B) The court must set the term of confinement in prison portion of the sentence
to be at least one year but not more than 40 years for a Class B felony, 20 years for
a Class BC felony, ten years for a Class C felony, five years for a Class D felony, or
two years for a Class E felony. If the person is being sentenced to prison for a felony
that is not in one of these classes, the term of confinement in prison portion of the
sentence must be at least one year but not more than 75% of the total length of the
bifurcated sentence.
C) The term of extended supervision must equal at least 25% of the length of
the term of confinement in prison. There is no limit on the length of the term of
extended supervision, other than the limit that results from the requirements that
the term of confinement in prison portion of a bifurcated sentence be at least one year
and that the total bifurcated sentence not exceed the maximum term of
imprisonment specified by law for the crime.
During the term of extended supervision, the person is subject to supervision
by DOC and is subject to conditions set by both the court and DOC. If a person
violates a condition of, or DOC rule related to, extended supervision, the person's
extended supervision may be revoked in an administrative proceeding and the
person may be returned to serve a period of time in prison.
3. The changes made by this bill. This bill makes the following changes relating
to the imposition of bifurcated sentences:
A) The bill establishes new maximum terms of confinement in prison for all
felony classes, except for Class A and Class B. The bill also limits the amount of
extended supervision that a court can impose for classified felonies. The maximum
term of confinement in prison and the maximum term of extended supervision for
each classified felony (other than Class A felonies) is as follows:
-
See PDF for table 
B) When a court is imposing a bifurcated sentence it must consider any
advisory sentencing guidelines for the offense adopted by the sentencing commission
(see below,
Sentencing commission) or, if the sentencing commission has not
adopted guidelines for the offense, the temporary advisory guidelines adopted by the
criminal penalties study committee (created by
1997 Wisconsin Act 283). In
addition, the bill requires the sentencing court to consider the protection of the
public, the gravity of the offense, and the rehabilitative needs of the defendant, along
with any applicable mitigating and aggravating circumstances. The bill includes a
partial list of aggravating circumstances that a court must consider, which
incorporates the provisions of current penalty enhancers eliminated by the bill (see
above,
Penalty enhancers). The bill also generally requires the court to state the
reasons for its sentencing decision in open court and on the record.
C) When a court imposes a bifurcated sentence on a person who is also subject
to a prison sentence for a crime committed before December 31, 1999 (an
indeterminate sentence), the court must specify all of the following: 1) whether the
confinement in prison portion of the bifurcated sentence is to run concurrent with or
consecutively to the imprisonment portion of the indeterminate sentence; and 2)
whether the period of parole under the indeterminate sentence is to run concurrent
with or consecutively to the term of extended supervision portion of the bifurcated
sentence. The court must make the same specifications when imposing an
indeterminate sentence on a person who is also subject to a bifurcated sentence.
D) The bill allows DOC to take custody of a person who is on extended
supervision in order to investigate an alleged violation of a condition of extended
supervision. If a person on extended supervision admits that he or she has violated
a condition or rule of extended supervision, DOC may confine the person for not more
than 90 days in a DOC regional detention facility or, with the consent of the sheriff,
in a county jail.
E) The bill changes the procedure for revoking extended supervision by
requiring that a court determine how long to send a person back to prison after his
or her extended supervision is revoked. DOC or the administrative law judge who
made the revocation decision must make a recommendation to the court concerning
the amount of time for which the person should be returned to prison. The court then
reviews the recommendation and makes the final decision as to the amount of time
for which the person is returned to prison.
F) DOC or a person on extended supervision may petition a court to modify the
conditions of extended supervision set by the court. The court may hold a hearing
on a petition to modify extended supervision and may grant the petition if it
determines that the requested modification would meet the needs of DOC and the
public and would be consistent with the objectives of the person's bifurcated
sentence.
G) Older prisoners who have been given a bifurcated sentence may petition the
sentencing court for a modification of the terms of the sentence if they are 65 years
of age or older and have served at least five years of the term of confinement in prison
portion of their bifurcated sentence or are 60 years of age or older and have served
at least ten years of the term of confinement in prison portion of the bifurcated
sentence. The prisoner files a petition with the prison's program review committee,
which may then refer the petition to the sentencing court if it finds that the public
interest would be served by a modification of the prisoner's bifurcated sentence. If
a petition is referred to a sentencing court, the court must determine whether the
public interest would be served by a modification of the prisoner's bifurcated
sentence. The victim of the prisoner's crime has a right to provide a statement
concerning the modification of the sentence.
If the court decides that the public interest would be served by such a
modification, the court must modify the sentence by: 1) reducing the term of
confinement in prison portion of the sentence to a number that provides for the
release of the prisoner to extended supervision; and 2) increasing the term of
extended supervision of the prisoner by the same number, so that the total length of
the bifurcated sentence does not change.
H) A prisoner who has been given a bifurcated sentence and who has a terminal
condition (defined as an incurable condition caused by injury, disease, or illness, as
a result of which the person has a medical prognosis that his or her life expectancy
is 6 months or less) may petition the sentencing court for a modification of the terms
of the sentence. The conditions under which and the manner by which a court may
modify a bifurcated sentence for such a person are identical to those that are
described in the second and third paragraphs of item 3-G, except that the prisoner
must submit affidavits from two physicians setting forth a diagnosis that the
prisoner has a terminal condition.
I) If a misdemeanor offender may be sentenced to prison because of the
application of a sentence enhancer and the court decides to sentence the person to
prison, the court must impose a bifurcated sentence. In sentencing a person to prison
in such a case, the term of confinement in prison portion of the sentence may not
constitute more than 75% of the total bifurcated sentence.
Sentences of life imprisonment
Currently, if a person is sentenced to life imprisonment for an offense
committed before December 31, 1999, the person usually must serve 20 years minus
time calculated under the mandatory release formula before he or she is eligible for
release on parole. If the person does not receive extensions due to violations of prison
rules, he or she reaches parole eligibility after serving 13 years, four months.
However, a court may set a parole eligibility date for a person serving a life sentence
that is later than the usual parole eligibility date or may provide that the person is
not eligible for parole. No person serving a life sentence of any kind is entitled to
mandatory release on parole.
If a person is sentenced to life imprisonment for a crime committed on or after
December 31, 1999, he or she is not eligible for parole. Instead, the court who is
sentencing the person to life imprisonment must do one of the following: 1) provide
that the person is eligible for release to extended supervision after serving 20 years;
2) set a date on which the person becomes eligible for extended supervision, as long
as that date requires the person to serve at least 20 years; or 3) provide that the
person is not eligible for extended supervision. If the court provides that the person
is eligible for extended supervision, the person may petition the sentencing court for
release to extended supervision on or after the extended supervision eligibility date.
A person sentenced to life imprisonment who is released to extended supervision is
on extended supervision for the remainder of his or her life and, like a person on
extended supervision under a bifurcated sentence (see above, The structure of
felony sentences, item 2-C), may have his or her extended supervision revoked in
an administrative proceeding and be returned to prison if he or she violates a
condition of extended supervision or a rule promulgated by DOC relating to extended
supervision. A person returned to prison after a revocation of extended supervision
may not petition for rerelease to extended supervision until he or she has served a
period of time back in prison. The time period, which must be at least five years, is
determined by an administrative law judge or, if the person waived a revocation
hearing, by DOC.
This bill changes the procedures regarding revocation of extended supervision
for a person serving a life sentence in the same way that it does for a person serving
a bifurcated sentence. (See above, The structure of felony sentences, items 3-D
and 3-E.) The only difference is that when extended supervision of a person serving
a life sentence is revoked, the recommendation by DOC or an administrative law
judge and the court's final decision concerning the amount of time for which the
person should be returned to prison must provide for the person to be returned to
prison for at least five years.
Sentencing commission
This bill creates a sentencing commission that must study sentencing practices
throughout the state. Using the information it obtains, the sentencing commission
must adopt advisory sentencing guidelines for judges when imposing sentences for
felonies committed on or after the effective date of the changes made in this bill
regarding felony classifications. The sentencing commission must also assist the
legislature in assessing the cost of changes in statutes affecting criminal sentencing
and provide information regarding sentencing to judges, lawyers, state agencies, and
the legislature. The sentencing commission is abolished on December 31, 2007.
Joint review committee on criminal penalties
This bill creates a joint review committee on criminal penalties to review
proposed legislation that creates a new crime or revises a penalty for an existing
crime. The joint review committee is comprised of one majority party member and
one minority party member from each house of the legislature, the attorney general
or his or her designee, the secretary of corrections or his or her designee, the state
public defender or his or her designee, two reserve judges, and two members of the
public appointed by the governor, one of whom must have law enforcement
experience in this state and one of whom must be an elected county official.
