Senate Bill 117
Boards of police and fire commissioners and protective services departments in populous cities. (FE)
Vetoed by the governor
Both chambers passed it, and the governor vetoed it on Mar 31, 2022. Lawmakers did not , so it stands.
-
Introduced, passed
Feb 18, 2021
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Senate vote, passed
Passed May 11, 2021
-
Assembly vote, passed
Passed Jan 25, 2022
-
Governor, stopped here
Vetoed Mar 31, 2022.
-
Law, not reached
Latest entry in the official record, May 17, 2022: “Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82”
Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.
Terms on this page
Veto override
Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.
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
What it would have done
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
This bill makes a number of changes that affect the board of fire and police commissioners of a first class city (presently only Milwaukee), the board of police and fire commissioners of a second class city with a population of 200,000 or more (presently only Madison) (jointly referred to as affected PFC boards), and the protective services departments of first class cities and second class cities with a population of 200,000 or more (jointly, populous cities). The changes include altering the makeup of affected PFC boards, requiring certain training for affected PFC board members, establishing certain requirements related to hiring and oversight of chiefs of protective services departments in populous cities, creating an executive director or independent monitor position in populous cities, and altering the judicial review process for police and fire department disciplinary cases in a first class city.
Under current law, the board of fire and police commissioners of a first class city consists of seven or nine members selected by the mayor. Boards of police and fire commissioners of other cities, including a second class city, consist of five members selected by the mayor. Under this bill, a board of fire and police commissioners of a first class city consists of nine members selected by the mayor, and confirmed by the common council. The board of a police and fire commission of a second class city with a population of 200,000 or more consists of seven members selected by the mayor.
Read the full summary Show less
Each of these boards must contain at least one member selected from a list provided by each of 1) the employee association that represents nonsupervisory law enforcement officers and 2) the employee association that represents fire fighters.
This bill provides a method for selecting members of affected PFC boards when the mayor fails to make an appointment to a vacant position. If the mayor fails to make an appointment within 120 days of the occurrence of a vacancy, the common council may make the appointment, except when the vacant position is one that must be filled from one of the lists described above. In this case, the association that provided the list may make the appointment without confirmation by the common council.
In a first class city, a three-member panel of the board of fire and police commissioners may conduct and decide a trial to evaluate a complaint against a member of the police or fire department. This bill specifies that when a three-member panel conducts such a trial, at least one member of the panel must have professional law enforcement experience if the accused is a police officer, and at least one such member must have professional fire fighting experience if the accused is a fire fighter.
The bill also requires each member of an affected PFC board to take a training class provided by the city in which it operates. The training class must cover the mission and role of the board, the procedures that apply to disciplinary hearings, the conduct policies of the police and fire departments, and use of force guidelines of the police department. A member may not participate in any action of the board until he or she completes the training class and any other training required by the city.
The bill also creates the office of executive director in a first class city and the office of independent monitor in a second class city with a population of 200,000 or more. Despite the different titles, these positions have the same duties and requirements. This person acts as the principal staff of an affected PFC board, reviews certain situations or investigations involving the police or fire department, evaluates police and fire department policies and practices, and issues periodic reports to the public relating to the status and outcome of complaints that have been filed. The executive director or independent monitor is appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the common council and serves a four-year term, at the pleasure of the board.
This bill also specifies the following related to affected PFC boards:
1. When an affected PFC board appoints a protective services chief, the board must meet in closed session with representatives of the employee association whose members will serve under the proposed chief.
2. When an affected PFC board appoints a protective services chief, the board must hold at least two public meetings to hear comments from residents of the city and other interested persons.
3. When a member is appointed to an affected PFC board, the common council must hold two public hearings that include public comment periods with regard to the appointments.
4. If an affected PFC board accepts an additional application for chief of police after the application period for accepting these applications has closed, the board must reopen the application period for an additional seven days.
5. If the common council adopts a resolution by a two-thirds majority to conduct a performance review of a protective services chief, an affected PFC board must conduct the review and provide a written report to the common council.
6. A PFC board member may not continue in office after the expiration of his or her term, unless reappointed and, in a first class city, confirmed.
Currently, if a board of fire and police commissioners of a first class city discharges, suspends, or reduces in rank an officer or member of the police or fire department, the disciplined person may appeal that decision to a circuit court. This bill specifies the scope of review under which a court is to review an appeal of this sort. Under the bill, a court must review the evidence independently and without deference to the board's findings; must reverse the board's decision if it finds that fairness or correctness of the action has been impaired by material or procedural errors; and must set aside or modify the board's decision if it finds that the board erroneously interpreted a provision of law, or may remand the case to the board for further action that is consistent with current law. The bill also requires the court to reverse the board's decision if it finds that the board's exercise of discretion is outside of its delegated powers; is inconsistent with a board rule, policy, or practice, unless the board's deviation is adequately explained; or violates the constitution or the statutes. The bill also authorizes a court to take additional testimony, depositions, and interrogatories, and to grant requests for additional discovery.
Who's behind it
6 senators are its . 5 are Republicans and 1 is a Democrat.
8 more lawmakers .
See all 14 names Hide the names
Authors (6)
- Rob Cowles · Republican, Senate
- Alberta Darling · Republican, Senate
- Dan Feyen · Republican, Senate
- André Jacque · Republican, Senate
- Lena Taylor · Democrat, Senate
- Van Wanggaard · Republican, Senate
Signed on in support (8)
- Dave Armstrong · Republican, Assembly
- Janel Brandtjen · Republican, Assembly
- Dan Knodl · Republican, Assembly
- Clint Moses · Republican, Assembly
- Michael Schraa · Republican, Assembly
- John Spiros · Republican, Assembly
- David Steffen · Republican, Assembly
- Chuck Wichgers · Republican, Assembly
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 were 5 votes on this bill.
Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety vote on an amendment
Passed, 6 to 1 · May 7, 2021
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 6, Noes 1”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety vote to recommend it
Passed, 6 to 1 · May 7, 2021
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 Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 6, Noes 1”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote on an amendment
Passed, 21 to 12 · May 11, 2021
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Senate Amendment 1 to Senate Substitute Amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 21, Noes 12”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote on an amendment
Passed, 21 to 12 · May 11, 2021
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Senate Amendment 2 to Senate Substitute Amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 21, Noes 12”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate vote to pass it
Passed, 22 to 11 · May 11, 2021
See how each of the 33 senators voted Hide the names
D: Democrat, R: Republican
Yes (22)
- Alberta Darling (R, 8)
- André Jacque (R, 1)
- Chris Kapenga (R, 33)
- Dale Kooyenga (R, 5)
- Dan Feyen (R, 20)
- Devin LeMahieu (R, 9)
- Duey Stroebel (R, 20)
- Eric Wimberger (R, 2)
- Howard Marklein (R, 17)
- Jerry Petrowski (R, 29)
- Joan Ballweg (R, 14)
- John Jagler (R, 13)
- Julian Bradley (R, 28)
- Kathleen Bernier (R, 23)
- Lena Taylor (D, 4)
- Mary Felzkowski (R, 12)
- Patrick Testin (R, 24)
- Rob Cowles (R, 2)
- Rob Stafsholt (R, 10)
- Roger Roth (R, 19)
- Steve Nass (R, 11)
- Van Wanggaard (R, 21)
No (11)
- Bob Wirch (D, 22)
- Brad Pfaff (D, 32)
- Chris Larson (D, 7)
- Janet Bewley (D, 25)
- Janis Ringhand (D, 15)
- Jeff Smith (D, 31)
- Jon Erpenbach (D, 27)
- Kelda Roys (D, 26)
- LaTonya Johnson (D, 6)
- Melissa Agard (D, 16)
- Tim Carpenter (D, 3)
Official motion: “PASSAGE”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
May 17, 2022
The veto stood. Lawmakers didn't override it.
-
Mar 31, 2022
The governor vetoed it.
-
Mar 28, 2022
Sent to the governor.
-
Jan 25, 2022
The Assembly passed it too.
-
Dec 7, 2021
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.
-
Oct 11, 2021
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Jun 17, 2021
1 more representative signed on in support.
-
May 11, 2021
The Assembly received it.
-
May 11, 2021
The Senate passed it, 22 to 11.
-
May 11, 2021
The Senate adopted it.
-
May 7, 2021
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 6 to 1.
-
May 7, 2021
“Report adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 6, Noes 1” (the official wording)
-
Apr 30, 2021
1 more representative signed on in support.
-
Mar 18, 2021
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Feb 25, 2021
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Feb 18, 2021
Sent to the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety.
-
Feb 18, 2021
Introduced in the Senate.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Feb 18, 2021 · Senate
Introduced by Senators Wanggaard, L. Taylor, Darling, Cowles, Feyen and Jacque; cosponsored by Representatives Brandtjen, Armstrong, Knodl, Moses, Spiros and Wichgers
- Feb 18, 2021 · Senate
Read first time and referred to Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety
- Feb 25, 2021 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Mar 18, 2021 · Senate
Public hearing held
- Apr 13, 2021 · Senate
LRB correction
- Apr 30, 2021 · Senate
Representative Schraa added as a cosponsor
- May 4, 2021 · Senate
Senate Substitute Amendment 1 offered by Senator Wanggaard
- May 6, 2021 · Senate
Executive action taken
- May 7, 2021 · Senate
Report adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 6, Noes 1
- May 7, 2021 · Senate
Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 6, Noes 1
- May 7, 2021 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- May 7, 2021 · Senate
Placed on calendar 5-11-2021 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 1 to Senate Substitute Amendment 1 offered by Senators Larson, L. Taylor, Carpenter and Johnson
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 2 to Senate Substitute Amendment 1 offered by Senators Larson, Carpenter, L. Taylor and Johnson
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Read a second time
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 1 to Senate Substitute Amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 21, Noes 12
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Senate Amendment 2 to Senate Substitute Amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 21, Noes 12
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Senate Substitute Amendment 1 adopted
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Ordered to a third reading
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Rules suspended
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Read a third time and passed, Ayes 22, Noes 11
- May 11, 2021 · Senate
Ordered immediately messaged
- May 11, 2021 · Assembly
Received from Senate
- Jun 17, 2021 · Assembly
Representative Steffen added as a cosponsor
- Oct 11, 2021 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Dec 7, 2021 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to committee on Rules
- Jan 20, 2022 · Assembly
Placed on calendar 1-25-2022 by Committee on Rules
- Jan 25, 2022 · Assembly
Rules suspended to withdraw from calendar and take up
- Jan 25, 2022 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Jan 25, 2022 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Jan 25, 2022 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Jan 25, 2022 · Assembly
Read a third time and concurred in
- Jan 25, 2022 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Jan 26, 2022 · Senate
Received from Assembly concurred in
- Jan 28, 2022 · Senate
Report correctly enrolled
- Mar 28, 2022 · Senate
Presented to the Governor on 3-28-2022 by directive of the Majority Leader
- Mar 31, 2022 · Senate
Report vetoed by the Governor on 3-31-2022
- May 17, 2022 · Senate
Placed on calendar 5-17-2022 pursuant to Joint Rule 82 (2)(a)
- May 17, 2022 · Senate
Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82
Terms on this page
Veto override
Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.
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
Veto override
Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.
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
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