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.
Sunset the confidentiality provisions on July 1, 2001, or upon passage of the 2001-03 biennial budget, whichever is later.
Reporting of Household Pesticide Sales and Use. Require DATCP to collect data on the sale, use and result of use of household pesticides in the state. Require only licensed manufacturers and labelers of household pesticides and household pesticide products to report to DATCP the amount of household pesticides sold in Wisconsin. Allow DATCP to purchase household pesticide product sales information from commercial marketing information firms.
Assembly: Delete $250,000 SEG and 3.0 positions from the agrichemical management fund and $150,000 SEG from the environmental fund and Joint Finance provisions for a pesticide sales and use reporting system (including the development of a pesticide database, criteria for system development and reporting requirements). Rather, provide $35,000 SEG from the environmental fund in 1999-00 in onetime funding in a biennial appropriation for a pesticide database study. Funding would be used to study the feasibility of creating a database that records the level of pesticide use by farmers, other businesses, government and homeowners in the state.
Conference Committee/Legislature: Delete provisions. Rather, place $250,000 SEG from the agrichemical management fund and $150,000 SEG from the environmental management account of the environmental fund in 1999-00 in the Joint Finance Committee's supplemental appropriation for release under s. 13.10 to DATCP 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, require DATCP to submit a plan to the Joint Finance Committee for (a) and (b) above by July 1, 2000.
Veto by Governor [B-2]: Delete the DATCP agrichemical management fund appropriation for pesticide sales and use reporting system administration. The Governor's veto message requests that DOA place the $250,000 in the Joint Finance Committee's supplemental appropriation in unallotted reserve to lapse to the agrichemical management fund. Delete the July 1, 2000, plan deadline and the limitation on environmental funds to be used only for contracts. The Governor's veto message requests that DATCP submit the plan before December 31, 2000.
[Act 9 Sections: 189g and 1942mc]
[Act 9 Vetoed Sections: 172 (as it relates to s. 20.115(7)(uc)), 189e, 189g and 1942mc]
12. EXPORT MARKETING [LFB Paper 213]
Funding Positions
GPR $600,000 2.00
PR 50,000 0.00
Total $650,000 2.00
Governor: Provide $300,000 GPR and 2.0 export consultant positions and $25,000 PR each year to restructure and expand the marketing division’s export promotion program. The Department currently has five export consultants. Of the amounts appropriated, $507,600 in the biennium would be used for supplies and services. Increased supplies funding would be used for educational materials, export publications, trade missions and a PR match for an agricultural export and statistical directory. PR and matching GPR would be used to collect data and then publish the export directory. Program revenues would come from industry contributions.
Joint Finance: Require DATCP to seek at least a $130,000 increase in federal funds annually for marketing promotion. Create a GPR sum sufficient appropriation to equal the difference between $300,000 and the amount by which federal monies exceed federal monies received in 1998-99 for export promotion.
Assembly/Legislature: Delete the Joint Finance provision which would create a GPR sum sufficient appropriation to equal the difference between $300,000 and the amount by which federal monies exceed federal monies received in 1998-99 for export promotion. Rather, provide the $300,000 in an annual GPR appropriation for promotion of exports of agricultural products. This provision eliminates the requirement that DATCP reimburse the general fund by the amount by which federal monies exceed federal monies received in 1998-99 for export promotion.
Veto by Governor [B-8]: Delete the remaining Joint Finance provision that requires DATCP to seek at least a $130,000 increase in federal funds available for marketing promotion.
[Act 9 Section: 179q]
[Act 9 Vetoed Section: 1930j]
13. FEDERAL DAIRY POLICY REFORM [LFB Paper 214]
GPR $100,000
Governor/Legislature: Provide $50,000 each year in a biennial appropriation to provide assistance to organizations to seek federal dairy price reform. Repeal the appropriation on July 1, 2001. This provision extends funding that was authorized in the 1997-99 budget for two more years.
[Act 9 Sections: 182, 183, 1928, 1929 and 9404(1)]
14. NURSERY REGULATIONS AND LICENSING [LFB Paper 215]
Governor: Decrease GPR by $36,400 and 0.75 staff annually and create a new, annual SEG appropriation from the forestry account of the conservation fund of $75,000 in 1999-00 and $81,000 in 2000-01 for 1.75 positions for plant protection, including nursery regulation and control of plant pests. Provide $114,600 PR in 1999-00 and $127,600 PR in 2000-01 in a new, continuing appropriation for nursery regulation and plant pest detection and control. Revenue would come from revamped nursery dealer and grower (including Christmas tree grower) license fees. Currently, license fees for nurseries generate approximately $46,900 annually for the general fund and $67,500 PR for gypsy moth eradication.
Repeal a PR continuing appropriation for gypsy moth eradication that was funded by a nursery grower surcharge of $20 to $90 or more depending on gross sales and acreage and a nursery dealer surcharge of $30. Transfer base authority of $74,600 and 1.0 position annually to the newly created PR appropriation. Transfer any unencumbered balance in the repealed PR appropriation to the newly created PR appropriation.
License Fees. Dealers and growers that sell less than $250 annually in nursery stock would not be required to obtain licenses. A temporary permit costing $5 would also be established to allow nonprofit organizations to sell nursery stock for no more than one week. Such organizations would not be required to hold an annual license. In addition to the fees listed in the table, an assessment equal to the license fee would be charged to all dealers and growers who in the prior year operated without a license.
Repeal current dealer license fees of $25 per business location with a $30 surcharge and nursery grower fees of $30 to $150 or more based on annual sales and number of sown acres. Rather, create the following fees, including new fees for Christmas tree growers that would be expected to generate an additional $59,600 in total revenue annually:
Nursery Dealer License Fees Nursery Grower License Fees
Annual Annual Grower Fees Grower Fees
