4. LOCAL ORDINANCE ASSISTANCE
Assembly/Legislature: Require DATCP to provide technical assistance to county land conservation committees and local units of government for the development of any local ordinance that implements agricultural performance standards. Specify that the technical assistance includes preparing model ordinances, providing data concerning these standards and reviewing draft ordinances for compliance with applicable state laws.
[Act 9 Section: 1909m]
5. LAND AND WATER RESOURCE ENGINEER STAFF
Positions
GPR 1.00
Governor/Legislature: Transfer $65,400 GPR in 1999-00 and $80,000 in 2000-01 from DATCP's soil and water resource management grant program appropriation to the program's general operations appropriation for 1.0 engineering position to provide training, consultation and oversight to county conservation staff for an 18-county area in Northern Wisconsin.
6. CONSERVATION RESERVE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM [LFB Paper 266]
Building Commission: Allocate funding from the Warren Knowles-Gaylord Nelson stewardship program and the reauthorized stewardship program to enable the state to participate in the federal Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP). Under CREP, financial incentives are provided to encourage farmers to enroll in ten- to 15-year voluntary contracts to remove land from agricultural production to improve water quality, erosion control and wildlife habitat in specific geographic areas. States are expected to provide at least 20 percent of the cost of the program.
Require DNR to submit a report to DATCP before September 30, 1999, in which DNR must identify an amount greater than $4,000,000 from the Warren Knowles-Gaylord Nelson stewardship program that can be expended by DATCP for the state conservation reserve enhancement subprogram. Require DNR to specify the components of stewardship from which the amounts identified will be taken. Prohibit DNR from committing any of the amounts identified in the report during the period from the date the report is submitted until June 30, 2000.
Require DATCP to identify the component of stewardship from which any amount committed for expenditure comes. Prohibit the sum of the amounts committed for expenditure for each component by DATCP to exceed the amounts identified by DNR. Require DATCP to commit these moneys for expenditure before July 1, 2000. Require DATCP, on or after July 1, 2000, to transfer the amount equal to the amount committed for expenditure from the state conservation reserve enhancement subprogram of the reauthorized stewardship program to the other subprograms that correspond to the purposes originally identified by DNR. After June 30, 2000, allow DNR to expend any amounts identified in the report not committed by DATCP on the identified components.
In addition, allocate the following base amounts for the state CREP subprogram: (a) $8 million in 2000-01; (b) $12 million in 2001-02; (c) $10 million in 2002-03; (d) $10 million in 2003-04. Specify that if the total amount obligated for the state CREP subprogram on June 30, 2004, is less than $40 million that DATCP may expend the unobligated amount in one or more subsequent fiscal years.
The administration estimates that this state funding could leverage up to an additional $200 million in federal funds for the program.
Joint Finance: Delete provision. Instead, provide $1.1 million GPR in 1999-00 and $1.4 million in 2000-01 in a biennial appropriation to DATCP for state participation in CREP.
Assembly: Specify that DATCP would administer the CREP subprogram of stewardship with a total bonding authorization of $26.3 million (in addition to the $2.5 million GPR provided by Joint Finance). Allow DATCP to transfer a portion of the available bonding authority in a given year to any of the other subprograms if the Board of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection finds that: (a) insufficient moneys are available in the other subprograms for the project or activity; (b) the land involved in the project or activity covers a large area or the land is uniquely valuable in conserving the natural resources of the state; and (c) delaying or deferring all or part of the cost to a subsequent fiscal year is not reasonably possible. Allow DATCP to transfer all or a portion of the unobligated bonding authority after July 1, 2003, if the Board finds that those three conditions apply.
