11. Minority Group Pupil Scholarships
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.255 (3) (fz)]
This provision increases funding for minority group pupil scholarships by $950,000 GPR in fiscal years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001.
I am vetoing this provision because it nearly doubles the expenditure authority for this appropriation in each year of the biennium. By lining out the Department of Public Instruction's s. 20.255 (3) (fz) appropriation for minority group pupil scholarships and writing in smaller amounts that delete $475,000 GPR in each fiscal year, I am vetoing the part of the bill which funds this provision. Despite the veto, the minority group pupil scholarships program will still receive a 45% increase. I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
12. Milwaukee Parental Choice Program Pupil Income Eligibility
Sections 2109m and 9339 (7c)
These provisions modify the eligibility criteria for the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) to allow a pupil to participate in the program if the pupil’s family income, averaged over a four-year period, does not exceed an amount equal to 1.75 times the federal poverty level.
I am vetoing these provisions in their entirety to restore the current law eligibility requirements because, while I support the intent of these provisions, as drafted they would create a substantial administrative burden for MPCP schools, students and their families and could exclude some students currently enrolled in the program. I will work with the Legislature to pass legislation that allows MPCP students to remain eligible for the program even if their family’s income rises above 1.75 times the poverty threshold, but ensures that the focus of the program remains on providing a wide range of educational options to students whose choices are constrained by the economic situations of their families.
13. Agricultural Education Consultant Position
Sections 172 [as it relates to s. 20.255 (1) (q)], 252p and 9139 (2g)
These sections create a sum certain appropriation in the Department of Public Instruction funded from the agricultural chemical cleanup fund to provide funding for an agricultural educational consultant at the department.
I am partially vetoing section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.255 (1) (q)] and vetoing sections 252p and 9139 (2g) to remove the 1.0 FTE SEG position and funding. While I support efforts to expand agricultural education, the agricultural chemical cleanup fund is not an appropriate source of funding for this purpose. The segregated fund was created to provide reimbursement of charges associated with the cleanup of agricultural chemical discharges. Funds that are deposited in the agricultural chemical cleanup fund come from fees and surcharges paid by sellers of agricultural chemicals. Furthermore, DPI already has 2.0 FTE, GPR-funded, agriculture education consultants.
14. Direct Instruction Program Grant
Section 2042m
This provision directs the Department of Public Instruction to award a grant of $280,000 annually, from fiscal year 1999-2000 to fiscal year 2002-2003, to the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee to conduct a direct instruction pilot program. The grant funding would come from the department’s PR-F appropriation under s. 20.255 (1) (me).
I am partially vetoing section 2042m to reduce the annual grant award to $80,000. I am partially vetoing this provision because the department, at present, does not have adequate discretionary federal funds to award the higher grant amount without adversely affecting other educational priorities. Notwithstanding this partial veto, I believe that the proposed direct instruction pilot program has the potential to add significantly to our understanding of how the interaction of school reforms can improve student learning. Furthermore, I strongly encourage the department to seek additional federal or private funding to support this important research effort, and I intend to revisit this issue in future legislation.
STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY
15. Heritage Trust Program
Sections 172 [as it relates to s. 20.245 (3) (a) and (e)], 247g, 628, 628b, 641m, and 946m
This provision establishes a Heritage Trust Program, establishes definitions regarding the program, and sets limits upon grants made to the trust and grants for preservation. As described in section 946m, the Heritage Trust Program would have provided the State Historical Society (SHS) with bonding revenue to make grants for historic preservation and would have also used bonding revenue to establish a trust for historic preservation.
I am vetoing this provision because it could have a negative impact on the state’s ability to issue bonds. The state has a strategic plan for using its bonding authority with proposals undergoing multiple levels of review. The Heritage Trust Program did not undergo this review, nor was a review done of how this program would fit into the state’s overall debt management. Furthermore, approval of this program would increase the state’s authorized bonding level at a time when many believe it is approaching its limit.
I am vetoing sections 247g and 172 [as it relates to s. 20.245 (3) (e)] because these sections provide $50,000 GPR in fiscal year 2000-2001 in a sum sufficient appropriation for the payment of bond interest and principal and section 641m because it provides a schedule for the amount of authorized debt that the state can assume for this purpose. I am also partially vetoing sections 628 and 628b, which reference s. 20.245 (3) (e).
