Relating to: determining the size of a livestock operation for the applicability of the livestock facility siting law, water quality regulation of livestock operations, granting rule-making authority, and providing an exemption from emergency rule procedures.
By
Senators
Kapanke and Brown; cosponsored by Representatives Ott, Ward, Petrowski, Musser, Nerison, Ainsworth and Towns.
To committee on Agriculture and Insurance.
__________________
Pursuant to Senate Rule
17 (5), Senator Carpenter added as a coauthor of
Senate Bill 423.
Pursuant to Senate Rule
17 (5), Senator Carpenter added as a cosponsor of
Assembly Bill 826.
Pursuant to Senate Rule
17 (5), Senator Carpenter added as a coauthor of
Senate Joint Resolution 57.
__________________
The committee on Job Creation, Economic Development and Consumer Affairs reports and recommends:
Blair
, Karla,
of Kaukauna, as a member of the Accounting Examining Board, to serve for the term ending July 1, 2008.
Confirmation.
Ayes, 3 - Senators
Kanavas, Zien and Lassa.
Noes, 0 - None.
Corbeille, Steve,
of Crivitz, as a member of the Accounting Examining Board, to serve for the term ending July 1, 2009.
Confirmation.
Ayes, 3 - Senators
Kanavas, Zien and Lassa.
Noes, 0 - None.
Senate Bill 453
Relating to: creating an individual income tax checkoff for donations to the fire fighters memorial.
Passage.
Ayes, 3 - Senators
Kanavas, Zien and Lassa.
Noes, 0 - None.
Ted Kanavas
Chairperson
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Ethics Board
January 17, 2006
The Honorable, The Senate:
The following lobbyists have been authorized to act on behalf of the organizations set opposite their names.
Brooks, Bryan Wisconsin Corn Growers Association
Brozek, Michael National Marine Manufacturers Association
Fuller, Kevin Bayer HealthCare
George Jr, Nicholas C Midwest Food Processors Association Inc
Hubbard, Gregory Unspam
Hulsey, Brett Wisconsin Corn Growers Association
Johnson, Kevin AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP
Mayfield, Linda Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence
Vetter, Marilyn Takeda Pharmaceuticals America
For more detailed information about these lobbyists and organizations and a complete list of organizations and people authorized to lobby the 2005 session of the legislature, visit the Ethics Board's web site at
http://ethics.state.wi.us
Also available from the Wisconsin Ethics Board are reports identifying the amount and value of time state agencies have spent to affect legislative action and reports of expenditures for lobbying activities filed by organizations that employ lobbyists.
Sincerely,
R. Roth Judd
Executive Director
Office of State Employment Relations
January, 2006
The Honorable, The Legislature:
Pursuant to s.230.04 (9)(em), Wis. Stats., I am pleased to submit the 2005 Veterans Employment Report. The report summarizes veteran new hires and on-board statistics for the time period from July 1, 2004, to June 30, 2005, and includes information for each state agency and each institution of the University of Wisconsin System.
Veterans comprise an important segment of the Wisconsin workforce in both the private and public sectors. State government - and any other employer - can benefit greatly by recruiting and retaining our nation's trained and motivated veterans.
Sincerely,
KAREN E. TIMBERLAKE
Director
State of Wisconsin
Claims Board
January 11, 2006
The Honorable, The Senate:
Enclosed is the report of the State Claims Board covering the claims heard on December 9, 2005.
The amounts recommended for payment undr $5,000 on claims included in this report have, under the provisions of s.
16.007, stats., been paid directly by the Board.
The Board is preparing the bill(s) on the recommended award(s) over $5,000, if any, and will submit such to the Joint Finance Committee for legislative introduction.
This report is for the information of the Legislature. The Board would appreciate your acceptance and spreading of it upon the Journal to inform the members of the Legislature.
