Home values, gross rent, homeownership, housing cost burdens, and the pressure from prices and incomes.
Median owner-occupied home value$266.5K2020–2024 · #30 of 50 · highest first
Median gross rent$1.09K2020–2024 · #32 of 50 · highest first
Homeownership rate67.8%2020–2024 · #22 of 50 · highest first
Wisconsin over time
Explore Wisconsin readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Wisconsin officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Wisconsin effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Wisconsin change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Home-price growth since 2016 Wisconsin · source units
WisconsinPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
85 of 85 reviewed Wisconsin actions match · 18 date markers shown. 26 major events shown separately.
Wisconsin · 2025: +94% · Rank #16 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: Not available
FactVote averages the four quarterly, not-seasonally-adjusted FHFA all-transactions HPI observations for each year. It compares that series with BEA annual per-capita personal income distributed by FRED, then rebases both to 100 in 2016. This is a pressure indicator, not a home-price-to-income ratio and not a measure of monthly mortgage affordability. Both series are nominal; neither is adjusted for inflation. Per-capita personal income includes earnings, property income, and transfers and is not median household income. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
View observations and export data
Wisconsin Home-price growth since 2016 · source units
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
Wisconsin · state comparison
Home values, rent, and homeownership
Census values are estimates for occupied housing, rather than current listing or sale prices.
Wisconsin · 2020–2024$266,500
Wisconsin rank#30among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$332,700Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Median owner-occupied home value
Median reported value of owner-occupied housing.
2024 dollars; a higher value can benefit owners and make buying harder.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Wisconsin stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Wisconsin has a dark outline.
Lower value · $162.6KHigher value · $839.1KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Wisconsin · $266,5002020–2024 · Rank #30 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Wisconsin with every state · 50 ranked
Median owner-occupied home value · 2020–2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
$839,100
—
#2
California
$734,700
—
#3
Washington
$564,600
—
#4
Massachusetts
$562,100
—
#5
Colorado
$539,400
—
#6
Utah
$489,400
—
#7
Oregon
$477,600
—
#8
New Jersey
$454,400
—
#9
Nevada
$435,400
—
#10
New York
$423,800
—
#11
Maryland
$419,900
—
#12
Idaho
$418,600
—
#13
Rhode Island
$404,200
—
#14
New Hampshire
$402,500
—
#15
Arizona
$394,500
—
#16
Virginia
$383,700
—
#17
Montana
$375,800
—
#18
Connecticut
$366,900
—
#19
Florida
$359,000
—
#20
Alaska
$352,900
—
#21
Delaware
$352,000
—
#22
Minnesota
$329,300
—
#23
Vermont
$316,600
—
#24
Wyoming
$309,700
—
#25
Georgia
$303,300
—
#26
Maine
$296,600
—
#27
North Carolina
$288,900
—
#28
Tennessee
$286,700
—
#29
Texas
$283,800
—
#30
Wisconsin · your comparison
$266,500
—
#31
Illinois
$263,300
—
#32
South Carolina
$259,000
—
#33
South Dakota
$257,400
—
#34
Pennsylvania
$254,500
—
#35
North Dakota
$249,900
—
#36
New Mexico
$248,100
—
#37
Nebraska
$238,600
—
#38
Michigan
$231,600
—
#39
Missouri
$230,300
—
#40
Indiana
$218,200
—
#41
Kansas
$217,200
—
#42
Louisiana
$216,500
—
#43
Ohio
$214,800
—
#44
Alabama
$209,900
—
#45
Iowa
$208,000
—
#46
Kentucky
$205,600
—
#47
Oklahoma
$199,800
—
#48
Arkansas
$188,000
—
#49
Mississippi
$169,800
—
#50
West Virginia
$162,600
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Median monthly gross rent for renter-occupied housing units paying cash rent, including contract rent plus estimated average utility and fuel costs paid by the renter.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Method and limitations
U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts, sourced from the American Community Survey 2020–2024 five-year estimate and expressed in 2024 dollars.
This is a multi-year statewide estimate, not a current asking-rent measure.
The median obscures differences by location, unit size, housing quality, and renter circumstances.
Compare moderate-or-severe and severe housing cost burdens for three distinct housing groups.
Wisconsin · 2020–202443.7%
Wisconsin rank#46among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark51.1%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Renters · spending at least 30% of income
Housing costs as a share of household income, excluding households for which a ratio cannot be computed.
Renters and owners have separate denominators. Ratios use the Census computed-income universe.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Wisconsin stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Wisconsin has a dark outline.
