6.
Revenue Limit Flexibility
This provision allows any school board, on a two-thirds vote, to increase its allowable revenue per student above the amount that would be permitted under current law. The provision also includes an adjustment linking the maximum size of the allowable increase, measured on a percentage basis, to a district's equalized property value per pupil; the lower the property value, the larger the increase. On a statewide basis, the average increase would equal 0.78 percent of the allowable revenue per student.
S294
I am vetoing this provision because it is likely to be inadequately funded, and it will have a negative effect on the state's overall fiscal condition. The Legislature included $15,000,000 in fiscal year 2001-02 and $30,000,000 in fiscal year 2002-03 to support this provision. The increase is based on the assumption that 37.5 percent of the available revenue limit flexibility will be used in 2001-02 and 75 percent in 2002-03. However, if the school boards representing the seventeen districts receiving the largest allowable increases make full use of their flexibility, the $15,000,000 provided in 2001-02 to cover the state's two-thirds share will be exceeded. Any shortfall could increase local property taxes. If all districts make full use of the available flexibility in both years, the state would fall $33,000,000 short of its commitment to fund two-thirds of the added spending. In addition, districts already have the authority to exceed limits through the referendum process.
This budget will include a $53,450,000 increase in funding for the Student Achievement Guarantee in Education (SAGE) program, which will greatly expand the state's efforts to reduce class size in grades kindergarten through three. This will bring total funding of the SAGE program to $95,029,600 in the 2002-03 school year. In addition, my veto of the provision that would have reduced funding for four-year-old kindergarten programs (see Department of Public Instruction, Item #7) will put more state resources into this important early learning program. Furthermore, the per student inflationary increases allowed under current law will add almost $600,000,000 in state and local school spending over the biennium. School districts will also be receiving an estimated $84,000,000 in credits under a premium holiday related to unfunded accrued liabilities within the Wisconsin Retirement System, authorized in
1999 Wisconsin Act 11. In addition, I have approved funding to allow small districts serving large geographic areas to exceed the allowable school revenue limits.
The most recent national survey of school spending by
Education Week magazine ranks Wisconsin sixth in spending per student. Clearly, this budget increases the state's already strong commitment to elementary and secondary education. Funding additional revenue limit flexibility, beyond these commitments, would severely strain the state's resources and increase local property taxes. By lining out the Department of Public Instruction's s.
20.255 (2) (ac) appropriation for general equalization aids and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $15,000,000 GPR in fiscal year 2001-02 and $16,000,000 in fiscal year 2002-03, I am partially vetoing the part of the bill which funds this provision. This partial veto retains $14,000,000 in fiscal year 2002-03 to fund the cost of my veto of changes to the four-year-old kindergarten membership count (see Department of Public Instruction, Item #7). I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
7.
Four-Year-Old Kindergarten Membership
Sections 2749m, 2761d, 2761g, 2764m, 2779 [as it relates to the amount of any revenue limit increase], 2788m, 2798L, 9140 (10f) and 9340 (8h)
This provision reduces state funding for four-year-old kindergarten programs, beginning in the 2002-03 school year, by reducing the maximum full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment count that is eligible for state aid from 0.5 FTE to 0.3 FTE per enrolled pupil in a regular program and from 0.6 FTE to 0.4 FTE in an expanded program. The provision also includes a revenue limit exemption that would authorize school boards to increase local property taxes to offset the loss in state support.
I am vetoing this provision to restore the current level of state support for four-year-old kindergarten. Research has shown that early education is an important factor in academic achievement as students progress through the educational system. This is especially true for pupils from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. As we expect our children to learn more, we need to give them more opportunities to learn. Four-year-old kindergarten programs can serve as a valuable companion to the Student Achievement Guarantee in Education (SAGE) program, which reduces class size in grades kindergarten through three. Working together these programs can provide children with a solid foundation for continued achievement.
Under a separate veto of the revenue limit flexibility provision (see Department of Public Instruction, Item #6), I have also reversed the $14,000,000 reduction in general equalization aids related to this provision. By deleting only $16,000,000 of the $30,000,000 included by the Legislature to fund the revenue limit flexibility provision in fiscal year 2002-03, $14,000,000 is available to maintain the current level of support for four-year-old kindergarten programs.
While this lower reduction restores the funding to reflect the costs of these programs, it is not possible through a veto to properly split the funding between the appropriations affecting public schools and the Milwaukee Parental Choice program for four-year-old kindergarten programs. Based on current estimates of fiscal year 2002-03 costs, $700,000 of the $14,000,000 restored through this veto should be added to the appropriation for the Milwaukee Parental Choice program. The proper distribution of these funds can be addressed when the Joint Committee on Finance meets in June 2002 to determine the general equalization amount for fiscal year 2002-03.
