Skip to content
Bills from the 2009–10 session

Senate Bill 507

Changing the fees collected by a register of deeds, the redaction of social security numbers from electronic documents, and changes to the land information program

Topics: Administration, Department of: Agency and general functions, County: Board, Data processing, Land, Register of deeds, Social security

Became law

The governor signed it on May 13, 2010. It's ⁠.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Feb 2, 2010

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Senate vote, passed

    Passed Feb 25, 2010

  4. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed Apr 20, 2010

  5. Governor, passed

    Signed

  6. Law, here now

    2009 Wisconsin Act 314

Latest entry in the official record, May 14, 2010: “Published 5-26-2010”

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 current law, the Department of Administration (DOA) directs and supervises the land information program and serves as a state clearinghouse for access to land information. Under the land information program, DOA provides technical assistance to state agencies and local governmental units with land information responsibilities, reviews and approves county plans for land records modernization, and provides aids to counties, derived from recording fee revenues collected by counties, for land records modernization projects.

Also under current law, a county board may establish a land information office or direct that the functions and duties of the office be performed by an existing county office. If a land information office is established, it is required to coordinate land information projects between different units and levels of government and between the government and the private sector, develop and receive approval for a countywide plan for land records modernization, and review and recommend projects from local governmental units for grants from DOA.

Read the full summary

Also under current law, counties collect a fee for recording and filing most instruments that are recorded or filed with a register of deeds. The fee is $11 for the first page of an instrument and $2 for each additional page. Counties must remit $7 of each $11 collected for recording or filing the first page of each instrument to DOA, which DOA uses the revenues to make grants to counties for land records modernization projects (modernization grants). However, if a county has established a land information office, receives approval from DOA for its land records modernization plan, and uses the money for certain specified purposes related to land records modernization, the county may retain $5 of each $7 fee that would otherwise be payable to DOA. Counties also collect a $25 fee for recording certain probate certificates and for preparing and mailing certain probate documents.

Under this bill, counties collect a $25 fee, regardless of the number of pages of the instrument, for recording or filing most instruments that are recorded or filed with a register of deeds. Counties must remit $10 of each fee to DOA, which DOA uses to make modernization grants. If a county has, in addition to the three requirements under current law for retaining DOA fees, established a land information council, the county may retain $8 of each $10 fee that would otherwise be payable to DOA. Also under this bill, counties may temporarily collect a $30 fee for recording or filing these instruments or for recording certain probate certificates or preparing and mailing certain probate documents if the county uses $5 of each fee for purposes of redacting social security numbers from certain electronic format records. The $30 fee reverts to a $25 fee upon the earliest of the following: 1) completion of redaction of social security numbers from certain electronic format records; 2) January 1, 2012, unless an extension of time is granted by DOA; or 3) January 1, 2015.

Also under this bill, when the register of deeds transfers instruments filed with or recorded by the register of deeds before April 1, 2006, to an electronic format, he or she is required to make a reasonable effort to redact social security numbers from the instrument's electronic format.

Also under this bill, if a county retains fees otherwise payable to DOA or receives a grant from DOA under the land information program, the county must submit a report to DOA describing the expenditure of those funds. These funds must be used to design, develop, and implement a land information system and to make the system accessible on the Internet before being used for any other purpose and thereafter for purposes related to land records modernization. If DOA determines that these funds have been used for unauthorized purposes, DOA may suspend the eligibility of the county for further grants or retained fees.

Also under this bill, a county board that has created a land information office must create a land information council consisting of no less than seven members.

The council reviews the priorities, needs, policies, and expenditures of the land information office and advises the county on matters affecting the land information office. Also, if a county employs countywide property assessment or maintains land records that identify the zoning classification of individual parcels, the county board must post on the Internet land records that identify the zoning classification of individual parcels.

Who's behind it

7 senators are its ⁠. All 7 are Democrats.

11 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 18 names

Authors (7)

Signed on in support (11)

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 2 votes on this bill.

Senate Committee on Ethics Reform and Government Operations vote on an amendment

Passed, 5 to 0 · Feb 18, 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 committee on Ethics Reform and Government Operations, Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly Committee on Urban and Local Affairs vote to recommend it

Passed, 7 to 0 · Mar 12, 2010

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

Official motion: “Report concurrence recommended by committee on Urban and Local Affairs, Ayes 7, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. May 14, 2010

    The new law was published.

  2. May 13, 2010

    The governor signed it. It became 2009 Wisconsin Act 314.

  3. May 11, 2010

    Sent to the governor.

  4. Apr 20, 2010

    The Assembly passed it too.

  5. Mar 12, 2010

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  6. Mar 12, 2010

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 7 to 0.

  7. Mar 1, 2010

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  8. Feb 26, 2010

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Urban and Local Affairs.

  9. Feb 26, 2010

    The Assembly received it.

  10. Feb 25, 2010

    The Senate passed it.

  11. Feb 25, 2010

    The Senate adopted it.

  12. Feb 18, 2010

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 5 to 0.

  13. Feb 18, 2010

    “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by committee on Ethics Reform and Government Operations, Ayes 5, Noes 0” (the official wording)

  14. Feb 18, 2010

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  15. Feb 10, 2010

    The committee held a public hearing.

  16. Feb 2, 2010

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Ethics Reform and Government Operations.

  17. Feb 2, 2010

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Feb 2, 2010 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Erpenbach, Lehman, Hansen, Kreitlow, Vinehout, Risser and Taylor;Cosponsored by Representatives Soletski, Hebl, Pope-Roberts, Smith, Lothian, Townsend, Vruwink, Dexter, Vos, Radcliffe and Van Roy

  2. Feb 2, 2010 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Ethics Reform and Government Operations

  3. Feb 10, 2010 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  4. Feb 16, 2010 · Senate

    Senate amendment 1 offered by Senator Erpenbach

  5. Feb 18, 2010 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  6. Feb 18, 2010 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  7. Feb 18, 2010 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by committee on Ethics Reform and Government Operations, Ayes 5, Noes 0

  8. Feb 18, 2010 · Senate

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Ethics Reform and Government Operations, Ayes 5, Noes 0

  9. Feb 18, 2010 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  10. Feb 23, 2010 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 2-25-2010 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  11. Feb 25, 2010 · Senate

    Read a second time

  12. Feb 25, 2010 · Senate

    Senate amendment 1 adopted

  13. Feb 25, 2010 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  14. Feb 25, 2010 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  15. Feb 25, 2010 · Senate

    Read a third time and passed

  16. Feb 25, 2010 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  17. Feb 26, 2010 · Assembly

    Received from Senate

  18. Feb 26, 2010 · Assembly

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

  19. Mar 1, 2010 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  20. Mar 9, 2010 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  21. Mar 12, 2010 · Assembly

    Report concurrence recommended by committee on Urban and Local Affairs, Ayes 7, Noes 0

  22. Mar 12, 2010 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  23. Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly

    Made a special order of business at 11:58 A.M. on 4-20-2010 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 23

  24. Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  25. Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representative Roys

  26. Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 laid on table

  27. Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  28. Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  29. Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly

    Read a third time and concurred in

  30. Apr 20, 2010 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  31. Apr 21, 2010 · Senate

    Received from Assembly concurred in

  32. Apr 26, 2010 · Senate

    Report correctly enrolled on 4-26-2010

  33. May 11, 2010 · Senate

    Presented to the Governor on 5-11-2010

  34. May 13, 2010 · Senate

    Report approved by the Governor on 5-12-2010. 2009 Wisconsin Act 314

  35. May 14, 2010 · Senate

    Published 5-26-2010

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