The WI DOC and MI Department of Consumer and Industry Services have similar minimum standards for juvenile detention facilities, including reporting hospitalization and injury or death of a juvenile, clothing, personal hygiene, nutrition, discipline, cell confinement, bedding and linen, construction, variances, training, mail (regular and privileged), visitation, religious programming, resident records and admission information, construction plans review and approval.
The WI Department of Commerce rules address with specificity fire detection standards.
There are differences between the standards in the following areas: staffing (WI ratio is 1:15, the MI ratio is 1:8; WI establishes dimensions and standards for single, double occupancy cells and dormitories (3 juveniles or more), MI has established dimensions and standards for single occupancy and multi-occupancy (WI provides for single cells to be a minimum of 54 sq. ft., double cells minimum of 70 sq. ft., and dormitories minimum of 70 sq. ft. combined day room and sleeping space; MI 70 sq. ft. single cell; 45 square feet in multi-resident sleeping rooms); grievance procedure; use of cell confinement for discipline purposes (WI up to 6 hours before administrator approval, MI up to 72 hours before supervisory approval); restraints (WI requires facilities to establish policies and procedures, MI has provided specific standards); inspection and approval required before occupancy.
Minnesota:
The Minnesota Department of Corrections establishes minimum standards and inspects county juvenile detention facilities. The standards are found at Minnesota Rules, Chapter 2960.
The WI DOC and MN Department of Corrections have similar minimum standards for juvenile detention facilities, including admission criteria, property, intake screening, rules, discipline and due process, religious services, exercise and recreation, education, health and hygiene, food service, clothing, bedding, laundry, visitation, mail, staff training, staffing plan, staffing plan, and a classification plan.
There are differences between the Wisconsin and Minnesota standards: Minnesota requires a staffing ratio of one staff member to 12 juveniles when the juveniles are awake and one staff member to 25 juveniles when the juveniles are asleep. (Wisconsin requires a staffing ratio of 1 staff to 15 juveniles. Wisconsin does not differentiate between juveniles who are awake or asleep.) Minnesota requires that facilities with more than 24 juveniles have a full time program director.
Minnesota has established several different types of secure facilities: 24 temporary hold over facility, 8 day temporary hold over facility, and a secure detention facility. (Wisconsin only has secure detention facilities.) Depending on the facility, some of the requirements and standards differ. For example, staff training for a MN 8 day facility is 24 hours annually, but for a secure detention facility the training is 40 hours. (Wisconsin requires 24 hours of training for facility staff. Under the proposed rule, Wisconsin will specify 8 hours of the 24 hours required training shall address the care and custody of juveniles, suicide prevention, mental health, crisis intervention, medication, and use of restraints and control devices.)
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
This rule does not affect small businesses. The rule establishes minimum standards for county secure detention facilities.
Analysis and supporting documentation used to determine effect on small businesses
No economic impact report was required.
Small Business Impact
There is no expected effect on small businesses under s.
227.114, Stats.
Fiscal Estimate
Summary
Although the Department anticipates it will have some additional workload related to policy and procedure development, any additional costs that would be generated should be able to be absorbed within the Department's budget.
Some counties may need to re-write their policies and procedures. Costs to individual counties cannot be determined at this time, but it is estimated that they will be minimal.
State fiscal effect
Increase in costs that may be possible to absorb within the agency's budget.
Local government fiscal effect
Increase in costs.
Types of local governmental units affected
Counties.
Long-range fiscal implications
Indeterminable.
Agency Contact Person
Kathryn R. Anderson, Chief Legal Counsel
Department of Corrections
3099 East Washington Avenue
P.O. Box 7925
Madison, WI 53707-7925
Phone: (608) 240-5049
FAX: (608) 240-3306
Notice of Hearing
Insurance
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to the authority granted under s.
601.41 (3), Stats., and the procedures set forth in s.
227.18, Stats., the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (OCI) will hold a public hearing to consider the adoption of rules creating section
Ins 6.90, Wis. Adm. Code, relating to the use of designations or certifications purporting to demonstrate special expertise in the financial or retirement needs of seniors.
Hearing Information
Date: July 6, 2009
Time: 10:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the
matter may be reached
Place: OCI, Room 227, 2nd Floor
125 South Webster St.
Madison, WI
Submission of Written Comments
Written comments can be mailed to:
Holly L. Strop
Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule Ins 690
Office of the Commissioner of Insurance
PO Box 7873
Madison WI 53707-7873
Written comments can be hand delivered to:
Holly L. Strop
Legal Unit - OCI Rule Comment for Rule Ins 690
Office of the Commissioner of Insurance
125 South Webster St – 2nd Floor
Madison WI 53703-3474
Comments can be emailed to:
Holly L. Strop
The deadline for submitting comments is 4:00 p.m. on the 14th day after the date for the hearing stated in this Notice of Hearing.
Copies of Proposed Rule and Contact Person
A copy of the full text of the proposed rule changes, analysis, and fiscal estimate may be obtained from the OCI internet Web site at
http://oci.wi.gov/ocirules.htm or by contacting:
Inger Williams
OCI Services Section
Phone: (608) 264-8110
Address: 125 South Webster St. – 2nd Floor
Madison WI 53703-3474
Mail: PO Box 7873, Madison, WI 53707-7873
Analysis Prepared by the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (OCI)
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
The proposed rule is promulgated under the Commissioner's authority to prescribe misleading, deceptive and prohibited practices for insurers and insurance intermediaries.
Related statutes or rules
The proposed rule relates to existing statutes and rules defining misleading, deceptive and prohibited practices for insurers and insurance intermediaries under ch.
628, Wis. Stats., and s.
Ins 6.60, Wis. Adm. Code.
Plain language analysis
Chapter
Ins 6, Wis. Adm. Code, sets forth general information regarding prohibited business practices insurers and insurance intermediaries. Recently, states have identified a possible fraudulent marketing and sales activity related to the use of senior-specific certifications in the sale of insurance products to seniors. In 2008, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) created a committee to establish a model rule setting standards for the use of senior specific certifications and professional designations by insurance producers in the sale of life insurance and annuities to all consumers regardless of age. The NAIC Model Rule was adopted in July of 2008. The proposed Wisconsin rule follows the NAIC Model with two exceptions. First, the proposed rule adds the term advertising to the list of practices and conduct to which the rule applies. Second, the proposed rule adds health insurance to life insurance an annuity products in the list of insurance products to which the rule applies.
Comparison with federal regulations
The North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) Model Rule, adopted March 20, 2008, addresses the use of senior specific certifications or designations by any person in connection with the offer, sale, or purchase of securities. The NAIC Model Rule, adopted in September of 2008, addresses the use of senior specific certifications and professional designations by insurance producers in the sale of life insurance and annuities.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
To date, Iowa is the sole state, adjacent to Wisconsin to adopt the NAIC Model Rule. Nationally, several non-adjacent states have adopted the NAIC Model Rule, including, California, Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Utah. Similar legislation is pending in Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Oklahoma, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Virginia. The degree to which each state's regulations track the Model Rule varies widely. Utah and Ohio also expanded the scope of the regulation to include health insurance.
Illinois: n/a
Iowa:
Iowa Administrative Code 191-10.19, tracks the NAIC Model Rule.
Michigan: n/a
Minnesota: n/a
