOINTED TO THE WISCONSIN REAL ESTATE EXAMINING BOARD, WHICH ADVISES THE SECRETARY OF SAFETY AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ON MATTERS RELATING TO THE REAL ESTATE PRACTICE AND CONDUCTS PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE PRACTICE. TOM KAMENICK WAS APPOINTED TO SERVE ON THE WISCONSIN COUNCIL ON LIBRARY AND NETWORK DEVELOPMENT, WHICH ADVISES THE SUPERINTENDENT, THE GOVERNOR, AND THE LEGISLATURE ON ISSUES RELATED TO THE 3,600+ LIBRARIES ACROSS THE STATE.MARQUETTE INTERNSHIPS, VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES:WE HAVE BEEN APPROVED TO BE PART OF MARQUETTE LAW SCHOOL'S INTERNSHIP PROGRAM, WHEREBY STUDENTS EARN CREDITS FOR WORKING AS INTERNS IN NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES. WE HAVE NOW HAD FOUR INTERNS FROM THAT PROGRAM. WE ALSO HAVE HAD BOTH ATTORNEYS AND LAW STUDENTS VOLUNTEER THEIR TIME WITH US TO HELP ON VARIOUS PROJECTS.NEW CASES INCLUDE:HIGHLAND MEMORIAL V. WISCONSIN:WISCONSIN HAS AN ARCANE LAW PROHIBITING CEMETERY OWNERS FROM HAVING ANY OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN A FUNERAL HOME. THE LAW EVEN PROHIBITS MERELY HAVING A FUNERAL HOME ON CEMETERY GROUNDS, EVEN IF IT WERE OWNED AND MANAGED BY A WHOLLY-SEPARATE COMPANY. THE LAW DATES FROM THE 1930S, AND WAS ENACTED AT THE URGING OF THE FUNERAL HOME LOBBY, WHO WERE FACING A NEW THREAT OF PRIVATELY-OWNED CEMETERIES OPENING FUNERAL HOMES TO INCREASE THEIR ATTRACTIVENESS TO POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS. THE LAW SERVES NO PURPOSE OTHER THAN TO PROTECT FUNERAL HOMES FROM COMPETITION. MOST OTHER STATES PERMIT SUCH "COMBINATION" FIRMS, WHICH OFFER CONSUMERS MORE CHOICES AND HELP KEEP PRICES DOWN. ON BEHALF OF HIGHLAND MEMORIAL PARK AND ITS OWNER, WE HAVE SUED TO HAVE THIS IRRATIONAL LAW STRUCK DOWN.MILEWSKI V. TOWN OF DOVER:THE RIGHT OF CITIZENS TO REFUSE TO CONSENT TO A GOVERNMENTAL SEARCH OF THEIR OWN HOME IS A FUNDAMENTAL TENET OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT. A COROLLARY TO THAT TENET IS THAT THE GOVERNMENT MAY NOT PUNISH YOU FOR REFUSE TO CONSENT TO A SEARCH. YET WISCONSIN LAW PERMITS MUNICIPALITIES TO DEMAND ENTRY INTO YOUR HOME IN ORDER TO INSPECT IT FOR TAX ASSESSMENT PURPOSES. WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU REFUSE? AMAZINGLY, YOU LOSE YOUR RIGHT TO CONTEST YOUR ASSESSMENT AT THE BOARD OF REVIEW HEARING, WHICH IN TURN PROHIBITS YOU FROM CONTESTING YOUR ASSESSMENT IN COURT. IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU ASSERT YOUR FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS, YOU LOSE YOUR FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO NOT BE DEPRIVED OF PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW. NOT ONLY DID THIS HAPPEN TO A COUPLE IN THE TOWN OF DOVER IN RACINE COUNTY, BUT THE ASSESSOR INTENTIONALLY OVERASSESSED THEIR HOME, KNOWING THEY COULDN'T CHALLENGE IT. WE ARE STANDING UP FOR THE RIGHTS OF HOMEOWNERS BY CHALLENGING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THIS LAW.KITTLE V. JEFFERSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT:ALL AROUND WISCONSIN OVER THE PAST COUPLE YEARS, MANY (BUT NOT ALL) POLICE AND SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENTS HAVE STARTED REDACTING BASIC INFORMATION FROM CITATIONS AND REPORTS, THE INFORMATION PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW MOST- THE IDENTITY OF THE MISCREANT ABOUT WHOM THE REPORT OR CITATION WAS WRITTEN. WHY? BECAUSE THAT INFORMATION IS USUALLY EITHER OBTAINED FROM OR VERIFIED BY THE DOT DRIVERS' DATABASE, AND THEY THINK THEY WILL GET IN TROUBLE IF THEY SHARE THAT INFORMATION. BUT THAT POLICY IS AN OVERREACTION TO A SEVENTH CIRCUIT CASE THAT HELD A VILLAGE IN ILLINOIS HAD "DISCLOSED" IDENTIFYING INFORMATION IN VIOLATION OF THE DRIVER'S PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT, A LAW ENACTED IN THE 90'S TO PREVENT DMV'S FROM SELLING DRIVER INFORMATION AND STALKERS FROM LEARNING WHERE TARGETS LIVED THROUGH MOTOR VEHICLE RECORDS. BUT THAT CASE WAS NOT AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST CASE, AND THE COURT DID NOT CONSIDER ANY OF THE 14 EXCEPTIONS THAT PERMIT THE GOVERNMENT TO DISCLOSE SUCH INFORMATION. ONE EXCEPTION IS IN CARRYING OUT ANY DUTY IMPOSED BY LAW, AND RESPONDING TO OPEN RECORDS REQUESTS IS A DUTY IMPOSED BY LAW; THEREFORE, THE DPPA SHOULD NOT REQUIRE REDACTION OF RECORDS. ON BEHALF OF A REPORTER AT WISCONSIN REPORTER, M.D. KITTLE, WE BROUGHT A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE JEFFERSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT FOR REDACTING RECORDS AND CLAIMING THE DPPA REQUIRES IT.BLASKA V. MADISON METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:THE MADISON METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT IS ANOTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY THAT BARGAINED WITH ITS EMPLOYEES' UNIONS IN VIOLATION OF ACT 10. WHILE THAT NEGOTIATION WAS ARGUABLY PERMISSIBLE BECAUSE ITS TEACHERS' UNION OBTAINED A RULING FROM DANE COUNTY JUDGE JUAN COLAS THAT ACT 10 WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AND THE CONTRACT COULD BE ENFORCED WHILE THAT CASE REMAINED PENDING, ONCE THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT OVERRULED COLAS AND SETTLED ONCE AND FOR ALL THAT ACT 10 IS PERFECTLY CONSTITUTIONAL, THOSE CONTRACTS BECAME NULL AND VOID. YET MMSD IS CONTINUING TO ENFORCE THE CONTRACT. ON BEHALF OF DAVE BLASKA (AND ANOTHER LOCAL TAXPAYER SOON TO BE ADDED TO THE CASE), WE SUED THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ITS UNION SEEKING TO HALT ENFORCEMENT OF THE CONTRACT.CRB V. GAB:WISCONSIN LAW IMPOSES A HARD LIMIT ON THE TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT A CANDIDATE FOR STATE OFFICE MAY ACCEPT IN DONATIONS FROM POLITICAL COMMITTEES. FOR EXAMPLE, A CANDIDATE FOR THE STATE SENATE MAY ACCEPT NO MORE THAN A TOTAL OF $15,525 FROM ALL COMMITTEES AND A CANDIDATE FOR THE ASSEMBLY MAY ACCEPT NO MORE THAN A TOTAL OF $7,763. THAT MEANS THAT A CANDIDATE MAY ACCEPT CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE FIRST FEW COMMITTEES THAT WANT TO SUPPORT HER, BUT LATER CONTRIBUTIONS, NO MATTER HOW SMALL, MUST BE REFUSED. WILL FILED A LAWSUIT IN FEDERAL COURT CHALLENGING THAT LAW ON BEHALF OF CRG NETWORK, A PAC WHOSE MISSION IS TO EDUCATE CITIZENS AND PROMOTE THE ELECTION OF CANDIDATES WHO ARE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. CRG NETWORK ATTEMPTED TO MAKE SMALL DONATIONS TO THREE SUCH CANDIDATES, ONLY TO HAVE THEIR DONATIONS RETURNED (IN WHOLE OR IN PART) AS A RESULT OF THE LAW IN QUESTION. THE COURT GRANTED A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, AND THE CASE IS NOW PENDING SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFS.Desc