Under the bill, when a bill that is introduced in either house of the legislature
proposes to create a new crime or revise a penalty for an existing crime, a standing
committee to which the bill is referred may not vote on whether to recommend the
bill for passage and the bill may not be passed by the house in which it is introduced
before the joint review committee submits a report on the bill or, if a report is
requested by the speaker of the assembly or the presiding officer of the senate, before
the 30th day after the report is requested, whichever is earlier. The report must
address such issues as the costs that are likely to be incurred or saved if the bill is
enacted, the consistency of penalties proposed in the bill with existing criminal
penalties, and whether acts prohibited under the bill are prohibited under existing
criminal statutes.
Finally, the bill requires the joint review committee to recommend standards
and procedures to be used by a court to modify a bifurcated sentence and to propose
legislation to implement those recommendations.
Law enforcement training
Under current law, no person may be appointed permanently as a law
enforcement or tribal law enforcement officer unless he or she first completes law
enforcement training approved by the law enforcement standards board and has
been certified by the board as being qualified to be a law enforcement or tribal law
enforcement officer. This bill requires that, as of January 1, 2003, the training
include training on responding to acts of terrorism.
education
Primary and secondary education
Under current law, the state determines how much general school aid to
appropriate to pay two-thirds of statewide school costs (two-thirds funding). This
bill provides that certain referendum-approved debt service is not aided, thus
lowering the amount of aid needed to meet two-thirds funding.
Under the current three-tiered school aid formula, the first tier of support is
for costs shared between the state and school district up to a primary cost ceiling of
$1,000 per pupil. The state's share at this level is calculated using a guaranteed
property valuation of $2,000,000 per pupil. Every school district is guaranteed no
less in general aid than this primary aid amount. This bill reduces this primary
guarantee to $1,930,000.
Current law generally limits the increase in the total amount of revenue per
pupil that a school district may receive from general school aids and property taxes
in a school year to the amount of revenue increase allowed per pupil in the previous
school year increased by the percentage change in the consumer price index. This
bill replaces the inflation-based adjustment with a flat $210 per pupil increase for
the revenue limit calculated for the 2002-03 school year, although the bill allows a
school board to override this change by a two-thirds vote. The bill directs DPI to
encourage school districts to accommodate this reduction in the revenue limit
increase without negatively affecting their instructional programs.
Current law requires each school board and charter school that operates high
school grades to administer a high school graduation examination to all 11th and
12th grade pupils beginning in the 2002-03 school year. This bill delays
implementation of the examination until the 2004-05 school year.
Higher education
This bill prohibits the UW board of regents from increasing the average tuition
charged a resident undergraduate in the 2002-03 academic year compared to the
average tuition charged a resident undergraduate in the 2001-02 academic year by
more than 10% without first obtaining the approval of JCF and DOA.
This bill appropriates moneys from the utility public benefits fund for paying
a portion of the energy costs of the UW System in fiscal year 2001-02 and fiscal year
2002-03. The bill also prohibits the UW board of regents from spending a portion
of its general purpose revenue funding for energy costs in fiscal year 2001-02 and
fiscal year 2002-03 without the approval of DOA.
Currently, the rate of the property tax levied by a technical college district board
is limited to 1.5 mills. This bill provides that the amount of that levy is limited to
the lesser of the amount generated by a levy rate of 1.5 mills or the amount levied
in the previous year increased by the rate of inflation. If a district board's limit is the
latter, it may exceed this limit (but not the 1.5 mill rate limit) if it obtains the
approval of the district electors at a referendum.
The bill also limits the increase in fees charged technical college students in the
2002-03 school year to 10%.
Under current law, the technical college system board awards a $500 grant to
each recent high school graduate who enrolls in the system and maintains a 2.0 grade
point average. This bill eliminates this grant program.
Instead, the bill directs the board to pay a student's tuition and fees at a
technical college if the student has been terminated or laid off from employment, has
been referred to the technical college by a local work force development board, and
has maintained a 2.0 grade point average.
Current law authorizes the technical college system board to establish and
supervise training programs in fire prevention and protection. This bill requires the
programs to include training in responding to acts of terrorism.
Other educational and cultural agencies
This bill eliminates funding for the Milwaukee Public Museum effective July
1, 2002.
environment
Current law requires a person to pay a supplemental title fee when the person
applies for a certificate of title for a new motor vehicle or for a certificate of title after
a transfer of ownership of a used motor vehicle. The supplemental title fees are
deposited into the transportation fund. On each October 1, an amount equal to the
amount of the supplemental title fees collected during the previous fiscal year is
transferred from the general fund to the environmental fund.
