An Act Relating to: marking the Mississippi River Trail. (FE)
Summary
AB 562, enacted as 2025 Wisconsin Act 158, directs the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to mark the Mississippi River Trail with signs. The bill ties implementation to a local approval process: once every municipality along the Great River Road route has adopted a resolution supporting the Mississippi River Trail effort and confirming the route through its jurisdiction, DOT must notify the Legislative Reference Bureau, which then publishes a notice in the Wisconsin Administrative Register.
After that notice date is published, DOT has up to 18 months to procure and erect the trail signs. The bill also allows DOT to seek supplemental funding from the Joint Committee on Finance for the sign project, and it expressly waives the usual requirement that the committee first determine an emergency exists before approving that supplemental appropriation.
Impact
The bill creates a nonstatutory directive affecting the Department of Transportation’s responsibilities for trail signage and coordination with municipalities along the Great River Road. It does not amend existing statutes directly, but it relies on s. 84.107 for the Great River Road route and establishes a new administrative process for notice, funding, and sign installation. The practical effect is to formalize state support for the Mississippi River Trail and potentially authorize additional DOT spending for signage.
Sentiment
The available record suggests the bill was noncontroversial. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided materials, and the bill advanced to enactment and publication without any documented opposition in the supplied context. The caption and structure indicate a straightforward infrastructure and tourism/signage measure rather than a policy dispute.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. The only potentially sensitive issue apparent from the text is funding: DOT may request supplemental appropriations, and the bill removes the usual emergency finding requirement for that funding action. Otherwise, the measure appears to depend on local municipal resolutions and route confirmation, but no disagreement over those conditions is shown in the record provided.