Despite broad support, housing bill stalls in Legislature

A bill that would permit accessory dwelling units in residential or mixed-use neighborhoods enjoys widespread bipartisan support — from Democrats and Republicans, from trade organizations and advocacy groups — but murmurings of concern from local governments have so far stalled its progress through the legislature.

A bill by Rep. Joy Goeben (R-Hobart) sailed through the Assembly Committee on Housing and Real Estate in early October on a 13-1 vote and was referred to the Assembly calendar for potential action. A companion measure by state Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin) received a public hearing on Oct. 15.

Since then, neither bill has moved.

Closer to home, the Oneida County zoning committee discussed the bill at its Jan. 21 meeting and, according to zoning director Karl Jennrich, directed zoning staff to prepare discussion points and concerns for supervisors to take to upcoming Wisconsin Counties Association (WCA) meetings.

“I believe the committee wanted me to give them some talking points when some county board supervisors go to the WCA meeting,” Jennrich said last week. “I was also waiting for Vilas County. I think their resolution is stalled.” 

The WCA held its annual legislative conference this week.

At issue is whether the state should require political subdivisions with zoning ordinances to allow at least one accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on residential or mixed-use parcels that already contain a single-family home.

Supporters say the bill not only balances property rights and local control but tackles a deepening housing affordability crisis. Skeptics say the proposal could chip away at community-first decision-making and create difficulties with zoning and infrastructure.

A growing housing gap

The debate is taking place amid unprecedented housing pressures in Wisconsin. According to the Wisconsin Realtors Association (WRA), Wisconsin averaged about 30,000 new home permits annually from 1994 to 2005. However, in 2024, only 12,837 permits were issued, even with a 10-percent increase over the previous year.

Analysts estimate the state will need between 14,000 and 22,700 new housing units each year to meet a projected need of 140,000 units by 2030, the WRA stated late last year.

The WRA described inventory levels late last year as being at “historic lows,” with median home prices climbing to $338,000, the highest in the Midwest. Meanwhile, median new home prices have surpassed $526,000, according to figures cited by the Wisconsin Builders Association.

“Housing is one of the top concerns the League hears from its members,” Toni Herkert, government affairs director for the League of Wisconsin Municipalities (LWM), and Evan Miller, a LWM government affairs specialist, offered in testimony at a hearing on the bill last September 30. “Whether cities and villages have been unable to see any new housing developments in recent years, sometimes decades, or whether these communities are simply unable to offer affordable housing options for their working residents, a lack of housing development blocks the growth local leaders work tirelessly to promote.”

Still, while broad agreement exists that affordable housing is a problem, there is less consensus about how to fix it.

According to the Legislative Reference Bureau analysis, Goeben’s and Bradley’s bills would require political subdivisions with zoning ordinances to allow, as a permitted use, at least one accessory dwelling unit on each parcel zoned for residential or mixed use that already contains a single-family dwelling.

A “permitted use” under the bills means no conditional use permit, variance, or special approval could be required for an ADU so long as it complies with the zoning district’s requirements.

Goeben’s bill defines an ADU as a residential unit located on the same parcel as an existing single-family home that provides complete independent living facilities and has a separate entrance. As amended in committee, the ADU must be created by converting an existing structure that is within, attached to, or detached from a single-family dwelling.

Local governments would retain authority to limit the size of the ADU to no larger than the primary dwelling; limit its height to the height allowed in the zoning district; require compliance with setback and lot coverage requirements; and prohibit the use of newly created or constructed ADUs as short-term rentals.

The amended version narrowed the definition from the original by requiring that the ADU be created by converting an existing structure; the initial bill would allow for new construction. Bradley has offered the same amendment in the Senate companion bill, but no action on either version has been taken in that body.

Protecting property rights

While the measure enjoys bipartisan support, the bill has been driven by Republicans, and at the Sept. 30 public hearing, Goeben depicted it as fundamentally about property rights.

“At its heart, this bill is about protecting and affirming the property rights of Wisconsin homeowners,” Goeben testified. “Across our state, individuals and families invest their savings, their hard work, and their futures into their homes. They deserve the reasonable freedom to make practical use of their property in ways that benefit their families, their neighbors, and their communities. Allowing a homeowner to create a modest secondary living space on their own parcel is a commonsense recognition of that right.”

Goeben described current ADU regulation as a patchwork of local ordinances.

“In some communities, a homeowner can add an ADU with relative ease, while in others the same project is tied up in red tape, or barred entirely,” she testified. “This inconsistency leaves property owners guessing about what they can and cannot do with their own land. [This bill] corrects that problem by establishing a clear statewide baseline.”

At the same time, Goeben said, the bill carefully respects the role of local government.

“Municipalities will still retain important tools to set reasonable standards, such as height, size, setbacks, and lot coverage, to ensure that ADUs fit appropriately within their communities,” she testified. “Grandfather ADUs that are currently being rented on a short-term basis, however, this bill prohibits any newly created ADUs from being used as short-term rentals. In short, local governments keep the reins on how ADUs look and function, while homeowners are assured they won’t face arbitrary denials.”

The benefits of such an approach are substantial, Goeben said. 

“Property owners gain flexibility, whether to house an aging parent, provide space for an adult child, or utilize the space in a way that is uniquely beneficial to their respective circumstances,” she testified. “Communities gain an additional pathway to address housing shortages without costly new developments or sprawling expansions. And the state affirms that homeowners have a basic right to reasonably use their property.”

Bradley echoed that message.

“These small, secondary homes are one of the simplest, most effective tools we have to expand housing options,” Bradley said. “Across our state, families, young professionals, and seniors are finding it harder than ever to find housing that fits their needs and their budgets.”

