This section creates a program to provide grants to assist in the formation and development of local watershed groups. The section also requires the Department of Natural Resources to fund a nonprofit organization that will administer the grants and establish a center to encourage, facilitate the development of, and educate local watershed groups.
A337
I am vetoing these provisions because the program is not a cost-effective use of state funds. The state already has a number of grant programs that seek to increase local and community involvement in water quality protection activities. The Land and Water Conservation Board also provides significant public involvement in watershed financing and policy development. I remain committed to local watershed efforts as evidenced through the significant increase in funding for the Priority Watershed and Land and Water Resource Management Programs. This bill appropriates approximately $48 million for local assistance and cost-sharing grants to improve water quality across the state. To ensure that these funds are used in the most effective means possible, I suggest that the Land and Water Conservation Board consider alternatives that promote local involvement in and responsibility for water quality activities.
19. Willow Flowage
Section 3487d
This section designates the Willow Flowage as an outstanding resource water.
I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary and infringes on the Natural Resources Board's authority to designate waters and waterways as outstanding resource waters. The board is currently reviewing the appropriateness of assigning this designation to the Willow Flowage.
20. Water Pollution Credit Trading Pilot
Sections 3606 and 9137 (1hm)
These sections require the Department of Natural Resources to administer at least one pilot project to evaluate a water pollution credit trading program and to select the Hay River watershed as one of the pilot projects. Also, these sections prohibit the department from beginning any new pilot projects after June 30, 1999.
I am partially vetoing section 3606 and vetoing section 9137 (1hm) to remove the June 30, 1999 date and the Hay River project designation because they unnecessarily limit the department's ability to successfully administer and evaluate a pilot of this new program. Since water pollution credit trading is an innovative approach to improving water quality, the department will need time to work with potential participants. In addition, I am concerned that legislative designations of projects undermine the department's ability to select projects based on merit. Pilot projects should evaluate a variety of situations in a deliberate fashion that includes significant local input and support.
21. Southeastern Wisconsin Fox River Commission Funding
Sections 378m, 378no and 1148t
These sections create the Southeastern Wisconsin Fox River Commission to conduct studies, liaison with agencies, and implement plans related to water quality and navigation in the Illinois Fox River basin. The commission will consist of local representatives and non-voting members from the Department of Natural Resources and the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission. These sections also allocate $300,000 from recreational boating facilities aids to the commission, which may also receive funds through local government appropriations and gifts and grants.
I am partially vetoing these sections to remove the allocation of $300,000 from recreational boating facilities aids because it is excessive. The commission may receive funds for its activities from local governments, gifts and grants. In addition, the commission may compete with other organizations for funding from state aid programs.
22. Commercial Harvest of Smelt and Alewife
Sections 1105s and 1105t
These sections allow commercial smelt fishing on Lake Michigan during any month except May.
I am vetoing this provision because it would have resulted in a substantial incidental catch and loss of alewife and chubs that would be detrimental to the overall Lake Michigan fishery.
I recognize that Wisconsin's Lake Michigan commercial fishers play an important role in the economy of our state. The expansion in the season length was sought by these businesses in order to increase their smelt harvest and thereby improve their economic viability. I also recognize that Wisconsin citizens greatly value the importance of the salmon and trout fishery in Lake Michigan. Not only is it vitally important to Wisconsin's anglers, it is also important to many other small businesses such as charter fishing operations, motels, bait shops and restaurants.
I have retained the addition of four hours to the commercial fishing day as proposed by the Legislature in order to give Lake Michigan commercial fishers more scheduling flexibility. I am aware that unless additional regulations are adopted by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), these additional hours of smelt fishing will lead to additional incidental catch of alewives which are a major forage base for our vitally important salmon and trout fishery. I am therefore requesting that DNR immediately implement the additional authority granted to them in this bill to establish by rule a harvest limit for alewife. I am requesting that the department bring an alewife harvest rule to the Natural Resources Board so that it is effective prior to the Green Bay commercial smelt season. The rule should be designed to prevent additional loss of the important alewife forage base.
23. New Stewardship Categories and Badger Trail Development
Sections 762g, 762h, 762k, 762L, 766b, 766c, 766d, 766e, 766f, 766h, 766i, 766m, 766n, 766p, 766q, 766r, 766s, 766ur, 766w, 766x, 766y and 767
These sections modify the Warren Knowles-Gaylord Nelson Stewardship Program to create open space and bluff protection categories and allow the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to expend up to $1,750,000 of existing funds to develop a state trail. Funded through reallocation of funding from existing Stewardship Program categories, the open space and bluff protection programs would provide grants to local governments and nonprofit conservation organizations to acquire easements and land. These sections also allow development of a state trail along a portion of an abandoned railroad corridor located in Dane and Green counties on land that is not owned by or under the jurisdiction of the department.
A338
I am vetoing the new Stewardship categories because creating new categories to serve these purposes is premature. The current Stewardship Program ends on June 30, 2000. I am committed to the overall resource protection goals of the Stewardship Program and have created a blue ribbon task force through executive order to evaluate the current program and propose alternatives for a new Stewardship Program. The open space and bluff protection categories should be considered by the task force as it develops its recommendations.
I am also vetoing the authority to develop an abandoned rail corridor because it is unnecessary. Under current law, DNR and the Natural Resources Board have the authority to decide which projects, and associated funding, will provide the best and most cost-effective recreational opportunities for Wisconsin's residents and visitors. Before approving this proposed trail, DNR and the Natural Resources Board need the flexibility to consider several issues, including ownership of the land, scheduling of other trail development projects, responsibility for development and maintenance, and possible funding sources.
24. Mountain Bay State Trail
Section 953m
This section requires the Department of Natural Resources to expend up to $333,000 of existing funds to complete the Mountain Bay State Trail in Shawano County and to maintain trail crossings in Brown, Oconto, Shawano and Marathon Counties.
I am vetoing this section because it increases the department's workload and diverts funding from existing projects. I am concerned that state funding of the remaining construction and ongoing maintenance of this trail will discourage counties from participating in cooperative trail agreements. These agreements are critical to maintaining the number and quality of trails available to Wisconsin's residents and visitors.
25. Group Deer Hunting
Sections 1119b, 1119c, 1119d, 1119e, 1119f and 1119g
These sections allow bow hunters to group hunt for deer and extend the time during which a killed deer must be tagged to one hour after the deer has been killed. Also, these sections prohibit the use of any electronic means to communicate the kill to another member of the hunting party.
I am vetoing these sections because the extension of group deer hunting privileges to bow hunters is unnecessary and the one-hour time limit is excessive. Bow hunting for deer is traditionally a solitary pursuit. To improve chances of harvesting a deer, bow hunters reduce the number of factors that may alert a deer to their presence, including wearing camouflaged clothing and hunting individually. These factors make group bow hunting for deer unnecessary and a safety concern. While I also recognize the need for sufficient time to contact other members of a hunting party after a kill, a one-hour limit is excessive and could lead to enforcement and safety problems. I request that the Department of Natural Resources work with interested legislators to develop separate legislation to address this issue.
26. First Right of Refusal
Sections 767r, 767t, 767v and 960g
These sections require the Department of Natural Resources to offer the first right of purchase of any land the department decides to sell to all previous owners. If the previous owners do not make an offer to purchase the land, the department must offer the right of purchase to immediate family members of the previous owners.
I am vetoing these sections because the requirements are burdensome and administratively unworkable. These sections do not address important issues such as multiple owners, application of the immediate family member provision for land not acquired from an individual, and the process for locating previous owners and immediate family. However, I do recognize the goals of this provision and request the department to review these options and work with interested legislators to develop separate legislation on this issue.
27. Required Studies and Approvals
Sections 322m, 381r, 381t, 381v, 779, 783v, 948m, 1041, 1042, 1139rv, 4194, 9137 (3g), 9137 (11t) and 9437 (9xoj)
These provisions require the Department of Natural Resources to do the following:
• Receive Joint Committee on Finance approval before expending funds under the wildlife damage control and claims program.
• Receive Joint Committee on Finance approval before entering into tribal licensing and registration reciprocity agreements with any American Indian tribe or band.
• Receive Joint Committee on Finance passive approval before entering into a contract to operate an automated campground reservation system.
• Study the feasibility of paving state bicycle trails and submit the study to the Legislature by July 1, 1998.
• Prepare statutory language concerning access to the department's databases that contain information regarding persons holding hunting or fishing licenses and recreational vehicle registrations and submit the language to the Joint Committee on Finance and the Joint Committee on Information Policy by January 1, 1998.
I am vetoing all of these provisions because I object to having the Legislature manage agency programs and creating additional demands on the department at a time when budgets are constrained.
28. Vehicle Fleet Pool Expenditure Request and Revenue Lapse
Sections 448, 9137 (7m) and 9237 (2q)
A339
These sections require the Department of Natural Resources to submit an expenditure plan to the Joint Committee on Finance (JCF) before expending funds under s.
20.370 (8) (mt) for information technology. Also the department is required to lapse $520,000 SEG-S in each fiscal year from the vehicle pool account under s.
20.370 (8) (mt) to the conservation fund.
I am partially vetoing section 448 and vetoing sections 9137 (7m) and 9237 (2q) to remove JCF oversight and the required lapse because they needlessly infringe on the department's authority. Implementation of information technology is central to achieving streamlined programs that reduce costs and improve service. A cumbersome approval process undercuts this goal. The required lapse would also limit the resources available for information technology investments. I recognize the goal of the lapse provision is to limit vehicle purchases and I request the department to review new vehicle acquisitions in light of reductions required of the Departments of Administration and Transportation and the University of Wisconsin System.
State fair park
29. Racing Contract
Sections 9107 (14t) and 9132 (2t)
These provisions require the Legislative Audit Bureau to review the State Fair Park Board's racing contract prior to release of $3,048,000 PR-supported bonding for racetrack improvements by the State Building Commission.
I am vetoing these provisions because the Legislative Audit Bureau's review could delay the start date for improvements as approved by the Building Commission. In addition, the Legislative Audit Bureau reviewed the contract in 1996, and its provisions have not been significantly altered since that time.
TOURISM
30. County Tourism Aids
Sections 169 [as it relates to s.
20.380 (1) (c)], 458m, 458p, 9148 (3m) and 9448
These sections provide $30,000 GPR in fiscal year 1997-98 and $45,000 GPR in fiscal year 1998-99 to the counties of Pierce, Polk, and Florence as compensation for distribution of tourism materials.
I am vetoing this provision because of the precedent it establishes for compensating any organization that distributes tourism materials. The Department of Tourism currently spends more than $7,000,000 annually to market all areas of the state as tourism destinations. This includes spending related to the development of tourism publications and their dissemination to local governments, organizations, and other interested parties. Providing funds to distribute these materials undermines the general goal of tourism marketing for the entire state.
31. Sale of Surplus Property
Sections 459 and 1327
Section 459 authorizes the expenditure of proceeds from the sale of surplus state property for tourism promotion. Section 1327 authorizes the department to acquire and sell surplus state property, with 50 percent of the revenue deposited in the general fund and 50 percent deposited in a new tourism promotion--surplus property appropriation.
I am partially vetoing these sections to delete the requirement that 50 percent of the revenue be deposited in the general fund because these proceeds will be of greater benefit to tourism promotion. Estimated revenue from the sale of surplus property would have a negligible effect on the general fund. As a result of this veto, 100 percent of the revenue would be deposited in a new tourism promotion appropriation.
transportation
32. Transportation Studies
Sections 2485m and 9149 (3g), (3gh) and (5g)
These sections require the Department of Transportation to conduct studies of build-operate-lease or transfer agreements, value-based and horsepower-based vehicle registration fees, and major highway project passing lanes. In addition, the department is required to submit a major highway development finance plan, biennially, beginning October 1, 1998.
I am vetoing sections 2485m and 9149 (5g) to eliminate the major highway project development finance plan and the study of major highway project passing lanes because both of these matters are already the subject of comprehensive reviews and analysis. Transportation finance was recently studied in an audit by the Legislative Audit Bureau, in a review by the legislatively mandated Transportation Finance Study Committee and in a bonding study commissioned by the Departments of Transportation and Administration. In addition, the Department of Transportation is continuously evaluating the need for passing lanes on highways with safety and capacity concerns and will continue to do so in the future.
I am partially vetoing sections 9149 (3g) and 9149 (3gh) to eliminate the reporting dates for the studies of value-based and horsepower-based registration fees and build-operate-lease or transfer agreements because the department needs additional time to conduct these studies due to the delayed budget enactment and administrative reductions. Instead, I am requesting that the department complete both of these studies by June 1, 1999. This will correspond with the due date of the highway bypass study that the Legislature directed the department to conduct.
33. Transportation Projects Commission
Sections 10q and 9149 (1h)
A340
Section 10q prohibits the Transportation Projects Commission from making recommendations concerning the enumeration of additional major highway projects before November 15, 2002 and the Department of Transportation from assisting the Transportation Projects Commission with any study or cost estimate on potential major highway projects before July 1, 1999. Section 9149 (1h) requires the Legislative Council to study the Transportation Projects Commission and the major highway project enumeration process.
I am vetoing section 10q because it restricts the Transportation Projects Commission from recommending for enumeration additional major highway projects that may be needed throughout the state. However, I understand the need for fiscal responsibility before enumerating new projects. For this reason, I did not veto the provision that prohibits the Transportation Projects Commission from recommending additional projects unless it is determined that construction on all major highway projects can be started within six years.
I am vetoing section 9149 (1h) because another study of this subject is unnecessary. Instead, I am requesting the Transportation Projects Commission to make recommendations on potential changes to improve the major highway project selection process.
34. Evaluation of Proposed Major Highway Projects
Sections 10g, 2476m and 9149 (2m)
These sections require the Department of Transportation to promulgate rules establishing a scoring system, including a minimum score, to evaluate proposed major highway projects. The initial rules must be submitted by April 1, 1998.
I am vetoing this provision because the department already utilizes a scoring system to rank proposed major highway projects. Promulgating rules is therefore unnecessary and would result in additional workload at a time when administrative resources are being reduced.
35. Appropriation Adjustments for Federal Aid Changes
Section 2471d
This section directs the Department of Transportation to submit plans for review and approval by the Joint Committee on Finance regarding appropriation adjustments necessary to address the actual levels of federal aid received by the department for fiscal year 1997-98 and thereafter. In the 1997-99 fiscal biennium, these plans must be submitted by December 1, 1997 and December 1, 1998, or 30 days after the applicable federal legislation for that fiscal year has been enacted, whichever is later.
I am vetoing this section because it unnecessarily limits the department's authority to allocate federal funding to address program needs. The department must be able to react quickly to federal legislative and administrative changes that affect appropriation levels and distribution formulas. This provision would reduce flexibility in those areas and could potentially reduce the state's ability to secure critical federal funding for transportation programs.
36. Marquette Interchange Design
Section 9149 (1gs)
This section allocates funding from the state highway rehabilitation appropriation for design work associated with reconstructing the Marquette Interchange in Milwaukee. In addition, it requires the Department of Transportation to coordinate this with design work associated with replacing the Sixth Street viaduct in Milwaukee.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove the requirement that the department coordinate the design of the Marquette Interchange and the Sixth Street viaduct projects because I do not feel that either of these projects should be delayed if the design timetables for the projects cannot be coordinated. In addition, the department already coordinates engineering activities with affected communities and will continue to do so during the design and construction of these two facilities.
37. Mobile Emissions Testing of Motor Vehicle Fleets
