For more detailed information about these lobbyists and organizations and a complete list of organizations and people authorized to lobby the 2007-2008 session of the legislature, visit the Government Accountability Board's web site at
http://ethics.state.wi.us/
Hubbard, Gregory Northwestern Mutual
McIntosh, Forbes Wisconsin Psychological Association
Also available from the Wisconsin Government Accountability 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,
Kevin Kennedy
Director and General Counsel
__________________
State of Wisconsin
University of Wisconsin System
May 29, 2008
To the Honorable, the Legislature:
Section
36.11(22)(2)(b), Wisconsin Statutes, requires the Board of Regents to annually submit a report to the chief clerk of each house of the Legislature on the methods used by each UW System institution to disseminate information to students on sexual assault and sexual harassment.
The law requires UW System institutions to incorporate oral and written information on sexual assault and sexual harassment into their orientation programs for newly entering students, including information on: (1) sexual assault by acquaintances of the victims; (2) the legal definitions and penalties for sexual assault; (3) generally available national, state, and campus statistics on sexual assault; (4) the rights of victims; and (5) protective behaviors including methods of recognizing and avoiding sexual assault and sexual harassment. In addition, each institution must annually supply printed material to all students enrolled in the institution that includes information on all of these topics. This law was enacted in April 1990, and this is the eighteenth report to be compiled for the Legislature since its enactment.
This report summarizes the primary methods used by each institution to comply with s.
36.11(22)(2)(b), Wisconsin Statutes. The summaries are not exhaustive of all efforts underway at the institutions. Instead, they summarize the programs institutions have identified as their “best practices" to respond to victims of sexual assault and provide information about sexual assault and its prevention to all students.
Overall, UW System institutions are (1) continually updating and improving the scope and quality of information provided to students; (2) integrating presentations, small‐group discussion of the issues, and interactive dramatizations relating to sexual violence into new student orientation programs; (3) providing the educational and resource information required by s.
36.11(22), Wisconsin Statutes, on the web or in print form; (4) offering educational programs addressing the topic in a wide range of venues, including residence halls, student unions, classrooms, student organization gatherings, and private housing facilities; and (5) establishing effective and important connections among campus Dean of Students staff, residence hall staff, police and security, counseling and health personnel, local police, community service agencies, and regional hospitals to address sexual violence in a coordinated manner.
The attached report is submitted on behalf of the Board of Regents to fulfill our statutory requirements.
If you need additional information regarding this report, please contact Janice Sheppard at
jsheppard@uwsa.edu or 608‐262‐5563.
Sincerely,
Kevin P. Reilly
President
Referred to committee on Agriculture and Higher Education.
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Department of Administration
May 30, 2008
The Honorable, The Legislature:
This report is transmitted as required by s.
20.002(11)(f), Wisconsin Statutes, (for distribution to the appropriate standing committees under s.
13.172(3), Wisconsin Statutes) and confirms that the Department of Administration has found it necessary to exercise the "temporary reallocation of balances" authority provided by this section in order to meet payment responsibilities and cover resulting negative cash balances during the month of April 2008.
On April 1, 2008, the General Fund cash balance closed at a negative $303.2 million. This negative balance continued through April 18, 2008, when the fund's cash balance closed at a positive $114.6 million. The General Fund cash balance reached its intra month low of a negative $648.4 million on April 10, 2008. The negative balance was due to the difference in the timing of revenues and expenditures.
On April 1, 2008, the
Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund cash balance closed at a negative $25.4 million. This negative balance continued through April 30, 2008, when the fund's cash balance closed at a negative $22.9 million.
The Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund cash balance reached its intra month low of a negative $25.5 million on April 7, 2008. The negative balance was due to the transfer of $71.5 million to the General Fund pursuant to
2007 Wisconsin Act 20, and the pending liquidation of fund securities necessary to offset this shortfall.
S851
On April 1, 2008, the
Lottery Fund cash balance closed at a negative $2.2 million. This negative balance continued intermittently through April 25, 2008, when the fund's cash balance closed at a positive $3.0 million.
The Lottery Fund cash balance reached its intra-month low of a negative $2.6 million on April 3, 2008. The negative balance was due to the difference in the timing of revenues and expenditures.
On April 21, 2008, the Utility Public Benefits Fund cash balance closed at a negative $2.8 million. This negative balance continued through April 30, 2008, when the fund's cash balance closed at a negative $4.1 million (its intra-month low). The negative balance was due to the difference in the timing of revenues and expenditures.
The General Fund, Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund, Lottery Fund, and Utility Public Benefits Fund shortfalls were not in excess of the statutory interfund borrowing limitations and did not exceed the balances of the funds available for interfund borrowing.
