Skip to content
Bills from the 2017–18 session

Senate Bill 85

Use of the construction manager-general contractor process for highway project contracting, major highway project reports, and cost-benefit analyses of certain services related to transportation

Became law

The governor signed it on Apr 3, 2018. It's ⁠.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Mar 2, 2017

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Senate vote, passed

    Passed May 10, 2017

  4. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed Feb 22, 2018

  5. Governor, passed

    Signed

  6. Law, here now

    2017 Wisconsin Act 247

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 3, 2018: “Published 4-4-2018”

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.

This bill implements the legislative changes recommended by the Legislative Audit Bureau in LAB's January 2017 report regarding the state highway program.

Under current law, DOT administers a major highway projects program. With limited exceptions, a major highway project is either 1) a project having a total cost of more than $30,000,000 and involving a) construction of a new highway 2.5 miles or more in length; b) reconstruction or reconditioning of an existing highway that relocates at least 2.5 miles of the highway or adds one or more lanes five miles or more in length to the highway; or c) improvement of an existing multilane, divided highway to freeway standards or 2) a project having a total cost of at least $75,000,000. For both categories of major highway projects, DOT annually adjusts the total cost threshold based on an inflation index.

Read the full summary

For major highway projects of the first type, the project must generally receive the approval of the Transportation Projects Commission and the legislature (generally referred to as “enumeration") before the project may be constructed. For major highway projects of the second type, DOT must submit a report to TPC and request TPC approval to proceed with the project under a passive review process.

Once approved by TPC, the project is considered enumerated as a major highway project under the statutes.

Among the requirements of the program, DOT must provide TPC with any studies and cost estimates with respect to a proposed project that are requested by TPC.

This bill specifies that when DOT provides a full project cost estimate under this requirement, the estimate must include all costs associated with the project, including all costs before enumeration, design engineering and construction engineering costs, the costs of environmental studies, and costs of the project that are paid by another program of the department. A full project cost estimate must also include the expected date of completion and an estimate of the effects of construction cost inflation and unexpected costs on the cost of the project.

Also under current law, every six months, DOT must submit a report to the TPC that summarizes the current status of each major highway project and identifies all actual and estimated project costs, itemized by major cost categories, as of the date of preparation of the report. The project information included in these reports must be reported on both a cumulative basis from the inception of the project and on an updated basis for the period since the department's last report.

Under this bill, these reports must also include for each project the full project cost estimate of the project made for the commission as of the date of the commission's approval of the project. This bill also specifies that the report must treat separately and as described in the enumerating statute each project.

This bill also requires DOT to annually prepare and submit to certain legislative committees a report that provides all of the following information for each major highway project:

1. The full project cost estimate of the project as of the date of enumeration.

2. The year in which the department expects to complete the project as of the date of enumeration.

3. The costs incurred as of the date of preparation of the report.

4. The full project cost estimate as of the date of preparation of the report.

5. The year in which the department expects to complete the project as of the date of preparation of the report.

6. An explanation of any difference between the full project cost estimates under items 1. and 4.

7. The opinion of the department as to whether the project will be completed as originally scheduled without the allocation of additional funds.

The bill also specifies that this report must treat separately and as described in the enumerating statute each project.

Under current law, highway improvement projects undertaken by DOT must be executed by contract based on bids, with limited exceptions. This bill authorizes DOT, for no more than three highway improvement projects, to enter into contracts using a construction manager-general contractor process. Under this process, the department contracts with a provider of construction services to supervise the design work for the project and, subject to an acceptable proposal, contracts with the provider of construction services for construction of the project. This bill authorizes DOT to enter into no more than three design contracts utilizing the construction manager-general contractor process no later than July 1, 2021.

Under current law, DOT may engage engineering, consulting, surveying, or other specialized services and this engagement of services is exempt from certain provisions of law relating to state procurement. For an engagement of services of more than $300,000, DOT must conduct a uniform cost-benefit analysis before the engagement and must review periodically, and before any renewal, the continued appropriateness of the engagement. Under this bill, when DOT conducts a cost-benefit analysis under this provision, DOT must also consider and document the results of the analysis before determining whether to undertake the proposed engagement.

Who's behind it

The official record doesn't name its authors.

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 3 votes on this bill.

Senate Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs vote on an amendment

Passed, 5 to 0 · May 3, 2017

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 Transportation and Veterans Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs vote on an amendment

Passed, 5 to 0 · May 3, 2017

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 2 recommended by Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs vote to recommend it

Passed, 5 to 0 · May 3, 2017

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

Official motion: “Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Apr 3, 2018

    The new law was published.

  2. Apr 3, 2018

    The governor signed it. It became 2017 Wisconsin Act 247.

  3. Apr 2, 2018

    Sent to the governor.

  4. Feb 22, 2018

    The Assembly passed it too.

  5. May 15, 2017

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  6. May 10, 2017

    The Assembly received it.

  7. May 10, 2017

    The Senate passed it.

  8. May 10, 2017

    The Senate adopted it.

  9. May 3, 2017

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

  10. May 3, 2017

    “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 2 recommended by Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0” (the official wording)

  11. May 3, 2017

    “Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0” (the official wording)

  12. Mar 16, 2017

    The committee held a public hearing.

  13. Mar 2, 2017

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs.

  14. Mar 2, 2017

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Mar 2, 2017 · Senate

    Introduced by Joint Legislative Audit Committee

  2. Mar 2, 2017 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs

  3. Mar 16, 2017 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  4. Apr 26, 2017 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 1 offered by Senator Petrowski

  5. Apr 26, 2017 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 2 offered by Senator Petrowski

  6. May 3, 2017 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  7. May 3, 2017 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Amendment 1 recommended by Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0

  8. May 3, 2017 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Amendment 2 recommended by Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0

  9. May 3, 2017 · Senate

    Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Transportation and Veterans Affairs, Ayes 5, Noes 0

  10. May 3, 2017 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  11. May 5, 2017 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 5-10-2017 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  12. May 10, 2017 · Senate

    Read a second time

  13. May 10, 2017 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 1 adopted

  14. May 10, 2017 · Senate

    Senate Amendment 2 adopted

  15. May 10, 2017 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  16. May 10, 2017 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  17. May 10, 2017 · Senate

    Read a third time and passed

  18. May 10, 2017 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  19. May 10, 2017 · Assembly

    Received from Senate

  20. May 15, 2017 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Rules

  21. Feb 20, 2018 · Assembly

    Made a special order of business at 1:41 PM on 2-22-2018 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 27

  22. Feb 22, 2018 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  23. Feb 22, 2018 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  24. Feb 22, 2018 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  25. Feb 22, 2018 · Assembly

    Read a third time and concurred in

  26. Feb 22, 2018 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  27. Feb 23, 2018 · Senate

    Received from Assembly concurred in

  28. Mar 2, 2018 · Senate

    Report correctly enrolled

  29. Mar 2, 2018 · Senate

    LRB correction (Senate Amendment 1)

  30. Apr 2, 2018 · Senate

    Presented to the Governor on 4-2-2018

  31. Apr 3, 2018 · Senate

    Report approved by the Governor on 4-3-2018. 2017 Wisconsin Act 247

  32. Apr 3, 2018 · Senate

    Published 4-4-2018

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

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

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote