Other DOA Duties. Direct DOA to encourage utility customers to make voluntary contributions to support public benefit programs. Specify that DOA would have to conduct an annual independent audit of the public benefits programs for submission to the Legislature and Governor.
Emergency Rules. Specify that DOA would have to promulgate emergency rules for the public benefits programs within 60 days of the general effective date of the biennial budget act and that draft permanent rules would have to be submitted to the Legislative Council within six months of the general effective date of the biennial budget act.
Council on Public Benefits. Create an 11-member Council on Public Benefits, attached to DOA and require DOA to consult with the Council in the development of public benefits programs.
Revenue Sources for Public Benefits Programs
Continuation of Existing Utility Funding. Direct the PSC to determine the amount that each major investor-owned electric or gas utility spent on public benefit programs in calendar year 1998 and require them to continue to collect such amounts through rates. Specify that for calendar years 1999, 2000 and 2001 utilities would have to phase over such revenue amounts from their programs to the DOA public benefits programs so that by 2002 the utilities would contribute the entire amount to DOA.
New Fees -- Collected by Investor-Owned Utilities. Specify that new public benefits fees would be set by DOA, by rule. For each individual customer, provide that the new fees would be capped, through June 30, 2008, at a 3% increase in the customer's total bill or $750 per month, whichever is less.
For the low-income programs in 1999-00, provide that the fees must be sufficient to generate $27 million minus one-half of the amount raised by municipal utilities and cooperatives. In subsequent years, provide that the amount to be raised would have to be the low–income need target amount minus: (a) one-half of the amounts raised by municipal utilities and cooperatives; (b) all federal funds received for low–income programs; and (c) all funds collected by utilities at the 1998 level of public benefit program expenditures by the utilities.
For the energy conservation and efficiency services program in 1999-00, require that the fees be sufficient to generate $20 million minus one-half of the amounts raised by municipal utilities and cooperatives. After 1999-00, require that the portion of fees for this program be the same as determined for 1999-00, except DOA would be required to reduce the required funding level of the energy conservation public benefit programs if DOA determines to reduce the required funding level for such programs beginning in 2004-05.
New Fees -- Collected by Municipal Utilities and Cooperatives. Provide that municipal utilities and cooperatives would have to collect fees from their customers that average $17 per electric meter per year. Specify that if such utilities did not choose to use the fees collected to support local "commitment to community" public benefits programs, the amounts collected would have to be remitted to DOA.
Federal Revenues. Provide that the amount of federal revenues received by the state for the existing federal funding amounts under the low-income weatherization assistance program and the low-income home energy assistance program would be included as part of the formula used to set the public benefit fees.
Public Benefits Fund and Appropriations Structure
Establish a segregated utility public benefits fund as a separate nonlapsible trust fund. Provide that investor-owned utility public benefits fees, municipal utility and cooperatives public full or partial benefits fees payments to DOA and voluntary contributions from utility customers would be deposited to this fund.
Create a SEG-funded annual appropriation under DOA, funded from the utility public benefits fund, to support the general program operations of DOA's public benefits function. No funding or position authority would be provided in this appropriation. Create two additional SEG-funded sum sufficient appropriations, funded from the utility public benefits fund, to support, respectively, low-income assistance grants and energy conservation and efficiency and renewable resource grants.
Conference Committee/Legislature: Include the Senate provision with the following changes:
Public Benefits Program Elements
Low-Income Energy Assistance Programs. Clarify the formula to determine the annual amount of awards under the proposed new low-income energy assistance program. Direct DOA to develop a mechanism for phasing in this formula during the 1999-00 and 2000-01 fiscal years and direct that the grants awarded during these fiscal years be made in accordance with this phase-in mechanism.
Program Administration
DOA Administrative Responsibilities. Clarify the manner by which DOA may reduce the amounts required for the energy conservation and efficiency and renewable resources program, commencing with the 2004-05 fiscal year. Specify that if DOA reduces the amounts for energy conservation and efficiency and renewable resources program awards by an amount greater that the public benefits fees collected from all utilities ($20 million annually), DOA must report to the PSC the amount by which the reduction exceeds the amount of public benefit fees collected. The PSC would be required to reduce the amount of public benefit fees that utilities are required to contribute for such programs by the amount of the difference.
