Skip to content

Bills · 2009-2010 Regular Session

AB 426

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

authorizing the designation of a tax incremental district as distressed and expanding the use of donor tax incremental districts.

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Assembly, not reached
  3. Passes Senate, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

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. Currently, towns also have a limited ability to create a TID under

certain circumstances. 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, approval of the city's or village's

proposed TID by a joint review board that consists of members who represent the

overlying taxation districts, 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 incremental 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;

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.

Under certain limited circumstances, a TID that has paid off all of its project

costs but has not reached its mandatory termination date may become a donor TID,

continue to receive tax increments, and forward those increments to a recipient TID

created by the same city or village.

Under current law, a planning commission may adopt an amendment to a

project plan, which requires the approval of the common council or village board and

the same findings that current law requires for the creation of a TID. Current law

also authorizes the amendment of a project plan up to four times during a TID's

existence to change the district's boundaries by adding or subtracting territory.

This bill authorizes a city or village to designate a TID that was created before

October 1, 2008, as a distressed TID if a number of steps occur. The city or village

must adopt a resolution finding that its project costs incurred on the TID exceed the

revenues the city or village expects the TID to generate during its lifetime. If DOR

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: Brooks (R) , Clark (D) , Davis (R) , Hintz (D) , Molepske Jr. (D) , Petersen (R) , Radcliffe (D) , Ripp (R) , Soletski (D) , Staskunas (D) , Townsend (R) , Zepnick (D)

7 cosponsors

Hixson (D) , Holperin (D) , Kreitlow (D) , Schultz (R) , Sullivan (D) , Taylor (D) , Vinehout (D)

Votes

Assembly: Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Jobs, the Economy and Small Business, Ayes 12, Noes 0

Passed 12–0 Oct 15, 2009 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Assembly: Read a third time and passed, Ayes 81, Noes 14

Passed 81–14 Oct 20, 2009 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Senate: Report concurrence recommended by committee on Economic Development, Ayes 7, Noes 0

Passed 7–0 Jan 8, 2010 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Sep 22, 2009 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Molepske Jr., Ripp, Radcliffe, Davis, Staskunas, Brooks, Townsend, Soletski, Clark, Zepnick, Hintz and Petersen;Cosponsored by Senators Sullivan, Schultz, Holperin, Kreitlow and Taylor

  2. Sep 22, 2009 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Ways and Means

  3. Sep 23, 2009 · Assembly

    Withdrawn from committee on Ways and Means and referred to committee on Jobs, the Economy and Small Business pursuant to Assembly Rule 42 (3)(c)

  4. Oct 12, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Oct 13, 2009 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  6. Oct 15, 2009 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 10-20-2009 by committee on Rules

  7. Oct 15, 2009 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  8. Oct 15, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by committee on Jobs, the Economy and Small Business

  9. Oct 15, 2009 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Jobs, the Economy and Small Business, Ayes 12, Noes 0

  10. Oct 15, 2009 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Jobs, the Economy and Small Business, Ayes 12, Noes 0

  11. Oct 15, 2009 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  12. Oct 20, 2009 · Assembly

    Representative Hixson added as a coauthor

  13. Oct 20, 2009 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  14. Oct 20, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 adopted

  15. Oct 20, 2009 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  16. Oct 20, 2009 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  17. Oct 20, 2009 · Assembly

    Read a third time and passed, Ayes 81, Noes 14

  18. Oct 20, 2009 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  19. Oct 20, 2009 · Senate

    Received from Assembly

  20. Oct 21, 2009 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Economic Development

  21. Jan 7, 2010 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  22. Jan 8, 2010 · Senate

    Report concurrence recommended by committee on Economic Development, Ayes 7, Noes 0

  23. Jan 8, 2010 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  24. Jan 21, 2010 · Senate

    Senator Vinehout added as a cosponsor

  25. Apr 28, 2010 · Senate

    Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1