Sections 806g, 806r and 9448 (5j)
These sections provide tribal gaming funding of $100,000 annually for the Aquaculture Demonstration Facility, to fund a University of Wisconsin System-Extension aquaculture specialist position.
I am vetoing these sections because I object to the unnecessary use of tribal gaming funding for this purpose, and believe that if the University of Wisconsin System believes a position is needed to carry out the mission of the Aquaculture Demonstration Facility, it may reallocate system resources.
26. Minority Teacher Loan Program Eligibility
Sections 1372r and 9319 (3f) [as it relates to the requirement to student teach in Milwaukee]
Section 1372r sets forth eligibility provisions for a reformed minority teacher loan program. To be eligible for the program, students must be: (a) state residents enrolled at least half-time as sophomores, juniors or seniors in an institution of higher education; (b) individuals enrolled in a program of study leading to a teacher's license in teacher shortage areas; (c) individuals enrolled in a program of study that includes student teaching in the city of Milwaukee; and (d) individuals with a grade point average of at least 3.0 on a 4-point scale or the equivalent.
I am partially vetoing these sections to delete the requirement that eligible individuals must be enrolled in a program of study that includes student teaching in the city of Milwaukee. The Milwaukee Public School District certainly is in need of excellent teachers, and the loan forgiveness structure of the improved program encourages teachers to teach and remain in Milwaukee. As such, I object to this eligibility provision because it is unnecessary and overly restrictive.
27. Position Reports
Section 277m
This section modifies current law to require the Board of Regents to report annually, instead of quarterly, on the number of non-GPR full-time equivalent positions created or abolished by the Board of Regents in the previous 12-month period and specifies that the report be based on the October 1 payroll. It also deletes current law specifying that positions authorized for the University of Wisconsin System not be included in any state position report beginning on July 1, 2015.
I am partially vetoing this section to maintain current law that excludes University of Wisconsin System positions from state position reports. The University of Wisconsin System has transitioned to its own personnel systems (one for the University of Wisconsin-Madison and one for all other system employees), which simplify titling structures in a way that is specific to the university and establish a separate compensation structure. Therefore, it is inappropriate to include university employees in the same report as all other state government employees.
28. Academic Staff Appointments
Section 1210m
This section prohibits the Board of Regents from making probationary or indefinite academic staff appointments beginning July 1, 2015. In addition, all academic staff holding probationary appointments on June 30, 2015, are transitioned to a fixed term appointment, while indefinite appointments are made permanent.
I am vetoing this section in its entirety because I object to making these changes without additional study to determine whether there are possible unintended consequences, particularly on certain programs at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
29. Conservation Fund Appropriations
Sections 596g, 596r and 9448 (5k)
Section 596g specifies that, from the grants for forestry programs appropriation, in each year of the 2015-17 biennium, $124,400 be provided to the University of Wisconsin- Stevens Point for the paper science program and $10,100 (the remaining appropriation balance) be provided to the University of Wisconsin-Madison for the Center for Cooperatives. For fiscal year 2017-18, sections 596r and 9448 (5k) restore the prior funding levels for the paper science program and Center for Cooperatives of $78,000 and $56,500 (the remaining appropriation balance), respectively.
I am vetoing these sections in their entirety because I believe existing funding levels from the conservation fund are appropriate, and that the University of Wisconsin System can reallocate other funds if needed for the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point paper science program.
C. REFORMING GOVERNMENT
30. Group Insurance Board Appointments
Sections 105d, 136d and 9112 (1c)
This provision requires that the six members of the Group Insurance Board who are appointed by the Governor to two-year terms under current law be appointed with the advice and consent of the Senate. The terms of office of the current gubernatorial appointees would terminate on the effective date of the budget bill, but the appointees could continue until successors are appointed and qualified to assume the board positions.
In addition, this provision would expand the board from 11 members to 15 members and specify the following new members: (a) one Representative appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly; (b) one Representative appointed by the Minority Leader of the Assembly; (c) one Senator appointed by the Majority Leader of the Senate; and (d) one Senator appointed by the Minority Leader of the Senate.
I am vetoing this provision in its entirety because it is administratively burdensome and unnecessarily adds a layer to the appointment process for the board. While the Legislature has a substantial role in setting statutory policy and establishing overall funding levels, the members of the board must develop significant expertise in health plan design and administration, while balancing the needs of the employers, employees and health plans. This is best achieved with the current composition of the board.
