Wednesday, March 16, 2011
One-Hundreth Regular Session
The Chief Clerk makes the following entries under the above date.
__________________
The Chief Clerk records:
Senate Joint Resolution
15
Deposited in the office of the Secretary of State on 3-16-2011.
__________________
The Chief Clerk makes the following entries dated Friday, March
11
, 2011.
The Chief Clerk records:
Senate Bill
11
Senate Bill
21
Report correctly enrolled on 3-11-2011.
__________________
Read and referred:
Senate Joint Resolution 16
Relating to: veto power of county executive over appropriations (second consideration).
By
Senators
Harsdorf, Carpenter, Moulton, Schultz, Risser and Taylor; cosponsored by Representatives Bies, Mursau, Nass, Pasch, Rivard, Roys, Sinicki, Spanbauer and Stone.
To committee on Judiciary, Utilities, Commerce, and Government Operations.
Read first time and referred:
Senate Bill 35
Relating to: the number of legislative districts.
By
Senator
Carpenter
; cosponsored by Representative Kaufert
.
To committee on Judiciary, Utilities, Commerce, and Government Operations.
Senate Bill 36
Relating to: the application of shoreland zoning ordinances to certain unincorporated areas.
By
Senators
Holperin, Jauch and Grothman; cosponsored by Representative Spanbauer
.
To committee on Natural Resources and Environment.
__________________
Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Senator Olsen added as a coauthor of
Senate Bill
32
.
Pursuant to Senate Rule 17 (5), Representative Jacque added as a cosponsor of
Senate Bill
32
.
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Government Accountability Board
March 8, 2011
The Honorable, The Senate:
The following lobbyists have been authorized to act on behalf of the organizations set opposite their names.
For more detailed information about these lobbyists and organizations and a complete list of organizations and people authorized to lobby the 2011-2012 session of the legislature, visit the Government Accountability Board's web site at:
http://gab.wi.gov/S185
Beiriger, Jeffrey J Wisconsin Illinois Senior
Housing
Berlinski, Heather Abbott Laboratories
Boycks, Brad Badger Advocates, Inc.
Brooks, Bryan Badger Advocates, Inc.
Carey, Ray Johnson Controls Inc
Childress, Jason Johnson Controls Inc
Fonfara, Thomas Badger Advocates, Inc.
Froehlke, Scott Ground Water Management
& Water Conservation Lobbying Association (d.b.a. Long Lake District)
Fuchs, Gary Hewlett-Packard Company
Goyke, Gary R. Citizens for a Scenic
Wisconsin
Goyke, Gary R. Specialized Medical Vehicle
Association of Wisconsin
Goyke, Gary R. Whitetails of Wisconsin
Goyke, Gary R. Wisconsin Pyrotechnic Arts
Guild Inc.
Goyke, Gary R. Wisconsin Rental Housing
Legislative Council
Graul, Mark Badger Advocates, Inc.
Hubbard, Gregory Badger Advocates, Inc.
Kammer, Peter Abbott Laboratories
Kammer, Peter Skyward Inc.
Krueger, Erin MAXIMUS Inc
Kussow, Matthew Badger Advocates, Inc.
Kussow, Michelle Badger Advocates, Inc.
Langenohl, Tony Johnson Controls Inc
Lavarreda, Elena Voces de la Frontera Action,
Inc.
Lueck, Larry Northeast Communications
of Wisconsin, Inc. dba
Martin, Waldo "Buck" Stockbridge-Munsee
Community
McCoshen, Carol Badger Advocates, Inc.
McCoshen, William J Johnson Controls Inc
McIntosh, Forbes Badger Advocates, Inc.
McIntosh, Forbes Crown Cork & Seal Company
Mitchell, Brian Wisconsin Car Rental
Alliance
Neumann-Ortiz, Christine Voces de la Frontera Action,
Inc.
Raschka, Adam Northern States Power d/b/a
Xcel Energy
Ruesch, Kristin Badger Advocates, Inc.
Schoenfeldt, Jeffrey Badger Advocates, Inc.
Scholz, Brandon Badger Advocates, Inc.
Seitz, Robert Badger Advocates, Inc.
Walby, Kathleen Johnson Controls Inc
Warkentin, Kimberly America Votes
Zelenkova, Ramie Badger Advocates, Inc.
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
Government Accountability Board
March 9, 2011
The Honorable, The Legislature:
I am writing to seek your preliminary feedback on the most viable dates for changing the State's September Partisan Primary. A date change for the September Partisan Primary is needed in order to comply with the requirements of the federal 2009 Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act.
Issue: To which date should the Wisconsin September Partisan Primary be moved in order to comply with requirements of the federal 2009 Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act?