This bill reduces the amount of the transfer from the general fund to the
environmental fund by $555,000 per fiscal year beginning in fiscal year 2002-03.
health and human services
Health
Under current law, DHFS must award grants to community health centers that
provide primary health care and social services to low-income persons. This bill
eliminates the grants to community health centers on July 1, 2002.
This bill expands training requirements for initial licensure or licensure
renewal as emergency medical technicians or initial certification or certification
renewal as first responders to require that, as of January 1, 2003, applicants
satisfactorily complete training for response to acts of terrorism.
Beginning in 2004, JCF annually must transfer to the tobacco control fund from
the permanent endowment fund the lesser of $25,000,000 or 8.5% of the market
value of the investments in the permanent endowment fund. Beginning in 2004, this
bill annually transfers from the general fund to the tobacco control fund an amount
equal to $25,000,000 less the amount transferred to the tobacco control fund by JCF
from the permanent endowment fund in that year.
Under current law, DHFS provides financial assistance for the treatment of
kidney disease, cystic fibrosis, and hemophilia. This bill permits DHFS to provide
this financial assistance only if the person has first applied for assistance under all
other state-funded health care assistance programs for which the person may be
eligible.
Current law requires that the financial assistance for the treatment of kidney
disease be equal to the allowable charges for that treatment under the federal
medicare program. This bill eliminates that requirement. The bill also provides that
if the amounts appropriated for this financial assistance are insufficient to assist all
eligible persons, DHFS may establish waiting lists and may assign priorities to
persons on those waiting lists.
Medical assistance
This bill requires the secretary of health and family services to create a
prescription drug prior authorization committee to advise DHFS on issues related
to prior authorization decisions concerning prescription drugs for medical assistance
recipients.
Mental illness and developmental disabilities
This bill appropriates moneys from the utility public benefits fund for paying
a portion of the energy costs of DHFS in fiscal year 2002-03. The bill also prohibits
DHFS from spending a portion of its general purpose revenue funding for energy
costs in fiscal year 2002-03 without the approval of the secretary of administration.
Other health and human services
Under current law, DHFS may confine a person who has been found to be
sexually violent in an institution, after which the person may petition the court to
order his or her supervised release. If the person is a serious child sex offender, the
court, when deciding whether he or she should be placed on supervised release, may
consider what arrangements are available to ensure that the person has access to
and will participate in antiandrogen treatment or other necessary treatment,
although the court may not base a decision to release a sexually violent person who
is a child sex offender on the person's suitability or willingness to undergo the
treatment. If the court finds that the person is appropriate for supervised release,
DHFS and the social services department of the county in which the person will
reside must prepare a plan -- which the court must approve -- that identifies the
person's needs for treatment and services, including antiandrogen treatment. This
bill eliminates the antiandrogen treatment program.
local government
Under current law, shared revenue (which includes payments under the shared
revenue program, the public utility distribution program, the county mandate relief
program, the expenditure restraint program, and the small municipality shared
revenue program) is paid from the general fund. This bill reduces the total amount
of shared revenue payments in 2002 and 2003 and eliminates shared revenue
beginning in 2004.
Under the bill, in 2002 and 2003, DOR determines the shared revenue
payments to be paid to each municipality and county in that year. DOR then reduces
those payments by subtracting an amount based on the municipality's or county's
population, so that the total amount of the reduction to all the payments in each year
is $350,000,000.
Under the bill, in 2002 and 2003, a portion of the payments under the shared
revenue programs will be paid from moneys in the permanent endowment fund,
which consists of all the proceeds from the sale of the state's right to receive payments
under the Attorneys General Master Tobacco Settlement Agreement of November
23, 1998, and all investment earnings on the proceeds. In 2002, the amount from the
permanent endowment fund to make payments under the shared revenue programs
is $580,000,000 less any amount expended from the permanent endowment fund for
purposes relating to the contracting of public debt during the 2001-02 fiscal year.
In 2003, the amount from the permanent endowment fund to make the payments is
the amount, determined by DOA, that is not designated for other purposes. In
addition, the bill appropriates moneys from the permanent endowment fund, in an
amount determined by DOA, for purposes relating to the contracting of public debt.