Prog Srvc Accom Acty2 ProgSrvcAccomActy2Grp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Expense$343,047ExpenseAmt
DescEDUCATION PROJECT:WILL'S EDUCATION PROJECT IS HEADED BY ASSOCIATE COUNSEL AND EDUCATION POLICY DIRECTOR CJ SZAFIR. THROUGH LITIGATION, LEGAL ADVICE, POLICY REPORTS, AND PUBLIC ADVOCACY, THE PROGRAM SEEKS TO PROMOTE SCHOOL CHOICE, HIGH QUALITY SCHOOLS, AND THE DISRUPTION OF THE EDUCATIONAL STATUS QUO. OUR RESEARCH REPORTS ON PARENTAL CHOICE AND K-12 EDUCATION HAVE BEEN CITED EXTENSIVELY IN WISCONSIN AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY. OUR EDUCATION LITIGATION INCLUDES SUITS AGAINST THE KENOSHA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AND MADISON SCHOOL DISTRICT OVER ILLEGAL COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, AGAINST THE STATE OF WISCONSIN ALLEGING THAT ITS OPEN ENROLLMENT PROGRAM VIOLATES FEDERAL DISABILITY LAW, AND AGAINST THE MILWAUKEE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOR WITHHOLDING PUBLIC RECORDS. WE ALSO PROVIDE FREE, PRO BONO LEGAL ADVICE TO PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND CHARTER SCHOOLS, AND ADVOCACY GROUPS SUCH AS SCHOOL CHOICE WISCONSIN.NEW CASES INCLUDE:OPEN ENROLLMENT:WISCONSIN HAS A STATE LAW THAT PERMITS STUDENTS TO OPEN ENROLL OUT OF THEIR "RESIDENT" SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ATTEND ANOTHER PUBLIC SCHOOL. OUR INVESTIGATIONS HAVE DISCOVERED THAT SPECIAL NEEDS STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES SUFFER SEVERE DISCRIMINATION IN THIS PROGRAM ON BOTH ENDS. FIRST, THE NON-RESIDENT DISTRICT CAN CREATE A "TWO-TRACK" SYSTEM WHERE THEY AGREE TO TAKE "REGULAR" STUDENTS THROUGH OPEN ENROLLMENT BUT REFUSE TO TAKE ANY STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES. THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT DOES NOT PERMIT THIS SORT OF DISCRIMINATION, AND WILL HAS FILED A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF SEVERAL FAMILIES WHOSE CHILDREN WERE DENIED OPEN ENROLLMENT BECAUSE THEY ARE DISABLED. SECOND, THE RESIDENT DISTRICT IS PERMITTED TO DENY THE OPEN ENROLLMENT IF ANY ADDITIONAL COST OF EDUCATION FOR THAT CHILD (WHICH IS PAID BY THE RESIDENT DISTRICT) WOULD CREATE AN "UNDUE FINANCIAL BURDEN" ON THE DISTRICT. DISTRICTS SUCH AS MADISON METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT HAVE HISTORICALLY ABUSED THAT PROVISION BY DENYING OPEN ENROLLMENT IF IT WOULD CREATE ANY INCREASE IN COSTS, AND THE DPI HAS BEEN COMPLICIT IN ALLOWING THIS DISCRIMINATION TO OCCUR. WILL SUBMITTED AN OPEN LETTER TO STATE SUPERINTENDENT EVERS RAISING OUR CONCERNS ON THIS ISSUE. WILL IS CONSIDERING FILING A COMPLAINT OR A LAWSUIT ALLEGING THAT THESE DISTRICTS AND THE DPI ARE VIOLATING STATE STATUTES AND THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, BUT NEEDS TO FIND A PLAINTIFF WITH A CLEAR FACT PATTERN, WHICH IS DIFFICULT.PENDING CASES INCLUDE:KRUEGER V. APPLETON AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT A GROUP OF APPLETON PARENTS SOUGHT TO CREATE AN ALTERNATIVE READING LIST FOR 9TH GRADE ENGLISH, INCLUDING ONLY BOOKS AT THE 9TH GRADE LEVEL WITH NO OBSCENITIES OR SEXUALIZED CONTENT. THE ULTIMATE SELECTION OF THE BOOKS IS THE STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITY OF THE BOARD, BUT IN THIS CASE IT WAS DELEGATED TO A COMMITTEE OF TEACHERS AND STAFF. THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS WERE NOT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND THE INTERESTED PARENTS WERE NOT ALLOWED TO ATTEND THE MEETINGS. WE FILED A LAWSUIT ALLEGING THAT THE LAW REQUIRES SUCH COMMITTEES TO FOLLOW THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW. THIS CASE HAS A REASONABLE CHANCE OF MAKING IT TO THE SUPREME COURT BECAUSE NO EXISTING CASES ADDRESS THIS FACT PATTERN, WHICH IS REPEATED AROUND THE STATE ON A REGULAR BASIS AS SCHOOL DISTRICTS UPDATE CURRICULA AND READING LISTS. THE COURT RULED THAT AASD HAD NOT VIOLATED THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW, CONCLUDING ERRONEOUSLY THAT THE COMMITTEE WAS A "TEACHER WORK GROUP" AND NOT A BODY CREATED BY RULE OR ORDER. WE HAVE APPEALED THE CASE AND BRIEFING WILL BEGIN SOON.RESOLVED CASES INCLUDE:WILL V. MPS: THE MILWAUKEE PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT IS NOTORIOUSLY BAD AT RESPONDING TO OPEN RECORDS REQUEST. THE DISTRICT, WHICH HAS A $1,000,000,00+ BUDGET AND IS THE SECOND-LARGEST GOVERNMENT ENTITY IN THE STATE AFTER THE STATE ITSELF, HAS ONLY ONE PERSON HANDLING RECORD REQUESTS ON A PART-TIME BASIS. WHEN MPS WAS UNREASONABLY DELAYING A REQUEST WE HAD MADE FOR RECORDS SURROUNDING THE SHADY DEAL TO TURN THE FORMER MALCOLM X ACADEMY OVER TO A PRIVATE DEVELOPER, WE SUED THEM, AND THEY TURNED OVER THE RECORDS BEFORE EVEN BEING SERVED WITH THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT.Desc