Other DOA Duties. Specify that DOA and the Council on Utility Public Benefits could also specify topics to be addressed in the annual independent audits of the public benefits programs.
Emergency Rules. Specify that DOA would not be required to consult with the Council on Utility Public Benefits in promulgating rules for the public benefits programs. Specify that DOA would not have to make a finding of an emergency in order to promulgate emergency rules relating to public benefits programs during the period before the promulgation of permanent rules.
Revenue Sources for Public Benefits Programs
Continuation of Existing Utility Funding. Require the PSC to direct the phase-over of utility-funded public benefits programs to the new DOA public benefits programs during calendar years 2000, 2001 and 2002, rather that during 1999, 2000 and 2001.
New Fees -- Collected by Investor-Owned Utilities. Specify that for low-income programs, the initial fees collected in 1999-00 would be set at $24,000,000, rather than $27,000,000. Specify further, that the amounts collected for low-income programs ($24,000,000, less one-half of the amounts collected from municipal utilities) and for energy conservation and efficiency programs ($20,000,000, less one-half of the amounts collected from municipal utilities) would be reduced in proportion to the amount of time that has elapsed in 1999-00 before DOA has promulgated emergency rules setting the amount of fees that must be collected from the various utilities. Specify further that the amount of the "low-income need target" used to develop fee collection requirements for low-income programs in future fiscal years would be treated as if the full annual amounts for low-income programs had been collected.
New Fees -- Collected by Municipal Utilities and Cooperatives. Provide that municipal utilities and cooperatives would have to collect fees from their customers that average $16 per electric meter per year rather than $17 per meter. It is estimated that $7 million annually would be collected under this provision.
State Fiscal Effect. DOA would have to set public benefits fees such that: (a) for low-income program in 1999-00, $24 million would have to be collected (less one-half of any amounts raised by municipal utilities and cooperatives); and (b) for the energy conservation and efficiency services program in 1999-00, $20 million would have to be collected (less one-half of any amounts raised by municipal utilities and cooperatives). Municipal utility and cooperative fee collections are estimated under the revised $16 per electric meter per year provision to total $7 million for all public benefits programs. Thus, in 1999-00 investor-owned utilities would be required to contribute a minimum of $20.5 million to the utility public benefits fund for low-income programs and a minimum of $16.5 million to the utility public benefits fund for energy conservation. However, the proposal would also require that the 1999-00 amounts be prorated to reflect the amount of time that elapses until DOA promulgates emergency rules governing the amount of fees to be collected in 1999-00. Assuming that such rules would be in place by January 1, 2000, total investor-owned utility collections for public benefits would be estimated to be $18.5 million for the balance of the 1999-00 fiscal year.
Contribution rates for the 2000-01 fiscal year would have to be determined by DOA during the 1999-00 fiscal year. However, if it is assumed that they would be comparable to those set by this proposal for the 1999-00 fiscal year, additional contributions of $37 million from investor-owned public utilities in 2000-01 could be expected, representing a total of $74 million of fee revenues for the 1999-01 biennium.
15. AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The amounts credited to the utility public benefits fund would actually be expended through the new sum sufficient appropriations to fund low-income assistance grants and energy conservation and efficiency grants. All revenues credited to the public benefits trust fund could be expended through the new sum sufficient appropriations for low-income assistance grants and energy conservation and efficiency and renewable resource grants. It is estimated that grant expenditures would amount to $18.5 million SEG in 1999-00 and $37.0 million SEG in 2000-01; however, the final expenditure amounts would be determined by the number and amount of grant applications actually received by DOA
[For a more complete description of utility public benefits programs as part of modifications to electric utility regulation ("Reliability 2000 Initiative"), see the description under "PSC -- Regulation of Electric Utilities: Reliability 2000 Initiative."]
Veto by Governor [F-1]: DOA Administrative Responsibilities. Delete the specific requirement that the low-income energy assistance public benefits program be established and administered "through the Division of Housing." Modify the definition of Division of Housing as used in connection with the utility public benefits program, so that the term "Division of Housing" means the Department of Administration. The effect of these partial vetoes is to eliminate any requirements that a specific administrative unit within DOA be responsible for the implementation of utility public benefits programs. As a result, the Secretary of DOA could determine how he or she wishes the Department to administer these programs.
