14.
Utility Service Cost Allocation Study
Section 9107 (12w)
This provision requires the Building Commission to direct the Department of Administration to contract with a private person to study the extent of utility services provided to state programs funded by program revenue and to determine whether the charges made to the programs utilizing this service are fairly compensating the state for the cost of the service provided to the programs. The report must include any recommendations for changes in allocation of charges for utility services. The department must report the results of the study, together with any recommendations included in the study report, to the cochairpersons of the Joint Committee on Finance no later than July 1, 2002.
S351
I am vetoing this provision because it is unnecessary. The Building Commission and the Department of Administration have the authority under current law to conduct a utility service cost allocation study.
15.
Revision of Enumerated Projects
Section 9101 (20z)
In this provision, the Legislature requires the Department of Administration's Division of Facilities Development and the Building Commission to revise the enumerated projects listed in the authorized state building program. At the second quarterly s.
13.10 meeting of the Joint Committee on Finance, the Department of Administration must provide the Joint Committee on Finance the recommendations of the Building Commission to revise the 2001-03 authorized state building program to reflect the reduction of $13,100,000 general fund supported borrowing provided in the budget bill. The Joint Committee on Finance is required to introduce appropriate legislation required to implement any revisions approved by the committee.
I am vetoing this provision because it is unnecessary. The legislative members of the Building Commission can introduce appropriate legislation required to make changes in the authorized state building program if such changes are deemed necessary. I believe the Building Commission should remain the sole state body responsible for oversight of building projects. I object to the requirement that changes in the authorized state building program be subject to s.
13.10 review prior to being introduced as separate legislation.
16.
Restriction on General Fund Supported Borrowing
Section 392p
This section prohibits the level of general fund supported borrowing that is authorized in any biennium, excluding borrowing for the purpose of refunding previously authorized bonds, from exceeding 3.5 percent of the estimated taxes of the first year of the biennium.
I am vetoing this section because I believe the formula provided is unworkable and does not recognize that the cost of borrowing is controlled by the amount of annual debt service on bonds issued, not the principal amount of the bonds issued. The proposed formula does not take into account the different forms of borrowing the state enters into, which have different interest costs, as well as different amortization periods, affecting both the interest cost as well as the average life of the debt. Most importantly, the section does not recognize the time variability of debt issuance. Debt authorized by the Legislature in this budget may not be issued for several years. Moreover, the overall bonding increase included in the bill, as passed by the Legislature, is two-and-one-half times what would be allowed under the proposed formula. Wisconsin is one of the few states with a constitutional limitation on the amount of debt that it can incur. I am striking this section which attempts to create a different standard.
17.
Wausau State Office Facility Study
Section 9107 (12mk)
This provision requires a study of the feasibility of constructing a state office facility in the Wausau area.
I am vetoing this provision because it is unnecessary. The Building Commission is already authorized to conduct studies on the feasibility of constructing state office facilities.
ELECTIONS BOARD
18.
Recall Elections of City, Village, Town or School District Officials
Sections 94f, 94i, 94L, 94p, 94s, 3828m and 9359 (11q)
These provisions revise the procedures for recalling city, village, town or school district officials. I am vetoing these provisions in their entirety because I believe changes in the procedures for recalling these officials should be adopted through separate legislation.
19.
Lease of Electronic Voting Equipment
Sections 906m, 9101 (20x), 9115 and 9129 (1x)
These provisions require the Department of Administration to enter into a master lease on behalf of the Elections Board to obtain sufficient electronic voting equipment suitable for use in municipalities that employed a punch card electronic voting system at the 2001 spring election. I am vetoing these provisions because the department should make the determination as to whether use of master leasing is appropriate to replace punch card voting systems.
ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT
20.
Appropriation Structure
These provisions establish appropriations in the new Department of Electronic Government. In my budget recommendations to the Legislature, I proposed that the department have one continuing appropriation with which to conduct general program operations. I did this because the new direction the state must take in managing its information technology resources requires both the broader authorities vested in the chief information officer position heading the agency and the financial flexibility inherent in a continuing appropriation.
The Legislature adopted several of the recommended changes in powers and duties recommended for the chief information officer. However, it approved an annual appropriation instead of continuing. By applying my partial veto, the continuing appropriation authority which I originally recommended will be retained.
S352
Because my partial veto simplifies and eliminates several appropriations under the new department, I also am partially vetoing some of the language relating to appropriation transfers. I am doing this to clarify that the secretary of the Department of Administration has full authority to ensure that appropriate assets and liabilities of operations and programs previously in the Department of Administration are transferred to the new department. Further, my veto is intended to give the secretary of the Department of Administration full authority to determine any question that might arise with respect to treatment of appropriation revenues and expenditures in the new department.
21.
Administrative Rule to Set Fees
Section 1030d
The Department of Electronic Government created in the budget derives its funding through the assessment of fees for various services and activities. This section requires the department to establish all fees and charges through the administrative rule process. I am removing this requirement with my partial veto because it will unnecessarily burden the chief information officer in expeditiously implementing the agency's mission.
22.
Chief Information Officer Vote on Information Technology Management Board
Section 176
This section creates the Information Technology Management Board which is attached to the Department of Electronic Government. The chief information officer is given membership on the board which is limited to a nonvoting status. I object to this limitation because I believe the chief information officer should be a full participating member. I am, therefore, vetoing the provision to remove the nonvoting status for the chief information officer.
23.
Ethics Board Procurement Authority
Sections 275m and 355m
The Department of Electronic Government is authorized to oversee and provide technical assistance and training to small agencies. Provisions added in the budget permit the State Ethics Board an exemption from department oversight. The board may utilize any funding made available for small agency support to obtain assistance or training from any source. I am vetoing these provisions because the department should retain authority to determine the form and source of technical assistance for these agencies.
24.
Veterans Museum Distance Learning Support
Section 1030m
This provision requires the Department of Electronic Government to administer a program providing outreach and training to veterans through a satellite system that is linked to five remote locations throughout the state.
I am vetoing this requirement because it is unnecessary. I believe that the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Electronic Government will mutually explore and pursue the best ways to use technology to assist veterans. The department will work with the Department of Veterans Affairs to increase outreach to veterans regarding veterans services and benefits and to provide training to Department of Veterans Affairs employees and to county veterans service officers. However, the new department should be allowed to decide how to accomplish this task after an assessment of how best to provide this assistance.
EMPLOYEE TRUST FUNDS
25.
Private Employer Health Insurance Coverage Program Changes and Funding
Sections 395 [as it relates to s.
20.515 (2) (a)], 910t, 1400mm, 3741amb, 3766ec, 3766ef, 3766em, 9327 (3q) (a) [as it relates to s.
635.05 (1)] and 9427 (3q) [as it relates to s.
635.05 (1)]
These sections provide funding for the start-up costs associated with the private employer health care coverage program, restrict the variance in health insurance premium rates which insurers are allowed to charge small employers and revise the definition of small employer. One provision requires the state life fund to provide an interest-free loan to the general fund in the amount of $850,000. The same amount is appropriated under the Department of Employee Trust Funds. The loan is to be paid back from program receipts or from the general fund if the program receipts are not sufficient within a reasonable period of time. Another provision reduces the variance permissible in health insurance premiums charged by insurers to plus or minus ten percent of the midpoint rate for small employers with similar case characteristics. A third provision revises the statutory definition of small employer to incorporate an eligible employee standard present under current state law.
S353
I am partially vetoing these provisions for the following reasons. The additional premium rate variance restrictions may have the effect of increasing costs to many small businesses that currently provide health insurance benefits to their employees. Therefore, I am striking out the rate band change. Also, I object to funding this program by an interest-free loan from the state life fund to the general fund. The life fund's assets are owned by the policyholders and are managed by the State of Wisconsin Investment Board, which has investment guidelines which such a required loan may violate. Therefore, I am vetoing the loan provision, and by lining out the Department of Employee Trust Funds' s.
20.515 (2) (a) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $850,000 GPR in fiscal year 2001-02, I am deleting the funds appropriated for this program. I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds. The Department of Employee Trust Funds, Office of the Commissioner of Insurance and State of Wisconsin Investment Board should explore arranging a loan which addresses needed program costs and conforms with the investment requirements of the board. Finally, I am vetoing the change in definition of small employer. I do so because the new definition would not meet the requirements of the federal definitions under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
26.
Funding for Shared Human Resources System
These provisions change the appropriation for the shared human resources system from continuing to a sum certain. In addition, these provisions prevent the Joint Committee on Finance from supplementing the appropriation above $16,000 until provided a number of reports.
I object to the change in appropriation status because I believe a continuing appropriation is better suited to the requirements of maintaining the system. I also am concerned that the requirements to prepare and submit additional reports as a condition for having supplemental funding requests considered will unnecessarily delay implementation of the shared human resources system. I am, therefore, vetoing these provisions in their entirety. The effect of my veto will retain the current law continuing appropriation.