Senate/Conference Committee: Rather than the Assembly provision, provide $40 million in general obligation bonding and delete $1.1 million GPR in 1999-00 and $1.4 million GPR in 2000-01 to enable DATCP to participate in CREP. Require that at least 50% of the acres enrolled in the program be under permanent easements. In addition, specify that after the first 50,000 acres of land have been enrolled in CREP, if less than 50% of the acreage is under permanent easement, DNR and DATCP are required to evaluate the effectiveness of CREP to determine if the program is meeting its water quality and wildlife habitat objectives. The agencies would report the results of the review to the appropriate standing committees of the Legislature. Specify that only the minimum federal eligibility standards, with respect to production and land ownership, need to be met in order for landowners to participate in CREP. Provide that CREP be structured in such a way that greater incentives be provided for permanent easements using fair market value than for temporary contracts and for landowners who provide public access on enrolled land. Require that state funds be utilized for commitments for a period to exceed the federal CRP contract length and be at least 20 years. Prohibit a person from using land enrolled in CREP for a licensed bird, fur, deer or game farm.
In addition, specify that willing counties and nonprofit organizations coordinate negotiation of CREP contracts and easements and land management plans with the assistance of DATCP and DNR. Specify that DATCP and DNR would provide this coordination if not provided by a county. Specify that DNR and DATCP jointly hold all easements under CREP.
Further, require that at least 30,000 acres of land enrolled in CREP (or 30% if less than 100,000 acres in total are authorized for the program) be designated as grassland wildlife habitat areas. Require the Blue Mounds Area (in Iowa, Dane and Green Counties), the Prairie Chicken Range (in Portage, Clark, Taylor and Marathon Counties) and the Western Prairie Area (in St. Croix and Polk Counties) be included as habitat areas. Specify that parcels in the identified areas need not have a riparian connection to be enrolled in CREP. Require that CREP be structured in a way so as to provide a bonus for adjacent property owners to enroll in permanent easements in the grassland project areas. Require that participants receive a bonus for choosing a CREP conservation practice that requires restoration of native tall grass prairie.
Veto by Governor [B-1]: Delete provisions, except funding. The act allows DATCP to expend $40 million in general obligation bond revenues to improve water quality, erosion control and wildlife habitat through participation in the CREP program as approved by the USDA Secretary.
[Act 9 Sections: 183tm, 628, 628b, 637e and 1933gm]
[Act 9 Vetoed Section: 1933gm]
7. FARMLAND PRESERVATION MODIFICATIONS AND ACREAGE CREDITS [LFB Papers 866 and 867]
Governor: Modify the formula used to compute farmland preservation credits, effective with claims filed for tax years beginning after December 31, 2000. Sunset the farmland preservation credit program, with no new credits to be paid for a tax year that begins after December 31, 2002. Further, make numerous modifications to the farmland preservation agreement, exclusive agricultural zoning and soil and water conservation requirements of the farmland preservation program, including eliminating the requirement that a 35-acre parcel is the minimum parcel size required for exclusive agricultural zoning. Create a farmland preservation acreage income tax credit for the sale of development rights that would preserve farmland and green space. The credit would first be available in tax years beginning after December 31, 1998. Allow a claimant to receive both a farmland preservation credit and a farmland preservation acreage credit. Specify that no new claims for the acreage credit could be made for a tax year beginning after December 31, 2002.
Joint Finance: Delete provision.
Assembly/Legislature: Restore the Governor’s recommendation to repeal the current 35-acre minimum parcel size requirement for exclusive agricultural zoning ordinances and, instead, require only that the ordinances specify a minimum lot size, effective on January 1, 2001.
[See "Shared Revenue -- Property Tax Credits" for information on the farmland preservation program.]
[Act 9 Sections: 1903 and 9404(6m)]
8. FARMLAND PRESERVATION -- TOWN OF TROY
Senate: Provide $500,000 in 1999-00 in a new, annual DATCP appropriation to provide a grant to the Town of Troy in St. Croix County for the purchase of development rights on agricultural land, if the town board approves a resolution requesting the grant. Specify that no funds could be encumbered from this appropriation after the first day of the 12th month after the effective date of the bill. Require the Town of Troy board of supervisors to determine which farmland is the best farmland and to attempt to purchase the development rights to that farmland.
Provide the Town of Troy the authority to rezone up to 40% of a parcel of land under exclusive agricultural zoning to allow for residential development, subject to population density requirements determined by the town board, if the owner of the parcel grants the town a permanent conservation easement on the remaining 60% or more of the parcel. Specify that the town could exercise this zoning authority from the effective date of the bill until the first day of the 24th month beginning after publication. Specify that if the land is rezoned by the Town of Troy, the town would not be responsible for any lien associated with the farmland preservation tax credits paid on that land. Rather, the developer of any residential units on the land rezoned by the town out of exclusive agricultural zoning would be required to meet the current farmland preservation tax credit repayments associated with any lien on that land. Further, specify that any funds associated with the repayment of tax credits on land rezoned by the Town of Troy under this authority could also be used by the town to purchase development rights on farmland within the town.
Define development rights to mean a holder's nonpossessory interest in farmland that imposes a limitation or affirmative obligation the purpose of which is to retain or protect natural, scenic or open space values of farmland, assuring the availability of farmland for agricultural, forest, wildlife habitat or open space use, protecting natural resources or maintaining or enhancing air or water quality. Define conservation easement identically to development rights, except that it would apply to all real property, rather than just farmland.
Conference Committee/Legislature: Rather than the Senate provision, provide $500,000 in 1999-00 in a new, biennial DATCP appropriation to provide a grant to the Town of Troy in St. Croix County for the purchase of development rights on agricultural land, if the town board approves a resolution requesting the grant. Specify that no funds could be encumbered from this appropriation after the first day of the 12th month after the effective date of the bill. Require the Town of Troy board of supervisors to determine which farmland is the best farmland and to attempt to purchase the development rights to that farmland.
Provide the Town of Troy with the authority to collect any repayment of farmland preservation tax credits on land rezoned out of exclusive agricultural zoning provided that any funds collected are used for the purchase of development rights on farmland within the Town. Provide that the Town may collect the repayment of farmland preservation tax credits by use of a lien on the sale of any residential lots created on the rezoned land, or by direct payments from the developer of those lots. Specify that the town could exercise this authority from the effective date of the bill until the first day of the 12th month beginning after publication.
Define development rights to mean a holder's nonpossessory interest in farmland that imposes a limitation or affirmative obligation the purpose of which is to retain or protect natural, scenic or open space values of farmland, assuring the availability of farmland for agricultural, forest, wildlife habitat or open space use, protecting natural resources or maintaining or enhancing air or water quality.
Veto by Governor [B-4]: Delete provisions.
[Act 9 Vetoed Sections: 172 (as it relates to s. 20.115(7)(dr)), 184c and 1580p]
9. AGRICHEMICAL MANAGEMENT FEES
Governor: Reduce certain agrichemical management (ACM) fund fees for a two-year period and permanently reduce fertilizer and feed tonnage fees. The proposed fee change would result in a loss of approximately $2.4 million in fee revenues including a loss of $1.2 million in both 2000-01 and 2001-02. The reductions would primarily be a two-year continuation of temporary fee reductions made in the 1997-99 budget, which will decrease fee revenues by $1.1 million in both 1998-99 and 1999-00. However, in addition, fertilizer and feed tonnage fees deposited to the ACM fund would be permanently reduced by 2¢ per ton for tonnage sold after the effective date of the bill (a reduction of $86,000 annually). The two cent fee would continue to be paid by fertilizer and feed dealers under the bill, but would be credited to the weights and measure program rather than the ACM fund. The ACM fund had a balance of $7 million at the end of 1998-99. The proposed ACM fund fees would be as follows:
Estimated
Current Estimated Governor Permanent
Agrichemical Governor Two-Year Permanent Annual
Management Fee Revenue Fee Revenue
Fee Category Fund Fee Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction
Fertilizer Tonnage (per ton) $0.32 -$0.09 -$254,400 -$0.02 -$28,300
Feed Tonnage (per ton) 0.25 -0.12 -689,300 -0.02 -57,400
Individual Pest Applicator License 40 -10.00 -115,100
Household Pesticide Registration
$0-25,000 sales 141 -50.00 -510,900
$25,000-75,000 sales 626 -100.00 -49,400
>$75,000 sales 1,376 -300.00 -112,200
Industrial Pesticide Registration
$0-25,000 sales 221 -50.00 -69,800
$25,000-75,000 sales 766 -100.00 -13,800
>$75,000 sales 2,966 -300.00 -51,000
Nonhousehold Pesticide Registration
$0-25,000 sales 226 -50.00 -347,700
$25,000-75,000 sales 796 -100.00 -46,200
>$75,000 sales 2,966 + 0.2% of sales -300.00 -145,200
TOTALS -$2,405,000 -$85,700
Conference Committee/Legislature: In addition, transfer $1,000,000 from the ACM fund to the general fund in 1999-00. The ACM fund is expected to have a June 30, 2001, balance of approximately $3.8 million.
[Act 9 Sections: 712, 1937, 1940 thru 1942, 1943, 1944 and 9204(3g)]
10. AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL CLEANUP PROGRAM [LFB Paper 211]
Governor: Reduce GPR funding for the cleanup of agrichemical spills by $1,171,300 in 1999-00 and $350,000 in 2000-2001. This amount includes $171,300 annually to make permanent the amount the Department was required to lapse under 1997 Act 27. In 1997-98, $1.5 million was spent for cleanups. Under the bill, $2,917,300 in 1999-00 and $3,738,600 in 2000-01 would be appropriated for agricultural chemical cleanup program (ACCP) grants (from GPR and SEG).
Further, transfer $500,000 from the ACCP fund to the general fund in each year of the 1999-01 biennium only. The ACCP fund receives revenues from industry fertilizer and pesticide license and tonnage surcharges. The ACCP fund, which also provides funding for the cleanup of agrichemical spills, had a closing balance of $11.5 million in 1997-98.
Joint Finance: Eliminate $678,700 GPR in 1999-2000 and $1,500,000 GPR in 2000-01 and delete the appropriation to eliminate GPR funding for the program. Further, increase expenditure authority from the ACCP fund by $678,700 SEG in 1999-2000 and $1,500,000 SEG in 2000-01 to fund reimbursement grants for agrichemical cleanups fully from the segregated ACCP fund.
Assembly: Delete the Governor's recommendation to direct a lapse of $500,000 annually from the ACCP fund to the general fund.
Conference Committee/Legislature: Retain the Governor's provision to lapse $500,000 annually. Further, transfer an additional $1,000,000 from the ACCP fund to the general fund in 1999-00 (a total of $1.5 million in 1999-00 and $500,000 in 2000-01 would be transferred). The ACCP fund is expected to have a June 30, 2001, balance of approximately $2.4 million.
Veto by Governor [B-3]: Restore the GPR appropriation. However, no GPR is appropriated.
[Act 9 Section: 9204(2)]
[Act 9 Vetoed Sections: 184e, 1945e and 1945g]
11. PESTICIDE SALES AND USE REPORTING SYSTEM [LFB Paper 212]
Governor: Provide $35,000 in 1999-00 in one-time funding for a pesticide database feasibility study. Funding would be used for a study on the feasibility of creating a database that records the level of outdoor pesticide use by farmers, other businesses, government and homeowners in the state.
Joint Finance: Delete provision. Rather, create a pesticide sales and use reporting system as follows:
Funding. Create a continuing appropriation and provide DATCP $250,000 SEG from the agrichemical management fund in 1999-2000 and 3.0 two-year project positions for (a) the development of a pesticide sales and use database reporting system and (b) testing of a pilot version of the reporting system. Further, provide $150,000 SEG in a continuing appropriation from the environmental management account of the environmental fund in 1999-2000 to contract for consultants to assist in the development of the pesticide sales and use reporting system.
