Wisconsin Legislature: AB43: Bill Text

The bill sets certain coverage requirements on individual health plans that are
short-term, limited duration plans. Under current law, a short-term, limited
duration plan is individual health benefit plan coverage that is marketed and
designed to provide short-term coverage as a bridge between other coverages and
that has a term of not more than 12 months and an aggregate term of all consecutive
periods of coverage that does not exceed 18 months. Under current law, an insurer
generally must renew individual health coverage at the option of the insured, but an
insurer is not required to renew a short-term, limited duration plan.

The bill requires an insurer that offers a short-term, limited duration plan to
accept each individual who applies for coverage, regardless of whether the individual
has a preexisting condition. The bill also prohibits a short-term, limited duration
plan from imposing a preexisting condition exclusion. Under current law, a
short-term, limited duration plan may impose a preexisting condition exclusion, but
the plan must reduce the length of time of the exclusion by the aggregate duration
of the insured's consecutive periods of coverage. Under current law, a preexisting
condition exclusion is a period of time during which a plan will not cover a medical
condition for which the insured received some medical attention before the effective
date of coverage.

Under the bill, an insurer that offers a short-term, limited duration plan may
not vary premium rates for a specific plan except on the basis of 1) whether the plan
covers an individual or a family; 2) area in this state; 3) age; and 4) tobacco use, as
specified in the bill. An insurer that offers a short-term, limited duration plan is
prohibited under the bill from establishing rules for the eligibility of any individual
to enroll based on certain health status-related factors, which are specified in the
bill, and from requiring an enrollee to pay a greater premium, contribution,
deductible, copayment, or coinsurance amount than is required of a similarly
situated enrollee based on a health status-related factor. Under the bill, a
short-term, limited duration plan may not establish lifetime limits or limits for the
duration of the coverage on the dollar value of benefits for an enrollee or a dependent
of an enrollee under the plan.

Finally, the bill reduces the maximum allowable term of a short-term, limited
duration plan from 12 months to three months and reduces the maximum aggregate
duration from 18 months to six months.

Eliminate obsolete OCI appropriation

The bill eliminates an obsolete appropriation. The 2021-23 biennial budget act
required the transfer of $1,520,300 in each fiscal year of that biennium from the
unencumbered balance of the program-revenue-funded general program
operations appropriation of OCI to an interagency and intraagency operations

appropriation created in the act for the purpose of general program operations. The
bill eliminates that appropriation.

justice

Grant programs

Treatment alternatives and diversion grants

Under current law, DOJ, in collaboration with DOC and DHS, awards grants
to counties and tribes that have established qualifying treatment alternatives and
diversion (TAD) programs that offer substance abuse or mental health treatment
services as alternatives to prosecution or incarceration in order to reduce recidivism,
promote public safety, and reduce prison and jail populations.

Under current law, in order to qualify for a TAD grant, a county's or tribe's
program is required to match 25 percent of the grant and to charge participants a fee
to participate. A county or tribe that receives a TAD grant must create an oversight
committee to administer and evaluate its program. DOJ is required to make grants
available to any county or tribe on a competitive basis every five years. At the end
of the five-year grant cycle, DOJ is required to prepare a comprehensive report on
the grant program based on annual reports and other data it collects from the
counties and tribes.

Under current law, one of the appropriations used to fund the TAD grant
program provides that DOJ may use that appropriation to provide a TAD grant to
counties that were not a recipient of a TAD grant as of September 23, 2017.

The bill makes several changes to the TAD grant program. Under the bill, a
program funded by a TAD grant need not focus solely on alcohol and other drug
treatment, but must employ evidence-based practices targeted to the population
served by the program. The bill changes the match requirement from 25 percent to
10 percent and changes the competitive grant process to a four-year cycle. The bill
allows, but does not require, an eligible program to charge participants a fee for their
treatment. The bill also eliminates certain requirements pertaining to exposure of
genitals during drug testing. The bill also provides that the appropriation that was
formerly limited to providing a TAD grant to a county that had not received one as
of September 23, 2017, may be used to provide a TAD grant to a county that is not
a recipient of a TAD grant on the effective date of the bill.

Under current law, when a person pleads or is found guilty of certain drug
offenses, the court is required to order a substance use assessment. Under current
law, the court does not have to order an assessment if the person is already covered
by such an order, has recently completed an assessment under such an order, or is
participating in a TAD program. The bill specifies that if a person is participating
in any evidence-based substance use disorder treatment program as determined by
DOJ, regardless of its status relating to the TAD program, the court does not need
to order an assessment.

