Law enforcement
Use of force policies
Under current law, each law enforcement agency must have a written public
policy that regulates the use of force by law enforcement officers. The bill makes
several changes that affect this requirement.
First, the bill requires the law enforcement agency to post its policy on the law
enforcement agency website or, if the agency does not have one, on a website
maintained by the municipality over which the law enforcement agency has
jurisdiction.
Second, the bill requires each law enforcement agency to ensure that its use of
force policy incorporates the following principles: that the primary duty of all law
enforcement is to preserve the life of all individuals; that deadly force is to be used
only as the last resort; that chokeholds are banned; that officers should use skills and
tactics that minimize the likelihood that force will become necessary; that, if officers
must use physical force, it should be the least amount of force necessary to safely
address the threat; and that law enforcement officers must take reasonable action
to stop or prevent any unreasonable use of force by their colleagues.
Third, under the bill, each law enforcement officer must annually complete at
least eight hours of training on use-of-force options and techniques a law
enforcement officer may use to de-escalate a potentially unstable situation.
Fourth, the bill prohibits disciplining a law enforcement officer for reporting a
violation of a law enforcement agency's use of force policy.
Finally, the bill requires the Law Enforcement Standards Board to develop a
model use of force policy for law enforcement agencies. The model policy must
address interactions with individuals with mental disorders, alcohol or drug
problems, dementia disorders, and developmental disabilities; limit the use of force
against vulnerable populations; and include other best practices that LESB
identifies.
Reports on use of force incidents
Current law requires DOJ to collect certain information concerning criminal
offenses committed in Wisconsin. The bill requires DOJ to collect data and publish
an annual report on law enforcement use of force incidents, including incidents in
which there was a shooting, in which a firearm was discharged in the direction of a
person (even if there was no injury), and in which other serious bodily harm resulted
from the incident. The bill requires certain demographic information to be collected
about each such incident, and reported annually by DOJ on its website.
Grant program to reduce violence
The bill creates a $1,000,000 grant program, administered by DOJ, to fund
community organizations that are utilizing evidence-based outreach and violence
interruption strategies to mediate conflicts, prevent retaliation and other potentially
violent situations, and connect individuals to community supports.
Cause of action for unnecessarily summoning a law enforcement officer
The bill creates a civil cause of action for unnecessarily summoning a law
enforcement officer. Under the bill, a person may bring an action against another
person who, with the intent to do any of the following, causes a law enforcement
officer to arrive at a location to contact the person: infringe upon a constitutional
right of the person; unlawfully discriminate against the person; cause the person to
feel harassed, humiliated, or embarrassed; cause the person to be expelled from a
place in which the person is lawfully located; damage the person's reputation or
standing within the community; or damage the person's financial, economic,
consumer, or business prospects or interests.
Under the bill, the person may recover the greater of special and general
damages, including damages for emotional distress, or an amount equal to $250 from
each defendant found liable; punitive damages; and costs, including all reasonable
attorney fees and other costs of the investigation and litigation that were reasonably
incurred.
Prohibition on no-knock warrants
Under current law, a law enforcement officer executing a search warrant must
knock and announce before entering unless, at the time the warrant is executed, the
law enforcement officer has a reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing
will be dangerous or futile or will inhibit the effective investigation of the crime. The
bill requires that a law enforcement officer executing a search warrant must, before
entering the premises, identify himself or herself as a law enforcement officer and
announce the authority and purpose of the entry.
Training and recruiting officers
The bill makes certain changes to the responsibilities of the Law Enforcement
Standards Board. Under current law, LESB regulates the training of law
enforcement officers. The bill requires LESB to also regulate jail and juvenile
detention officer training standards, and to regulate recruitment standards for the
recruiting of new law enforcement, jail, and juvenile detention officers.
The bill also requires each law enforcement agency to maintain an employment
file for each employee. Under the bill, when a law enforcement agency, jail, or
juvenile detention facility is recruiting for new officers, the agency, jail, or facility
must require each candidate that is or has been employed by a different agency, jail,
or facility to authorize that employer to disclose his or her employment files to the
recruiting agency, jail, or facility and to release that employer from any liability
related to the use and disclosure of the files.
