Sections 3w, 28e, 28m, 30c, 30g, 68k, 68L, 68m, 68n, 235m, 1799m, 2710e, 2710m, 2710s, 2875e, 2898g, 2898r, 3023a, 3023b, 3023c, 3023d, 3023e, 3023f, 3023g, 3023h, 3023i, 3023j, 3023k, 3023L, 3023m, 3023n, 3023o, 3023p, 3023q, 3023r, 3023s,3023t, 3023u, 3036m, 9150, 9151, 9350, 9351 and 9451
These sections reduce the ability of the Governor and the Legislature to provide oversight and accountability over the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority in relation to bonding authority, board membership and lease agreements. These sections also relieve the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority of responsibilities relating to disabled children, public safety and health care regulation.
Specifically, these sections delete the authority of the Superintendent of the Department of Public Instruction to apply to the board of directors of the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority for admission to the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics of any pupil at the school operated by the Wisconsin Educational Services Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing or the school operated by the Wisconsin Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired.
In addition, these sections delete the authority of the Joint Committee on Finance to review and make recommendations concerning the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority lease agreements; remove the phrase “comprehensive, high quality" from language describing the purpose of the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority; delete references to one-time transfer of funds; delete prohibitions that prevent the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority from accepting research grants in which the investigator is an employee of the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents; delete the requirement that the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority use the Building Commission as the financial consultant when issuing bonds; delete a requirement that the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority operates a poison control center; delete a requirement that the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority is subject to state law under Chapter
150, Wisconsin Statutes, that regulates health care providers; and clarify current law relating to collective bargaining as it applies to the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority.
The sections also modify current law relating to the appointment, terms, membership and quorum requirements for the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority Board of Directors. The sections remove limits on the amount of bonds the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority can issue and restrict issuance of bonds unless certain conditions related to refinancing and rating are met, the Joint Committee on Finance has approved issuance of bonds and the secretary of the Department of Administration has issued written approval.
I am vetoing these provisions because I object to the placement of these nonfiscal policy items in the budget. These provisions, taken together, constitute major changes to the operations of the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority and should be subject to the full legislative process where the merits of these provisions can be fully and openly debated. Furthermore, I am concerned that the requirements, if enacted, would adversely affect students at the schools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing and the Blind and Visually Impaired. While I am vetoing all of these provisions, I am willing to consider more narrowly focused legislation that protects services for disabled children and maintains executive and legislative oversight.
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
3.
Independent Purchase of Telecommunications Services
Section 2929v
This section allows the University of Wisconsin System to use funding from the universal service fund to pay for telecommunications services at any campus and allows the system to use universal service fund revenue to purchase its own telecommunications services apart from those provided by the Department of Administration. Under current law, these funds may only be used by the River Falls, Stout, Superior and Whitewater campuses, and telecommunications services must be purchased from the Department of Administration under the unified state BadgerNet contract.
While I support allowing the University of Wisconsin System to spend universal service fund moneys at any campus, I object to creating a possible exemption for the system from the state telecommunications contract. The use of a statewide telecommunications network ensures the coordination and efficient delivery of telecommunications services among all state agencies and institutions.
4.
Information on Instructors
Section 732p
S380
This section requires the University of Wisconsin System to provide information to students when they register for a class regarding who will be teaching the class on a daily basis and whether the teacher will be a tenured or probationary faculty member, a member of the academic staff, or a teaching assistant. I am vetoing this section in its entirety because it provides system campuses with too little flexibility to address the realities of providing instructional services.
At the time of registration, which is several months before classes actually begin, system campuses are often unable to assign specific individuals to teach every course section. In addition, circumstances such as retirements, faculty accepting positions at other universities and illness that were not anticipated during the registration period can require the assignment of academic staff and teaching assistants to teach course sections.
WISCONSIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE SYSTEM
5.
Levy Limits on Technical College Districts
Sections 737m, 737r and 9446
This provision limits, for calendar years 2007 and 2008, the increase in property taxes that a technical college district may levy. Under this provision, technical college districts are limited to an annual increase in property tax levies of four percent. This provision also establishes adjustments to the limits for debt service and allows for the limits to be exceeded by referenda. This provision would sunset on November 30, 2009.
Wisconsin's technical colleges have had levy restraints in place longer than any other unit of local government. In total, technical college levies comprise less than eight percent of the average property tax bill. Collectively, the state's technical colleges do not even use the full levy authority provided under current law. Property taxes can be controlled without placing limits on technical colleges because this budget increases funding for K-12 education and the school levy tax credit, and retains the existing 1.5 mill rate limit on technical college levies.
I am vetoing this provision because it restricts economic development and hinders educational attainment and job training. These restrictive limits threaten the ability of the Wisconsin Technical College System to help Wisconsin's economy thrive. If technical colleges do not have the ability to respond to the rapidly changing needs of businesses in Wisconsin, economic growth will suffer.
These levy limits also hinder educational attainment and job training. The limits on technical college levies will require students to pay more for classes or reduce the course availability at the technical colleges. In either case, this diminishes the state's ability to provide individuals with the skills necessary to improve their earnings and compete for better paying jobs.
6.
Limitations on Workforce Advancement Training Grants to Small Businesses
This provision creates a limit of $20,000 for Workforce Advancement Training Grants to small businesses and requires small businesses to provide a 50 percent match on all grant funding received.
I am vetoing this provision because I object to setting different criteria for grants to small businesses than for other grants distributed under the Workforce Advancement Training Grant program. The 50 percent statutory match requirement for grants to small businesses stands out in contrast to the 25 percent match established by administrative rule for all other Workforce Advancement Training grants. I am directing the Technical College System Board to address this discrepancy by including a match requirement for small businesses that is comparable to the requirement for other grants under this program.
In addition, I am vetoing the proposed $20,000 statutory grant ceiling because it creates an inequitable situation for small businesses compared with other grant awards under this program for which no statutory ceiling exists. The Technical College System Board needs the flexibility to adjust the size of grants to small businesses within a reasonable range to ensure that the recipients can achieve meaningful workforce advancement goals. I am also directing the Technical College System Board to set reasonable guidelines for the maximum grant award to small businesses.
B.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND COMMERCIAL RESOURCES
Commerce
Loans for Pulp and Paper Mill
Sections 198 [as it relates to loans for a pulp and paper mill] and 9108 (5x)
These provisions require the Department of Commerce to make two loans of $1,000,000 each from the Wisconsin development fund repayments appropriation under s.
20.143 (1) (ie), Wisconsin Statutes, to a paper mill in this state to emerge from bankruptcy.
I am partially vetoing section 198 to remove a cross reference related to the repayments appropriation. I am partially vetoing section 9108 (5x) to remove the requirement that the loans come from the Wisconsin development fund repayments appropriation. I object to requiring that the loans be made from the repayments appropriation because funds are limited in that program. I am requesting the secretary of the Department of Commerce to make these loans from the Wisconsin development fund grants and loans; recycling fund appropriation under s.
20.143 (1) (tm), Wisconsin Statutes.
2.
Petroleum Environmental Cleanup Fund Award (PECFA) Program Sunset
Sections 2616c, 2616e, 2616g, 2616i, 2622e, 2622j, 2622L, 2622p and 9308 (2f)
These sections authorize the Department of Commerce and the Department of Natural Resources to determine that no further action is necessary at a site, even if the site owner does not request the agencies to make the determination, and identifies conditions under which a site would not be eligible for PECFA reimbursement, thereby beginning the phaseout of the program.
S381
I am vetoing these sections because it is premature to require phaseout of the program. The departments are actively monitoring activity in the program and are best equipped to determine when the program has met its goals. To impose a sunset on the program could potentially leave many sites unnoticed and contaminated, creating potential threats to the environment and prohibiting further development at those sites.
NATURAL RESOURCES
3.
Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) and Wildlife Damage Funding
Sections 707d and 9135 (3k)
Section 707d prohibits the Department of Natural Resources from expending more than $2,360,000 from nonfederal funds in the conservation fund for chronic wasting disease, thereby limiting the department's ability to manage and test for the disease. Section 9135 (3k) requires the department to prepare a plan by January 1, 2008, that describes methods for administering the Wildlife Damage Abatement and Claims Program in fiscal year 2008-09 so that the amounts expended by the department for those programs, as authorized under s.