Community policing and community prosecution program grants

Under current law, DOJ awards grants to local governments for many
purposes, including for community-oriented policing-house programs and to
increase beat patrol officers. The bill adds that DOJ must award grants to cities,

villages, towns, counties, and tribes to fund community policing and community
prosecution programs.

Sexual assault victim services grants for the Wisconsin Coalition Against
Sexual Assault

Under current law, DOJ administers a grant program to provide grants to
organizations that provide services to victims of sexual assault. The bill requires
that, in addition to the other grants under the program, DOJ must provide an annual
grant of $343,000 to the Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault. Under the bill,
the Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault may also apply for additional grants
under the program.

Law enforcement recruitment, retention, and wellness grants

Under current law, DOJ awards grants for many purposes, including for
community-oriented policing-house programs and to increase beat patrol officers.
The bill adds that DOJ must award grants to law enforcement agencies and tribal
law enforcement agencies in this state to fund programs that recruit and retain law
enforcement officers and that promote officer wellness.

Crime victims services grants

Under current law, DOJ awards grants for many purposes, including grants to
organizations to provide services for sexual assault victims. The bill adds that DOJ
must award grants to organizations that provide services for crime victims.

Elder abuse grants and hotline

Attorney general and litigation

Powers of the attorney general

The bill repeals changes made to the powers of the attorney general in 2017
Wisconsin Act 369 relating to the power to compromise or discontinue civil actions
prosecuted by DOJ and the power to compromise and settle actions in cases where
DOJ is defending the state. The bill reestablishes these settlement powers as they
existed under the law before 2017 Wisconsin Act 369 was enacted.

The bill allows the attorney general to compromise or discontinue actions
prosecuted by DOJ 1) when directed by the officer, department, board, or commission
that directed the prosecution or 2) with the approval of the governor when the action
is prosecuted by DOJ on the initiative of the attorney general or at the request of any
individual. The bill eliminates the requirement for approval of a compromise or
discontinuance from a legislative intervenor or JCF. It also eliminates the
requirement for the attorney general to obtain approval of a compromise or
discontinuance by the Joint Committee on Legislative Organization in certain
circumstances before submitting a proposed plan to JCF.

Under the bill, when DOJ is defending the state, the attorney general may
compromise and settle the action as the attorney general determines to be in the best
interest of the state. The bill eliminates the requirement under current law that, in

actions for injunctive relief or if there is a proposed consent decree, the attorney
general must 1) obtain the approval of any legislative intervenor or 2) if there is no
intervenor, submit a proposed plan to JCF and, in certain circumstances, obtain
approval of JCF. The bill also eliminates the requirement for the attorney general
to obtain approval from JCLO in certain circumstances before submitting a proposed
plan of settlement or compromise to JCF.

Gifts and grants and disposition of settlement funds

The bill repeals certain changes made by 2017 Wisconsin Act 369 relating to
gifts and grants and certain proceeds received by DOJ, specifically reversing
provisions that changed a DOJ gifts and grants appropriation and a DOJ gifts,
grants, and proceeds appropriation from continuing appropriations to annual
appropriations.

Second, the bill repeals the requirement that the attorney general must deposit
all settlement funds into the general fund. The bill restores procedures relating to
discretionary settlement funds under which the attorney general could expend
certain settlement funds not committed under the terms of a settlement after
submitting a plan to JCF for passive review only if either 1) the cochairpersons of
JCF do not schedule a meeting or 2) a meeting is scheduled and JCF approves a plan
for expenditure.

Certain legal expenses related to the tobacco settlement agreement

The bill establishes an appropriation from which DOJ may expend moneys for
its legal expenses related to participation in arbitration or other alternative dispute
resolution processes arising from payments under the Attorneys General Master
Tobacco Settlement Agreement of November 23, 1998. In 1998, numerous states and
territories including Wisconsin agreed to a settlement with the major U.S. tobacco
companies regarding dozens of state lawsuits brought to recover health care costs
associated with treating smoking-related illnesses. Under the agreement, the state
receives annual payments from U.S. tobacco product manufacturers in perpetuity.

General justice

Background checks on all transfers of firearms

Current law provides that a federally licensed firearms dealer may not transfer
a handgun after a sale until the dealer has performed a background check on the
prospective transferee to determine if he or she is prohibited from possessing a
firearm under state or federal law. The bill generally prohibits any person from
transferring any firearm, including the frame or receiver of a firearm, unless the
transfer occurs through a federally licensed firearms dealer and involves a
background check of the prospective transferee. Under the bill, the prohibition does
not apply to 1) a transfer to a firearms dealer or to a law enforcement or armed
services agency; 2) a transfer of a firearm classified as antique; 3) a transfer for no
more than 14 days for the purpose of hunting or target shooting that involves no more
than nominal consideration; or 4) a transfer that is by gift, bequest, or inheritance
to a family member. A person who is convicted of violating the prohibition is guilty
of a misdemeanor and must be fined not less than $500 nor more than $10,000, may

be imprisoned for not more than nine months, and may not possess a firearm for a
period of two years.

