I am partially vetoing this provision to remove the report on utilization of services because I believe this report is administratively burdensome.
71. Emergency Physician Services and Reimbursement Workgroup
This provision establishes a workgroup to examine and make recommendations regarding medical services provided in hospital emergency departments to Medical Assistance recipients. The workgroup is to focus on aspects of the healthcare system involving emergency care, specifically patient care practices, medication use and prescribing practices, billing and coding administration, organization of health care delivery systems, care coordination, patient financial incentives, and any other aspects the workgroup finds appropriate.
This provision specifies the workgroup to include: (a) two physicians practicing in Wisconsin representing a statewide physician-member organization of emergency physicians; (b) two representatives of the Division of Medicaid Services, with experience in emergency physician services, codes and payment; (c) one representative who is a hospital emergency department administrator employed by a Wisconsin hospital or hospital-based health system; and (d) one coding/billing specialist from an organization with expertise in the business of emergency medicine that contracts with emergency physicians practicing in Wisconsin.
The provision requires the workgroup to meet no later than 60 days after the effective date of the bill and at least every 45 days following until a consensus of the workgroup has established a set of recommendations. The workgroup is to report its finding to the Joint Committee on Finance no later than September 1, 2018.
I am vetoing this provision because it is duplicative of current managed care and care coordination efforts in the Department of Health Services. I direct the department to continue its efforts.
72. Youth Crisis Stabilization Facility
These provisions create two new facilities for serving individuals with mental health needs. First, these provisions modify the Governor's budget initiative to allow the Department of Health Services to make transfers from its program revenue appropriation that funds the general operations of the state mental health institutes by transferring $450,000 PR in fiscal year 2018-19 on a one-time basis to a new program revenue, all moneys received appropriation for the purpose of contracting for a peer-run respite center for veterans in the Milwaukee area.
Further, these provisions modify language included in the Governor's budget to establish a youth crisis stabilization facility eliminating funding from the department and requiring the department to submit a request under s. 13.10 to the Joint Committee on Finance for release of funds allocated for youth crisis stabilization grants. The provisions require the department to submit any such request to the Joint Committee on Finance prior to the department soliciting proposals and allows the Committee to approve or modify and approve any plan submitted for review. A new sum certain appropriation is created in the department to receive any approved transfer of authority from the Committee and fund the costs of the facility. These provisions also require the department to include in its 2019-21 budget request, a proposal to provide ongoing GPR funding for both the peer-run respite center for veterans as well as the youth crisis stabilization facility.
Finally, both the new appropriation for the peer-run respite center for veterans as well as the appropriation for the crisis stabilization facility are repealed at the end of the biennium, as is the authority to transfer any balances from the state operations for the mental health institutes appropriation for these purposes.
I believe both a youth crisis stabilization facility and a peer-run respite center for veterans are important tools for the department to support and treat individuals with complex mental health needs and potentially significant mental health crises. I object to the overly burdensome requirements laid out in the bill and believe they will impede the ability for the department to negotiate and enter into contracts for both services, thereby delaying critical treatment options for some of Wisconsin's most vulnerable citizens. In order to give the department full flexibility in implementing these important programs, I am partially vetoing the provisions in the following ways.
First, I am partially vetoing section 183 [as it relates to s. 20.435 (5) (kd)] and vetoing section 379j to remove the appropriation for the youth crisis stabilization facility. Further, I am vetoing section 9120 (1b) to remove any requirements for the department to seek funding from the Joint Committee on Finance to implement this program. I object to this overly burdensome process and believe this type of treatment center should be implemented as soon as the department believes it is feasible to do so. I am also partially vetoing section 183 [as it relates to s. 20.865 (4) (g)] by lining out the appropriation and writing in a smaller amount that reduces the appropriation by $1,245,500 in fiscal year 2017-18. I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary to not allot these funds. Next, I am partially vetoing section 183 [as it relates to s. 20.435 (5) (kp)] related to the peer-run respite center for veterans by striking the words "veterans peer-run respite" from the title of the appropriation to broaden its scope in order to fund both the peer-run respite center for veterans and a youth crisis stabilization center. I am also partially vetoing section 379p to further broaden the scope of the appropriation. However, I direct the department to expend at least $450,000 PR for a peer-run respite center for veterans and at least $1,245,500 PR for a youth crisis stabilization facility, consistent with the amounts approved for each by the Legislature. Further, I am partially vetoing section 377 to allow sufficient funding to be transferred from the appropriation funding operations of the mental health institutes to fund the youth crisis stabilization facility and the peer-run respite center for veterans.
Lastly, I am vetoing the remaining provisions to ensure ongoing funding for both the peer-run respite center and the youth crisis stabilization facility.
I believe these changes will allow the department to implement these important mental health treatment options in the most efficient manner possible.
