An Act to create 85.65 of the statutes; Relating to: public protective services hearing protection assistance. (FE)
Summary
SB283 creates a new Wisconsin statute, section 85.65, establishing a public protective services hearing protection assistance program. Under the program, the Department is required to contract with a manufacturer of hearing protection devices to supply qualifying devices to law enforcement and fire protective agencies in Wisconsin. The devices must be reusable, fit entirely within the ear canal, and meet specified performance standards, including a minimum noise reduction rating of 25 decibels and a maximum output of 80 decibels.
The bill sets different access and cost rules depending on the agency. State law enforcement agencies may request any number of devices at no charge. Other law enforcement or fire protective agencies may receive, at no charge, devices equal to 20 percent of their officers or firefighters, or 10 devices, whichever is fewer. Additional devices for those agencies may be obtained at 50 percent of the device cost. The act took effect upon publication and became 2025 Wisconsin Act 14.
Impact
The bill adds a new statutory program in chapter 85 governing hearing protection assistance for public protective services personnel. It directs the Department to administer the program through a manufacturer contract and creates a state-backed procurement and distribution framework for hearing protection devices. The practical effect is to provide subsidized or free hearing protection to law enforcement and fire agencies, with the greatest benefit going to state law enforcement agencies and limited free allocations for local agencies.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was generally supported but not unanimously, with passage in both chambers after some rejected amendments. The Senate passed the bill on a 18-14 vote after rejecting two amendments, and the Assembly tabled substitute and floor amendments on 52-44 and 54-42 votes. That pattern indicates majority support for the core proposal, alongside meaningful partisan or policy disagreement over possible changes to the bill.
Contention
The main points of contention appear to have centered on amendments rather than the underlying concept of providing hearing protection. In the Senate, both a substitute amendment and Amendment 2 were rejected before final passage, and in the Assembly both a substitute amendment and Amendment 1 were laid on the table. While no committee transcript is available, the close votes suggest disagreement over the bill’s structure, scope, or funding terms—especially the differing treatment of state agencies versus local law enforcement and fire protective agencies, and the partial-cost model for additional devices.