Lower value · 38.9%Higher value · 60.1%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Wisconsin · 43.7%2020–2024 · Rank #46 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Wisconsin with every state · 50 ranked
Renters · spending at least 30% of income · 2020–2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Florida
60.1%
—
#2
Hawaii
56.7%
—
#3
Nevada
55.9%
—
#4
California
55.3%
—
#5
Louisiana
54.8%
—
#6
Colorado
52.9%
—
#7
Connecticut
52.6%
—
#8
Oregon
52.5%
—
#9
Georgia
52.4%
—
#10
South Carolina
52.1%
—
#11
New York
52.1%
—
#12
Massachusetts
51.8%
—
#13
Texas
51.7%
—
#14
New Jersey
51.6%
—
#15
Maryland
51.5%
—
#16
Arizona
51.4%
—
#17
Mississippi
51.3%
—
#18
Michigan
50.4%
—
#19
New Mexico
50.2%
—
#20
Washington
49.9%
—
#21
Delaware
49.6%
—
#22
North Carolina
48.9%
—
#23
West Virginia
48.9%
—
#24
Tennessee
48.8%
—
#25
Alabama
48.8%
—
#26
Virginia
48.5%
—
#27
Maine
48.4%
—
#28
Vermont
48.4%
—
#29
New Hampshire
48.2%
—
#30
Pennsylvania
48.2%
—
#31
Minnesota
48.1%
—
#32
Indiana
48.1%
—
#33
Rhode Island
48%
—
#34
Illinois
47.9%
—
#35
Utah
47.2%
—
#36
Idaho
46.9%
—
#37
Oklahoma
46.3%
—
#38
Ohio
45.9%
—
#39
Missouri
45.6%
—
#40
Kentucky
45.4%
—
#41
Nebraska
45.1%
—
#42
Arkansas
44.8%
—
#43
Montana
44.8%
—
#44
Alaska
44.6%
—
#45
Iowa
43.9%
—
#46
Wisconsin · your comparison
43.7%
—
#47
Kansas
43.5%
—
#48
Wyoming
43.1%
—
#49
South Dakota
39.8%
—
#50
North Dakota
38.9%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Both series start at 100 in 2016. The gap describes price pressure; it is not a mortgage payment or a price-to-income ratio.
Wisconsin · 2025+94%
Wisconsin rank#16among all 50 states
U.S. benchmarkNot availableSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Home-price growth since 2016
FactVote averages the four quarterly, not-seasonally-adjusted FHFA all-transactions HPI observations for each year. It compares that series with BEA annual per-capita personal income distributed by FRED, then rebases both to 100 in 2016.
This is a pressure indicator, not a home-price-to-income ratio and not a measure of monthly mortgage affordability. Both series are nominal; neither is adjusted for inflation. Per-capita personal income includes earnings, property income, and transfers and is not median household income.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Wisconsin
2025 · Wisconsin: +94% · Rank #16 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Wisconsin Home-price growth since 2016 history
Period
Wisconsin
Compare
2016
+0%
2017
+4.5%
2018
+9.9%
2019
+15.3%
2020
+20.5%
2021
+35.1%
2022
+56.4%
2023
+70.5%
2024
+83.8%
2025
+94%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Wisconsin stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Wisconsin has a dark outline.
Lower value · +38.2%Higher value · +141.7%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Wisconsin · +94%2025 · Rank #16 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at the index base (0% growth); #1 means the highest value.
Compare Wisconsin with every state · 50 ranked
Home-price growth since 2016 · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Idaho
+141.7%
—
#2
Florida
+114.5%
—
#3
Maine
+113.7%
—
#4
Utah
+113.6%
—
#5
Tennessee
+112.4%
—
#6
Arizona
+112.3%
—
#7
New Hampshire
+110.1%
—
#8
Rhode Island
+108%
—
#9
Georgia
+107.6%
—
#10
North Carolina
+107.1%
—
#11
Montana
+106.7%
—
#12
Nevada
+106.1%
—
#13
South Carolina
+105.5%
—
#14
Washington
+100.2%
—
#15
Indiana
+94.5%
—
#16
Wisconsin · your comparison
+94%
—
#17
Michigan
+93.7%
—
#18
Ohio
+93.3%
—
#19
Vermont
+92.6%
—
#20
New Jersey
+88.9%
—
#21
Missouri
+86.9%
—
#22
New York
+85.9%
—
#23
Nebraska
+84.6%
—
#24
Massachusetts
+84.3%
—
#24
South Dakota
+84.3%
—
#26
Texas
+83.3%
—
#27
Kentucky
+83.2%
—
#28
Colorado
+83.1%
—
#29
Kansas
+82.5%
—
#30
New Mexico
+82.3%
—
#31
Alabama
+81.3%
—
#32
Arkansas
+80.8%
—
#33
Connecticut
+79.8%
—
#34
Pennsylvania
+78.4%
—
#35
Virginia
+76.5%
—
#36
Delaware
+75.4%
—
#37
Oregon
+74.7%
—
#38
California
+72.7%
—
#39
Oklahoma
+71.9%
—
#40
Minnesota
+70%
—
#41
Wyoming
+69.3%
—
#42
Illinois
+65.3%
—
#43
Iowa
+64.2%
—
#44
Mississippi
+63.9%
—
#45
Hawaii
+63%
—
#46
Maryland
+59.4%
—
#47
West Virginia
+58.6%
—
#48
Alaska
+51.9%
—
#49
North Dakota
+45.9%
—
#50
Louisiana
+38.2%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
State building activity, vacant units, mortgage performance, and borrowing rates are different measures.
Wisconsin · 202525,569
Wisconsin rank#18among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark1,431,616Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Total housing units authorized
New privately owned housing units authorized by building permits; final annual, not seasonally adjusted.
A permit is authorization, not a start or completed home. Absolute counts reflect the size of a state. Units in permit-issuing places; excludes public housing.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Wisconsin stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Wisconsin has a dark outline.
