Wisconsin Assembly Bill AB1204

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/19/26
• Refer: 3/19/26
• Failed: 3/23/26

Caption

An Act to repeal 64.09 (3); to create 66.0502 (4) (e) and 66.0502 (4) (f) of the statutes; Relating to: residency requirements for certain employees of a local governmental unit. (FE)

Summary

AB1204 would change Wisconsin law governing when local governmental units may require employees to live within a particular jurisdiction. Under current law, residency requirements are generally prohibited for local government employees, with limited exceptions mainly for certain public safety personnel. This bill repeals one existing statutory provision and creates new exceptions allowing specified local bodies to impose residency requirements on certain high-level employees. Specifically, the bill would allow a police, fire, or combined protective services department to require its chief to reside within a designated area; allow a city or village to require residency for a city or village administrator; allow a county without an elected county executive to require residency for a county administrator; allow a school board to require residency for a school district administrator; and allow a city or village operating under the city manager system to require residency for the city manager. The bill applies only to individuals hired on or after the effective date, so it would not retroactively affect current employees already in those positions.

Impact

The bill would narrow the current statewide restriction on local-government residency requirements by creating targeted statutory exceptions in s. 66.0502 and repealing s. 64.09 (3). It would give local governing bodies more discretion to condition employment of certain top administrators and department chiefs on residency, while leaving the general prohibition in place for other local employees. The affected parties are cities, villages, counties, school boards, and the designated positions listed in the bill, especially newly hired managers and administrators.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and available legislative context, the measure appears to be framed as a limited, administrative change rather than a broad policy shift. No committee transcript or vote record is available here, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to indicate strong support or opposition. The fiscal estimate notation suggests the bill was moving through the process in a routine way at the time of the last recorded action.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the policy question of whether local governments should be able to require residency for senior officials, since Wisconsin law generally bars residency mandates for public employees. Supporters would likely argue that residency can improve accountability, local knowledge, and responsiveness for top administrators and public safety chiefs. Opponents would likely view the change as an erosion of employee mobility and a step away from the existing statewide protection against residency mandates, especially for school and municipal administrators who are not traditionally subject to such requirements.