73. Disposition of Surplus Revenue Balance in the Mental Health Institutes Appropriation
This provision requires the Department of Health Services, at the close of each even-numbered fiscal year, to provide county and tribal human services agencies with the unencumbered balance in the program revenue appropriation account for the state mental health institutes. If this amount exceeds 17 percent of the expenditures from the appropriation in the even-numbered year, the department must include a spending plan for the balance in its next biennial budget request. The department is required to consult with county human services agencies in developing the proposal.
While consultation between the Department of Health Services and counties is an integral part to setting policy, I am vetoing this provision as I believe it is overly burdensome for the agency and encroaches on the executive branch's responsibility to manage state agency programs within the statutes and funding levels set by the Legislature. In addition, these consultations already occur without a statutory requirement.
74. Office of Children's Mental Health Travel Reimbursement
Section 392c
This provision requires the Department of Health Services to fund, from within its base resources in its GPR general administration appropriation, travel reimbursements for individuals with firsthand mental health experience to participate in Office of Children's Mental Health meetings.
I am vetoing this provision because the Department of Health Services has the ability to provide funding for this purpose and so the authorization in statute for the department to fund these costs is duplicative and unnecessary.
Department of Veterans Affairs
75. Veterans Trust Fund and State Veterans Homes
Sections 739qg, 739qm, 9149 (1f) and 9149 (1g)
These provisions make a series of changes to the Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs veterans trust fund and State Veterans Homes. Under these provisions, the Department of Veterans Affairs is prohibited from making any transfer from the unencumbered program revenue balance of the Veterans Homes to the veterans trust fund unless the transfer has been approved by the Joint Committee on Finance.
The Department of Veterans Affairs is required to prepare a report that contains all of the following: (a) a description and analysis of the administrative costs supported by the veterans trust fund and veterans home revenue; (b) proposes any changes to the department's programs, administrative structure or position level and salaries to increase efficiency or lower administrative costs; and (c) proposes two long-term plans to maintain solvency of the veterans trust fund, one of which allows for transfers from the homes and one of which uses no such transfers.
Further, these sections require the department to submit proposed changes to VA 6 of the Administrative Code to include a formula for calculating private pay rates for nursing home and assisted living care at Veterans Homes and to clearly define rate-setting terms. Further, the department is required to submit a report to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee and the Joint Committee on Finance by January 1, 2018, on the cash balance in the Veterans Home program revenue appropriation it believes is appropriate to maintain, and its efforts to develop, and routinely update, a detailed plan for the management and proposed use of the cash balance.
Finally, under these sections the department is required to submit a report to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee and the Joint Committee on Finance by January 1, 2018, on its efforts to (a) establish a systematic process for comprehensively identifying and assessing the capital-related project needs for the State Veterans Homes, and (b) the use of this information to complete a ten-year facilities plan for the Veterans Homes and to help develop its required six-year facilities plans in the future.
I am vetoing these provisions because I object to the creation of a series of additional mandated reports which are administratively burdensome and redirects valuable staff time away from care for veterans. Further, I believe these requirements encroach on the executive branch's responsibility to manage state agency programs within the statutes and funding levels set by the Legislature.
Budget Management
76. General Fund Structural Balance
Section 140k
This section prohibits general fund net appropriations from exceeding general fund revenues in the second year of the fiscal biennium for every future Governor's budget bill submitted to the Legislature.
I am vetoing this section for several important reasons.
First, I am vetoing this section because I object to the unnecessary constraint that this provision places upon the Governor's budget recommendations. Prudent budgeting can, and has been, undertaken without this constraint. This unnecessary limitation would prohibit the Governor from recommending the return of excess funds at the beginning of the second year of a fiscal biennium to the people of Wisconsin through reduced taxes, increases in state aid or enhanced state programs.
Second, I am vetoing this section because it is poorly placed in the budget process and, consequently, can be expected to create unnecessary uncertainty for the funding of state programs. It is poorly placed because the Governor's budget recommendations are made prior to the final general fund revenue estimates used for budget passage that the Legislative Fiscal Bureau typically makes in May of each odd-numbered year. As a result, this section may generate unneeded angst regarding the funding of a wide variety of state aids and programs despite an expected excess balance in the state's general fund.
Third, I am vetoing this section because it establishes a standard contradictory to legislative action. This requirement would submit the Governor's budget to a constraint that the Legislature has explicitly excluded itself from in recent budgets, including this 2017-19 budget act.
Finally, I am vetoing this section because it forces the Executive Budget Bill to be incomplete, in that it cannot be fully tailored to address the state's fiscal circumstances. By prohibiting all Governors, both current and future, from having the current level of budget flexibility in making gubernatorial budget recommendations, it gives the Legislature an incomplete outline, direction and vision to move the state forward in the best manner possible just as the Legislature begins its budget deliberations.
General Fund Taxes
77. Refundable Business Tax Credit Claims
Sections 1036h, 1036Lm, 1037bc, 1037bd, 1037be, 1037d, 1037e, 1037f, 1037g, 1037h, 1037i [as it relates to s. 71.07 (3wm) (c) and (d)], 1037t, 1037u, 1037v, 1037w, 1038g, 1038h, 1085ba, 1085bb, 1085bc, 1085bd, 1085be, 1085d, 1085e, 1085f, 1085g, 1085h, 1085i [as it relates to 71.28 (3wm) (c) and (d)], 1086b, 1086d, 1086e, 1086f, 1086g, 1086h, 1110ba, 1110bb, 1110bc, 1110bd, 1110be, 1110d, 1110e, 1110f, 1110g, 1110h, 1111b, 1111d, 1111e, 1111f, 1111g, 1111h, 1769v, 1779L, 1783q and 9150 (3t) These provisions require that claims for credits awarded by the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation must be filed with and paid by the corporation from the tax credit appropriations using policies and procedures developed by the corporation’s board. In addition, these provisions require that credits earned by pass-through entities be claimed by the business entity itself rather than the individual owners of the business. Finally, these provisions specify that the corporation may recover such credits that have been revoked or that are otherwise invalid from either the pass-through entity or the entity’s individual owners.
I am vetoing these provisions because I object to transferring these responsibilities from the Department of Revenue to the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation, which may result in a diminution of internal controls that safeguard against incorrect payments. I appreciate the desire for efficiency by consolidating functions with the corporation, but the department has a well-established system to prevent incorrect payments of these credits that would be unnecessarily jeopardized by transferring these functions to the corporation.
78. Limit on Enterprise Zones
Sections 1783L and 1783o
These provisions eliminate the current law limit that the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation may not designate more than 30 zones under the Enterprise Zone Jobs Tax Credit program. Instead, the provisions specify that the corporation may not verify businesses as eligible to claim enterprise zone credits of more than $80,600,000 biennially, beginning with the 2017-19 biennium. The corporation would be permitted to exceed the biennial limit if such an action is approved by the Joint Committee on Finance subject to a 14-day passive review process.
I am vetoing these provisions because I object to fully removing the 30-zone limitation on the corporation while also imposing limitations on credit payments that could result in uncertainty for recipients regarding when their credits, which are subject to existing contracts specifying timetables for payment, may be claimed. The biennial limitation on verifications may result in situations where key Wisconsin companies would face significant delays between when their qualifying activity takes place and when they may claim the credits for those activities. This would weaken the attractiveness of the enterprise zone program for businesses, potentially harming the ability of the state to attract and retain businesses.
79. Historic Rehabilitation Credit
Section 1775g
This section creates a limitation on the historic rehabilitation tax credit that limits the amount of credits the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation may certify to no more than $5 million on the same parcel. This limitation would first take effect with certifications beginning on July 1, 2018.
I am partially vetoing this because I object to continuing this program with almost no limitation on the amount that can be awarded each fiscal year. The $5 million per parcel limitation does little to curtail the fiscal effects of this program, which has swelled to cause an annual tax revenue loss exceeding $60 million, making it one of this state’s most expensive economic development incentives. My budget proposal included a recommendation to limit program awards to $10 million annually and institute competitive awards of those credits to emphasize job creation potential, among other considerations, in order to balance the state’s fiscal exposure with the needs of local communities. I am using the digit veto to reduce the per parcel cap from $5,000,000 to $500,000. Reducing the per parcel cap to $500,000 per parcel leaves unchanged the incentives for many of the projects in smaller communities across Wisconsin while reducing the state’s fiscal exposure on larger projects. I am maintaining the July 1, 2018, effective date for this new cap to allow projects currently under consideration time to incorporate the limitation into their plans.
Roughly half of states have per project caps and a third of those state have per project caps at or lower than $500,000. Of the awards approved since 2014, just under half have been for $500,000 or less.
Further, while I support the reasonable changes made through this veto, the Legislature could pursue separate legislation that more closely mirrors my original budget recommendations to more thoroughly reform this program, addressing both the state’s fiscal exposure and program objectives in a comprehensive manner.
The fiscal effect of this veto is estimated to be an increase in general fund tax revenue of $1,220,700 in fiscal year 2018-19, $12,062,900 in fiscal year 2019-20 and $33,173,000 in fiscal year 2020-21. Savings would grow to $46,241,200 in fiscal year 2021-22 and $47,390,000 annually beginning in fiscal year 2022-23.
80. Working Families Tax Credit
Section 1041e
This section repeals the Working Families Tax Credit beginning with the 2017 tax year.
I am vetoing this section because I object to entirely eliminating the Working Families Tax Credit instead of addressing the narrower issue of ensuring that credits may only be claimed by full-time Wisconsin residents, which I proposed in the Executive Budget for the 2017-19 biennium. The fiscal effect of vetoing this provision will be a loss of $200,000 in general fund tax revenue in each year of the biennium.