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.245 (3) (a)] provides $25,000 GPR in fiscal year 1999-2000 and $50,000 GPR in fiscal year 2000-2001 for an additional 1.0 FTE position to administer the Heritage Trust Program. Although there is no language in the budget bill that authorizes this increase, the purpose of this funding was included in the Conference Committee amendment to the bill. By lining out SHS’s s. 20.245 (3) (a) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes the $75,000 GPR provided for this purpose in fiscal years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, I am vetoing the part of the bill which funds the 1.0 FTE position.
TEACH WISCONSIN
16. Funding for K-12 Instructional Web Site
Section 9148 (2g)
This provision authorizes the TEACH Wisconsin Board to allocate $502,000 GPR in fiscal year 1999-2000 to the University of Wisconsin System (UWS) for the development and maintenance of an Internet site which would instruct K-12 teachers on the integration of technology into the classroom. The web site would be maintained until September 1, 2001.
I am partially vetoing this provision because providing $502,000 GPR to UWS for this purpose would reduce needed resources for training and technical assistance for cooperative educational service agencies (CESAs) and educational consortia, who are the primary beneficiaries of this program. The effect of this partial veto will be to provide $52,000 GPR to UWS during the biennium. Furthermore, I am directing the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee to use this funding to partner with the TEACH Board, the Wisconsin Technical College System and the Department of Public Instruction to provide web-based instruction for educators.
17. Training and Technical Assistance Grants
Sections 172 [as it relates to s. 20.275 (1) (et)], 273n, 955m, 955p and 9148 (2x)
Sections 172 and 273n modify the educational technology training and technical assistance grant appropriation from a biennial to an annual appropriation. Section 955p requires the TEACH Wisconsin Board to consult with the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) prior to awarding training and technical assistance grants. Sections 955m and 9148 (2x) authorize the TEACH Wisconsin Board to promulgate emergency rules for the purpose of implementing the training and technical assistance grant program, and to submit the proposed rules to the Joint Committee on Information Policy (JCIP) for a 14-day passive review.
I am partially vetoing sections 172 and 273n to restore this appropriation as a biennial appropriation. The effect of this veto will be to retain the TEACH Board's flexibility in awarding training and technical assistance grants to educators.
I am vetoing section 955p because it unnecessarily hinders and delays the TEACH Wisconsin staff's ability to award training and technical assistance grants. While I encourage the TEACH Board to seek input from DPI when appropriate, I oppose mandating this consultation in statute.
I am vetoing sections 955m and 9148 (2x) in order to remove the requirements that the TEACH Board promulgate rules, and submit them to JCIP under the 14-day passive review process. The effect of these vetoes will be to delete the emergency rule-making and passive review requirements. Given the delay in the budget's passage, new rule-making requirements will only impede the TEACH staff's ability to complete the competitive grant process in a fair and timely manner.
18. 2001-2003 Biennial Budget Requirements
Section 9148 (1w)
This provision requires the TEACH Wisconsin Board to submit a biennial budget request which includes information concerning the long-term size, funding needs, funding sources and duration of the telecommunications access program.
I am vetoing this provision because the TEACH Board has developed performance-based budgeting information as part of its biennial budget submission. Requiring the TEACH Board to submit additional information about the telecommunications access program creates additional work and unnecessary duplication.
19. Federal E-Rate Reporting Requirements
Section 953g
This provision would require the TEACH Wisconsin Board to submit an annual report to the Department of Administration, the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service Commission on the status of federal E-rate discounts, which are used to discount telecommunications services, Internet access, and internal connections for eligible schools and libraries.
I am vetoing this provision because the TEACH Board already has to meet significant reporting requirements as part of its statutory obligations. Information about the federal E-rate program can be included in existing reporting requirements and does not require a separate report.
20. Federal E-Rate Appropriations
Sections 172 [as it relates to s. 20.275 (1) (gf), (gg) and (gh)], 274m, 274r, 274t, 279m, 280m, 281m and 2329
These provisions create three continuing appropriations for the receipt of federal E-rate funding, and stipulate that federal E-rate funding received should be used to offset state spending for educational technology.
I am vetoing these provisions because they unnecessarily restrict the TEACH Wisconsin Board's decision-making abilities regarding federal E-rate funding. Given the current uncertainty surrounding the federal E-rate program, the TEACH Board will need as much flexibility as possible to meet changes that might occur at the federal level. In vetoing these provisions, I am directing the TEACH Board not to use federal E-rate funding for additional staff, but instead to offset state spending on telecommunications access subsidies to the extent possible.
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN HOSPITAL AND CLINICS AUTHORITY
21. Bonding Authority Limitations
Sections 2367e, 2367m, 2367o, 2367q, 2368m and 2368r
These provisions restrict the University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics Authority (UWHCA) from issuing bonds or incurring indebtedness through the Wisconsin Health and Educational Facilities Authority for the purpose of purchasing a health maintenance organization (HMO) or insurance company.
I am vetoing these provisions because a restriction of this sort could have a negative impact on the bond ratings UWHCA receives for any of its bond issues. While UWHCA has no plans to purchase an HMO or insurance company with this bonding authority, it is important for the authority to be able to obtain the most favorable rate possible for its bonds.
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
22. Plan for Increased Enrollment
Sections 172 [as it relates to s. 20.865 (4) (a)] and 9154 (3d)
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.865 (4) (a)] provides $4,800,000 GPR in fiscal year 2000-2001 to the Joint Committee on Finance (JCF) appropriation for GPR general program supplementation. This funding is provided so JCF may supplement the University of Wisconsin System (UWS) appropriation s. 20.285 (1) (a) if enrollment for the 2000-2001 academic year increases by 1000 students systemwide. Section 9154 (3d) specifies that UWS must enroll 300 students at UW-Madison and 700 additional students throughout the system in order to receive the supplemental funding under section 172.
I am vetoing section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.865 (4) (a)] to reduce the level of funding because the Board of Regents should explore more cost effective alternatives to increase access. To help achieve this, I am directing the board to spend at least $1,000,000 on distance education-based strategies to increase access. Additionally, the board should explore ways to combine the resources under this initiative with the $1,000,000 in new funding provided under the Diversity 2008 initiative to both increase access and diversity. By lining out the JCF’s s. 20.865 (1) (a) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $1,000,000 of the $4,800,000 GPR provided for this purpose in fiscal year 2000-2001, I am vetoing the part of the bill which funds this provision. Furthermore, I am requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
I am partially vetoing section 9154 (3d) to remove the requirement that 300 students be enrolled specifically at the UW-Madison. UW-Madison has provided assurances that it will take an additional 300 students. I object to setting enrollment targets for individual campuses in the statutes.
23. Lawton Minority Undergraduate Grant Appropriation
Sections 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (4) (dd)], 297t, 894m and 9454 (1g)
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (4) (dd)] provides $2,638,000 GPR in fiscal year 1999-2000 and $2,891,200 GPR in fiscal year 2000-2001 for the Lawton Minority Undergraduate Grant program. Although there is no language in the budget bill that authorizes this increase, the purpose of this funding was included in the Conference Committee amendment to the budget bill.
Section 297t changes the appropriation for the program from an annual, sum certain to a sum sufficient appropriation. Section 894m alters the method for determining the funding for the program by increasing the appropriation by the highest percentage increase in resident undergraduate tuition charged at a University of Wisconsin System (UWS) institution in the prior school year. The Lawton Minority Undergraduate Grant program provides financial assistance to undergraduate minority students enrolled at least half time at a UWS college or university.
I am partially vetoing the increase in fiscal year 2000-2001 to reflect the impact of the tuition freeze on UWS resident undergraduate students included in this bill. By lining out the UWS's s. 20.285 (4) (dd) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $253,200 of the $2,891,200 GPR provided for this purpose in fiscal year 2000-2001, I am vetoing the part of the bill which funds this provision. Furthermore, I am requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds. The resulting zero percent increase in funding between fiscal year 1999-2000 and fiscal year 2000-2001 is consistent with the tuition freeze for resident undergraduate students attending UWS institutions in 2000-2001.
I object to sections 297t and 894m because making this appropriation sum sufficient and linking it to tuition increases limits the Governor’s and the Legislature’s flexibility to address issues that may affect the level at which this program is most appropriately funded. By vetoing these sections, the Lawton Minority Undergraduate Grant program will continue to operate as an annual appropriation.
24. Advanced Opportunity Program
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (4) (b)]
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (4) (b)] provides $4,309,400 GPR in fiscal year 1999-2000 and $4,568,000 GPR in fiscal year 2000-2001 for the Advanced Opportunity Program (AOP). Although there is no language in the budget bill that authorizes this increase, the purpose of this funding was included in the Conference Committee amendment to the budget bill.
