An Act to repeal 66.0602 (3) (dq), 66.0602 (3) (dv), 66.1105 (2) (f) 3., 66.1105 (4) (h) 7., 66.1105 (4m) (b) 2m., 66.1105 (5) (de) and 66.1105 (5) (dm); to amend 60.23 (32) (b) 4., 66.0602 (1) (d), 66.0602 (3) (dm), 66.0602 (3) (ds), 66.1105 (2) (cm), 66.1105 (2) (f) 1. a., 66.1105 (4) (gm) 4. c., 66.1105 (5) (bn), 66.1105 (5) (bo), 66.1105 (5) (bt), 66.1105 (5) (bu), 66.1105 (5) (d), 66.1105 (6m) (c) 8., 66.1105 (10) (c), 66.1105 (12) (intro.), 66.1105 (12) (b), 66.1105 (16) (d), 66.1105 (17) (title), 66.1105 (17) (a) (intro.), 66.1105 (17) (a) 3., 66.1105 (17) (d), 66.1105 (17) (e), 66.1105 (17) (f), 66.1105 (17) (g), 66.1105 (18) (c) 3. and 66.1105 (20) (b) (intro.); to create 66.1105 (2) (f) 1. am. of the statutes; Relating to: equalized value calculations, project costs, and local levy limits relating to tax incremental districts. (FE)
The bill also repeals certain provisions introduced in 2023 Wisconsin Act 12 concerning local property tax levy limits as they pertain to TIDs. For example, it reinstates the previous mechanism for calculating net new construction for tax levies that could potentially increase local revenue for municipalities. The revisions included in SB696 are intended to offer more flexibility for local governments to support growth and development initiatives.
Senate Bill 696 addresses several aspects of tax incremental districts (TIDs) within Wisconsin, specifically focusing on how project costs are calculated and how local levy limits are applied. One key provision of the bill is the increase of the allowable equalized value contained within a TID from the current 12 percent limit to 18 percent. This change aims to enable municipalities to utilize TIDs more effectively in fostering economic development by allowing for greater investment in these districts.
There may be contention surrounding the removal of limitations on including expenditures for newly platted residential development in project costs, as the bill also specifies that costs for constructing residential buildings and expanding parks can now be explicitly included as project costs. This expansion of project costs may raise concerns about the financial implications of TIDs on local taxpayers and potential misalignment of public resources towards residential projects as opposed to mixed-use or commercial enterprises, which may generate higher long-term revenue.
The Department of Administration is tasked with preparing a report on the financial projections stemming from these changes, indicating that the bill's implications are seen as significant enough to warrant detailed financial scrutiny.