8.
High School Graduation Test
Sections 2703m, 2707m and 2718m
This provision delays implementation of the high school graduation test from the 2002-03 school year to the 2004-05 school year.
I am vetoing this provision to restore the implementation date to the 2002-03 school year. The Department of Public Instruction has been developing the high school graduation test for the past several years and is nearing completion of a version that it planned to pilot in the 2001-02 school year. School districts and pupils have also been preparing for implementation. To delay the test at this late date is unfair to those who are expecting implementation in 2002-03. It also damages the state's credibility with the educational community, which has made a considerable investment in getting ready for the test.
S295
In addition, a two-year delay would require the department to repeat much of the work that has already been done at an additional cost to state taxpayers. Finally, it is critically important that greater accountability at a statewide level be expected from a system educating over 850,000 pupils at a cost that will exceed $8 billion by the 2002-03 school year. The high school graduation test is an important part of that accountability.
It is not possible, through a veto, to restore the $9,300,000 included in my original budget request for continued development and implementation of the test. However, the federal government is currently considering funding to support the federal testing initiative in grades three through eight. Should that funding become available, the department should be able to reallocate existing state support for testing in the elementary grades to the high school graduation test. If additional federal funding is not forthcoming, I will propose separate legislation to address the implementation of the high school graduation test.
9.
Calculator Use on Statewide Fourth-Grade Examination
Sections 2709m and 9340 (16c)
This provision prohibits pupils, beginning in the 2002-03 school year, from using calculators while taking the statewide fourth-grade examination.
I am vetoing this provision because one of Wisconsin's model academic standards, which were developed under a process approved by the Legislature, requires fourth-grade pupils to "select and efficiently use appropriate computational procedures such as . . . using a calculator." The current fourth-grade examination already includes a mathematical section where calculator use is prohibited. While I fully support the development of strong mathematical skills that do not rely on the use of a calculator, I also recognize that being able to use a calculator properly is both necessary in today's society and allows pupils to solve more complicated and interesting problems.
10.
Study on School Financing
Section 9140 (10k)
This provision requests the Joint Legislative Council to conduct a study of school financing.
I am vetoing this provision because the Legislature already has the authority to request a study without a nonstatutory provision.
11.
Special Education Study
Section 9140 (10fm)
This provision requests the Joint Legislative Council to conduct a study of the criteria used to determine a pupil's need for special education services.
I am vetoing this provision because the Legislature already has the authority to request a study without a nonstatutory provision.
12.
University of Wisconsin Special Education Study
Sections 1351zb and 2638m
This provision requires the board of regents to direct the University of Wisconsin-Madison's School of Education and Department of Neurology to study methods of identifying and remediating special education pupils with dyslexia and irlen syndrome and to distribute the completed report to each school district.
I am vetoing these provisions because the Legislature and the university have the authority to conduct a study without a budget provision. Furthermore, while I believe this research could be of significant value, the University of Wisconsin does not require statutory language to conduct studies. In light of the potential value of research on dyslexia and irlen syndrome, I strongly encourage the board of regents to direct that such a study be done.
13.
Minority Group Pupil Scholarships
This provision increases funding for minority group pupil scholarships by $450,000 GPR in fiscal years 2001-02 and 2002-03.
I am partially vetoing this provision because I object to providing a 29.5 percent increase to this program at a time when the state faces significant fiscal constraints. By lining out the Department of Public Instruction's s.
20.255 (3) (fz) appropriation for minority group pupil scholarships and writing in smaller amounts that delete $450,000 GPR in fiscal year 2001-02 and $297,500 GPR in fiscal year 2002-03, I am vetoing the part of the bill which funds this provision. This will still provide the Minority Group Pupil Scholarship program with a ten percent increase in fiscal year 2002-03. The program also received a 45 percent increase in the 1999-2001 biennial budget.
14.
Wisconsin Educational Opportunity Program Study
This section provides $50,000 GPR in fiscal year 2002-03 to the Department of Public Instruction to study the effectiveness of the programs that comprise the Wisconsin Educational Opportunity Program.
I am vetoing this provision because the department can conduct this study without being required to do so by statute.
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 bill. By lining out the department's s.
20.255 (1) (a) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes the $50,000 GPR provided for this purpose in fiscal year 2002-03, I am vetoing that part of the bill which funds the Wisconsin Educational Opportunity Program study. The appropriation under s.
20.255 (1) (a) is also reduced by my veto of the department's exclusion from base budget reductions (see Department of Public Instruction, Item #18). Furthermore, I am requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
S296
15.
Aid to Public Library Systems
This provision increases funding for public library systems by $250,000 GPR in fiscal year 2002-03.