The proposed legislation strikes the right balance, Bradley said.

“It gives property owners a clear and predictable pathway to build ADUs — whether that means converting a garage or finishing a basement, ….,” he testified. “And by prohibiting new ADUs from being used for short-term rentals, this bill keeps the focus on what matters most: adding long-term housing options for Wisconsinites.”

Bradley said the issue was about more than just supply. 

“It’s about opportunity,” he testified. “ADUs provide options for aging parents to live near their family, give young people a first step toward building generational wealth, and maximize homeownership’s economic opportunity. ADUs do all this without radically altering neighborhood character or requiring massive taxpayer-funded developments. This is a simple, market-driven solution that uses the infrastructure we already have to solve a real problem.”

Trade groups line up in support

Professional associations and industry groups lined up in support of the bill.

Cori Lamont, vice president of legal affairs for the Wisconsin Realtors Association (WRA), tied the proposal directly to inventory shortages and affordability challenges.

“[The bill] requires local governments to allow ADUs on property zoned for residential or mixed use where a single-family dwelling exists,” Lamont testified. “This bill provides a targeted housing solution by expanding multi-generational living options for aging parents or adult children.”

The Wisconsin Builders Association cited projections that Wisconsin needs 140,000 new housing units by 2030 and observed that housing starts have lagged far behind annual demand.

“ADUs provide a low-impact, flexible tool to expand housing supply without large-scale development,” the association stated. “[It] creates regulatory consistency across the state. The current ‘patchwork’ of local ADU rules creates confusion for builders, property owners, and renters. A statewide framework ensures clarity, fairness, and predictability.”

The group argued the bill would unlock economic opportunity by enabling more efficient use of existing land.

The American Association of Retired People (AARP) Wisconsin also strongly supported the measure.

“This will promote greater housing choice for Wisconsin residents — particularly older adults — seeking to age in place,” AARP associate state director Darrin Wasniewski said. “… AARP has been a long-standing supporter of ADUs as a tool to provide housing and caregiving options for older adults to successfully age in the community. Research shows the positive impacts that remaining close to social connections has on older adults.”

Wasniewski said AARP recognized that ADUs could provide a more practical option for downsizing from a larger home that no longer fits a life stage, or an opportunity for a caretaker or family member to live close by when extra help may be needed, allowing the older adult to stay rooted in their community. 

“Moreover, permitting the construction of ADUs easily allows a homeowner to exercise their property rights to gain additional income,” he testified.

Local concerns

Not all groups are fully on board.

The League of Wisconsin Municipalities (LWM) testified “for information only,” acknowledging both potential benefits and concerns.

“Advancing the availability and affordability of housing options for Wisconsinites has no simple solution,” Herkert and Miller said in written testimony. “Land costs, inflation, supply chain issues, market uncertainty, labor availability, and yes, federal, state, and local regulations are all pieces of a more complex puzzle leading to Wisconsin’s current housing crisis. There’s no one solution to the housing crisis we’re currently facing, and many Wisconsin municipalities that have made significant efforts to promote housing are yet to see the fruits of their labor.”

Local leaders serve the same constituents as legislators, but they are closer to the problems that hamper the availability and affordability of housing in their communities, Herkert and Miller testified.

Herkert and Miller argued that when the hands of local leaders are tied by statewide policies based on unique and localized concerns, many local leaders will find themselves unable to promote growth in their communities. While acknowledging that ADUs can serve useful purposes, the LWM raised concerns about state mandates limiting community-first decision-making.

“The League will always raise concerns with proposals that limit community-first decision-making,” they testified. “Ultimately, [this bill] does just that. However, [it] does strike a better balance between community-first decision-making and state mandates than we’ve seen with other proposals.”

The key local authority retained by that effort is local zoning powers, which regulate height, dimensional standards, and lot coverage, Herkert and Miller wrote. 

“These aspects are crucial for community planning, including preparing for heavy rain events and the allocation of utility services,” they testified. “While some municipalities have implemented ordinances to allow or even promote the use of ADUs, others the League has heard from have not allowed ADUs as they fear it will do nothing to grow their housing stock but rather will just grow the available number of short-term rentals.”

That is particularly true in communities with or near a large tourism economy, Herkert and Miller wrote. 

“Short-term rentals may cause many problems for the neighbors of these units, particularly when plopped down in the middle of a quiet neighborhood,” they testified. “That’s why the League appreciates that municipalities would be allowed to prohibit new ADUs from becoming short-term rentals, ensuring these new units truly may address local housing needs.”

The Wisconsin County Code Administrators Association (WCCA) expressed practical zoning concerns.

“WCCA understands the growing desire of property owners to provide a space for aging parents and/or their dependents preparing to enter the next stage of their lives,” its testimony stated. “The intent of this bill is well placed. However, this will cause many obstacles for county and town zoning.”

For one thing, the WCCA stated, some communities do not allow human habitation in accessory structures. 

“The reason for this is that most accessory structures are not constructed properly to allow for human habitation,” the testimony stated. “While a brand-new structure may be able to be constructed properly, the reality of the situation is that many existing detached garages and pole barns are likely to be converted into living spaces.”

And while the bill calls for permitting requirements, the WCCA stated, many property owners don’t learn of those requirements until after they have invested thousands of dollars only to find out they need to redo or can’t do the work they have already completed.

At the moment, it doesn’t appear that the bill is headed anywhere this session. Still, it is likely to return as the state’s housing affordability continues to lag, and because there is bipartisan sentiment to allow the structures as a part of the solution.

Richard Moore is the author of “Dark State” and may be reached at richardd3d.substack.com.