Current law requires DNR and DOA jointly to prepare 3 versions of a biennial finance plan for the clean water fund program. Under this bill, DNR and DOA prepare amendments to the biennial finance plan to reflect the biennial budget bill and the biennial budget act, rather than new versions of the plan. The bill also eliminates requirements that the biennial finance plan include certain information. The bill requires the biennial finance plan to include audited financial statements of the clean water fund program.
Under current law, DNR is required to complete plans to implement the nonpoint source water pollution abatement program (which provides financial assistance for measures to reduce water pollution from diffuse sources) in priority watersheds (those watersheds in which the need for nonpoint source pollution abatement is most critical) by December 31, 2000. This bill changes the date by which the plans must be completed to December 31, 2015.
This bill reduces the amount of general obligation bonding that may be incurred for the nonpoint source program by $4,000,000. The bill increases the amount of general obligation bonding that may be incurred for environmental cleanups in or adjacent to the Great Lakes by $4,000,000.
Current law prohibits the building commission from incurring over $15,500,000 in general obligation bonding for the nonpoint source program without the approval of the secretary of administration and the joint committee on finance. This bill eliminates that prohibition.
Under current law, DNR provides lake management planning grants to provide information on the quality of water in lakes and to aid in the selection of projects to improve water quality. This bill adds nonprofit conservation organizations as eligible recipients of lake management planning grants.
Under current law, DNR provides lake management grants to improve or protect the quality of water in lakes. This bill eliminates the current $100,000 maximum amount for a lake management grant.
Air quality
Under current law, the operators of certain stationary sources of air pollution are required to obtain air pollution control permits from DNR. This bill expands some of the provisions relating to air pollution control permits that currently apply only to existing sources (those on which construction began on or before November 15, 1992, and that have not been modified since that date) so that the provisions also apply to new and modified sources (those on which construction or modification began after November 15, 1992). One of these provisions authorizes DNR, under specified circumstances, to issue an operation permit for a source of air pollution that will not be able to comply with the terms of the permit at the time that the permit is issued.
The bill also authorizes DNR to deny an application for renewal of an operation permit for a stationary source that is in violation of its current operation permit.
In addition, the bill authorizes a person who owns a new or modified source for which the person received an air pollution permit under former law, before November 15, 1992, to continue to operate the new or modified source under that permit but requires the person to apply for an operation permit under current law no later than March 1, 1996.
DNR awards grants to the owners of gasoline stations to pay for a portion of the costs of installing equipment to recover vapors that are released when gasoline is pumped into a motor vehicle. The grants are available only for stations located in an area of this state where federal standards for ozone pollution are exceeded. Under current law, DNR may not make vapor recovery grants after June 30, 1995, or the day after publication of the 1995-97 budget act, whichever is later. This bill allows DNR to make vapor recovery grants until December 31, 1995. This bill also expands the vapor recovery grant program so that gasoline dispensing facilities that are not retail gasoline stations but that are located in ozone nonattainment areas and are required to install vapor recovery systems are eligible for grants.
Solid and hazardous waste; environmental cleanup
This bill eliminates the radioactive waste review board, the radioactive waste policy council and the radioactive waste technical council. The bill transfers the responsibilities of the radioactive waste review board, which concern proposals related to the long-term disposal of highly radioactive waste, to the public service commission, except that the bill eliminates a requirement to provide educational programs concerning highly radioactive waste.
Under the current hazardous substance spills law, administered by DNR, a person who possesses or controls a hazardous substance or who causes the discharge of a hazardous substance is required to inform DNR of the discharge and to take the actions necessary to restore the environment to the extent practicable. DNR may issue an order requiring a person to fulfill the duty to restore the environment. If a person required to remedy the environmental damage caused by a hazardous substance discharge is not fulfilling that duty or if the identity of the person is unknown, DNR may dispose of the substance or take other emergency action that DNR considers appropriate.
Currently, under the petroleum storage remedial action program (commonly called PECFA), the department of industry, labor and human relations (DILHR) pays a portion of the costs incurred by the owners or operators of certain petroleum storage tanks to remedy environmental damage caused by discharges from those storage tanks. A claimant is not eligible for a PECFA award unless DNR determines that the activities performed to restore the environment satisfy the requirements of the hazardous substance spills law. DNR also reviews site investigations and clean-up plans under the PECFA program.
