If you are hearing or visually impaired, do not speak English, or have circumstances which might make communication at the hearing difficult and if you, therefore, require an interpreter or a non-English, large print or taped version of the hearing document, contact the person at the address or phone number above. A person requesting a non-English or sign language interpreter should make that request at least 10 days before the hearing. With less than 10 days notice, an interpreter may not be available.
Written Comments
Written comments on the proposed rules received at the above address no later than October 11, 1996, will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Notice of Hearing
Employe Trust Funds
The Wisconsin Department of Employe Trust Funds will hold a public hearing in accordance with the provisions of s. 227.16 (1), Stats., to review this proposed rule, which repeals s. ETF 10.12 (4) (d) and amends s. ETF 10.12 (4) (b) and (c), Wis. Adm. Code, relating to withdrawal of funds invested in the Public Employe Trust Fund by a separate retirement system as permitted by s. 40.03 (1) (n) and (2) (q), Stats.
Hearing Information
The public hearing will be held on:
October 3, 1996 Room 103, GEF I
Thursday 201 East Washington Ave.
At 10:00 a.m. Madison, WI
Written Comments
The public record on this proposed rulemaking will be held open until 4:30 p.m. on Friday, October 4, 1996 to permit the submission of written comments from people unable to attend the public hearing in person, or who wish to supplement testimony offered at the hearing. Any such written comments should be addressed to:
Robert Weber, Chief Legal Counsel
Dept. of Employe Trust Funds
201 E. Washington Ave.
P.O. Box 7931
Madison, WI 53707-7931
Agency Analysis
Statutory authority: s. 40.03 (2) (q)
General Summary of Rule
The City of Milwaukee is one of only two separate retirement systems which has invested its funds in the Public Employe Trust Fund, as permitted under s. 40.03 (1) (n) and (2) (q), Stats., and s. ETF 10.12 (4), Wis. Adm. Code. The City of Milwaukee retirement system desires to withdraw its funds and has begun doing so. The proposed rule would permit the City of Milwaukee to withdraw its funds more rapidly from the Public Employe Trust Fund than is currently permitted, provided the Secretary of the Department of Employe Trust Funds (DETF) determines that no harm would result. The proposed rule is not limited in its application to the City of Milwaukee and would apply to any separate retirement system investing in the Public Employe Trust Fund as permitted under s. 40.03 (1) (n) and (2) (q), Stats.
The present policy is set out in s. ETF 10.12 (4) (c), Wis. Adm. Code, which limits withdrawals as follows:
Withdrawals by a separate retirement system shall be limited in any calendar month to the greater of 5% of the system's balance on deposit or $2 million.
This means that if an account balance exceeds $40 million, the maximum withdrawal is 5% of the balance. As each withdrawal is made, the balance falls and the 5% limit decreases, too. Once the balance on deposit reaches $40 million, withdrawals at a steady $2,000,000 per month may be made. Thus, under the present rule, it would take over five years for a separate retirement system with $374 million on deposit (as the City of Milwaukee had in December 1995 when it began making withdrawals) to fully withdraw its investment from the Trust Fund if it acts as quickly as possible. This time estimate is actually overly optimistic, since it ignores interest earned on the remaining balance which would be credited to the account during the five years, thereby prolonging the time needed to close the account.
Protection against extraordinarily large withdrawals is necessary, to avoid imprudently draining the Trust Fund's cash on hand or interfering with long-range investment plans by forcing the premature sale of investments. However, there is no reason to enforce the present 5% or $2 million limit if larger withdrawals could safely be made without harm to the Public Employe Trust Fund.
The proposed rule allows the DETF Secretary to permit more money to be withdrawn by a separate retirement system each month, provided the Secretary consults prior to each monthly withdrawal with the Executive Director of the State of Wisconsin Investment Board and is satisfied that no harm would result to the Public Employe Trust Fund (i.e., no imprudent reduction of cash on hand and no premature liquidation of investments) and/or to Wisconsin Retirement System participants who have a beneficial interest in the Trust Fund and its earnings.
The proposed rule also establishes the minimum period of advance notice required for any withdrawal at 21 days (instead of the current requirement for 60 days notice of withdrawals in excess of $10 million). Withdrawals are expressly limited to one per month, paid on the first working day of a month, which codifies present practices.
