8. UNCLAIMED PRIZES RETAINED BY RACETRACK LICENSEE
Senate/Legislature: Provide that, effective with the 2000 race year a pari-mutuel racetrack licensee may retain any winnings on a race that are not claimed within 90 days after the end of the race year. Under current law, unclaimed prizes are paid to the state and deposited to the racing general program operations appropriation in the Department of Administration and the gaming law enforcement appropriation relating to racing in the Department of Justice. Annual revenue from unclaimed prizes in the 1999-01 biennium is estimated at $814,000. The provision would take effect for the 2000 race year, reducing state revenues beginning in 2000-01.
Veto by Governor [F-3]: Delete provision.
[Act 9 Vetoed Sections: 481m, 545, 3023j and 9301(2g)]
9. LEGISLATIVE APPROVAL OF STATE-TRIBAL GAMING COMPACTS
Assembly: Require the Governor, before entering into any state-tribal gaming compact, to submit the proposed compact to the Legislature for approval. Provide that the Governor may not enter into any compact until the Legislature approves the compact by joint resolution. Require that, if the Legislature does not approve the proposed compact, the compact would be returned to the Governor for renegotiation.
Provide that the Governor may not concur with a determination of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior that a gaming establishment proposed to be located on tribal trust lands acquired after October 17, 1988, would not be detrimental to the surrounding community unless the Legislature approves the proposed gaming establishment by joint resolution.
Under current law, the Governor has the authority to negotiate state-tribal gaming compacts on behalf of the state. Under federal law, a tribal gaming establishment to be located on tribal trust land acquired after October 17, 1988, must be authorized by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior and agreed to by the Governor.
Conference Committee/Legislature: Adopt the Assembly provision but provide that legislative approval relating to Indian gaming establishments to be located on tribal trust lands acquired after October 17, 1998, would not be required for an Indian gaming establishment proposed to be located at Dairyland Greyhound Park.
Veto by Governor [F-17]: Delete provision.
[Act 9 Vetoed Sections: 7m thru 7q and 9301(1d)]
10. TRIBAL GAMING REVENUE FOR FARMLAND TAX RELIEF CREDIT
Senate: Provide that a share of a tribe’s payments under its state-tribal gaming compact would be applied towards the cost of the farmland tax relief credit, if the tribe acquires a pari-mutuel racetrack currently operating in Wisconsin and the tribe converts the racetrack into a casino gaming facility or expands the racetrack to include casino gaming. Provide that the amount so applied would be calculated on March 1 of each year, by: (a) dividing the net win in the prior calendar year at all of a tribe’s gaming facilities at which pari-mutuel racing is conducted and at which pari-mutuel racing was conducted on the effective date of this provision, by the net win in the prior calendar year at all of the tribe’s gaming facilities; and (b) multiplying the number calculated in (a) by the amount of Indian gaming receipts received by the state from the tribe in the prior calendar year. Provide that "net win" would be the amount wagered at an Indian gaming facility, less the amount paid out as winnings.
Conference Committee/Legislature: Adopt the Senate provision, but technically correct a requirement that would transfer the calculated share of tribal gaming payments to the lottery fund, to instead transfer the amount to a farmland tax relief credit appropriation authorized to receive Indian gaming receipts.
[Act 9 Sections: 586h, 612g, 612p, 1710db, 1744bd, 1757bd, 3025t, 3026h and 3026p]
General Statutory Provisions
1. AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER POSITIONS WITHIN DOA WITHOUT LEGISLATIVE APPROVAL [LFB Paper 180]
Governor: Authorize DOA to change, without seeking legislative approval, the funding source for any positions funded in whole or in part from program revenue, within any of DOA's program revenue appropriations except for those listed under "Committees and Interstate Bodies," "Attached Divisions, Boards, Councils and Commissions," "Office of Justice Assistance" and "College Tuition Prepayment Program," which are all entities attached to DOA for administrative purposes except for the College Tuition Prepayment Program. Affected positions would include classified as well as unclassified positions and full or part-time positions. This authority would be available during the period from the effective date of the budget to June 30, 2001, or on the date of publication of the 2001-03 budget, whichever is later. During this period, DOA would be required only to report quarterly to the Co-chairs of the Joint Committee on Finance concerning any position changes made during the previous quarter under this authority. The reports would be required to include, for each position, the position type, and the appropriations between what each position was shifted. Although the authority to shift positions in this manner without legislative approval would expire upon enactment of the next biennial budget, all position changes made during the period would remain in effect after the period of authorization expires.
In general, under current law, program revenue positions may only be created, abolished, or transferred to another funding source if authorized by: (a) the Legislature by law or in the budget; (b) the Joint Committee on Finance under ss. 13.10 or 16.515; or (c) for positions funded from federal funds the Governor may act without approval of the Legislature.
There are, in addition, two other special exceptions provided. One exception allows the UW Board of Regents to unilaterally change the number of positions authorized for the UW System--but only for positions funded from certain program revenue or federal revenue accounts. A second exception allows the UW Hospital and Clinics Board to unilaterally change the number of positions authorized for the Board funded from program revenues. The UW Board of Regents and the UW Hospitals and Clinics Board are required to report quarterly to the Department of Administration and Joint Committee on Finance on position changes made under these provisions.
Joint Finance/Legislature: Delete provision.
2. EXPANSION OF MASTER LEASE PROGRAM [LFB Paper 181]
a. Modify basic authority regulating the use of master leases.
Governor/Legislature: Modify current law to allow DOA to enter into a master lease to obtain property or services, rather than for the lease of goods or the provision of services. Specify that a master lease may not be used to obtain a facility for use or occupancy by the state, a state agency, or any other instrument of the state or to obtain an internal improvement. Broaden the authority of DOA to enter varied financing agreements, which the Department determines are necessary to facilitate the use of a master lease, and repeal the seven specific financing tools currently identified in the statute (liquidity facilities, re-marketing or dealer agreements, letters of credit, insurance policies, interest rate guarantees, reimbursements and indexing agreements). Exempt master leases from the statutory requirements governing contractual services and lowest responsible bidder requirements. Lastly, clarify the uniform commercial code exemption for master leases from the requirement to file a perfect security interest with Department of Financial Institutions (DFI). DOA is directed to record and preserve the record of perfect interest throughout the master lease and language is included that clarifies that master leases have priority of interest over conflicting interest of an encumbrancer or owner of the real estate.
Under current law, the master lease program may be used for the lease of goods or the provision of services on behalf of one or more state agencies. The types of financing are enumerated in the statutes. Under current law the fiscal agent services are exempt from the requirements governing contractual services and lowest responsible bidder requirements; but the master lease contracts are not. The current process of perfecting security interest is necessary to determine the order of ownership of a property dispute. This is normally done by filing a notice of security interest with DFI. Master leases are currently exempt form the uniform commercial code and DOA may grant a security interest rather than DFI.
b. Expand the master lease program to municipalities.
Governor: Authorize the use of state master leases for municipalities and create an appropriation to expend monies received from municipalities to make state master lease payments. Provide that use of a master lease by a municipality would be restricted to obtaining property or services related to public safety functions of the municipality. Require that when DOA uses a master lease on behalf of a municipality, the Department is required to enter into an installment sales contract with the municipality to obtain any property or service. Specify that the municipality shall issue a general obligation promissory note to DOA as security for the property or services obtained under the master lease. In addition, stipulate that a state agency's ability to use a master lease may not be dependent upon payment by a municipality unless the obligation of the municipality constitutes a general obligation. The master lease program cannot currently be used to finance municipal purchases.
Joint Finance/Legislature: Delete provision.
[Act 9 Sections: 93 thru 100, 2819 thru 2821 and 2822]
3. FINANCING OF ENERGY CONSERVATION CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
Governor/Legislature: Modify current law regarding DOA's energy conservation audits and construction projects program to newly allow construction work under this program to be initially financed by the state.
Under current law, DOA may contract with a qualified contractor for the conduct of an energy conservation audit to be performed at any state-owned building, structure or facility. After the audit, if DOA believes that projected potential savings from any proposed energy conservation construction project would be sufficient to enable recovery of the costs of the construction within a reasonable period of time, DOA may contract with the audit contractor to undertake the proposed construction work. The contract must require that the contractor undertake the construction work at its own expense. DOA may then make payments to the contractor for the construction work from the fuel and utility costs appropriation in the respective agency as the projected energy savings are realized.
Under the Governor's proposal, the state would be able to directly finance the initial construction work. If the state chooses to do so, the state would also be newly authorized to finance any portion of the construction work using master lease financing. Further, for any project for which the state provides initial financing, DOA would be required to recover from the contractor any amount paid by the state to the contractor that is greater than the amount of savings realized by the state from the project within the reasonable period of time identified in the contract. The proposed language would also require that DOA, in its required annual report on construction projects contracted for under this program, include information on amounts of money due from contractors under this proposed change in how energy savings realized would be used. Finally, the bill would provide that if master lease financing is used to pay for any energy conservation construction projects, payments under the master lease could not be conditioned upon contractors making the above required payments to the state.
[Act 9 Sections: 102, 106 and 107]
4. PROCUREMENT -- EXEMPTION FROM BUYING FROM WORK CENTERS FOR THE SEVERELY HANDICAPPED [LFB Paper 182]
Governor: Authorize the Secretary of DOA to waive, at the request of an agency, the procurement requirements that provide preference to work centers for the employment of severely handicapped individuals if such a preference contravenes competitive requirements under federal law or regulations.
Under current law, procurement regulations governing agency purchases, or purchases made for an agency, require that preference be given to work centers for severely handicapped individuals. The State Use Board maintains a list of approved work centers and state agencies are directed to purchase goods produced from these work centers. The requirement does not apply to: (a) printing and stationary purchases; (b) goods produced by another state institution; (c) goods produced by prison industries; and (d) major procurements. Agencies may also obtain written certificates of exception from the State Use Board if all of the following conditions are met: (a) the work center cannot furnish the material, supply, equipment, or service in the time period specified in the order; and (b) the material, supply, equipment, or service is available from commercial sources in quantities and at an earlier time.
Joint Finance/Legislature: Delete provision.
5. BUDGET REQUEST SUBMITTAL DATE [LFB Paper 183]
Governor: Require that all agencies, other than the Legislature and Courts, submit their biennial budget requests to DOA and the Legislative Fiscal Bureau on the date specified by DOA. Under current law, the agencies are required to submit their requests by September 15 of each even-numbered year.
Joint Finance/Legislature: Delete provision.
6. STATE AGENCY MEMBERSHIP DUES
Assembly/Legislature: Include a session law provision to require the Secretary of DOA to lapse, in 1999-00 and in 2000-01, to the general fund or the respective program revenue account or segregated fund from each state agency an amount equal to 10% of the amounts expended in 1998-99 by the respective agency for the costs of membership dues in national and state organizations, excluding federal funds. Provide that these amounts shall be lapsed from the respective agency appropriations from which the membership dues were paid. It is estimated that this provision will result in lapses totaling $460,800 annually, composed of GPR lapses of $187,200 annually, PR lapses of $179,400 annually and SEG lapses of $94,200 annually.
Veto by Governor [E-3]: Delete provision.
[Act 9 Vetoed Section: 9158(10g)]
7. STATE PROCUREMENT OF TONER CARTRIDGES
Senate: Require the Department of Administration, every other state agency to which DOA delegates purchasing authority other than the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority and the World Dairy Center Authority, and state legislative and judicial branch entities to ensure that the specifications that they use for purchasing prohibit the procurement of toner cartridges whose original manufacturer places restrictions on the remanufacturing of the toner cartridges by any person other than the manufacturer. Define "toner cartridge" as any cartridge containing a dry, powdered ink for application to paper by use of a photocopier, laser printer or similar device. Provide restrictions on remanufacturing that include reducing the price of the toner cartridge in exchange for an agreement not to remanufacture the toner cartridge, a licensing agreement on the toner cartridge that forbids remanufacturing and any contract that forbids the remanufacturing or recycling of a toner cartridge. Prohibit cities, villages, towns, counties and other local units of government from purchasing toner cartridges that have such restrictions on remanufacturing. The provision would first apply to specifications for notices inviting bids or competitive sealed proposals for purchases and to specifications for orders for purchases placed on the first day of the seventh month after the effective date of the bill.
Conference Committee/Legislature: Adopt the Senate provision except for the prohibition of cities, villages, towns, counties and other local units of government from purchasing toner cartridges that have such restrictions on remanufacturing.
Veto by Governor [B-30]: Delete provision.
[Act 9 Vetoed Sections: 81g, 82pm, 82pr, 84m, 1619 and 9358(7m)]
Office of Justice Assistance
1. PENALTY ASSESSMENT REVENUE DISTRIBUTION [LFB Papers 187 thru 192 and 165]
Governor: Make the following changes concerning the receipt and distribution of penalty assessment program revenues: (a) create a new appropriation under the Office of Justice Assistance (OJA) to receive all penalty assessment revenues; (b) delete certain existing penalty assessment appropriations and modify others that receive penalty assessment revenues to reflect this change; (c) move the statutory language concerning levy of penalty assessment from Chapter 165 (Department of Justice) to Chapter 757 (general provisions concerning courts of record, judges, attorneys and clerks); (d) provide that all appropriations funded from penalty assessment revenues be annual appropriations limited to the appropriated amounts; (e) provide that 90% of the unencumbered balances of certain penalty assessment appropriations on the effective date of the bill be transferred to the newly-created OJA penalty assessment receipts appropriation; and (f) convert funding for the county-tribal law enforcement program under the Department of Justice (DOJ) from penalty assessment revenue to tribal gaming revenue provided under the recently completed state-tribal gaming compacts.
Whenever a court imposes a fine or forfeiture for a violation of state law or municipal or county ordinance (except for violations involving smoking in restricted areas, failing to properly designate smoking or nonsmoking areas, and nonmoving traffic violations or safety belt use violations), the court also imposes a penalty assessment of 23% of the total fine or forfeiture.
Under current law, penalty assessment revenues collected for violations of state law are deposited to the following program revenue appropriations on a percentage basis: (a) the Department of Justice's (DOJ) penalty assessment receipts appropriation for law enforcement training and crime laboratory equipment (49.09% of penalty assessment revenues); (b) DOJ's county-tribal receipts appropriation for the county-tribal law enforcement programs (4.55%); (c) OJA's anti-drug enforcement program--local appropriation which provides state match for the federal Byrne anti-drug law enforcement funds (22.73%); (d) the Department of Correction's (DOC) correctional officer training appropriation (9.09%); (e) the State Public Defender's (SPD) conferences and training appropriation (0.91%); (f) the Department of Public Instruction's (DPI) alcohol and other drug abuse (AODA) programs appropriation (8.48%); and (g) DPI's AODA--state operations appropriation (5.15%). All monies from the first two revenue-receiving appropriations and a portion of the monies from the next appropriation are transferred to fund a variety of programs, namely: (a) penalty assessment match for state programs and OJA administration under the federal anti-drug program; (b) state law enforcement training and administration, drug enforcement intelligence units and crime lab equipment in DOJ; (c) the county-tribal law enforcement program; and (d) youth diversion programs under DOC. Under the bill, all of these programs, with the exception of the county-tribal law enforcement program, would continue to be funded with penalty assessment revenues.
Under the bill, 90% of the unencumbered balances of certain penalty assessment appropriations would be transferred (on the effective date of the bill) to the newly-created OJA receipts appropriation. This transfer to OJA is estimated to result in revenue totaling $3,332,800 from the following appropriations: (a) DPI's AODA appropriations, $710,700 from the state operations appropriation and $1,116,800 from the program appropriation; (b) SPD's conferences and training appropriation, $63,400; and (c) DOJ's county tribal law enforcement and penalty assessment receipts appropriations, $71,900 and $1,370,000, respectively. The remaining 10% would be distributed as follows: (a) the monies would remain in the modified DPI and SPD appropriations; (b) the county-tribal balance would be transferred to the new county-tribal appropriation funded through tribal gaming revenue; and (c) DOJ's penalty assessment receipts balance would be transferred to the law enforcement training fund--state operations appropriation.
Joint Finance/Legislature: Make the following changes to the penalty assessment revenue distribution provision:
a. Retain DOJ’s penalty assessment surcharge receipts appropriation and its receipt of 49.09% of penalty assessment revenues.
b. Transfer 100% of the revenue credited to the renumbered appropriations between July 1, 1999, and the effective date of the bill and provide that the revenue transfers to the OJA appropriation would take place immediately before the transfers to the renumbered appropriations. Reestimate the amount of the unencumbered balances to be transferred from $3,332,800 PR-REV to $2,564,600 PR-REV, as follows (changes to the bill are in parenthesis): (1) $93,800 from the SPD conferences and training appropriation ($30,400); (2) $363,000 from the DPI AODA administration appropriation (-$347,700); (3) $93,500 from the DPI AODA programs appropriation (-$1,023,300); (4) $1,960,200 from DOJ's penalty assessment, surcharge receipts appropriation ($590,200); and (5) $54,100 from DOJ's county-tribal programs, surcharge receipts appropriation (-$17,800).
c. Transfer 80% of the unencumbered balances on June 30, 1999 and 100% of revenue credited to OJA’s anti-drug enforcement local, state and administrative appropriations between July 1, 1999, and the effective date of the bill to the OJA penalty assessment receipts appropriation (estimated to be $1,080,800). Direct that the transfers take place immediately before the transfers to the renumbered appropriations.
d. Transfer 100%, rather than 90%, of the unencumbered balance from DOJ's county-tribal programs, surcharge receipts appropriation to OJA's penalty assessment receipts appropriation on June 30, 1999 (estimated to be an additional $6,000 transferred to the OJA appropriation).
e. Transfer 90% of the unencumbered balance from DOJ's penalty assessment surcharge receipts appropriation (estimated to be $805,400) on June 30, 2000 to the OJA penalty assessment receipts appropriation.
Conference Committee/Legislature: Technically correct, from July 1, 1999, to August 1, 1999, the start date for the revenues credited to the renumbered appropriations to be transferred to the new OJA penalty assessment receipts appropriation, to reflect the one-month delay from the State Treasurer's receipt of penalty assessment revenues to the crediting of the revenue-receiving appropriation accounts.
[Act 9 Sections: 115, 252, 266, 360, 361d, 367, 481, 482, 483, 484, 485m, 486m, 488m, 489, 494, 517, 517e, 525x, 526, 539, 540, 542, 543, 594, 605g, 605h, 686, 1576, 1577, 1609 thru 1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 2044, 2290, 2290v, 2291, 2292m, 2293, 2294m, 2295 thru 2298, 2301, 2753 thru 2761, 3050m, 3050n, 3050o, 3066 thru 3072, 3076 thru 3078, 3079, 3085, 3094, 3097, 3199, 3203, 9101(10g), 9101(12), 9201(2m), 9201(2n), 9201(2p), 9211(2g), 9230(1), 9230(2m), 9230(3m), 9238(1h), 9239(1h) and 9239(2h)]
2. PENALTY ASSESSMENT STATE MATCH FUNDING FOR THE FEDERAL ANTI-DRUG ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM [LFB Paper 191]
Governor: Make the following changes to the penalty assessment state match funding for the federal Byrne anti-drug enforcement program: (a) delete $1,972,400 in 1999-00 and $1,674,000 in 2000-01 from the program revenue appropriations for penalty assessment state match; (b) change funding for those appropriations from 22.73% of penalty assessment revenues to the appropriated amounts, and modify the appropriation language to reflect this change; and (c) delete statutory language which requires local units of government to provide at least a 10% match for the anti-drug law enforcement monies they receive from OJA.
Under current law, penalty assessment revenues are used to match federal anti-drug law enforcement funds that are distributed to state agencies and local units of government and to OJA for administration. Under the bill, penalty assessment revenues would continue to fund these appropriations, but all penalty assessment revenues would initially be deposited to a newly-created appropriation under OJA. Under the bill, only the amounts appropriated for the state, local and administration match for the anti-drug enforcement program would be transferred from the new OJA revenue-receiving appropriation to the respective anti-drug enforcement penalty assessment match appropriations.
The funding reductions are related to: (a) -$1,793,800 annually in the appropriation which provides match monies for local programs to remove funding which, under the current appropriation structure, is appropriated in both OJA's local appropriation and also in the state and administration anti-drug enforcement program appropriations (currently, penalty assessment revenues are initially deposited into the local appropriation, then transferred to the state and administration appropriations); (b) -$126,600 in 1999-00 and -$125,500 in 2000-01 in the local appropriation, to reflect reestimates of required match amounts; (c) -$72,000 in 1999-00 and $225,300 in 2000-01 in the state appropriation, to reflect reestimates of required match amounts; and (d) $20,000 annually in the program administration appropriation, for administrative costs associated with a new federal program (the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant).
Joint Finance: Retain the statutory language which requires local units of government to provide at least a 10% state match for the anti-drug law enforcement monies they receive from OJA. In addition, transfer 80% of the anti-drug appropriations unencumbered balances on June 30, 1999 and 100% of the revenue credited to these appropriations between July 1, 1999, and the effective date of the bill to the newly-created OJA penalty assessment receipts appropriation (estimated to be $1,080,800).
Conference Committee/Legislature: Technically correct the start date, from July 1, 1999, to August 1, 1999, for the revenues credited to the anti-drug appropriations to be transferred to the newly-created penalty assessment receipts appropriation.