I am vetoing this provision because it increases expenditure authority for this appropriation at a time when the state is experiencing significant financial constraints. In addition, aid to public library systems received an 11.3 percent increase in the 1999-2001 biennial budget.
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 bill. By lining out the Department of Public Instruction's s.
20.255 (3) (e) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes the $250,000 GPR provided for this purpose in fiscal year 2002-03, I am vetoing that part of the bill which funds the increase to public library system aids. Furthermore, I am requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
16.
Library Service Contracts
This provision increases funding for library service contracts by $97,300 GPR in fiscal year 2001-02 and $125,300 GPR in fiscal year 2002-03.
I am vetoing this provision because it increases expenditure authority for this appropriation at a time when the state is experiencing significant financial constraints. In addition, payments for library service contracts received a 7.6 percent increase in the 1999-2001 biennial budget.
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 bill. By lining out the Department of Public Instruction's s.
20.255 (3) (ea) appropriation and writing in smaller amounts that delete the $97,300 GPR in fiscal year 2001-02 and the $125,300 GPR in fiscal year 2002-03, I am vetoing that part of the bill which funds the increase to library service contracts. Furthermore, I am requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
17.
Wisconsin Educational Services Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Sections 181m, 371b, 395 [as it relates to s.
20.255 (1) (b), s.
20.255 (1) (c), s.
20.255 (1) (gb), s.
20.255 (1) (gh), s.
20.255 (1) (gL), s.
20.255 (1) (gs) and s.
20.255 (1) (gt)], 541r, 542, 545d, 545f, 545h, 545j, 545L, 1381g, 1381p, 1381r, 1416 [as it relates to the Wisconsin Educational Services Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing], 1489m, 1789b, 1789c, 1789d, 2639m, 2660m, 2660r, 2660t, 2661m, 2661p, 2661r, 2661t, 2662g, 2764c, 2779s, 3938s and 9140 (3q)
These provisions would expand the mission of the Wisconsin School for the Deaf by creating the Wisconsin Educational Services Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. The purpose of this program would be to serve as a statewide educational resource for children with hearing impairments and their families.
I am vetoing these provisions because they would create future funding expectations at a time when the state is experiencing significant financial constraints. Any expansion of the Wisconsin School for the Deaf's mission would necessitate additional financial input from the state to implement. I am reluctant to commit in advance to such a use of state resources given current state financial trends.
In addition, this proposal was included in the budget without the type of full legislative study conducted by the Joint Legislative Council prior to the expansion of the Wisconsin School for the Visually Handicapped's mission in the 1999-2001 biennial budget. I do not oppose a legislative analysis of expanding the Wisconsin School for the Deaf's mission.
The effect of this veto will be to delete any changes to current law and to restore the Wisconsin School for the Deaf's existing mission.
18.
Base Budget Reduction
This provision provides $12,502,400 in fiscal year 2001-02 and $12,747,400 in fiscal year 2002-03 for the Department of Public Instruction's central office operations. Although there is no language in the bill that authorizes this level of funding, the restoration of the five percent base reduction proposed in my budget request was included in Conference Committee amendment to the bill.
By lining out the department's s.
20.255 (1) (a) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $723,000 in fiscal year 2001-02 and $723,000 in fiscal year 2002-03, I am vetoing section 395 [as it relates to s.
20.255 (1) (a)] to provide for a base budget reduction of four percent in each year of the biennium. The appropriation under s.
20.255 (1) (a) is also reduced by my veto of the Wisconsin Educational Opportunity Program study (see Department of Public Instruction, Item #14). There is no compelling reason to exclude the department's central office operations from any base budget reductions. A base budget reduction to the department's central operations will have no impact on the financial resources available to individual school districts. This veto retains the exemption from base reductions for the two residential schools operated by the department and requires a smaller reduction to the department's central operations than what is required of most other state agencies. I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
19.
Museum Eligibility for Telecommunications Access Program Services
Section 1416 [as it relates to museums]
This provision would allow museums to participate in TEACH's telecommunications access program, which is funded by the universal service fund.
I am partially vetoing this provision because the cost of the expansion would lead to additional charges on consumers' monthly phone bills at a time when universal service fund charges to consumers are significant. In addition, the definition of museum is vague and overly broad. The effect of this veto will be to delete museum eligibility for TEACH's telecommunications access program.
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
20.
Nonresident Student Tuition and Base Reduction
Section 9156 (3pn) requires the board of regents to increase nonresident undergraduate tuition by 2.5 percent in each year of the 2001-03 biennium in addition to the regular tuition increases approved by the board.
