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.
3. The employment benefits an employer may be required to provide to its
employees.
4. An employer's right to solicit information regarding the salary history of
prospective employees.
5. Occupational licensing requirements that are more stringent than a state
requirement.
Certain local and state government regulations
The bill repeals the following:
1. The prohibition of the state and local governments from requiring any person
to waive the person's rights under state or federal labor laws as a condition of any
approval by the state or local government.
2. A provision under which neither the state nor a local government may enact
a statute or ordinance, adopt a policy or regulation, or impose a contract, zoning,
permitting, or licensing requirement, or any other condition, that would require any
person to accept any provision that is a subject of collective bargaining under state
labor laws or the federal National Labor Relations Act.
Exception to law enforcement officer citizenship requirement
Under current law, no person may be appointed as a deputy sheriff of any
county or police officer of a municipality unless that person is a citizen of the United
States. The bill allows the sheriff of a county or the appointing authority of a local
law enforcement agency to elect to authorize the appointment of noncitizens who are
in receipt of valid employment authorization from the federal Department of
Homeland Security as deputy sheriffs or police officers. The bill also prevents the
law enforcement standards board from preventing such a noncitizen from
participating in a law enforcement preparatory training program.
Local government civil service system and grievance procedure
requirements
The bill modifies the requirements for any grievance system established by
local governmental units, including adding a requirement for any civil service
system or grievance procedure to include a just cause standard of review for
employee terminations. Under current law, a local governmental unit that did not
have a civil service system before June 29, 2011, must have established a grievance
system. In order to comply with the requirement to have established a grievance
system, a local governmental unit may establish either 1) a civil service system under
any provision authorized by law, to the greatest extent practicable, if no specific
provision for creation of a civil service system applies to the governmental unit; or
2) a grievance procedure as set forth in the statutes. Current law requires that any
civil service system established or grievance procedure created must contain a
grievance procedure that addresses employee terminations, employee discipline,
and workplace safety. The bill does not eliminate the requirement for these
provisions, but instead adds a requirement for a provision relating to a just cause
standard of review for employee terminations, including a refusal to renew a
teaching contract.
Current law also requires that if a local governmental unit creates a grievance
procedure, the procedure must contain certain elements, including a written
document specifying the process that a grievant and an employer must follow; a
hearing before an impartial hearing officer; and an appeal process in which the
highest level of appeal is the governing body of the local governmental unit. The bill
provides that the hearing officer must be from the Wisconsin Employment Relations
Commission, and adds two additional required elements in the grievance procedure:
1) a provision indicating the grievant is entitled to representation throughout the
grievance process; and 2) a provision indicating that the employer must bear all fees
and costs related to the grievance process, except the grievant's representational fees
and costs.
Consideration of climate change in certain local plans
Under current law, local governmental units are required or permitted to
prepare a variety of plans that guide the local governmental unit's response to future
events. Among these plans are comprehensive plans that assist in guiding a local
governmental unit's future physical development, community health plans that
assist in guiding a local governmental unit's response to community health
problems, and hazard mitigation plans that assist a local governmental unit in
preparing for disasters. Under the bill, if a local governmental unit prepares a
comprehensive plan, a community health plan, or a disaster mitigation plan, it must
consider the effects of climate change when preparing the plan.
Municipal records filings and filing requirements for certain annexations
The bill transfers the duty of filing certain municipal records from the secretary
of state to the secretary of administration and transfers certain records held by the
secretary of state to instead be held by DOA.
2015 Wisconsin Act 55 transferred
some, but not all, municipal records filing duties from the secretary of state to DOA.
The bill completes the transfer of these duties from the secretary of state to DOA for
all municipal filing categories.
The bill also replaces the term “plat” with the term “scale map” in certain filing
statutes to conform with existing statutory requirements for certain filings,
including petitions for incorporation and for annexation. The bill reduces the
number of copies that must be provided to DOA in certain circumstances from
multiple copies to just one copy. Finally, the bill removes the population requirement
for annexations initiated by electors and property owners to make uniform the filing
requirements for all annexations, regardless of county population size.
City of Superior local exposition district
Generally, under current law, a political subdivision may create a local
exposition district, either singly or with another political subdivision. A local
exposition district is a unit of government that is separate from the political
subdivision that creates it and has powers related to creating and operating an
exposition center.
The bill makes changes to the local exposition district law that apply only to
future districts created by the City of Superior (Superior exposition districts). Under
the bill, the primary uses of a Superior exposition district may include sporting
tournaments, and the structures included in the district may include those intended
for use by transient tourists. A Superior exposition district may impose and collect
a food and beverage tax and may impose and collect a room tax at a maximum rate
of 2 percent. The bill limits the maximum amount of bond proceeds that the district
may issue for development and construction of an exposition center to $20,300,000.
Before an enabling resolution adopted by the City of Superior to create a Superior
exposition district may take effect, it must be approved in a referendum by a majority
of the electors in the city voting on the resolution.
MMSD dredged material management facility
The bill allows a metropolitan sewerage commission for a sewerage district
including a first class city (currently only the city of Milwaukee) to finance and
construct a dredged material management facility.
