This bill eliminates the authority of the department of commerce to regulate
sources of ionizing and nonionizing radiation. The bill authorizes the governor to
enter into agreements with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to discontinue
certain federal governmental licensing and related regulatory authority with respect
to by-product, source and special nuclear radioactive material and to assume state
regulatory authority. Under the bill, if the agreements are made, persons possessing
licenses issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission are considered to be
licensed by the state.
The bill authorizes DHFS, beginning on January 1, 2003, to license specifically
the possession, use, transfer or acquisition of radioactive by-product material and
to license specifically the possession, use, manufacture, production, transfer or
acquisition of radioactive material or devices or items that use radioactive material
and to operate a site that uses radioactive material. The bill also authorizes DHFS
to establish general license requirements for the possession, use, transfer or
acquisition of by-product radioactive material or devices or items that contain
by-product radioactive material.
The bill authorizes DHFS annually, until January 1, 2003, to assess a fee of 36%
of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission license application fee and annual
materials license fee, for any person in this state holding a license issued by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The bill also authorizes DHFS to revise the fee
amounts.
The bill eliminates court-imposed forfeitures for violations of the radiation
regulatory statutes and rules of DHFS and instead establishes administrative
forfeitures that DHFS may directly assess.
Lastly, the bill authorizes DHFS to issue emergency orders to protect the public
from radiation exposure; increases the annual fees for registration of ionizing
radiation installation sites and for X-ray tubes at those sites; and changes current
law to prohibit, rather than to allow, the transfer of registration of ionizing radiation
installations if ownership transfers.
This bill appropriates federal substance abuse block grant moneys to DHFS
and authorizes DHFS to award the moneys to counties and private entities to provide
community-based alcohol and other drug abuse treatment programs. The programs
must meet the special needs of women with problems resulting from alcohol or other
drug abuse and must emphasize parent education, vocational and housing
assistance and coordination with other community programs and with treatment
under intensive care.
Under current law, DHFS distributes community aids to counties to provide
social, mental health, developmental disabilities and alcohol and other drug abuse
services. DHFS must distribute community aids in the form of a basic county
allocation, together with certain categorical allocations, including an allocation for
Alzheimer's family and caregiver support. A county's annual community aids
allocation is specified in a contract between DHFS and the county, and DHFS
distributes the county's allocation in reimbursement of claims submitted by the
county for moneys expended for those services.
This bill specifies that DHFS may distribute no more than $4,500,000 of the
basic county allocation in each fiscal year based on performance standards developed
by DHFS for services funded by community aids. The bill provides that, if a care
management organization under the family care program, created under the bill (see
Long-term care; family care), is available in a county, DHFS may dispose of the
county's Alzheimer's family and caregiver support allocation and not more than
21.3% of the county's basic county allocation by transferring a portion of those
allocations, as determined by DHFS, to the family care program to fund the services
of resource centers and care management organizations under that program and by
transferring a portion of those allocations, as determined by DHFS, to the county's
allocation for adult protective services created under the bill.
On January 4, 1999, DWD assumed responsibility from the clerks of court for
receiving and disbursing child support, maintenance, family support and other
support-related payments. A payer of support or maintenance currently must pay
an annual receipt and disbursement fee of $25 to DWD. This bill provides that the
receipt and disbursement fee must be paid by wage assignment, just as support and
maintenance payments are paid.
Current law provides that each order for child or family support, maintenance
or spousal support is an automatic assignment of a person's wages to DWD in an
amount that is sufficient to ensure payment of the amount under the order, as well
as any arrearages due at a periodic rate that does not exceed 50% of the amount due
under the order, as long as the additional amount for arrearages does not leave the
person at an income below the federal poverty line. Current law also provides that,
if an assignment does not require immediately effective withholding and the payer
misses a payment, the court or family court commissioner may cause the assignment
to go into effect by providing notice of the assignment to the payer's employer or other
person from whom the payer receives or will receive money. The payer also receives
notice and may request a hearing on whether the assignment should remain in effect.
This bill clarifies that the portion of the original assignment that was for any
arrearages due is an assigned amount that does not require immediately effective
withholding and that, if a payer accrues an arrearage by missing a payment, the
assignment of the arrearage may be put into effect, without another court hearing,
by providing notice to the payer and to a person from whom the payer receives or will
receive money. The bill provides that, in addition to the court and the family court
commissioner, the county child support agency may cause the assignment for
arrearages to go into effect by sending the required notices.
The bill also provides that the wage assignment of a person obligated to pay
support or maintenance continues in effect after the person no longer has a current
obligation to pay if the person has an arrearage in the payment of support or
maintenance. The amount of the assignment may be up to the amount that the
assignment was before the person's current obligation to pay support or maintenance
terminated.
Under current law, in a number of situations the state may join in an action
affecting the family (such as a divorce action or an action to enforce a child support
order) as a real party in interest for purposes of establishing paternity or securing
future support or reimbursement of aid paid. The most common situation is when
a child or custodial parent of a child involved in the action is the recipient of certain
services or benefits provided by the state. This bill adds another situation under
which the state may join in an action as a real party in interest: if a custodial parent
involved in the action is receiving food stamp benefits.
Under current law, DWD certifies to the department of revenue (DOR) the
names of individuals who are delinquent in the payment of child or family support,
maintenance, medical expenses of a child or birth expenses (support). DOR uses the
information to intercept income tax refunds that would be paid to those delinquent
obligors. DWD also provides the certifications that it makes to DOR to various
specified state agencies that make grants or loans to individuals. Any individual who
is the subject of such a certification is prohibited from receiving a grant or loan.
Also under current law, if an individual who has a court-ordered obligation to
make periodic payments of support fails to make a payment, the amount of the
delinquent support automatically becomes a lien against all of the individual's
property. DWD is required to maintain a statewide support lien docket that lists the
delinquent obligors and the amount of support that each owes.
This bill eliminates the requirement that DWD provide to the various specified
state agencies the certifications that it provides to DOR. Instead the bill prohibits
each agency from making a grant or loan to an individual whose name appears on
the statewide support lien docket, unless the individual provides to the agency a copy
of a payment agreement that has been approved by a county child support agency for
the payment of the delinquent support.
Under current law, the state receives federal foster care and adoption
assistance funding under Title IV-E of the federal Social Security Act (generally
referred to as IV-E funds), in reimbursement of moneys expended by the state and
the counties for activities relating to foster care and the adoption of children. DHFS
distributes IV-E funds as community aids to counties for the provision of social
services to children and families. If on December 31 of any year there remains
unspent or unencumbered in the community aids basic county allocation an amount
that exceeds the amount of IV-E funds allocated as community aids in that year
(excess IV-E funds), DHFS must carry forward to the next year those excess IV-E
funds and distribute not less than 50% of those excess IV-E funds to counties other
than Milwaukee County for services and projects to assist children and families.
This bill requires DHFS to distribute as community aids to counties other than
Milwaukee County any MA funds received as reimbursement of moneys expended
in those counties by the state and by the counties for case management services
provided to children who are recipients of MA (MA targeted case management
funds). The bill also provides that, if on December 31 of any year there remains
unspent or unencumbered in the community aids basic county allocation an amount
that exceeds the combined amount of IV-E funds and MA targeted case management
funds distributed as community aids in that year (excess IV-E and MA targeted case
management funds), DHFS must carry forward to the next year those excess IV-E
and MA targeted case management funds and distribute those excess funds to
counties other than Milwaukee County for services and projects to assist children
and families.
The bill also requires DHFS to establish and counties to implement a statewide
automated child welfare information system (generally referred to as WISACWIS)
before July 1, 2006; permits DHFS, beginning on July 1, 2001, to distribute excess
IV-E funds only to counties that are making a good faith effort to implement
WISACWIS; and permits DHFS to recover from a county that does not implement
WISACWIS before July 1, 2006, any excess IV-E funds distributed to that county
after June 30, 2001.
Under current law, general purpose revenue funds services for adolescent
parents that emphasize high school graduation and vocational preparation, training
and experience (otherwise known as adolescent self-sufficiency services); adolescent
pregnancy prevention services; in Milwaukee County, services of an adolescent
resource center and services related to development of adolescent parenting skills;
and the provision of information to communities about problems of adolescents and
information to and activities for adolescents to aid in skills development (otherwise
known as adolescent choices project grants). This bill substitutes moneys that are
received under the federal TANF block grant to fund all of these services.
Current law directs the adolescent pregnancy prevention and pregnancy
services board to award grants to provide adolescent pregnancy prevention
programs or pregnancy services. The grants currently are funded with general
purpose revenue. This bill funds the grants with moneys that are received under the
federal TANF block grant program.
This bill appropriates moneys derived from Indian gaming compacts to fund the
American Indian drug abuse prevention and education program, to fund the delivery
of social services and mental hygiene services to American Indians and to fund
vocational rehabilitation services for Native American individuals and federally
recognized tribes or bands.
Currently, each person ordered to pay a fine or forfeiture for operating a motor
vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant, controlled substance or other drug
(OWI) is required to pay a driver improvement surcharge of $340. A majority (62.4%)
of the money collected from the driver improvement surcharge is used by the county
where the violation occurred to provide alcohol and other drug abuse services to
drivers who are referred for alcohol or other drug abuse assessment. A portion of the
remainder of the money is used to provide chemical testing training to law
enforcement officers and a portion is allocated by the secretary of administration to
various state agencies for services related to OWI offenses.
Under this bill, of the money received by the state from the driver improvement
surcharge, $290,900 is transferred to the department of transportation for the
purchase of preliminary breath screening instruments. These instruments are used
to test the breath of a person who is suspected of committing an OWI offense at the
time that the person is stopped to help determine if an arrest is appropriate.
Insurance
This bill requires every managed care plan, which is, generally, a health care
plan that requires insureds to obtain services from certain specified providers under
contract with the health care plan, to offer at least one point-of-service coverage
option in each geographical service area of the managed care plan. A
point-of-service coverage option is a coverage option under which an insured may
obtain health care services that are paid for by the health care plan from a provider
of his or her choice, regardless of whether that provider is a participating provider
of the insured's health care plan or a member of the health care plan's provider
network.
This bill authorizes the office of the commissioner of insurance (OCI) to make
a grant of not more than $200,000 to a private organization for the establishment of
private health insurance purchasing pools for small employers. (Generally, small
employers are those with 50 or fewer employes.) The private organization must
submit a business plan to OCI and the commissioner of insurance must approve the
plan before the grant may be made. OCI and the private organization must enter into
a written agreement concerning the use of the grant proceeds, and the private
organization must submit a report to OCI after spending the proceeds.
Under current law, most policy forms for all types of insurance must be filed
with OCI and approved prior to use. This bill allows the commissioner to exempt
certain classes of insurance policy forms from the requirement for prior filing and
approval.
Currently, OCI charges various fees for services that it provides, as well as for
its regulation of the insurance industry. This bill changes the amount of the fee that
OCI charges an applicant for examination for a license as an insurance intermediary
and the amount of the fee for regulating an insurance intermediary each year after
the year in which the intermediary's license was initially issued to amounts set by
the commissioner by rule.
Local government
Under current law, a county board may engage in zoning and land-use
planning that may result in the preparation of a county development plan for the
physical development of the towns within the county and for the cities and villages
within the county whose governing bodies agree to have their areas included in the
county plan. The development plan may include a number of elements, such as
comprehensive surveys, existing land-use, population, economy, soil characteristics,
wetland and floodplain conditions and natural features of the county.
Also under current law, a city or village, or certain towns that exercise village
powers, may create a plan commission to engage in zoning and land-use planning.
The plan commission must adopt a master plan for the physical development of the
city, village or town including, in some instances, unincorporated areas outside of the
city or village. The master plan is required to show the commission's
recommendations for such physical development, and must also contain a
comprehensive zoning plan.
Also under current law, regional planning commissions (RPCs) may be created
by the governor or, in response to a resolution submitted by the governing body of a
city, village, town or county (political subdivision), by a state agency or official that
the governor designates. Currently, there are eight multicounty RPCs in the state
and one RPC that consists only of Dane County. Five counties, which are adjacent
to Dane County, are not in an RPC. Generally, the membership composition of an
RPC is specified by statute, and the governor may dissolve an RPC by the request
of a majority of the local governments in the region.
An RPC is required to prepare a master plan for the physical development of
the region, which must contain the RPC's recommendations for such physical
development. The elements of an RPC's master plan are the same as the elements
contained in a master plan developed by a city, a village and certain towns, although
all of an RPC's functions are solely advisory to the political subdivisions that
comprise the region.
This bill changes the membership composition of the Dane County RPC on the
31st day after the effective date of the bill, and dissolves the RPC on December 31,
2001. Under the bill, all of the members of the Dane County RPC are appointed by
the governor from lists submitted by the Dane County executive, the mayor of the
city of Madison and associations representing third and fourth class cities, villages
and towns. If the Dane County RPC has any outstanding debt on the date of its
dissolution, that debt is assessed to Dane County. The bill also requires the five
boards of the counties that are not in an RPC, and the Dane County board, to vote
on whether they want to participate in a new multicounty RPC. If at least two-thirds
of the voting counties approve, the new RPC becomes effective on January 1, 2002.
The bill also specifies that the membership composition of all RPCs that are created
after December 31, 2001, that include a county that contains a 2nd class city must
follow the same statute that sets the membership composition for a RPC that
contains a 1st class city. Finally, the bill prohibits after December 31, 2001, the
creation of an RPC that consists of only one county.
The bill also changes the requirements that must be contained in a county
development plan or a city, village, town or RPC master plan. Under the bill, all such
plans must do all of the following:
1. Include background information on the local governmental unit and a
statement of objectives, policies, goals and programs of the local governmental unit
to guide the future growth and development of the local governmental unit over a
20-year planning period.
2. Include information on the local governmental unit's housing stock and
plans for housing for residents with all income levels and various needs.
3. Address transportation issues and evaluate the relationship between the
local governmental unit's transportation plans and state and regional
transportation plans.
4. Guide the development of public and private utilities, governmental services
and community facilities.
5. Guide the development of conservation policies for, and the effective
management of, agricultural, natural, historic and cultural resources.
6. Promote the stabilization, retention or expansion of the economic base of, and
quality employment opportunities in, the local governmental unit.
7. Provide for joint planning and decision making with other jurisdictions.
8. Guide the future development and redevelopment of public and private
property in the local governmental unit.
9. Contain programs and specific actions to be completed in a stated sequence,
including proposed changes to any applicable zoning ordinances, building codes or
subdivision ordinances, to implement the other elements.
The bill does not, however, require a local governmental unit to take any specific
action at any particular time. If a local governmental unit that has not created a
development plan or a master plan before the effective date of the bill does so, or
amends an existing plan after the effective date of the bill, the new elements of a
development plan or master plan that are contained in the bill must be used.
Under current law, most towns may incorporate as a city or village only after
following certain procedures and receiving approval for the incorporation from a
circuit court and from the department of administration (DOA). The circuit court
must review the incorporation petition to ensure compliance with procedural and
signature requirements and must make several determinations relating to
minimum area and population density requirements of the area to be incorporated.
This bill reduces the minimum area requirements from four square miles to three
square miles under certain circumstances. DOA must also determine whether the
proposed incorporation is in the public interest.
Current law allows any combination of cities, villages or towns (municipalities)
to determine the boundary lines between them under a cooperative plan that is
approved by DOA. This bill authorizes municipalities that enter into a cooperative
plan to include as part of the plan the incorporation of all or part of a town into a city
or village. Because an incorporation that is part of a cooperative plan may not take
effect unless it is approved in a referendum, such a plan must include a contingency
cooperative plan that will take the place of the plan if the proposed incorporation is
defeated in the referendum. An incorporation as part of a cooperative plan is subject
to DOA review and very limited circuit court review.
Under current law, a city, village, town or county (political subdivision) may
create an environmental remediation tax incremental district (ERTID) to defray the
costs of remediating contaminated property that is owned by the political
subdivision. The mechanism for financing eligible costs is very similar to the
mechanism under the tax incremental financing (TIF) program.
Under this bill, ER tax incremental financing may be used to defray the costs
of remediating contaminated property that is owned by private persons.
Currently, before a political subdivision may use ER tax incremental financing,
it must create a joint review board that is similar to the current tax incremental
district (TID) joint review board, or a city or village may use an existing TID joint
review board, to review the political subdivision's proposal to remediate
environmental pollution. If the joint review board approves the proposal, the
political subdivision may proceed with its plan. An ERTID joint review board is
made up of one representative chosen by the school district that has power to levy
taxes on the property that is remediated, one representative chosen by the technical
college district that has power to levy taxes on the property, one representative
chosen by the county that has power to levy taxes on the property that is remediated,
one representative chosen by the political subdivision and one public member.
This bill clarifies that the joint review board consists of one representative from
each of the taxing jurisdictions that has power to levy taxes on the property in the
ERTID.
