I am vetoing Assembly Bill 912 in its entirety.
This bill limits the use of emergency powers during emergencies.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to the Legislature potentially preventing small businesses from receiving targeted relief and resources designed specifically to support small, family-owned businesses during an economic emergency, and I object to potentially having to use economic relief programs designed for small, family-owned, and main street businesses to support big box corporations.
Economic crises often have disproportionate effects on small, main street businesses compared to larger corporations and big businesses. To this end, a state’s immediate economic relief and recovery efforts must make intentional and targeted investments to support local main streets and economies that otherwise might not be able to leverage economic resources to the same extent as large, corporate counterparts. See, for example, my administration’s “We’re All In” small business grant program announced in May 2020 to respond to the coronavirus pandemic, which was funded through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act. Our program invested $75 million in the early days of the pandemic to provide $2,500 in cash grants to help businesses with cost interruptions or health and safety improvements, paying worker salaries and wages, rent and mortgages, and inventory. These grants were critically important in helping small businesses across our state and were specifically targeted to go to small businesses with 20 or fewer employees.
Investing specifically in Wisconsin small businesses has been a central focus of our economic relief and recovery efforts during a state of emergency. The “We’re All In” grant program referenced above was just one of many I have implemented to specifically provide targeted resources and assistance in response to this economic crisis. In fact, my administration has been proud to be a national leader in the share of the federal aid we have directed to economic development and small business support. An analysis conducted in November 2021 found Wisconsin ranked second in the country for aid we have directed to economic development and first in the country in aid, we have allocated to businesses. During this pandemic, we have helped more than 100,000 small businesses, including helping more than 3,400 small businesses open up storefronts in all 72 counties. Clearly, many of these programs were directed to help small businesses, not big box corporations.
This bill would have potentially forced us to reduce or even eliminate altogether some of the economic support programs we ultimately devoted to our small businesses, instead requiring us to provide the same economic support to big-box corporations as well—no matter how big they are or how much money they have—to the significant detriment of Wisconsin’s small businesses that desperately needed our help. Under this bill, any future state action relating to an emergency must be applied to all businesses uniformly, which could prevent the state from responding to an emergency by providing targeted resources to specifically help small businesses without necessarily providing those same resources to big box corporations, too.
I am concerned that, under this bill, the state would not be able to implement future economic relief and support programs designed to help small businesses without having to provide the same support to big businesses and corporations that likely do not need that same support as main street businesses in an economic crisis. We prioritized using our federal pandemic aid to go to small businesses rather than big-box businesses and corporations in recognition of the fact that most small businesses do not have the economic reserves, resources, and leverage big businesses and corporations do that are necessary to weather and survive economic turbulence.
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 932 in its entirety.
This bill would mandate the Governor to provide at least $20 million in federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding to the Department of Workforce Development for the purpose of promoting apprenticeship programs to school districts with low or no apprenticeship program participation, increasing approved apprenticeship programs, and funding apprenticeship completion awards.
I welcome the opportunity to invest in, promote, and expand youth apprenticeship programs in our state. The 2019-21 biennial budget I signed included $10 million to invest in local youth apprenticeship grants over the biennium. With changes made through the 2021-23 biennial budget I signed in July 2021 we added an additional $1 million annually to invest $12 million into youth apprenticeship grants across our state over this biennium.
Moreover, while our unemployment rate has rebounded to even better than pre-pandemic levels and continues to be at historic lows, our state has long faced workforce challenges that preceded the coronavirus pandemic. Wisconsin has always been proud of our high workforce participation rates—Wisconsinites are hard workers by nature. We have had the fewest number of people unemployed ever in our state’s history as people across our state have returned to work. At the same time, we also know we need to find meaningful, long-term solutions to train our talented workers and bring more workers to our state.
My administration and I have, thankfully, not waited for Legislative direction to begin this important work. In fact, I was proud to announce an investment of more than six times what the Legislature is proposing here. In July 2021, I announced I would be investing $130 million into solutions to help address our state’s long-term workforce challenges. This investment included $100 million to develop innovative, community-based solutions to supporting our workforce, apprenticeship, and work training, $20 million toward subsidizing employment and skills training to individuals who are unemployed, and $10 million to help connect workers with available jobs. Today, much of this investment has already been awarded to important projects and efforts in every corner of our state.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to the Legislature’s effort to limit the state’s ability to use federal funds. In Wisconsin, it is the role of the Governor to oversee the use of federal funds under Section 16.54 of the Wisconsin State Statutes, which is clearly established, has been in place for decades, and was reaffirmed by legislative leadership in a letter sent to me in April 2020. Moreover, as outlined above, Wisconsin has long been leading on this issue by making these critical, significant investments without the Legislature’s direction. I am vetoing Assembly Bill 940 in its entirety.