31. Review of Annual Proposed Changes to the State Group Health Insurance Program
Sections 1389r and 9112 (3j)
These sections require the Group Insurance Board to submit proposed changes to the state group health insurance program to the Joint Committee on Employment Relations by April 1 of each year. The committee must hold a public hearing and act by May 1 to approve, disapprove or modify the changes and then submit them to the Governor. The Governor is then required to approve or reject the changes in their entirety within 10 calendar days. An affirmative vote of at least six of the eight members of the committee would be required to override any rejection by the Governor.
For calendar year 2016, any changes must be submitted to the committee no later than 30 calendar days after the enactment of the budget and the committee must act within 30 calendar days of receiving the proposed changes.
I am vetoing this provision in its entirety because I object to having the committee infringe on the responsibilities of the board, which was created to set policy and oversee administration of the group health insurance plan for state and local employees, retirees and employers. The committee already has a substantial role given its biennial review of the compensation plan for state employees. Additionally, health plans are already in the process of bidding for calendar year 2016, and requiring the board to submit changes to the committee after enactment of the budget will create a substantial and problematic delay in the rate setting process.
32. Agency Budget Requests
Sections 272d, 272h and 272i
These sections require state agencies, beginning in the 2017-19 biennium, to submit budget requests under three scenarios: (a) no increase in GPR, PR or SEG funding over base with the exception of sum sufficient reestimates and amounts required to comply with federal law; (b) the scenario under (a) modified to include cost-to-continue amounts as well as amounts due to caseload or population adjustments, and amounts necessary to fund previously enacted program commitments; and (c) the scenario under (b) modified to include any amounts requested for programmatic changes.
I am vetoing these sections in their entirety because I object to these restrictions on gubernatorial flexibility to establish budget instructions in a manner consistent with his or her fiscal and policy priorities.
33. Statutory Reserve and Budget Stabilization Fund
Sections 282m, 478d, 478g and 478h
Section 282m specifies that a revenue transfer from the general fund to the budget stabilization fund can only occur if the statutory reserve of 2 percent of GPR appropriations plus compensation reserves has been met in the general fund. Any general fund revenues in excess of 2 percent of GPR appropriations plus compensation reserves would then be subject to the current provision, which transfers to the budget stabilization fund 50 percent of the amount that actual deposits during the fiscal year exceed the amount projected to be deposited in the general fund during the fiscal year.
Under current law, each year, the Department of Administration secretary calculates the difference between the amount of moneys projected to be deposited in the general fund during the fiscal year that are designated as "Taxes" in the general fund summary of the biennial budget bill and the amount of such moneys actually deposited in the general fund during the fiscal year. Under sections 478d and 478g, the required statutory balance at the end of fiscal year 2015-16 would be $65,000,000 plus the amount calculated by the secretary for fiscal year 2015-16; and in fiscal year 2016-17, the balance would be $65,000,000 plus the amount calculated by the secretary for both fiscal year 2015-16 and fiscal year 2016-17.
Section 478h specifies that in fiscal year 2017-18, and in each fiscal year thereafter, the required statutory balance would be the prior fiscal year's required statutory balance plus $5,000,000 and the accumulated amount calculated by the secretary for fiscal year 2017-18, and each fiscal year thereafter, but not to exceed 2 percent GPR appropriations plus compensation reserves.
I am vetoing sections 282m, 478d and 478g, and partially vetoing section 478h, because I object to reducing the amounts to be deposited into the budget stabilization fund in the future. The budget stabilization fund is an important tool that helps ensure the state's financial stability. I support increasing the required statutory balance each fiscal year, however, and am therefore retaining a portion of section 478h, which will add $5,000,000 each year, beginning in fiscal year 2017-18, to the required statutory balance.