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total Program Service Expenses$637,773TotalProgramServiceExpensesAmt
Described In Section501c3Yes (1)DescribedInSection501c3Ind
Schedule B RequiredYes (1)ScheduleBRequiredInd
Political Campaign Acty0PoliticalCampaignActyInd
Lobbying Activities0LobbyingActivitiesInd
Subject To Proxy Tax0SubjectToProxyTaxInd
Donor Advised Fund0DonorAdvisedFundInd
Conservation Easements0ConservationEasementsInd
Collections Of Art0CollectionsOfArtInd
Credit Counseling0CreditCounselingInd
Temp Or Permanent Endowments0TempOrPermanentEndowmentsInd
Report Land Building EquipmentYes (1)ReportLandBuildingEquipmentInd
Report Investments Other Sec0ReportInvestmentsOtherSecInd
Report Program Related Invst0ReportProgramRelatedInvstInd
Report Other Assets0ReportOtherAssetsInd
Report Other Liabilities0ReportOtherLiabilitiesInd
Include FIN48 FootnoteYes (1)IncludeFIN48FootnoteInd
Independent Audit Fincl StmtYes (1)IndependentAuditFinclStmtInd
Consolidated Audit Fincl Stmt0ConsolidatedAuditFinclStmtInd
School Operating0SchoolOperatingInd
Foreign Office0ForeignOfficeInd
Foreign Activities0ForeignActivitiesInd
More Than5000 K To Org0MoreThan5000KToOrgInd
More Than5000 K To Individuals0MoreThan5000KToIndividualsInd
Professional Fundraising0ProfessionalFundraisingInd
Fundraising Activities0FundraisingActivitiesInd
Gaming Activities0GamingActivitiesInd
Operate Hospital0OperateHospitalInd
Grants To Organizations0GrantsToOrganizationsInd
Grants To Individuals0GrantsToIndividualsInd
Schedule J RequiredYes (1)ScheduleJRequiredInd
Tax Exempt Bonds0TaxExemptBondsInd
Engaged In Excess Benefit Trans0EngagedInExcessBenefitTransInd
PY Excess Benefit Trans0PYExcessBenefitTransInd
Loan Outstanding0LoanOutstandingInd
Grant To Related Person0GrantToRelatedPersonInd
Business Rln With Org Mem0BusinessRlnWithOrgMemInd
Business Rln With Fam Mem0BusinessRlnWithFamMemInd
Business Rln With Officer Ent0BusinessRlnWithOfficerEntInd
Deductible Non Cash Contri0DeductibleNonCashContriInd
Deductible Art Contribution0DeductibleArtContributionInd
Terminate Operations0TerminateOperationsInd
Partial Liquidation0PartialLiquidationInd
Disregarded Entity0DisregardedEntityInd
Related Entity0RelatedEntityInd
Related Organization Ctrl Ent0RelatedOrganizationCtrlEntInd
Trnsfr Exmpt Non Chrtbl Rltd Org0TrnsfrExmptNonChrtblRltdOrgInd
Activities Conducted Prtshp0ActivitiesConductedPrtshpInd
Schedule O RequiredYes (1)ScheduleORequiredInd
IRP Document0IRPDocumentCnt
IRP Document W2 G0IRPDocumentW2GCnt
Employee7EmployeeCnt
Employment Tax Returns FiledYes (1)EmploymentTaxReturnsFiledInd
Unrelated Bus Incm Over Limit0UnrelatedBusIncmOverLimitInd
Foreign Financial Account0ForeignFinancialAccountInd
Prohibited Tax Shelter Trans0ProhibitedTaxShelterTransInd
Taxable Party Notification0TaxablePartyNotificationInd
Nondeductible Contributions0NondeductibleContributionsInd
Quid Pro Quo Contributions0QuidProQuoContributionsInd
Form8282 Property Disposed Of0Form8282PropertyDisposedOfInd
Rcv Fnds To Pay Prsnl Bnft Cntrct0RcvFndsToPayPrsnlBnftCntrctInd
Pay Premiums Prsnl Bnft Cntrct0PayPremiumsPrsnlBnftCntrctInd
Indoor Tanning Services0IndoorTanningServicesInd
Info In Schedule O Part VIYes (X)InfoInScheduleOPartVIInd
Governing Body Voting Members4GoverningBodyVotingMembersCnt
Independent Voting Member3IndependentVotingMemberCnt
Family Or Business Rln0FamilyOrBusinessRlnInd
Delegation Of Mgmt Duties0DelegationOfMgmtDutiesInd
Change To Org Documents0ChangeToOrgDocumentsInd
Material Diversion Or Misuse0MaterialDiversionOrMisuseInd
Members Or Stockholders0MembersOrStockholdersInd
Election Of Board Members0ElectionOfBoardMembersInd
Decisions Subject To Approva0DecisionsSubjectToApprovaInd
Minutes Of Governing BodyYes (1)MinutesOfGoverningBodyInd
Minutes Of CommitteesYes (1)MinutesOfCommitteesInd
Officer Mailing Address0OfficerMailingAddressInd
Local Chapters0LocalChaptersInd
Form990 Provided To Gvrn BodyYes (1)Form990ProvidedToGvrnBodyInd
Conflict Of Interest PolicyYes (1)ConflictOfInterestPolicyInd
Annual Disclosure Covered PrsnYes (1)AnnualDisclosureCoveredPrsnInd
Regular Monitoring EnfrcYes (1)RegularMonitoringEnfrcInd
Whistleblower PolicyYes (1)WhistleblowerPolicyInd
Document Retention PolicyYes (1)DocumentRetentionPolicyInd
Compensation Process CEOYes (1)CompensationProcessCEOInd
Compensation Process OtherYes (1)CompensationProcessOtherInd
Investment In Joint Venture0InvestmentInJointVentureInd
States Where Copy Of Return Is FldWIStatesWhereCopyOfReturnIsFldCd
Own WebsiteYes (X)OwnWebsiteInd
Upon RequestYes (X)UponRequestInd

Books In Care Of Detail BooksInCareOfDetail

Business Name BusinessName

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Business Name Line1WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW & LIBERTY INCBusinessNameLine1Txt
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Phone4147279455PhoneNum

US Address USAddress

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Address Line11139 E KNAPP STREETAddressLine1Txt
CityMILWAUKEECityNm
State AbbreviationWIStateAbbreviationCd
ZIP532022828ZIPCd

Form990 Part VII Section A Form990PartVIISectionAGrp (5 entries)

TitleTitleTxtAverage Hours Per WeekAverageHoursPerWeekRtIndividual Trustee Or DirectorIndividualTrusteeOrDirectorIndOfficerOfficerIndHighest Compensated EmployeeHighestCompensatedEmployeeIndReportable Comp From OrgReportableCompFromOrgAmtReportable Comp From Rltd OrgReportableCompFromRltdOrgAmtOther CompensationOtherCompensationAmt
RICHARD M ESENBERG
PRESIDENT AND TREASURER40.00Yes (X)Yes (X)Yes (X)$208,500$0$47,682
JAMES T BARRY III
DIRECTOR1.00Yes (X)$0$0$0
MICHAEL H WHITE
DIRECTOR1.00Yes (X)$0$0$0
CHRISTOPHER WOLFE
DIRECTOR1.00Yes (X)$0$0$0
STACY A STUECK
SECRETARY40.00Yes (X)$68,750$0$20,771
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total Reportable Comp From Org$277,250TotalReportableCompFromOrgAmt
Tot Reportable Comp Rltd Org$0TotReportableCompRltdOrgAmt
Total Other Compensation$68,453TotalOtherCompensationAmt
Indiv Rcvd Greater Than100 K1IndivRcvdGreaterThan100KCnt
Former Ofcr Employees Listed0FormerOfcrEmployeesListedInd
Total Comp Greater Than150 KYes (1)TotalCompGreaterThan150KInd
Compensation From Other Srcs0CompensationFromOtherSrcsInd
Cntrct Rcvd Greater Than100 K0CntrctRcvdGreaterThan100KCnt
All Other Contributions$1,462,199AllOtherContributionsAmt
Total Contributions$1,462,199TotalContributionsAmt

Program Service Revenue ProgramServiceRevenueGrp (2 entries)

DescDescBusinessBusinessCdTotal Revenue ColumnTotalRevenueColumnAmtRelated Or Exempt Func IncomeRelatedOrExemptFuncIncomeAmt
STATUTORY FEES541100$143,392$143,392
REIMBURSED CASE COST541100$5,697$5,697
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total Program Service Revenue$149,089TotalProgramServiceRevenueAmt

Investment Income InvestmentIncomeGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total Revenue Column$410TotalRevenueColumnAmt
Exclusion$410ExclusionAmt

Total Revenue TotalRevenueGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total Revenue Column$1,611,698TotalRevenueColumnAmt
Related Or Exempt Func Income$149,089RelatedOrExemptFuncIncomeAmt
Unrelated Business Revenue$0UnrelatedBusinessRevenueAmt
Exclusion$410ExclusionAmt

Comp Current Ofcr Directors CompCurrentOfcrDirectorsGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$345,703TotalAmt
Program Services$227,945ProgramServicesAmt
Management And General$92,140ManagementAndGeneralAmt
Fundraising$25,618FundraisingAmt

Other Salaries And Wages OtherSalariesAndWagesGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$237,259TotalAmt
Program Services$237,259ProgramServicesAmt

Pension Plan Contributions PensionPlanContributionsGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$23,715TotalAmt
Program Services$23,715ProgramServicesAmt

Other Employee Benefits OtherEmployeeBenefitsGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$54,145TotalAmt
Program Services$54,145ProgramServicesAmt

Payroll Taxes PayrollTaxesGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$37,107TotalAmt
Program Services$30,979ProgramServicesAmt
Management And General$5,060ManagementAndGeneralAmt
Fundraising$1,068FundraisingAmt

Fees For Services Accounting FeesForServicesAccountingGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$7,115TotalAmt
Management And General$7,115ManagementAndGeneralAmt

Fees For Services Prof Fundraising FeesForServicesProfFundraising

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$3,798TotalAmt
Fundraising$3,798FundraisingAmt

Fees For Services Other FeesForServicesOtherGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$960TotalAmt
Management And General$960ManagementAndGeneralAmt

Advertising AdvertisingGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$833TotalAmt
Management And General$833ManagementAndGeneralAmt

Office Expenses OfficeExpensesGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$1,332TotalAmt
Management And General$1,332ManagementAndGeneralAmt

Information Technology InformationTechnologyGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$4,159TotalAmt
Management And General$4,159ManagementAndGeneralAmt

Occupancy OccupancyGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$27,092TotalAmt
Program Services$24,213ProgramServicesAmt
Management And General$2,540ManagementAndGeneralAmt
Fundraising$339FundraisingAmt

Travel TravelGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$12,114TotalAmt
Program Services$10,123ProgramServicesAmt
Fundraising$1,991FundraisingAmt

Conferences Meetings ConferencesMeetingsGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$691TotalAmt
Program Services$691ProgramServicesAmt

Depreciation Depletion DepreciationDepletionGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$4,347TotalAmt
Program Services$3,939ProgramServicesAmt
Management And General$408ManagementAndGeneralAmt

Insurance InsuranceGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$7,053TotalAmt
Program Services$4,719ProgramServicesAmt
Management And General$2,334ManagementAndGeneralAmt

Other Expenses OtherExpensesGrp (4 entries)

DescDescTotalTotalAmtProgram ServicesProgramServicesAmt
CASE COSTS$6,902$6,902
SUBSCRIPTIONS AND REFER$6,368$6,368
MEMBERSHIP AND DUES$2,620$2,620
CLIENT DEVELOPMENT$2,050$2,050

All Other Expenses AllOtherExpensesGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$6,345TotalAmt
Program Services$2,105ProgramServicesAmt
Management And General$2,520ManagementAndGeneralAmt
Fundraising$1,720FundraisingAmt

Total Functional Expenses TotalFunctionalExpensesGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total$791,708TotalAmt
Program Services$637,773ProgramServicesAmt
Management And General$119,401ManagementAndGeneralAmt
Fundraising$34,534FundraisingAmt

Savings And Temp Cash Invst SavingsAndTempCashInvstGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$521,696BOYAmt
EOY$1,309,153EOYAmt