Under current law, if more than one school district, more than one technical
college district or more than one county has the power to levy taxes on the property
that is remediated, the unit in which is located property that has the greatest value
chooses that representative to the board. Under the bill, a similar provision applies
if more than one city, village or town has the power to levy taxes on the property that
is remediated.
Currently, a political subdivision that has incurred eligible costs to remediate
environmental pollution on a parcel of property may apply to the department of
revenue (DOR) to certify the environmental remediation tax incremental base
(ERTIB) of the parcel.
Under the bill, the environmental remediation does not need to be completed
before a political subdivision may apply to DOR to certify the ERTIB. The political
subdivision is required, under the bill, to submit to DOR a statement that the
political subdivision has incurred some eligible costs and to include with the
statement a detailed proposed remedial action plan that contains cost estimates for
anticipated eligible costs. The political subdivision is also required to include
certification from DNR that the department has approved the site investigation
report that relates to the parcel.
Currently, eligible costs are costs related to the removal, containment or
monitoring of, or the restoration of soil or groundwater affected by, environmental
pollution. Eligible costs are reduced by any amounts received from persons who are
responsible for the discharge of a hazardous substance on the property and by the
amount of net gain on the sale of the property by the political subdivision.
This bill includes in eligible costs property acquisition costs, costs associated
with the restoration of air, surface water and sediments affected by environmental
pollution, demolition costs including asbestos removal, and the costs of removing and
disposing of certain abandoned containers. The bill reduces eligible costs by any
amounts received, or reasonably expected by the political subdivision to be received,
from a local, state or federal program for the remediation of contamination in the
district and that do not require reimbursement or repayment. Under the bill, a
political subdivision is authorized to use an ER tax increment to pay the cost of
remediating environmental pollution of groundwater without regard to whether the
property above the groundwater is owned by the political subdivision.
Under current law, town territory that is contiguous to any city or village may
be annexed to that city or village. In a county with a population of at least 50,000,
DOA is authorized to mail to the clerks of the town and city or village involved in the
proposed annexation a notice that states that, in the opinion of DOA, the annexation
is against the public interest. Currently, DOA renders its opinion within 20 days
after receipt of the notice of annexation.
Under this bill, the period of time under which DOA renders its opinion is
expanded from 20 days to 60 days. DOA may halt the annexation process if DOA
determines that the legal description or scale map is illegible, contains errors that
prevent DOA from ascertaining the territory that is proposed to be annexed or does
not conform to generally accepted standards for the preparation of legal descriptions
or scale maps. If the proposed annexing city or village cures these defects to DOA's
satisfaction, the annexation process may proceed.
Currently, an annexation ordinance takes effect upon the enactment of the
ordinance. Under the bill, an annexation ordinance does not take effect until it is
recorded with the register of deeds.
Under the current blighted area law, cities, villages and towns (municipalities)
may undertake redevelopment projects, which include the acquisition of property, to
improve conditions in blighted or slum areas. Under the current Blight Elimination
and Slum Clearance Act, a redevelopment authority is created in every municipality
in which slum and blighted areas exist to engage in blight elimination, slum
clearance and urban renewal programs. Under the TIF program, cities or villages
may create tax incremental districts to foster redevelopment in blighted or slum
areas.
This bill adds environmental pollution to the current definition of a blighted
area under the blighted area law, the Blight Elimination and Slum Clearance Act
and the TIF program.
Under current law, any person may inspect, copy or receive a copy of a public
record unless the record is specifically exempted from access under state or federal
law or authorized to be withheld from access under state law, or unless the custodian
of the record demonstrates that the harm done to the public interest by providing
access to the record outweighs the strong public interest in providing access.
This bill specifically authorizes the custodian of any record of a local
governmental unit to withhold from access information contained in a record of the
governmental unit pertaining to the home address or home telephone number of any
employe of that governmental unit.
Natural resources
Fish, game and wildlife
This bill changes the fees charged by the department of natural resources
(DNR) for certain hunting and fishing approvals. For hunting, the bill increases the
fees for all resident hunting licenses except turkey hunting licenses and small game
hunting licenses issued to certain persons. The bill increases the fees for all
nonresident hunting licenses except turkey hunting licenses. The bill also increases
the fees for trapping licenses, bonus deer hunting permits and wild turkey hunting
stamps. The bill decreases the fee for pheasant hunting stamps.
