state mental health institute prior to July 1, 2015. The provision requires the Department of Health Services to report to the Joint Committee on Finance by September 1, 2013, on issues related to county cost liability for residents formerly enrolled in Family Care who are admitted to the state mental health institutes; request the release of the funds
following the submission of the report; reimburse counties for qualifying costs using a specified schedule; and notify responsible counties of new admissions within 48 hours. Further, the provision requires managed care organizations to maintain records of enrollee emergency contacts, require managed care organizations and counties to create emergency plans for Family Care enrollees deemed at risk of admission to a mental health institute, and specify the members of a placement team that must be created for each Family Care member admitted into a state mental health institute.
I am vetoing sections 347j, 347k, 831f, 831p, 9118 (5e) and 9418 (10e) and writing down section 200 [as it relates to s. 20.865 (4) (a)] because I object to the establishment of a short-term stop-gap program to address the ongoing, complex issues that hamper the placement of individuals with long-term care and mental health treatment needs in the most appropriate setting. Instead, I am directing the Department of Health Services to analyze the factors that contribute to impediments in providing appropriate, patient-centered and coordinated treatment for individuals with co-occurring mental health, behavioral health and long-term care needs, including an insufficient number of placement options, and to recommend options for addressing these factors, including the role of the department's mental health institutes and centers for the developmentally disabled. Further, I am directing the department to review and recommend organizational changes to improve the development and implementation of policies to better address the needs of individuals with mental and behavioral health needs in the state's long-term care delivery systems. By lining out the appropriation under s. 20.865 (4) (a) and writing in a smaller amount that deletes $500,000 in fiscal year 2013-14, I am vetoing the portion of the bill that funds this provision. Finally, I am requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds. G. Helping Victims of Domestic Violence
42. Global Positioning System Tracking Grant Program
Section 1942m [as it relates to matching funds]
This provision creates a pilot program for the Department of Justice to provide grants to counties to establish a global positioning system (GPS) tracking program for persons who are subject to domestic abuse or harassment temporary restraining orders or injunctions. Counties are required to provide a 50 percent match for any grant funds received under the program, and two or more counties may jointly establish and administer a program, and apply for and receive a grant under the GPS tracking pilot grant program.
I am partially vetoing this provision because I object to the 50 percent match requirement in order for a county or counties to receive grant funds. This creates an additional financial burden on smaller counties and is counterproductive for the purposes of a pilot program.
H. Reforming Health Care Entitlements
43. Voluntary Reduction in FoodShare Benefits
Section 1211v
This section requires the Department of Health Services to allow recipients to elect to receive FoodShare benefits in an amount that is less than the amount for which the individual or the individual's household is eligible.
Although I support the intent of the provision to allow recipients to elect to receive a lower benefit amount, thereby reducing program costs, I am vetoing this section because it is prohibitively difficult to implement and administer, likely resulting in higher administrative expenditures than the amount saved from the reduction in benefit payments. Further, the additional administrative cost is unnecessary since FoodShare recipients may currently elect to spend less than the amount of benefits issued in each month, with unexpended benefits expiring after 12 months.
44. Allocations to Income Maintenance Consortia
Section 1211b
This section requires the Department of Health Services to reimburse a multicounty consortium for income maintenance services provided under contract using a method determined by the department that includes the number of cases for which the consortium is responsible and the complexity of those cases.
I am partially vetoing this section because the criteria for allocation of the funding are overly vague and not defined in statute. Further, I object to the inflexibility of the language as it prevents the department and multicounty consortia from modifying the allocation criteria in the future to meet changing program needs. The partial veto will allow the department to work cooperatively with the multicounty income maintenance consortia to determine a funding allocation methodology that best reflects income maintenance workloads.
45. FoodShare Employment and Training Reporting Requirement
Section 1215m
This section requires the Department of Health Services to report annually, beginning January 1, 2015, to the Joint Committee on Finance and Legislature on FoodShare employment and training outcomes, including the number of able-bodied adults subject to the benefit time limit, the number of able-bodied adults subject to the benefit time limit who disenrolled from the program, and the impact of the work requirement enforcement on the payment error rate and income maintenance workloads.