Pledges And Grants Receivable PledgesAndGrantsReceivableGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$101,462BOYAmt
EOY$152,000EOYAmt

Accounts Receivable AccountsReceivableGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$10,770BOYAmt
EOY$750EOYAmt

Prepaid Expenses Defrd Charges PrepaidExpensesDefrdChargesGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$14,659BOYAmt
EOY$9,971EOYAmt
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Land Bldg Equip Cost Or Other Bss$22,785LandBldgEquipCostOrOtherBssAmt
Land Bldg Equip Accum Deprec$14,136LandBldgEquipAccumDeprecAmt

Land Bldg Equip Basis Net LandBldgEquipBasisNetGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$11,946BOYAmt
EOY$8,649EOYAmt

Total Assets TotalAssetsGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$660,533BOYAmt
EOY$1,480,523EOYAmt

Total Liabilities TotalLiabilitiesGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$0BOYAmt
EOY$0EOYAmt
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Organization Follows SFAS117Yes (X)OrganizationFollowsSFAS117Ind

Unrestricted Net Assets UnrestrictedNetAssetsGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$459,908BOYAmt
EOY$1,055,444EOYAmt

Temporarily Rstr Net Assets TemporarilyRstrNetAssetsGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$200,625BOYAmt
EOY$425,079EOYAmt

Total Net Assets Fund Balance TotalNetAssetsFundBalanceGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$660,533BOYAmt
EOY$1,480,523EOYAmt

Tot Liab Net Assets Fund Balance TotLiabNetAssetsFundBalanceGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
BOY$660,533BOYAmt
EOY$1,480,523EOYAmt
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Reconcilation Revenue Expnss$819,990ReconcilationRevenueExpnssAmt
Other Changes In Net Assets$0OtherChangesInNetAssetsAmt
Method Of Accounting AccrualYes (X)MethodOfAccountingAccrualInd
Accountant Compile Or Review0AccountantCompileOrReviewInd
FS AuditedYes (1)FSAuditedInd

FS Audited Basis FSAuditedBasisGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Separate Basis Fincl StmtYes (X)SeparateBasisFinclStmtInd
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Audit Committee0AuditCommitteeInd
Federal Grant Audit Required0FederalGrantAuditRequiredInd

Schedule A IRS990ScheduleA

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Public Organization170Yes (X)PublicOrganization170Ind

Gifts Grants Contri Rcvd170 GiftsGrantsContriRcvd170Grp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Current Tax Year Minus3 Years$505,000CurrentTaxYearMinus3YearsAmt
Current Tax Year Minus2 Years$653,128CurrentTaxYearMinus2YearsAmt
Current Tax Year Minus1 Year$906,928CurrentTaxYearMinus1YearAmt
Current Tax Year$1,457,199CurrentTaxYearAmt
Total$3,522,255TotalAmt

Total Calendar Year170 TotalCalendarYear170Grp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Current Tax Year Minus3 Years$505,000CurrentTaxYearMinus3YearsAmt
Current Tax Year Minus2 Years$653,128CurrentTaxYearMinus2YearsAmt
Current Tax Year Minus1 Year$906,928CurrentTaxYearMinus1YearAmt
Current Tax Year$1,457,199CurrentTaxYearAmt
Total$3,522,255TotalAmt
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Substantial Contributors Tot$2,812,622SubstantialContributorsTotAmt
Public Support Total170$709,633PublicSupportTotal170Amt

Gross Investment Income170 GrossInvestmentIncome170Grp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Current Tax Year Minus3 Years$364CurrentTaxYearMinus3YearsAmt
Current Tax Year Minus2 Years$247CurrentTaxYearMinus2YearsAmt
Current Tax Year Minus1 Year$204CurrentTaxYearMinus1YearAmt
Current Tax Year$410CurrentTaxYearAmt
Total$1,225TotalAmt
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total Support$3,523,480TotalSupportAmt
Gross Receipts Rltd Activities$191,197GrossReceiptsRltdActivitiesAmt
First5 Years170Yes (X)First5Years170Ind

Schedule B IRS990ScheduleB

Contributor Information ContributorInformationGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
ContributorRESTRICTEDContributorNum

Contributor Business Name ContributorBusinessName

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Business Name Line1RESTRICTEDBusinessNameLine1

Contributor US Address ContributorUSAddress

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Address Line1RESTRICTEDAddressLine1
Address Line2RESTRICTEDAddressLine2
CityRESTRICTEDCity
StateRESTRICTEDState
ZIP CodeRESTRICTEDZIPCode
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total ContributionsRESTRICTEDTotalContributionsAmt

Schedule D IRS990ScheduleD

Equipment EquipmentGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Other Cost Or Other Basis$22,785OtherCostOrOtherBasisAmt
Depreciation$14,136DepreciationAmt
Book Value$8,649BookValueAmt
FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Total Book Value Land Buildings$8,649TotalBookValueLandBuildingsAmt
Footnote TextYes (X)FootnoteTextInd
Total Rev Etc Audited Fincl Stmt$1,611,698TotalRevEtcAuditedFinclStmtAmt
Revenue Not Reported$0RevenueNotReportedAmt
Revenue Subtotal$1,611,698RevenueSubtotalAmt
Revenue Not Reported Fincl Stmt$0RevenueNotReportedFinclStmtAmt
Total Revenue Per Form990$1,611,698TotalRevenuePerForm990Amt
Tot Expns Etc Audited Fincl Stmt$791,708TotExpnsEtcAuditedFinclStmtAmt
Expenses Not Reported$0ExpensesNotReportedAmt
Expenses Subtotal$791,708ExpensesSubtotalAmt
Expenses Not Rpt Fincl Stmt$0ExpensesNotRptFinclStmtAmt
Total Expenses Per Form990$791,708TotalExpensesPerForm990Amt

Supplemental Information Detail SupplementalInformationDetail

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Form And Line ReferencePART X, LINE 2:FormAndLineReferenceDesc
ExplanationWISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW & LIBERTY DID NOT HAVE UNRECOGNIZED TAX BENEFITS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013 AND DOES NOT EXPECT THIS TO CHANGE SIGNIFICANTLY OVER THE NEXT 12 MONTHS. THE ORGANIZATION WOULD RECOGNIZE ANY INTEREST AND PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ORGANIZATION'S TAX POSITIONS AS A COMPONENT OF UNRELATED BUSINESS INCOME TAX EXPENSE ON THE STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES. AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2014 AND 2013, THE ORGANIZATION HAS NOT ACCRUED INTEREST OR PENALTIES RELATED TO UNCERTAIN TAX POSITIONS.ExplanationTxt

