Bills · 2025-2026 Regular Session
Relating to: alternative delivery of projects contracted by the Department of Transportation. (FE)
Road — Construction and repair Transportation department of — Roads
- Introduced, stopped here
- Passes Assembly, not reached
- Passes Senate, not reached
- Governor signs, not reached
- Law, not reached
Unfamiliar terms? Glossary
What this bill does
Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau
This bill makes numerous changes to alternative delivery of highway projects contracted by the Department of Transportation.
Under current law, the design and construction of highway projects are generally two distinct phases. Under this method, commonly known as “design-bid-build,” DOT has broad authority to accomplish the design of a project. The construction of a project must be executed by contract based on bids, with DOT awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder.
Under a current pilot program, DOT is authorized to award not more than six contracts for design-build projects, which are projects under which the design, engineering, construction, and related services are provided by a single entity. Under the program, DOT may not expend more than $250,000,000 for the six contracts. DOT is also required to maintain an inventory of at least five projects suitable for selection as design-build projects.
The bill eliminates the pilot program and the requirement that DOT maintain an inventory of design-build suitable projects. The bill provides that DOT may encumber not more than $300,000,000 in each fiscal biennium for state trunk highway improvement projects using alternative project delivery, which is defined as any construction project delivery method, other than design-bid-build, that is eligible for federal funding.
Current law details how, under the pilot program, DOT must solicit requests for qualifications, requests for proposals, and cost proposals and how DOT must award contracts. The bill eliminates these requirements and provides that DOT must use a procedure that conforms to federal regulations for evaluating and selecting contracts under which the design and construction are provided by a single entity.
The bill provides that, for alternative project delivery, a technical review committee must review all responses to a request for qualifications and determine which respondents are qualified responsible bidders. The technical review committee must also review and evaluate each proposal provided in response to a request for proposals. Finally, the technical review committee must make a recommendation for awarding a contract, but only if DOT received two or more proposals.
Under the pilot program that the bill eliminates, DOT must award a stipulated fee of not less than three-tenths of 1 percent of DOT’s estimated cost of design and construction to 1) each qualified responsible bidder that provides a responsive but unsuccessful proposal, 2) each qualified responsible bidder that provides a responsive proposal if DOT does not award a contract, and 3) each qualified responsible bidder if DOT cancels the the solicitation before the technical review committee reviews technical proposals.
Under the bill, DOT must award the stipulated fee for design-build projects and may award the stipulated fee for other alternative delivery projects, if the fee is included in the notice of solicitation for the project.
Under the pilot program that the bill eliminates, any person aggrieved and directly affected by a DOT decision to issue a request for qualifications or a request for proposals is entitled to judicial review of the decision. The bill does not include a similar provision for alternative project delivery.
What it would cost
Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs
Sponsors
Introduced by: Dallman (R) , Dittrich (R) , Goodwin (D) , Kaufert (R) , Knodl (R) , Maxey (R) , Moses (R) , Murphy (R) , O'Connor (R)
10 cosponsors
Dassler-Alfheim (D) , Feyen (R) , J. Jacobson (D) , Keyeski (D) , Marklein (R) , Ortiz-Velez (D) , Ratcliff (D) , Spreitzer (D) , Stubbs (D) , Testin (R)
Registered lobbying interests · 6
Organizations that registered lobbying activity on this bill with the Wisconsin Ethics Commission. Registration means interest, not a position for or against. Official record
Votes
Assembly: Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by Committee on Transportation, Ayes 5, Noes 0
Passed 5–0 Nov 20, 2025 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Assembly: Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Transportation, Ayes 5, Noes 0
Passed 5–0 Nov 20, 2025 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Full history
- Oct 15, 2025 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Dallman, Dittrich, Goodwin, Kaufert, Knodl, Maxey, Moses, Murphy and O'Connor; cosponsored by Senators Marklein, Feyen, Keyeski, Spreitzer, Testin, Dassler-Alfheim and Ratcliff
- Oct 15, 2025 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to Committee on Transportation
- Oct 16, 2025 · Assembly
Representative Ortiz-Velez added as a coauthor
- Oct 22, 2025 · Assembly
Assembly Amendment 1 offered by Representative Dallman
- Oct 29, 2025 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Nov 12, 2025 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Nov 12, 2025 · Assembly
Executive action taken
- Nov 20, 2025 · Assembly
Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by Committee on Transportation, Ayes 5, Noes 0
- Nov 20, 2025 · Assembly
Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Transportation, Ayes 5, Noes 0
- Nov 20, 2025 · Assembly
Referred to committee on Rules
- Jan 8, 2026 · Assembly
Placed on calendar 1-13-2026 by Committee on Rules
- Jan 13, 2026 · Assembly
Representative Stubbs added as a coauthor
- Jan 13, 2026 · Assembly
Laid on the table
- Feb 9, 2026 · Assembly
Representative J. Jacobson added as a coauthor
- Mar 23, 2026 · Assembly
Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1