Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Patricia Lipton
Executive Director
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Department of Commerce
Department of Natural Resources
Madison
December 6, 1999
To the Honorable, the Legislature:
The 1999-2001 Biennial Budget contains numerous provisions impacting the operation of the Petroleum Environmental Cleanup Fund (PECFA) program. One significant provision deals with the allocation of responsibility for sites with petroleum contamination. The Budget Bill directs a determination of the risk individual sites pose to people and the environment based upon a statutory definition of what constitutes a "high risk" site. The risk level determination was to be completed by December 1, 1999, with all "low" and "medium risk" sites being transferred to the Department of Commerce by that date. The Department of Natural Resources has been working, since passage of the budget bill, to determine the risk classification for the approximately 4800 sites impacted by petroleum. The Department has met the December 1 deadline and the test of having no more than 35% of the sites classified as "high risk".
In addition to completing the site classification, four separate, joint emergency rules were to be completed within thirty (30) days of the effective date of the Budget Bill. We believe we meet the intent of many of these provisions. One of these requirements, s.
101.143(2e) Risk Based Analyses, was met through the adoption of emergency rules Comm 46 and NR 746 by both agencies. In addition, we are well along in finalizing a streamlined, more cost-effective process for administering the PECFA program, as required by s.
101.143(2)(h). We expect this new process to be finalized shortly with adoption of emergency rules to codify the processes to follow.
With respect to the requirements under s.
101.143(2)(i) and 101
(2)(j), relating to procedures for evaluation remedial action plans, conditions under which employees must issue approvals, cost reporting, etc., we believe that these directives are consistent with provisions contained in Comm 46 and Comm 47 and the cost survey which is now being implemented by the Department of Commerce. Over the next few months, the Departments will be working to complete the additional detail and elements required to be included in joint administrative rules covering these topics.
A576
We are committed to complying with the requirements of the Budget Bill and intend to address them fully. Thank you for your support and understanding as we work through these complicated issues. If you have questions regarding the current status of any of these rules, please contact John Alberts at 266-9403 or Joy Hochmuth at 267-9521.
Sincerely,
Brenda J. Blanchard, Secretary
Department of Commerce
George E. Meyer, Secretary
Department of Natural Resources
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Legislative Audit Bureau
Madison
December 9, 1999
To the Honorable, the Legislature:
We have completed a financial and program evaluation audit of the Division of Gaming within the Department of Administration, as required by s.
13.94(1)(eg), Wis. Stats. The Division administers and regulates the State's racing, Indian gaming, and charitable gaming activities. We have issued an unqualified opinion on the Division's budgetary-based financial statements for fiscal year (FY) 1998-99 and FY 1997-98.
Revenues from pari-mutuel racing and charitable gaming have declined significantly in recent years, in part as a result of declining consumer interest in gaming. Tax revenue generated by pari-mutuel racing declined from $4.7 million in FY 1994-95 to $2.2 million in FY 1998-99, or by 53.2 percent. Charitable gaming revenue has decreased largely as a result of a decline in bingo tax revenues, which have fallen from $566,000 in FY 1994-95 to $490,000 in FY 1998-99, or by 13.4 percent.
We focused our program review on Indian gaming, both because it represents the most significant gaming activity in Wisconsin and because the State's revenues for Indian gaming will increase from $350,000 in FY 1996-97 to an expected $22.1 million in FY 1999-2000 as a result of renegotiated tribal gaming compacts.
Despite increases in the number of staff positions, we found that the number of field audits completed by the Office of Indian Gaming declined from 1996 through 1999. In addition, the Office has experienced backlogs in the processing of vendor certification applications. In part, these problems are the result of difficulties the Office has had in recruiting and retaining staff.
To improve its ability to monitor gaming activities, the Office plans to purchase a computerized system to monitor slot machine activity at casinos and will soon implement a new inventory system intended to maintain an up-to-date listing of gaming devices approved for use in Wisconsin casinos.
We appreciate the courtesy and cooperation extended to us by the Department of Administration. The Department's response is the Appendix.
Respectfully submitted,
Janice Mueller
State Auditor