Schedule J IRS990ScheduleJ

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
Board Or Committee ApprovalYes (X)BoardOrCommitteeApprovalInd
Severance Payment0SeverancePaymentInd
Supplemental Nonqual Rtr Plan0SupplementalNonqualRtrPlanInd
Equity Based Comp Arrngm0EquityBasedCompArrngmInd
Comp Based On Revenue Of Flng Org0CompBasedOnRevenueOfFlngOrgInd
Comp Bsd On Rev Related Orgs0CompBsdOnRevRelatedOrgsInd
Comp Bsd Net Earns Flng Org0CompBsdNetEarnsFlngOrgInd
Comp Bsd Net Earns Rltd Orgs0CompBsdNetEarnsRltdOrgsInd
Any Non Fixed Payments0AnyNonFixedPaymentsInd
Initial Contract Exception0InitialContractExceptionInd

Rltd Org Officer Trst Key Empl RltdOrgOfficerTrstKeyEmplGrp

FieldValueIRS element (for citing)
PersonRICHARD M ESENBERGPersonNm
TitlePRESIDENT AND TREASURERTitleTxt
Base Compensation Filing Org$208,500BaseCompensationFilingOrgAmt
Compensation Based On Rltd Orgs$0CompensationBasedOnRltdOrgsAmt
Bonus Filing Organization$0BonusFilingOrganizationAmount
Bonus Related Organizations$0BonusRelatedOrganizationsAmt
Other Compensation Filing Org$0OtherCompensationFilingOrgAmt
Other Compensation Rltd Orgs$0OtherCompensationRltdOrgsAmt
Deferred Compensation Flng Org$20,850DeferredCompensationFlngOrgAmt
Deferred Comp Rltd Orgs$0DeferredCompRltdOrgsAmt
Nontaxable Benefits Filing Org$26,832NontaxableBenefitsFilingOrgAmt
Nontaxable Benefits Rltd Orgs$0NontaxableBenefitsRltdOrgsAmt
Total Compensation Filing Org$256,182TotalCompensationFilingOrgAmt
Total Compensation Rltd Orgs$0TotalCompensationRltdOrgsAmt
Comp Report Prior990 Filing Org$0CompReportPrior990FilingOrgAmt
Comp Report Prior990 Rltd Orgs$0CompReportPrior990RltdOrgsAmt

Schedule O IRS990ScheduleO

Supplemental Information Detail SupplementalInformationDetail (7 entries)