34. Utilization of Department of Administration Procurement and Purchasing Services
Sections 282s, 326q, 327b, 327d [as it relates to s. 16.745], 330n, 333r, 334c, 339n, 345b, 345d, 345f, 345h, 346p, 354p, 355b and 355s [as it relates to s. 16.745] These sections specify that the Department of Administration may not require the Department of Employee Trust Funds to utilize the Department of Administration’s procurement and purchasing services. These sections also establish statutory authority and a process for the Department of Employee Trust Funds purchasing function. The Department of Employee Trust Funds would be required to file all bills and statements of purchase with the Department of Administration secretary, who would then be required to audit and authorize payment of such bills and statements. Upon the Department of Employee Trust Funds' request, the Department of Administration would be required to make recommendations and provide assistance regarding purchasing procedures, as well as process requisitions for purchases and procure materials for the Department of Employee Trust Funds.
I am vetoing sections 282s, 326q, 327b, 330n, 333r, 334c, 339n, 345b, 345d, 345f, 345h, 346p, 354p and 355b, and partially vetoing sections 327d [as it relates to s. 16.745] and 355s [as it relates to s. 16.745] because I object to limiting the ability of the Department of Administration to create statewide efficiencies related to procurement. For Chapter 16 purchasing authority, the Department of Employee Trust Funds should be treated like other agencies and operate under Department of Administration procurement policies and contracts unless a delegation agreement is signed by both parties. I am directing the Department of Administration to work collaboratively with the Department of Employee Trust Funds on such an agreement. 35. Pay-for-Performance Contracting Reports
Sections 1785m and 9152 (1c)
Section 9152 (1c) requires all state agencies to review current programs and submit a plan that identifies existing government expenditures that could be decreased or programs that could be improved by using pay-for-performance contracts. The plan must be submitted to the Joint Committee on Finance on or before December 1, 2015.
In addition, under section 1785m, the Department of Children and Families is authorized to issue a request for proposals for a pay-for-performance contract to reduce offender recidivism in the city of Milwaukee. The section specifies that after selecting a proposal, the department must submit a written plan including certain information to the Committee under passive review.
I am vetoing section 9152 (1c) to remove the requirement that all state agencies review current programs and submit a plan to the Committee because it is unduly burdensome to those state agencies that do not have operations that are likely to be candidates for pay-for-performance contracts. With this veto, all state agencies would not be required to review and report as prescribed. However, I direct other cabinet agencies that do have the potential to use these contracts to review applicable programs and consider the use of this type of contracting.
I am partially vetoing section 1785m because I object to the department having to submit a report to the Committee. With this veto, the department would not need to submit the plan under passive review, but would be authorized to pursue the pay-for-performance contract to reduce Milwaukee offender recidivism.
36. Local Zoning Exception
Sections 44b and 44m
These sections exempt the structure or facility constructed for the benefit or use of the state that was enumerated under the state building program as the State Transportation Building Replacement – Madison (the Hill Farms facility) from compliance with municipal zoning ordinances.
Though well-intentioned, I am vetoing these sections because this exemption is unnecessary, as the city and state are working to ensure the project meets local standards and is constructed on schedule.
37. Building Commission Contracting Requirements
Sections 47b, 370, 373b and 374b
These sections clarify the authority of the Building Commission by separating two existing types of alternatives to state construction specified in the statutes.
I am partially vetoing section 47b and fully vetoing sections 370, 373b and 374b because I object to removing acquisition of facilities from the Building Commission's authority and adding a cross-reference that does not clarify the exemption of alternative state construction types from single prime contracting requirements. The intent of this veto is to retain current practice.
38. Health Insurance for Protective Services Employees
Section 1952c
This section specifies that if a first class city offers health care insurance to employees who are police officers, fire fighters or emergency medical technicians, it shall also offer to those employees a high-deductible health plan that has identical design features to the plan offered to state employees.
I am partially vetoing this section because I believe that the city of Milwaukee should be able to choose the specific design features of its high-deductible plan to best suit its overall benefit structure rather than being required to use the design of the state's high-deductible plan.
39. Information Technology Services for Certain Agencies and Shared Agency Services Pilot Program
Section 9101 (5n) (a)
Section 9101 (5n) requires the Department of Administration to consult with certain agencies to develop a plan for assuming responsibility for human resources, payroll, finance, budgeting, procurement and information technology services, to be submitted to the Joint Committee on Finance by March 1, 2016, for approval under s. 13.10, for implementation beginning July 1, 2016. I am partially vetoing section 9101 (5n) (a) to remove the Board on Aging and Long-Term Care, Board for People with Developmental Disabilities, Office of the Secretary of State, Office of the State Treasurer, Office of the Governor and Office of the Lieutenant Governor from the list of agencies that are subject to the plan. These agencies already receive most, if not all, of the above services from the department. With this veto, the department can focus on plans to extend services to agencies currently receiving few or no services.