The distribution of interest earnings to investment pool participants is based on the average daily balance in the pool and each fund's share. Therefore, the monthly calculation by the State Controller's Office will automatically reflect the use of these temporary reallocations of balance authority, and as a result, the funds requiring the use of the authority will effectively bear the interest cost.
Sincerely,
Michael l. morgan
Secretary
Referred to joint committee on Finance.
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Public Service Commission
June 13, 2008
The Honorable, The Legislature:
The enclosed audit report on Alliant Energy Corporation and its impact on the operations of Wisconsin Power and Light Company was prepared as required by Wis. Stat. 196.795(7)(ar) for distribution to the Legislature under Wis. Stat. 13.172(2)
If you have any questions or comments about the report please contact Ms. Jodee Bartels of the Commission staff and (608) 267-9859.
Sincerely,
Sandra J. Paske
Secretary to the Commission
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Claims Board
June 16, 2008
The Honorable, The Senate:
Enclosed is the report of the State Claims Board covering heard on May 29, 2008.
Those claims approved for payment pursuant to the provisions of ss.
16.007 and
775.05 Stats., have been paid directly by the Board.
This report is for the information of the Legislature. The Board would appreciate your acceptance and publication of it in the Journal to inform the members of the Legislature.
Sincerely,
Cari Anne Renlund
Secretary
STATE OF WISCONSIN CLAIMS BOARD
The State of Wisconsin Claims Board conducted hearings at the State Capitol Building in Madison, Wisconsin, on May 29, 2008, upon the following claims:
Claimant Agency Amount
The following claims were considered and decided without hearings:
Claimant Agency Amount
The following claim, having been previously considered at a hearing on January 24, 2008, was considered and decided without hearing:
11. Jennifer Addis Health and Family $2,260.00
Services
The Board Finds:
1. Tabatha Blomberg of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, claims $3,271.84 for refund of overpayment of sales taxes. The claimant states that she received a notice on August 29, 2007, that the Department of Revenue (DOR) was missing her March 2005 sales tax return. The claimant states that she did not realize the return had not been filed and that the late payment she made in July 2007 was for an estimated March 2005 tax amount, not the actual tax due. The claimant completed the missing return, which showed an income of zero and no taxes due because her business is not open in the winter. She submitted the return on September 2, 2007. The claimant states that the original due date for the return would have been October 7, 2005, and that her September 2, 2007, filing therefore falls within the 2 year statute of limitations. She also points to the fact that she was working actively with DOR for a number of months to correct her tax problems and believes that during that time someone at DOR should have caught the fact that her March 2005 return was missing before she made her July 2007 payment based on an estimated amount.
The Department of Revenue recommends denial of this claim. DOR's records indicate that the claimant has a significant history of filing her sales tax returns late. DOR issued an estimated assessment on August 8, 2005, for failure to file the March 2005 return. DOR records indicate that the assessment was paid in full on July 6, 2007. On August 29, 2007, DOR sent the claimant another request that she file the missing return. The claimant filed the return on September 2, 2007, reporting no sales tax due. DOR states that §
77.59(4)(b), Stats., allows a claim for refund of sales tax to be filed within two years of a tax assessed and then paid. DOR states that the two year statute of limitations expired on August 8, 2007, and DOR has no authority to allow a refund for the claimant's return filed on September 2, 2007.
S852
The Board concludes the claim should be paid in the reduced amount of $1,635.92 based on equitable principles. The Board further concludes, under authority of §
16.007 (6m), Stats., payment should be made from the Claims Board appropriation §
20.505(4)(d), Stats.
2. Kathleen M. Howe of Wausau, Wisconsin, claims $785.00 for damages related to theft of personal property from a state-owned vehicle. The claimant is a food inspector working for the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP). In January 2008, she went on a two night business trip to complete required inspections in her area, which covers 23 counties in northwestern Wisconsin. The claimant was using an assigned state vehicle during the trip. She arrived at the Osseo Super Valu to conduct an inspection and parked her vehicle in the parking lot around 11 AM. Her purse was under the front passenger seat, the state-assigned laptop (in her personal case) was behind the front passenger seat and her personal suitcase was on the back seat. When she returned to the vehicle approximately one hour later, she discovered a window smashed and all of the items stolen. She immediately contacted the Osseo Police Department and filed a report. None of her personal property was recovered. The claimant's bank card was used twice by the thief but her bank reimbursed her for those damages. The claimant's homeowner's insurance has a $1000 deductible and she therefore is not able to recover her losses from her insurer.
The Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection has no objection to payment of this claim. DATCP states that the claimant was using a state-owned station wagon during her business trip. DATCP notes that inspectors are sometimes assigned station wagons in order to carry a variety of items used for inspections. DATCP states that inspectors leave their personal items in the vehicle during inspections because businesses are not expected to provide space for an inspector's personal items. DATCP states that, although the department was not intentionally or negligently responsible for the incident, neither was the claimant. DATCP therefore has no objection to reimbursing claimant for the amount requested.
The Board concludes the claim should be paid in the amount of $785.00 based on equitable principles. The Board further concludes, under authority of §
16.007 (6m), Stats., payment should be made from the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection appropriation §
20.115(1)(gb), Stats.
3. Helen Lutes of Tomahawk, Wisconsin claims $1,555.80 for money taken from the claimant's bank account by the Department of Revenue (DOR) relating to a Homestead Tax Credit. In May 2001, DOR issued an assessment stating that the claimant was not eligible for the Homestead Tax Credit she claimed on her 1997 taxes. She appealed the assessment but was denied. The claimant also appealed a similar adjustment to her 1998 taxes but that was also denied. The claimant states that she is a widow and that when her son was killed in 1996, she had his funeral taxes on her house. She alleges that DOR staff harassed her and took money from her account without notice. She further alleges that she could not apply for the federal stimulus rebate because DOR would seize that as well. The clamant believes that she is eligible for the Homestead Tax Credit and that DOR has wrongly taken money from her account.
The Department of Revenue recommends denial of this claim. DOR states that the claimant's 1997 Homestead Tax Credit claim was completed without including her Social Security income. She received a credit of $828. However, when the claimant's Social Security income is included; her total household income exceeds the threshold for Homestead Credit eligibility. DOR issued an assessment in March 2001 for return of the credit and also made a similar adjustment to the claimant's 1998 Homestead Tax Credit Claim. The claimant appealed both determinations and the Wisconsin Tax Appeals Commission upheld the denial of the credit for both tax years. DOR notes that the claimant has not filed a Homestead Tax Credit claim since 1998. DOR states that over the past seven years, it has written numerous letters of explanation to the claimant and also actively pursued collection of the assessment by intercepting the claimant's federal tax refunds. DOR states that it has not collected an excessive amount from the claimant on this liability and recommends denial of this claim.
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.
4. Susan V. Marcquenski of Madison, Wisconsin, claims $339.35 for vehicle damage related to a series of catalytic converter thefts in the Madison area. The claimant, a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) employee, has a state-owned minivan that is assigned to her for her fish health work. When she needs to use the minivan, her personal vehicle is parked at the Science Operations Center. It is sometimes necessary for the claimant to take the minivan home for overnight trips or trips that require an early start to a destination in the opposite direction from the lab. The claimant states that this was the case on September 28, 2007, when she left her personal vehicle parked at the lab and took the minivan home so that she could drive to a seminar in Illinois early on Saturday morning. Approximately 27 vehicles along Progress Road had their catalytic converters stolen late on September 28th or early September 29th, including several trucks at a neighboring business, 4-5 state-owned vehicles and 3 personal vehicles in the Science Center parking lot. The claimant's vehicle was one of the vehicles damaged. She requests reimbursement for the cost to repair her vehicle.
The Department of Natural Resources recommends payment of this claim. Although the department does not normally recommend payment for damaged employee personal property, DNR feels that circumstances in this case warrant making an exception to that policy. DNR notes that, but for the claimant's need to use the state minivan for her business trip, her vehicle never would have been damaged. DNR also believes that it is a reasonable assumption that if the state-owned minivan had been in the parking lot, its converter would have been stolen instead of the claimant's and the DNR would have incurred a loss either way. The DNR believes that both equity and the unique circumstances of this situation warrant reimbursing the claimant for the cost of replacing her converter.
The Board concludes the claim should be paid in the amount of $339.35 based on equitable principles. The Board further concludes, under authority of §
16.007 (6m), Stats., payment should be made from the Department of Natural Resources appropriation §
20.370(4)(mu), Stats.
S853
5. Michael C. Sacotte of Racine, Wisconsin, claims $1,000.00 for money allegedly stolen during a basketball game at the University of Wisconsin-Parkside (UWP). On December 6, 2007, the claimant officiated a high school girls' basketball game at UWP. The claimant left his personal clothing and wallet in the changing area designated for officials. The claimant states that after he showered and changed, he realized that his credit card and money were missing from his wallet. Another individual using the room discovered a jacket and money missing. A police report was filed but the claimant's money was not recovered. The claimant states that he was never informed that the changing area would be unlocked during the game. The claimant states that the game manager later told him that when there were multiple games, they did not lock the changing area. The claimant believes that it was UWP's responsibility to at least monitor the room to make sure no unauthorized individuals had access to the area. The claimant requests reimbursement for his stolen money.
