17.
Approval for University of Wisconsin-Madison Employment Plans
18.
Annual Reporting of Contractual Service Procurements
19.
Joint Committee on Finance Authority to Postpone Telecommunications Services Prohibition
A418
20.
Review of Position Titles and Classifications
21.
Technical Correction to "Academic Faculty"
C.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
22.
Include Certain Emergency Medical Service Providers in the 2011 Wisconsin Act 10 Collective Bargaining Exemptions
23.
Modify Pay Provisions for City of Milwaukee Discharged or Suspended Police Officers
EMPLOYEE TRUST FUNDS
24.
Required Minimum Annual Contributions by Local Governmental Units to a Retirement System
25.
Wisconsin Retirement System Vesting Requirements
26.
Study of Group Insurance Board Health Insurance Options
27.
Payment of Employee-Required Contributions - Initial Applicability
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD
28.
Statements of Economic Interest
D.
HEALTH SERVICES AND INSURANCE
HEALTH SERVICES
29.
Family Care Cost-Effectiveness Study
30.
Medicaid Family Planning Waiver Services
31.
Study on the Purchase of Generic Drugs for Medical Assistance
SAFETY AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
32.
Bail Bond Surety Licensing
33.
Unclassified Bureau Director Position Authority
VETERANS AFFAIRS
34.
Chippewa Falls Veterans Home Cost-Benefit Analysis
35.
Veterans Trust Fund Information
36.
Military Funeral Honors Funding – Technical Veto
E.
STATE GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
ADMINISTRATION
37.
Disclosure of Expenditures on Internet Web Site
38.
Base Budget Review
39.
Report on Surplus Positions
40.
Procurement Bid Threshold
41.
Build and Lease Back Program
42.
Energy Efficiency Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Systems Study
F.
TAX, TRANSPORTATION AND OPERATIONS
REVENUE
43.
Weight-Based Taxation for Moist Snuff Tobacco Products
44.
Sharing of Loss Carry-Forwards under the Corporate Income and Franchise Tax Incurred Before 2009
45.
County and Municipal Levy Limits
46.
Property Tax Exemption for Certain University of Wisconsin–Madison Student Housing Facilities
TRANSPORTATION
47.
County Highway Department Funding
48.
Department of Transportation 10-year Financing Plans
49.
Southeast Wisconsin Freeway Megaprojects
50.
Astronautics Funding
__________________
VETO ITEMS
A.
AGRICULTURE, ENVIRONMENT AND JUSTICE
AGRICULTURE, TRADE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
1.
Agricultural Chemical Funds Report
Section 9103 (2u)
This provision would require the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to study and evaluate the condition of the agricultural chemical cleanup fund and the agrichemical management fund and their structural imbalances. The department would also be required to report its findings to the Joint Committee on Finance by December 31, 2011.
A419
I am partially vetoing this provision to remove the date by which the department must report to the Joint Committee on Finance. I object to this provision because requiring this evaluation to be prepared by the specified date places an undue burden on the department to produce a quality report. Vetoing this provision will provide the department with more time and flexibility to prepare its report and make recommendations to the committee.
2.
Grain Inspection Program Report
Section 9103 (3q)
This provision would require the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to report to the Joint Committee on Finance by January 1, 2012, on the specific actions or administrative efforts the department has planned to reduce and eliminate the remaining deficit in the grain inspection program.
I am vetoing this provision because I object to requiring additional reporting requirements for a program that has been in deficit since the end of fiscal year 2000-01. The department has been and will continue to explore all options for deficit reduction, but has limited options for addressing the deficit without limiting services. Vetoing this provision will allow the department to continue working toward a solution to the deficit in the grain inspection program without the added burden of preparing a report.
CORRECTIONS
3.
Inmate Litigation Loans
Section 3014m
This provision specifies that a prisoner may not receive more than $100 annually in litigation loans. Any amount that the prisoner repays in the year may be re-loaned without counting against the limit. Prisoners must repay prior loans in full or make arrangements for repayment with the warden of the institution before receiving a litigation loan.
I am partially vetoing this provision to eliminate the requirement that the repayment arrangements be made with the warden of the institution because it is too burdensome on the Department of Corrections. This partial veto allows the department flexibility to designate a procedure for making repayment arrangements taking into consideration the duties of the warden and the movement of inmates between institutions.
4.
Nursing Services Report
Section 9111 (1u)
This provision requires the Department of Corrections secretary to report to the Joint Committee on Finance by October 1, 2011, on nursing staff and costs for each facility and a summary of each contract for nursing services for fiscal years 2009-10 and 2010-11.
I am vetoing this provision because it is unnecessary and burdensome. The department currently provides information it has available to the Legislature and other interested parties on these matters, and the department continues to work to improve data management.
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND OFFICE OF STATE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
5.
Pay Progression for Certain Attorneys
Sections 9113 (3c) and 9155 (3c)
Section 9113 (3c) requires the Association of State Prosecutors and the Director of the Office of State Employment Relations (OSER) to develop a pay progression plan for assistant district attorneys. The plan must include a detailed description of how the system would be structured and administered and also the fiscal cost of the system in future biennia. This plan must be submitted to the Joint Committee on Finance by October 1, 2011, and is subject to 14-day passive review. The pay progression system would be funded from any salary savings realized from hiring new attorneys to replace attorneys who retire during the period of January 1, 2011, through June 30, 2013.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove the requirement that OSER work with the Association of State Prosecutors and to remove the required parameters of the plan, submission to the Joint Committee on Finance and the funding mechanism. I am maintaining the language requiring the Director of OSER to develop a pay progression plan for assistant district attorneys. I object to the requirement that OSER must work with the Association of State Prosecutors on a pay progression plan without involving the District Attorneys. The executive budget required OSER to work with the District Attorneys to develop a distribution plan for the $1,000,000 annual funding provided for assistant district attorney compensation. In order to return to this intent, I direct OSER to work with the District Attorneys to develop a pay progression plan for future implementation. I continue to support a system that increases retention of experienced prosecutors around the state and this partial veto maintains that support.
Section 9155 (3c) requires the Wisconsin State Attorneys Association and the Director of the Office of State Employment Relations to develop a pay progression plan for attorneys who are included in the legal collective bargaining unit. The plan must include a detailed description of how the system would be structured and administered and also the fiscal cost of the system in future biennia. This plan must be submitted to the Joint Committee on Finance by October 1, 2011, and is subject to a 14-day passive review. The pay progression system would be funded from any salary savings realized from hiring new attorneys to replace attorneys who retire during the 2011-13 biennium.
I am vetoing this section because I object to the requirement that the Office of State Employment Relations must work with the attorneys association without involving the agencies who employ these attorneys. I also object to the selection of this bargaining unit to receive a pay progression system when no information has been presented to indicate there is a recruitment or retention problem among this group.
6.
Brownfield Site Assessment Grants
Sections 2990r and 9155 (3g)
These provisions restrict the amount of a grant to 67 percent of eligible project costs for brownfield site assessment grants and require the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation to give priority in awarding brownfield site assessment grants to applicants who would have been on the funding list for fiscal year 2010-11 awards in the Department of Natural Resources.
I am partially vetoing Section 2990r as it relates to the required level of matching funds an applicant must contribute to receive a grant and vetoing Section 9155(3g) relating to priority in awarding grants because I object to limiting the flexibility of the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation in issuing grants for this program.
Vetoing these provisions will also maintain the current match requirement of the recipient of each grant and allow the corporation to issue a grant that covers up to 80 percent of project costs, but maintains the flexibility to issue grants that cover a smaller portion of the project costs. This will continue to allow the opportunity for higher priority projects to be adequately funded.
7.
Economic Impact Analysis
Section 9135 (3f)
This provision would require the Department of Natural Resources to prepare an economic impact analysis for the phosphorous effluent limitation and shoreland zoning administrative rules by December 31, 2011.
I am partially vetoing this provision to remove the date by which the department must prepare its analysis. I object to this provision because requiring these analyses to be prepared by the specified date may compromise the quality of the analyses. This partial veto will provide the department greater time and flexibility to prepare an economic impact analysis on each of the rules. While it is important for the department to conduct the analyses, it is more important to provide the time necessary to fully evaluate the impact of these rules.
OFFICE OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE
8.
Report on Drug Offender Diversion Surcharge Fund
Section 9101 (4j)
This section requires the Department of Administration to submit a plan to the Joint Committee on Finance reporting how the department will reduce state appropriations by $1,917,900 over the 2011-13 biennium and lapse the associated funding to the general fund to eliminate the deficit in the drug offender diversion surcharge fund.
