Issue · Environment

Environment

Every environment bill, vote, and legislator stance in Wisconsin, automatically classified by Maddy, our AI policy reader.

Total bills
4
2025-2026 Regular Session
Top supporter
Shannon Zimmerman
89% support rate
Top opponent
Francesca Hong
20% support rate
Ranked legislators
10
5 support · 5 oppose
Key legislators

Who's moving environment in Wisconsin

Legislators moving environment in Wisconsin
Legislator Party Stance Support rate Votes
Shannon Zimmerman
Shannon Zimmerman House · District 30
R
Strong +
89% 17
Mark Spreitzer
Mark Spreitzer Senate · District 15
D
Strong +
88% 18
Melissa Ratcliff
Melissa Ratcliff Senate · District 16
D
Strong +
88% 18
Jodi Habush Sinykin
Jodi Habush Sinykin Senate · District 8
D
Strong +
88% 18
Kelda Roys
Kelda Roys Senate · District 26
D
Strong +
86% 17
Francesca Hong
Francesca Hong House · District 76
D
Strong −
20% 19
Supreme Moore Omokunde
Supreme Moore Omokunde House · District 17
D
Strong −
20% 19
Lori Palmeri
Lori Palmeri House · District 54
D
Strong −
20% 19
Darrin Madison
Darrin Madison House · District 10
D
Strong −
20% 19
Sequanna Taylor
Sequanna Taylor House · District 11
D
Strong −
20% 18
Showing 4 of 4 bills

All environment bills

vetoed · Wisconsin · Senate May 13, 2026

SB 420: Relating to: prohibiting rights of nature ordinances. (FE)

SB 420 prohibits cities, towns, villages, and counties from enacting "rights of nature ordinances," which are local laws granting legal rights to natural resources (like rivers or forests) to exist, be protected from pollution, or maintain healthy ecosystems. The bill directly affects local governments that might consider such ordinances. It creates a new statute (66.0132) explicitly banning these ordinances without providing exceptions. The law is purely procedural, preventing local governments from passing this specific type of ordinance.
vetoed · Wisconsin · Senate May 13, 2026

SB 289: Relating to: requirements for proposed administrative rules that impose any costs.

SB 289 requires state agencies to provide detailed economic impact analyses for proposed rules that impose costs on businesses, local governments, or individuals. Agencies must quantify expected implementation and compliance costs (and potential savings) for each affected group, attribute all costs directly to the rule (not other laws or federal requirements), and include this in their analysis. If an independent analysis shows costs exceed $10 million over two years, the rule must be paused until costs are addressed or offset. This bill directly affects state agencies creating new rules and the businesses, local governments, and individuals who would bear the financial impact.
signed · Wisconsin · Assembly Apr 6, 2026

AB 130: Relating to: exempting certain persons from PFAS enforcement actions under the spills law. (FE)

AB 130 exempts specific groups from certain PFAS enforcement actions under Wisconsin's spills law if they allow the state to clean up contaminated land at no cost to them. It directly affects landowners, fire departments, airports, wastewater spreaders, and waste facilities that handled PFAS-contaminated materials legally. The bill creates exemptions for those who spread permitted biosolids, owned land where such spreading occurred, used PFAS in emergency response (per federal rules), accepted PFAS waste, or own property not responsible for the contamination origin. This applies only to enforcement sections related to PFAS contamination under the spills law, not all PFAS regulations.
signed · Wisconsin · Assembly Apr 2, 2026

AB 453: Relating to: required approvals of rezoning requests related to residential development, contents of and consistency of local ordinances with local comprehensive plans, certain tax incremental district project costs related to residential development, and tax incremental district lifespan extension. (FE)

AB 453 requires counties and cities to include specific elements in their comprehensive land-use plans, such as 20-year projections of residential development (in 5-year increments) and maps showing current/future land uses, including environmentally sensitive areas. It mandates that local ordinances related to residential development must align with these plans, though density requirements (specifying minimum/maximum residential units per acre) apply only to cities, not towns or counties. The bill affects local governments by standardizing planning processes for residential growth and ensuring consistency between zoning rules and long-term land-use goals. It does not create new taxes or funding but updates existing planning statute requirements.