Text of Rule
SECTION 1. ERC 1.06 (1), (2) and (3) are amended to read:
ERC 1.06 Fees. (1) Complaints. At the time a complaint is received alleging that an unfair labor practice has been committed under s.
111.06, Stats., the complaining party or parties shall pay the commission a filing fee of
$40. $80. The complaint is not filed until the fee is paid.
(2) Grievance arbitration. At the time a request is received asking that the commission or its staff act as a grievance arbitrator under s.
111.10, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
(3) Mediation. At the time a request is received asking the commission or its staff to act as a mediator under s.
111.11, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
SECTION 2. ERC 10.21 (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) are amended to read:
ERC 10.21 Fees. (1) Complaints. At the time a complaint is received alleging that a prohibited practice has been committed under s.
111.70(3), Stats., the complaining party or parties shall pay the commission a filing fee of
$40. $80. The complaint is not filed until the fee is paid.
(2)
Grievance arbitration. At the time a request is received asking that the commission or its staff act as a grievance arbitrator under s.
111.70 (4) (c) 2., or
(cm) 4., Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
(3) Mediation. At the time a request is received asking the commission or its staff to act as a mediator under s.
111.70 (4) (c) 1. or
(cm) 3., Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee or
$125. $250.
(4) Fact-finding. At the time a request is received asking the commission to initiate fact-finding under s.
111.70 (4) (c) 3., Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125, $250, except that if the parties have previously paid a mediation filing fee for the same dispute under sub. (3), no fee shall be paid.
(5) Interest arbitration. At the time a request is received asking the commission to initiate interest arbitration under s.
111.70 (4) (cm) 6.,
(4) (jm) or
111.77 (3), Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125, $250, except that if the parties have previously paid a mediation filing fee for the same dispute under sub. (3), no fee shall be paid.
SECTION 3. ERC 20.21 (1), (2), (3) and (4) are amended to read:
ERC 20.21 Fees. (1) Complaints. At the time a complaint is received alleging that an unfair labor practice has been committed under s.
111.84, Stats., the complaining party or parties shall pay the commission a filing fee of
$40. $80. The complaint is not filed until the fee is paid.
(2) Grievance arbitration. At the time a request is received asking that the commission or its staff act as a grievance arbitrator under s.
111.86, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
(3) Mediation. At the time a request is received asking the commission or its staff to act as a mediator under s.
111.87, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125. $250.
(4) Fact-finding. At the time a request is received asking the commission to initiate fact-finding under s.
111.88, Stats., the parties to the dispute shall each pay the commission a filing fee of
$125, $250, except that if the parties have previously paid a mediation filing fee for the same dispute under sub. (3), no fee shall be paid.
Analysis Prepared by the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission
The emergency rules provide the increased filing fee revenue needed to support 2.0 Program Revenue positions authorized by
2003 Wisconsin Act 33.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Small businesses rarely use those Commission's services impacted by the increase in filing fees. The occasional impact on small business of the fee increase will be limited to payment of the employer share of the increased fees.
Fiscal Estimate
During the last four fiscal years, WERC has averaged $225,000 in filing fee revenue.
WERC estimates that doubling the existing filing fee levels will produce some reduction in the requests for WERC fee-related services but produce an additional $200,000 in fee revenues annually.
Because the vast majority of filing fee revenue is derived from services for which the union and employer each pay 50% of the fee and because the vast majority of the WERC's fee-related services are provided to public sector employers and the unions representing their employees, WERC anticipates that doubling the existing fees will increase the costs of public sector employers by $100,000 annually.
Contact Person
Notice of Hearing
Workforce Development
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to ss.
49.137 (4m) and
227.11, Stats., the Department of Workforce Development proposes to hold a public hearing to consider changes to ch.
DWD 59, relating to the child care local pass-through program.
Hearing Information
Wednesday, November 12, 2003
GEF 1 Building, Room B103
201 E. Washington Avenue
Madison, WI
1:30 p.m.
Interested persons are invited to appear at the hearing and will be afforded the opportunity to make an oral presentation of their positions. Persons making oral presentations are requested to submit their facts, views, and suggested rewording in writing.
Visitors to the GEF 1 building are requested to enter through the left East Washington Avenue door and register with the customer service desk. The entrance is accessible via a ramp from the corner of Webster Street and East Washington Avenue. If you have special needs or circumstances that may make communication or accessibility difficult at the hearings, please call (608) 267-9403 at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Accommodations such as ASL interpreters, English translators, or materials in audiotape format will be made available on request to the fullest extent possible.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Workforce Development
The federal Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), a federal block grant, makes federal child care funding available to states that can contribute the required match at the state's federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) rate. Wisconsin's current FMAP rate is approximately 42%. The state child care local pass-through program began in 1999 to bring federal CCDF funds into the state that had been left unmatched in the state budget. Through the child care pass-through program, the department awards grants to all local governments and tribes that supply the match required to bring the funds into the state. In the three grant cycles that have occurred thus far, $11.4 million, $14 million, and $17.25 million have been awarded for services in approximately 66 counties to fund activities such as accommodation of children with disabilities, education of providers, and staff retention strategies.