Current law allows a metropolitan sewerage commission for a sewerage district
including a first class city to participate in certain shore protection projects, but the
provision does not apply to any project after January 1, 1992. The bill would modify
certain current law requirements, including the date restriction, to specifically allow
the metropolitan sewerage commission to construct projects, including a dredged
material management facility project, before January 1, 2032. Under the bill, the
metropolitan sewerage commission must pay for all costs of the project through its
capital budget and finance the project over a period of 35 years. The bill also provides
that the commission may reserve space in the dredged material management facility
for the disposal of sediment from flood management projects.
Marijuana
Legalizing recreational marijuana
Current law prohibits a person from manufacturing, distributing, or delivering
marijuana; possessing marijuana with the intent to manufacture, distribute, or
deliver it; possessing or attempting to possess marijuana; using drug paraphernalia;
or possessing drug paraphernalia with the intent to produce, distribute, or use a
controlled substance. The bill changes state law so that it allows recreational use of
marijuana. The bill does not affect federal law, which generally prohibits persons
from manufacturing, delivering, or possessing marijuana and applies to both
intrastate and interstate violations.
The bill changes state law to allow a Wisconsin resident who is at least 21 years
old, or a qualifying patient, to possess no more than two ounces of marijuana and to
allow a nonresident of Wisconsin who is at least 21 years old to possess no more than
one-quarter ounce of marijuana. Under the bill, generally, a qualifying patient is an
individual who has been diagnosed by a physician as having or undergoing a
debilitating medical condition or treatment and who is at least 18 years old.
Generally, under the bill, a person who possesses more than the maximum
amount he or she is allowed to possess, but not more than 28 grams of marijuana,
is subject to a civil forfeiture not to exceed $1,000 or imprisonment not to exceed 90
days or both. A person who possesses more than 28 grams of marijuana is guilty of
a Class B misdemeanor, except that, if the person takes action to hide the amount
of marijuana he or she has and the person has in place a security system to alert him
or her to the presence of law enforcement, a method of intimidation, or a trap that
could injure or kill a person approaching the area containing the marijuana, the
person is guilty of a Class I felony.
The bill also eliminates the prohibition on possessing or using drug
paraphernalia that relates to marijuana consumption.
Permits to produce, process, and sell recreational marijuana
The bill creates a process by which a person may obtain a permit to produce,
process, or sell marijuana for recreational use and pay an excise tax for the privilege
of doing business in this state. Sixty percent of the revenue collected from the tax
is deposited into a segregated fund called the “community reinvestment fund.”
Under the bill, the community reinvestment fund is used to provide grants to
underserved communities, sparsity aid to school districts, grants to promote health
equity, and grants to promote diversity and advance equity and inclusion.
The bill requires a person to obtain separate permits from DOR to produce,
process, distribute, or sell marijuana, and requires marijuana producers and
processors to obtain additional permits from DATCP. The requirements for
obtaining these permits differ based on whether the permit is issued by DOR or
DATCP but, in general, a person may not obtain such a permit if he or she is not a
state resident, is under the age of 21, or has been convicted of certain crimes. In
addition, a person may not operate under a DOR permit within 500 feet of a school,
playground, recreation facility, child care facility, public park, public transit facility,
or library and may not operate as a marijuana producer under a DATCP permit
within 500 feet of a school. A person who holds a permit from DOR must also comply
with certain operational requirements.
Under the bill, a permit applicant with 20 or more employees may not receive
a permit from DATCP or DOR unless the the applicant certifies that the applicant
has entered into a labor peace agreement with a labor organization. The labor peace
agreement prohibits the labor organization and its members from engaging in any
economic interference with persons doing business in this state, prohibits the
applicant from disrupting the efforts of the labor organization to communicate with
and to organize and represent the applicant's employees, and provides the labor
organization access to areas in which the employees work to discuss employment
rights and the terms and conditions of employment. Current law prohibits the state
and any local unit of government from requiring a labor peace agreement as a
condition for any regulatory approval. The permit requirements under the bill are
not subject to that prohibition.
The bill also requires DATCP and DOR to use a competitive scoring system to
determine which applicants are eligible to receive permits. Each department must
issue permits to the highest scoring applicants that it determines will best protect
the environment; provide stable, family-supporting jobs to local residents; ensure
worker and consumer safety; operate secure facilities; and uphold the laws of the
jurisdictions in which they operate. Each department may deny a permit to an
applicant with a low score.
Under the bill, a person who does not have a permit from DOR to sell marijuana
may not sell, distribute, or transfer marijuana or possess marijuana with the intent
to sell or distribute it. A person who violates this prohibition is guilty of a Class I
felony.
Also under the bill, a person who does not have a permit from DATCP may not
produce or process marijuana. A person who violates this prohibition, who fails to
pay the fee for a permit, or who violates any rules promulgated by DATCP relating
to producing or processing marijuana is subject to a criminal penalty of a fine of
between $100 and $500, imprisonment of up to six months, or both. In addition, a
person who is cultivating marijuana plants without a permit who possesses more
than six but not more than 12 marijuana plants that have reached the flowering
stage is subject to a civil forfeiture not to exceed $1,000 or imprisonment not to exceed
90 days or both. If the person possesses more than 12 plants that have reached the
flowering stage at one time, the person is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor, except
that, if the person takes action to hide the number of plants he or she has and the
person has in place a security system to alert him or her to the presence of law
enforcement, a method of intimidation, or a trap that could injure or kill a person
approaching the area containing the plants, the person is guilty of a Class I felony.
Penalties for sales to minors
