4. Contractual Services Contracts Cost Reviews
5. Authority for Public Utilities to Retain Transitional Funding
6. Sale or Lease of Residual State Property
BUDGET MANAGEMENT
7. Structural Balance
8. State Employee Cap
9. Equitable Statewide Reduction in Agency Services
10. Priority Order for Agency Layoffs
11. Memberships and Dues Lapses
12. Prohibiting Certain Cost Allocations and Fee or Assessment Increases
BUILDING COMMISSION
13. Distributed Generation Units
ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT AND TECHNOLOGY FOR EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT IN WISCONSIN BOARD (TEACH)
14. Dissolution of the Department of Electronic Government and its Merger into the Department of Administration and the Transfer of TEACH to the Department of Public Instruction
LEGISLATURE
15. Legislative Audit Bureau – Large Program Performance Study
REGULATION AND LICENSING
16. Regulation of Boxing
F. TAX, FINANCE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
1. Disciplinary Procedures for Certain Local Law Enforcement Officers and Firefighters
INVESTMENT BOARD
2. Venture Capital Investment
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
3. Cogeneration Facility at the University of Wisconsin-Madison
4. Exemption from Hiring Freeze for Certain Vacant Commission Positions
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
5. Fiscal Year 2001-02 Budget Reductions
6. Fiscal Year 2002-03 Budget Reductions and Positions
SHARED REVENUE AND TAX RELIEF
7. Expenditure Restraint and Shared Revenue Utility Payments
8. Definition of Agricultural Land for Use Value
9. Annexation in Dane County
10. Local Subdivision Regulation
A.
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
ARTS BOARD
1.
Milwaukee Art Museum Grant
This provision creates a new $50,000 GPR appropriation to provide a one-time grant in fiscal year 2002-03 to the Milwaukee Art Museum for the Leonardo da Vinci and the Splendor of Poland exhibition.
I am vetoing this provision because it is not prudent to increase GPR spending for noncritical items given the state's current budget shortfall. This exhibition has already been scheduled and museum officials have indicated that it will proceed regardless of the receipt of earmarked state funding. Like other arts organizations, the Milwaukee Art Museum can compete for funding from the Arts Board under existing grant programs.
HISTORICAL SOCIETY
2.
Program Revenue Lapses
Section 9125
This provision requires the Wisconsin Historical Society to allocate $100,000 in fiscal years 2001-02 and 2002-03 for the Office of Local History and the society library.
I am vetoing this earmarking of funds because it runs counter to previous legislative action. Under
2001 Wisconsin Act 16 (the 2001-03 biennial budget) and changes in this budget reform act, the Legislature and I significantly reduced the number of separate appropriations to give the society more flexibility to operate its programs efficiently and effectively. The legislative earmarking of funds under this provision would limit the very flexibility we intended the society to have.
In addition, the provision is not necessary because the society's current annual expenditures on the library alone far exceed the $100,000 required under this amendment. To best meet its responsibilities, the Wisconsin Historical Society needs to retain the funding flexibility granted to it under both
2001 Wisconsin Act 16 and this act.
PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
3.
Sale of Soft Drinks in Schools
Section 280n
This provision requires school districts that enter into exclusive contracts with soft drink vendors to ensure that milk is available to students whenever soft drinks are available.
I am partially vetoing this provision because it is overly broad and would require the sale of milk at all scholastic events, not just during the school day. The effect of this partial veto will be to delete the statutory requirement addressing all scholastic events.
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
4.
Undergraduate Coursework Beyond 165 Credits
Sections 93r, 93s, 9101 (8w) and 9256 (2x)
This provision requires the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents to charge students the full cost per credit for any credits beyond 165 accumulated in coursework towards a first baccalaureate degree. The provision also reduces the system's general program operations appropriation by $6,700,000 GPR in fiscal year 2002-03 to reflect a reduction in GPR support for these credits and increases the academic student fees appropriation by $6,700,000 PR in fiscal year 2002-03 to reflect estimated increases in tuition revenues.
I am partially vetoing this provision to eliminate the requirement for the Board of Regents to charge the full cost per credit for any credits beyond 165 and to delete the increase to the academic student fees appropriation. While I believe that state taxpayers should not be obligated to subsidize an unlimited number of credits for each student, the policy needs to recognize differences in the credit requirements for different majors, several of which already require more than 165 credits. A policy limiting the number of subsidized credits must recognize the role of degree requirements, as well as the responsibility of the student.
Finally, implementing the limit at this late date would not be fair to the estimated 3,500 students who would potentially face a 200 percent increase in tuition without adequate time to plan. My veto retains the $6,700,000 GPR reduction, which the system will need to accommodate through other efficiencies, but deletes the equivalent increase to the academic student fees appropriation.
I plan to address credit limits on resident tuition in my 2003-05 biennial budget proposal. I also request that the Board of Regents report to me by December 15, 2002, on alternatives to ensure that the credits-to-degree system is organized in a way that minimizes the cost to taxpayers without adversely affecting students' ability to complete degrees at resident tuition rates.
WISCONSIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE SYSTEM
5.
Funding for Travel and Advertising
Sections 94m, 9248 (1) and 9248 (1x)
Section 94m prohibits the state board of the Wisconsin Technical College System from using general purpose revenue (GPR) funds for advertising expenses. In addition, section 9248 (1) reduces GPR-supported state operations funding by $34,900 in fiscal year 2001-02 and $156,900 in fiscal year 2002-03. Section 9248 (1x) further reduces GPR-supported state operations funding by $40,000 in fiscal year 2002-03 to reflect a 100 percent reduction in advertising funding and a fifty percent reduction in the agency's funding for travel.
A900
I am vetoing section 94m to remove the prohibition against spending on advertising and partially vetoing sections 9248 (1) and 9248 (1x) to retain the $40,000 GPR reduction, but remove the requirement that the reduction be applied to travel and advertising expenses. There is no compelling reason to single out the technical college system for a limit on advertising. As written, the prohibition would even prevent the state board from advertising to fill vacant positions. Furthermore, given the importance of increasing technical college enrollment to building Wisconsin's economy, providing less information to the public on technical college educational opportunities would be counterproductive. My veto retains the $40,000 GPR funding reduction, but gives the state board the flexibility to apply the reduction in a manner that does the least harm to the system.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL AND COMMERCIAL RESOURCES
AGRICULTURE, TRADE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
1. Consumer Protection Transfer to the Department of Justice
Sections 26 [as it relates to s.
20.455 (1) (g)], 27m, 28m, 41g, 41k, 41mp, 259m, 259sd, 259se, 259sf, 259sh, 259sj, 259sm, 259sp, 262m, 263bb, 263bd, 263bg, 263bj, 263bn, 263bq, 263bt, 263bw, 263bz, 263gb, 263gd, 263gg, 263gj, 263gm, 263gp, 263gs, 263gu, 263gx, 263mb, 263mf, 263mj, 263mm, 263mp, 263mr, 263mt, 263mv, 263mx, 263mz, 263nb, 263nd, 263nf, 263nj, 263nm, 263nn, 263no, 263nq, 263nt, 263nv, 263nz, 263pb, 263pf, 263pj, 263pm, 263pp, 263ps, 263pv, 264d, 264h, 264p, 264t, 266m, 267kb, 267kd, 267ke, 267kf, 267kh, 267kj, 267kL, 267kn, 267ko, 267kp, 267kq, 267kr, 267ks, 267kt, 267ku, 267kv, 267kw, 267kx, 267ky, 267kz, 269m, 312m, 314m, 314p, 314r, 338gf, 338m, 338r, 442g, 442m, 442r, 511bg, 511br, 511bz, 511h, 511k, 511p, 516g, 516n, 516p, 516r, 9104, 9131 (2xz), 9204 (14xz), 9231 (10xo) and 9404
These provisions transfer consumer protection functions from the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection and from the Department of Health and Family Services to the Department of Justice.
The provisions reduce the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection's expenditure and position authority by $2,584,500 GPR and 43.75 FTE GPR positions in fiscal year 2002-03 and increase the Department of Justice's expenditure and position authority by $1,502,200 GPR and 26.0 FTE GPR positions in fiscal year 2002-03. The provisions also transfer 5.5 FTE PR positions and the authority to collect fee revenue relating to the statewide do-not-call list from the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to the Department of Justice.