Form And Line ReferenceFormAndLineReferenceDescExplanationExplanationTxt
FORM 990, PAGE 2, LINE 4A, DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM SERVICE:PENDING CASES INCLUDE: JOHNSON V. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT: FEES EARNED IN 2014: $67,996 FEES COLLECTED IN 2014: $78,030, OF THIS AMOUNT $10,770 WAS EARNED IN 2013 THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT ("ACA") WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT WOULD REQUIRE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND THEIR STAFFS TO PURCHASE INSURANCE FROM THE "EXCHANGES" ESTABLISHED UNDER THE ACA. FURTHERMORE, THEY WERE NOT TO RECEIVE AN EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION FROM THE GOVERNMENT. HOWEVER, PRESIDENT OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION CHANGED THE RULES IN AN ILLEGAL MATTER. THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT REWROTE THE RULES SO THAT MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND THEIR STAFFS COULD RECEIVE AN EMPLOYER SUBSIDY FOR PURCHASING INSURANCE ON THE EXCHANGE AND FURTHERMORE REQUIRED THEM TO PURCHASE INSURANCE THROUGH THE D.C. "SHOP" EXCHANGE, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE EXCLUSIVELY FOR SMALL EMPLOYERS. ORDINARY CITIZENS CANNOT RECEIVE TAX-FREE SUBSIDIES FROM THEIR EMPLOYERS TO PURCHASE INSURANCE ON EXCHANGES. IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THE ACA IS IMPLEMENTED THE WAY CONGRESS WROTE IT, AND TO FIGHT BACK AGAINST THE PRESIDENT'S UNLAWFUL USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWER, SENATOR RON JOHNSON (R-WI) FILED A FEDERAL LAWSUIT WITH LEGAL ASSISTANCE FROM WILL AND FORMER U.S. SOLICITOR GENERAL PAUL CLEMENT. THE DISTRICT COURT IN GREEN BAY DISMISSED THE CASE, CONCLUDING THAT THE SENATOR LACKED STANDING TO CHALLENGE THE OPM RULES BECAUSE HE ALLEGEDLY "BENEFITED" FROM THEM. WE APPEALED THAT DETERMINATION TO THE 7TH CIRCUIT AND ARE AWAITING A RULING. MARONE V. MATC: THE MILWAUKEE AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE WAS ONE OF A FEW LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYERS TO TRY AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE SO CALLED "WINDOW" OF OPPORTUNITY TO AVOID ACT 10 SUPPOSEDLY CREATED BY DANE COUNTY JUDGE JUAN COLAS'S RULING IN MADISON TEACHERS FINDING PORTIONS OF ACT 10 UNCONSTITUTIONAL. IN FEBRUARY, 2013, MATC REACHED A LABOR AGREEMENT WITH ITS EMPLOYEES' UNIONS CONTAINING NUMEROUS PROVISIONS IN VIOLATION OF ACT 10. ON BEHALF OF AN MATC PROFESSOR, WILL SUED MATC, SEEKING TO HAVE THE CONTRACT DECLARED NULL AND VOID. THE CASE IS CURRENTLY IN BRIEFING. AFTER THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT DECLARED ACT 10 CONSTITUTIONAL, WE EXPECTED MATC AND ITS UNION WOULD QUICKLY CONCEDE. HOWEVER, THEY HAVE CONTINUED FIGHTING, RAISING REPEATED ARGUMENTS THAT THE CASE IS MOOT BECAUSE THE PERIOD COVERED BY THE CONTRACT HAS ALREADY EXPIRED (THANKS TO THEIR OWN DELAYS) AND THAT THERE NEVER WAS A CONTRACT IN THE FIRST PLACE (WHICH IS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEY ARGUED EARLY IN THE LITIGATION). WE ARE FIGHTING AS BEST WE CAN TO REACH THE RESULT WE DESERVE - A DECLARATION FROM THE COURT THAT MATC AND THE UNION VIOLATED ACT 10 BY BARGAINING OVER PROHIBITED TOPICS. LACROIX V. KENOSHA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: FEES SOUGHT AND RECOVERED: $10,500 WHILE THE MADISON TEACHERS CASE WAS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT, JUDGE COLAS HELD THE WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION IN CONTEMPT AND ORDERED THEM NOT TO ENFORCE ACT 10 AGAINST ANY OTHER MUNICIPAL EMPLOYERS OR UNIONS. SEEKING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE CONFUSION CAUSED BY THE CONTEMPT ORDER (WHICH WAS LATER THROWN OUT), THE KENOSHA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION ENTERED INTO HURRIED NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE KENOSHA SCHOOL DISTRICT (THE THIRD LARGEST DISTRICT IN THE STATE), CREATING A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT THAT IGNORES ACT 10'S REQUIREMENTS. ON BEHALF OF A KENOSHA TAXPAYER AND A KENOSHA TEACHER, WE FILED A LAWSUIT SEEKING TO DECLARE THAT CONTRACT VOID. ALTHOUGH THE JUDGE DENIED OUR REQUEST FOR A TEMPORARY INJUNCTION, HE ALSO DENIED THE DISTRICT'S AND UNION'S MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND RULED THAT DESPITE JUDGE COLAS'S RULING IN MADISON TEACHERS, ACT 10 APPLIED TO KENOSHA. IN JUNE 2014, THE DISTRICT CAPITULATED, AGREEING TO A STIPULATED JUDGMENT DECLARING THE CONTRACTS VOID, AND LEAVING ONLY THE UNIONS DEFENDING THEM. AFTER THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT DECLARED ACT 10 CONSTITUTIONAL, WE FILED A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ASKING THE COURT TO DECLARE THE CONTRACTS VOID. THAT MOTION HAS BEEN PENDING FOR OVER FOURTH MONTHS. COYNE V. WALKER: 2011 WISCONSIN ACT 21 CHANGED THE LAW RELATING TO STATE AGENCY RULEMAKING IN VARIOUS WAYS THAT LIMIT THE POWER OF STATE AGENCIES TO REGULATE WISCONSIN CITIZENS, INCLUDING THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION. RELEVANT TO THIS LAWSUIT, IT ALLOWS THE GOVERNOR TO VETO PROPOSED RULES FROM GOVERNMENT AGENCIES. LAST OCTOBER, THE DANE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HELD THAT ACT 21, AS APPLIED TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, VIOLATED THE WISCONSIN CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE X, SECTION 1, WHICH GRANTS THE SUPERINTENDENT THE DUTY OF SUPERVISION OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION. ON BEHALF OF FORMER SPEAKER OF THE ASSEMBLY SCOTT JENSEN AND STATE REPRESENTATIVE JASON FIELDS, WILL FILED AN AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ACT 21, ARGUING THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT DOES NOT HAVE INHERENT RULEMAKING AUTHORITY. AFTER A LENGTHY DELAY, THE COURT OF APPEALS UPHELD THE DANE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT DECISION, AND WE EXPECT THE CASE TO BE PETITIONED TO THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT, WHERE WE WILL ALSO LIKELY FILE AN AMICUS BRIEF. HEALY PETITION BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WISCONSIN: BRETT HEALY, PRESIDENT OF THE JOHN K. MACIVER INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY, AND DOZENS OF OTHER WE ENERGIES CUSTOMERS FILED THIS PETITION URGING THE PSC TO DECLARE THAT THE CITY OF MILWAUKEE MUST BEAR THE SUBSTANTIAL COSTS OF UTILITY RELOCATION FOR ITS TROLLEY PROJECT, INSTEAD OF THE UTILITIES AND THEIR RATEPAYERS. AFTER NUMEROUS ROUNDS OF SPARRING BEFORE THE PSC, THE WISCONSIN LEGISLATURE PASSED A LAW BANNING MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS THE STATE FROM REQUIRING UTILITY COMPANIES TO PAY RELOCATION COSTS FOR URBAN RAIL PROJECTS SUCH AS THE TROLLEY. SHORTLY AFTER THAT LAW WAS PASSED, THE PSC RULED IN OUR FAVOR. THE CITY HAS APPEALED THAT DECISION TO THE MILWAUKEE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, WHERE WE HAVE JOINED AND ARE AWAITING A BRIEFING SCHEDULE. RESOLVED CASES INCLUDE: NAACP V. WALKER; LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS V. WALKER; FRANK V. WALKER; LULAC V. DEININGER: THESE CASES ARE CHALLENGES TO WISCONSIN'S NEW VOTER ID LAW. THE FIRST TWO CASES WERE STATE CASES THAT INITIALLY RESULTED IN PERMANENT INJUNCTIONS AGAINST THE LAW FROM DANE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES. ON BEHALF OF A DIVERSE GROUP OF CONCERNED CITIZENS WHO SUPPORT VOTER ID, WILL FILED AMICI BRIEFS SUPPORTING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REQUEST TO HAVE THE SUPREME COURT TAKE THE CASE UP IMMEDIATELY, BUT THE SUPREME COURT DECLINED. WILL HAS ALSO FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF ON THE MERITS