Sections 176 [as it relates to s.
20.255 (2) (ch)], 242d, 2274t, 2309 and 9339 (7j)
This provision creates a new school aid appropriation starting in the 2009-10 school year for payments to school districts that have net pupil transfers out of the district under the Open Enrollment Program greater than 10 percent of their pupil membership. The payment would be equal to the net number of pupils in excess of 10 percent of the district's membership who transferred out of the district in the prior year multiplied by the per pupil transfer payment in the prior year. It is estimated that this provision would cost $772,000 annually. Any payments received by school districts under this provision would be subject to revenue limits.
I am vetoing this provision because it is unnecessary. Pupils who transfer out of their resident school district under the Open Enrollment Program are included in their resident district's membership count for school aid purposes. A school district's equalization aid is then increased or decreased by a fixed dollar amount per pupil, as established in statute, multiplied by a district's net gain or loss of pupils under the program. However, the amount of funding per pupil authorized to school districts under revenue limits is higher than the per pupil transfer payment under open enrollment. Therefore, under the Open Enrollment Program, school districts receive a net revenue gain for pupils they no longer educate. As a result, it is not necessary to provide school districts with additional payments for pupils that transfer out of the district.
13.
Milwaukee Parental Choice Program Payments to Schools Barred from the Program
Sections 244s, 2295g, 2295h and 9439 (3c)
These sections require the Department of Public Instruction to send payments to private schools barred by the department from participating in the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program. Payments would be sent to schools in the form of checks made out to parents or guardians of pupils who were attending the schools at the time they were barred. The parents or guardians of those pupils would be required to endorse the checks. The total payment to each barred school would be based on instructional time provided by the school prior to removal from the program less any amount previously paid to the school by the department. Schools would first be required to use the additional payments to reimburse money owed to a state entity and then, if funds remain, reimburse teachers for any salaries that had not been paid when the school was removed from the program. This provision would apply to schools barred from the program, beginning three years prior to the budget bill's effective date.
I am vetoing this provision because it lacks both a system to ensure that the additional payments to parents eventually reach teachers who are not fully compensated and a location to send the checks if the private school no longer exists. I am sympathetic to teachers who are not fully compensated for their teaching time when a school is removed from the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program for failing to meet the limited accountability measures that currently exist. Under the stronger accountability provisions included in this budget, the overall quality of choice school management should improve significantly and the need to remove schools from the program should diminish.
A313
C.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATION
1.
Reimbursement for Legal Notices in Newspapers
Sections 3405ay and 3405b
This section specifies that any newspaper in a county of more than 500,000 individuals may be compensated for printing of legal notices. The newspaper must have a circulation of at least 40,000 copies in the region and would exempt the newspaper from current law requirements relating to its circulation and subscribers.
I am vetoing this provision because it should be subject to the full legislative process where the merits of the provision can be fully and openly debated.
2.
Access to State and Federal Surplus Property Sales
Section 104n, 104p and 680n
This provision requires the Department of Administration or any agency allowed to purchase property by the department to grant any entity or group that is entitled to participate in federal surplus property sales or auctions or is entitled to special purchasing rights or preference in sales the same purchasing rights and preferences that are available to all agencies.
I am vetoing this provision because it is unnecessary. The surplus property program is open to all entities and groups that wish to participate.
3.
Use of Private Contractor Positions
Sections 76L, 82L, 104L, 2157r, 9139 (7u) [as it relates to the definition of federal economic stimulus funds] and 9157 (2L)
This budget makes several modifications to the executive branch use of private contractor positions. While I concur that state agencies should be reviewing and limiting, where appropriate, the use of private contractor positions, I am vetoing these provisions because the use of private contractor positions should be reviewed across all state agencies, not just the executive branch and because these provisions are administratively burdensome.
Budget Submission Requirements: Requires agencies and the Department of Administration to identify information related to contract positions including the number and funding, both base and requested, for such positions, and the number of state positions required to perform work being completed by contracted positions as part of the Governor's biennial budget submission.
Hiring Requirements: Directs that during a hiring freeze or mandatory furlough, executive branch agencies cannot hire private contractor positions or consultants in that fiscal year, unless the use of those positions is required or authorized under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Reduction Requirements: Requires all state executive branch agencies to review service contract practices for private personnel and report the findings on how they would achieve savings of 1 percent for the 2009-11 biennium. Authorize the Joint Committee on Finance to reduce appropriations by up to 1 percent based on identified savings.
Electrical Consultant Private Contractors: Requires the Department of Commerce to perform a more robust cost-benefit analysis if using private contractors instead of hiring FTE electrical consultants. If the cost-benefit analysis shows that it is more cost effective to hire a state position, the department is required to hire a state employee.
I do, however, believe that these provisions are well intentioned. As such, I request that state agencies review the use and hiring of private contractor positions during these difficult economic times. To meet the deep across-the-board reductions, agencies will be reviewing all business practices, including the hiring and use of private contractor positions. To reduce state agency appropriation authority by a further 1 percent based on the reduction of private contractor positions during a time when agencies have to manage significant funding reductions could lead to unacceptable gaps in service or delays in meeting critical business needs. Additionally, the cost-benefit analysis process required under current law will continue to ensure that all contracts entered into by agencies are done so only after a thoughtful analysis of need.
To ensure that contractor positions are not replacing state workers who have been laid off or furloughed, and that the use of a private contractor position is appropriate, I am creating a centralized review process with aid from the newly formed Division of Legal Services, the state Bureau of Procurement and the Office of State Employment Relations. While I object to the limiting and burdensome requirements of these provisions, I welcome and look forward to working with all state agencies to manage the use of private contractor positions to achieve additional savings while maintaining the high service standards Wisconsin citizens expect from state government.
COMMERCE
4.
Grant to Pleasant Prairie Technology Incubator Center
Section 9110 (17q)
This provision requires the Department of Commerce to provide a one-time grant to the Pleasant Prairie Technology Incubator Center of $700,000. It also requires the center to obtain $700,000 in matching funds from sources other than the state.
As I am concerned about allocating large amounts from the Wisconsin Development Fund, I am partially vetoing this provision to strike a digit to reduce the amount of the grant and the matching funds from $700,000 to $70,000. I am also requesting that the Department of Commerce work with the Pleasant Prairie Technology Incubator Center to help identify additional resources.
A314
5.
Area Development Manager
Section 9110 (18f)
This section requires the Department of Commerce to fill a currently vacant area development manager position which serves 16 counties in the Northwest section of the state.
I am vetoing this section because I object to the Legislature requiring an agency to fill an existing vacant position. I do support the work that the department does in this area and request the Department of Commerce secretary to fill the position when a qualified candidate has been identified.
6.
Innovation and Research Grants
This provision provides funding for small business innovation research stage businesses and preparation costs as well as a 1.0 FTE GPR position to establish a regulatory ombudsman to administer the grants.
I am lining out the s.
20.143 (1) (a) appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $75,000 GPR annually. By lining out the additional funding, I am vetoing the 1.0 FTE GPR position added by the Legislature because this is not a priority program for new funding. I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds and not to authorize the additional 1.0 FTE GPR position.
7.
Film Production Tax Credits Program Changes
Sections 176 [as it relates to ss.
20.835 (2) (bL) and
(bm)], 621m, 1579x, 1580yj, 1580yk, 1659y, 1660h, 1660i, 1725w, 1726yh, 1726yj and 3070m
These provisions replace the current film production services tax credit with a new refundable tax credit. The provisions provide $1,500,000 in each year of the biennium, define an "accredited production" with cost thresholds, create an application fee, require reporting, and set percentages, eligible expenditures and various caps for the new credit.
I am partially vetoing provisions in sections 176 [as it relates to ss.
20.835 (2) (bL) and
(bm)], 621m, 1579x, 1580yk, 1659y, 1660i, 1725w and 1726yj because the funding level for the program is excessive. This veto restores my original intent regarding funding for this program. The effect of this veto will be to make permanent the expenditure control language, which limits the credits that may be claimed in the upcoming biennium. To clearly reflect my intent, I am striking a "1" from the $1,500,000 appropriation under s.
20.835 (2) (bm) to reduce the Chapter
20 schedule authority by $1,000,000 to $500,000 in each year and requesting the Department of Administration secretary reestimate expenditures by this amount. I am further striking the "1" from the $1,500,000 referenced in ss. 1579x, 1580yk, 1659y, 1660i, 1725w and 1726yj and partially vetoing related provisions. I am also changing from sum sufficient to annual the new appropriation under s.
20.835 (2) (bL).
I am partially vetoing sections 1579x, 1659y and 1725w to provide a single cost threshold of $50,000, because I object to separate cost thresholds based on the length of a production. The final length of a production does not determine its ability to create jobs or infrastructure.
I am vetoing section 3070m to remove the requirement to report to the Joint Committee on Finance because it is redundant with current reporting requirements under
2007 Wisconsin Act 125.
I am partially vetoing sections 1579x, 1659y and 1725w to delete the credit for labor-related payments to nonstate residents because the focus of the film production tax credit should be to encourage the development of a creative infrastructure and work force within the state. By removing this provision, the program will focus on Wisconsin's workers.
I am partially vetoing sections 1579x, 1659y and 1725w to delete the 3 percent add-on to the credit for labor-related payments made to residents in economically distressed areas because it is unclear and would present an administrative burden to the Departments of Commerce and Revenue that would outweigh limited benefits.
Finally, I am vetoing sections 1580yj, 1660h and 1726yh and the provisions under sections 1579x, 1659y and 1725w to delete a $10,000,000 limit on credits claimed per project because it is unnecessary due to the $500,000 annual limit on the program established through my vetoes.
8.
Rural Outsourcing Grants
Sections 207, 207p, 208, 210, 9110 (13u) and 9110 (16u).
This provision requires the Department of Commerce to award up to $250,000 PR in grants over the biennium to businesses for outsourcing work to rural areas of the state. It also requires the department to obtain funding from grantees at least equal to the grant amount.
I am vetoing section 9110 (13u) and partially vetoing sections 207, 207p, 208, 210 and 9110 (16u) because this provision has not been fully explained and limits the department's flexibility in meeting statewide economic development goals. I am requesting the Department of Commerce secretary to continue to work with rural leaders on economic development initiatives.
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
9.
Credit Union Service Organization
Sections 2453um and 2453v
This provision permits a credit union service organization to provide services related to the sale or leasing of motor vehicles as a routine daily operation of the organization if those services were provided prior to January 1, 2009.
I am vetoing this provision because it requires further review through the legislative committee process where the merits of this provision can be fully considered. This is a significant change in the scope of services offered by these organizations and it requires broad input and discussion.
A315
10.
Conversion of a Credit Union to a Mutual Savings Bank
Sections 2453w, 2453x, 2453y, 2476nm, 2476o, 2476p, 2476t and 9417
This provision modifies the requirements that a state-chartered credit union must meet to convert to a state-chartered mutual savings bank.
I am vetoing this provision because it requires further review through the legislative committee process where its merits can be fully considered. This is a significant change to the credit union chartering process and it requires broad input and discussion.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
11.
Limitation on Construction Work Performed by County
Section 1444v
This provision requires that a county may not perform construction work, including road work, for a project that is directly or indirectly owned, funded, or reimbursed, in whole or in part, by a private person.
I am vetoing this provision because it is overly broad. I understand concerns regarding unfair competition by counties with private sector firms; however, the Legislature should consider a less expansive means to address issues related to public and private competition for these projects.
12.
Required Reports
Sections 1424m, 1815g, 1918i, 1918j, 1928b, 9108 (8u), 9110 (11r), 9111 (2i), 9111 (2k), 9111 (3x), 9122 (8v), 9150 (4d), 9150 (5d), 9150 (5x) and 9150 (8j)
These sections mandate certain reports.
Section 1424m requires the Department of Health Services to annually report by October 1, to the Joint Committee on Finance on the status of individuals relocated from the Southern Wisconsin Center to a community setting. The report is to include information on the effect the placement has had on a person's health status for people placed in the prior three years; a list of each setting the person has lived in for the prior three years; the involvement of guardians and family with the person placed in the community and the cause of death for each person who died in the previous year. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary. The Department of Health Services will be closely monitoring the transition of individuals from this facility and will work closely with the families and communities during this process.
Section 1815g requires the Department of Revenue to provide an annual report to the Governor, Legislature and Joint Committee on Finance concerning department activities related to enhanced enforcement of state tax laws. The report should describe the allocation of funding and positions; expenditures incurred; activities or projects undertaken; data regarding the type of enforcement actions, number of taxpayers affected, additional amounts assessed and collected, and additional revenues that were generated; and an analysis of the cost effectiveness of the activities. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary. The Department of Revenue already measures the performance of tax compliance activities.
Section 1918i requires the Department of Transportation to prepare an environmental impact statement for a potential major highway development project involving USH 12 from the city of Elkhorn to the city of Whitewater. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary and inconsistent with established highway planning processes.
Section 1918j requires the Department of Transportation to prepare an environmental assessment or, if necessary, an environmental impact statement, construction of a new bridge across the Wisconsin River, connecting Wood County Trunk Highway Z south of the city of Wisconsin Rapids to STH 54/73 in the village of Port Edwards. Funding would come from the state highway rehabilitation program. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary and inconsistent with established highway planning processes.
Section 9111 (2i) requires the Department of Corrections and Department of Administration to jointly devise a statutory mechanism to address future deficits in the juvenile correctional services appropriation under s.
20.410 (3) (hm), Wisconsin Statutes. The provision further requires both departments to submit, by September 30, 2009, a report to the Joint Committee on Finance on this mechanism, including any proposed legislation that is necessary for its implementation. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary. Deficits in the juvenile corrections appropriation have persisted for many years and can continue to be addressed through existing appropriation and review processes.
Section 9111 (2k) requires the Department of Corrections and Department of Administration, together with any other state agency that provides relevant services, to conduct a comprehensive review of juvenile correctional services provided in the state and the funding of these services. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary and overly prescriptive. State agencies continue to seek ways to better deliver services through collaborative efforts and comprehensive studies.
Section 9111 (3x) requires the Department of Corrections within 60 days after the effective date of this bill to submit to the Joint Committee on Finance a report demonstrating that the department has eliminated all prohibitions on inmates receiving donated books. I am vetoing this section because it is inconsistent with safe and appropriate management of the correctional system. The Department of Corrections will continue to review this issue in the context of overall safety of corrections staff and prisoners.
A316
Section 9122 (8v) requires the Department of Health Services to report to the Legislature by December 1, 2009, on recommendations for improving the birth defect prevention and surveillance system, standards for measuring system performance, individual privacy concerns, and potential federal and private funding sources. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary. The department already provides reports and other communications to the Legislature and other interested parties on these matters.
Section 1928b requires the Department of Transportation to consider the feasibility of a stop at Waterloo in any high speed rail plan for the Milwaukee to Madison corridor. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary and is inconsistent with federal planning requirements. Rail stops on a future Milwaukee to Madison corridor will be determined based on a full assessment of traffic patterns, travel times and equipment configurations.
Section 9150 (8j) requires the Department of Transportation to present a recommendation to the Transportation Projects Commission by March 15, 2010, regarding an environmental study for a potential major highway development project involving STH 13 from the city of Marshfield to STH 29. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary and conflicts with existing review and planning processes.
Section 9150 (4d) requires the Department of Transportation to submit a report to the Joint Committee on Finance assessing the most appropriate uses of consultants for highway project development. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary. The Department of Transportation is continually seeking to ensure the most cost-effective use of transportation resources.
Section 9150 (5x) requires the Department of Transportation to submit to the Joint Committee on Finance a report that provides an assessment of potential freight rail improvements and acquisitions in a multi-modal perspective, comparing benefits of these projects to other modes of transportation. The report should also assess whether railroads could fund a higher percentage of line improvements. The report is to be completed by January 1, 2010. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary. The Department of Transportation is continually updating multi-modal plans, including freight rail needs, based on overall economic development trends and goals.
Section 9150 (5d) requires the Department of Transportation a report to submit to the Joint Committee on Finance a report on the current and future harbor improvements in the next 10 years for freight and non-freight industries in a multi-modal perspective, comparing benefits of these projects to other modes of transportation. Report is to be completed by July 1, 2010. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary. The Department of Transportation is continually updating multi-modal plans, including harbor and port needs, based on overall economic development trends and goals.
Section 9110 (11r) requires the Department of Commerce to submit to the Joint Committee on Finance co-chairs a report that identifies retention methods the department could use to identify companies at risk for relocation or expansion outside of Wisconsin and that includes a plan to identify businesses outside of Wisconsin that could be encouraged to relocate or expand through the use of incentives. The provision requires the department to develop an emergency response team that could contact prospects for expansion or relocation. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary and may compromise efforts to grow Wisconsin business. The Department of Commerce is continually seeking ways to attract and retain businesses and jobs.
Section 9108 (8u) requires the Department of Children and Families to submit a plan to the Joint Committee on Finance by January 1, 2010, specifying how the department will make the ombudsman office, which is operated by the Planning Council for Health and Human Services, Inc., under contract with the department, more effective in reviewing and resolving complaints concerning the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary. I am requesting the Department of Children and Families secretary to review the specific issues and work with interested parties on this matter.
13.
Earmarks
Sections 199, 215d, 816m, 1924c, 9110 (10q), 9110 (12h) and 9125
These sections earmark specific projects or grants.
Sections 199 and 9110 (10q) require the Department of Commerce to award to the WiSys Technology Foundation, Inc., an annual grant of not less than $50,000 GPR, for providing intellectual property management services to the University of Wisconsin-Extension and all University of Wisconsin institutions and colleges other than the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. I am vetoing these sections because they are unnecessary. I am requesting the department to work with the WiSys Technology Foundation, Inc., to identify ways the department can provide assistance.
Section 816m requires the Department of Tourism, in each biennium, to expend not less than $200,000 PR-S to conduct or contract for marketing activities related to exhibits or activities on behalf of the Milwaukee Public Museum. I am vetoing this section because it is unnecessary. The Department of Tourism already has sufficient flexibility to work with the museum on level of support.