LEGISLATURE
27.
Legislative Hotline
Sections 102p, 2304p and 9432 (1z)
This provision prohibits the Legislature from maintaining a toll-free telephone service for use of the public to contact members of the Legislature.
The legislative hotline provides a convenient means for the public to contact members of the Legislature. Eliminating this central point of access could discourage citizens from communicating with their legislators. For this reason, I am vetoing deletion of the legislative hotline.
28.
Emergency Rule Changes
Sections 3034d, 3034j and 3034k
This provision changes the initial length of time that emergency administrative rules may be in effect from 150 to ninety days. It also modifies the maximum extension of the effective period from 120 days to 180 days. Also included is a new requirement that any proposed administrative rule must be submitted to the Revisor of Statutes and the Secretary of State within thirty days after legislative review is complete.
I am vetoing this provision because it places unnecessary restrictions on the executive branch and the emergency rule process.
29.
Legislative Council Studies
Sections 9132 (4b) and 9132 (4z)
Section 9132 (4b) requests the Joint Legislative Council to study how juries are selected, including what actions are needed to increase the participation of racial and ethnic minorities on juries so that juries reflect the racial and ethnic composition of the areas from which the juries were selected. Section 9132 (4z) requests the council to study how state government, the state's research universities and the state's business community can foster economic development in this state by assisting industries and businesses that are based on science and technology.
I am vetoing these provisions because they are unnecessary. These studies can be completed without a nonstatutory requirement.
30.
Capstone Certificate Program Reimbursement Funding
This section provides $9,500 GPR annually to the Assembly to reimburse staff members who participate in the Capstone Certificate Program. This program provides professional development courses to staff members of the Legislature.
I am vetoing this section because providing funding to only one house of the Legislature would discourage other staff members from participating in the program. By lining out the s.
20.765 (1) (a) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount, I am deleting $9,500 each year for the Capstone Certificate Program.
MILITARY AFFAIRS
31.
National Guard Tuition Grant Program
Sections 1024bg, 1024c, 1024m, 9336 (2gk) and 9436 (1gk)
These sections reduce the reimbursement percentage for the National Guard Tuition Grant program from 100 percent to 85 percent. They also make grant recipients ineligible for tuition reimbursement if they are members of the U.S. armed forces, including the National Guard, for ten years or more and make guard members eligible for grants after June 30, 2005, only if they attend University of Wisconsin System schools, schools participating in the Minnesota-Wisconsin reciprocity agreement or any technical college.
I am vetoing these sections in their entirety because they will have an adverse affect on maintaining a strong National Guard. I am committed to maintaining a 100 percent tuition grant reimbursement program for the National Guard in Wisconsin. The program is a vital recruitment incentive. While I cannot restore funding for the current law reimbursement rate through a veto, I will support legislation that provides full funding of the program at a 100 percent reimbursement level.
32.
Badger Challenge Program
Section 9159 (1) (b)
This provision prohibits the Department of Military Affairs from submitting a request to reduce funding for the Badger Challenge Program as part of the department's general purpose revenue appropriation reduction for state operations.
S354
I am vetoing this provision because it will have an adverse affect on the department. Every other state agency that must reduce general purpose revenue funding in state operations may request to reallocate its reduction to any other general purpose revenue appropriation for state operations within the agency. It is inequitable to prohibit the Department of Military Affairs from requesting to reduce general purpose revenue in the Badger Challenge Program when other state agencies are not restricted in such a manner.
REGULATION AND LICENSING
33.
Regulation of Closing Agents
Sections 3579c, 3608cg, 3608cm, 3608cr, 3608dg, 3608dq, 3608dr, 3608eg, 3608em, 3608er, 3608fg, 3608fm,3608fr, 3608gg, 3608gm, 3608gr, 3608hg, 3608hm, 3608hr, 3608ig, 3608im, 3608ir, 3608jg, 3608jm, 3608jr, 3608kg, 3608km, 3608kr, 3608Lg and 9443 (3km)
These provisions newly regulate real estate closing agents and require that all trust accounts used by closing agents be interest-bearing. The interest earned by these trust accounts would be transferred to the Department of Administration to provide grants to alleviate homelessness.
I am vetoing these provisions in their entirety because the licensing requirements do not respond to a demonstrated need and will add little additional protection for consumers.
34.