Under current law, with some exceptions, no county may impose an operating
levy (the county purpose levy less the debt levy) at an operating levy rate (the total
levy rate less the debt levy rate) that exceeds .001 or the operating levy rate in 1992,
whichever is greater. A county may exceed the limit if its board adopts a resolution
to do so and the resolution is approved by the electors of the county in a referendum.
The limit may also be exceeded if a county increases the services that it provides by
adding responsibility for providing a service transferred to the county by another
governmental unit. If a county exceeds the limit, DOR must reduce the county's
shared revenue payment and may ask DOT to reduce the county's general
transportation aid payments.
Under this bill, generally no city, village, town, or county (political subdivision)
whose total levy rate is at least one mill may annually increase its operating levy by
a percentage that exceeds the sum of the rate of increase of inflation and population
growth in the political subdivision. A political subdivision may exceed this limit if
its governing body adopts a resolution to do so and the resolution is approved by the
electors of the political subdivision in a referendum. The limit does not apply to any
increase in a political subdivision's operating levy that results from complying with
a court order, and may be adjusted to account for a transfer of responsibility to
provide a service between units of government.
In addition, the limit on the increase in the levy under the bill does not apply
in any county in which the operating levy that the county may impose under current
law is less than the operating levy that the county may impose under the levy rate
limit imposed by the bill.
This bill authorizes a political subdivision to request a waiver from a state
mandate (a requirement for a political subdivision to engage in an activity or provide
a service, or to increase the level of its activities or services), other than a state
mandate in the area of health or safety.
The appropriate agency, or DOR, determines whether to grant the request and
notifies the political subdivision and DOR in writing. A waiver is effective for four
years and may be extended.
State government
State building program
Currently, if the building commission sells a state-owned building or structure,
the commission must first use the net proceeds of the sale to retire any public debt
incurred to finance construction or acquisition of the building or structure. Any
remaining net proceeds are appropriated to JCF for use as determined by JCF.
This bill provides that if, before to July 1, 2003, the building commission sells
any or all of the state office buildings located at 123 West Washington Avenue
(Lorraine Building), 121 East Wilson Street (Lake Terrace Building), or 149 East
Wilson Street in the city of Madison the commission must deposit the net proceeds
of the sale, after retiring any outstanding debt incurred in constructing or acquiring
the buildings, into the general fund.
The bill also provides that if, during the period beginning on July 1, 2001, and
ending on the day before the effective date of this bill, the building commission sold
one of these state office buildings and any portion of the proceeds of that sale was
appropriated to JCF, then on that effective date an amount equivalent to the lesser
of the amount appropriated or the unencumbered balance in that appropriation is
transferred to the general fund.
Currently, as work proceeds on a state building project, the state makes
payments to the contractors, but the state retains 10% of the value of the work to be
performed until 50% of the value of the work is completed. Under this bill, the state
retains not more than 5% of the value of the work to be performed.
State employment
This bill requires the secretary of administration to determine the number of
positions in each state agency not funded as a result of any reduction in state agency
operations appropriations under
2001 Wisconsin Act 16 for the 2001-03 fiscal
biennium or any reduction in the appropriations under this bill and to notify JCF of
the determination. If the cochairpersons of JCF do not notify the secretary within
14 working days that the committee has scheduled a meeting to review the
determination, the secretary must reduce each state agency's authorized positions
for the 2002-03 fiscal year by the number of unfunded positions for that state agency.
If, within 14 working days, the chairpersons of JCF notify the secretary that JCF has
scheduled a meeting to review the determination, the secretary may make the
reductions in the authorized positions only upon approval of JCF.
State finance
Under current law, if the secretary of administration determines that
previously authorized expenditures will exceed revenues in the current or
forthcoming fiscal year by more than 0.5% of the estimated general purpose revenue
appropriations for that fiscal year, the secretary must immediately notify the
governor, the presiding officers of each house of the legislature, and JCF. The
governor must then submit a bill to correct the imbalance between projected
revenues and authorized expenditures. If the legislature is not in a floorperiod at the
time of the secretary's notification, the governor must call a special session of the
legislature and submit the bill for consideration at that session.
This bill revises the process by which the secretary and the governor may
correct budgetary imbalances. Under the bill, in each even-numbered year, the LFB
must prepare an estimate of general purpose revenue receipts and expenditures for
the current fiscal biennium. In addition, at any time during a fiscal biennium, DOA
and DOR may prepare an estimate of general purpose revenue receipts and
expenditures for the current fiscal biennium.