Agency Responsibilities. Provide that in cooperation and coordination with the UW-Madison College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, UW Environmental Toxicology Center, the Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Enterprise Information Technology and Applications, the Department of Health and Family Services Division of Health, the Department of Administration Division of Technology Management, the Wisconsin State Cartographer's Office, the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, representatives of the pest management industry, agricultural, environmental, medical and public health institutions and advocacy groups, school districts, municipal governments, and other interested parties, DATCP: (a) develop and administer a pilot program by no later than the first day of the 13th month beginning after the effective date of the bill, which tests the pesticide sales and use reporting system; (b) develop a program that offers training and technical assistance to database users and to pesticide users required to report the data by January 1, 2002; (c) establish and maintain a pesticide sales and use database system by December 31, 2002, that provides a systematic method for collecting, retaining, analyzing and publicly disseminating data related to pesticide sales and use in the state; and (d) no later than January 1, 2001, report to each appropriate standing committee of the Legislature on the necessity of continuing, revising or repealing provisions regarding the partial confidentiality of agricultural pesticide users. Require the database system to be integrated with statewide geographic information system mapping. Require DATCP to issue, no later than March 1 of each year, an annual report which includes a summary and analysis of the types, quantity and area of pesticides applied and sold during the previous calendar year. Require DATCP to include funding for the full ongoing operation of the system in the Department's 2001-03 budget request to the Governor.
Criteria for System Development. Require DATCP to develop administrative rules necessary for the consistent submission and dissemination of accurate pesticide sales and use data. The criteria shall include: (a) technical assistance for those submitting pesticide sales and use data; (b) specific deadlines for submitting pesticide sales and use data; (c) methods for reviewing and analyzing the accuracy of the reported data; and (d) mechanisms for the Department to make the reported data available to the public (including via an internet web site and via compact and floppy disks).
Reporting of Nonhousehold and Industrial Pesticide Sales. In designing and maintaining the pesticide sales and use reporting system, the Department would require nonhousehold and industrial pesticide manufacturers, distributors and retailers of pesticides in the state to report the following information: (a) the date of sale, brand name and amount of pesticide products sold to each purchaser in the state; (b) the name, address and nine digit zip code of each pesticide purchaser; and (c) any license or pesticide applicator certification number of the purchaser.
Reporting of Pesticides Applied by Commercial Applicators. In designing and maintaining the pesticide sales and use reporting system, DATCP would require commercial and private applicators to report the following information for each application of an industrial or nonhousehold pesticide: (a) type of pesticide applied, brand name, EPA-registered pesticide product name, federal registration number, manufacturer and active ingredients; (b) name and certification number (if certified) of the applicator; (c) date, time and amount of pesticide applied; (d) how the product was applied, including any additives and the type of applicator device; (e) rate of application, including location and acreage of pesticide applications including the street address, township, county, nine digit zip code, section, range, and meridian where the product was applied and any adjacent waterways and municipalities; (f) type of site to which the product was applied and purpose of the application; (g) specific crop, commodity, plant, animal, structure, equipment and material to which the pesticide was applied; (h) weather conditions during application; and (i) name of person who prepared the report and relationship to applicator.
Partial Confidentiality of Agricultural Pesticide Users. Notwithstanding state public records law, information about pesticide sales or use for private agricultural purposes that would reveal the owner or specific property where a pesticide was applied would be treated as confidential, upon the written request of the landowner, unless the information is requested by: (a) state or local government for any investigation, subject to existing confidentiality requirements; (b) a governmental agency that has made provisions to protect the confidentiality of the information; (c) a researcher or medical doctor who presents a valid need for the information and who has made provisions to protect the confidentiality of the information; and (d) a state agency or public water supply system for water assessment, subject to existing confidentiality requirements.