Fiscal Estimate
The Department estimates that there will be no direct fiscal impact from this rulemaking upon the state and anticipates no effect upon the fiscal liabilities or revenues of any county, city, village, town, school district, technical college district or sewerage district.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Department anticipates that the provisions of this proposed rule will have no direct adverse effect on small businesses.
Copies of Rule and Contact Person
Copies of this rule are available without cost by making a request to:
Office of the Secretary
Telephone (608) 266-1071
Dept. of Employe Trust Funds
P.O. Box 7931
Madison, WI 53707
For questions about this rulemaking, please call Robert Weber, Chief Legal Counsel, (608) 266-5804.
Notice of Hearing
Regulation & Licensing
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to authority vested in the Department of Regulation and Licensing in ss. 227.11 (2) and 440.26, Stats., and s. 167.31 (4) (a) 4., Stats., as created by 1995 Wis. Act 122, and interpreting s. 167.31 (4) (a) 4., Stats., the Department of Regulation and Licensing will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to repeal and recreate s. RL 30.02 (7); and to create s. RL 30.02 (4m), relating to a private security person or a private detective carrying a loaded firearm in a vehicle while on duty as a private security person.
Hearing Information
September 27, 1996 Room 133
Friday 1400 E. Washington Ave.
11:00 a.m. MADISON, WI
Written Comments
Interested people are invited to present information at the hearing. People appearing may make an oral presentation, but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to:
Office of Administrative Rules
Department of Regulation & Licensing
P.O. Box 8935
Madison, WI 53708
Written comments must be received by October 11, 1996 to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Analysis Prepared by the Dept. of Regulation & Licensing
Statutes authorizing promulgation: ss. 227.11 (2) and 440.26, Stats., and s. 167.31 (4) (a) 4., Stats., as created by 1995 Wis. Act 122.
Statute interpreted: s. 167.31 (4) (a) 4.
Section 1 creates a definition of “in plain view,” as the Department of Regulation and Licensing is directed in s. 167.31 (4) (a) 4., Stats., as created by 1995 Wis. Act 122. This section of this proposed order permits the private security person to carry a firearm in a holster or without a holster, provided that the firearm or the holster with the firearm in it is entirely discernible from ordinary observation of a person located outside and within the immediate vicinity of the vehicle and is at all times within the control of the private security person and not accessible to other occupants in the vehicle. The holster may not be partially or wholly covered by the uniform of the private security person.
Section 2 repeals and recreates the current definition of “on duty” to clarify that a private security person is not on duty when the private security person drives to or from his or her place of employment or a facility at which he or she receives or intends to receive training to act as a private security person. The effect of this change and that described in Section 1 is to prohibit private security persons from having a loaded weapon in a vehicle when they drive to and from their place of employment or a facility at which they receive or intend to receive training to act as a private security person.
Text of Rule
SECTION 1. RL 30.02 (4m) is created to read:
RL 30.02 (4m) “In plain view,” as used in s. 167.31 (4) (a) 4., Stats., means a firearm which includes the following:
(a) Is not covered by any part of the uniform of a person acting as a private security person.
(b) Is or is not in a holster and the firearm or the holster with the firearm in it is entirely discernible from ordinary observation of a person located outside and within the immediate vicinity of the vehicle and is at all times within the control of the private security person and not accessible to other occupants in the vehicle.
Note: A firearm located in a glove compartment, in a briefcase or under a seat of a vehicle is not “in plain view,” as defined in this section.
SECTION 2. RL 30.02 (7) is repealed and recreated to read:
RL 30.02 (7) (a) “On duty,” except as provided in par. (b), means that time for which or during which a private detective or private security person:
1. Receives or is entitled to receive fees or other compensation for services as a private detective or a private security person; or
2. Acts or purports to be acting as a private detective or private security person.
(b) Notwithstanding subd. 1., “on duty” does not include that time during which a private security person drives in a vehicle to or from his or her place of employment or a facility at which the private security person receives or intends to receive training to act as a private security person.
Fiscal Estimate
1. The anticipated fiscal effect on the fiscal liability and revenues of any local unit of government of the proposed rule is: $0.00.
2. The projected anticipated state fiscal effect during the current biennium of the proposed rule is: $0.00.
3. The projected net annualized fiscal impact on state funds of the proposed rule is: $0.00.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
These proposed rules will be reviewed by the Department through its Small Business Review Advisory Committee to determine whether there will be an economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses, as defined in s. 227.114 (1) (a), Stats.
Copies of Rule and Contact Person
Copies of this proposed rule are available without cost upon request to:
