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
These sections provide $200,000 PR annually for stray voltage research to be conducted by the University of Wisconsin System (UWS) and the Department of Health and Family Services (DHFS). Revenues will be generated through assessments on private utilities.
I am partially vetoing section 222m and vetoing section 997m to delete the stray voltage research program at DHFS. DHFS is not the appropriate agency to be conducting scientific research of this type. By lining out the Public Service Commission’s s. 20.155 (1) (jm) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $25,000 of the $200,000 PR provided annually for this purpose, 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 891k to delete the statutory priorities mandating how the UWS conducts stray voltage research. UWS researchers need flexibility to design research in a manner that will produce accurate and objective conclusions. I am confident that the Board of Regents will ensure that the research on stray voltage will address the most significant concerns of Wisconsin citizens.
31. Wisconsin Humanities Council
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (1) (ft)]
Section 172 [as it relates to s. 20.285 (1) (ft)] provides $125,000 GPR in fiscal year 1999-2000 and $125,000 GPR in fiscal year 2000-2001 for the Wisconsin Humanities Council (WHC). 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 it is excessive. This provision increases funding for the WHC by 150% over fiscal year 1998-1999. By lining out the University of Wisconsin System’s s. 20.285 (1) (ft) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $50,000 of the $125,000 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 will still provide a 50% increase over fiscal year 1998-1999. Furthermore, I am requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
WISCONSIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE SYSTEM
32. Agricultural Education Consultant
Sections 172 [as it relates to 20.292 (1) (q)], 302p and 9147 (3w)
These sections create a sum certain appropriation in the Wisconsin Technical College System funded from the agricultural chemical cleanup fund to provide funding for an agricultural educational consultant at the Wisconsin Technical College System.
I am partially vetoing sections 172 [as it relates to s. 20.292 (1) (q)], 302p and 9147 (3w) to change the $89,200 biennial funding for the 0.75 FTE agricultural education consultant position authorized in these sections from segregated revenue to general purpose revenue. While I believe that providing high quality post-secondary training programs in agriculture is vital to the future of farming in Wisconsin, 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.
33. Rules for Wisconsin Technical College System Grant Programs
Sections 40t and 901r
Section 40t includes a provision that the Department of Administration (DOA) shall promulgate rules to establish the criteria for judging applications from technical college districts to develop or expand programs in occupational areas in which there is a high demand for workers. Section 901r includes a provision that the Wisconsin Technical College System Board (the board) shall promulgate rules to establish the criteria for judging applications from technical college districts to add course sections for courses where student demand exceeds capacity.
I am partially vetoing these sections to remove the requirement that DOA and the board must promulgate rules to establish the criteria for judging applications for these programs. The requirement to promulgate rules would hinder the ability of the Technical College System Board and DOA to quickly address new or changing workforce training needs.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL AND COMMERCIAL RESOURCES
AGRICULTURE, TRADE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
1. Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program
Section 1933gm
This section requires the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) to work with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to administer the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), as approved by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This section also creates several requirements for Wisconsin’s participation in CREP, including a grassland component, the amount of land covered by permanent conservation easements and a prohibition on the land enrolled being used for bird, game, deer and fur farms.
I am partially vetoing this section because it unduly restricts the state’s ability to work with the federal government to fashion a program that provides the most benefits to Wisconsin farmers and residents. In developing a proposal for my review, I urge DATCP to work with a wide range of interest groups, DNR and counties to create a program focused on full-time farming operations.
2. Pesticide Database
Sections 172 [as it relates to s. 20.115 (7) (uc)], 189e, 189g, and 1942mc
These sections appropriate $250,000 SEG from the agricultural chemical management fund and $150,000 SEG from the environmental fund for the Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection to contract for the development of a pilot pesticide sales and use database. The funds have been placed in a Joint Committee on Finance segregated appropriation for release upon submittal of a plan for the database.
I am partially vetoing these sections to delete funding from the agricultural chemical management fund, the requirement for the department to contract for database development and the due date of the plan because they are either inappropriate or overly restrictive. The agrichemical management fund is supported by user fees for the purpose of regulating chemical use related to agricultural production and commercial applications. The fund is also being drawn upon in this budget to support general fund programs.
The effect of this veto will be to reduce expenditures in the sum sufficient appropriation under s. 20.865 (4) (u) by $250,000 in fiscal year 1999-2000. I am requesting the Department of Administration secretary to place $250,000 SEG in fiscal year 1999-2000 into unallotted reserve in appropriation s. 20.865 (4) (u) to lapse to the segregated agrichemical management fund.
My vetoes will leave $150,000 SEG for the department to study the development of a pesticide database. This funding is adequate to accomplish the goal. I request that the department seek consensus in developing a plan for review by the Joint Committee on Finance before December 31, 2000.
3. Agricultural Chemical Cleanup Fund – GPR Appropriation
Sections 184e, 1945e and 1945g