Under this bill, beginning on July 1, 1996, the department of commerce (formerly the department of development) is required to administer a program under which owners and operators of certain storage tanks and certain other persons (called responsible persons) investigate discharges from those tanks and take the actions necessary to restore the environment to the extent practicable. The storage tanks covered by the program (called regulated storage tanks) are petroleum product storage tanks that are covered by PECFA plus underground storage tanks that contain hazardous substances and that are required under federal law to be regulated by the federal environmental protection agency or by a state. Under the bill, the department of commerce may issue an order requiring a responsible person to remedy the environmental damage caused by a discharge from a regulated storage tank. The bill requires DNR to inform the department of commerce whenever a person reports a discharge from a regulated storage tank. The bill also places some restrictions on DNR's authority under the hazardous substance spills law to order cleanups of discharges from regulated storage tanks and to conduct those cleanups.
Also under the bill, the department of commerce administers the PECFA program starting on July 1, 1996. The bill gives to the department of commerce the PECFA responsibilities currently performed by DILHR and by DNR.
This bill requires DNR to promulgate a rule that establishes an alternative to immediate reporting under the hazardous substances spills law, or an exemption from reporting, for discharges of less than a specified amount of a hazardous substance for which a minimum reporting amount has been established under the federal comprehensive environmental response, compensation and liability act (superfund act) or under the federal emergency planning and community right-to-know act. In the rule, DNR may not specify an amount of one of these hazardous substances that is less than the minimum reporting amount specified under federal law. The bill authorizes DNR to promulgate a rule that establishes an alternative to immediate reporting, or an exemption from reporting, for discharges of less than a specified amount of a hazardous substance for which a federal minimum reporting amount has not been established.
Under the bill, before DNR promulgates its rule concerning a hazardous substance for which a federal minimum reporting amount has been established, a person is not required to report to DNR a discharge of that hazardous substance if the amount of the discharge is less than the federal minimum reporting amount.
Under current law, the recycling market development board provides financial and other assistance to improve the marketing of, and to develop markets for, certain materials recovered from solid waste. The board consists of the secretaries of natural resources and development and 9 members appointed by the governor. Under current law, the board is attached to DOA. Under this bill, the board is attached to the department of development (DOD), effective on July 1, 1996. The bill also reduces the size of the recycling market development board by 4 appointees. The bill terminates the membership of the 9 current members appointed by the governor, allowing the governor to appoint 5 new members. The bill also eliminates the position of executive director of the board.
Under current law, the board provides assistance for materials that are recovered by recycling programs operated by local governmental units and that are required to be recycled under this state's recycling law. This bill requires the board to annually establish a list of materials recovered from solid waste that are eligible for assistance from the board. The list must include the materials that are required to be recycled under this state's recycling law.
Under this state's recycling law, persons are generally prohibited from disposing of specified discarded materials in landfills and from incinerating specified discarded materials. These prohibitions do not apply to discarded materials from an area that has an effective recycling program. If the area is in another state, the state must also have an approved landfill siting program.
In order to be an effective recycling program, a recycling program must require persons in the area to separate the specified materials from their solid waste or send their solid waste to a facility that separates the materials from solid waste, but DNR may grant a one-year variance from that requirement with respect to a specified material in the event of an emergency or if the cost of selling the material exceeds specified amounts.
Current law also authorizes DNR to grant an exception from the disposal and incineration prohibitions for a specified material to a local governmental unit that operates a recycling program in the event of an emergency. An exception may be for up to one year.
This bill requires DNR to review markets for the discarded materials to which the landfill and incineration prohibitions apply, beneficial uses for those materials and technologies for managing those materials in solid waste. If DNR finds that a prohibition with respect to a specific material is not feasible or practical and that the prohibition is not needed to achieve the goals of this state's solid waste management policy, DNR may do one of the following:
1. Promulgate a rule specifying conditions under which the material may be disposed of in a landfill or incinerated.
2. Exempt specified persons from the landfill or incineration prohibition with respect to the material.
3. Authorize, for up to one year, the material to be disposed of in a landfill or incinerated.
The bill also authorizes DNR to grant a variance so that an effective recycling program need not require persons to separate a specified material from solid waste if DNR takes one of the actions in items 1 to 3, above, with respect to the material.
The authority granted to DNR concerning exemptions from the landfill and incineration prohibitions and variances for effective recycling programs replaces the authority granted DNR under current law to grant exemptions and variances in emergencies.
Under current law, DNR determines whether recycling programs are effective and whether to approve other states' landfill siting programs. Under current law, DNR may approve an out-of-state recycling program only by formal rule-making procedures.
A federal district court has held that the procedural requirements (for escaping the disposal and incineration prohibitions) imposed on out-of-state municipalities, beyond those requirements placed on municipalities located within this state, discriminates against out-of-state interests in violation of the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. National Solid Wastes Management Assoc. v. Meyer, No. 94-C-0603-S (W.D. Wis. Dec. 15, 1994), petition for cert. filed.
Under this bill, an out-of-state municipality is not required to obtain DNR approval of its state's landfill siting program before disposing of or incinerating specified recyclable materials in this state. Under the bill, DNR is not required to undertake formal rule-making procedures to determine that an out-of-state municipality has an effective recycling program.
Current law generally prohibits the burning of yard waste without energy recovery in a solid waste facility in this state. Current law authorizes DNR to grant waivers to the prohibition on burning yard waste to allow the burning of brush or other clean woody vegetative material no greater than 6 inches in diameter at wood burning facilities licensed by DNR.
This bill provides that the prohibition on burning yard waste without energy recovery does not apply to the burning of brush or other clean woody vegetative material no greater than 6 inches in diameter at a wood burning facility that is licensed or permitted by DNR.
Under current law, the council on recycling advises various state agencies, the packaging industry, state and local authorities and others to promote the efficient and prompt implementation of state programs related to solid waste reduction, recovery and recycling. This bill abolishes the council on recycling and transfers the functions of the council on recycling to the recycling market development board.
This bill authorizes DNR to seek funds from any source for the costs of remedying environmental contamination if the activities being funded are part of a cooperative effort by DNR and the person providing the funds to remedy the environmental contamination.
Currently, with certain exceptions, no elective state official, candidate for state office, legislative employe or official of a state agency who participates in the rule-making process may solicit anything of pecuniary value from a lobbyist or principal. This bill provides that this prohibition does not apply to the solicitation by an agency official of DNR of funds to pay the costs of remedying environmental contamination.
Under current law, the low -- level radioactive waste council ceases to exist after July 1, 1996. This bill extends the existence of the low -- level radioactive waste council to June 30, 2002.
Other environment
Under current law, the attorney general must designate an assistant attorney general as the public intervenor. The public intervenor is generally authorized to formally initiate actions and intervene in all proceedings before any state agency or any court where the intervention is needed for the protection of public rights in water and other natural resources. In addition, under current law, the attorney general must appoint a public intervenor advisory committee. This bill eliminates the public intervenor position and eliminates the requirement that the attorney general appoint a public intervenor advisory committee.
Under the current hazardous pollution prevention assessment grant program, DOD, in consultation with the hazardous pollution prevention program in the University of Wisconsin-Extension (UW-Extension), awards grants to applicants for the purpose of having an assessment conducted to determine the full costs of using and producing hazardous substances, toxic pollutants and hazardous waste; to identify processes that use or produce such substances, pollutants or waste; and to identify options for the prevention of hazardous pollution. Also under current law, the hazardous pollution prevention board, which is attached to DOD, has a number of responsibilities related to hazardous pollution prevention.
This bill eliminates the board and replaces it with a hazardous pollution prevention council in DOD. The bill eliminates DOD's hazardous pollution prevention assessment grant program and, in its place, DOD is authorized to contract with the board of regents of the UW System for business assessment services from the UW-Extension solid and hazardous waste education center for the same purposes as those for which assessments were conducted under the grant program. In addition to authorizing DOD to contract for business assessments, the bill requires DOD, in coordination with DNR, the UW-Extension and the hazardous pollution prevention council, to conduct an education, environmental management and technical assistance program to promote the prevention of hazardous pollution among businesses in the state.
This bill creates an environmental science council in DOA, consisting of 9 members, appointed by the governor, who have expertise in the engineering sciences, economic sciences, biological sciences, physical sciences, human medical sciences or statistical or risk assessment sciences. The council, upon the request of the governor or the secretary of administration, is required to advise the governor or the secretary on: issues affecting the protection and management of the environment and natural resources in this state; proposed rules that establish environmental or natural resources standards or other criteria; the scientific and technical adequacy of environmental programs, methodologies, protocols and tests; scientific standards or other criteria for protection of human health and the environment; the quality of state agency environmental plans or programs of research, development and demonstration; and the importance of natural and anthropogenic sources of pollution. Also, the council, upon the request of the governor or the secretary of administration, is required to consult with state agencies on any environmental matter.
Currently, the recycling fund is used to finance programs and activities relating to recycling, including grants to assist local governmental units to pay for their recycling programs. This bill transfers $25,000,000 from the recycling fund to the general fund.
Gambling
Under current law, the state levies a 2% tax on the total amount wagered on dog races on a given race if the total amount wagered on all previous days during the year is not more than $25,000,000; a 2 2/3% tax if the amount is more than $25,000,000 but not more than $100,000,000; a 4 2/3% tax if the amount is more than $100,000,000 but not more than $150,000,000; a 6 2/3% tax if the amount is more than $150,000,000 but not more than $200,000,000; a 7 2/3% tax if the amount is more than $200,000,000 but not more than $250,000,000; and an 8 2/3% tax if the amount is more than $250,000,000. This bill reduces the tax to a 1% tax if the total amount wagered on all previous days during the year is not more than $25,000,000; to a 2% tax if the amount is more than $25,000,000 but not more than $100,000,000; to a 4% tax if the amount is more than $100,000,000 but not more than $150,000,000; to a 6% tax if the amount is more than $150,000,000 but not more than $250,000,000; and to an 8% tax if the amount is more than $250,000,000.
Under current law, a racetrack licensee is required to round down payouts to the nearest 10 cents. This rounding down may result in surplus funds in the wagering pool and is called the "breakage". Under current law, a racetrack licensee is required to pay 50% of the breakage to the state. This bill allows a racetrack licensee to retain 100% of the breakage.
Under current law, an intertrack wagering licensee (a person who is issued a license by the gaming commission for the purpose of simultaneously televising -- that is, simulcasting -- a race at one racetrack that is being conducted at a different racetrack) may not simulcast and accept wagers on more than 9 races a year, nor accept wagers on more than one race when 2 or more races are simulcast at the same time. This bill eliminates these restrictions.
Under current law, an intertrack wagering licensee must pay 50% of the total amount of intertrack wagers to the racetrack at which the race is actually conducted, after making certain allocations. These allocations are as follows: a) on days on which no racing is held at the racetrack, but simulcast races take place, the licensee must distribute 3.5% of the total amount of intertrack wagers to the host track for purses at the host track and must retain at least 1% of the total amount of intertrack wagers for purses at the licensee's racetrack; and b) on days on which racing is held at the racetrack, in addition to simulcast races, these percentages are 2.25% and 2.25%, respectively. This bill changes these allocations by requiring only that the intertrack wagering licensee retain at least 1.5% of the total amount of intertrack wagers for purses at the racetrack at which the intertrack wagering was conducted.
Under current law, a racetrack licensee must deduct 17% of the total amount wagered on a straight pool race -- that is, a race in which a person picks a single animal to win, place or show -- and 23% of the total amount wagered on a multiple pool race -- that is, a race in which a person picks 2 or more animals to finish in a certain order -- and pay the remainder to winning ticket holders. This bill allows racetrack licensees to deduct up to 20% of the total amount wagered on a straight pool race and 25% of the total amount wagered on a multiple pool race.
Under current law, the gaming commission consists of 3 full-time members appointed for 4-year terms. This bill changes the composition of the commission, effective on January 1, 1996, to consist of one full-time member, who is to be the chairperson and who is appointed for a 4-year term, and 2 other members who are to be appointed from the ranks of state employment for 2-year terms and who are not required to be full-time members of the commission.
Under current law, the gaming security division in the gaming commission is responsible for providing all security services for gaming operations, monitoring regulatory compliance of gaming operations, auditing gaming operations and investigating suspected violations of gaming-related laws. This bill abolishes, on January 1, 1996, the gaming security division and requires the gaming commission to enter into a contract with either the department of administration (DOA) or another person for the performance of these functions.
Under current law, DOA is authorized to contract for management consultation services to assist in the management or operation of the state lottery, but DOA is not authorized to contract for financial auditing or security monitoring services for the state lottery. Under this bill, DOA is not prohibited from contracting for data processing auditing services for the state lottery.
Under current law, DOA must require separate bids or separate competitive sealed proposals for management consultation services, instant lottery ticket services and supplies and on-line services and supplies. This bill eliminates this requirement with respect to on-line services and supplies and provides that instant lottery ticket data processing services are not subject to these bid and concealed proposal requirements.
This bill increases the compensation paid to a person who sells lottery tickets from 5% to 6% of the retail price of the lottery ticket or lottery share sold by that person. In addition, the bill eliminates the authority of the gaming commission to pay an incentive bonus to a person who sells lottery tickets.