The bill would require the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC) to submit within 30 days a plan to the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Finance describing in detail how the WEDC intends to make expenditures required under 2021 Wisconsin Act 58—the 2021-23 biennial budget—using funds approved for talent attraction and retention initiatives. I am vetoing this bill because I object to the Legislature’s unnecessary interference in the WEDC’s administration of talent attraction and retention initiatives.
The Legislature crafted the very provision in the 2021-23 biennial budget relating to talent attraction and retention not even one year ago now, having seemingly determined the WEDC could implement those initiatives without being micromanaged by the Legislature. The WEDC fully intends to meet its requirements under 2021 Wisconsin Act 58 to expend at least $3 million on talent attraction and retention initiatives during the 2021-23 biennium. I am vetoing Assembly Bill 941 in its entirety.
The bill would require the Governor to allocate federal funding received under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 to the Department of Transportation to create three programs to increase the number of people with commercial driver licenses.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to limiting the state’s ability to use federal funds with the flexibility necessary to confront the variety of challenges posed by the recovery from the coronavirus pandemic and to respond to Wisconsin’s changing needs. More specifically, it is the role of the Governor in Wisconsin to oversee federal fund use under Section 16.54 of the Wisconsin State Statutes, which is clearly established, has been in place for decades, and reaffirmed by legislative leaders in an April 2020 letter. Additionally, I am also vetoing this bill because I object to locating a workforce development program within the Department of Transportation. The bill’s proposed programs are outside the scope of the Department of Transportation’s traditional mission and duties and would limit the exploration of better or complementary options for workforce training efforts.
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 962 in its entirety.
This bill would require that, if requested, the University of Wisconsin System institutions must cooperate with and participate in a Department of Public Instruction-initiated “landscape analysis” of certain educator preparation programs for which the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee approved using funds from the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to this bill creating duplicative processes. Every institution in the University of Wisconsin System offering an education preparation program that ultimately leads to licensure is already reviewed by the Department of Public Instruction and the Higher Learning Commission. Additionally, the bill would implement a lengthy process with no continual funds to support increased associated administrative and implementation responsibilities. Instead, the process is supported by existing funds that should be used to support student reading achievement right now. Finally, the data used by the bill’s authors is problematic. The state’s Badger Exam differs from those that formed the basis for the national tests relied on by the bill authors and the 2018-19 results of the state test pointed to a higher proficiency rate than the national exams.
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 965 in its entirety.
This bill requires the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) to seek legislative approval for any changes to future report card measures, index systems, or other components, methods, and formulas by requiring DPI to promulgate rules. Further, the bill prohibits DPI from weighing pupil growth more heavily than pupil performance in calculating overall school report card scores. Finally, it requires DPI to use components and formulas used for school and school district report cards for the 2018-19 school year for report cards prepared for the 2021-22 school year.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to the Legislature’s continued efforts to politicize our schools and our classrooms. For years, DPI has reported school and school district report cards on an annual basis. This bill would constrain DPI’s ability to improve how it calculates school report card scores, including changes based on input from parents, educators, and school administrators, as well as education experts, on what metrics best reflect school and student achievement. As I have said before and appreciate the opportunity to reiterate again today, I trust parents, educators, and schools to work together to do what is best for our kids—they have long been doing this work without political interference and micromanagement by the Legislature.
Moreover, this legislation again fails to provide meaningful investments in our kids and our schools. Our kids have faced an especially challenging few years due to the coronavirus pandemic. We must act swiftly to ensure our kids have the support and resources to be successful, and that conversation begins with the state upholding its obligation to provide meaningful, sustainable investments in our schools. Over the course of the last three years, we have worked diligently to support and improve school quality after a decade of disinvestment. Now, our pre-K-12 education system ranks 8th best in the country after falling to 17th just five years ago. We can and should do more, I have called repeatedly on the Legislature to do so, and I welcome the opportunity to work together to do what’s best for our kids.
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 967 in its entirety.
This bill requires a school board to include a provision in the authorizing contract of a charter school to allow the charter governing board to open one or more additional charter schools if all of the charter schools operated by the governing board were assigned one of the top two performance categories in the most recent school and school district accountability report published by the Department of Public Instruction.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to the Legislature’s attempt to usurp the local authority of elected school board members to decide what conditions must be met for the expansion of a school board-authorized charter school. Charter schools were first authorized in Wisconsin in 1993 and there are currently more than 200 charter schools authorized by school boards in Wisconsin, each with a carefully considered contract to operate. Each of these charter school governing boards may request additional schools if and when their authorizing contract is renewed by their school board, and locally elected decision-makers can then decide if additional schools are in the best interest of their community. We should trust parents, educators, and school districts to work together to do what’s best for our kids and what makes sense for their local community. The Legislature’s attempt to remove such decision-making authority from local school boards undermines these decisions being made at the local level.
