Skip to content

Bills · 2019-2020 Regular Session

SB 92

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

Relating to: authorizing limited residency requirements for a city or village operating under the city manager plan. (FE)

Municipality — Council Village

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Senate, not reached
  3. Passes Assembly, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

This bill authorizes limited residency requirements for a city or village

operating under the city manager system.

Under current law, a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th class city, as well as certain villages with

a population in excess of 1,000, may choose to operate under the city manager form

of government. Under this system, the elective members of the common council elect

a city manager. The election of the city manager must be based purely on merit, and

the members of the council must give due regard for a candidate's training,

experience, and executive and administrative abilities. A city manager is engaged

by the council for an indefinite term, and he or she is in charge of the executive side

of city government. Currently, residence in the city or the state may not be a

qualification for the office of city manager.

Also under current law, a local governmental unit (any city, village, town,

county, or school district) may not, generally, require as a condition of employment

that any employee or prospective employee reside within any jurisdictional limit.

Current law provides limited exceptions to the prohibition on residency

requirements for law enforcement, fire, or emergency personnel.

Under this bill, a city or village that operates under the city manager system

of government may impose a residency requirement on its city manager. The

residency requirement authorized under the bill first applies to an individual who

is hired for the position of city manager on the bill's effective date.

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: Feyen (R) , Ringhand (D) , Smith (D)

16 cosponsors

Bowen (D) , Crowley (D) , Emerson (D) , Gruszynski (D) , Kitchens (R) , Kolste (D) , Loudenbeck (R) , Ohnstad (D) , Sinicki (D) , Spreitzer (D) , Stafsholt (R) , Steffen (R) , Subeck (D) , Thiesfeldt (R) , Vorpagel (R) , Vruwink (D)

Votes

Senate: Report passage recommended by Committee on Local Government, Small Business, Tourism and Workforce Development, Ayes 4, Noes 1

Passed 4–1 Sep 11, 2019 official source full page

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

Full history

  1. Mar 15, 2019 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Feyen, Ringhand and Smith; cosponsored by Representatives Spreitzer, Thiesfeldt, Bowen, Crowley, Emerson, Gruszynski, Kitchens, Kolste, Loudenbeck, Sinicki, Subeck, Vruwink, Stafsholt, Steffen and Vorpagel

  2. Mar 15, 2019 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Local Government, Small Business, Tourism and Workforce Development

  3. Mar 27, 2019 · Senate

    Representative Ohnstad added as a cosponsor

  4. Apr 15, 2019 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Jun 18, 2019 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  6. Sep 10, 2019 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  7. Sep 11, 2019 · Senate

    Report passage recommended by Committee on Local Government, Small Business, Tourism and Workforce Development, Ayes 4, Noes 1

  8. Sep 11, 2019 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  9. Nov 1, 2019 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 11-5-2019 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  10. Nov 5, 2019 · Senate

    Referred to committee on Senate Organization

  11. Nov 5, 2019 · Senate

    Read a second time

  12. Apr 1, 2020 · Senate

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1