Emergency Rules. Delete the requirement that the emergency rules regarding the collection of public benefits fees by utilities be promulgated no later than 60 days after the effective date of the biennial budget act.
[Act 9 Sections: 28at, 109m, 587b, 699m, 718b, 2334p and 9101(1zt), (1zu), (1zv) & (1zw)]
[Act 9 Vetoed Sections: 109m and 9101(1zu)]
Conference Committee/Legislature: Create a DOA air quality improvement program that provides grants to operators of electric power plants in western Wisconsin to support reductions of nitrogen oxide emissions that are necessary to comply with federal standards. Provide that the new grant program is only implemented if the DNR notifies DOA that it has issued a state implementation plan, in response to federal requirements, that require electric power plants in western Wisconsin to comply with nitrogen oxide emission reduction requirements. Create in DOA a segregated, sum sufficient appropriation for the program and a new segregated fund for air quality improvement.
Require DOA, upon notification by DNR, to transfer up to $2,500,00 annually to the air quality improvement fund from the appropriation for energy conservation and efficiency and renewable resource grants under the newly-created public benefits programs. In addition, require the PSC to collect up to $2,400,000 annually from assessments of electric public utility affiliates to also be deposited in the fund. Funding from both sources could be decreased in accordance with the notice from the DNR that lesser amounts are needed. Provide that both sources of funding are authorized for up to 10 years.
Direct DOA to provide grants of up to $4.9 million annually from the air quality improvement fund to generator public utilities or generator electric cooperatives that provide service in the western part of the state. Require DOA to promulgate rules for the program that include an identification of the reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions that will be achieved. Limit the maximum grant for any eligible public utility to $500,000 annually. Authorize grant recipients to assign the grant to third parties if the grant recipient demonstrates to the satisfaction of DOA that an equivalent amount of nitrogen oxide emissions is achievable by the third party.
[For a more complete description of the new air quality improvement provisions, see the description under "PSC - Regulation of Electric Utilities: Reliability 2000 Initiative."]
[Act 9 Sections: 109no, 587d, 695g, 718d, 2336mt and 2554j]
16. HIGH-VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINE FEE DISTRIBUTIONS
Senate /Legislature: Create two continuing appropriations to provide funding to municipalities and counties where new high-voltage transmission lines, defined as those that operate at 345 kilovolts or more, are located. Require applicants for establishing new high-voltage transmission lines, as part of the PSC approval process, to pay to DOA an annual impact fee equal to 0.3% of the cost of the transmission line and a one-time environmental impact fee equal to 5% of the cost of the transmission line. Require DOA to distribute the impact fee revenue to municipalities (cities, villages and towns) through which the new transmission line is routed in proportion to the amount of investment in the facility in each municipality. Provide that DOA shall distribute 50% of the revenue from the environmental fee to counties and the other 50% to municipalities in proportion to the amount of investment in each county and municipality. Direct DOA to promulgate rules for the new fees.
[For a more complete description of the new high-voltage transmission fees and grants, see the description under "PSC - Regulation of Electric Utilities: Reliability 2000 Initiative."]
[Act 9 Sections: 114nm, 511n, 511r, 2335wf, 2335wh, 9101(1zu) and 9341(1zt)]
Information Technology
1. BUREAU OF JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEMS -- DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND INTEGRATED JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEM PROJECTS [LFB Paper 190]
Governor: Provide $4,894,600 annually for the Bureau of Justice Information Systems (BJIS) to complete information technology automation in all district attorneys’ (DA) offices statewide and for other integrated justice information system projects. Program revenue would be provided from the following sources: (a) $2,484,300 in 1999-00 and $1,064,600 in 2000-01 from justice information system fee revenue; (b) $1,600,000 annually from penalty assessment surcharge revenue; and (c) $810,300 in 1999-00 and $2,230,000 in 2000-01 from federal anti-drug enforcement and matching state penalty assessment revenues provided through DOA's Office of Justice Assistance (OJA). Base funding from all sources totals $5,090,700 and 10.0 positions. In total, including base funds, the executive budget office indicates that $6,080,000 annually would be budgeted for DA office automation and $250,000 annually for integrated justice information system projects.
Create a separate, annual appropriation for justice information systems development, operation and maintenance funded from penalty assessment revenues, with the amounts appropriated transferred from OJA to BJIS. (See "Office of Justice Assistance" for further information on penalty assessment funding.)
