Skip to content
Bills from the 2011–12 session

Assembly Bill 87

Expanding the number of tax incremental financing districts that may be designated as distressed or severely distressed

Topics: 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.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Apr 12, 2011

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The full Assembly never voted on it.

  4. Senate vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Mar 23, 2012: “Failed to pass pursuant to ⁠”

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 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

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 certain limited circumstances, a TID that has paid off all of its project costs but has not reached its mandatory termination date may become a donor TID, continue to receive tax increments, and forward those increments to a recipient TID created by the same city or village.

Currently, a city or village that acts before October 1, 2011, may designate a TID that was created before October 1, 2008, as a distressed or severely distressed TID (distressed TID) if a number of steps occur. The city or village must adopt a resolution finding that its project costs incurred on the TID exceed the revenues the city or village expects the TID to generate during its lifetime. The municipal clerk must send to DOR and the joint review board a copy of the resolution and the related financial data that the city or village used when it adopted its resolution.

Before the city or village may adopt the resolution concerning its project costs, the common council must hold a public hearing at which interested parties may express their views on the proposed distressed TID. Following receipt of the resolution and financial data, the joint review board must evaluate the information to determine whether designating the district as a distressed TID or allowing increment sharing will likely enhance the ability of the city or village to pay its project costs. The resolution adopted by the city or village may not take effect without joint review board approval of the designation. The board may approve or deny the designation. If the joint review board approves the designation, DOR must certify the designation and notify all overlying taxing jurisdictions of the certification.

A distressed TID may continue to exist and receive tax increments, as well as contributions from a donor TID, for up to 40 years after the distressed TID was created. A distressed TID may not amend its project plan to add any additional project costs, add territory, become a donor TID, make any expenditures after its original expenditure period ends, or expend funds outside of the TID's boundaries.

A distressed TID must terminate whenever all of its project costs have been paid off or 40 years after it was created, whichever occurs first. A donor TID must terminate upon the earlier of the distressed TID's termination or 40 years after the donor TID is created.

This bill repeals the requirement that a TID must have been in existence for at least seven years before the city or village may adopt a resolution designating the TID as a distressed TID.

Who's behind it

6 lawmakers are its ⁠. 5 are Republicans and 1 is a Democrat.

2 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 8 names

Authors (6)

Signed on in support (2)

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 was one vote on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Ways and Means vote on an amendment

Passed, 9 to 0 · Jul 14, 2011

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

Official motion: “Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Ways and Means, Ayes 9, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Mar 23, 2012

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Jul 14, 2011

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 8 to 1.

  3. Jun 2, 2011

    The committee held a public hearing.

  4. Apr 25, 2011

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  5. Apr 12, 2011

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means.

  6. Apr 12, 2011

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Apr 12, 2011 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Murtha, Fields, Petrowski, Rivard, Brooks and Petryk;Cosponsored by Senators Harsdorf and Moulton

  2. Apr 12, 2011 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Ways and Means

  3. Apr 25, 2011 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Jun 2, 2011 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  5. Jul 12, 2011 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representative Kerkman

  6. Jul 14, 2011 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  7. Jul 14, 2011 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Ways and Means, Ayes 9, Noes 0

  8. Jul 14, 2011 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Ways and Means, Ayes 8, Noes 1

  9. Jul 14, 2011 · Assembly

    Referred to Calendar of 7-20-2011 pursuant to Assembly Rule 93

  10. Jul 20, 2011 · Assembly

    Laid on the table

  11. 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.

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

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

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