Creating the Office of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women

The bill creates within DOJ the Office of Missing and Murdered Indigenous
Women, which is tasked with providing certain services to crime victims, their
families, witnesses, and others who are members of a tribe; providing training
relating to missing and murdered indigenous women, including search, rescue, and
response training; and establishing a grant program related to missing and
murdered indigenous women.

Hate crimes reporting portal

The bill requires DOJ to develop an Internet-based reporting system and a
telephone hotline for the reporting of hate crimes. Under the bill, DOJ must conduct
a public education campaign on hate crimes and where to report them and must
collect data relating to the reporting of hate crimes.

Relator appropriation

The bill creates a continuing appropriation to hold all money received by DOJ
that is owed to a relator, to provide payments to relators. A relator is a type of party
in a legal action in whose name an action is brought by a state.

Repeal of report on field prosecutor positions

2017 Wisconsin Act 261 created two field prosecutor attorney positions in DOJ
to assist the Division of Criminal Investigation and district attorneys. Act 261 also
required DOJ to submit annual reports to JCF on the activities and effectiveness of
the attorneys. The project positions terminate on April 11, 2023. The bill repeals the
requirement that DOJ submit the corresponding annual report.

Name of Shot Spotter Program

Under current law, DOJ provides money to the Shot Spotter Program in the city
of Milwaukee. The bill changes the name of the program to the “Gunfire Detection
Program.”

local government

Levy limits

Local levy overview

Generally, under current law, local levy increase limits are applied to the
property tax levies that are imposed by political subdivisions in December of each
year. Current law prohibits a political subdivision from increasing its levy by a
percentage that exceeds its valuation factor, which is defined as the greater of either
0 percent or the percentage change in the political subdivision's equalized value due
to new construction, less improvements removed.

Current law contains a number of exceptions to these levy increase limits, such
as amounts a county levies for a countywide emergency medical system, for a county
children with disabilities education board, and for certain bridge and culvert
construction and repair. In addition, a political subdivision may exceed the levy
increase limit that is otherwise applicable if its governing body adopts a resolution
to do so and if that resolution is approved by the voters in a referendum.

Alternative minimum valuation factor increase

The bill increases the alternative minimum valuation factor used to calculate
local levy limits from 0 percent to 2 percent, beginning with levies imposed in
December 2023.

Reduction for certain service revenues

Under current law, a political subdivision must reduce its allowable levy by the
estimated amount of any revenue from fees or payments in lieu of taxes if the revenue
is received for providing certain covered services that were funded with property tax
revenues in calendar year 2013. The covered services are certain garbage collection,
fire protection, snow plowing, street sweeping, and storm water management.

The bill repeals the requirement that a political subdivision must reduce its
allowable levy by the estimated amount of revenues received for providing covered
services that were funded with property tax revenues in calendar year 2013.

Reduction for service transfers

Under current law, if a political subdivision transfers to another governmental
unit the responsibility to provide a service that it provided in the previous year, the
levy increase limit otherwise applicable in the current year is decreased to reflect the
cost that the political subdivision would have incurred to provide that service. The
bill repeals that provision.

Approval of use of unused capacity

Current law provides two exceptions allowing a political subdivision to use
previously unused levy capacity. Under these exceptions, if a political subdivision's
allowable levy in prior years was greater than its actual levy in those years, the
otherwise applicable levy increase limit for the next succeeding year may be
increased by the difference between the allowable levy and the actual levy, up to a
specified maximum increase. These increases, in some cases, must be authorized by
a supermajority vote of the political subdivision's governing body. The bill eliminates
the supermajority requirements and, instead, requires only a simple majority vote
of the political subdivision's governing body for use of either of these unused levy
capacity exceptions.

Joint emergency services levy limit exception modification

Among the current law exceptions to local levy limits is an exception for the
amount that a municipality levies to pay for charges assessed by a joint fire
department or joint emergency medical services district organized by any
combination of two or more municipalities. This exception applies only to the extent
that the amount levied to pay for such charges would cause the municipality to
exceed the otherwise applicable levy limit and only if the charges assessed by the
department or district increase in the current year by an amount not greater than
the rate of inflation over the preceding year, plus 2 percent, and if the municipality's
governing body adopts a resolution in favor of exceeding the otherwise applicable
levy limit.

