96_10_02

Donna Doyle
Senate Chief Clerk's Office

The following rules have been published:

Clearinghouse Rule 94-80 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 94-183 effective 1-1-97

Clearinghouse Rule 95-107 part eff. 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 95-190 effective 10-1-97

Clearinghouse Rule 95-195 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 95-222 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 95-233 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-9 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-26 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-27 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-28 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-31 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-45 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-52 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-59 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-60 effective 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-61 part eff. 10-1-96

Clearinghouse Rule 96-88 effective 10-1-96

Sincerely,

Gary L. Poulson

Deputy Revisor

__________________

Referral of Agency Reports

State of Wisconsin
Wisconsin Gaming Board
Madison

September 30, 1996

To the Honorable, the Legislature:

RE: Wisconsin Gaming Commission Quarterly Report

A1208 Included with this correspondence, I am submitting the quarterly report of the Wisconsin Gaming Commission for the year ending June 1996. As required by s. 565.37(3), Wis. Stats., the attached materials contain Wisconsin Lottery sales and financial information, and pursuant to s. 562.02(1)(g), Wis. Stats., parimutual wagering and racing statistical information.

If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].

Sincerely,

F. Scott Scepaniak

Executive Director

Referred to special committee on Gambling Oversight.

__________________

State of Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Administration
Madison

September 30, 1996

To the Honorable, the Assembly:

Attached to this letter is the Clean Water Fund Biennial Finance Plan for FY 1997-1999.

Clean Water Fund legislation requires the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Administration to submit a Biennial Finance Plan to the Legislature and to the State Building Commission by October 1 of each even-numbered year (Section 144.2415(3)(bm), Wisconsin Statutes). The purpose of the plan is to provide information on the present value subsidy and the operations and activities of the Clean Water Fund program for the 1997-1999 biennium.

If you have any questions regarding the Biennial Finance Plan, please contact Kathryn A. Curtner at 266-0860 or Frank Hoadley at 266-2305.

Sincerely,

Kathryn A. Curtner, Director

Office of Government Relations, DNR

FRANK R. HOADLEY, Director

Capital Finance, DOA

Referred to committee on Natural Resources.

__________________

Agency Reports

State of Wisconsin
Department of Health and Family Services
Madison

September 13, 1996

To the Honorable, the Assembly:

In accordance with sec. 1.11(2)(j) Wis. stats., the Department of Health and Family Services reports that it has not conducted any Environmental Impact Statements or Environmental Assessments during the reporting period July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996.

The Department of Administration did not conduct an Environmental Assessment for purchase of the facility in Prairie du Chien for development as a Juvenile Corrections school in the Division of Youth Services, but it did not require continuation into an Environmental Impact Statement.

Sincerely,

JOE Leean

Secretary, DHFS

__________________

State of Wisconsin
Legislative Audit Bureau
Madison

September 19, 1996

To the Honorable, the Legislature:

We have completed a review of state agency efforts to provide prevention programs to children, youth, and families, as directed by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee. These programs have been developed to address a wide variety of problems, including adolescent pregnancy, child abuse and neglect, crime and juvenile delinquency, domestic abuse, alcohol and other drug abuse, poor academic performance and school dropouts, and health problems. In fiscal year (FY) 1994-95, 13 state agencies administered the 88 prevention programs we identified, and program costs totaled $181.8 million.

We found significant overlap in the services provided to prevent various types of problems and in the populations to which these services are directed. While federal regulations have in some instances created barriers to the consolidation of program funds, the State has also created specific requirements that act as barriers to program consolidation.

Some attempts have been made to evaluate the effectiveness of prevention programs. Specifically, within the past ten years, efforts were made to evaluate the effectiveness of 31, or 35.2 percent, of the programs. However, additional efforts are needed if the Legislature and the public are to be assured that funds are dedicated only to programs that are likely to be effective in accomplishing their objectives. In addition, additional efforts to coordinate prevention activities could allow services to be provided more efficiently and effectively at both the state and the local level.

Although most programs could be consolidated within a single agency, more feasible strategies are likely to include consolidating funding for state programs that provide similar services; enhancing local prevention efforts through funding strategies that encourage development of local prevention initiatives and provide more flexibility in the use of state funds; and providing more effective information and technical assistance services, such as identifying effective models that local agencies may use in establishing their own programs.

A1209 Appendices to the report include descriptions of each of the prevention programs administered by state agencies. We appreciate the courtesy and cooperation extended to us by the many state and local staff and representatives of community-based organizations who assisted us during the course of this evaluation. Responses from the Department of Health and Family Services and the Department of Public Instruction, the two agencies to whom we have directed recommendations, are Attachments VI and VII, respectively.

Respectfully submitted,

Dale Cattanach

State Auditor

__________________

State of Wisconsin
State Public Defender
Madison

September 19, 1996

To the Honorable, the Legislature:

This letter constitutes the report of the State Public Defender (SPD) evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the use of the 12 FTE two-year paralegal project positions provided for in the 1995-97 biennial budget (1995 Wisconsin Act 27).

To assist in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the positions, the agency has been soliciting feedback from the paralegals' supervisors on a monthly basis. As indicated in the SPD's Budget Forecasting Report, the agency's experience with the paralegals has yielded primarily positive results. The paralegals have enabled the agency to improve the quality of legal service provided and have demonstrated the potential for increasing the volume of cases handled.

However, the ability of the paralegals to facilitate an increased caseload is limited by licensing restrictions on tasks that they may perform. For example, paralegals may not represent clients in court proceedings, even for routine or uncontested hearings. Because the vast majority of an assistant state public defender's work time is spent in court, a paralegal's work is unable to equate 100% of the statutory attorney caseload.

Agencywide, paralegals currently enable attorneys to handle additional cases approximating, on average, 25% of an attorney caseload. At this rate, the annual savings from caseload generated by use of the paralegals is approximately $364,400. The annual cost of the 12 project positions, including salaries ($328,700), fringe benefits ($108,800) and supplies ($49,200), is approximately $486,700. Consequently, the paralegals currently result in a net annual cost to the agency of approximately $122,300.

The agency believes the paralegal project is still evolving, however, and that the paralegals may increase in efficiency and cost-effectiveness as they become more familiar with the SPD's legal practice and the field supervisors and attorneys become more skilled in their use of paralegals. Therefore, the agency has requested in its 1997-99 biennial budget proposal that the 12 paralegal project positions be continued for another two years at 50% of the statutory attorney caseload. Based on the agency's study of the project thus far, this caseload figure appears to be a more reasonable expectation of what the paralegals may achieve. If the goal is actually met, the agency's use of the paralegals would result in a net annual savings of approximately $242,100 (assuming the cost figure remains constant).

Thank you for your support of the paralegal project and the agency.

Very truly yours,

Sally Mayne Pederson

Legal Counsel, SPD

__________________

State of Wisconsin
Investment Board
Madison

September 20, 1996

To the Honorable, the Legislature:

Section 25.17(14r) of the Statutes, as created by 1995 Wisconsin Act 274, requires that the State of Wisconsin Investment Board (SWIB) submit a report to the Joint Committee on Audit, Joint Committee on Finance, and Chief Clerks of each House summarizing any change in the Board's investment policies, upon adoption of the change.

On September 12, 1996, the Board of Trustees approved a change to the investment guidelines for our domestic equities portfolios. The change is highlighted on the attached copy of the guidelines.