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.
I am vetoing this section because this requirement is unnecessary. This deficit will be examined again in developing the 2013-15 biennial budget.
9.
Repeal of Traffic Stop Data Collection Requirements
These provisions relate to funding for the traffic stop data collection requirements enacted in
2009 Wisconsin Act 28. Section 373 includes two appropriations, Traffic stop data collection; state and Traffic stop data collection; local in the Chapter
20 schedule. Section 717 funds the two appropriations from justice information fee revenues deposited in the Department of Administration. Sections 737 and 738 detail the appropriations in the Chapter
20 language.
I am vetoing these provisions at the request of the Legislative Reference Bureau because of conflicts with passage of separate legislation,
2011 Wisconsin Act 29. As passed by the Legislature, conflicts would be created regarding these sections between the act and the biennial budget without the veto. The intent remains to repeal the requirements for traffic stop data collection and provide mandate relief to law enforcement agencies. This veto retains that intent but ensures no statutory language conflicts will exist with Act 29 after the biennial budget bill is enacted.
SUPREME COURT
10.
Judicial Compensation Commission
Section 9155 (1j)
This section creates a seven-member Judicial Compensation Commission to review the salaries of the justices of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals judges and judges of the Circuit Court. No later than December 1, 2012, the commission must submit a report to the Governor and the Joint Committee on Employment Relations that includes recommendations on salaries of the justices and judges. The committee must review the recommendations for the 2013-15 fiscal biennium and approve the recommendations, unless a majority of members agree not to approve or agree to modify the recommendations. The Governor must provide funding sufficient to implement the recommendations for the 2013-15 fiscal biennium. If the salary adjustment approved by the committee is less than the percentage of any across-the-board pay adjustments for any other position in the classified service, the annual salary adjustment for the justices and judges is increased equal to the percentage increase of the highest across-the-board pay adjustment provided for any position in the classified service. Staff and support services will be provided by the Director of State Courts and the commission sunsets after December 1, 2012.
A421
I am vetoing this section because I object to the requirement to provide a certain amount of funding for judicial salaries in the 2013-15 biennium. I also object to required salary increases for justices and judges when state employees are facing salary reductions due to increased contributions for health insurance and pension. Judicial salaries are included in the compensation plan, similar to all other elected officials, and will be adjusted as necessary under that system.
B.
EDUCATION, CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
Children and Families
11.
Transitional Jobs Demonstration Project
Sections 1385 and 1385c
These sections require that any host site for employing individuals or placing work crews under the Transitional Jobs Demonstration Project be a business that is operated for profit, except that in the case of a natural disaster for which the Governor has declared a state of emergency under s.
323.10, the Department of Children and Families shall give preference to any work crew placement or host site involved in natural disaster recovery.
I am partially vetoing section 1385 and vetoing section 1385c because this requirement is overly prescriptive and may be contrary to the goal of moving individuals back to productive work. Currently, 51 percent of transitional jobs placements are with nonprofit host sites, such as hospitals and community agencies. These placements provide valuable work experience to individuals and give these individuals the skills to move into unsubsidized employment.
However, I am cognizant that the best way to move individuals into unsubsidized, private-sector employment is to give them experience working in the private sector. Therefore, I am directing the department give preference to host sites that are for-profit businesses.
12.
Local Child Support Enforcement
Section 9108 (2i) (a) 2.
The bill requires the Department of Children and Families to develop, and submit to the Joint Committee on Finance no later than August 31, 2011, a detailed plan for distributing child support incentive payments to counties during calendar years 2012 and 2013. This provision prohibits the department from basing the child support incentive plan on an across-the-board reduction to child support incentive payments made in calendar year 2011.
I am vetoing this provision because the department already distributes federal child support incentive payments and state funding to counties for child support enforcement activities under an incentive program. The distribution is based on a county's share of statewide support cases that receive enforcement services from a county child support agency and already established performance standards. Therefore, an across-the-board reduction should be an option the department can consider in developing its plan.
13.
Fingerprinting for Child Care Providers
Section 1335d
This provision requires the Department of Children and Families, a county department, an agency contracted to administer the Wisconsin Shares program, or school board to require any person seeking a license to operate a child care center, certification as a child care provider or a contract to operate a child care program, be fingerprinted on two fingerprint cards, each bearing a complete set of the person's fingerprints. Additionally, the Department of Justice may provide the fingerprint cards to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for the purposes of verifying the identity of the person fingerprinted and obtaining records of his or her criminal arrests and convictions.
Under current law, agencies already have the authority to require fingerprints of certified and licensed child care providers if those agencies determine there is a reasonable basis for further investigation as a result of required background checks.
I am vetoing this provision because requiring fingerprints of all child care providers creates an unnecessary burden for small child care businesses. If there is reasonable basis for further investigation as a result of required background checks, fingerprints can already be required. However, for child care providers who wish to participate in the Wisconsin Shares program, additional safeguards must be implemented to ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent properly. Reducing fraud and protecting the safety of children in the Wisconsin Shares program are top priorities of my administration. Therefore, I am directing the Department of Children and Families to amend the administrative rules for certified and licensed child care providers to require that any provider who wishes to participate in the Wisconsin Shares program submit fingerprints to the Department of Children and Families, a county department, or agency contracted to administer the Wisconsin Shares program.
14.
Rules Related to Child Care Subsidies for Children of Child Care Providers
Section 9108 (2c)
The bill prohibits distribution of child care funds for services that are provided for a child by a child care provider who is the parent of the child or who resides with the child. Additionally, if a child's parent is a child care provider, the bill prohibits the distribution of funds for services that are provided for the child by another child care provider who is not the child's parent. These provisions would not apply if the child's parent has applied for, and been granted, a waiver of the prohibitions. The bill further provides that the Department of Children and Families shall specify the circumstances or standards under which a waiver will be granted by rule.
Section 9108 (2c) requires the department to submit the rules in proposed form to the Legislative Council staff under s.
227.15 (1) of the statutes no later than the first day of the fourth month beginning after the effective date of the bill.
A422
I am vetoing this provision because it is unnecessary. Current law already requires submission of proposed rules to Legislative Council staff and I am directing the department to submit these proposed rules by January 1, 2012.
15.
Child Care State Administration and Licensing
Section 9108 (1v) (b)
The bill transfers $1,000,000 annually from the Department of Children and Families' economic support federal block grant operations appropriation to the Joint Committee on Finance's federal funds general supplementation appropriation for an automated attendance tracking system. This section requires the department to submit a request, by January 1, 2012, for these funds under a 14-day passive review process along with a plan that details how the automated attendance tracking system would work and how these funds would be spent.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove the due date because it is overly restrictive. The department needs sufficient time to fully research the best options for implementation of the automated attendance tracking system for child care providers.
PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
16.
Submission of Data for Choice Program Eligibility Determinations
Section 2532m creates a parental choice program for school districts other than Milwaukee that meet certain criteria. This section includes pupil eligibility criteria as well. Under the section, pupils are eligible to participate in the parental choice program if family income is 300 percent of the federal poverty level or less. Section 2532m [as it relates to s.
118.60 (2) (a) 1. b.] establishes a method of determining income eligibility and requires participating schools to submit certain data to the Department of Revenue.
The budget also revises income eligibility for the Milwaukee parental choice program, incorporating the 300 percent of the federal poverty level ceiling set forth in section 2532m. Section 2536g also requires participating schools to submit certain data to the Department of Revenue for income eligibility determinations.
I am partially vetoing sections 2532m [as it relates to s.
118.60(2) (a) 1. b.] and 2536g to require participating schools to submit family income data to the Department of Public Instruction instead of the Department of Revenue. I object to the process proposed because it unnecessarily requires participating schools to report data to multiple state agencies. The Department of Public Instruction is the primary contact at the state level for schools in the parental choice program. Further, it is responsible for determining eligibility of schools and of pupils whose eligibility cannot be determined by the Department of Revenue, and as such also likely will collect information from participating schools. Therefore, it is appropriate for the Department of Public Instruction to collect all data and share it as needed with the Department of Revenue.
University of Wisconsin System
17.
Approval for University of Wisconsin-Madison Employment Plans
Sections 970L, 2426L and 9152 (1c) (b)
The bill gives additional operational flexibility to the University of Wisconsin-Madison related to employee compensation, personnel systems and labor negotiations. It allows the University of Wisconsin System and the University of Wisconsin-Madison to provide supplemental pay plans in the 2011-13 biennium funded from base resources to provide competitive pay; transfers all current University of Wisconsin System employees to a new personnel system and University of Wisconsin-Madison employees to a new personnel system, beginning on July 1, 2013; and transfers labor contracts and future labor negotiations, subject to
2011 Wisconsin Act 10, from the Office of State Employment Relations to the University of Wisconsin System and the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
These sections require the Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison to submit compensation, personnel system plans and tentative labor agreements related to University of Wisconsin-Madison employees to the Board of Regents for approval, prior to submitting these plans to the Joint Committee on Employment Relations.
I object to the requirement that the Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison submit the supplemental pay plan, personnel system plan and tentative labor agreements to the Board of Regents for approval. Under the bill, these plans will already require approval from the Joint Committee on Employment Relations.
Therefore, I am partially vetoing sections 970L, 2426L and 9152 (1c) (b) to eliminate the Board of Regents' review and approval. I originally proposed restructuring the University of Wisconsin-Madison into a public authority to provide greater autonomy to manage compensation and human resources to recruit top faculty and remain an engine for research and patent production. Removing this level of approval will give the state's flagship campus the level of autonomy it needs to successfully compete in the global higher education environment.
18.
Annual Reporting of Contractual Service Procurements
These sections exempt the University of Wisconsin System from reporting the procurement of contractual services annually to the Governor and the Legislature.
A423
I am vetoing section 239g and partially vetoing section 9452 (1d) [as it relates to s.
16.705 (8) (intro.)] because I object to this reduction in accountability and transparency in state government. It is important to continue to report procurements of contractual services to ensure that all state agencies are spending tax dollars responsibly. It is also important to collect information necessary for the State Bureau of Procurement to analyze and respond to procurement trends throughout state government.
19.
Joint Committee on Finance Authority to Postpone Telecommunications Services Prohibition
Section 1015x
This section defines telecommunications services and third-party entity and, beginning July 1, 2013, prohibits the University of Wisconsin System from becoming a member, shareholder or partner in any third-party entity or other person that offers, resells, or provides telecommunications services to the general public or to any public or private entity unless the third-party entity or other person does not offer, resell or provide telecommunication services that it did not offer, resell, or provide on June 15, 2011, and the third-party entity or other person does not offer, resell, or provide telecommunications services to a private entity, to the general public, or to a public entity other than a university or a university-affiliated research facility or a facility approved by the Joint Committee on Finance that it is not already serving on June 15, 2011. The section allows the Joint Committee on Finance to postpone the July 1, 2013, effective date for these prohibitions through majority vote.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove the authority of the Joint Committee on Finance to postpone these prohibitions because the University of Wisconsin System should not compete with private sector businesses in providing telecommunications services. The bill does not prohibit the University of Wisconsin System from participating in a third-party comprised entirely of universities and university-affiliated research facilities. There is no need to delay the prohibitions included in the bill beyond July 1, 2013.
20.
Review of Position Titles and Classifications
Sections 2410L and 9452 (1d) [as it relates to s. 111.825 (3m)]
These sections require the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission to determine if titles or classifications newly created by the University of Wisconsin-Madison or the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System would make the person who holds the position an employee eligible for a bargaining unit, and to assign any eligible new position title or classification to the appropriate collective bargaining unit; and set July 1, 2013, as the effective date.
I am vetoing section 2410L and partially vetoing section 9452 (1d) [as it relates to s.
111.825 (3m)] to remove the commission's review and assignment of newly created titles or classifications, because this provision significantly expands the commission's responsibilities beyond current law and unnecessarily burdens the commission. The effect of this veto is to limit the commission's role to unit clarification as under current law.
21.
Technical Correction to "Academic Faculty"
Sections 2410a and 2410b
These sections create bargaining units for University of Wisconsin System and University of Wisconsin-Madison employees, except "academic faculty" and "academic staff." The term "academic faculty" does not appear in current law under s.
36.13, as referenced in sections 2410a and 2410b.
I am partially vetoing these sections to remove the term "academic" because the reference is incorrect and a technical modification is necessary. In statute, this type of employee is referred to only as 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
Section 2406d
This section defines public safety employees for the purpose of employee compensation and collective bargaining changes under
2011 Wisconsin Act 10. An emergency medical service provider for the emergency medical services departments in Door and Waushara Counties is included in the definition of public safety employee. Under Act 10, current public safety employees retain the ability to bargain for wages, hours and conditions of employment, including the ability to bargain for employer payment of employee-required retirement and health insurance contributions.
I am partially vetoing this section to delete the reference to Door and Waushara counties because I object to limiting this eligibility to emergency medical service providers in two counties. With this veto, all emergency medical service providers will be covered by this provision, consistent with emergency medical services providers that are considered firefighter personnel for purposes of collective bargaining changes under Act 10.
23.
Modify Pay Provisions for City of Milwaukee Discharged or Suspended Police Officers
Sections 1715h and 1715k
These sections require that any member of a police force in a first class city (currently only the city of Milwaukee) may not be discharged or suspended without pay or benefits until a decision regarding the discharge or suspension has been made by the Board of Police and Fire Commissioners or the time for filing an appeal has passed, unless felony or class A or B misdemeanor charges are also pending.
A424
While I understand the concerns that this provision seeks to address, I object to this provision because I believe that changes to the current law provision should be dealt with through separate legislation in order to gather input from all affected parties regarding the process. My veto of these sections will return pay treatment of discharged or suspended officers in the city of Milwaukee to current law, which prohibits withholding pay and benefits for officers who have been suspended but permits the city to discharge a police officer without pay during the appeals process.
EMPLOYEE TRUST FUNDS
24.
Required Minimum Annual Contributions by Local Governmental Units
to a Retirement System
Section 1725e
This section requires local governmental units to pay employer contributions into the retirement system in which their employees are participating in an amount at least equal to all the employee-required contributions under that retirement system, no later than December 31 of each year.
I am vetoing this section because it may have the unintended consequence of creating an unfunded liability as the employer-required share will generally exceed the employee share due to employer contribution requirements for protective occupational classes. It may also result in overfunding if the retirement system is fully funded and payments are being made, when savings could be returned to taxpayers or used for other services. In addition, it may encourage employers to delay making payments into the system until the end of the calendar year, which creates the potential for a situation that negatively affects the system's cash flow.
25.
Wisconsin Retirement System Vesting Requirements
Sections 1156k and 1156t
These sections modify the vesting requirements for state and local employees hired on or after the effective date of the bill. Under the provision, employees who separate from service with fewer than five years of creditable service in the Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) and who are eligible for an annuity may only receive a partial annuity under a formula or money purchase benefit. The partial benefit is based on a percentage of credited employer contribution available to the employee and is based on the years of service. Under current law, employees are vested immediately, and the annuity upon retirement is based on a formula benefit calculated on years of service or a money purchase benefit which includes all employee and employer contributions.
I object to this provision as it is administratively difficult and expensive to implement, with little cost savings to the WRS. Because the annuity that would be calculated for employees with fewer than five years of service is relatively modest, those employees are already likely to take their accumulated employee contributions with them upon separation from WRS service.
I am partially vetoing these sections in order to require employees to have five years of service prior to being eligible for either a formula or money purchase annuity benefit by digit vetoing the annuity amount for those with less than five years of creditable service to zero. This provision, as modified by the partial veto, is similar to the vesting waiting period in 25 other states and the WRS vesting provisions that existed until 1998. It will also improve retention by encouraging employees participating in the WRS to work for a WRS-participating employer at least five years.