I object to this increase because funding increases for AOP should be consistent with other financial aid programs administered by the University of Wisconsin System (UWS). UWS also administers a financial aid program for undergraduate minority students, which will receive no increase in funding between fiscal year 1999-2000 and fiscal year 2000-2001, to reflect the tuition freeze for resident undergraduate students attending UWS institutions in 2000-2001. By lining out UWS's s. 20.285 (4) (b) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $258,600 GPR provided for this purpose in fiscal year 2000-2001, I am vetoing the part of the bill which funds this provision. Furthermore, I am requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
25. GPR Position Flexibility
Section 9154 (3t)
This section prohibits the Board of Regents from including in any certification to the Department of Administration for supplementation for compensation and fringe benefits under s. 20.928 (1) of the statutes any sum to pay costs of a position authorized under this section during the 1999-2001 biennium.
I am partially vetoing this section to ensure that the limitation concerning supplementation for compensation and fringe benefits will apply to all future biennial budgets, rather than just the 1999-2001 budget. Under the GPR position flexibility provision, the board’s proposal to increase GPR positions by 1% may be approved only if the incremental costs for these positions are not to be included in any subsequent request submitted by the board under s. 16.42 (1) of the statutes. Deleting the reference to the 1999-2001 biennial budget will result in a more consistent policy for the board concerning GPR position flexibility.
26. Area Health Education Centers
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (1) (b)]
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (1) (b)] provides $1,504,300 GPR in fiscal year 1999-2000 and $1,504,300 GPR in fiscal year 2000-2001 for Area Health Education Centers (AHECs). Although there is no language in the budget bill that authorizes this increase, the purpose of this funding was included in the Conference Committee amendment to the budget bill.
This provision increases state funding for AHECs by nearly 90% over fiscal year 1998-1999. While the increase was provided in large part to offset a reduction in federal funding, the state should not be obligated to offset every reduction in federal funds. By lining out the University of Wisconsin system’s s. 20.285 (1) (b) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $350,000 of the $1,504,300 GPR provided annually for this purpose in fiscal years 1999-2000 and 2000-2001, I am vetoing the part of the bill which funds this provision. This still provides a 44% increase in GPR support for AHECs. I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
27. Information Technology Student Retention Plan and Report
Section 9154 (1d)
Section 9154 (1d) requires the University of Wisconsin System (UWS) to develop a retention plan that would help ensure that students who receive information technology training from the UWS and are employed as student workers in the UWS’s information technology area are retained as employes in that area for the duration of their enrollment. The Board of Regents would be required to submit its plan to the Joint Committee on Finance (JCF) before November 1, 1999. This section further requires the board to report annually to JCF concerning the numbers of student information technology positions filled during the 1999-2000 fiscal year, as well as information related to salaries, training costs and turnover rates.
I am vetoing Section 9154 (1d) to eliminate the requirement that the UWS develop a student retention plan and report annually to JCF concerning student information technology workers because these provisions are unnecessary and burdensome. UWS already prepares an annual information technology plan, which includes a report on new student information technology positions. Furthermore, due to the late passage of the 1999-2001 budget bill, the board would not have sufficient time to develop and submit an adequate student retention plan by November 1, 1999, as required in section 9154 (1d).
28. Ginseng Research Grants
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (1) (qd)], 295m and 9154 (2t)
Section 295m creates a new, biennial appropriation in the University of Wisconsin System (UWS) to provide one time funding in the 1999-2001 biennium for research concerning the properties of ginseng grown in Wisconsin. Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (1) (qd)] provides $125,000 SEG annually for this research. The funding for this research comes from the agrichemical management fund.
I am vetoing this provision because, while I support efforts to improve the quality and profitability of ginseng farming in Wisconsin, the agrichemical management fund is not an appropriate source of funding for this purpose. The fund was created to address issues related to pesticide control and is funded through fees charged to providers of agricultural chemicals. To ensure that this valuable research is done, I am directing UWS to reallocate base resources to fund ginseng research.
29. Study of Programs in Marathon County
Section 887r
Section 887r directs the Board of Regents to study the feasibility of expanding the offering of 4-year and graduate degree programs in Marathon County, as soon as sufficient private or local government funds have been raised to pay for the study.
I am vetoing section 887r because it is unnecessary. UW-Stevens Point currently has collaborative degree-completion programs with UW-Marathon County. Furthermore, additional programs can be created to meet student’s academic demands at UW-Marathon County. In addition, the Board of Regents has the authority to study this issue without a legislative directive.
30. Stray Voltage Research
Sections 172 [as it relates to s. 20.155 (1) (jm)], 222m, 891k and 997m