Lower value · 848Higher value · 210,217Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Wisconsin · 25,5692025 · Rank #18 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Wisconsin with every state · 50 ranked
Total housing units authorized · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
210,217
—
#2
Florida
178,297
—
#3
California
103,856
—
#4
North Carolina
86,167
—
#5
Georgia
61,196
—
#6
Arizona
51,532
—
#7
South Carolina
45,862
—
#8
Tennessee
43,374
—
#9
New York
38,667
—
#10
Washington
34,913
—
#11
Colorado
33,754
—
#12
Ohio
33,640
—
#13
Virginia
33,094
—
#14
Indiana
29,076
—
#15
New Jersey
27,661
—
#16
Utah
26,775
—
#17
Pennsylvania
25,709
—
#18
Wisconsin · your comparison
25,569
—
#19
Michigan
23,075
—
#20
Minnesota
20,947
—
#21
Alabama
19,061
—
#22
Illinois
18,551
—
#23
Nevada
18,540
—
#24
Idaho
17,944
—
#25
Missouri
17,474
—
#26
Oklahoma
15,513
—
#27
Arkansas
15,492
—
#28
Kentucky
14,940
—
#29
Oregon
14,839
—
#30
Louisiana
14,203
—
#31
Iowa
13,664
—
#32
Maryland
13,358
—
#33
Massachusetts
12,477
—
#34
Nebraska
10,596
—
#35
Kansas
10,299
—
#36
Mississippi
8,405
—
#37
New Mexico
7,747
—
#38
Connecticut
7,273
—
#39
Maine
6,979
—
#40
Delaware
6,468
—
#41
South Dakota
5,305
—
#42
Montana
5,258
—
#43
New Hampshire
5,030
—
#44
West Virginia
3,962
—
#45
Hawaii
3,708
—
#46
North Dakota
2,440
—
#47
Vermont
2,294
—
#48
Wyoming
2,238
—
#49
Rhode Island
1,738
—
#50
Alaska
848
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
85 of 85 reviewed Wisconsin actions · newest first
Jul 8, 2026 · DOJ 2026-07-08 · Joined an amicus brief challenging reductions in the wage standard for H-2A agricultural workers and addressing effects on domestic farmworkers’ wages. · Reported actionWisconsin agencies · DOJ 2026-07-08
Joined an amicus brief challenging reductions in the wage standard for H-2A agricultural workers and addressing effects on domestic farmworkers’ wages.
Jul 8, 2026 · Reported action
Attorney General Josh Kaul · Filed amicus brief
FactVote reviewed summary
Joined an amicus brief challenging reductions in the wage standard for H-2A agricultural workers and addressing effects on domestic farmworkers’ wages.
Reported in the original official document dated 2026-07-08. Filed amicus brief. The reporting date may follow the filing or court order. A filing, comment, or guidance does not enact law or establish final liability.
Why this record is included
Foreign-born residents include naturalized citizens and lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens. A provision about a particular immigration status concerns only a subset of that population; it does not change a person’s birthplace. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born · Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(608) 266-1220 NEWS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 8, 2026 Wisconsin DOJ Joins Amicus Brief in United Farm Workers v. United States Department of Labor to Protect Wages for Domestic and H-2A Farmworkers MADISON, Wis. – The Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) is joining a coalition in filing an amicus brief supporting the United Farm Workers’ (UFW) motion for summary judgment seeking to permanently enjoin the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) from applying its 2025 interim final rule (IFR) that implements a significant reduction to the Adverse Effect Wage Rate ( AEWR). The AEWR is a longstanding regulatory tool used to protect the wages and working conditions of domestic farmworkers from the effects of employers hiring foreign labor. Through the IFR, the DOL seeks to transfer an estimated $2.46 billion annually from H-2A farmworkers to industry employers by lowering worker pay standards, without calculating the impact on domestic farmworkers . The rule abandons reliable farm - specific data, arbitrarily creates new lower -paying job categories, and deducts housing costs from the wages paid to H -2A workers. These changes harm the public interest and exacerbate the roots of farmworker poverty for b oth H-2A workers and domestic farmworkers ali ke, because when employers can pay H -2A workers less, they pay domestic workers less too. “Farmworkers do essential work, and they deserve to be paid fairly,” said AG Kaul. “This interim final rule, which drives down wages for farmworkers, should be blocked.” The H -2A program allows certain agricultural employers to bring in foreign temporary workers when there are insufficient domestic workers to fulfill necessary Page 2 of 2 DOJ Communications Office [email protected] (608) 266-1220 jobs. H-2A employers are responsib
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Mar 25, 2026 · AB 1120 · repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE) · Did not passWisconsin Legislature · AB 1120
repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE)
Mar 25, 2026 · Did not pass
Rep. Darrin Madison · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB1120: repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, no city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance that imposes a moratorium on a landlord from pursuing an eviction action against a tenant of the landlord’s residential or commercial property. This bill repeals that provision. For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill. This describes the proposal at introduction; the recorded disposition below is separate.
2026-03-25: Fiscal estimate received. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, no city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance that imposes a moratorium on a landlord from pursuing an eviction action against a tenant of the landlord’s residential or commercial property. This bill repeals that provision. For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Mar 25, 2026 · SB 1107 · repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE) · Did not passWisconsin Legislature · SB 1107
repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE)
Mar 25, 2026 · Did not pass
Sen. LaTonya Johnson · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored SB1107: repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, no city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance that imposes a moratorium on a landlord from pursuing an eviction action against a tenant of the landlord’s residential or commercial property. This bill repeals that provision. For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill. This describes the proposal at introduction; the recorded disposition below is separate.
2026-03-25: Fiscal estimate received. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, no city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance that imposes a moratorium on a landlord from pursuing an eviction action against a tenant of the landlord’s residential or commercial property. This bill repeals that provision. For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.