29.889, Wisconsin Statutes, do not exceed the revenues received by the department.
I am partially vetoing section 707d because I object to the limitation on the department's ability to determine how best to use limited resources. The effect of this veto is to eliminate the provision's restriction on the use of nonfederal funds in the conservation fund for management of and testing for chronic wasting disease.
I am also partially vetoing section 9135 (3k) because the language inhibits the department from pursuing alternative solutions to the deficit facing the wildlife damage program. I understand the need to address the deficit, but the department needs the flexibility to explore alternative feasible options and not be constrained by the January 1, 2008, report requirement.
4.
Stewardship Review
Sections 9335 (2c), 9336 (1) and 9337 (1)
Section 9335 (2c) relates to initial applicability of Stewardship appraisals. Section 9336 (1) relates to initial applicability of public defender representation in civil commitment, protective placement and involuntary medication cases. Section 9337 (1) relates to initial applicability of Department of Public Instruction school breakfast programs.
I am partially vetoing these sections because the provisions related to review of certain land acquisitions by the Joint Committee on Finance should become effective with the reauthorized Stewardship program, which begins July 1, 2010.
5.
Muskellunge Fishing Season and Catch and Release Bass Fishing
Sections 712m and 712r
Section 712m prohibits a person from using any hook, bait or lure, other than an artificial lure that has a barbless hook, while fishing during a catch and release bass fishing season established by the Department of Natural Resources. Section 712r requires the department to establish a fishing season that authorizes catch and release muskellunge fishing on inland waters north of U.S. Highway 10 other than the boundary waters between this state and the state of Michigan. It also prohibits a person from using any hook, bait or lure, other than an artificial lure that has a barbless hook, while fishing during the catch and release muskellunge fishing season established by the department.
I am partially vetoing sections 712m and 712r because they would apply to more people than those who are only fishing catch and release for bass and muskellunge.
STATE FAIR PARK BOARD
6.
Quarterly and Annual Reports
Section 781v
This section requires the State Fair Park Board to submit quarterly reports to the Department of Administration and the Joint Committee on Finance, projecting revenues and expenditures for the coming quarterly period for the park's program revenue appropriations. This section also requires the board to submit an annual plan to the Department of Administration, for bringing park expenditures in line with revenues and reducing the existing deficit. The plan must then be submitted, with or without modifications by the Department of Administration, to the Joint Committee on Finance, under 14-day passive review procedures, by November 15th of each year. These requirements would sunset on December 31, 2013.
I am vetoing this section because I object to the infringement on executive branch authority to manage programs and because it is unnecessary. The board must have flexibility to operate the State Fair and other nonfair events. While I am concerned with the status of the board's finances, the board and its staff have taken several measures to address factors that are not under the board's control and to better manage the operations that the board does control.
C.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND JUSTICE
ADMINISTRATION AND UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
Information Technology Requirements
Sections 9p, 9rg, 128t [as it relates to s.
16.793 (10) and
(11)], 128u, 128w, 736x [as it relates to s.
36.59 (1) (d),
(2) and
(3)], 9101 (8i), 9101 (8j), 9101 (9q), 9152 (2v) and 9152 (2w)
This budget makes several positive changes in the way the State of Wisconsin will conduct its information technology business. Incorporating improvements suggested by the Legislative Audit Bureau and affirmed by the secretary of the Department of Administration and the state's Chief Information Officer to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the Legislature has established concrete guidelines that will ensure a stronger project planning process and accountability. A partnership has been defined and established that will help ensure that proper oversight and control of large information technology projects occur and that decision makers in both branches of government understand what is involved.
S382
I am singling out a few of the many modifications for attention in my partial veto considerations. These provisions are well-intended. However, I am vetoing the following sections because these provisions will significantly burden the implementation of more efficient and transparent information technology management.
• Section 9p assigns a default advisory responsibility to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, should the statutory Joint Committee on Information Policy and Technology not be organized.
• Section 9rg adds to the required duties of the Joint Committee on Information Policy and Technology the review of any executive branch information technology project identified in a new report required to be submitted by the Department of Administration.
•
Provisions under paragraphs of sections 128t, 128u, 128w and 736x require the Department of Administration and University of Wisconsin Board of Regents to promulgate administrative rules in order to use commercially available information products; the Department of Administration to post on the Internet detailed cost and billing information for any services provided, managed or supervised by the department; and setting a limit of 110 percent of cost basis on the methodology used to determine project cost recovery charges.
• Three provisions under sections 9101 (8i), 9101 (8j) and 9101(9q) and two provisions under sections 9152 (2v) and 9152 (2w) require approval by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee of reports on written policies for information technology projects that the Department of Administration and University of Wisconsin Board of Regents separately must submit to the Joint Committee on Information Policy and Technology; the promulgation of administrative rules pertaining to high-risk information technology projects undertaken by the Department of Administration and University of Wisconsin Board of Regents; and prior completion by the Department of Administration of another study to consolidate network servers in state agencies.
I believe that the value added by fulfillment of these enumerated requirements will be far outweighed by the costs and delays of compliance. I welcome and look forward to working with the statutory joint committee created by the Legislature to represent its interests in the oversight of state information technology projects. The many remaining provisions added in this budget to improve the understanding, authorization and accountability in the management of information technology projects will be a source of state government efficiency that I have been committed to achieving since my first budget.
CIRCUIT COURTS
2.
Technical Modification to Kenosha County Circuit Court Branch 8
Section 9107 (1j)
This provision establishes the initial election term for the Circuit Court judge in Branch 8 in Kenosha County and applicable term dates.
I am partially vetoing this provision because, as drafted, the language erroneously establishes the initial election for the spring of 2008, although the term commences on August 1, 2009. The Legislative Reference Bureau concurs on the necessity of this partial veto, as a revisor's correction would occur too late to fix the error. This veto is intended to establish the initial election date in the spring of 2009.
CORRECTIONS
3.
Juvenile Correctional Services Deficit
Sections 324g, 324h, 3114m and 9409 (2f)
These provisions require:
• The Department of Corrections, prior to the end of each odd-numbered fiscal year, to estimate projected balances that will remain in the juvenile correctional services appropriation on June 30 of that year.
• If the estimated balance is projected to be negative, the Department of Administration must include the amount of the estimated deficit in the cost basis for the calculation of the proposed secured correctional facilities' daily rates for the subsequent biennium.
• The Department of Administration must include 50 percent of any projected deficit in the cost basis for the calculation of daily rates for each year of the subsequent biennium.
• The Department of Administration secretary must reserve, for the purpose of retiring the deficit, the share of the daily rate revenue that is proportionate to the share of the increased cost basis associated with the estimated deficit. Any revenue reserved for this purpose that exceeds the amount of the deficit must be reimbursed to the counties and the state in a manner proportionate to the total number of days of juvenile placements at the facilities for each county and the state.
I am vetoing sections 324h and 3114m and partially vetoing sections 324g and 9409 (2f) because these sections limit the Department of Corrections' flexibility to effectively manage juvenile corrections programs over time. As I stated when I vetoed these provisions in the 2005-07 biennial budget, these provisions would place an undue burden on counties by requiring the department to charge counties to recover deficits in the appropriation.
D.
HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES AND INSURANCE
HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES
Demonstration Waiver for Health Opportunity Accounts Under BadgerCare
Section 1559e
This section requires the Department of Health and Family Services to request a federal waiver in order to offer health opportunity accounts to BadgerCare recipients and to provide the Joint Committee on Finance an implementation plan upon receipt of federal approval of the waiver. The Committee must approve the plan prior to implementation.
I am vetoing this section because I object to this limitation on the department's ability, in collaboration with a wide array of health care experts, to develop reforms that are in the best interest of providers, recipients and the state. Under current law, the department may request a waiver to offer health opportunity accounts under BadgerCare if it is determined to be beneficial by the department, with the advice of the BadgerCare Plus Advisory Committee.
S383
2.
Disease Management Program
Sections 1559g and 1641d
