Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 86.16 (2026)
Utility lines on highways; place of poles; penalty
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
86.16(1)(1) Any person, firm, or corporation, including any foreign corporation authorized to transact business in this state, may, subject to ss. 30.44 (3m), 30.45 and 196.491 (3) (d) 3m., with the written consent of the department with respect to state trunk highways, and with the written consent of local authorities with respect to highways under their jurisdiction, including connecting highways, construct and operate lines, wires, or fiber for telecommunications service, as defined in s. 182.017 (1g) (cq), telegraph, telephone, or electric lines, or pipes or pipelines, for the purpose of transmitting voice, video, data, messages, water, liquid manure, heat, light, or power along, across, under, or within the limits of the highway.
86.16(1m)(a)(a) If a pipe or pipeline transmitting liquid manure along, across, or within the limits of a highway under the jurisdiction of a local authority is not subterranean, all of the following apply:
86.16(1m)(a)1.1. Subject to par. (c), a person holding a permit issued by the local authority under s. 86.07 (2) for a manure hose that is the pipe or pipeline is not required to obtain written consent for the pipe or pipeline under sub. (1).
86.16(1m)(a)2.2. Subject to par. (c), a person may obtain written consent under sub. (1) for the pipe or pipeline in lieu of obtaining a permit issued by the local authority under s. 86.07 (2).
86.16(1m)(b)(b) Any culvert installed in the ground for the purpose of running through it a hose transmitting liquid manure is considered a pipe or pipeline transmitting liquid manure under sub. (1) and, before such installation, written consent under sub. (1) is required.
86.16(1m)(c)(c) A local authority may specify that only the permit described in par. (a) 1. or only the written consent described in par. (a) 2. will be accepted by the local authority as the method for authorizing a pipe or pipeline transmitting liquid manure within or across a highway right-of-way.
86.16(2)(2) All poles used in the construction of such lines shall be set in such manner as not to interfere with the use of such highway by the public, nor with the use of the adjoining land by the owner thereof; and all pole lines shall hereafter be constructed so as to meet the requirements of the provisions of the state electrical code promulgated by the public service commission.
86.16(3)(3) No tree shall be cut, trimmed or the branches thereof cut or broken in the construction or maintenance of any such line without the consent of the owner of the tree.
86.16(4)(4) Any person erecting any telephone, telegraph, electric light or other pole or stringing any telephone, telegraph, electric light or other wire, or constructing any pipes or pipe lines in violation of the provisions of this section shall forfeit a sum not less than $10 nor more than $50.
86.16(5)(5) Any person, firm, or corporation whose written application for permission to construct such lines, pipes, or pipelines within the limits of a highway has been refused, or has been on file with the department or local authority for 20 days and no action has been taken thereon, may file with the department or local authority a notice of appeal to the division of hearings and appeals. The department or local authority shall thereupon return all of the papers and action of the department or local authority to the division of hearings and appeals, and the division of hearings and appeals shall hear and try and determine the appeal on 10 days’ notice to the department or local authority, and the applicant. The order entered by the division of hearings and appeals shall be final.
86.16(6)(6) If the department consents under sub. (1) to the construction of broadband infrastructure in unserved areas, as designated under s. 196.504 (2) (e), the department may not charge any fee for the initial issuance of any permit necessary to construct broadband infrastructure along, across, or within the limits of a highway.
86.16 HistoryHistory: 1977 c. 29 s. 1654 (8) (d), (e); 1979 c. 34; 1981 c. 347 s. 80 (2); 1989 a. 31; 1993 a. 16, 490; 1997 a. 204; 2007 a. 63; 2015 a. 231; 2017 a. 59; 2023 a. 77.
86.16 AnnotationPipelines to transport water under sub. (1) include wastewater as well as freshwater pipelines. Review of a town’s refusal to grant permission to a city to construct a sewer line was within the scope of DHA’s authority under sub. (5). Town of Barton v. Division of Hearings & Appeals, 2002 WI App 169, 256 Wis. 2d 628, 649 N.W.2d 293, 01-1209.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1932–2006 · leading case: Racine Harley-Davidson, Inc. v. State Div. of Hearings & Appeals, 2006 WI 86 (Wis. 2006).