As a nonstatutory provision, direct the Secretary of DOA to allocate $363,900 in 1999-00 and $1,782,000 in 2000-01 from OJA’s federal anti-drug enforcement and matching state penalty assessment appropriations to fund the installation of equipment for automated justice information systems. Direct the Secretary of DOA to allocate $446,500 annually from OJA federal anti-drug enforcement monies to fund the general operations of BJIS related to automated justice information systems.
Joint Finance/Legislature: Modify the provision as follows:
a. Reduce funding by $184,500 in 1999-00 and $181,400 in 2000-01 to reflect the lower operating costs for BJIS as identified by DOA.
b. Provide $35,800 in 1999-00 and $10,500 in 2000-01 to correct an error made in calculating costs of equipment necessary for DA LAN network infrastructure.
c. Convert contracted DA LAN and case management staff support to state employes. Provide an additional 9.0 positions in 1999-00 and 12.0 positions in 2000-01 in BJIS and reduce funding by $577,400 in 1999-00 and $662,400 in 2000-01.
d. Reduce funding by $483,100 in 1999-00 and $375,100 in 2000-01 to account for a delayed installation schedule for the DA LAN system.
e. Delete $623,300 in 1999-00 and $749,500 in 2000-01 to provide a staff support ratio of approximately 61 to 1.
f. Effective July 1, 2000, provide that $2, rather than $4, of the revenue from the justice information system fee be deposited to the BJIS justice information system fee appropriation. It is estimated that this provision would result in -$1,200,000 PR-REV.
g. Provide that $1,200,000 in 2000-01 be provided from penalty assessment revenues, rather than justice information fee revenues.
Total funding for BJIS is $4,649,500 and 19.0 positions in 1999-00 and $4,524,100 and 22.0 positions in 2000-01. Funding and positions are divided as follows: (a) justice information system fee, $3,919,700 in 1999-00 and $1,300,000 in 2000-01 and 19.0 positions annually; (b) penalty assessment revenues, $1,200,000 and 3.0 positions in 2000-01; and (c) Byrne anti-drug funds, $729,800 in 1999-00 and $2,024,100 in 2000-01.
In addition, specify that BJIS give priority to assisting counties that show the greatest need for additional assistant district attorney positions based on a weighted prosecutor caseload measurement formula developed by the state prosecutors office in the Department of Administration, unless such a county informs BJIS that it does not want to be given priority in receiving assistance.
Veto by Governor [D-8]: Delete the provision which requires that BJIS give priority to assisting counties that show the greatest need for additional assistant district attorney positions based on a weighted prosecutor caseload measurement formula developed by the state prosecutors office in the Department of Administration, unless such a county informs BJIS that it does not want to be given priority in receiving assistance.
[Act 9 Sections: 115, 517, 517e, 525x, 526, 539, 542, 9101(10g) and 9458(4m)]
[Act 9 Vetoed Section: 115]
2. STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES -- EXPENDITURE REESTIMATE [LFB Paper 140]
Governor: Provide $1,209,500 annually to increase the supplies and services expenditure level in the Division of Information Technology Services continuing appropriation to reflect estimated expenditure levels for non-personnel operating costs, based on the amount by which expenditures for these purposes exceeded budgeted levels in 1997-98. Funding to support the increased expenditures would be provided from charges to state agencies for their use of state computer utility services.
Joint Finance: Modify the Governor's recommendation to provide an additional $4,537,900 PR annually for increased supplies and services expenditure levels based on estimated 1998-99 expenditure levels. In addition, provide $464,500 PR annually to provide funding for increased permanent property expenditures.
Senate: Convert the current general operations PR appropriation for the Division of Information Technology Services (DITS) from a continuing to an annual appropriation. Under an annual appropriation, an agency may expend up to the maximum amount appropriated. In contrast, under a continuing PR appropriation, the dollar amounts in the appropriations schedule are only estimates of the amount of funds that the agency expects to spend for these purposes and DITS may expend as much as the accumulated revenue in the appropriation level will allow.
Conference Committee/Legislature: Include Joint Finance provision.
3. STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES -- GIS PROPERTY ASSESSMENT DATABASE PROJECT [LFB Paper 196]