Background: The Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act requires all states to distribute an official ballot that contains federal offices, i.e. President, Vice-President, U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives, to military and overseas voters no less than 45 calendar days prior to the election; if the voter has submitted an absentee ballot request. Wisconsin's September Primary is scheduled the second Tuesday in September which, combined with current statutory ballot deadlines, makes it impossible to meet the MOVE Act's 45-day requirement. Simply stated, the Wisconsin September Partisan Primary must be moved.
The Government Accountability Board's staff has met and will continue to meet with local election officials (municipal and county clerks) and with concerned and interested constituents, customers, and stakeholders to gather broad input on viable recommendation for consideration by the Governor and Legislature on possible new Partisan Primary dates.
For the 2010 Fall Election Cycle, we requested a waiver from the 45-day transit provision of the MOVE Act, because Wisconsin has a long-demonstrated history of providing ballots to military and overseas votes in a timely manner; though, less than 45 days. Due to the fact that Wisconsin's 2010 election calendar fell short of the federal 45-day minimum transit time as required by the MOVE Act, our State was sued by the U.S. Department of Justice. That lawsuit resulted in a consent decree which ensured that Wisconsin's military and overseas voters would have sufficient time to cast ballots for the November 2, 2010 General Election. Moving forward, however, we have been advised by the U.S. Justice Department that a permanent structural change to Wisconsin's Election Calendar needs to be effectuated for the 2012 election cycle and beyond. In order to comply with the MOVE Act, a statutory change in the State's September Partisan Primary date and possible other election dates as well, is required.
Request: As part of our information-gathering on the preference and impact of the various choices, in consultation and collaboration with our local election officials, partners and customers, we have identified some viable options for changing the September Partisan Primary. In continuing that process, we want to solicit your initial thoughts on which options you feel best fit with the Legislative calendar and business of the Legislature, and other public policy considerations. We request that you provide your feedback by the close of business on Monday, March 21, 2011.
For you information and consideration, attached is the Government Accountability Board's staff's initial review of potential Partisan Primary dates. This review includes several examples of new Partisan Primary dates, some important election events they affect, and pros and cons for each example. Partisan Primary dates, some important election events they affect, and pros and cons for each example. In addition to changing the Partisan Primary date, adjustments must also be considered for the special election cycle and the Presidential Preference Election, which are not addressed in this report.
A report, including your feedback, additional input from our local election officials and other interested customers, and additional analysis, will be submitted to the Governor and Legislature after members of the Government Accountability Board consider this matter during its March 22-23, 2011, regular meeting.
My staff and I are available to answer your questions and discuss the attached review. I may be contacted at
Kevin.Kennedy@wi.gov, or at (608) 261-8683. Thank you in advance for reviewing this matter and for your feedback.
Sincerely,
kevin kennedy
Director and General Counsel
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Legislative Audit Bureau
March 8, 2011
The Honorable, The Legislature:
S186
In response to a complaint reported on the Fraud, Waste, and Mismanagement Hotline established by
2007 Wisconsin Act 126, we have completed a limited-scope review of the Department of Transportation's (DOT's) warranty program for asphalt state highways. Concerns were raised about the quality of asphalt highways constructed under warranties. From 1995 through 2009, 184 such highways were constructed under warranties that guarantee pavements will meet contractually specified performance standards, typically for five years. If DOT determines that these standards have not been met, contractors can be required to perform and pay for repairs.
We reviewed all warranted asphalt state highway projects constructed from 2002 through 2004. Pavements on 12 of these 34 projects did not meet some performance standards during their warranty periods. However, because many inspection results were provided to DOT regional offices after warranties had expired, it is unclear whether contractors can now be required to repair identified problems.
We also compared the quality of 33 asphalt pavement projects constructed under warranties to that of all 215 asphalt pavement projects constructed on state highways during the same three year period. We found that the warranted projects generally show less distress?such as cracks, potholes, and ruts - and are smoother than those without warranties. However, some DOT engineers are concerned that warranted pavements constructed since 2004 are deteriorating more quickly than anticipated, particularly in northwest Wisconsin.
Because our May 2009 review of concrete state highways and several recent single audit reports for the State of Wisconsin found that DOT did not always follow its quality assurance program, we examined quality assurance procedures for asphalt state highways. We found that construction engineers performed 181 of the 193 tests (93.8 percent) required by DOT to measure the density of asphalt pavement on 41 projects constructed in 2009. We also found that DOT has improved its documentation of contractors' roughness measurements.
We appreciate the courtesy and cooperation extended to us by DOT in completing this review.
Sincerely,
janice mueller
State Auditor
__________________