Racine Harley-Davidson, Inc. v. State Div. of Hearings & Appeals, 2006 WI 86 (Wis. 2006). “The Town denied the request, and the City appealed to the Division of Hearings and Appeals under Wis. Stat. § 86.16 (5). 68 The Division ordered the Town to permit installation of the interceptor.”
Town of Barton v. Div. of Hearings & Appeals, 2002 WI App 169 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “The City of West Bend appeals the circuit court's reversal of a decision of the Division of Hearings and Appeals of the Department of Administration (DHA), wherein DHA ordered the Town of Barton to permit the City to install a sanitary sewer interceptor and laterals in two…”
City of Appleton v. Transp. Comm'n, 342 N.W.2d 68 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). “Section 86.16 did not expressly authorize the commission to do more than “hear and try and determine” the appeal of the town’s refusal to consent to the proposed utility construction, and to enter an order with respect to its determination.”
Pub. Serv. Corp. v. Marathon Cnty., 249 N.W.2d 543 (Wis. 1977). “In 1950, the plaintiff, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, pursuant to permits and authorization issued between 1919 and 1941 under sec. 86.16, Stats., erected overhead utility lines on the north side of a town road which lies between the Town of Kronenwetter Marathon County,…”
Milwaukee Elec. Ry. & Light Co. v. City of Milwaukee, 245 N.W. 860 (Wis. 1932). “Defendants’ contention is based upon the provisions of sec. 86.16, Stats., which relates to “Electric lines on highways; place of poles; penalty.”
South Shore Util. Co. v. R.R. Comm'n, 240 N.W. 784 (Wis. 1932). “We conclude that, under the existing law, a public utility does not obtain an indeterminate permit in a town by simply occupying the highways pursuant to the permit authorized by sec. 86.16, Stats., or by virtue of organization under sec.”
— Wis. Stat. § 86.16(1) — 3 cases
Racine Harley-Davidson, Inc. v. State Div. of Hearings & Appeals, 2006 WI 86 (Wis. 2006). “The Town denied the request, and the City appealed to the Division of Hearings and Appeals under Wis. Stat. § 86.16 (5). 68 The Division ordered the Town to permit installation of the interceptor.”
Town of Barton v. Div. of Hearings & Appeals, 2002 WI App 169 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “The City of West Bend appeals the circuit court's reversal of a decision of the Division of Hearings and Appeals of the Department of Administration (DHA), wherein DHA ordered the Town of Barton to permit the City to install a sanitary sewer interceptor and laterals in two…”
City of Appleton v. Transp. Comm'n, 342 N.W.2d 68 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). “Section 86.16 did not expressly authorize the commission to do more than “hear and try and determine” the appeal of the town’s refusal to consent to the proposed utility construction, and to enter an order with respect to its determination.”
— Wis. Stat. § 86.16(5) — 3 cases
Racine Harley-Davidson, Inc. v. State Div. of Hearings & Appeals, 2006 WI 86 (Wis. 2006). “The Town denied the request, and the City appealed to the Division of Hearings and Appeals under Wis. Stat. § 86.16 (5). 68 The Division ordered the Town to permit installation of the interceptor.”
Town of Barton v. Div. of Hearings & Appeals, 2002 WI App 169 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “The City of West Bend appeals the circuit court's reversal of a decision of the Division of Hearings and Appeals of the Department of Administration (DHA), wherein DHA ordered the Town of Barton to permit the City to install a sanitary sewer interceptor and laterals in two…”
City of Appleton v. Transp. Comm'n, 342 N.W.2d 68 (Wis. Ct. App. 1983). “Section 86.16 did not expressly authorize the commission to do more than “hear and try and determine” the appeal of the town’s refusal to consent to the proposed utility construction, and to enter an order with respect to its determination.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.