OF THE ISSUE. BOTH CASES WERE EVENTUALLY REVERSED BY THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT. HOWEVER, THOSE DECISIONS HAD LITTLE PRACTICAL EFFECT, AS A FEDERAL INJUNCTION AGAINST THE LAW REMAINS PENDING IN THE OTHER CASES. THE SECOND TWO CASES ARE FEDERAL CHALLENGES IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. ONE ARGUES THAT VOTER ID VIOLATES SECTION 2 OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT BECAUSE IT HAS A DISPROPORTIONATE EFFECT ON MINORITIES. THE OTHER ARGUES THAT IT VIOLATES THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE AND CONSTITUTES AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL POLL TAX. A LENGTHY JOINT TRIAL WAS HELD IN BOTH CASES IN NOVEMBER, AND WILL PROVIDED REPRESENTATION FOR CRUCIAL WITNESSES. THE TRIAL COURT STRUCK DOWN VOTER ID, ENJOINING ITS IMPLEMENTATION. THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT QUICKLY REVERSED AND LIFTED THE INJUNCTION, BUT DUE TO THE LOOMING FALL ELECTION, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ACTUALLY TOOK THE UNUSUAL STEP OF REINSTATING THE INJUNCTION. HOWEVER, THE COURT DECLINED TO HEAR THE CASE, LIFTING THE INJUNCTION AND PERMITTING VOTER ID TO BE IMPLEMENTED. WHILE THE DECISION CAME TOO LATE TO PERMIT VOTER ID IN THE SPRING 2015 ELECTION, VOTER ID WILL BE THE LAW OF THE LAND EVERY ELECTION THEREAFTER. MACIVER V. ERPENBACH: FEES SOUGHT AND RECOVERED: $58,265 STATE SENATOR JON ERPENBACH REFUSED TO DISCLOSE THE EMAIL ADDRESSES OF GOVERNMENT WORKERS WHO EMAILED HIM ABOUT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. WILL FILED AN OPEN RECORDS LAWSUIT CHALLENGING THAT REFUSAL. JUDGE VANDEHEY IN GRANT COUNTY RULED THAT ERPENBACH WAS CORRECT IN WITHHOLDING THE RECORDS, BUT THE COURT OF APPEALS REVERSED IT IN A STRONGLY-WORDED OPINION UPHOLDING THE RIGHT OF THE PUBLIC TO LEARN THE IDENTITIES OF ANYONE WHO TRIES TO INFLUENCE A LEGISLATOR. MADISON TEACHERS, INC. V. WALKER: IN MADISON TEACHERS, ALTHOUGH THE DANE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT INITIALLY RULED ACT 10 UNCONSTITUTIONAL (CREATING MUCH CONFUSION AND A MISTAKEN BELIEF IN SOME OTHER LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT THAT THEY COULD NEGOTIATE FREELY WITH UNIONS), THE WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT REVERSED, UPHOLDING EVERY PORTION OF ACT 10.
FORM 990, PAGE 2, LINE 4A, DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM SERVICE:MCCUTCHEON V. FEC; YOUNG V. GAB: YOUNG V. GAB FEES SOUGHT AND RECOVERED: $5,312 THESE TWO CASES CHALLENGED AGGREGATE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS AT THE FEDERAL AND STATE LEVEL. AGGREGATE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS PREVENT CITIZENS FROM SUPPORTING CANDIDATES FOR PUBLIC OFFICE IN MULTIPLE RACES BEYOND A CERTAIN POINT. THE LIMITS WERE SO LOW IN WISCONSIN THAT A SINGLE MAXIMUM CONTRIBUTION TO ONE CANDIDATE, SAY THE GOVERNOR, WOULD PREVENT THE SAME PERSON FROM GIVING SO LITTLE AS $100 TO ANY OTHER CANDIDATE. IN THE CASE CHALLENGING FEDERAL LIMITS, MCCUTCHEON V. FEC, WE FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF WITH THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, URGING THE COURT TO START TREATING ALL EXPRESSIONS OF SUPPORT FOR A CANDIDATE - WHETHER VIA MONEY OR INDEPENDENT SPEECH - EQUALLY. WHILE THE SUPREME COURT DID NOT ADOPT THIS POSITION, THE COURT DID VOTE TO STRIKE DOWN THE AGGREGATE LIMITS. WE ALSO FILED A COURT ACTION IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN CHALLENGING WISCONSIN'S AGGREGATE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS ON BEHALF OF FRED YOUNG. ONCE MCCUTCHEON WAS DECIDED, THE GAB QUICKLY STIPULATED TO A JUDGMENT DECLARING THAT WISCONSIN'S AGGREGATE LIMITS WERE ALSO UNCONSTITUTIONAL. RICE V. MILWAUKEE COUNTY BOARD (ROUND TWO): JOSEPH RICE, A FORMER MILWAUKEE COUNTY BOARD MEMBER, FILED TWO OPEN MEETINGS COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE MILWAUKEE COUNTY BOARD. FIRST, THAT THE BOARD VIOLATED THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW WHEN IT WENT INTO CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS AND VOTE ON ENTERING INTO CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH ITS UNIONS IN VIOLATION OF ACT 10. SECOND, THAT THE BOARD VIOLATED THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW WHEN A QUORUM OF SUPERVISORS ATTENDED AND TESTIFIED AT A LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON ASSEMBLY BILL 85, WHICH WOULD LATER BECOME THE LAW DRAMATICALLY REDUCING THE BOARD'S POWERS. THE COURT RULED THAT THE BOARD HAD NOT VIOLATED THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW, AND OUR CLIENT DECIDED NOT TO APPEAL. IBRAHIM V. CITY OF MILWAUKEE: ON BEHALF OF LOCAL TAXI-CAB DRIVERS, THE INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE SUED THE CITY OF MILWAUKEE SEEKING TO OVERTURN AN ORDINANCE CAPPING THE NUMBER OF CAB LICENSES AVAILABLE AT AN ARBITRARY NUMBER. THIS CAP CREATED A MASSIVE BARRIER TO ENTRY FOR ANYBODY WHO WANTED TO START THEIR OWN CAB BUSINESS (AS OPPOSED TO DRIVING FOR SOMEBODY ELSE'S BUSINESS), BECAUSE THE VALUE OF THOSE PERMITS SOARED TO APPROXIMATELY $150,000. JUDGE JANE CARROLL AGREED WITH IJ, STRIKING DOWN THE ORDINANCE AS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL RESTRICTION OF ECONOMIC LIBERTY. THE CITY APPEALED, AND WILL FILED AN AMICUS BRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEALS ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER GROUP OF TAXI-CAB DRIVERS. HOWEVER, THE CITY AMENDED ITS ORDINANCE, ADDING AN ADDITIONAL 100 PERMITS, AND THEN DISMISSED ITS OWN APPEAL. EVENTUALLY, THE CITY LIFTED THE CAP ALTOGETHER. CASES LITIGATED IN 2013 WITH FEES RECOVERED IN 2014: JERUSALEM EMPOWERED AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH V. MILWAUKEE: FEES SOUGHT AND RECOVERED: $1,319 WILL FILED A LAWSUIT CHALLENGING A DETERMINATION BY THE CITY OF MILWAUKEE THAT A PORTION OF A SMALL MILWAUKEE CHURCH'S 4.4-ACRE LOT WAS "EXCESS" AND THEREFORE TAXABLE. FIRST, WILL CONVINCED THE JUDGE THAT A STATE LAW PREVENTING LANDOWNERS FROM CHALLENGING A PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION DENIAL IN COURT UNLESS THEY PAID THE TAXES FIRST WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS IT APPLIED TO JEAMEC, A NON-PROFIT CHURCH WITHOUT THE RESOURCES TO PAY THE UNLAWFUL TAX BILL. WILL ALSO CONVINCED THE JUDGE, WITH HELPFUL TESTIMONY FROM THE CITY'S OWN ASSESSORS THAT THE PROPERTY MET THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE TAX EXEMPT, TO GRANT THE CHURCH A RETROACTIVE TAX EXEMPTION.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 11FORM 990 IS REVIEWED BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND BOARD PRESIDENT PRIOR TO FILING WITH THE IRS.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 12CBOARD MEMBERS AND KEY PERSONNEL COMPLETE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. DISCLOSURE OF POSSIBLE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ARE REVIEWED BY THE ENTIRE BOARD.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 15COMPENSATION OF THE PRESIDENT AND KEY PERSONNEL IS REVIEWED ANNUALLY BY THE BOARD. COMPARATIVE DATA IS USED TO REVIEW COMPENSATION LEVELS FOR ALL STAFF.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION C, LINE 18THE ORGANIZATION'S FORM 990 IS AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION AT THE ORGANIZATION'S LOCATION DURING BUSINESS HOURS. COPIES ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION C, LINE 19ALL GOVERNING DOCUMENTS, CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY, AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.

Comments

Anonymous: no account or email. Up to 2,000 characters, at most one link. Comments are checked automatically; some wait for review.