Under current law, the administrator of the lottery division in the gaming commission and the administrator of the racing division in the gaming commission are each authorized to appoint and supervise a deputy and assistant to serve outside the classified service. This bill eliminates these deputy and assistant positions.
Under current law, there exists an executive assistant to the gaming commission. This bill eliminates this position and creates a deputy to the gaming commission. Also, the bill creates a director of a charitable gaming and crane games subunit in the gaming commission.
Under current law, the gaming commission may establish a separate Indian gaming subunit to coordinate the state's activities regarding Indian gaming. Current law provides that the director of the Indian gaming subunit is in the classified service. This bill provides that the director of the Indian gaming subunit must be in the unclassified service.
Under current law, the gaming commission is required, immediately after every race, to test the animal that won the race and an additional animal selected at random for any medications or foreign substances that may have been administered to that animal. This bill changes this requirement by providing that the gaming commission must test only one animal.
Health and social services
Public assistance
Transfer of functions from the department of health and social services
Under current law, the department of health and social services (DHSS) provides state administration of a range of economic support and work programs. These programs include: the aid to families with dependent children (AFDC) program; the job opportunities and basic skills (JOBS) program, which requires certain AFDC recipients to participate in employment and training programs; the work experience and job training program for certain noncustodial parents, commonly referred to as the children-first program; the food stamp program, under which certain low-income families are provided with food coupons; the general relief program; the relief of needy Indian persons program (RNIP); the medical assistance or medicaid program, which provides certain medical services to certain low-income individuals and recipients of certain other forms of public assistance; the program for providing state supplements to recipients under the federal supplemental security income (SSI) program, which provides cash payments to certain aged and disabled individuals; the low-income energy assistance program; and the program for paying funeral expenses of certain public assistance recipients. DHSS annually contracts with county departments of social services and human services for county income maintenance administration of RNIP, AFDC and medical assistance. Under these contracts, DHSS reimburses counties for certain administrative expenses and for payments to recipients and providers of services. Among other duties, DHSS submits to the federal authorities state plans for the administration of AFDC and medical assistance, promulgates rules that establish standards for eligibility for the programs, supervises cost accounting and management information systems that monitor utilization of services by public assistance recipients, recovers overpayments under these programs and conducts activities to reduce payment errors.
This bill transfers from DHSS to the department of industry, labor and human relations (DILHR), effective July 1, 1996, the powers and duties of state agency supervision for the administration of AFDC, JOBS, and all of the AFDC and JOBS pilot programs including learnfare, work-not-welfare and the parental responsibility pilot program. The learnfare pilot program requires certain children in families receiving AFDC to attend school as a condition of receiving AFDC benefits; the work-not-welfare pilot program sets time limits on AFDC benefits and requires AFDC recipients subject to the program to meet certain employment and training requirements; and the parental responsibility pilot program limits AFDC benefit increases for certain additional children born to AFDC recipients and requires AFDC recipients to participate in certain training and parental education programs. The bill also transfers from DHSS to DILHR administration of the food stamps program and the employment and training program for food stamp recipients; the children-first program; and the program for payment of funeral expenses for recipients of certain public assistance programs. The bill also transfers from DHSS to DILHR the responsibility for state supervision of income maintenance administration by county departments of social services and human services for medical assistance and RNIP. This includes supervision of county efforts to reduce recipient fraud under medical assistance and RNIP. However, DHSS retains responsibility for administering all aspects of medical assistance other than supervision of county income maintenance administration. DHSS also retains responsibility for administering general relief and RNIP which, as discussed below, are combined into an emergency medical relief program, and the state SSI supplement. Administration of the low-income energy assistance program is transferred under the bill from DHSS to the department of administration (DOA).
General relief and RNIP
Under current law, a county is required to provide general relief to all eligible dependent persons within the county. A similar program provides relief to needy Indian persons residing on tax-free land. This bill combines the general relief and RNIP programs into a single program called emergency medical relief, under which benefits are limited to emergency medical services. Participation by counties and tribal governing bodies in the program is optional. Under the bill, counties and tribal governing bodies may establish their own relief programs that are more comprehensive than emergency medical relief; however, partial state reimbursement is provided only to counties that elect to provide emergency medical relief and only with respect to eligible emergency medical relief costs. In particular, the bill makes the following changes:
1. Eligibility. Under current law, eligibility for general relief is determined primarily in accordance with written criteria, established by counties, to determine dependency. However, state law provides that certain people who have recently moved to the state are ineligible for general relief until they have resided in the state for at least 60 consecutive days. State law also provides that no person is eligible for general relief if the person is eligible for benefits under the AFDC or SSI programs, if the person fails to comply with general relief work requirements, if the person is removed from certain other public assistance programs as a result of sanctions or if the person is ineligible for AFDC because of provisions under the work-not-welfare pilot program, which provides AFDC benefits only for a limited time period. Similarly, current law provides that a person is not eligible for general relief medical benefits if the person is ineligible for medical assistance because the person has divested resources.
