Senate Bill 527
The agricultural producer security program, providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures, and granting rule-making authority
Topics: Agricultural credit, Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, Department of, Dairy product: Regulation, Farm produce, Grain marketing
Became law
The governor signed it on May 12, 2010. It's .
-
Introduced, passed
Feb 9, 2010
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Senate vote, passed
Passed Mar 4, 2010
-
Assembly vote, passed
Passed Apr 15, 2010
-
Governor, passed
Signed
-
Law, here now
2009 Wisconsin Act 296
Latest entry in the official record, May 13, 2010: “Published 5-26-2010”
Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.
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
What it does
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
This bill makes changes in the agricultural producer security program, which is administered by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP). The program is designed to minimize the risk that milk contractors, grain dealers, grain warehouse keepers, and vegetable contractors (collectively referred to as contractors) will default on their financial obligations to dairy, grain, and vegetable farmers (producers) and to reimburse producers for a portion of the losses they incur when contractors do default. A milk contractor is a person who buys milk from producers. A grain dealer is a person who buys grain from producers. A grain warehouse keeper is a person who operates a warehouse for the storage of grain that belongs to others. A vegetable contractor is a person who buys vegetables from producers for use in food processing.
Contingent financial backing Current law requires certain contractors to contribute to the agricultural producer security fund (fund). If a contributing contractor defaults on its financial obligations to producers, DATCP makes payments to producers from the fund, up to a maximum deductible amount per default. Current law requires DATCP to obtain "contingent financial backing" to supplement the fund in case of a large default. The contingent financial backing may be in the form of a surety bond or a contract to provide a cash loan to the fund whenever DATCP requests a loan.
Read the full summary Show less
Under this bill, DATCP may, but is not required to, obtain contingent financial backing for the fund. The bill also authorizes DATCP to obtain contingent financial backing in the form of trade credit insurance or in any other form that DATCP determines is appropriate.
Fund assessments Current law specifies the amounts of contractor fund assessments, but authorizes DATCP to change the amounts by rule. DATCP has changed the amounts of fund assessments for milk contractors, and this bill eliminates the statutory amounts of those assessments.
Current law requires DATCP to modify the amounts of fund assessments as necessary to keep the overall balance in the fund, and the balance attributable to each type of contractor, within specified limits. This bill authorizes DATCP to use emergency rule-making procedures, without making the finding of emergency that is ordinarily required, to modify fund assessments when the amount in the fund falls below one of the specified minimums. Such a rule may remain in effect for up to 24 months.
Financial statements Current law requires a contractor above a specified size threshold to file an annual financial statement with DATCP. The financial statement must be a reviewed statement or, for larger contractors, an audited statement.
This bill increases some of the thresholds above which contractors must file financial statements and above which contractors must file audited financial statements. This bill also changes the basis for determining whether a grain dealer or milk contractor must file an annual financial statement from the value of grain or milk procured to the volume of grain or milk procured.
License fees Current law requires contractors to pay license fees in amounts specified in the statutes unless DATCP specifies a different amount by rule. DATCP has specified different amounts by rule for grain dealers, grain warehouse keepers, and vegetable contractors, and this bill eliminates the statutory amounts for those fees. Under current law, license fees for grain dealers are based on the value of grain procured.
Under this bill, license fees for grain dealers are based on the volume of grain procured.
Disqualification from fund participation Under current law, a contractor may be disqualified from participating in the fund in specified situations. If a contractor who is disqualified defaults on payments to producers, no payments may be made from the fund to compensate producers for the losses resulting from the default. Current law authorizes DATCP to issue an order requiring a contractor to remedy a violation of the agricultural producer security law.
This bill authorizes DATCP to disqualify a contractor from participation in the fund pending compliance with an order requiring the contractor to remedy a violation of the agricultural producer security law. The bill also requires a contractor who is disqualified from the fund to notify producers of the disqualification.
Related entities and default claims Under this bill, a producer who owns a majority interest in a contractor or who is under common ownership with a contractor may waive eligibility to obtain payment from the fund if the contractor ever defaults. If a producer waives eligibility, the amount of the contractor's obligations to the producer is subtracted in determining the contractor's fund contribution and financial statement filing requirements.
The bill also requires DATCP to disallow a claim for payment from the fund, by a producer who did not waive eligibility, when a contractor defaults on payment to the producer if DATCP determines that allowing the claim would be unfair or unreasonable because the producer owns a majority interest in the contractor or is under common ownership with the contractor or because the producer had substantial management control over any of the defaulting contractor's operations involved in the default.
Other default claims disallowed This bill disallows a default claim if a defaulting contractor paid a producer by check but the producer failed to cash the check within 30 days.
Current law authorizes grain dealers and vegetable contractors to enter into deferred payment contracts with producers under certain conditions. A deferred payment contract is a contract under which payment is delayed for some time after the producer delivers the grain or vegetables under the contract.
