Skip to content
Bills from the 2009–10 session

Senate Bill 144

Authorizing sharing of tax increments by certain environmental remediation tax incremental districts

Topics: Municipality, Property tax, Revenue, Department of

Stopped in committee

It had a but no committee vote, so it never came up for a vote. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Mar 31, 2009

  2. Committee, stopped here

    Stopped here. It had a hearing but no committee vote.

  3. Senate vote, not reached

  4. Assembly 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 ⁠”

It sat with the Senate Committee on Health, Health Insurance, Privacy, Property Tax Relief, and Revenue.

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 current law, the environmental remediation tax incremental financing program permits a city, village, town, or county (political subdivision) to recoup the costs of remediating contaminated property from property taxes that are levied on the remediated property. The mechanism for financing remediation costs is very similar to the mechanism for financing project costs under the tax incremental financing program.

Initially, the governing body of a political subdivision adopts a resolution creating an environmental remediation tax incremental district (ERTID) with particular boundaries. This resolution is then reviewed by a joint review board made up of representatives of the overlying taxing jurisdictions. If the joint review board approves the ERTID, a political subdivision that has incurred eligible costs to remediate environmental pollution on a parcel of property may apply to the Department of Revenue (DOR) to certify the environmental remediation tax incremental base of the parcel. DOR is required to certify the environmental remediation tax incremental base if the political subdivision submits to DOR all of the following: 1) a statement that the political subdivision has incurred some eligible costs, together with a detailed proposed remedial action plan approved by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) that contains cost estimates for anticipated eligible costs, a schedule for the design and implementation that is needed to complete the remediation, and certification from DNR that it has approved the site investigation report that relates to the parcel; 2) a statement that all taxing jurisdictions with authority to levy general property taxes on the parcel of property have been notified that the political subdivision intends to recover its environmental remediation costs by using an environmental remediation tax increment; and 3) a statement that the political subdivision has attempted to recover its environmental remediation costs from the person who is responsible for the environmental pollution that is being remediated. Thereafter, the political subdivision that created the ERTID may use positive environmental remediation tax increments to pay eligible costs of remediating environmental pollution in the ERTID.

Read the full summary

Currently, the maximum life of an ERTID is 23 years and no expenditure for an eligible cost may be made by a political subdivision later than 15 years after the environmental remediation tax incremental base is certified by DOR. An ERTID may also terminate when a political subdivision has received sufficient environmental remediation tax increments to cover all of the eligible costs.

This bill allows the governing body of a political subdivision to adopt a resolution requesting that DOR allocate environmental remediation tax increments from an ERTID that has recovered all eligible costs to another ERTID created by the same governing body. Upon receipt of a copy of this resolution, DOR would continue to allocate environmental remediation tax increments from the donor ERTID after all of the eligible costs for that ERTID have been recovered. These increments would be applied to another ERTID created in the same political subdivision. Increments from the donor ERTID continue to be generated until the earlier of: 1) 23 years after the creation of the donor ERTID; or 2) the recovery of all eligible costs for the recipient ERTID.

Who's behind it

Jeffrey Plale, a Democrat, is its ⁠.

5 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 6 names

Author (1)

Signed on in support (5)

What it would cost

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

What happened

  1. Apr 28, 2010

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Oct 28, 2009

    The committee held a public hearing.

  3. Apr 13, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  4. Mar 31, 2009

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Health, Health Insurance, Privacy, Property Tax Relief, and Revenue.

  5. Mar 31, 2009

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Mar 31, 2009 · Senate

    Introduced by Senator Plale;Cosponsored by Representatives Mason, Turner, Richards, Zepnick and Molepske Jr.

  2. Mar 31, 2009 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Health, Health Insurance, Privacy, Property Tax Relief, and Revenue

  3. Apr 13, 2009 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Oct 28, 2009 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  5. Apr 28, 2010 · Senate

    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

Public hearing

A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.

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

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.

More in the glossary

Public hearing

A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.

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