Local government
Public contracts
Bidding thresholds
In general, under current law, a second, third, or fourth class city or a village,
town, county, technical college district board, or federated public library system must
let a public contract having an estimated cost of more than $25,000 to the lowest
responsible bidder. Under the bill, the amount above which any of these local
governmental units must let a contract to the lowest responsible bidder is raised to
$50,000.
Levy limits
Levy limits; alternative minimum growth factor increase
Generally under current law, local levy limits are applied to the property tax
levies that are imposed by a city, village, town, or county (political subdivision) in
December of each year. Current law prohibits any political subdivision from
increasing its levy by a percentage that exceeds its “valuation factor," which is
defined as the greater of either 0 percent or the percentage change in the political
subdivision's equalized value due to new construction, less improvements removed.
The bill increases the alternative percentage factor for purposes of the “valuation
factor” to 2 percent.
Levy limit reduction for service transfer
Under current law, if a political subdivision transfers to another governmental
unit the responsibility to provide a service that it provided in the previous year, the
levy limit otherwise applicable in the current year is decreased to reflect the cost that
the political subdivision would have incurred to provide that service. The bill repeals
that provision.
Levy limit negative adjustment for certain service revenues
Under current law, a political subdivision must reduce its allowable levy by the
estimated amount of any revenue from fees or payments in lieu of taxes if the revenue
is received for providing certain “covered services" that were funded with property
tax revenues in calendar year 2013. The “covered services" are certain garbage
collection, fire protection, snow plowing, street sweeping, and storm water
management.
The bill repeals the requirement that a political subdivision must reduce its
allowable levy by the estimated amount of revenues received for providing covered
services that were funded with property tax revenues in calendar year 2013.
Levy limit exclusion for cross-municipality transit routes
Current law contains a number of exceptions to the levy limit, such as amounts
a county levies for a countywide emergency medical system, for a county children
with disabilities education board, and for certain bridge and culvert construction and
repair. In addition, a political subdivision may exceed the levy limit that is otherwise
applicable if its governing body adopts a resolution to do so and if that resolution is
approved by the electors in a referendum.
The bill creates another exception to local levy limits. Under the bill, amounts
levied by a political subdivision for costs related to new or enhanced transit services
that cross adjacent county or municipal borders do not apply to the limit if the
political subdivisions between which the routes operate have entered into an
agreement to provide for the services and if the agreement is approved in a
referendum.
Levy limit exception for regional planning commission contributions
The bill creates a local levy limit exception for the amount a political
subdivision levies to pay for the political subdivision's share of a regional planning
commission's (RPC's) budget.
An RPC's budget is determined annually by the RPC. The RPC then charges
all political subdivisions within its jurisdiction a proportional amount to fund the
budget based on the equalized value of property in the political subdivision and the
total amount of equalized value of property within the RPC's jurisdiction.
Tax incremental financing
Tax incremental housing for workforce housing
The bill authorizes workforce housing initiatives and makes changes that affect
tax incremental districts and state housing grants. The bill creates a definition for
workforce housing, changes the definition of “mixed-use development TID,”
increases the maximum number of years a city or village may extend the life of a TID
to improve its affordable and workforce housing, requires a TID's project plan to
contain alternative economic projections, and changes the method of imposing
certain impact fees.
Under the bill, a political subdivision may put into effect a workforce housing
initiative by taking one of several specified actions and posting on its website an
explanation of the initiative. Workforce housing initiatives include the following:
reducing permit processing times or impact fees for workforce housing; increasing
zoning density for a workforce housing development; rehabilitating existing
uninhabitable housing stock into habitable workforce housing; or implementing any
other initiative to address workforce housing needs. Once an initiative takes effect,
it remains in effect for five years. After June 30, 2021, if a political subdivision has
in effect at least three initiatives at the same time, WHEDA, WEDC, and DOA must
give priority to housing grant applications from, or related to a project in, the political
subdivision.
The bill defines “workforce housing” to mean the following, subject to the
five-year average median costs as determined by the U.S. Census Bureau:
1. Housing that costs a household no more than 30 percent of the household's
gross median income.
2. Housing that comprises residential units for initial occupancy by individuals
whose household median income is no more than 120 percent of the county's gross
median income.
Under current law, a mixed-use development TID contains a combination of
industrial, commercial, or residential uses, although newly platted residential areas
may not exceed more than 35 percent of the real property within the TID. Under the
bill, newly platted residential areas may not exceed either the 35 percent limit or 60
percent of the real property within the TID if the newly platted residential use that
exceeds 35 percent is used solely for workforce housing.
Currently, a city or village may extend the life of a TID for up to one year for
housing stock improvement if all of the following occurs:
1. The city or village pays off all of the TID's project costs.
2. The city or village adopts a resolution stating that it intends to extend the
life of the TID, the number of months it intends to do so, and how it intends to improve
housing stock.
3. The city or village notifies DOR.
Current law requires the city or village to use 75 percent of the tax increments
received during the period specified in the resolution to benefit affordable housing
in the city or village and 25 percent to improve the city's or village's housing stock.
Under the bill, a city or village may extend the life of a TID for up to three years
to increase the number of affordable and workforce housing improvements. The bill
also changes the term “housing stock” to “affordable and workforce housing units.”
Under current law, if a city, village, or town (municipality) imposes an impact
fee on a developer to pay for certain capital costs to accommodate land development,
the municipality may provide in the ordinance an exemption from, or a reduction in
the amount of, impact fees on land development that provides low-cost housing.
Under the bill, the impact fee exemption or reduction provisions also apply to
workforce housing. Current law prevents the shifting of an exemption from or
reduction in impact fees to any other development in the land development in which
the low-cost housing is located. The bill applies this provision to workforce housing
as well.
Tax incremental districts in city of Wisconsin Dells
The bill extends the expenditure periods for two tax incremental districts in the
City of Wisconsin Dells. Under current law, a city or village that creates a TID
generally may not make expenditures for project costs later than five years before
the TID's unextended termination date. Under the bill, the City of Wisconsin Dells
may make expenditures for project costs through November 2026 for TID Number
Two and through May 2040 for TID Number Three.
General local government
Provision and funding of emergency medical services by towns
The bill authorizes a town to contract for or maintain emergency medical
services for the town. The bill also authorizes a town to do any of the following for
the purpose of funding these emergency medical services:
1. Appropriate money.
2. Charge property owners a fee for the cost of emergency medical services
provided to their property according to a written schedule established by the town
board.
3. Levy taxes on the entire town.
4. Levy taxes on property served by a particular source of emergency medical
services, to support the source of emergency medical services.
Municipality construction, ownership, or operation of broadband facilities
Current law prohibits, with several exceptions, a municipality from
constructing, owning, or operating a facility for providing video service,
telecommunications service, or broadband service to the public unless 1) the
municipality holds a public hearing on the proposed action, 2) notice of the public
hearing is given, and 3) the municipality prepares and makes available for public
inspection a report estimating the total costs of, and revenues derived from,
constructing, owning, or operating the facility for a period of at least three years. The
bill eliminates the requirement that a municipality prepare and make available for
public inspection that report if the facility is a broadband facility intended to serve
an area designated as underserved or unserved by PSC.
Currently, under one of the exceptions, the public hearing and cost report do not
apply to a facility for providing broadband service if 1) the municipality offers use of
the facility on a nondiscriminatory basis to persons who provide broadband service
to end users of the service, 2) the municipality itself does not use the facility to
provide broadband service to end users, and 3) the municipality determines that, at
the time of authorization, the facility does not compete with more than one provider
of broadband service. The bill eliminates the requirements under items 2 and 3 for
facilities that are intended to serve an underserved or unserved area. As a result,
a municipality is not required to hold a public hearing or prepare a report for a
broadband facility intended to serve an underserved or unserved area if the
municipality offers use of the facility on a nondiscriminatory basis to persons who
provide broadband service.