Regulation of Cemeteries
Sections 395 [as it relates to 20.165 (1) (q)], 465p, 1104p, 1144m, 2077, 2093, 2100m, 2852bb, 2852bf, 2852bj, 2852bL, 2852bn, 2852bp, 2852br, 2852bt, 2852bx, 2852da, 2852dc, 2852de, 2852dk, 2852dm, 2852ds, 2852dt, 2852dy, 2852fb, 2852fd, 2852fh, 2852fj, 2852fL, 2852fn, 2852fp, 2852fr, 2852ft, 2852fu, 2852fw, 2852fx, 2852gb, 2852hb, 2852jd, 2852jf, 2852jh, 2852jj, 2852jL, 2852jn, 2852jp, 2852jr, 2852jt, 2852jv, 2852jx, 2852jy, 2852jz, 2852Lb, 2852Ld, 2852Lf, 2852Lh, 2852Lj, 2852LL, 2852Ln, 2852Lp, 2852Lt, 2852ob, 2852obm, 2852oc, 2852od, 2852oh, 2852of, 2852og, 2852oj, 2852ok, 2852oL, 2852on, 2852op, 2852or, 2852ot, 2852ov, 2852ox, 2852oz, 2852pb, 2852pd, 2852pf, 2852ph, 2852pj, 2852pL, 2852pn, 2852pp, 2852pr, 2852pt, 2852pv, 2852px, 2852pz, 2852qb, 2852qd, 2852qf, 2852qh, 2852qhk, 2852qhL, 2852qj, 2852qL, 2852qn, 2852qp, 2852qr, 2852qt, 2852qv, 2852se, 2852sh, 2852si, 2852sj, 2852sk, 2852sL, 2852sm, 2852sn, 2852snb, 2852so, 2852sp, 2852sq, 2852sr, 2852ss, 2852st, 2852sv, 2852sx, 2852sz, 2852w, 2852yh, 2852yL, 2852yu, 3492w, 3504f, 3504h, 3504k, 3605gb, 3605gf, 3605gL, 3605gn, 3605gp, 3605gx, 3605ic, 3605ih, 3605in, 3605iq, 3605is, 3605iv, 3605kd, 3605kL, 3605km, 3605kn, 3605kp, 3605kr, 3605kt, 3605kv, 3605kx, 3605kz, 3605mb, 3605md, 3605mf, 3605mh, 3605mj, 3605mm, 3605mn, 3605mv, 3605mx, 3605mz, 3605ob, 3605od, 3605of, 3605oh, 3605oj, 3605oL, 3605on, 3605op, 3605or, 3605ot, 3605ov, 3605ox, 3605oz, 3605qb, 3605qd, 3605qg, 3605qh, 3605qhc, 3605qhe, 3605qhg, 3605qhj, 3605qhk, 3605qj, 3605qjd, 3605qjf, 3605qr, 3605qt, 3605qx, 3605qz, 3605sb, 3605sd, 3605sh, 3605sj, 3605sL, 3605sn, 3605sp, 3605sr, 3605st, 3605sv, 3605ud, 3605uh, 3605uv and 3605ux.
Under current law, if a cemetery is abandoned, the respective city, town or municipality having jurisdiction is obliged to assume care for the property. These provisions change the law to require that if a cemetery in Milwaukee County is abandoned or neglected for a period of six months, the city, town or municipality in which the cemetery is located must report the problem to a cemetery authority. The authority then has 90 days (plus one 90-day extension) to address the situation. If the cemetery authority does not succeed with a remedy, a court may appoint a trustee to manage the cemetery and correct existing problems.
The provision also creates a new Cemetery Management Insurance Trust Fund. This fund would consist of revenues collected in Milwaukee County from a $10 filing fee for death certificates and a $1 surcharge on certified copies of death certificates. The amounts available are to be used to fund activities of the trustee appointed to manage the neglected or abandoned cemetery.
I am concerned that the trustee's ability to adequately maintain the cemetery will be linked to the new Cemetery Management Insurance Fund balance. Currently, no other state requires a fee to file a death certificate. This fee could provide a disincentive for individuals to file a death certificate, which could impact the official number of deaths for Milwaukee County as well as limit the liquidity of the new fund.
Also, there has not been a formal inventory to estimate how many neglected cemeteries might require management by a trustee. Nor has there been a study to determine the trustee costs for managing a neglected cemetery. The provision provides no alternate means of payment of trustee costs should the insurance fund become depleted.
