18. YOUTH DIVERSION PROGRAM REVENUE APPROPRIATION
Governor: Convert the program revenue appropriation for youth diversion program contracts from a biennial to an annual appropriation. Base-level funding in the appropriation ($645,000 from penalty assessment revenues) would remain unchanged. This change is a part of the Governor's proposal to modify the distribution mechanism of penalty assessment revenue [see "Administration -- Office of Justice Assistance"]. Under current law, a total of $1,325,000 is provided to DOC annually for youth diversion programming ($380,000 GPR, $645,000 PR from penalty assessment revenue administered by the Office of Justice Assistance and $300,000 PR from federal funds administered by DHFS). DOC contracts with organizations in Milwaukee, Racine, Kenosha and Brown Counties and the City of Racine for gang diversion services.
[Bill Section: 367]
19. AUTHORIZATION OF A SECURED GROUP HOME
Governor: Effective January 1, 2000, authorize the Department of Corrections (DOC) to license not more than one county department of social services or human services in the state, and contract with not more than one county to operate a group home as a secured group home, for holding in secure custody juveniles who have been convicted under original adult court jurisdiction or adjudicated delinquent by an adult or juvenile court and provided a disposition as a serious juvenile offender or a disposition for a secured correctional placement. Provide that, subject to state licensing, the county board of supervisors of any county may establish a secured group home in accordance with DOC requirements.
Under current law, any person who receives, with or without transfer of legal custody, five to eight children, to provide care and maintenance for those children must obtain a license to operate a group home from the Department of Health and Family Services (DHFS). These group homes are not secured (locked) facilities. Under the bill, DOC could also license a group home licensed by DHFS as a secured group home. The secured group home would be subject to the same limit of five to eight juveniles, but the facility would be treated in the same manner and subject to the same requirements as secured correctional facilities and secured child caring institutions under current law, except that educational provisions applicable to secured child caring institutions would not apply to secured group homes.
Provide that placement in a secured group home would be considered a correctional placement. As such, it would be added as a dispositional option for juveniles adjudicated delinquent for committing an act that would be punishable by a sentence of six months or more if committed by an adult and who has been found to be a danger to the public and in need of restrictive custodial treatment. Provide that placement in a secured group home would be authorized, if a court of civil or criminal jurisdiction orders a juvenile to serve a period of incarceration of six months or more for certain traffic, boating, snowmobile or all terrain vehicle violations. Current law correctional placements in these cases include secured correctional facilities and secured child caring institutions.
Provide that a secured group home placement would be an option under the serious juvenile offender program and, in addition, would be an alternate care placement option for serious juvenile offenders. Provide that juveniles who violate a condition of either the serious juvenile offender program or the corrective sanctions program may, without a hearing, be taken into custody by DOC and placed in a secured group home. Under current law, such violators may be returned to a secured correctional facility or a secured child caring institution. Authorize the Department’s Office of Juvenile Offender Review to be responsible for decisions regarding case planning and the release of juvenile offenders from a secured group home to aftercare placements.
Provide that current law requirements that affect the care, treatment and supervision of juveniles in secured correctional facilities and secured child caring institutions would also apply to secured group homes. These provisions would include requirements relating to: (a) sex offender registration; (b) the commitment of sexually violent persons; (c) the DNA data bank of sex offenders; (d) HIV testing; (e) notification requirements relating to release or escape; (f) escaping or assisting, permitting or negligently allowing escape; (g) running away or failing to return to a facility following an authorized absence; (h) strip searches; (i) exceptions to open records law; (j) court reports; (k) aftercare planning; (l) permanency planning; (m) early release and intensive supervision program limits; (n) the waiving of counsel for certain 15 and 16 year old juveniles; (o) eligibility for low-income energy assistance payments; (p) transfer of school records; (q) term of license; (r) proposed changes in placement to secure care; and (s) transfers to a state treatment facility. Provide that, following a transfer to a treatment facility, the petition for review of the admission be filed by the Department of Health and Family Services, rather than DOC.
Provide that a juvenile would be subject to original adult court jurisdiction if he or she is alleged to have committed battery or assault while placed in a secured group home. If convicted, criminal penalties would apply. Under current law, this provision applies to juveniles placed in a secured correctional facility, a secure detention facility or a secured child caring institution.
Require that the contract between DOC and the county specify that the county operating the secured group home must comply with all DOC rules applicable to the treatment of juveniles placed in a secured correctional facility. Authorize DOC to investigate and supervise any secured group home and to fix reasonable standards and regulations for the design, construction, repair and maintenance of any secured group home.
Provide that, in counties having a population of less than 500,000, the nonjudicial operational policies of a secured group home be determined by the county board of supervisors or, in the case of a secured group home established by two or more counties, by the county boards of supervisors jointly. Provide that in counties having a population of 500,000 or more, the nonjudicial operational policies of a secured group home be established by the county board of supervisors, and require that the execution these policies be the responsibility of the director of the children's court center. Require that counties submit plans for the secured group home to DOC and require DOC to promulgate rules establishing minimum requirements for the approval of the operation of secured group homes. Require that these plans and rules are designed to protect the health, safety and welfare of the juveniles placed in a secured group home.
Provide that, in counties having a population of less than 500,000, a secured group home would be in the charge of a superintendent. The superintendent and other necessary personnel would be appointed by the county board of supervisors or, where two or more counties jointly operate a secured group home, the county boards of supervisors jointly. Provide that in counties having a population of 500,000 or more, the director of the children's court center would be in charge of and responsible for a secured group home and the personnel assigned to the home.
Provide that each county’s proportion of the number of juveniles statewide placed in a secured group home would be included in a criterion for distributing community intervention program funding to counties. Under current law, the criterion (used to distribute 33% of the funding) is based on each county’s proportion of the number of juveniles statewide placed in a secured correctional facility or a secured child caring institution during the most recent two-year period for which information is available.
In addition to adding the term "secured group home" to numerous statutory provisions relating to the care, treatment and supervision of juveniles in secured settings, the bill would add the term "secured child caring institution" to several statutory sections where the term does not currently appear. These additions do not change current law in any material way, but make the treatment of secured correctional facilities, secured child caring institutions and secured group homes consistent in these sections. Further, numerous amendments are made to statutory sections relating to DOC and the juvenile code to remove inconsistent terminology and redundant cross-references. These changes do not modify current law.
Modify the following provisions: (a) authorize the appropriation language for juvenile residential aftercare to make expenditures for the provision of secured group home care; and (b) authorize DOC to make payments from the serious juvenile offender appropriation to reimburse a secured group home for the cost of caring for juveniles funded by the appropriation. Require DOC, by January 1, 2000, to calculate and submit to the Department of Administration the per person daily cost assessments (daily rates) to be paid by the state and counties for the cost of caring for juveniles who are placed in a secured group home. The secured group home care provisions would first apply to delinquent acts committed on the effective date of the provisions (January 1, 2000).
[Bill Sections: 65, 161, 366, 999, 1131 thru 1134, 1153 thru 1158, 1182 thru 1189, 1488, 1532 thru 1534, 1539, 1555 thru 1561, 1800, 2056, 2067, 2288, 2289, 2434, 2435, 2683 thru 2688, 2690 thru 2694, 2699, 2701, 2702, 2706 thru 2708, 2710, 2712 thru 2717, 3117 thru 3120, 3123 thru 3128, 3130 thru 3142, 3151 thru 3153, 3155 thru 3157, 3160, 3162 thru 3175, 3177 thru 3184, 3186, 3188, 3189, 3192 thru 3196, 3201, 3202, 3216 thru 3220, 3222, 9111(1), 9311(2) and 9411(1)]
20. REMEDIAL MODIFICATIONS
Governor: Modify two statutory provisions, as follows:
a. Provide that a county department’s investigation of the personal and family history and environment of a juvenile or any physical or mental examinations of a juvenile are made to determine the type of care or placement that is best suited to the juvenile and to the protection of the public. Under current law, the purpose of these investigations or examinations is to determine the type of care necessary for the juvenile. The new language is intended to conform this section of the statutes to the requirements of the 1997 federal Adoption and Safe Families Act.
b. Modify the definition of an aftercare agent as it pertains to battery of aftercare agents, which is considered a special circumstance and subject to a Class D felony, to include any person authorized by a county department of social services or human services to exercise control over a juvenile on aftercare. Under current law, aftercare agents are persons authorized by DOC to exercise control over a juvenile on aftercare supervision.
[Bill Sections: 3185 and 3190]
21. AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENTS
Governor: Add cross references to the appropriations for juvenile residential aftercare and the corrective sanctions program in a statutory section authorizing DOC to pay for the costs of care of adjudicated juveniles who are under the guardianship of the Department of Health and Family Services at the time of the adjudication to properly reflect that payments for residential aftercare and corrective sanctions are made from those appropriations. Under current law, the only type of care that is referenced is secured correctional facility care.
[Bill Section: 2700]
COURT OF APPEALS
Budget Change Items
1. STANDARD BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
GPR $749,000
Governor: Provide $374,500 annually for the following: (a) full funding of salaries and fringe benefits ($369,200 annually); (b) full funding of financial services charges ($800 annually); and (c) fifth week vacation as cash ($4,500 annually). Full funding of salaries and fringe benefits includes judge and attorney pay increases not reflected in the adjusted base.
2. REPEAL OF AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS APPROPRIATION
PR - $20,800
Governor: Delete $10,400 annually and repeal the program revenue appropriation for the Court of Appeals automated information systems. The automated information systems appropriation for the Court of Appeals was created in 1997 Act 27 to fund information technology initiatives from program revenues from certain court fees deposited to the Circuit Court Automation Program (CCAP). Court officials indicate that program revenues are insufficient to support this appropriation and the expenditure authority is, therefore, not being used. The Court of Appeals' information technology initiatives are funded through the Court's sum sufficient GPR appropriation. A technical correction to the CCAP appropriation is needed to properly reflect this repeal.
[Bill Sections: 600 and 605]
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
Budget Change Items
1. STANDARD BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Funding Positions
GPR $196,400 - 2.00
PR 521,800 - 13.00
Total $718,200 - 15.00
Governor: Provide $98,200 GPR and -2.0 GPR positions annually and $309,100 PR and -12.0 PR positions in 1999-00 and $212,700 PR and -13.0 PR positions in 2000-01 for the following: (a) remove non-continuing elements (-$100,900 GPR and -2.0 GPR positions annually and -12.0 PR positions in 1999-00 and -$96,400 PR and -13.0 PR positions in 2000-01); (b) full funding of continuing salaries and fringe benefits ($75,500 GPR annually and $308,800 PR annually); (c) full funding of financial services charges ($2,300 GPR annually and $300 PR annually); (d) night and weekend differential ($56,500 GPR annually); and (e) fifth week vacation as cash ($64,600 GPR annually). The 15.0 positions removed as non-continuing elements include: (a) 2.0 GPR assistant district attorney (ADA) positions for sexually violent person commitments that terminate on June 30, 1999; (b) 2.0 PR Milwaukee County child welfare ADA positions funded by the Department of Health and Family Services (DHFS) that end on June 30, 1999; (c) 7.0 PR positions funded by the federal Violence Against Women Act (2.0 positions in Dane County, 4.0 positions in Milwaukee County and 1.0 position in Kenosha County), all of which end by June 30, 1999; (d) 2.0 PR ADA anti-drug positions funded through the Office of Justice Assistance that terminate in January, 2000; (e) 1.0 PR statutory rape ADA position funded by DHFS that terminates on June 30, 2000; and (f) 1.0 PR technical deletion.
2. PROSECUTORS FOR SEXUALLY VIOLENT PERSON COMMITMENT CASES
Funding Positions
GPR $305,000 2.00
Governor: Provide $152,500 and 2.0 positions annually to make permanent two assistant district attorney project positions, one in Brown County and the other in Milwaukee County, which prosecute cases under the sexually violent person commitment law (Chapter 980). These positions, created in 1997 Act 27, terminate on June 30, 1999. (Funding and position authority for the project positions are deleted as noncontinuing elements under the standard budget adjustments.) Under the bill, the positions would statutorily be required to prosecute sexually violent person commitment proceedings exclusively. These positions would be authorized, by statute, to file and prosecute these cases in any county throughout the state. The bill also requires district attorneys to maintain records of the time spent on Chapter 980 prosecutions, and to submit an annual report to the Department of Administration summarizing those records. DOA would be required to maintain this information. The recordkeeping and reporting requirements would sunset on July 1, 2001.
[Bill Sections: 3208 thru 3211 and 9101(4)]
3. CHILD WELFARE POSITIONS
Funding Positions
PR $357,800 2.00
Governor: Provide $178,900 and 2.0 positions annually to make permanent two assistant district attorney project positions in Milwaukee County which prosecute Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) cases and assist child welfare efforts to permanently place children in new homes. The project positions were created three years ago and will terminate on June 30, 1999. (Position authority for the project positions is deleted as a noncontinuing element under the standard budget adjustments. Funding for the positions is not a part of the agency's base and therefore is not deleted as part of the standard budget adjustments.) The Department of Health and Family Services, which funds the positions, expects funding to continue through the next biennium.
4. ANTI-DRUG PROSECUTOR IN OUTAGAMIE COUNTY
Funding Positions
PR $162,000 1.00
Governor: Provide $81,000 and 1.0 position annually to make permanent the drug prosecutor position serving the Multijurisdictional Enforcement Group (MEG unit) of Calumet, Fond du Lac, Outagamie, and Winnebago counties. While serving all four counties, the position is assigned to Outagamie County. (Position authority for the project position is deleted as a noncontinuing element under the standard budget adjustments. Funding for the position is not part of the agency's base and therefore, is not deleted as part of the standard budget adjustments.) MEG units are funded with federal Byrne anti-drug money and state matching penalty assessment funds, administered by the Office of Justice Assistance, to develop effective anti-drug law enforcement strategies based on cooperative agreements between law enforcement jurisdictions. While the Governor's recommendation would provide a permanent position and expenditure authority, the decision to use MEG funds for this position remains with the MEG.
5. MILWAUKEE COUNTY DRUG AND VIOLENT CRIME CLERKS
PR $15,100
Governor: Provide $5,000 in 1999-00 and $10,100 in 2000-01 for increased reimbursement to the Milwaukee County District Attorney's office for the salary and fringe benefit costs of the 4.5 clerks who provide clerical services to prosecutors handling cases in the speedy drug courts and speedy violent crime court. In addition, increase the statutory limits on the amounts reimbursed to Milwaukee County for the cost of these clerks from $164,600 in 1998-99 to $169,600 in 1999-00 and $174,700 in 2000-01. Funding for the clerks comes from a $2 special prosecution fee assessed on forfeiture judgments and various other civil court actions in Milwaukee County.
[Bill Sections: 3212 and 3213]
6. CONTINUED FUNDING FOR ANTI-DRUG PROSECUTORS IN DANE AND MILWAUKEE COUNTIES
Governor: Direct the Office of Justice Assistance to provide $346,600 in 1999-00 and $359,100 in 2000-01 in federal Byrne anti-drug funding and state matching penalty assessment funds to the Multijurisdictional Enforcement Groups (MEG units) in Dane and Milwaukee counties in order to continue to fund four assistant district attorney (ADA) positions which prosecute drug-related crimes. The Dane County MEG would be provided $83,600 in 1999-00 and $87,800 in 2000-01 to fund one position, and the Milwaukee County MEG would be provided $263,000 in 1999-00 and $271,300 in 2000-01 to fund three positions. These four positions are funded through non-competitive grants awarded to Milwaukee and Dane counties by the Department of Administration's Office of Justice Assistance. Funding and position authority for these positions are in the agency's base budget.
[Bill Sections: 9101(2) and 9101(3)]
7. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Governor: Provide funding under the Department of Administration's Bureau of Justice Information Systems (BJIS) for district attorney information technology in all 71 district attorney offices. Since 1996-97, BJIS has provided DA offices with personal computers and related hardware, software applications and user training. Funding was also provided under 1997 Act 27 (the 1997-99 budget act) for: (a) DA access to the TIME system, WisLaw and Lexis; (b) installation of local area networks (LANs) in some counties; and (c) the initial development of a District Attorney case management system. The Governor's recommendation would: (a) complete county LANs for all remaining DA offices and provide connections between DA LANs; (b) complete the case management system development; and (c) provide funding for installation and equipment costs and ongoing support and maintenance. With base funding, $6,080,000 annually would be provided in 1999-01. [See "Administration -- Bureau of Justice Information Systems."]
EDUCATIONAL BROADCASTING CORPORATION
