Wisconsin Assembly Bill AB274

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/30/25
• Refer: 5/30/25
• Report Pass: 12/2/25
• Refer: 12/2/25
• Failed: 3/23/26

Caption

An Act to renumber 227.15 (3); to amend 227.114 (2) (intro.), 227.14 (6) (c) 1. (intro.), 227.15 (7) and 990.01 (30m); to create 35.93 (2) (b) 3. gn., 35.93 (2) (b) 3. gp., 35.93 (2) (b) 3. gq., 35.93 (2) (c) 2m., 35.93 (3) (g), 227.10 (3) (f), 227.135 (1) (g), 227.137 (3) (h), 227.14 (6) (c) 1m., 227.15 (3) (b) and 227.225 of the statutes; Relating to: the expiration of administrative rules. (FE)

Summary

AB274 would create a new system under which each chapter of the Wisconsin Administrative Code expires seven years after it takes effect, unless the agency readopts the chapter. For existing code chapters already in effect when the bill takes effect, the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR) would have to establish a staggered expiration schedule, with expirations beginning no earlier than January 1, 2028 and running through January 1, 2035. Emergency rules would be excluded from this expiration framework. The bill sets up a readoption process in the year before a chapter expires. An agency could submit a notice of intent to readopt the chapter to the legislature and JCRAR, and if no member of JCRAR or the relevant standing committee objects within 40 days, the chapter would be considered readopted automatically. If there is an objection, the chapter would expire unless the agency goes through the standard rulemaking process to readopt it, with or without changes. JCRAR could also extend a chapter’s expiration date by up to one year to allow time for readoption, but the bill prohibits using emergency rules to extend a rule that is subject to expiration. AB274 would also change several administrative-rule procedures and related statutory definitions. It requires agencies to avoid outdated, derogatory, or offensive words and phrases in rules, adds notice and reporting requirements for readoption proposals, and directs the Legislative Reference Bureau to remove expired chapters from the code. It also updates the rules procedures manual and clarifies that “promulgate” includes readopting a rule. The bill would affect agencies that issue administrative rules, the legislature’s review committees, the Legislative Reference Bureau, and regulated parties subject to those rules. The general sentiment reflected in the bill’s structure is reform-oriented and aimed at increasing legislative oversight and periodic review of administrative rules. Because there were no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of debate or bipartisan support in the materials here. The bill ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The main point of contention likely concerns the burden and uncertainty created by mandatory rule expiration, especially for agencies and regulated entities that rely on stable administrative chapters. Supporters would likely view the bill as a way to prevent outdated rules from remaining in force indefinitely and to improve accountability, while critics may argue it could force unnecessary re-promulgation, create administrative workload, and risk gaps in regulation if chapters expire before readoption is completed.

Impact

AB274 would substantially alter Wisconsin’s administrative rule framework by adding a sunset provision for every chapter of the Wisconsin Administrative Code, requiring periodic readoption or expiration. It would amend chapters governing rulemaking procedure, legislative review, and administrative code maintenance, and would create new duties for agencies, JCRAR, standing committees, and the Legislative Reference Bureau. The bill would also affect how proposed rules are drafted and reviewed, including new readoption-specific notice, analysis, and withdrawal provisions.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been introduced as a government-oversight and regulatory-reform measure, with its text emphasizing periodic review, legislative notice, and removal of expired rules. However, the provided record contains no committee discussion or vote detail, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from legislators in the materials. The final status indicates the bill failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1.

Contention

The likely central controversy is whether administrative rules should expire automatically after seven years. Proponents would favor forcing agencies to revisit and justify rules regularly, while opponents may worry about destabilizing the regulatory code, increasing administrative costs, and creating the risk that important rules lapse if readoption is delayed or contested. Another possible point of contention is the bill’s increased role for JCRAR and standing committees in objecting to readoptions, which could be seen either as stronger oversight or as a political bottleneck for agency rulemaking.