Sincerely,
JOHN E. ROTHSCHILD
Secretary
STATE OF WISCONSIN CLAIMS BOARD
The State Claims Board conducted hearings at the State Capitol Building in Madison, Wisconsin, on December 9, 2005, upon the following claims:
Claimant Agency Amount
The following claims were considered and decided without hearings:
Claimant Agency Amount
4 Larry D. Conley D.O.C. $233.63
5.Charles C. Downing D.O.C. $173.22
6.Flint Ink North America Dept. of Financial Institutions $19,667.00
7.Hugasian Motors, Inc. D.O.T. $2,000.00
In addition, the Board considered a motion to refer the innocent convict claim (s.
775.05, Stats.) of Richard A. Moeck to a hearing examiner.
The Board Finds:
1. Carl A. Haas Racing Teams, Ltd. of Lincolnshire, Illinois files this procedural claim arising from the claimant's desire to file a third-party action against Wisconsin State Fair Park. The claimant is the former lessee of the Milwaukee Mile Racetrack. During the lease term, the claimant contracted with Southern Bleacher Company to make improvements to the site. The claimant alleges that this contract was entered into with the knowledge and consent of the State. The claimant states that a dispute arose between Southern Bleacher and one of its subcontractors, Seater Construction Company, which resulted in Southern Bleacher terminating Seater's contract. In February 2004 Seater Construction filed suit against both Southern Bleacher and the claimant for money allegedly due Seater. The claimant states that it was named as a party in the suit as the "owner" of the racetrack. The claimant believes that the proper defendant in this case should be Wisconsin State Fair Park, the actual owner of the racetrack. The claimant does not believe it is able file a third-party action to bring State Fair Park into this litigation without first submitting this claim to the Claim Board.
While State Fair Park admits that it is the owner of the Milwaukee Mile Racetrack, this fact does not translate into liability for the actions of the claimant or Southern Bleacher. Wisconsin State Fair Park strongly recommends denying any liability relating to the lawsuit brought by Seater Construction against the claimant and Southern Bleacher. State Fair Park points out that as the lessee, the claimant was responsible for track improvements. There was no state contract for the work and no consideration or approval by the State Fair Park Board, the Building Commission or the Department of Administration's Division of State Facilities.
The Board concludes there has been an insufficient showing of negligence on the part of the state, its officers, agents or employees and this claim is neither one for which the state is legally liable nor one which the state should assume and pay based on equitable principles. (Member Rothschild not participating.)
S525
2. Noble Grain Farm
of Burlington, Wisconsin claims $45,570.00 for crop damage allegedly caused by the DNR's installation of a dam on the Bong Recreational Base (the Bong), which is adjacent to the farm. The dam was installed on Hoosier Creek in 1967, creating a 30-40 acre flowage known as the northern flowage. The claimants purchased the farm in 1974. The prior landowner had installed an earth berm along the property line to stop overflow from the Bong. The claimants state that the prior owner told them he had installed drainage tile on the property to help with the flooding problem that already existed. The claimants state that in the late 1980's, an additional 80 acres (the southern flowage) began flooding. The claimants state that their drainage tile kept up with the flooding until about 1990, when it increased to the point that their tile could not keep up with the flow. They state that, although the southern flowage has a higher elevation than the northern flowage, the water from the southern flowage is not able to drain fast enough into the northern flowage and that the resulting back up in the southern flowage floods the claimants' property. The claimants believe that the inadequate flow from the southern to northern flowages is caused by improper placement of the dam, which does not allow the drainage tile around the creek to function adequately. They state that the flooding became intolerable about seven years ago and that they contacted the DNR and the Drainage Board. They state that the Drainage Board suggested that the DNR never should have installed the dam because the creek and tile are under the control of the Drainage District. The claimants allege that the DNR has been reluctant to make necessary improvements. The claimants state that they incurred crop losses in 7 of the last 14 years due to flooding and that, although they do have catastrophic crop insurance, it does not cover this type of damage. The claimants request reimbursement for these crop losses.
The DNR opposes payment of this claim. The DNR states that, even without the dam, the claimants' land would still be subject to flooding, because drainage from the Bong toward the claimants' property is a natural condition, as indicated by the wetland soil types on that area of the farm and the elevation drop from the Bong to the farm, which results in a natural, westerly flow. The DNR states that this natural flow from the Bong to the farm was altered in the 1970's, not by any action of the DNR, but by the prior owner of the land, who installed the berm and in doing so, essentially created the Southern Flowage and the resulting potential flow into the northern flowage. The DNR states that there is no evidence that any actions by the DNR caused the drainage onto the farm to be worse than under natural conditions. The DNR also presents historical aerial photographs which show that this portion of the farm was not usually cropped even before the construction of the northern flowage. Although the DNR initially questioned the existence of a tile system connecting the north and south flowages, the department now believes that such a system may exist, but that it is located approximately 600' east of the original mapped location, with the result that the drain tile system enters the northern flowage. The DNR states that this tile system appears to have been damaged during the construction of a gas pipeline in the area. However, despite the possibly damaged tile system, the DNR states that the discharge of this drain into the northern flowage cannot be shown to be the cause of the drainage onto the claimants' property. Finally, the DNR states that it has undertaken a number of projects to try and mitigate the flooding onto the farm and that, although attempts to lessen the flow have not been as successful as hoped, the DNR has no legal liability for the natural flow of water onto the claimants' land and no legal duty to prevent such flow. The DNR points to Tiedman v. Middleton, which provides that alterations which redirect the natural flow of water but do not increase it, do not increase the landowners liability.
The Board concludes that at this time there has been an insufficient showing of negligence on the part of the state, its officers, agents or employees and this claim is neither one for which the state is legally liable nor one which the state should assume and pay based on equitable principles. The Board would be willing to reconsider this claim if new or additional evidence becomes available in the future.
3. The Estate of Paul D. Rivers, deceased, formerly of Kewaunee, Wisconsin claims $4,671.15 for taxes allegedly overpaid by Paul Rivers. In 2001, Mr. Rivers' wages were certified for an assessment of unpaid income taxes for the years 1996 through 1999. In 2002, Mr. Rivers' wages at a subsequent employer were also certified for this assessment. Mr. Rivers' statement indicates that he tried to resolve the tax issue between October 2003 and April 2004. Mr. Rivers stated that when he filed the returns, they resulted in a tax due of only $5,424.27, although $12,563.20 had been garnished from his wages. Mr. Rivers died in March 2005 and his surviving children are now pursuing this claim, with the assistance of Dawn Wittig, Mr. Rivers' ex-wife. His children request payment of $7,138.92, to be divided equally among them.
The DOR recommends denial of this claim. DOR records indicate that in April 2001, the department issued an assessment for failure to file for the years 1996 through 1999. DOR records also indicate that the department already had a certification action in place to collect other unpaid tax liabilities, and that the 1996-99 assessment became a part of that collection action. DOR states that it certified Mr. Rivers' wages from February though May of 2001, and then began again with his subsequent employer in January 2002. The DOR states that Mr. Rivers did not contact the department to resolve this issue until October 27, 2003. The 1996-99 returns were filed on November 6, 2003, and at that time Mr. Rivers asked the DOR to complete his 2000 through 2002 returns based on his wage statements, which the department did. DOR records indicate that the total amount closed to refund pursuant to s.
71.75(5), Stats., was $10,938.91. DOR records indicate that the 2000 through 2003 tax liabilities were referred for collection in 2004. The DOR states that Mr. Rivers submitted a Petition for Compromise, requesting that his overpayment be applied to the new assessments. The DOR accepted that request and credited $6,267.76 to the 2000-03 tax years. Based on that that Petition for Compromise, this claim should be reduced to $4,671.15. The department points to the fact that s.
71.57(5), Stats., prohibits the DOR from refunding any remaining overpayment because no refund was claimed before the two-year statute of limitations, which expired on April 23, 2003.
