Skip to content
Bills from the 2019–20 session

Assembly Bill 764

Creating a grant program for farmers who use certain sustainable practices, granting rule-making authority, and making an appropriation. (FE)

Stopped in committee

It never got a ⁠, so it never came up for a vote. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Jan 21, 2020

  2. Committee, stopped here

    Stopped here. No public hearing was held.

  3. Assembly vote, not reached

  4. Senate vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 1, 2020: “Failed to pass pursuant to ⁠”

It never got a hearing in the Assembly Committee on Agriculture. See every bill that never got a hearing this session.

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.

This bill requires the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to create a sustainable agriculture grant program, under which DATCP may award grants to farmers to 1) implement on-site fossil fuel input efficiency measures, such as reducing the use of fossil fuel-based fertilizers or pesticides or adopting alternative fuel technologies like solar or wind power; 2) plant hedgerows, windrows, riparian buffers, or woody plantings like fruit trees; 3) increase the carbon stored in the soil, such as by using no- or low-till practices or changing grazing practices; or 4) develop a conservation management plan for carbon reduction or sequestration. Under the bill, a grant may not be awarded for a project that occurs on lands participating in a land retirement program or on commercial forest lands, or for aquaculture-based projects. A grant also may not be awarded to a farmer who is eligible for the combined state-federal conservation reserve enhancement program unless the farmer has already applied for that program, or to a farmer who is eligible for any other state, federal, or local grant for the same conservation actions unless the farmer has already applied for that grant.

The bill requires DATCP, in prioritizing grant recipients, to seek to maximize the total reduction in atmospheric carbon dioxide equivalents per grant dollar awarded by leveraging other nonstate public or private funding. In addition, DATCP must prioritize projects that both improve air or water quality and provide agronomic benefits. The department must also attempt to provide grants to farmers in different parts of the state and for different types of projects, and must ensure that small- and medium-sized farms are included in the grant program. Under the bill, DATCP may use up to 20 percent of the amount appropriated for the grant program to create educational programs about the grants, to provide technical assistance, to develop models to assist in prioritizing grant awards, and to administer the grant program.

Read the full summary

The bill allows a grant recipient to use grant funds to make down payments on equipment or other types of loans related to the purpose of the grant. The bill also allows grants awarded for carbon storage projects that have an uncertain storage life to include ongoing annual payments for the previous year's storage or upfront cumulative payments based on the expected storage in future years.

The bill also allows DATCP to require a grant recipient to allow access to the property on which the grant project will take place, and requires DATCP to maintain a public list of all grant recipients, the amount of money spent or borrowed under the program, and the impact on total atmospheric carbon dioxide equivalents emissions under the program.

In addition, the bill requires DATCP, in consultation with the UW Extension, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Department of Natural Resources, and county land and water conservation departments to promulgate rules to administer the grant program. The bill also requires DATCP to report to the legislature biennially on the implementation and impact of the grant program.

Finally, the bill provides that an offer of a grant under the new grant program qualifies as a bona fide offer of cost-sharing. Under the current soil and water resource management program, unless a farmer receives a bona fide offer of cost-sharing from DATCP or from DNR, the farmer is not required to follow the conservation practices set by DATCP and DNR if doing so would require the farmer to discontinue or modify cropping practices on existing cropland or to discontinue or modify an existing livestock facility or operation.

Who's behind it

25 lawmakers are its ⁠. All 25 are Democrats.

5 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 30 names

Authors (25)

Signed on in support (5)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

What happened

  1. Apr 1, 2020

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Jan 31, 2020

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  3. Jan 21, 2020

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Agriculture.

  4. Jan 21, 2020

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Jan 21, 2020 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Neubauer, Shankland, Spreitzer, Anderson, Billings, Bowen, Brostoff, Considine, Crowley, Fields, Goyke, Gruszynski, Hebl, Hesselbein, Kolste, Ohnstad, Pope, Riemer, Sargent, Sinicki, Stubbs, Subeck, C. Taylor, Vruwink and Zamarripa; cosponsored by Senators Smith, Schachtner, Hansen, Larson and Shilling

  2. Jan 21, 2020 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Agriculture

  3. Jan 31, 2020 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Apr 1, 2020 · 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

Public hearing

A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.

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

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.

More in the glossary

Public hearing

A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.

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