I am partially vetoing this provision to increase the amount of the surcharge to five percent in each year. I believe the high quality of a University of Wisconsin education justifies increasing tuition for nonresident undergraduates. For example, the University of Wisconsin-Madison's nonresident undergraduate tuition is currently $6,000 less than the nonresident tuition charged at the University of Michigan. Even with a five percent annual surcharge, the difference would still be approximately $4,500.
The increased revenue obtained from the five percent surcharge will allow for additional reductions to the state's general purpose revenue spending, thereby helping to improve the state's overall fiscal condition. By lining out the University of Wisconsin System's s.
20.285 (1) (a) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $2,000,000 GPR in fiscal year 2001-02 and $4,000,000 GPR in fiscal year 2002-03, I am vetoing the part of the bill that reflects my intent to use the additional revenue from increasing the nonresident undergraduate tuition to replace GPR. I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds.
21.
Transfer of Credits Between the University of Wisconsin and the Wisconsin Technical College System
Sections 1351x and 1370m
Section 1351x requires the University of Wisconsin System institutions to accept all general education credits transferred from both the Wisconsin Technical College System and from within the University of Wisconsin System, as well as credits included in cooperative agreements between the two systems. The provision also authorizes the Assembly and Senate Committees on Higher Education to block credits on a case-by-case basis, by a majority vote. Section 1370m requires the Wisconsin Technical College System to accept credits transferred between its campuses and from the University of Wisconsin System institutions.
I am vetoing sections 1351x and 1370m because I believe the University of Wisconsin System and Wisconsin Technical College System should continue to expand the number of transferable credits through the plan developed under the 1999-2001 biennial budget act. I fully support increasing the ease of movement between Wisconsin institutions of higher learning. As the economy becomes more knowledge-based, many workers with less than baccalaureate degrees are finding it necessary to pursue additional postsecondary education in order to advance in their careers. However, in order to maintain the academic quality of both systems, I believe it is more appropriate for the decisions to be made through existing negotiations between the two systems than by legislative mandate. I urge the University of Wisconsin and the Wisconsin Technical College Systems to continue their dialogue toward establishing a credit transfer policy.
I am retaining the provision that requires regular reporting on progress in implementing the credit transfer plan. This should provide policymakers with up-to-date information on credit transfer arrangements.
22.
Sex Offender Notification
Sections 1351zd, 3352p, 3352w and 9311 (7c)
Section 3352p requires the Department of Corrections to immediately provide to the board of regents detailed information regarding registered sex offenders who are either employed by the University of Wisconsin or are students attending a University of Wisconsin institution. Section 1351zd requires the board of regents to provide the information received from the Department of Corrections regarding registered sex offenders to students attending the institutions at which the registered sex offenders are employed or attend and to the students' parents or guardians.
I am vetoing this provision in its entirety. While I agree with the intent of this provision to protect the well-being of students at the University of Wisconsin, I am concerned that the provision as drafted may not accomplish its intended purpose. By limiting the information to registered sex offenders who are employed by or attend the University of Wisconsin, the provision does not provide students with information about other registered sex offenders who may live in the same community, but are not associated with the university. Should a registered sex offender be a threat to the safety of students, it is as likely to be someone not affiliated with the University of Wisconsin as it is a fellow student or employee.
S298
Current law authorizes law enforcement agencies to provide other organizations with the same information required under this provision if the law enforcement agencies determine that providing this information is necessary to protect the public. In the case of the University of Wisconsin, the information provided could include registered sex offenders not affiliated with the university. I request that the board of regents make use of the authority under current law to obtain information on registered sex offenders in those communities where the university has a presence.
In addition, I urge the Department of Corrections to consider adding the University of Wisconsin to the list of organizations to which the department can directly provide information on request under the s.
301.46 (4) (a) 14. If the department has legal concerns about its authority under this provision, I will support the introduction of legislation to include the board of regents on the statutory list. The effect of this veto will be to provide students with more comprehensive information on registered sex offenders than would be provided under this provision.
23.
Resident Tuition for Certain Undocumented Persons
Section 1360m
This section provides an exemption from nonresident tuition to citizens of other countries who are not citizens of the United States, if they graduate from a Wisconsin high school (or receive a Wisconsin graduation equivalency), reside in the state for three years following high school graduation and submit an affidavit of their intent to apply for permanent residency as soon as they are eligible.
I am vetoing this provision because under the federal Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, aliens who are not lawfully present in the United States are not eligible for any postsecondary education benefit based on residency in a specific state unless all legal residents of the United States are eligible for the same benefit. Under this act, all nonresident students would be eligible for resident tuition if that benefit is provided to persons living in Wisconsin who are not citizens or permanent residents of the United States. I object to potentially obligating state taxpayers to subsidize the tuition of out-of-state students.