Eligibility for RNIP is currently determined under state law. A person is eligible if the person is an American Indian residing on tax-free land or is the spouse or child of such a person residing in the same household, if the person is ineligible for SSI, AFDC or medical assistance, if the person complies with RNIP work requirements and if the person meets the financial eligibility criteria under the AFDC program. A person is ineligible for RNIP if the person is ineligible for AFDC because of provisions under the work-not-welfare program.
Under this bill, eligibility for the emergency medical relief program is similar to eligibility under the current general relief program. A person is eligible for medical relief if the person resides in a county or on tribal land that elects to provide emergency medical relief and if the person qualifies under written criteria of dependency established by the emergency medical relief agency in that county or on that tribal land. The same state residency requirements which currently exist under the general relief program apply to emergency medical relief, as do the provisions requiring ineligibility of persons who receive other forms of public assistance or who have divested themselves of resources. However, unlike the eligibility criteria under the general relief program, persons who have been sanctioned under other public assistance programs or who have become ineligible for AFDC under the work-not-welfare program continue to be eligible for emergency medical relief.
2. Benefits. Currently, both the general relief and RNIP programs provide eligible recipients with cash benefits or in-kind relief for nonmedical support. These benefits are eliminated under this bill, as are nonemergency medical benefits. Under the emergency medical relief program, recipients may receive only emergency hospitalization and care when, in the reasonable professional judgment of a physician, emergency medical treatment or hospitalization is necessary because severe physical or psychological damage to the recipient will occur if the treatment or hospitalization is withheld. DHSS is required to promulgate rules establishing standards to be used by physicians in making this judgment.
3. Administration. Currently, there are a number of requirements that must be followed by counties in administering general relief, including procedures that must be followed by hospitals and counties that provide emergency medical treatment or hospitalization and provisions granting applicants for, and recipients of, general relief a number of procedural rights. These administrative provisions are largely eliminated in this bill. Instead, like the RNIP program under current law, many requirements concerning the administration of the emergency medical relief program are left to DHSS to specify in rules. The bill requires DHSS to promulgate rules regarding the administration of emergency medical relief, including procedures for making eligibility determinations, procedures for counties and tribal governing bodies to follow in obtaining partial reimbursement for emergency medical relief expenses and procedures for appealing eligibility determinations.
4. State reimbursement. Under current law, the state reimburses a county for up to 37.5% of eligible cash benefit costs under the general relief program. The state also reimburses up to 40% of eligible medical costs incurred by the county for a recipient that are not more than $10,000 and up to 70% of eligible medical costs over that amount, except in a county that enrolls its recipients in a prepaid health plan and meets certain additional criteria, in which case the state reimburses the county for 60% of the enrollment costs. If there are not enough funds appropriated to pay the maximum percentages permitted under current law, DHSS prorates the available funds among the counties claiming reimbursement. Current law also requires a county to accept, as payment of a claim for reimbursement of general relief costs, certain payments made to county hospitals and county mental health complexes under the medical assistance program. There is no reimbursement by the state for administrative costs relating to general relief. Under current law, the state reimburses elected tribal governing bodies for 100% of RNIP benefits and for 100% of RNIP administrative costs.
Under this bill, reimbursement is provided only for eligible emergency medical costs. For counties, the reimbursement percentages are the same as under current law, except that if a county operates a comprehensive medical relief program and enrolls its participants in a prepaid health plan, the state reimburses the county for 60% of the portion of the enrollment costs for all recipients that are attributable to emergency medical services. Under the bill, DHSS is required to promulgate rules for determining the portion of the enrollment costs that are attributable to emergency care. Counties are required to treat certain payments to county hospitals and county mental health complexes under the medical assistance program as reimbursement for emergency medical relief. If there are insufficient funds appropriated to pay counties the maximum reimbursement percentages, proration among the counties is required. For tribal governing bodies, the state reimburses 100% of eligible emergency medical costs, but no longer reimburses tribal governing bodies for any administrative costs. As under current law, reimbursement is made to counties on a yearly basis and reimbursement is made to tribal governing bodies in accordance with DHSS rules.
5. Repeal of general relief and RNIP work programs. Under current law, recipients of general relief and RNIP may be required to participate in work or grant diversion programs. Under the general relief grant diversion program, counties may use a recipient's general relief grant to pay up to 50% of the wages that an employer pays to the recipient for a period of up to 6 months. If the employer fails to retain the individual as an employe for at least 3 months after the wage subsidization has ended and the employe was not dismissed for cause, the employer must pay back the wage subsidization that it received. As part of general relief work programs, the general relief agency may require participation in educational or other programs that, in the judgment of the general relief agency, can assist the recipient in achieving financial independence. Current law provides for similar RNIP work relief and grant diversion programs, as well as for tribal economic development projects. This bill repeals these work and grant diversion programs. The bill authorizes counties to operate their own county-funded relief programs and permits counties to include work components in these relief programs.
6. Other changes. This bill makes a number of other changes related to the elimination of general relief and relief of needy Indian persons and the establishment of emergency medical relief programs and optional county-funded relief programs. The bill repeals provisions governing recovery of cash overpayments and repeals provisions that allow these amounts to be recovered by withholding any state income tax refunds due the recipient. Currently, the Wisconsin conservation corps and the Wisconsin service corps programs are required to attempt to hire 50% of their corps members from among recipients of specified types of public assistance. The bill changes these specified types of public assistance to eliminate general relief and RNIP and to include optional county-funded relief programs. The bill also amends a number of provisions exempting general relief and RNIP benefits from attachment and garnishment to exempt optional county-funded relief programs instead. Similarly, the exemption of general relief benefits from income, for purposes of the Wisconsin individual income tax, is replaced with an exemption for cash benefits provided under optional county-funded relief programs.
Under current law, the state provides funding to counties to provide certain types of mental health and alcohol and other drug abuse treatment services through what is commonly referred to as "community aids". Under the general relief program, the state also reimburses counties for a portion of counties' general relief medical costs. This bill provides that counties are not required to provide mental health and alcohol and other drug abuse treatment services under the general relief program or, after January 1, 1996, under the emergency medical relief program, and prohibits state reimbursement for these services under these programs.
Aid to families with dependent children
Under this bill, DHSS is required to conduct a demonstration project, pursuant to a waiver from the secretary of the federal department of health and human services, that would permit DHSS to limit increases in an AFDC grant for certain additional children. Under the demonstration project, in determining the amount of the AFDC grant, DHSS would not consider a child born into a family more than 10 months after the date on which the family was first determined to be eligible for AFDC, subject to certain exceptions. The demonstration project does not apply to certain children who are conceived as a result of sexual assault or incest. It also does not apply to a child who is born into a family that did not receive AFDC benefits for 6 months, other than as a result of being sanctioned, and who is born during that time or not more than 10 months after the family resumed receiving AFDC benefits. In addition, it does not apply to a child who does not reside with his or her biological parents. If the waiver is granted, DHSS may award grants to counties to provide family planning education services to persons covered by the waiver. The waiver does not apply to persons subject to the parental responsibility pilot program. DHSS may request that the waiver apply to all AFDC recipients or to a test group determined by DHSS. If the waiver is granted and in effect, the bill requires DHSS to implement the waiver.
Under the JOBS program, AFDC recipients who are not exempt are required to participate in certain jobs-related activities. DHSS has received a waiver from the federal government to permit the state to require participation in the JOBS program of certain parents and other caretakers of children who would otherwise be exempt from participation under federal law and regulations. Current state law requires participation of parents and other caretakers of children who have attained 2 years of age. Current federal law now grants states the option of requiring parents and other caretakers of children who have attained one year of age to participate in the JOBS program. This bill eliminates the current provision regarding the waiver and takes advantage of the federal law option to require JOBS participation of parents and other caretakers of children who have attained one year of age.
In addition, the bill requires DHSS to request a waiver from the federal department of health and human services to permit DHSS to require AFDC applicants to provide verification of compliance with certain orientation and job search activities before providing aid under the AFDC program. Under the waiver, DHSS may require attendance at one or more orientation sessions during the 30-day period beginning on the date that the applicant applied for AFDC. In addition, DHSS may require participation in not more than 30 days of job search activities by an AFDC applicant who is subject to the JOBS program. Exceptions to the mandatory orientation and job search requirements may be made if a determination is made that the AFDC applicant would not benefit from application of the requirement. In addition, DHSS may not require participation in orientation or job search activities for certain AFDC recipients who are subject to certain school attendance requirements under the learnfare program, if the orientation or job search activity would conflict with school attendance.