Under the bill, a producer who enters into a deferred payment contract with a grain dealer may not recover from the fund in case of a default by the grain dealer if the payment under the contract became due more than 120 days after the producer delivered the grain to the grain dealer. Also, under the bill, a producer who enters into a deferred payment contract with a vegetable contractor may not recover from the fund in case of a default by the vegetable contractor if payment became due after January 31 of the year after the year in which the producer delivered the vegetables.
Milk contractor security requirements Current law requires certain milk contractors to file security with DATCP to secure payment of milk payroll obligations to producers. The determination of whether security must be filed is based in part on the milk contractor's highest amount of unpaid milk payroll obligations since the beginning of the contractor's last fiscal year.
Under this bill, a milk contractor may choose to have the determination of whether the contractor must file security based on the highest amount of the contractor's unpaid milk payroll obligations during the last 12 months or on the highest amount of milk payroll obligations incurred by the contractor in any month during the last 12 months. The bill makes related changes in the calculation of the amount of security that a milk contractor must file and in milk contractor reporting requirements.
Interfering with DATCP This bill prohibits a contractor from assaulting, threatening, intimidating, or otherwise interfering with an officer, employee, or agent of DATCP in the performance of his or her duties.
Who's behind it
4 senators are its . 3 are Democrats and 1 is a Republican.
12 more lawmakers .
See all 16 names Hide the names
Authors (4)
- Sheila Harsdorf · Republican, Senate
- Mark Miller · Democrat, Senate
- Lena Taylor · Democrat, Senate
- Kathleen Vinehout · Democrat, Senate
Signed on in support (12)
- Alvin Ott · Republican, Assembly
- Chris Danou · Democrat, Assembly
- Kristen Dexter · Democrat, Assembly
- Phil Garthwaite · Democrat, Assembly
- Ann Hraychuck · Democrat, Assembly
- Andy Jorgensen · Democrat, Assembly
- Louis Molepske Jr. · Democrat, Assembly
- Keith Ripp · Republican, Assembly
- Dale Schultz · Republican, Senate
- Jeff Smith · Democrat, Senate
- Gary Tauchen · Republican, Assembly
- Amy Sue Vruwink · Democrat, Assembly
What it would cost
State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.
How lawmakers voted
There was one vote on this bill.
Senate Committee on Agriculture and Higher Education vote to recommend it
Passed, 5 to 0 · Feb 24, 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 Agriculture and Higher Education, Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
May 13, 2010
The new law was published.
-
May 12, 2010
The governor signed it. It became 2009 Wisconsin Act 296.
-
May 11, 2010
Sent to the governor.
-
Apr 15, 2010
The Assembly passed it too.
-
Mar 5, 2010
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.
-
Mar 5, 2010
The Assembly received it.
-
Mar 4, 2010
The Senate passed it.
-
Feb 24, 2010
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 5 to 0.
-
Feb 12, 2010
1 more senator signed on in support.
-
Feb 10, 2010
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Feb 10, 2010
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Feb 9, 2010
Sent to the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Higher Education.
-
Feb 9, 2010
Introduced in the Senate.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Feb 9, 2010 · Senate
Introduced by Senators Vinehout, Miller, Taylor and Harsdorf;Cosponsored by Representatives Vruwink, Jorgensen, Garthwaite, Smith, Hraychuck, Danou, Tauchen, Ripp, Dexter, Molepske Jr. and A. Ott
- Feb 9, 2010 · Senate
Read first time and referred to committee on Agriculture and Higher Education
- Feb 10, 2010 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 10, 2010 · Senate
Public hearing held
- Feb 12, 2010 · Senate
Senator Schultz added as a coauthor
- Feb 24, 2010 · Senate
Executive action taken
- Feb 24, 2010 · Senate
Report passage recommended by committee on Agriculture and Higher Education, Ayes 5, Noes 0
- Feb 24, 2010 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- Mar 3, 2010 · Senate
Placed on calendar 3-4-2010 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- Mar 4, 2010 · Senate
Read a second time
- Mar 4, 2010 · Senate
Ordered to a third reading
- Mar 4, 2010 · Senate
Rules suspended
- Mar 4, 2010 · Senate
Read a third time and passed
- Mar 4, 2010 · Senate
Ordered immediately messaged
- Mar 5, 2010 · Assembly
Received from Senate
- Mar 5, 2010 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to committee on Rules
- Apr 13, 2010 · Assembly
Made a special order of business at 11:33 A.M. on 4-15-2010 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 22
- Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly
Read a third time and concurred in
- Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Apr 16, 2010 · Senate
Received from Assembly concurred in
- Apr 23, 2010 · Senate
Report correctly enrolled on 4-23-2010
- May 11, 2010 · Senate
Presented to the Governor on 5-11-2010
- May 12, 2010 · Senate
Report approved by the Governor on 5-12-2010. 2009 Wisconsin Act 296
- May 13, 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
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