Skip to content
Bills from the 2009–10 session

Senate Bill 408

The exception to the assessment of withdrawal taxes and fees against a landowner who transfers ownership of managed forest land for siting a public safety communications tower

Topics: County, Forestry: Taxation, Lease, Municipality, Natural Resources, Department of: Environmental protection, Public safety, Telecommunications

Became law

The governor signed it on Mar 16, 2010. It's ⁠.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Nov 20, 2009

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Senate vote, passed

    Passed Feb 23, 2010

  4. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed Feb 23, 2010

  5. Governor, passed

    Signed

  6. Law, here now

    2009 Wisconsin Act 186

Latest entry in the official record, Mar 19, 2010: “Published 3-29-2010”

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 does

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

Under the Managed Forest Land (MFL) Program, the owner of land that meets certain requirements as to size and the amount of timber on the land may apply to have the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) designate the land as MFL. The owner of such land then makes an annual payment that is lower than, and in lieu of, the property taxes that normally would be payable on the land. In exchange, the owner must comply with certain forestry practices and may keep a specific area closed to public access; the remainder of the land must be kept open for recreational activities consisting of hunting, fishing, hiking, sight-seeing, and cross-country skiing. Land is not eligible for designation as MFL if more than 20 percent of the land is unsuitable for producing merchantable timer, it is developed for commercial recreation, for industry, or for any other use that DNR determines is incompatible with the practice of forestry, or it is developed for a human residence.

Current law provides that DNR may, at the request of an owner of managed forest land or of the governing body of any municipality in which any managed forest land is located, or at its own discretion, investigate to determination whether the designation as MFL should be withdrawn. Among the reasons why DNR may order the withdrawal of all or a part of a parcel of MFL is for the failure of the land to conform to an eligibility requirement. If DNR issues an order withdrawing land as MFL, it must assess against the owner a withdrawal tax and a withdrawal fee unless certain exceptions apply. Among the exceptions is an exception for an owner who transfers ownership of managed forest land for a public road or railroad or utility right-of-way. This bill expands the exceptions so that DNR may not assess a withdrawal tax or a withdrawal fee against an owner who transfers ownership of MFL to a county, city, village, or town for siting a public safety communications tower if DNR orders the withdrawal on or after September 22, 2009.

Who's behind it

4 senators are its ⁠. 3 are Democrats and 1 is a Republican.

10 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 14 names

Authors (4)

Signed on in support (10)

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 were 3 votes on this bill.

Senate Committee on Transportation vote to recommend it

Passed, 6 to 0 · Feb 5, 2010

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

Official motion: “Report passage recommended by committee on Transportation, Tourism, Forestry, and Natural Resources, Ayes 6, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Joint Committee on Finance vote on an amendment

Passed, 16 to 0 · Feb 16, 2010

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

Official motion: “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 16, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote to pass it

Passed, 32 to 0 · Feb 23, 2010

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

Official motion: “Read a third time and passed, Ayes 32, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Mar 19, 2010

    The new law was published.

  2. Mar 16, 2010

    The governor signed it. It became 2009 Wisconsin Act 186.

  3. Mar 11, 2010

    Sent to the governor.

  4. Feb 23, 2010

    The Assembly passed it too.

  5. Feb 23, 2010

    “Read” (the official wording)

  6. Feb 23, 2010

    The Assembly received it.

  7. Feb 23, 2010

    The Senate passed it, 32 to 0.

  8. Feb 23, 2010

    The Senate adopted it.

  9. Feb 16, 2010

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 16 to 0.

  10. Feb 16, 2010

    “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 16, Noes 0” (the official wording)

  11. Feb 10, 2010

    Sent to the Joint Committee on Finance.

  12. Feb 5, 2010

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 6 to 0.

  13. Jan 20, 2010

    The committee held a public hearing.

  14. Dec 4, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  15. Nov 30, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  16. Nov 20, 2009

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Transportation, Tourism, Forestry, and Natural Resources.

  17. Nov 20, 2009

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Nov 20, 2009 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Jauch, Lassa, Taylor and Schultz;Cosponsored by Representatives Hubler, Turner, Montgomery, Ziegelbauer, Petersen, Bies, Mursau, Zepnick, Kestell and Brooks

  2. Nov 20, 2009 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Transportation, Tourism, Forestry, and Natural Resources

  3. Nov 30, 2009 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Dec 4, 2009 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Jan 15, 2010 · Senate

    Senate amendment 1 offered by Senator Jauch

  6. Jan 20, 2010 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  7. Feb 4, 2010 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  8. Feb 5, 2010 · Senate

    Report passage recommended by committee on Transportation, Tourism, Forestry, and Natural Resources, Ayes 6, Noes 0

  9. Feb 5, 2010 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  10. Feb 10, 2010 · Senate

    Referred to joint committee on Finance by committee on Senate Organization pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e)

  11. Feb 16, 2010 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  12. Feb 16, 2010 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 16, Noes 0

  13. Feb 16, 2010 · Senate

    Report introduction and adoption of Senate Amendment 2 recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 16, Noes 0 by joint committee on Finance

  14. Feb 16, 2010 · Senate

    Report passage as amended recommended by joint committee on Finance, Ayes 16, Noes 0

  15. Feb 16, 2010 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  16. Feb 18, 2010 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 2-23-2010 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  17. Feb 23, 2010 · Senate

    Read a second time

  18. Feb 23, 2010 · Senate

    Senate amendment 1 adopted

  19. Feb 23, 2010 · Senate

    Senate amendment 2 adopted

  20. Feb 23, 2010 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  21. Feb 23, 2010 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  22. Feb 23, 2010 · Senate

    Read a third time and passed, Ayes 32, Noes 0

  23. Feb 23, 2010 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  24. Feb 23, 2010 · Assembly

    Received from Senate

  25. Feb 23, 2010 · Assembly

    Read

  26. Feb 23, 2010 · Assembly

    Rules suspended and taken up

  27. Feb 23, 2010 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  28. Feb 23, 2010 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  29. Feb 23, 2010 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  30. Feb 23, 2010 · Assembly

    Read a third time and concurred in

  31. Feb 23, 2010 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  32. Feb 24, 2010 · Senate

    Received from Assembly concurred in

  33. Feb 26, 2010 · Senate

    Report correctly enrolled on 2-26-2010

  34. Mar 11, 2010 · Senate

    Presented to the Governor on 3-11-2010

  35. Mar 16, 2010 · Senate

    Report approved by the Governor on 3-15-2010. 2009 Wisconsin Act 186

  36. Mar 19, 2010 · Senate

    Published 3-29-2010

Terms on this page

Wisconsin Act

The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.

Official term: Act. 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

Wisconsin Act

The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.

Official term: Act

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