40. Energy Efficient Building Designer Tax Deduction Certification
Section 393p
This section directs the Department of Administration to provide any necessary certification for a person, who was the primary designer of an energy efficient commercial building property installed on or in state-owned property, to receive a federal energy efficient commercial buildings tax deduction.
I am vetoing this section because this requirement poses a significant administrative burden to the department for a tax deduction that has already been eliminated as of December 31, 2014. Significant department staff and resources would be needed to apply this requirement retroactively and to review past projects and ensure appropriate analysis and documentation is completed to justify and defend equitable allocations of the tax deduction among multiple designers for all state construction projects.
41. Time Allocation for Workers' Compensation Examiners
Section 2830e
This section requires the Department of Administration's Division of Hearings and Appeals to have examiners on its staff to decide and assist in effective adjudication of claims for workers' compensation. In addition, this section specifies that at least 18 administrative law judges must spend at least 80 percent of their time on workers' compensation issues.
I am partially vetoing this section because it unnecessarily limits the ability of the division to manage its caseload and workforce. I proposed this transfer to realize greater efficiencies due to the ability to cross-train staff and to utilize a larger pool of administrative law judges to manage unexpected increases in contested case hearings. While the workers' compensation expertise of current administrative law judges is valuable and needs to be taken into consideration, the specific time allocation of division employees is a function best left to the discretion of the division administrator.
42. Duties of the Secretary of State
Section 1959e
This section creates a new method for certain towns contiguous to a third class city and certain towns contiguous to a village to incorporate without utilizing the Department of Administration's incorporation process if they meet certain criteria. These criteria currently only apply to the town of Windsor in Dane County and the town of Maine in Marathon County. In this section, the town clerk must certify the vote to incorporate and submit a fee to the Secretary of State, who would then issue a certificate of incorporation.
I am partially vetoing this section because I object to the Secretary of State retaining the responsibility to certify an incorporation vote for only these two incorporations. Going forward, the incorporation process will be administered by the Department of Administration. With this partial veto, the town clerk would certify the incorporation vote to the "secretary." The intent of this veto is to retain this function in the Department of Administration.
43. Alternative Telecommunications Utilities
Section 3528m
This section removes the Public Service Commission's authority to require alternative telecommunications utilities to obtain commission approval before abandoning or discontinuing a line, extension or service under current law. In approving a request, the commission must require the utility to remove, from the right-of-way, any pole at ground level or any other structure extending more than three feet above ground level that belongs to the utility at the time of abandonment. Further, if the commission approves such a request and the abandoned right-of-way is in a rural area and was obtained by the utility by condemnation, the utility shall be required to dispose of the right-of-way within three years of the date of approval.
I am vetoing this provision because I do not believe the commission's authority regarding alternative telecommunications utilities should be modified in this manner. These changes would shift responsibility for removing abandoned lines and poles to land owners and municipalities, which may create cost and safety issues. In addition, decisions by providers to abandon service may affect service to customers of interconnected providers. With this veto, the commission's current authority is retained.
44. Intervenor Compensation
Sections 510m, 3532k, 3532m and 3532n
These sections eliminate the authority of the Public Service Commission to make a grant to one or more nonstock, nonprofit advocacy corporations as well as reduce the compensation rate for consumer groups and representatives to 50 percent of the cost of participating in a commission proceeding.
I am vetoing these sections because they are unnecessarily prescriptive. Under current law, the commission has the flexibility to compensate for some or all of the reasonable costs of participation in commission proceedings. With this veto, the commission can continue to ensure only reasonable costs are reimbursed by its intervenor compensation appropriation and prescribe a match as it deems appropriate.
45. Extension of Municipal Water and Sewer Service Appeals Process
Section 1991m
This provision permits a dispute between municipalities concerning the extension of water or sewer service to first be appealed to the Public Service Commission. This provision subsequently permits a municipality involved in a dispute to appeal the decision of the commission to the Department of Natural Resources. The department must provide its decision within 45 days.
