66.1105(6m)(b)1.
1. Twelve months after 30% of the project expenditures are made;
66.1105(6m)(b)3.
3. Twelve months after the termination of the tax incremental district under
sub. (7).
66.1105(6m)(c)
(c) The city shall prepare and make available to the public updated annual reports describing the status of each existing tax incremental district, including expenditures and revenues. The city shall send a copy of the report to each overlying district by May 1 annually.
66.1105(7)
(7) Termination of tax incremental districts. A tax incremental district terminates when the earlier of the following occurs:
66.1105(7)(a)
(a) That time when the city has received aggregate tax increments with respect to the district in an amount equal to the aggregate of all project costs under the project plan and any amendments to the project plan for the district, except that this paragraph does not apply to a district whose positive tax increments have been allocated under
sub. (6) (d),
(dm),
(e), or
(f) until the district to which the allocation is made has paid off the aggregate of all of its project costs under its project plan.
66.1105(7)(ak)1.1. Except as provided in
par. (am) 1., for a district about which a finding is made under
sub. (4) (gm) 4. a. that not less than 50 percent, by area, of the real property within the district is a blighted area or an area in need of rehabilitation or conservation work, and if the district to which the plan relates is created after September 30, 1995, and before October 1, 2004, 27 years after the district is created.
66.1105(7)(ak)2.
2. For a district that is created after September 30, 1995, and before October 1, 2004, and that is not subject to
subd. 1., 23 years after the district was created, and, except as provided in
subd. 3., for a district that is created before October 1, 1995, 27 years after the district is created.
66.1105(7)(ak)3.
3. For Tax Incremental District Number 2 in the city of Racine, 37 years after the district is created.
66.1105(7)(am)1.1. For a district described under
par. (ak) 1., the time period specified in that subdivision, except that the city that created the district may, subject to
sub. (8) (e), request that the joint review board extend the life of the district for an additional 4 years. Along with its request for a 4-year extension, the city may provide the joint review board with an independent audit that demonstrates that the district is unable to pay off its project costs within the 27 years after the district is created. The joint review board may deny or approve a request to extend the life of the district for 4 years if the request does not include the independent audit, and the board shall approve a request to extend the life of the district for 4 years if the request includes the audit. If the joint review board extends the district's life, the district shall terminate at the earlier of the end of the extended period or the period specified in
par. (a).
66.1105(7)(am)2.
2. For a district that is created after September 30, 2004, about which a finding is made under
sub. (4) (gm) 4. a. that not less than 50 percent, by area, of the real property within the district is suitable for industrial sites or mixed-use development, 20 years after the district is created, except that the city that created the district may, subject to
sub. (8) (e), request that the joint review board extend the life of the district for an additional 3 years. Along with its request for a 3-year extension, the city may provide the joint review board with an independent audit that demonstrates that the district is unable to pay off its project costs within the 20 years after the district is created. The joint review board may deny or approve a request to extend the life of the district for 3 years if the request does not include the independent audit, and the board shall approve a request to extend the life of the district for 3 years if the request includes the audit. If the joint review board extends the district's life, the district shall terminate at the earlier of the end of the extended period or the period specified in
par. (a).
66.1105(7)(am)3.
3. For a district that is created after September 30, 2004, about which a finding is made under
sub. (4) (gm) 4. a. that not less than 50 percent, by area, of the real property within the district is a blighted area or in need of rehabilitation, 27 years after the district is created, except that the city that created the district may, subject to
sub. (8) (e), request that the joint review board extend the life of the district for an additional 3 years. Along with its request for a 3-year extension, the city may provide the joint review board with an independent audit that demonstrates that the district is unable to pay off its project costs within the 27 years after the district is created. The joint review board may deny or approve a request to extend the life of the district for 3 years if the request does not include the independent audit, and the board shall approve a request to extend the life of the district for 3 years if the request includes the audit. If the joint review board extends the district's life, the district shall terminate at the earlier of the end of the extended period or the period specified in
par. (a).
66.1105(7)(ar)
(ar) Notwithstanding
par. (am), 35 years after the district is created if it was created before October 1, 1995, and if the project plan is amended under
sub. (4) (h) 4.
66.1105(7)(as)
(as) Notwithstanding
par. (am), 35 years after the last expenditure identified in the project plan is made if the district to which the plan relates is created before October 1, 1995, and
sub. (6) (d) applies to the district.
66.1105(7)(at)
(at) Notwithstanding
par. (am), 31 years after the district is created if the district is created before October 1, 1995, and the expenditure period is specified in
sub. (6) (am) 2. c.
66.1105(7)(au)
(au) With regard to a distressed, or severely distressed, tax incremental district under
sub. (4e), the time period specified in
sub. (4e) (d) 2.
66.1105(7)(b)
(b) The local legislative body, by resolution, dissolves the district at which time the city becomes liable for all unpaid project costs actually incurred which are not paid from the special fund under
sub. (6) (c), except this paragraph does not make the city liable for any tax incremental bonds or notes issued.
66.1105(8)
(8) Notice of district termination, reporting requirements. 66.1105(8)(a)(a) A city which creates a tax incremental district under this section shall give the department of revenue written notice within 60 days of the termination of the tax incremental district under
sub. (7).
66.1105(8)(b)
(b) If the department of revenue receives a notice under
par. (a) during the period from January 1 to May 15, the effective date of the notice is the date the notice is received. If the notice is received during the period from May 16 to December 31, the effective date of the notice is the first January 1 after the department of revenue receives the notice.
66.1105(8)(c)
(c) After a city transmits to the department of revenue the notice required under
par. (a), the city and the department shall agree on a date by which the city shall send to the department, on a form prescribed by the department, all of the following information that relates to the terminated tax incremental district:
66.1105(8)(c)1.
1. A final accounting of all expenditures made by the city.
66.1105(8)(c)3.
3. The total amount of positive tax increments received by a city.
66.1105(8)(c)4.
4. The total amount of project costs, if any, not paid for with tax increments that became obligations of the city after the district was terminated.
66.1105(8)(d)
(d) If a city does not send to the department of revenue the form specified in
par. (c) within the time limit agreed to by the city and the department under
par. (c), the department may not certify the tax incremental base of a tax incremental district under
sub. (5) (a) and
(b) until the form is sent to the department.
66.1105(8)(e)
(e) A city shall notify the department of revenue at least one year before the date on which a tax incremental district is required to terminate under
sub. (7) (am) if a joint review board approves a request to extend the life of the district under
sub. (7) (am). If a city does not notify the department of revenue by that date, the department may deny the extension.
66.1105(9)(a)(a) Payment of project costs may be made by any one or more of the following methods:
66.1105(9)(a)1.
1. Payment by the city from the special fund of the tax incremental district;
66.1105(9)(a)3.
3. Payment out of the proceeds of the sale of bonds or notes issued by it under
ch. 67;
66.1105(9)(a)4.
4. Payment out of the proceeds of the sale of public improvement bonds issued by it under
s. 66.0619;
66.1105(9)(a)8.
8. Payment out of the proceeds of the sale of tax incremental bonds or notes issued by it under this subsection; or
66.1105(9)(a)9.
9. Payment out of the proceeds of revenue bonds issued by the city as provided by
s. 66.1103, for a purpose specified in that section.
66.1105(9)(b)1.1. For the purpose of paying project costs or of refunding municipal obligations issued under
ch. 67 or this subsection for the purpose of paying project costs, the local legislative body may issue tax incremental bonds or notes payable out of positive tax increments. Each bond or note and accompanying interest coupon, if any, is a negotiable instrument. The bonds and notes shall not be included in the computation of the constitutional debt limitation of the city. Bonds and notes issued under this subsection, together with their interest and income, shall be taxed in the same manner as are municipal obligations issued under
s. 67.04.
66.1105(9)(b)2.
2. Tax incremental bonds or notes shall be authorized by resolution of the local legislative body without the necessity of a referendum or any elector approval, but a referendum or election may be held, through the procedures provided in
s. 66.1103 (10) (d). The resolution shall state the name of the tax incremental district, the amount of bonds or notes authorized, and the interest rate or rates to be borne by the bond or notes. The resolution may prescribe the terms, form and content of the bonds or notes and any other matters that the local legislative body deems useful.
66.1105(9)(b)3.
3. Tax incremental bonds or notes may not be issued in an amount exceeding the aggregate project costs. The bonds or notes shall mature over a period not exceeding 23 years from the date of issuance or a period terminating with the date of termination of the tax incremental district, whichever period terminates earlier. The bonds or notes may contain a provision authorizing the redemption of the bonds or notes, in whole or in part, at stipulated prices, at the option of the city, on any interest payment date and shall provide the method of selecting the bonds or notes to be redeemed. The principal and interest on the bonds and notes may be payable at any time and at any place. The bonds or notes may be payable to bearer or may be registered as to the principal or principal and interest. The bonds or notes may be in any denominations. The bonds or notes may be sold at public or private sale. To the extent consistent with this subsection, the provisions of
ch. 67 relating to procedures for issuance, form, contents, execution, negotiation, and registration of municipal bonds and notes apply to bonds or notes issued under this subsection.
66.1105(9)(b)4.
4. Tax incremental bonds or notes are payable only out of the special fund created under
sub. (6) (c). Each bond or note shall contain the recitals necessary to show that it is only so payable and that it does not constitute an indebtedness of the city or a charge against its general taxing power. The local legislative body shall irrevocably pledge all or a part of the special fund to the payment of the bonds or notes. The special fund or the designated part of the fund may then be used only for the payment of the bonds or notes and interest on the bonds or notes until the bonds or notes have been fully paid; and a holder of the bonds or notes or of any coupons appertaining to the bonds or notes has a lien against the special fund for payment of the bonds or notes and interest on the bonds or notes and may either at law or in equity protect and enforce the lien.
66.1105(9)(b)5.
5. To increase the security and marketability of tax incremental bonds or notes, the city may:
66.1105(9)(b)5.a.
a. Create a lien for the benefit of the bondholders upon any public improvements or public works financed by the bonds or notes or the revenues from the bonds or notes; or
66.1105(9)(b)5.b.
b. Make covenants and do any acts, not inconsistent with the Wisconsin constitution, necessary or convenient or desirable in order to additionally secure the bonds or notes or tend to make the bonds or notes more marketable according to the best judgment of the local legislative body.
66.1105(10)
(10) Overlapping tax incremental districts. 66.1105(10)(a)(a) Subject to any agreement with bondholders, a tax incremental district may be created, the boundaries of which overlap one or more existing districts, except that districts created as of the same date may not have overlapping boundaries.
66.1105(10)(b)
(b) If the boundaries of 2 or more tax incremental districts overlap, in determining how positive tax increments generated by that area which is within 2 or more districts are allocated among the overlapping districts, but for no other purpose, the aggregate value of the taxable property in the area as equalized by the department of revenue in any year as to each earlier created district is that portion of the tax incremental base of the district next created which is attributable to the overlapped area.
66.1105(10)(c)
(c) The department of revenue shall exclude any parcel in a newly created tax incremental district that is located in an existing district when determining compliance with the 12 percent limit described in
sub. (4) (gm) 4. c.
66.1105(11)
(11) Equalized valuation for apportionment of property taxes. 66.1105(11)(a)(a) With respect to the county, school districts and any other local governmental body having the power to levy taxes on property located within a tax incremental district, if the allocation of positive tax increments has been authorized by the department of revenue under
sub. (6) (a), the calculation of the equalized valuation of taxable property in a tax incremental district for the apportionment of property taxes may not exceed the tax incremental base of the district until the district is terminated.
66.1105(12)
(12) Equalized valuation; the 12 percent limit. If the department of revenue notifies a local legislative body that is not in compliance with the 12 percent limit described in
sub. (4) (gm) 4. c., the local legislative body shall do one of the following:
66.1105(12)(b)
(b) Remove parcels from the district's, or proposed district's, boundaries so that the district, or proposed district, complies with the 12 percent limit. Such a removal of parcels may not substantially alter the project plan as approved under
sub. (4) (g), or the resolution adopted under
sub. (4) (gm) and approved by the joint review board under
sub. (4m) (b) 2. Not later than 30 days after receiving the department's notice of noncompliance under
sub. (4) (gm) 4. c., the city clerk shall submit, or resubmit, to the department the application described under
sub. (5) (b), and the application shall reflect the removal of parcels under this paragraph.
66.1105(13)
(13) The department of commerce, in cooperation with other state agencies and local governments, shall make a comprehensive report to the governor and the chief clerk of each house of the legislature, for distribution to the legislature under
s. 13.172 (2), at the beginning of each biennium, beginning with the 1977 biennium, as to the effects and impact of tax incremental financing projects socially, economically and financially.
66.1105(14)
(14) Use of tax incremental financing for inland lake protection and rehabilitation prohibited. Notwithstanding
sub. (9), no tax incremental financing project plan may be approved and no payment of project costs may be made for an inland lake protection and rehabilitation district or a county acting under
s. 59.70 (8).
66.1105(15)
(15) Substantial compliance. Substantial compliance with
subs. (3),
(4) (a),
(b),
(c),
(d),
(e),
(f), and
(h),
(4m), and
(5) (b) by a city that creates, or attempts to create, a tax incremental district is sufficient to give effect to any proceedings conducted under this section if, in the opinion of the department of revenue, any error, irregularity, or informality that exists in the city's attempts to comply with
subs. (3),
(4) (a),
(b),
(c),
(d),
(e),
(f), and
(h),
(4m), and
(5) (b) does not affect substantial justice. If the department of revenue determines that a city has substantially complied with
subs. (3),
(4) (a),
(b),
(c),
(d),
(e),
(f), and
(h),
(4m), and
(5) (b), the department of revenue shall determine the tax incremental base of the district, allocate tax increments, and treat the district in all other respects as if the requirements under
subs. (3),
(4) (a),
(b),
(c),
(d),
(e),
(f), and
(h),
(4m), and
(5) (b) had been strictly complied with based on the date that the resolution described under
sub. (4) (gm) 2. is adopted.
66.1105(16)(a)(a) A town may create a tax incremental district under this section if all of the following apply:
66.1105(16)(a)1.
1. The town enters into a cooperative plan with a city or village, under
s. 66.0307, under which part or all of the town will be annexed by the city or village in the future.
66.1105(16)(a)2.
2. The city or village into which the town territory will be annexed adopts a resolution approving the creation of the tax incremental district.
66.1105(16)(a)3.
3. The tax incremental district is located solely within territory that is to be annexed by a city or village as described under
subd. 1.
66.1105(16)(b)
(b) Along with the application that is filed under
sub. (5) (b), a town shall include a copy of the cooperative plan to which it is a party.
66.1105(17)
(17) Subtraction of territory, creation of new district. 66.1105(17)(a)(a) Subject to
par. (b), a city may simultaneously create a tax incremental district under this section and adopt an amendment to a project plan to subtract territory from an existing district without adopting a resolution containing the 12-percent-limit findings specified in
sub. (4) (gm) 4. c. if all of the following occur:
66.1105(17)(a)1.
1. The city includes with its application described under
sub. (5) (b) a copy of its amendment to a project plan that subtracts territory from an existing district, as described in
sub. (4) (h) 2.
66.1105(17)(a)2.
2. The city provides the department of revenue with 2 appraisals from certified appraisers, as defined in
s. 458.01 (7), which demonstrate all of the following:
66.1105(17)(a)2.a.
a. The current fair market value of the taxable property within the district that the city proposes to create.
66.1105(17)(a)2.b.
b. The current fair market value of the taxable property that the city proposes to subtract from an existing district.
66.1105(17)(a)3.
3. Both appraisals under
subd. 2. demonstrate that the value of the taxable property that is subtracted from an existing district equals or exceeds the amount that the department of revenue believes is necessary to ensure that, when the proposed district is created, the 12-percent limit specified in
sub. (4) (gm) 4. c. is met.
66.1105(17)(a)4.
4. The city certifies to the department of revenue that no other district created under this paragraph currently exists in the city.
66.1105(17)(b)
(b) A city may not act under
par. (a) if a tax incremental district that has been created under
par. (a) currently exists in the city.
66.1105 History
History: 1975 c. 105,
199,
311;
1977 c. 29 ss.
724m,
725,
1646 (1), (3);
1977 c. 418;
1979 c. 221,
343;
1979 c. 361 s.
112;
1981 c. 20,
317;
1983 a. 27,
31,
207,
320,
405,
538;
1985 a. 29,
39,
285;
1987 a. 27,
186,
395;
1989 a. 31,
336;
1993 a. 293,
337,
399;
1995 a. 27 ss.
3330c to
3337,
9116 (5),
9130 (4);
1995 a. 201,
225,
227,
335;
1997 a. 3,
27,
237,
252;
1999 a. 9;
1999 a. 150 ss.
457 to
472; Stats. 1999 s. 66.1105;
2001 a. 5,
11,
16,
104;
2003 a. 34,
46,
126,
127,
194,
320,
326;
2005 a. 6,
13,
46,
328,
331,
385;
2007 a. 2,
10,
21,
41,
43,
57,
73,
96;
2009 a. 5,
28,
67,
170,
176,
310,
312.
66.1105 Annotation
The tax increment law constitutionally authorizes financing of described public improvements, but does not authorize acquisition of private property by condemnation. Sigma Tau Gamma Fraternity House v. Menomonie,
93 Wis. 2d 392,
288 N.W.2d 85 (1980).
66.1105 Annotation
TIF bonds that a city proposed to issue under this section constituted debt under Art. XI, s. 3 and are subject to its debt limits. City of Hartford v. Kirley,
172 Wis. 2d 191,
493 N.W.2d 45 (1992).
66.1105 Annotation
Whether the city appropriately determined the project costs under sub. (2) (f) 1. is not a relevant consideration for the joint review board under sub. (4m) (c) 1. The joint review board generally considers the benefits and costs of the TIF district. A failure to consider whether the project plan should include the cost of improving areas outside the TIF district is not grounds for invalidating the board's decision. State ex rel. Olson v. City of Baraboo Joint Review Board, 2002 WI App 64,
252 Wis. 2d 628,
643 N.W.2d 796,
01-0201.
66.1105 Annotation
While sub. (4m) (c) 1. directs the joint review board to consider whether the development expected in the TIF district would occur without the use of tax incremental financing, it does not follow that the joint review board is barred from approving a TIF district if there is any land within the district that would have otherwise been developed. State ex rel. Olson v. City of Baraboo Joint Review Board, 2002 WI App 64,
252 Wis. 2d 628,
643 N.W.2d 796,
01-0201.
66.1105 Annotation
TIF districts can be created or amended without notice to or input from towns that adjoin the creating municipality. Although property taxpayers in adjoining towns that lie within the same overlying taxing districts are arguably affected when TIF districts are created or amended, the towns themselves are not, and lack legally protected interests at stake in the amendment of the TIF district. Consequently, towns lack standing to challenge the creation of a TIF district by an adjoining municipality. Town of Baraboo v. Village of West Baraboo, 2005 WI App 96,
283 Wis. 2d 479,
699 N.W.2d 610,
04-0980.
66.1105 Annotation
A city may lawfully agree to cooperate with a business venture in an effort to create a TIF district as long as it is clear from the agreement that all applicable laws and procedures are to be followed. The city is not bound until the common council votes to approve the agreement. Town of Brockway v. City of Black River Falls, 2005 WI App 174,
285 Wis. 2d 708,
702 N.W.2d 418,
04-2916.
66.1105 Annotation
Tax increment law appears constitutional on its face. 65 Atty. Gen. 194.
66.1105 Annotation
A Modest Proposal: Eliminating Blight, Abolishing But-For, and Putting New Purpose in Wisconsin's Tax Increment Finance Law. Farwell. 89 MLR 407 (2005).
66.1105 Annotation
Developer-Funded Tax Incremental Financing: Promoting Development Without Breaking the Bank. Ishikawa. Wis. Law. May 2006.
66.1106
66.1106
Environmental remediation tax incremental financing. 66.1106(1)(a)
(a) "Chief executive officer" means the mayor or city manager of a city, the village president of a village, the town board chairperson of a town or the county executive of a county or, if the county does not have a county executive, the chairperson of the county board of supervisors.