Sponsored AB1197: the definition of tenant at will. Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, chapter 704 of the Wisconsin statutes, which pertains to landlords and tenants, excludes from the definition of “tenant at will” a person holding possession of real property under an employment contract. This bill removes that exclusion. This describes the proposal at introduction; the recorded disposition below is separate.
2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, chapter 704 of the Wisconsin statutes, which pertains to landlords and tenants, excludes from the definition of “tenant at will” a person holding possession of real property under an employment contract. This bill removes that exclusion.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Mar 23, 2026 · AB 1133 · local regulation of landlords and tenants. · Did not passWisconsin Legislature · AB 1133
local regulation of landlords and tenants.
Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass
Rep. Brienne Brown · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB1133: local regulation of landlords and tenants. Introduced proposal analysis: Current law prohibits cities, villages, towns, and counties (local governments) from enacting ordinances that impose certain limitations on residential landlords, including 1) restricting a landlord in entering into a rental agreement with a prospective tenant while the premises is occupied by a current tenant; 2) restricting a landlord in showing a premises to a prospective tenant during a current tenant’s tenancy; or 3) requiring a landlord to provide to a tenant information that is not required to be provided under federal or state law. This bill creates an exception to these restrictions, allowing…
2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Current law prohibits cities, villages, towns, and counties (local governments) from enacting ordinances that impose certain limitations on residential landlords, including 1) restricting a landlord in entering into a rental agreement with a prospective tenant while the premises is occupied by a current tenant; 2) restricting a landlord in showing a premises to a prospective tenant during a current tenant’s tenancy; or 3) requiring a landlord to provide to a tenant information that is not required to be provided under federal or state law. This bill creates an exception to these restrictions, allowing a local government to enact an ordinance that 1) requires a landlord to make a good faith offer to renew a tenant’s lease unless there is good cause for nonrenewal, and establishes standards for determining good cause; 2) prescribes notice requirements related to a landlord’s offer to renew a lease; 3) establishes requirements related to the execution of a renewed lease agreement; 4) prescribes timeframes during which a landlord may enter a leased premises to show the premises to prospective tenants or lease the premises to another tenant for a subsequent lease period; or 5) provides a penalty or remedy for violation of the ordinance.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Mar 23, 2026 · AB 1064 · prohibiting landlords from charging application fees and credit checks and background checks obtained by landlords. · Did not passWisconsin Legislature · AB 1064
prohibiting landlords from charging application fees and credit checks and background checks obtained by landlords.
Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass
Rep. Lori Palmeri · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB1064: prohibiting landlords from charging application fees and credit checks and background checks obtained by landlords. Introduced proposal analysis: This bill prohibits landlords from charging application fees to prospective tenants. The bill also modifies certain requirements when a landlord charges a fee to a tenant for a credit check or background check. Current statutes do not specifically address application fees charged by a landlord for consideration of a rental application. However, the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection has promulgated rules defining an “earnest money deposit” as the total of all payments or deposits “given by a prospective…
2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
This bill prohibits landlords from charging application fees to prospective tenants. The bill also modifies certain requirements when a landlord charges a fee to a tenant for a credit check or background check. Current statutes do not specifically address application fees charged by a landlord for consideration of a rental application. However, the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection has promulgated rules defining an “earnest money deposit” as the total of all payments or deposits “given by a prospective tenant to a landlord in return for the option of entering into a rental agreement in the future, or for having a rental agreement considered by a landlord,” which includes an application fee. DATCP rules require a landlord to fully refund an earnest money deposit if 1) the landlord rejects the rental application or refuses to enter into a rental agreement with the applicant; 2) the applicant withdraws the rental application before the landlord accepts the application; or 3) the landlord fails to approve the rental application within a specified period. If the landlord approves the application and the applicant fails to enter into the rental agreement, the landlord generally may withhold from the earnest money deposit an amount sufficient to compensate the landlord for actual costs and damages incurred because of the prospective tenant’s failure to enter into the rental agreement. If the applicant enters into the rental agreement, the landlord must apply the earnest money deposit as rent or as a security deposit or return it to the tenant. The bill prohibits a landlord from charging a prospective tenant an application fee or accepting earnest money from a prospective tenant any portion of which includes an application fee. The bill defines an “applic
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Wisconsin officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs from FactVote’s Wisconsin candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
25 statements from 15 candidates
2026 Wisconsin Governor — General Election
2 candidates with matching statements · 3 statements
Government should help create jobs—not just be a check cutter. Under Crowley’s leadership, public dollars will multiply opportunity. Investments in housing, health care, and climate resilience pay dividends across Wisconsin, with accountability and outcomes that families can feel. That means homes p…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Housing affordability
Candidate campaign source
Government should help create jobs—not just be a check cutter. Under Crowley’s leadership, public dollars will multiply opportunity. Investments in housing, health care, and climate resilience pay dividends across Wisconsin, with accountability and outcomes that families can feel. That means homes people can afford, care that’s easy to access, and family supporting jobs.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
Crowley will build and preserve affordable and attainable housing in rural, urban, and suburban communities alike. He’ll make it easier to get projects approved and ensure new housing is energy-efficient, resilient, and affordable to working families.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Housing affordability
Candidate campaign source