If the LFB estimate or the DOA and DOR estimate concludes that previously
authorized general purpose revenue expenditures will exceed general purpose
revenue receipts by an amount greater than 2% of the previously authorized general
purpose revenue appropriations for that fiscal year, the governor must declare a
fiscal emergency no later than 15 days after the date on which LFB or DOA and DOR
makes the determination. If the legislature is in a floorperiod on the date on which
the governor declares a fiscal emergency, the governor, no later than 15 days after
the date on which the governor declared a fiscal emergency, must submit a bill to the
legislature to correct the imbalance. If the legislature has not passed a bill to correct
the imbalance before the close of the last regular floorperiod of the legislative session,
the secretary may, to correct the imbalance, reduce any sum certain appropriation
or any expenditure estimate previously approved by the secretary during the fiscal
biennium or lapse or transfer moneys to the general fund from program revenue or
segregated revenue appropriations.
However, if the legislature is not in a floorperiod on the date on which the
governor declares a fiscal emergency, the governor is not required to submit a bill to
the legislature and the secretary may, to correct the imbalance, reduce any sum
certain appropriation or any expenditure estimate that was previously approved by
the secretary during the fiscal biennium or lapse or transfer moneys to the general
fund from program revenue or segregated revenue appropriations.
Under the bill, the secretary may not lapse or transfer money to the general
fund from any of the following: an appropriation that is funded from federal
revenues; an appropriation for principal repayment and interest payments on public
debt or operating notes; an appropriation to DOT for the purpose of undertaking
construction projects; an appropriation for the operation of any state institution
established for the care or custody of individuals; an appropriation funded from gifts,
grants, or bequests; an appropriation containing moneys whose lapse or transfer
would violate a condition imposed by the federal government on the expenditure of
the moneys; or an appropriation containing moneys whose lapse or transfer would
violate the federal or state constitution.
Finally, the bill provides that if the secretary reduces a sum certain
appropriation or an expenditure estimate, or lapses or transfers money to the general
fund from any appropriation that is made to provide money to more than one local
governmental unit, with the result that less money is provided to the local
governmental unit, the secretary must ensure that each local governmental unit
receives the same percentage reduction in money paid from that appropriation.
This bill requires the board of commissioners of public lands to establish the
Federal Match Star Program, under which the board may make loans from the
common school fund, the normal school fund, the university fund, and the
agricultural college fund to any municipality eligible to receive a state trust fund
loan. The moneys must be used to provide matching funds for any federal grant that
is awarded to a municipality following a competitive application process and that
requires matching funds. The bill provides that the total amount of outstanding
loans may not exceed $50,000,000.
Under current law a fiscal estimate must be prepared for any bill making an
appropriation and any bill increasing or decreasing existing appropriations or state
or general local government fiscal liability or revenues. This bill requires that an
estimate of the economic impact on a private person or a political subdivision of this
state must also be prepared.
Other state government
Under current law, whenever an agency proposes an administrative rule that
may have an effect on small businesses, the agency must consider methods of
reducing that effect, including the establishment of less stringent requirements for
small businesses. The agency must also allow small businesses to participate in rule
making and must notify the secretary of commerce and the small business
ombudsman clearinghouse if the agency proposes a rule that will affect small
businesses. If the agency determines that the proposed rule may have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses, the agency must
include a regulatory flexibility analysis at the time the agency submits its final draft
of the proposed rule to the legislature.
This bill requires DOA to prepare an economic impact assessment of any
proposed rule prepared by an agency that may have an economic impact on a private
person, such as a business or corporation, or on a political subdivision of the state,
such as a city or county. The assessment must evaluate the costs and benefits of
complying with the proposed rule and the potential impact of the proposed rule on
the decisions of the private person or political subdivision of the state. The agency
must submit the economic impact assessment to the legislative council staff with the
proposed rule, and to the legislature when the proposed rule is in final form, with a
report explaining any changes that were made in the proposed rule as a result of the
economic impact assessment.
Current law requires each county to appoint a local emergency planning
committee to facilitate the preparation and implementation of an emergency
response plan for responding to the release of a hazardous substance. The division
of emergency management in DOA awards grants to local emergency planning
committees for maintaining, exercising, reviewing, and implementing emergency
response plans related to the release of a hazardous substance and purchasing
necessary equipment and supplies.
This bill authorizes the office of justice assistance to award grants to local
emergency planning committees for purchasing materials and providing services
related to investigating, preventing, and responding to acts of terrorism. The grant
program sunsets on June 30, 2003.
