Skip to content

Bills · 2011-2012 Regular Session

SB 440

Became law Official bill text Atom feed

increasing the allowable number of project plan amendments, and lengthening the time during which tax increments may be allocated and expenditures for project costs may be made, for Tax Incremental District Number 3 in the city of Middleton.

  1. Introduced, completed
  2. Passes Senate, completed
  3. Passes Assembly, completed
  4. Governor signs, completed
  5. Law, completed

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

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 project costs of a TID, which are initially incurred by the creating city or

village, include public works such as sewers, streets, and lighting systems; 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. Also under current law, a city or village may not generally

make expenditures for project costs later than five years before the unextended

termination date of the TID. Under certain circumstances, the life of the TID, the

expenditure period, and the allocation period may be extended.

Generally under current law a local planning commission may amend the

project plan of a TID, by adding or subtracting territory from the district, not more

than four times during the TID's existence.

Under this bill, with regard to TID number 3 in the city of Middleton, the local

planning commission may amend the project plan of the TID not more than seven

times, expenditures for project costs may be made for up to 32 years after the TID

was created, and DOR may allocate tax increments for up to 37 years after the TID's

creation.

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: Erpenbach (D) , Grothman (R) , Risser (D)

3 cosponsors

Kleefisch (R) , Pope-Roberts (D) , Roys (D)

Votes

Senate: Report passage recommended by committee on Economic Development and Veterans and Military Affairs, Ayes 6, Noes 1

Passed 6–1 Feb 17, 2012 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Senate: Referred to joint committee on Finance by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e), Ayes 5, Noes 0

Passed 5–0 Feb 20, 2012 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Assembly: Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 56, Noes 35

Passed 56–35 Mar 15, 2012 official source full page

Aye · 56

Full history

  1. Feb 7, 2012 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Grothman, Erpenbach and Risser;Cosponsored by Representatives Kleefisch, Roys and Pope-Roberts

  2. Feb 7, 2012 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Economic Development and Veterans and Military Affairs

  3. Feb 10, 2012 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Feb 14, 2012 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  5. Feb 16, 2012 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  6. Feb 17, 2012 · Senate

    Report passage recommended by committee on Economic Development and Veterans and Military Affairs, Ayes 6, Noes 1

  7. Feb 17, 2012 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  8. Feb 20, 2012 · Senate

    Referred to joint committee on Finance by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e), Ayes 5, Noes 0

  9. Feb 20, 2012 · Senate

    Withdrawn from joint committee on Finance and made Available for Scheduling by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e), Ayes 5, Noes 0

  10. Feb 20, 2012 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 2-21-2012 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  11. Feb 21, 2012 · Senate

    Read a second time

  12. Feb 21, 2012 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  13. Feb 21, 2012 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  14. Feb 21, 2012 · Senate

    Read a third time and passed, Ayes 31, Noes 2

  15. Feb 21, 2012 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  16. Feb 22, 2012 · Assembly

    Received from Senate

  17. Feb 29, 2012 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Rules

  18. Mar 2, 2012 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 3-6-2012 by committee on Rules

  19. Mar 6, 2012 · Assembly

    Made a special order of business at 11:25 A.M. on 3-13-2012 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 22

  20. Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  21. Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  22. Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  23. Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly

    Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 56, Noes 35

  24. Mar 15, 2012 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  25. Mar 16, 2012 · Senate

    Received from Assembly concurred in

  26. Mar 19, 2012 · Senate

    Report correctly enrolled on 3-19-2012

  27. Mar 20, 2012 · Senate

    Presented to the Governor on 3-20-2012

  28. Mar 22, 2012 · Senate

    Report approved by the Governor on 3-21-2012. 2011 Wisconsin Act 139

  29. Mar 23, 2012 · Senate

    Published 4-4-2012