Currently, under another of the exceptions, the public hearing and cost report
do not apply to a facility for providing broadband service to an area within the
boundaries of a municipality if the municipality asks, in writing, each person that
provides broadband service within the boundaries of the municipality whether the
person currently provides broadband service to the area or intends to provide
broadband service to the area within nine months and 1) does not receive an
affirmative response within 60 days, 2) the municipality determines that a person
who responded does not currently provide broadband service to the area, and no
other person makes the response to the municipality, or 3) the municipality
determines that a person who responded that the person intended to provide
broadband service to the area within nine months did not actually provide the service
within nine months and no other person makes the response to the municipality.
Under the bill, for this exception in the case of an underserved or unserved area,
rather than asking whether a person plans to provide broadband service to the area
within nine months, the municipality must ask whether the person intends or
actively plans to provide broadband service to the area within three months.
County debt issuance
The bill authorizes a county to issue debt to replace revenue lost due to a
disaster or public health emergency declared by the governor or by the county board
itself. The county board must adopt a resolution stating that the debt is issued for
such a purpose, must specify the amount of revenue lost or expected to be lost, and
must send a certified copy of the resolution to DOA. DOA must determine, based on
the resolution and any other available information, the appropriate amount of debt
that the county may issue. The bill requires DOA to promulgate any rules it believes
are necessary to administer its requirement to determine the appropriate amount
of debt. Under the bill, the county may not issue debt in an amount that exceeds the
amount specified by DOA. The debt may not be issued for a term that exceeds 10
years.
Use of premiums received in issuance of municipal obligations
Under current law, the proceeds of municipal obligations must be paid into a
municipality's borrowed money fund, except that any accrued interest and any
premium received when municipal obligations are sold above par value must be paid
into the debt service fund. In general, moneys may be disbursed from the borrowed
money fund only for the purposes for which the municipal obligations were issued
and from the debt service fund only to pay debt service on the obligations. Under the
bill, a premium received when municipal obligations are sold above par value is paid
into the debt service fund only to the extent provided in a resolution authorizing the
issuance of the municipal obligations.
Local landlord-tenant ordinances
Current law prohibits political subdivisions from enacting certain ordinances
relating to landlords and tenants. Political subdivisions may not do any of the
following:
1. Prohibit or limit landlords from obtaining or using certain information
relating to a tenant or prospective tenant, including monthly household income,
occupation, rental history, credit information, court records, and social security
numbers.
2. Limit how far back in time a landlord may look at a prospective tenant's
credit information, conviction record, or previous housing.
3. Prohibit or limit a landlord from entering into a rental agreement with a
prospective tenant while the premises are occupied by a current tenant.
4. Prohibit or limit a landlord from showing a premises to a prospective tenant
during a current tenant's tenancy.
5. Place requirements on a landlord with respect to security deposits or earnest
money or inspections that are in addition to what is required under administrative
rules.
6. Limit a tenant's responsibility for any damage to or neglect of the premises.
7. Require a landlord to provide any information to tenants or to the local
government any information that is not required to be provided under federal or
state law.
8. Require a residential property to be inspected except under certain
circumstances.
9. Impose an occupancy or transfer of tenancy fee on a rental unit.
Current law also prohibits political subdivisions from regulating rent
abatement in a way that permits abatement for conditions other than those that
materially affect the health or safety of the tenant or that substantially affect the use
and occupancy of the premises. The bill eliminates all of these prohibitions.
Local moratorium on evictions
Current law prohibits political subdivisions from imposing a moratorium on
landlords from pursuing evictions actions against a tenant. The bill eliminates that
prohibition.
Local employment regulations
The bill repeals the preemptions of local governments from enacting or
enforcing ordinances related to the following:
1. Regulations related to wage claims and collections.
2. Regulation of employee hours and overtime, including scheduling of
employee work hours or shifts.
