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.
For fishing approvals, the bill increases the fees for resident annual fishing
licenses and fishing licenses issued jointly to resident married couples. The bill
increases the fees for all nonresident fishing licenses except two-day sports fishing
licenses. The bill increases the fee for sturgeon spearing licenses and decreases the
fees for inland waters trout stamps and Great Lakes trout and salmon stamps.
This bill increases the fees charged by DNR for licenses for wild animal game
farms, except fur animal farms, and for wildlife exhibits.
The bill also authorizes DNR to impose surcharges for the following licenses:
1. Licenses for game farms on which there are bears or cougars.
2. Licenses for game farms on which the licensee permits an individual to hunt
game birds for a fee.
3. Licenses for game farms on which the licensee sells game animals, the gross
revenue from which is $10,000 or more in the preceding license year.
Under current law, state agencies, including DNR, must release certain
information to a third party upon that party's request. This bill changes this
requirement as it applies to information about holders of fish and game licenses,
stamps and other approvals (approval holders) as follows:
1. DNR may not release any information about approval holders who are under
the age of 18 or about approval holders who request that DNR not release any such
information.
2. DNR may, at its discretion, release the names and addresses of, and
demographic information about, all other approval holders and may produce and sell
lists of the names, addresses and demographic information.
3. DNR may not release telephone numbers or driver's license numbers of
approval holders, or approval numbers or identification numbers given to approval
holders by DNR, under any circumstances.
Under current law, DNR may issue bonus deer hunting permits to state
residents and nonresidents who hold deer hunting licenses in order to control the
state's deer population. This permit allows the holder to kill an additional deer.
Under current law, most applicants must pay a fee for this permit. Also under
current law, DNR or its agents collect an issuing fee for most fish and game licenses.
This bill requires that if a person must pay a fee for a bonus deer hunting permit, he
or she must also pay an issuing fee.
Under current law, DNR appoints agents to issue fish and game approvals.
DNR may charge a handling fee to cover the costs incurred by DNR in issuing these
approvals by mail, telephone or electronic means. Under this bill, DNR may
authorize any of its agents to collect and retain this handling fee.
This bill requires that DNR establish a system to allow a hunter to reserve the
same deer hunting back tag number each year upon payment of a reservation fee.
DNR may limit the number of back tag numbers that may be reserved.
This bill grants DNR specific authority to promulgate rules to regulate wildlife
rehabilitators. The rules may include a system for issuing rehabilitator licenses or
permits.
Under current law, if DNR and the Lac du Flambeau band of the Lake Superior
Chippewa (band) have in effect an agreement under which the band agrees to limit
its treaty-based, off-reservation rights to fish, the band may elect to issue DNR
fishing licenses and DNR inland waters trout stamps as an agent of DNR and to
retain the fees that the band collects for these licenses and stamps. Current law also
authorizes DNR to pay the band an amount equal to the amount that DNR collects
from its other agents who issue DNR fishing licenses and trout stamps on the
reservation if the agreement is in effect. Under current law, these payments are
made from the conservation fund.
This bill provides additional funding for these payments from moneys received
by the state under Indian gaming compacts.
This bill provides funding to DNR for costs associated with the management of
the state's elk population from moneys received by the state under Indian gaming
compacts.
Navigable waters
Under current law, with certain exceptions, a riparian owner may not place a
structure or deposit or conduct certain other activities in a navigable body of water
without first obtaining a permit from or entering into a contract with DNR. For most
structures, deposits or activities (riparian activities) that require a permit or
contract, the procedure for obtaining the permit or contract requires that DNR
provide notice to the public in a newspaper that is likely to give notice in the area
where the riparian activity will be located and to the county and city, village or town
(municipality) in which the riparian activity will be located. If DNR receives a
written objection in response to the notice, it must hold a public hearing on the issue
of whether it should approve the permit or contract. DNR may also use this notice
and hearing procedure when it is not specifically required if DNR determines that
substantial interests of any party may be adversely affected by the granting of the
permit or contract. For certain other riparian activities that require permits, current
law does not require this notice and hearing procedure. These riparian activities
include the placement of fish cribs, bird nesting platforms, gravel, riprap and bridges
less than 35 feet wide and the enlargement of certain artificial waterways.
This bill changes these public notice and hearing procedures. These changes
include the following:
1. The first notice issued by DNR must contain a preliminary decision of
whether to grant the permit or the contract instead of stating that DNR will render
a decision without a hearing unless a substantive written objection is received within
30 days. The preliminary decision becomes final if no such objection is received
within 30 days.
