MADISON - Wisconsin’s Supreme Court abruptly cut stipends this month for reserve judges, reducing compensation for a group that tried to get the high court to strengthen its conflict-of-interest rules.

The stipend reduction for reserve judges comes at a time when the head of the Supreme Court is seeking to boost pay for sitting judges by 16%.

On a 5-2 vote, the high court ended the ability of reserve judges to receive $454 daily stipends when they go to conferences or classes they are required to attend. They will continue to receive reimbursement for meals, lodging and other travel costs.

The move will save the state — and cost reserve judges — about $160,000 a year, according to the Supreme Court. The state has about 115 reserve judges, retired judges who fill in for circuit and appeals court judges when they are ill or otherwise cannot hear cases.

In dissent, Justice Shirley Abrahamson suggested the cut to stipends could look like an effort to retaliate against reserve judges who recently urged the Supreme Court to tighten its rules on when judges and justices must step aside from cases because of conflicts of interest. She berated her colleagues for cutting the pay of reserve judges without taking their input.

“In a closed conference room, with the seven justices talking and listening only to themselves, five justices adopted this amendment reducing the compensation of retired judges,” Abrahamson wrote.

Supporting the stipend reduction were the court’s five conservatives — Chief Justice Patience Roggensack and Justices Rebecca Bradley, Michael Gableman, Daniel Kelly and Annette Zeigler. The court’s liberals — Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley — were in dissent.

The majority did not explain its reasoning for cutting stipends in its Sept. 15 order.

Reserve judges had been receiving stipends when they attended judicial conferences and classes, as well as getting their travel costs covered. The reserve judges are required to attend 15 hours of conferences or classes a year.

Supreme Court candidate Tim Burns is making a campaign issue of the cut to stipends.

“Once again, the right-wing majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court shows a startling insensitivity to the appearance of impropriety,” Burns said in a statement. “Axing benefits of judges who shine the moral spotlight on the court worries citizens that we have a Wisconsin Supreme Court that will deal swiftly with judges who raise legitimate concerns.”

Burns, a Madison attorney, is one of three candidates running to replace Gableman, who is not seeking a second term next year. Also running are Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Rebecca Dallet and Sauk County Judge Michael Screnock.

Court officials have been discussing the stipends for conferences and classes since at least 2010.

In 2014, a committee of chief judges unanimously recommended ending the practice. The Supreme Court didn't address the issue at the time but took it up this month in a closed meeting.

Roggensack is seeking a 16% pay raise for sitting judges and justices. The state budget included about 4% more for judges and other workers over the next two years, but Roggensack can try to get additional money for judges when lawmakers finalize the state’s pay plan.

RELATED:Wisconsin judges seeking 16% pay hike

RELATED:Wisconsin Supreme Court rejects recusal changes when campaign donors are litigants

The five who agreed to cut the stipends were the same five who rejected a proposal in April that would have required judges and justices to step aside in cases involving their campaign donors and other supporters. That request came from more than 50 retired judges, most of whom are currently serving as reserve judges.

“Adopting this order with the benefit of adequate facts and after consultation with knowledgeable, concerned persons would avoid any perception that the order is a retaliatory measure taken by the five justices against reserve judges ...," Abrahamson wrote.