Under the bill, the exception is expanded to include joint fire services or joint
emergency medical services provided by a combination of two or more municipalities
through a joint district, joint ownership, joint purchase of services from a nonprofit

corporation, or joint contracting with a public or private services provider. The
exception is also expanded to cover all fees charged to a municipality by the joint fire
services or joint emergency medical services.

Exception for cross-municipality transit routes

The bill creates an exception to local levy limits for certain transit services.
Under the bill, amounts levied by a political subdivision for costs related to new or
enhanced transit services that cross adjacent county or municipal borders do not
apply to the limit if the political subdivisions between which the routes operate have
entered into an agreement to provide for the services and if the agreement is
approved in a referendum.

Exception for regional planning commission contributions

The bill creates a local levy increase limit exception for the amount a political
subdivision levies to pay for the political subdivision's share of the budget of a
regional planning commission (RPC). An RPC's budget is determined annually by
the RPC. The RPC then charges all political subdivisions within its jurisdiction a
proportional amount to fund the budget based on the equalized value of property in
the political subdivision and the total amount of equalized value of property within
the RPC's jurisdiction.

Tax incremental financing

Tax incremental financing overview

Under current law, cities and villages may use tax incremental financing (TIF)
to encourage development in the city or village. In general, under TIF, a city or
village pays for improvements in a tax incremental district (TID) and then collects
tax moneys attributable to all taxing jurisdictions on the increased property value
in the TID for a certain period of time to pay for the improvements. Ideally, after the
period of time, the city or village will have been repaid for its initial investment and
the property tax base in the TID will have permanently increased in value.

In general and in brief, a city or village makes use of TIF using the following
procedure:

1. The city or village designates an area as a TID and creates a project plan
laying out the expenditures that the city or village will make within the TID.

2. DOR establishes the base value of the TID. This value is the equalized value
of all taxable property within the TID at the time of its creation.

3. Each year thereafter, the value increment of the property within the TID is
determined by subtracting the base value from the current value of property within
the TID. The portion of taxes collected on any positive value increment is collected
by the city or village for use solely for the project costs of the TID. The taxes collected
by the city or village on positive value increments include taxes that would have been
collected by other taxing jurisdictions, such as counties or school districts, were the
TID not created.

4. Tax increments are collected until the city or village has recovered all of its
project costs or until the TID reaches its statutory termination date.

Workforce housing initiatives

The bill authorizes workforce housing initiatives and makes changes that affect
TIDs and state housing grants. The bill creates a definition for “workforce housing,”
changes the definition of a “mixed-use development” TID, increases the maximum
number of years a city or village may extend the life of a TID to improve its affordable
and workforce housing, requires a TID's project plan to contain alternative economic
projections, and changes the method of imposing certain impact fees.

Under the bill, a political subdivision may put into effect a workforce housing
initiative by taking one of several specified actions and posting on its website an
explanation of the initiative. Workforce housing initiatives include the following:
reducing permit processing times or impact fees for workforce housing; increasing
zoning density for a workforce housing development; rehabilitating existing
uninhabitable housing stock into habitable workforce housing; or implementing any
other initiative to address workforce housing needs. Once an initiative takes effect,
it remains in effect for five years. After June 30, 2024, if a political subdivision has
in effect at least three initiatives at the same time, DOA must give priority to housing
grant applications from, or related to a project in, the political subdivision.

The bill defines “workforce housing” to mean the following, subject to the
five-year average median costs as determined by the U.S. Bureau of the Census:

1. Housing that costs a household no more than 30 percent of the household's
gross median income.

2. Housing that is comprised of residential units for initial occupancy by
individuals whose household median income is no more than 120 percent of the
county's gross median income.

Under current law, a mixed-use development TID contains a combination of
industrial, commercial, or residential uses, although newly platted residential areas
may not exceed more than 35 percent of the real property within the TID. Under the
bill, newly platted residential areas may not exceed either the 35 percent limit or 60
percent of the real property within the TID if the newly platted residential use that
exceeds 35 percent is used solely for workforce housing.

The bill also requires a TID's project plan to include alternative projections of
the TID's finances and feasibility under different economic situations, including a
slower pace of development and lower rate of property value growth than expected
in the TID.

Currently, a city or village may extend the life of a TID for up to one year for
housing stock improvement if all of the following occurs:

1. The city or village pays off all of the TID's project costs.

2. The city or village adopts a resolution stating that it intends to extend the
life of the TID, the number of months it intends to do so, and how it intends to improve
housing stock.