Although I agree with the intent of the section to regularly report on the results of the employment and training program, I am vetoing this section because the program will not be fully implemented before the initial reporting date and a partial analysis would be premature. I am instructing the department to provide the requested information as soon
as practicable following a reasonable period of statewide implementation.
46. Certified Medical Coder Position
Section 1043p
This section requires the Department of Health Services to employ at least one full-time certified medical coder to improve Medicaid payment accuracy.
I am vetoing this section because I object to limiting the flexibility of the department to hire or contract for services in the most financially sound manner and to determine the best use of state resources, including state personnel, in ensuring the integrity of the Medicaid program.
47. Self-Directed Services Waiver for Post-Secondary Education
Section 834h
This section requires the Department of Health Services to request a federal home and community-based services waiver to provide Medicaid coverage for services provided to individuals with developmental disabilities receiving post-secondary education on the grounds of a health care institution. If the waiver is approved, the department shall limit the coverage to 100 individuals per month and shall determine the funding for each participant based on the benefit levels for the Include, Respect, I Self-direct (IRIS) waiver program.
I am partially vetoing this section because certain provisions of the language are too narrow and may conflict with federal definitions and waiver requirements. The partial veto is intended to improve the chances of receiving federal approval for the new waiver by removing the requirements that the institution be defined as a health care institution and that funding for each participant in the new waiver be based on the IRIS waiver program.
I. Protecting Our Citizens
48. Crime Prevention Funding Boards and Crime Prevention Funding Board Surcharge
Sections 514s, 1238m, 1239m, 1243m, 2291m, 2293m, 2352m, 2358m and 9129
This provision creates a $20 crime prevention funding board surcharge which would be applied to any misdemeanor or felony conviction. The surcharge is to be assessed only after an offender pays the global positioning system (GPS) tracking surcharge in full. The crime prevention funding board surcharge revenue must be retained by the county treasurer in a crime prevention fund and be distributed as grants at the direction of a crime prevention funding board, which is created in every county, which consists of the following individuals, or their designees: the district attorney; the sheriff; either the county executive, administrator or county board chairperson; the chief elected official of the city, village or town with the largest population in the county; a person chosen by majority vote of the sheriff and police chiefs in the county; and the presiding judge of the circuit court. The board may solicit applications and award grants to certain specified entities. At least half of the funds must go to one or more private, nonprofit organizations that has as its primary purpose preventing crime, providing a funding source for crime prevention programs, encouraging the public to report crime or assisting law enforcement agencies in the apprehension of criminal offenders. The board may direct that the rest of the funds be distributed to a law enforcement agency that has a crime prevention fund. The board and grant recipients must submit reports regarding the use of the funds to the clerk of court for the county, the county board and the legislative bodies of each municipality located in the county.
I am vetoing these sections because I object to the creation of an additional surcharge and an additional board, which may have no demonstrated effectiveness. There are already numerous surcharges on felony and misdemeanor convictions, and adding an additional surcharge will detract surcharge revenue from many other proven and worthwhile crime victim services and law enforcement programs.
49. Regulation of Bail Bond Agents, Bail Bond Agencies and Bail Bond Recovery Agents
Sections 200 [as it relates to s. 20.165 (1) (gk)], 204s [as it relates to s. 440.282],204w, 2179t, 2179w, 2183e, 2183m, 2183s, 2187c, 2187g, 2187h, 2187i, 2187j, 2187k, 2187L, 2187m, 2187n, 2187o, 2265ce, 2285m, 2342c, 2342g, 2342n, 2342r, 2342w, 9138 (1i) and 9438 (1i) These provisions require the Department of Safety and Professional Services to regulate and license bail bond agents, bail bond agencies and bail bond recovery agents; and to collect annual licensing fees of $1,000 per agent or agency, under requirements promulgated by administrative rule. Bail bond agents, bail bond agencies and bail bond recovery agents are compensated 10 percent of the bond set, but may only be compensated for an action brought in Dane, Kenosha, Milwaukee, Racine or Waukesha counties for the first five years.
I am partially vetoing sections 200 and 204s, and I am vetoing sections 204w, 2179t, 2179w, 2183e, 2183m, 2183s, 2187c, 2187g, 2187h, 2187i, 2187j, 2187k, 2187L,
2187m, 2187n, 2187o, 2265ce, 2285m, 2342c, 2342g, 2342n, 2342r, 2342w, 9138 (1i) and 9438 (1i) because I object to the potential negative impact on the payment of restitution to victims and fines. Just as the creation of an additional surcharge will detract from existing crime victim services and law enforcement programs, the allocation of 10 percent of the bond to these entities will reduce funds for these important programs. This policy is best addressed through separate legislation to provide opportunity for additional study of the current system of pretrial release and to allow for public input.
50. Prerelease Pilot Program for Prisoners
This provision creates a GPR annual appropriation for the Department of Justice for funding a one-time grant to the Department of Corrections for a prerelease pilot program to end on July 1, 2015, with funding of $172,800 in fiscal year 2013-14, and $192,000 in fiscal year 2014-15, and requires the Department of Corrections to enter into a contract for the services of Freedom Life Skills, Inc., to teach life skills and character development to inmates who will be released to parole or to extended supervision.
I am vetoing this provision because I object to the creation of a redundant program. The Department of Corrections already has a prerelease program for prisoners. Furthermore, I am concerned about the lack of transparency in the awarding of the contract, since the funding would be provided to a specific organization without a competitive bidding process.
51. Five Star Provider Meeting Requirement
Section 9106 (1q)
This section requires the Department of Children and Families to convene a meeting of all five star YoungStar providers who provide child care to over 50 Shares children by September 30, 2013. The department must hear the concerns of these providers and summarize the concerns and make recommendations to address the concerns in a report to the Joint Committee on Finance.
I am vetoing this section because it is overly prescriptive and unnecessary. The department already has the authority to meet with providers, and is in ongoing communications with providers that have concerns. With this veto, the department will not be required to hold another meeting with these providers by a specific date, and will be free to interact with providers and address any concerns in the manner it determines is most effective.
52. Child Support Arrears Pilot Program
Section 2277
This section establishes a pilot project under which noncustodial parents would qualify for a modified interest rate on child support arrears, with the goal of increasing child support payments. In order for the pilot project to continue beyond June 30, 2015, the Department of Children and Families would be required to obtain the approval of the
Joint Committee on Finance under a 14-day passive review process. The department would be required to provide specific information on the amount of reduction in arrears owed and increase in number and dollar amount of payments towards arrears.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove the requirement that the department obtain the approval of the Joint Committee on Finance and the end date of the pilot. I believe that neither provision is necessary, because the department is capable of determining whether the pilot is successful, and can determine whether to continue the program without the burden of unnecessary review.
J. Supporting Our Veterans
53. Transfers to the Veterans Trust Fund and Mortgage Loan Repayment Fund
Sections 801f and 9249 (2e)
Section 801f permits the Department of Veterans Affairs to transfer all of the unencumbered balances of the appropriations related to operations of the state veterans homes to the Veterans Trust Fund or Mortgage Loan Repayment Fund on June 30th of each year, if the department requests and receives the approval of the Joint Committee on Finance under a 14-day passive review process.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove the provision limiting transfers to June 30th of each year and the requirements related to Joint Committee on Finance approval because I object to the inflexibility of the language. Setting such rigid requirements for the transfer unduly restricts the department's ability to ensure the solvency of the Veterans Trust Fund and Mortgage Loan Repayment Fund by transferring surplus revenues generated from the efficient operation of the state veterans homes.
In addition, I am vetoing section 9249 (2e), that requires the transfer of $10,000,000 from the program revenue appropriation related to the operations of the state veterans
homes to the Veterans Trust Fund in fiscal year 2013-14, because this provision is no longer necessary. The Department of Veterans Affairs will determine the appropriate amount of the transfer necessary to maintain the solvency of the Veterans Trust Fund.
K. Preserving Wisconsin’s Heritage