The provisions transfer from the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to the Department of Justice the authority to protect consumers from fraud and deceptive practices in areas including telephone solicitation and services; motor vehicle rustproofing; cable television services; mail order sales; drug advertising and pricing; and consumer product safety. The provisions also transfer the authority to regulate fitness center staff from the Department of Health and Family Services to the Department of Justice.
In addition, the provisions transfer from the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to the Department of Justice the authority to prohibit the sale of hazardous substances, flammable fabrics, and unsafe or mislabeled products; investigate and begin court actions relating to consumer protection; require the provision of testimony under oath by persons having knowledge of suspected fraudulent activity; issue subpoenas, administer oaths and hold hearings regarding fraudulent activity; issue general and specific orders prohibiting unfair trade practices; recover overdue fees relating to unfair competition; recover reasonable expenses of prosecution; and promulgate rules relating to consumer protection.
I am vetoing these provisions because I object to the transfer of consumer protection functions from the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection and the Department of Health and Family Services. The regulation of fitness center staff is most appropriately done by the Department of Health and Family Services. That department has the experience and expertise required to ensure that fitness center staff members have appropriate training in first aid and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The Department of Justice, as the state's legal services provider, lacks the requisite expertise in these health care matters.
The regulation of consumer protection functions is most appropriately done by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection. The department has been responsible for trade and consumer protection functions since 1929. The department's extensive experience with consumer protection shows in its strong professional relationships with federal regulators and local officials. The department's direct service philosophy enables it to educate consumers and businesses to prevent and avoid consumer protection problems. When consumers are defrauded, the department works to correct the problem and return money to the hands of consumers as quickly as possible. Only when a company refuses to do the right thing is it necessary to pursue legal action. In those rare cases where complex legal work is required, the Department of Justice is currently authorized to assist the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection and district attorneys.
If consumer protection functions were transferred to the Department of Justice, the direct service philosophy would be undermined by the loss of nearly twenty consumer protection positions and the elimination of regional consumer protection offices. Instead of addressing consumers' educational and individual needs, the Department of Justice would likely continue to employ a litigation philosophy that would create expensive lawsuits against major violators.
COMMERCE
2. Technology Development Grants and Loans
Sections 504c and 504m
These sections direct the Department of Commerce to award at least $364,400 in Wisconsin development fund technology grants or loans per biennium to pollution reduction or energy conservation projects.
A901
I am vetoing this provision because it is unnecessary. While I support a link between environmental protection and economic development, the department is best able to assess which businesses or consortia will benefit most from grant or loan awards for the research and development of new industrial products and processes. Under the current award process, the department takes into account a project's potential for pollution prevention and energy conservation.
3. Wisconsin Development Fund Reduction
Section 9210 (10w)
This provision reduces funding for the Wisconsin development fund by $1,000,000 GPR in fiscal year 2002-03.
I am vetoing this provision to preserve funding integral to stimulating economic development. I object to this reduction because current economic conditions, combined with our state's fiscal outlook in the next biennium, make it crucial to grow Wisconsin's economy with technology development and job creation and expansion. Consistent with the objectives of the Build Wisconsin initiative, Wisconsin development fund grants and loans help provide jobs with high wages and good benefits, create new and innovative job training opportunities, and expand funding for technology-based projects.
4. Branding Grant to Forward Wisconsin, Inc.
Sections 17u, 17v, 26 [as it relates to s.
20.143 (1) (bp)], 28no, 28p, 9110 (1c) and 9410 (1e)
These provisions allocate $50,000 GPR in fiscal year 2002-03 to a newly created appropriation for a one-time grant to Forward Wisconsin, Inc., for a study and proposal on a national brand image related to technology and biotechnology for the state. The Department of Commerce would be required to enter into an agreement with Forward Wisconsin, Inc., that specifies uses for the grant proceeds as well as reporting and auditing requirements. The department would additionally be required to submit a report to the Legislature by December 31, 2003, detailing results and recommendations from the study.
I am vetoing these provisions because I object to this appropriation of new funds during these tight fiscal times. I also object to the long time frame for completion of the study. Building our state's image as a technology and biotechnology hub is vital to economic development plans for Wisconsin, and a national brand image should be developed as quickly as possible.
5. Horse Boarding and Training Facilities Exemption