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 968 in its entirety.
This bill creates the Charter School Authorizing Board (CSAB) consisting of the State Superintendent, two members appointed by the Governor, two members appointed by the State Superintendent, and six members appointed by legislative leaders. The CSAB is attached to the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) and may authorize independent charter schools, funded in the same manner as those chartered by the UW System Office of Educational Opportunity (OEO).
I am vetoing this bill because I object to the Legislature’s continued efforts to inject partisan politics and micromanagement into our education system. Specifically, this bill creates an unelected, unaccountable board to authorize and supervise new charter schools in Wisconsin, in violation of Article X, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution. The framers of our constitution vested the supervision of public instruction in the State Superintendent, a constitutional officer elected by the people of this state. Here, the board would not be accountable to the State Superintendent or voters of Wisconsin. Instead, the bill allows Legislative leaders, who are not elected by the entire state, to appoint a majority of the eleven board members.
I further object to complicating our school funding system by creating yet another state-level charter school authorizer. Currently, funding for students in an OEO authorized independent charter school is provided through state General Purpose Revenue (GPR) and a corresponding state general aid reduction to the resident school district of a child attending such a school. While the resident school district is allowed to count the student in their membership for revenue limits and state general aid purposes, they are generally not made whole for the state aid reduction, which can result in higher property taxes for residents in those school districts. This funding system results in inconsistent financial impacts on property taxes and overall public school resources with varying relative costs per pupil and relative property value per pupil.
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 984 in its entirety.
This bill requires that the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents and System institutions establish and use only “objective admissions criteria” in making undergraduate student admissions determinations and course admission criteria and requires that institutions publish the criteria online.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety for several reasons, among them the fact that the concerns this bill purports to address are already addressed under current law—Wisconsin state statutes already prohibit any tests based on partisanship, religion, national origin, or sex in student admissions for the University of Wisconsin System. As I have also said before, I object to the Legislature’s efforts to politicize our campuses and micromanage our higher education institutions. I also object to the Legislature haphazardly mandating the University of Wisconsin System to use only certain criteria in the admissions process that Legislature apparently took no care to even define, much less extrapolate upon, in the present bill before me.
Moreover, this bill would likely have inadvertent but severe consequences for Wisconsin’s workforce and our ability to likewise keep talented Wisconsinites here by arbitrarily limiting enrollment in our universities. In so doing, I am also concerned this bill might necessarily affect non-traditional students, including folks returning to education, service members and veterans, or other individuals who might not have taken a typical path to one of our institutions but who nevertheless are an essential part of our state’s success.
Implementing this bill could severely and negatively impact overall enrollment across the System, hindering both the state’s future workforce and individuals seeking access to the high-quality education System institutions provide.
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 995 in its entirety.
This bill prohibits school board districts or their employees from requiring students to wear face coverings in school buildings or on public school grounds if the student is opted out of the requirement. It also requires a school board to provide a full-time, in-person option for all pupils enrolled in the school district.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to the Legislature inserting itself into mitigation decisions that parents, educators, and schools have been making together at the local school district level throughout this pandemic to keep our kids, our educators, and our classrooms safe. Having spent most of my career working in Wisconsin schools and classrooms, I know that every school district in Wisconsin looks different—they have different challenges, different class sizes, and different facilities. This is among the reasons why many Wisconsin schools returned to in-person instruction in 2020 and we have trusted local districts, parents, and schools, in consultation with local public health officials, to make decisions about mitigation efforts that make sense for their schools based on their unique needs. We will continue to do so.
Respectfully submitted,
TONY EVERS
Governor
_____________
Communications
April 8, 2022
Edward A. Blazel
Assembly Chief Clerk
17 West Main Street, Suite 401
Madison, WI 53703
Dear Chief Clerk Blazel:
hist159919Please add my name as a co-author of Assembly Bill 17, relating to various changes to the worker's compensation law. hist159920Please add my name as a co-author of Assembly Bill 67, relating to storage and processing of sexual assault kits and requiring the exercise of rule-making authority. hist159921Please add my name as a co-author of Assembly Bill 190, relating to the responsibilities of the Law Enforcement Standards Board and disclosure of employment files when recruiting former or current officers. hist159922Please add my name as a co-author of Assembly Bill 297, relating to traffic violations when emergency or roadside response vehicles are present and providing a penalty. hist159923Please add my name as a co-author of Assembly Bill 333, relating to crisis program enhancement grants. hist159924Please add my name as a co-author of Assembly Bill 960, relating to battery or threat to a health care provider or staff member of a health care facility and providing a penalty. Sincerely,
STEVE DOYLE
State Representative
94th Assembly District