Crowley will build and preserve affordable and attainable housing in rural, urban, and suburban communities alike. He’ll make it easier to get projects approved and ensure new housing is energy-efficient, resilient, and affordable to working families.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
Across Wisconsin, families are feeling squeezed. Prices are up, but wages and support haven’t kept pace. As the daughter of a single mom who worked multiple jobs, JoCasta knows how hard it is to stretch every dollar. She’s using this campaign to call for bold, statewide investment in affordable chil…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Housing affordability
Candidate campaign source
Across Wisconsin, families are feeling squeezed. Prices are up, but wages and support haven’t kept pace. As the daughter of a single mom who worked multiple jobs, JoCasta knows how hard it is to stretch every dollar. She’s using this campaign to call for bold, statewide investment in affordable child care, attainable housing, and relief at the grocery store—not in five years, but now. These aren’t luxuries. They’re essentials every family should have access to.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
Uses her campaign to call for statewide investment in child care, housing, and grocery-cost relief; the Secretary of State does not control state appropriations.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Cost of Living
Candidate campaign source
Uses her campaign to call for statewide investment in child care, housing, and grocery-cost relief; the Secretary of State does not control state appropriations.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
JoCasta has led the way on housing solutions in Milwaukee and understands how deeply the affordability crisis is affecting families across the state. She believes the state must play a more active role in supporting affordable housing development, preventing displacement, and making sure renters and…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Housing affordability
Candidate campaign source
JoCasta has led the way on housing solutions in Milwaukee and understands how deeply the affordability crisis is affecting families across the state. She believes the state must play a more active role in supporting affordable housing development, preventing displacement, and making sure renters and first-time buyers have a fair shot. Every Wisconsinite deserves a safe, stable place to live.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
Increase the state's role in supporting affordable housing development, preventing displacement, and improving access for renters and first-time buyers.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Housing Affordability
Candidate campaign source
Increase the state's role in supporting affordable housing development, preventing displacement, and improving access for renters and first-time buyers.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
Now, JoCasta is running as a Democrat for Wisconsin Secretary of State to use the platform to fight for what matters: more funding for our schools so families aren’t forced into referenda every election, real housing relief for working people, and affordable child care that lets parents breathe.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: MEET JOCASTA
Candidate campaign source
Now, JoCasta is running as a Democrat for Wisconsin Secretary of State to use the platform to fight for what matters: more funding for our schools so families aren’t forced into referenda every election, real housing relief for working people, and affordable child care that lets parents breathe.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
This section matches specific housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs terms in retained, attributed source text from published Wisconsin candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
Wisconsin incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Wisconsin legislators and Wisconsin’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Wisconsin’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
75 matching sponsorships or proposals · 29 Wisconsin incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Rep. Ann Roe
Wisconsin State Assembly, District 44 · D–WI
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Ann RoeWisconsin Legislature · AB 607
housing and homelessness; emergency rental assistance program; indigent civil legal services; workforce development; community action agencies; poverty reports; mental health; economic security; reimbursement for nonemergency medical transportation services; urban mass transit aid; lead exposure and abatement services; lead service line replacement; providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures; granting rule-making authority; and making an appropriation. (FE)
Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass
Rep. Ann Roe · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB607: housing and homelessness; emergency rental assistance program; indigent civil legal services; workforce development; community action agencies; poverty reports; mental health; economic security; reimbursement for nonemergency medical transportation services; urban mass transit aid; lead exposure and abatement services; lead service line replacement; providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures; granting rule-making authority; and making an appropriation. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: Housing, homelessness, and indigence Grants to facilitate the independent living of homeless persons Under current law, the Department of Administration provides housing grants to…
2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Housing, homelessness, and indigence Grants to facilitate the independent living of homeless persons Under current law, the Department of Administration provides housing grants to counties, municipalities, community action agencies, and private organizations for the purpose of providing housing and associated supportive services to homeless individuals and families in order to facilitate the movement of homeless persons to independent living. This bill provides an additional $5,000,000 in the 2025-27 fiscal biennium to fund that grant program. Emergency rental assistance grants The bill creates an emergency rental assistance program under which DOA awards grants to provide tenant-based rental assistance to individuals and families who have suffered an economic hardship and whose annual household income does not exceed 80 percent of the median household income for the county in which the individual or family resides. The bill appropriates $10,000,000 for the program in the 2025-27 fiscal biennium. Grants to defray housing costs The bill increases funding for DOA to award grants to persons or families of low or moderate income to defray housing costs. The bill provides an additional $220,000 in each fiscal year of the 2025-27 fiscal biennium for that purpose. Duties of the Interagency Council on Homelessness The bill requires the Interagency Council on Homelessness to do all of the following every two years: 1. Identify ways in which DOA and other state agencies specified in the bill and the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority can increase access to services for homeless individuals and families, including homeless children and youths as defined under federal law. 2. Advise each of the state agencies specified in the bill and WHEDA to revise any policy or
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Brienne BrownWisconsin Legislature · AB 1133
local regulation of landlords and tenants.
Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass
Rep. Brienne Brown · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB1133: local regulation of landlords and tenants. Introduced proposal analysis: Current law prohibits cities, villages, towns, and counties (local governments) from enacting ordinances that impose certain limitations on residential landlords, including 1) restricting a landlord in entering into a rental agreement with a prospective tenant while the premises is occupied by a current tenant; 2) restricting a landlord in showing a premises to a prospective tenant during a current tenant’s tenancy; or 3) requiring a landlord to provide to a tenant information that is not required to be provided under federal or state law. This bill creates an exception to these restrictions, allowing…
2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Current law prohibits cities, villages, towns, and counties (local governments) from enacting ordinances that impose certain limitations on residential landlords, including 1) restricting a landlord in entering into a rental agreement with a prospective tenant while the premises is occupied by a current tenant; 2) restricting a landlord in showing a premises to a prospective tenant during a current tenant’s tenancy; or 3) requiring a landlord to provide to a tenant information that is not required to be provided under federal or state law. This bill creates an exception to these restrictions, allowing a local government to enact an ordinance that 1) requires a landlord to make a good faith offer to renew a tenant’s lease unless there is good cause for nonrenewal, and establishes standards for determining good cause; 2) prescribes notice requirements related to a landlord’s offer to renew a lease; 3) establishes requirements related to the execution of a renewed lease agreement; 4) prescribes timeframes during which a landlord may enter a leased premises to show the premises to prospective tenants or lease the premises to another tenant for a subsequent lease period; or 5) provides a penalty or remedy for violation of the ordinance.
5 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Darrin MadisonWisconsin Legislature · AB 1120
repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE)
Mar 25, 2026 · Did not pass
Rep. Darrin Madison · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB1120: repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, no city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance that imposes a moratorium on a landlord from pursuing an eviction action against a tenant of the landlord’s residential or commercial property. This bill repeals that provision. For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill. This describes the proposal at introduction; the recorded disposition below is separate.
2026-03-25: Fiscal estimate received. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, no city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance that imposes a moratorium on a landlord from pursuing an eviction action against a tenant of the landlord’s residential or commercial property. This bill repeals that provision. For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.
rent abatement and retaliatory conduct and granting rule-making authority.
Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass
Rep. Darrin Madison · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB1119: rent abatement and retaliatory conduct and granting rule-making authority. Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, a tenant may withhold (abate) rent if the rental premises is in such disrepair that it affects the health or safety of the tenant or substantially affects the use and occupancy of the premises. Current law allows a tenant to abate rent to the extent that the tenant is deprived of the full normal use of the premises, but prohibits a tenant from withholding rent in full if the tenant remains in possession of the premises. This bill provides that, in these situations, a tenant may abate rent in accordance with a rent abatement schedule promulgated by the…
2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, a tenant may withhold (abate) rent if the rental premises is in such disrepair that it affects the health or safety of the tenant or substantially affects the use and occupancy of the premises. Current law allows a tenant to abate rent to the extent that the tenant is deprived of the full normal use of the premises, but prohibits a tenant from withholding rent in full if the tenant remains in possession of the premises. This bill provides that, in these situations, a tenant may abate rent in accordance with a rent abatement schedule promulgated by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection by rule, if available, and directs DATCP to create such a schedule. The schedule must specify items for which a tenant is entitled to rent abatement and the amount of rent abatement for each item. The bill also allows rent to be abated in full. In addition, if a tenant complains to the landlord or to a local housing code agency about a defect in a residential premises, current law prohibits the landlord from retaliating against the tenant by increasing rent, decreasing services, bringing an eviction action, refusing to renew a lease, or threatening to do any of these things. This bill clarifies that a landlord may not retaliate against a tenant for the reasonable abatement of rent. The bill also provides that if a landlord in a residential tenancy increases rent, decreases services, brings an action for possession of the premises, refuses to renew a lease, or threatens to do any of these things, such action is presumed to be a prohibited retaliatory action if the tenant has complained to the landlord or to a local housing code agency about a defect in a residential premises or exercised any of the tenant’s legal rights relating to his or her tenanc
Sponsored AB1048: local regulation of landlords. Introduced proposal analysis: Current law prohibits a political subdivision from enacting an ordinance that does any of the following with respect to a residential landlord: 1) prohibits or limits the landlord from obtaining or using various types of information about a tenant or prospective tenant, such as household income, occupation, court records, rental history, and credit information; 2) limits how far back in time a prospective tenant's credit information, conviction record, or previous housing may be considered by the landlord; 3) prohibits the landlord from showing a rental property to a prospective tenant, or from entering into a…
2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Current law prohibits a political subdivision from enacting an ordinance that does any of the following with respect to a residential landlord: 1) prohibits or limits the landlord from obtaining or using various types of information about a tenant or prospective tenant, such as household income, occupation, court records, rental history, and credit information; 2) limits how far back in time a prospective tenant's credit information, conviction record, or previous housing may be considered by the landlord; 3) prohibits the landlord from showing a rental property to a prospective tenant, or from entering into a rental agreement for a rental property with a prospective tenant, while the current tenant is living there; 4) places requirements on the landlord relating to security deposits, earnest money, or inspections that are additional to the requirements under the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection's rules; 5) limits a landlord's ability to recover for damages to a landlord's premises during the tenant's occupancy or to recover for costs for which the tenant is responsible under the lease; 6) requires a landlord to provide certain information to its tenants or to the political subdivision; 7) requires inspections of rental properties or units except upon complaint or as part of a statutorily described inspection program; 8) charges fees beyond those specified under the statutes; or 9) requires that a rental property or rental unit be certified, registered, or licensed or requires that a residential rental property owner register or obtain a certification or license related to owning or managing the rental property. This bill repeals these prohibitions.
rent abatement and retaliatory conduct and granting rule-making authority.
