Assembly Bill 105
Creating an exception to certain requirements in the creation of or amendment to a tax incremental financing district in the village of Pleasant Prairie
Topics: Kenosha County, Property tax
Stopped before the full Assembly voted
The recommended passing it, but the full Assembly never voted on it. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.
-
Introduced, passed
Apr 26, 2011
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Assembly vote, stopped here
Stopped here. The full Assembly never voted on it.
-
Senate vote, not reached
-
Governor, not reached
-
Law, not reached
Latest entry in the official record, Mar 23, 2012: “Failed to pass pursuant to ”
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
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
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
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 would have done
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
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 and counties 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;
Read the full summary Show less
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 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 new 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.
Currently, before a TID may be created or its project plan amended, the city or village must adopt a resolution containing a finding that the equalized value of taxable property of the TID plus the value increment of all existing TIDs does not exceed 12 percent of the total equalized value of taxable property in the city or village (the "12 percent test"), subject to one exception. Under the exception, a city or village may simultaneously create a new TID and subtract territory from an existing TID without adopting a resolution containing the 12 percent test if the city or village demonstrates to DOR that the value of the territory that is subtracted at least equals the amount that DOR believes is necessary to ensure that, when the new TID is created, the 12-percent test is met. The city or village must also certify to DOR that no other district created under this exception currently exists in the city or village.
Under this bill, the calculation of the 12 percent test is changed for the village of Pleasant Prairie. Under the bill, if the village wants to create a new TID, the sum of the equalized value of taxable property of the district; the value increment of all existing districts in the village, other than Tax Incremental District Number 2; and 1.33 times the tax incremental base of Tax Incremental District Number 2 may not exceed 12 percent of the total equalized value of taxable property within the village.
A similar modification exists if the village wants to amend the project plan of a district by adding territory to the district.
Who's behind it
3 representatives are its . 2 are Democrats and 1 is a Republican.
1 more lawmaker .
See all 4 names Hide the names
Authors (3)
- Peter Barca · Democrat, Assembly
- Samantha Kerkman · Republican, Assembly
- John Steinbrink · Democrat, Assembly
Signed on in support (1)
- Bob Wirch · Democrat, Senate
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.
Assembly Committee on Ways and Means vote to recommend it
Passed, 10 to 1 · Jun 28, 2011
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 Ways and Means, Ayes 10, Noes 1”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
Mar 23, 2012
The session ended, and the bill died with it.
-
Jun 28, 2011
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.
-
Jun 28, 2011
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 10 to 1.
-
May 19, 2011
The committee held a public hearing.
-
May 13, 2011
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Apr 26, 2011
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means.
-
Apr 26, 2011
Introduced in the Assembly.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Apr 26, 2011 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Kerkman, Steinbrink and Barca;Cosponsored by Senator Wirch
- Apr 26, 2011 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to committee on Ways and Means
- May 13, 2011 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- May 19, 2011 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Jun 2, 2011 · Assembly
Executive action taken
- Jun 28, 2011 · Assembly
Report passage recommended by committee on Ways and Means, Ayes 10, Noes 1
- Jun 28, 2011 · Assembly
Referred to committee on Rules
- Jul 19, 2011 · Assembly
Referred to calendar of 7-20-2011 pursuant to Assembly Rule 93
- Jul 20, 2011 · Assembly
Laid on the table
- Mar 23, 2012 · Assembly
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.
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
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
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
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
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