Increased match rate.
2003 Wisconsin Act 33 allocated the state's CCDF funds in a manner that assumes an increase in the match rate that local governments and tribes must contribute to receive pass-through funds. Federal law requires that federal CCDF funds received by the state as a whole be matched at the state's FMAP rate.
2003 Wisconsin Act 33 allocated some of the state's CCDF funds to the direct child care subsidy program under s.
49.155, Stats., with match through general purpose revenue at less than the state's FMAP rate. Budget documents indicate that the legislature intended that local governments contribute a higher match under the pass-through program to cover the state match shortfall in the direct subsidy program and ensure that Wisconsin does not lose valuable federal child care dollars available under CCDF. The Legislative Fiscal Bureau document entitled
Comparative Summary of Budget Recommendations-- Governor and Joint Committee on Finance, June 2003 specifies that the Joint Finance option for funding the pass-through program, which was eventually adopted, would require local agencies to contribute 52% matching funds in 2003-2004 and slightly more in 2004-2005. This document is available at
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/lfb/2003- 05budget
/JFC/dwd.pdf. The pass-through program is discussed at page 35 of the Workforce Development paper and page 731 of the comprehensive document. The current Chapter
DWD 59 requires that local governments and tribes contribute matching funds at the FMAP rate to be eligible for pass-through funds. This order amends the rule so that the match rate for a given year will be dependent on legislative allocation of federal CCDF funds. The department will determine the match rate to be either the FMAP rate or a higher percentage rate needed to meet the state's match requirements under federal CCDF law and state budget appropriations under Chapter
20, Stats.
Administrative process.
2003 Wisconsin Act 33 also reduced funding to the child care local pass-through program by 86%. This dramatically reduced funding necessitates a change in the process for awarding grants. Chapter
DWD 59 currently requires a 2-step grant process wherein a statewide request for continuation plans is issued and grants awarded for continuing grants, with funds set aside for a second statewide request for proposals for initial grants. Current grantees receive up to 75% of the funds under a noncompetitive process for 2 years following the receipt of the initial grant, and can compete, along with any eligible jurisdiction in the state, for the remaining 25% or more as initial grantees under the same matching terms.
This rulemaking order changes that process to allow all funds to be committed to continuing grants if there is insufficient funding to provide continuing grants of at least 50% of the eligible grantees' initial grant levels from the previous two grant cycles. Jurisdictions receiving continuing grants generally provide more service for the program dollar because they have already done the start-up work and are building the sustainability of programs that are filling a community need. There are currently 63 initial grantees representing approximately 130 jurisdictions in over 60 counties. If grants were awarded to new grantees, the amount of initial grants that could be awarded would be quite small, given the limited funding for the pass-through program. An inordinate amount of these small grants would be spent on start-up costs and some grantees may reject the grant once it is awarded.
Even if the grant process is not changed to allow all funds to be committed to continuing grants, it is likely that current grantees would still receive most of the funds available under the open initial grant process. While the initial grants process is open and awards funds to all eligible applicants, current grantees are likely to claim most, if not all, of the funds available under any new initial grants process. They were the only jurisdictions submitting eligible applications in 2002, have demonstrated interest in the pass-through program, have services in progress that are facing significant budget shortfalls, have experience with the grant application process, and have the matching funds in hand. A two-step grant award process with such limited funds available to distribute is unwieldy and wasteful. The same people at the local level are likely to be filling out 2 applications to receive both a continuing and initial grant, while department staff would have the workload of preparing, distributing, reviewing, and calculating 2 sets of grant awards. This would not only waste state and local staff resources on low-value administrative processes, it would waste state and local public funds at a time when they are in short supply. This could further undermine state and local efforts to ensure a reasonable supply of reliable and quality child care for families who depend on this service in order to work.
This order also amends the rule to provide that if initial grants are awarded, no initial grant will be awarded if the amount would be less than $500.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The proposed rules do not affect small business as defined in s.
227.114, Stats.
Fiscal Impact
The match rate paid by local governments that receive a pass-through grant will increase from approximately 42% to approximately 52% for the current biennium and may vary in future years depending on legislative allocation of federal CCDF dollars. The increased match for pass-through grants will cover the GPR shortfall in funds appropriated to the child care direct subsidy program and allow Wisconsin to draw the full federal funding available under the Child Care Development Funds (CCDF) block grant.
For the current biennium, the rule change allows state government to receive $1,289,800 in federal CCDF dollars that would have otherwise been left undrawn.
2003 Wisconsin Act 33 provides $2,475,100 in SFY04 and $2,478,500 in SFY05 for local pass-through grants. Based on these appropriations, the increased match rate will increase cost to local governments by $918,400.
Contact Information
A paper copy may be obtained at no charge by contacting:
Elaine Pridgen
Office of Legal Counsel
Dept. of Workforce Development
201 E. Washington Avenue
P.O. Box 7946
Madison, WI 53707-7946
(608) 267-9403
elaine.pridgen@dwd.state.wi.us
Written Comments
Written comments on the proposed rules received at the above address no later than November 14, 2003, will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
