Skip to content
Bills from the 2009–10 session

Assembly Bill 175

Expanding the life of a tax incremental district in the city of Racine

Topics: Property tax, Racine, City of, Revenue, Department of

Stopped before the full Assembly voted

The recommended passing it, but the full Assembly never voted on it. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Mar 30, 2009

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The full Assembly never voted on it.

  4. Senate vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 28, 2010: “Failed to pass pursuant to ⁠”

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

Under the current tax incremental financing program, a city or village may create a tax incremental district (TID) in part of its territory to foster development if at least 50 percent of the area to be included in the TID is blighted, in need of rehabilitation or conservation, suitable for industrial sites, or suitable for mixed-use development. Before a city or village may create a TID, several steps and plans are required. These steps and plans include public hearings on the proposed TID within specified time frames, preparation and adoption by the local planning commission of a proposed project plan for the TID, approval of the proposed project plan by the common council or village board, and adoption of a resolution by the common council or village board that creates the TID as of a date provided in the resolution.

Also under current law, once a TID has been created, the Department of Revenue (DOR) calculates the "tax increment base value" of the TID, which is the equalized value of all taxable property within the TID at the time of its creation. If the development in the TID increases the value of the property in the TID above the base value, a "value increment" is created. That portion of taxes collected on the value increment in excess of the base value is called a "tax increment." The tax increment is placed in a special fund that may be used only to pay back the project costs of the TID. The costs of a TID, which are initially incurred by the creating city or village, include public works such as sewers, streets, and lighting systems;

Read the full summary

financing costs; site preparation costs; and professional service costs. DOR authorizes the allocation of the tax increments until the TID terminates or, generally, 20 years, 23 years, or 27 years after the TID is created, depending on the type of TID and the year in which it was created. Under certain circumstances, the life of the TID and the allocation period may be extended. Also under current law, a city or village may not generally make expenditures for project costs later than five years before the unextended termination date of the TID.

Under this bill, for TID Number 2 in the city of Racine, the 27-year life of the TID and the period of time during which DOR may authorize tax increments is extended from 2010 to 2020, and the expenditure period is extended from 2005 to 2015.

Who's behind it

4 representatives are its ⁠. All 4 are Democrats.

4 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 8 names

Authors (4)

Signed on in support (4)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

How lawmakers voted

There was one vote on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Urban and Local Affairs vote on an amendment

Passed, 7 to 1 · Oct 27, 2009

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Urban and Local Affairs, Ayes 7, Noes 1”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Apr 28, 2010

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Oct 29, 2009

    “Placed at the foot of the calendar of 10-29-2009” (the official wording)

  3. Oct 27, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  4. Oct 27, 2009

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 5 to 3.

  5. Apr 7, 2009

    The committee held a public hearing.

  6. Apr 6, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  7. Mar 30, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Urban and Local Affairs.

  8. Mar 30, 2009

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Mar 30, 2009 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Mason, Turner, Zepnick and Barca;Cosponsored by Senators Lehman, Plale, Coggs and Wirch

  2. Mar 30, 2009 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Urban and Local Affairs

  3. Apr 6, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Apr 6, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representative Mason

  5. Apr 7, 2009 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  6. Oct 22, 2009 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  7. Oct 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Urban and Local Affairs, Ayes 7, Noes 1

  8. Oct 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Urban and Local Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 3

  9. Oct 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  10. Oct 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 10-29-2009 by committee on Rules

  11. Oct 29, 2009 · Assembly

    Placed at the foot of the calendar of 10-29-2009

  12. Oct 29, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 offered by Representatives Gottlieb, Vos and LeMahieu

  13. Oct 29, 2009 · Assembly

    Laid on the table

  14. Apr 28, 2010 · Assembly

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

More in the glossary

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote