<<

A Brief Explanation of ’s Local Forms of Government Attorney Douglas H. Frazer, DeWitt Ross & Stevens

he local forms of government in Wisconsin Menomonee Falls, with about 35,000 residents, is the state’s most include , villages, and . The populous . In contrast, a few cities have populations under 1,000. form of government is predicated not on T Villages and cities, as opposed to towns, enjoy constitutional rule: a ’s population or area, but rather on citizen preference and legislative approval. enhanced power to govern themselves in local matters without state government interference. This power is conferred by a 1924 state constitutional Wisconsin has 190 cities, 406 villages, and 1,257 amendment commonly referred to as the Home Rule Amendment. towns. Cities and villages are viewed as self- contained units of government and defined as The amendment provides: “Cities and villages … may determine their “full” or “true” municipal corporations. local affairs and government, subject only to this constitution and to such enactments of the legislature of statewide concern as with Towns, considered quasi-municipal corporations, govern those areas uniformity shall affect every or every village ….” Wis. Const. art. not within the corporate boundaries of cities or villages. Originally, XI, § 3(1). The amendment requires a to exercise its most towns were 6 miles by 6 miles (36 square miles)—the basic constitutional home rule through the adoption of a ordinance. “” survey unit, which is the grid-based framework for legal descriptions of all land in the state. The Legislature, over time, has been active in preempting the home rule powers. It happens a lot. For instance, the Legislative Fiscal Bureau Although only 30 percent of Wisconsin’s residents live in a , towns identified 128 instances between 2011 and 2016 of the Legislature contain 95 percent of Wisconsin’s land area. The smallest town is the restricting or preempting local authority, or imposing unfunded Town of Germantown—only 1.7 square miles. The entire 365 square-mile mandates on .2 In two of the most widely reported of Menominee (more or less coterminous with the Menominee examples, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld legislative preemption— ), also designated as a town, is the largest. over municipal home rule objection—occasioned by 2011 Wisconsin Act 10 and the statute abolishing local government residency requirements.3 Many of us live in what was once the Town of Milwaukee, formed in 1835. With the incorporation of Glendale in 1950 and Bayside in 1953, The courts almost always uphold state decision-making authority over as well as the municipal annexation of other , the Town of local government. This is because the Wisconsin Supreme Court has Milwaukee ceased its legal existence in 1955. interpreted the home rule provision to mean that a statute controls over any conflicting ordinance if the statute meets a disjunctive test: Cities and villages typically provide services such as police, fire, either the enactment a matter of statewide concern, or the water, sewer, licensing, property tax billing and collection, parks and enactment uniformly affects every city or village. This has resulted in recreation, cultural services, planning and development, zoning, social a narrow opening for the home rule amendment to operate without services, and solid waste and recycling collection. Moreover, cities and legislative restriction. Indeed, since the adoption of the Home Rule villages have broad authority to create tax incremental finance Amendment, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has only twice upheld a (TIFs) to foster economic development or redevelopment. By means municipality’s exercise of home rule authority. of a TIF, the municipality loans money to a developer or makes public works improvements and is paid back by the increase in tax revenue All this could change. Three sitting justices have argued for a re- from the project. See generally Wis. Stat. Chapters 61 (villages), 62 examination and reversal of this precedent. These justices interpret (cities), and 66 (general municipal law). the Home Rule Amendment to require a conjunctive test: that is, a legislative enactment preempts a conflicting ordinance under the home Towns, on the other hand, typically do not provide the full spectrum rule amendment only when the enactment both concerns a matter of of urban services found in cities and villages, such as public water and statewide concern and uniformly affects every city or village.4 This sewer systems, libraries, and police and fire departments. Towns have interpretation would give an ordinance more chance of surviving a TIF authority, but it is limited. See generally Wis. Stat. Chapter 60. conflicting legislative enactment. Cities and villages, unlike towns, can expand their boundaries through State statutes are a second source of municipal home rule authority, annexation of unincorporated territory. Residents of cities and villages 1 although that authority is still subservient to conflicting enactments of can initiate ordinances through the direct legislation statute —i.e., the Legislature. The statutory grants of home rule power are broad. They by presenting a proposed law directly to the legislative body—while give the governing municipal body, except as otherwise provided by law, citizens in towns lack this power. management and control of municipal property, finances, highways, Towns have an annual town meeting where qualified voters are entitled navigable waters, and public service. The statutes empower governing to discuss and vote on matters specified by state law. Cities and villages, bodies to act for the municipality’s commercial benefit, and for the on the other hand, work exclusively on the representative model. public’s health, safety, and welfare. The statutes authorize the governing bodies to carry out these powers by license, regulation, borrowing, tax Cities typically are organized with separate executive and legislative levy, appropriation, fine, imprisonment, confiscation, and other necessary functions, under which authority is shared by a and common or convenient means. Wis. Stat. § 61.34(1) (villages); § 62.11(5) (cities). council. Villages have unified executive and legislative functions and are governed by a board of trustees, elected at large and led by a president. There you have it. We have in Wisconsin an interesting mix of local Towns also have unified executive and legislative functions and are government forms—one quite different from the next. Toss the volatile governed by a town board of supervisors, led by a chairman. home rule issue into that mix, and you have a recipe for continuing legal controversy. continued page 26 Messenger 9 Local Government continued from p. 9 Douglas H. Frazer, Northwestern 1985, is a shareholder in the Milwaukee office of Dewitt Ross & Stevens. He focuses his practice on tax litigation and controversy.

1Wis. Stat. § 9.20 “permits local electors to submit a petition requesting that an attached proposed ordinance either be adopted by the municipality’s governing body without alternation or be referred to a vote in the next election.” See Bach, “Vox Populi: Wisconsin’s Direct Legislation Statute,” Wisconsin Lawyer (May 2008).

2See Memorandum from Bob Lang, Director of the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, to Rep. Katrina Shankland (May16, 2016). For an interesting discussion of the Home Rule Amendment see May, “Rejected: Municipal Home Rule Powers in Milwaukee Cases,” Wisconsin Lawyer (Nov. 2016).

3Black v City of Milwaukee, 2016 WI 47, ¶¶ 23-39, 369 Wis. 2d 272, 882 N.W.2d 333, cert. denied, --- U.S. ---, 137 S.Ct. 538 (upholding statute precluding city from enforcing residency requirement); Madison Teachers Inc. v Walker, 2014 WI 99, ¶¶ 87-129, 358 Wis. 1, 851 N.W.2d 337 (upholding Act 10’s prohibition of City of Milwaukee from paying employee share of pension contributions).

4Black, 2016 WI 47, ¶¶ 52-127 (Justice Rebecca Bradley concurring in result, Justices Abrahamson and Ann Bradley concurring and dissenting).

Messenger 27