81. Private Label Credit Card Bad Debt Deduction
Section 2265
This section delays the effective date for 2013 Wisconsin Act 229, which pertains to allowing sales tax return adjustments for bad debts on private label credit cards, until July 1, 2018, instead of the September 1, 2019, recommended in the Executive Budget. I am exercising the digit veto in this section to delay the effective date to July 1, 2078, because I object to incurring a large fiscal effect in this biennium. The effect of this veto will be to achieve the same result as my original budget recommendations. These funds may be better spent on broad-based relief such as with a sales tax holiday that was included in my original budget recommendations as opposed to a provision that will benefit only select financial institutions. Partially vetoing this provision will increase sales and use tax collections by $10,436,000 in fiscal year 2018-19.
82. Sales Tax Exemption for Broadcast Equipment
Sections 1187d, 1187e, 1187f and 9438 (2i)
These provisions create a sales and use tax exemption for broadcast transmitters, satellite dishes and communications towers if the equipment is used primarily for transmitting or receiving commercial radio or television material. This sales tax exemption would first be effective on July 1, 2019, and would cause an annual general fund revenue loss of $928,000. These provisions also exempt a vehicle if it is used exclusively in the origination of radio or television programs. In addition, these provisions create an exemption for leased space on a communications tower if the space is used exclusively for transmitting or receiving commercial radio or television program material. For the purposes of this exemption, "program material" is defined to mean material generally available to the public free of charge.
I am vetoing these provisions because I object to providing a sales and use tax exemption that does not have any clear tax equity or economic purpose. It is unclear if any meaningful activity would be incentivized by this exemption. Further, there is no compelling tax equity issue being addressed by this sales and use tax exemption. This may be better reviewed as separate legislation. Vetoing this provision will increase annual revenue collections by $928,000 beginning in fiscal year 2019-20.
83. Alternative Minimum Tax Repeal Technical Correction
Section 1052e
This section sunsets the state alternative minimum tax with taxable years beginning after December 31, 2016. Separately in the bill, nonstatutory language specifies that the effective date for the repeal is for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2018.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove the "2016" reference in the applicable taxable years, which is inconsistent with the general effective dates of this provision and the Legislature’s stated intent. The intent of this provision is to sunset the state alternative minimum tax with taxable years beginning after December 31, 2018. This corrective partial veto will leave the only sunset date as the nonstatutory language setting the initial applicability of the repeal as December 31, 2018.
Local Government
Section 981e
This section specifies that the duties and responsibilities of the Milwaukee County Comptroller include administering accounts payable, payroll, accounting and financial information systems, in addition to those duties and responsibilities specified under current law.
I am vetoing this section because I object to how the increased specification of duties for the Milwaukee County Comptroller in state law will diminish how the county may best structure its administrative responsibilities.
_Hlk49297546085. County Board Approval for Sale or Lease of Land Owned by Milwaukee County Sections 980s, 980se, 981h, 981m [as it relates to land transactions in Milwaukee County], 982f and 9331 (7t)
These sections specify that, with regard to the sale or lease of property owned by Milwaukee County, the Milwaukee County Executive's action must be consistent with established county board policy and must be approved by the county board to take effect. In addition, these sections provide that the county board may only approve or reject a contract for the sale or lease of county property as negotiated by the Milwaukee County Executive. These sections also delete current law provisions that permit the Milwaukee County Executive, together with either the Milwaukee County Comptroller or an appointed real estate executive, to form a majority to lease, sell or convey any nonpark county property regardless of board policy and without board approval. These changes apply to a land transaction for which a contract has been entered into after September 1, 2018.
I am vetoing these sections [as these sections relate to land transactions in Milwaukee County] because these changes would hinder recent progress made to provide the Milwaukee County Executive with effective and efficient means to conduct the county’s business transactions.
86. Conduit Revenue Bonds
Sections 8s, 177s, 179e, 179f, 179s, 585h, 984g, 984gb, 984gc, 984gd, 984ge, 984gf, 984gg, 984gh, 984gi, 984gj, 984gk, 984gL, 984gm, 984gn, 984go, 984gp, 984gq, 984gqf, 984gr, 984gs, 984gt, 984gu, 984gv, 984gw, 984gx, 984gy, 984h, 984hb, 984hc, 984hd, 984he, 984hf and 984hg
This provision modifies current law as it relates to the Public Finance Authority and its ability to issue bonds in an assortment of ways, including empowering the authority to create one or more business units to carry out, or assist the authority in carrying out, all or part of the purposes or powers of the authority. In addition, the provision modifies the requirements for local approval of financing by the authority; broadens the authority's ability to own or operate property; and extends the existing personal liability law exemptions to officers, employees and agents of the authority and related business units.