Apr 15, 2024 · Did not pass
Rep. Darrin Madison · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB706: rent abatement and retaliatory conduct and granting rule-making authority. Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, a tenant may withhold (abate) rent if the rental premises is in such disrepair that it affects the health or safety of the tenant or substantially affects the use and occupancy of the premises. Current law allows a tenant to abate rent to the extent that the tenant is deprived of the full normal use of the premises, but prohibits a tenant from withholding rent in full if the tenant remains in possession of the premises. This bill provides that, in these situations, a tenant may abate rent in accordance with a rent abatement schedule promulgated by the…
2024-04-15: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, a tenant may withhold (abate) rent if the rental premises is in such disrepair that it affects the health or safety of the tenant or substantially affects the use and occupancy of the premises. Current law allows a tenant to abate rent to the extent that the tenant is deprived of the full normal use of the premises, but prohibits a tenant from withholding rent in full if the tenant remains in possession of the premises. This bill provides that, in these situations, a tenant may abate rent in accordance with a rent abatement schedule promulgated by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection by rule, if available, and directs DATCP to create such a schedule. The bill also allows rent to be abated in full. In addition, if a tenant complains to the landlord or to a local housing code agency about a defect in a residential premises, current law prohibits the landlord from retaliating against the tenant by increasing rent, decreasing services, bringing an eviction action, refusing to renew a lease, or threatening to do any of these things. This bill clarifies that a landlord may not retaliate against a tenant for the reasonable abatement of rent. The bill also provides that if a landlord in a residential tenancy increases rent, decreases services, brings an action for possession of the premises, refuses to renew a lease, or threatens to do any of these things, such action is presumed to be a prohibited retaliatory action if the tenant has complained to the landlord or to a local housing code agency about a defect in a residential premises or exercised any of the tenant's legal rights relating to his or her tenancy, including reasonably abating rent, at any point in the preceding 12 months.
repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE)
Apr 15, 2024 · Did not pass
Rep. Darrin Madison · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB707: repealing the prohibition against local governments enacting or enforcing an eviction moratorium on a landlord. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, no city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance that imposes a moratorium on a landlord from pursuing an eviction action against a tenant of the landlord's residential or commercial property. This bill repeals that provision. For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill. This describes the proposal at introduction; the recorded disposition below is separate.
2024-04-15: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, no city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance that imposes a moratorium on a landlord from pursuing an eviction action against a tenant of the landlord's residential or commercial property. This bill repeals that provision. For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.
3 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Francesca HongWisconsin Legislature · AB 365
local and private regulation of accessory dwelling units. (FE)
Mar 23, 2026 · Did not pass
Rep. Francesca Hong · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB365: local and private regulation of accessory dwelling units. (FE) Introduced proposal analysis: This bill requires political subdivisions with zoning ordinances to allow as a use permitted by right at least one accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on each parcel on which single-family or multi-family residential use is a use permitted by right. The bill also prohibits political subdivisions from doing any of the following: 1. Charging fees, other than standard building permit fees, related to the addition of an ADU to a parcel. 2. Providing dimensional, physical, design, or locational requirements that apply to ADUs, but do not apply to single-family dwellings. 3. Providing standards,…
2026-03-23: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
This bill requires political subdivisions with zoning ordinances to allow as a use permitted by right at least one accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on each parcel on which single-family or multi-family residential use is a use permitted by right. The bill also prohibits political subdivisions from doing any of the following: 1. Charging fees, other than standard building permit fees, related to the addition of an ADU to a parcel. 2. Providing dimensional, physical, design, or locational requirements that apply to ADUs, but do not apply to single-family dwellings. 3. Providing standards, other than standards relating to habitability, that apply to ADUs but do not apply to other accessory structures. 4. Imposing any additional parking requirements to parcels on the basis of the existence of an ADU. 5. Requiring the installation of a separate utility connection to an ADU. The bill also provides that any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in a deed or other instrument affecting real property that prohibits or unreasonably restricts the construction, maintenance, or use of an ADU is void and unenforceable and prohibits a homeowners’ association from restricting or preventing the construction, maintenance, or use of an ADU, except to the extent necessary to protect public health and safety. Because this bill may increase or decrease, directly or indirectly, the cost of the development, construction, financing, purchasing, sale, ownership, or availability of housing in this state, the Department of Administration, as required by law, will prepare a report to be printed as an appendix to this bill. For further information see the local fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.
requiring landlords or tenants to apply for emergency rental assistance and participate in mediation prior to eviction and prohibiting certain rent increases.
Apr 15, 2024 · Did not pass
Rep. Francesca Hong · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB712: requiring landlords or tenants to apply for emergency rental assistance and participate in mediation prior to eviction and prohibiting certain rent increases. Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, if a tenant is late in paying rent, the landlord may give the tenant a notice that requires the tenant to pay rent or vacate within at least five days after the notice is given. If the tenant fails to pay the rent by that date, the tenancy is terminated. Under certain circumstances, if a tenant is late in paying rent, the landlord may give the tenant a notice requiring the tenant to vacate within at least 14 days after the notice is given without the option to cure by…
2024-04-15: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, if a tenant is late in paying rent, the landlord may give the tenant a notice that requires the tenant to pay rent or vacate within at least five days after the notice is given. If the tenant fails to pay the rent by that date, the tenancy is terminated. Under certain circumstances, if a tenant is late in paying rent, the landlord may give the tenant a notice requiring the tenant to vacate within at least 14 days after the notice is given without the option to cure by paying rent. Under current law, a landlord may bring a small claims eviction action against a tenant whose tenancy has been terminated for failure to pay rent. Under this bill, if a residential tenant fails to pay rent when due, the tenant's tenancy is terminated only if the landlord gives the tenant a notice that requires the tenant to pay rent or vacate within at least 30 days after the notice is given; the tenant fails to pay the rent; and the landlord applies for and is denied emergency rental assistance under a local, state, or federal assistance program, if such a program exists, or is ineligible for such emergency rental assistance. Under the bill, a 30-day notice must include certain information, including contact information for the emergency rental assistance provider serving the county where the tenant resides; a statement as to whether the landlord is qualified to receive emergency rental assistance under a rental assistance program, and, if eligible, that the landlord is required to apply for such funds; a statement that, if the landlord is ineligible for such funds, the tenant may be able to apply for emergency rental assistance; and a statement that the landlord may not pursue an action for eviction against the tenant for failure to pay rent if the tenant or the landlord a
requiring landlords or tenants to apply for emergency rental assistance and participate in mediation prior to eviction during certain declared public health emergencies and prohibiting certain rent increases.