The bill also requires DHSS to request a waiver from the federal department of health and human services relating to the AFDC and JOBS programs. Currently, under the JOBS program, an AFDC recipient who is not exempt and who does not participate may be removed from AFDC grant eligibility for a specified period.
The waiver requested under this bill would allow DHSS, in certain circumstances, to reduce the amount of an AFDC grant based on the level of participation in the JOBS program. The waiver would apply to an AFDC recipient who is not exempt if: 1) the AFDC recipient is required to participate in a JOBS activity for a regularly scheduled number of hours in a month; 2) the activity is expected to continue for more than one month; and 3) the recipient fails to participate in the activity for the required number of hours in that month without good cause, as defined by DHSS by rule. If these criteria are met, for every hour that an AFDC recipient is required to participate in a JOBS activity, does not participate and does not have good cause for not participating, an amount equal to the federal minimum wage is subtracted from the AFDC grant for the recipient's family for a subsequent month.
Under current state law and the terms of a waiver from the federal department of health and human services, certain AFDC recipients between the ages of 6 and 19 are required to attend school under the learnfare program. The school attendance standard, which must be maintained in order for persons subject to the learnfare program to avoid sanctions, is currently set by administrative rule. This bill provides that an individual who is subject to the learnfare program fails to meet the school attendance requirement if the individual is a habitual truant. "Habitual truant" is defined as an individual who is absent from school without an acceptable excuse for part or all of 5 or more days out of 10 consecutive days on which school is held during a school semester or for part or all of 10 or more days on which school is held during a school semester. Under current law, a school board must establish a written attendance policy specifying the reasons for which pupils may be permitted to be absent from a public school. Whether or not an individual has an acceptable excuse is determined under this written attendance policy.
Current law permits DHSS to recover overpayments of AFDC benefits by reducing the amount of a family's monthly AFDC allowance by a specified percentage of the maximum monthly payment allowance for a family of that size. The percentage is 10% for overpayments resulting from an intentional AFDC program violation by a member of the family, and is 7% in all other cases. This bill eliminates this distinction and provides for a recoupment percentage of 10% in all cases.
Currently, the state pays for certain burial, funeral and cemetery expenses of AFDC recipients. This bill requires DHSS to amend the state AFDC plan to treat these payments as special-needs items under federal AFDC regulations, thus allowing the state to receive federal financial participation for these payments under the AFDC program.
Under current law, certain pregnant women are eligible for certain benefits under the AFDC program. These benefits begin on the first day of the month in which the 7th month of pregnancy begins or on the first day of the first month after the pregnant woman notifies the county department of health or county department of social services of the pregnancy, whichever is later. If the pregnant woman was receiving AFDC prior to the notification, the woman is eligible for a maternity benefit in addition to her current AFDC grant. If the pregnant woman was not receiving AFDC but would be eligible to receive AFDC but for the fact that she has no children, the pregnant women is eligible for the maternity benefit and an AFDC grant based on a family size of one. Eligibility for all of these benefits continues through the month of the child's birth. This bill provides that these benefits do not begin until the first day of the month in which the 8th month of pregnancy begins or on the first day of the first month after the pregnant woman notifies the county department of the pregnancy, whichever is later.
The work-not-welfare program is currently a pilot program under the AFDC program. In general, persons who are subject to the pilot program receive a combined AFDC and food stamps benefit that is paid in cash. The benefits are payable only for a limited time period, generally 24 months, and must be used within a specified benefit period. After the benefits are exhausted or the benefit period has expired, persons subject to the work-not-welfare program are generally ineligible for AFDC, general relief and RNIP for a 3-year period. This bill makes a number of changes to the work-not-welfare program:
1. Under the work-not-welfare program, the monthly benefit amount is equal to the AFDC and food stamp benefit that would have been paid to the recipient if the recipient were not subject to the work-not-welfare program, with certain adjustments and exceptions. This benefit amount is calculated based on the average income of the work-not-welfare group, estimated prospectively for a 6-month period, except that, for the first 2 months of participation in the program, the benefit amount is based on the estimated average income for those first 2 months. This bill provides that, for the first 2 months of participation in the program, the benefit amount is based on the estimated income for those first 2 months.
