Wisconsin Senate Bill SB1039

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/24/26
• Refer: 2/24/26
• Failed: 3/23/26

Caption

An Act to repeal 66.0422 (2) (c), 66.0422 (4) and 66.0422 (5); to amend 196.504 (1) (ac) 3. and 196.504 (2) (a) of the statutes; Relating to: broadband expansion grants for cities, villages, towns, and counties and telecommunications-related construction projects of cities, villages, and towns. (FE)

Summary

SB1039 revises Wisconsin’s broadband expansion grant program and related local government authority over telecommunications and broadband projects. The bill would let cities, villages, towns, and counties apply for broadband expansion grants on their own, without having to partner with a telecommunications utility or a nonprofit or for-profit organization as current law requires. It also expands the allowable uses of grant funds to include broadband project planning, such as feasibility reports, and to cover up to 50% of the cost of hiring and employing one broadband director. The bill also removes several procedural requirements for cities, villages, and towns that want to construct or operate telecommunications, cable, video, or broadband facilities. Specifically, it repeals statutory provisions requiring a pre-hearing report with cost and revenue estimates and a cost-benefit analysis before a local government may authorize such a project. In effect, SB1039 reduces administrative hurdles for local broadband and telecommunications initiatives while preserving the overall grant structure administered by the Public Service Commission.

Impact

SB1039 would amend Wisconsin statutes governing broadband expansion grants and local telecommunications construction projects. It repeals portions of s. 66.0422 and revises s. 196.504 so political subdivisions can directly seek broadband grants and use grant money for planning and broadband staffing support, not just infrastructure construction. The bill would also remove reporting requirements tied to local authorization of broadband and related service facilities, easing local procedural obligations for cities, villages, and towns.

Sentiment

The available bill text and context suggest a generally supportive policy direction focused on expanding broadband access and giving local governments more flexibility. The bill was introduced with multiple Senate and Assembly cosponsors, which indicates a degree of bipartisan or cross-chamber interest in the proposal. No committee transcript or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or debate in the supplied materials.

Contention

The main points of contention are likely to center on the bill’s reduction of oversight and partnership requirements. Opponents of the changes may argue that eliminating the required partnership for grant applications and removing the pre-project cost-benefit report could weaken accountability, reduce private-sector collaboration, or increase the risk of poorly planned local broadband projects. Supporters are likely to favor the bill because it lowers barriers for local governments, broadens eligible grant uses, and may speed deployment in unserved areas.