Mar 15, 2022 · Did not pass
Rep. Francesca Hong · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB738: requiring landlords or tenants to apply for emergency rental assistance and participate in mediation prior to eviction during certain declared public health emergencies and prohibiting certain rent increases. Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, if a tenant is late in paying rent, the landlord may give the tenant a notice that requires the tenant to pay rent or vacate within at least five days after the notice is given or, under certain circumstances, a notice requiring the tenant to vacate within at least 14 days after the notice is given without the option to cure by paying rent. If the tenant fails to pay the rent by that date, the tenancy is terminated. Under…
2022-03-15: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, if a tenant is late in paying rent, the landlord may give the tenant a notice that requires the tenant to pay rent or vacate within at least five days after the notice is given or, under certain circumstances, a notice requiring the tenant to vacate within at least 14 days after the notice is given without the option to cure by paying rent. If the tenant fails to pay the rent by that date, the tenancy is terminated. Under current law, a landlord may bring a small claims eviction action against a tenant whose tenancy has been terminated for failure to pay rent. Under the bill, during a public health emergency, if a residential tenant fails to pay rent when due, the tenant's tenancy is terminated only if the landlord gives the tenant a notice that requires the tenant to pay rent or vacate within at least 30 days after the notice is given; the tenant fails to pay the rent; and the landlord applies for and is denied emergency rental assistance under a federal assistance program, if such a program exists, or is ineligible for such emergency rental assistance. The bill defines “public health emergency” as a state or federal public health emergency declared in response to an infectious disease outbreak. Under the bill, a 30-day notice must include certain information, including contact information for the emergency rental assistance provider serving the county where the tenant resides; a statement as to whether the landlord is qualified to receive emergency rental assistance under a federal assistance program, and, if eligible, that the landlord is required to apply for such funds; a statement that, if the landlord is ineligible for such funds, the tenant may be able to apply for emergency rental assistance; and a statement that the landlord may not pursue a
U.S. representative for Wisconsin, District 6 · R–WI
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Glenn GrothmanU.S. Congress · Wisconsin delegation · H.R. 3540
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Elimination Act
May 21, 2025 · Introduced
Rep. Glenn Grothman · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
H.R. 3540 would end the low-income housing tax credit for buildings placed in service in taxable years beginning after enactment. It has not become law.
2025-05-21: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. This bill has not been enacted.
Why this record is included
The credit finances income-restricted rental housing. Ending it for newly eligible buildings concerns future rental supply and financing; it does not directly set Wisconsin rents or establish a change in the 2020–2024 median.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
H.R. 3540 would end the low-income housing tax credit for buildings placed in service in taxable years beginning after enactment. It has not become law.
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Jenna JacobsonWisconsin Legislature · AB 713
eviction notices.
Apr 15, 2024 · Did not pass
Rep. Jenna Jacobson · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Sponsored AB713: eviction notices. Introduced proposal analysis: Under current law, if a landlord provides notice of termination of a tenant's tenancy due to failure to pay rent or other amount due under the rental agreement and the notice includes an incorrect statement of the amount due, the notice is still valid unless the statement of amount due is intentionally incorrect or the tenant provided a payment of an amount the tenant believes to be due. This bill repeals this provision. Additionally under current law, notice of termination of tenancy is considered given on the 2nd day after the day of mailing, if the mail is addressed to a point within the state. This bill changes “2nd day” to…
2024-04-15: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1. The proposal did not become law.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and tenant-paid utilities. Rental protections, assistance, and housing supply concern components of rental-market conditions; they do not set Wisconsin’s median rent. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Wisconsin evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Under current law, if a landlord provides notice of termination of a tenant's tenancy due to failure to pay rent or other amount due under the rental agreement and the notice includes an incorrect statement of the amount due, the notice is still valid unless the statement of amount due is intentionally incorrect or the tenant provided a payment of an amount the tenant believes to be due. This bill repeals this provision. Additionally under current law, notice of termination of tenancy is considered given on the 2nd day after the day of mailing, if the mail is addressed to a point within the state. This bill changes “2nd day” to “5th day.” Also under current law, a landlord providing certain notices of termination of tenancy may provide proof of certified mailing from the United States post office in order to establish that the landlord provided proper notice for the purpose of filing a complaint in small claims court or otherwise demonstrating that proper notice has been provided in an eviction action, and an affidavit of service may not be requested to establish that proper notice has been provided. The bill eliminates that provision.
Only current Wisconsin officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Wisconsin statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Wisconsin snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Wisconsin, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.