Relating to: the lake acidification experiment at Little Rock Lake.
By
Representative
Handrick
; cosponsored by Senator Breske
.
To committee on Natural Resources.
Assembly Bill 741
Relating to: arrest and conviction record discrimination.
By
Representatives Kelso, Grothman, Zukowski, Underheim, Kaufert, Schneiders, Nass, Plache, Olsen, Silbaugh, Powers, Ladwig and Notestein; cosponsored by Senators Huelsman and Darling
.
To committee on Labor and Employment.
__________________
Executive Communications
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Governor
Madison
December 6, 1995
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly and the Senate:
The following bill(s), originating in the Senate or the Assembly, have been approved, signed and deposited in the office of the Secretary of State:
Assembly Bill Act Number
Date Approved
138107December 6, 1995
222108December 6, 1995
676109December 6, 1995
557 (partial veto)113December 6, 1995
Respectfully submitted,
Tommy G. Thompson
Governor
__________________
Governor's Veto Message
December 6, 1995
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I have approved
Assembly Bill 557 as
1995 Wisconsin Act 113 and deposited it in the Office of the Secretary of State.
The signing of this bill marks the conclusion of a lengthy period of debate about funding for critical transportation improvement projects and local transportation needs. I forwarded two separate revenue and spending proposals to the Legislature to address these needs in the 1995-97 biennium. These proposals included increases in user fees to address declining federal highway aid and increasing multimodal state transportation needs and to provide property tax relief through increases in the state share of local transportation costs. Ultimately, the Legislature chose not to approve the user fee changes I recommended and decided to substantially increase the use of bonding to make more cash available in the short term while substantially increasing our debt obligations over the long term.
I respect the Legislature's efforts to do more with fewer dollars in the operations of the Department of Transportation. I also applaud the resourceful reallocation of dwindling federal dollars toward critical highway rehabilitation efforts. But I cannot approve the extensive use of borrowing to support a transportation program that we cannot afford without changes to federal and state transportation user fee revenue levels.
The transportation bill I am signing is balanced and through my vetoes relies less on borrowing. However, it continues to be a bill that does not adequately provide for long term state and local transportation needs. It will result in significant delays in completing the critical backbone element of the Corridors 2020 plan and reduce the number of miles of state and local roads and streets that will be rehabilitated.
A690
These issues cannot be ignored. In the next biennium, it is anticipated that even more demands, particularly with the Milwaukee freeway system, will arise. The difficult resource decisions faced in this biennium remain and must be addressed in 1997-99.
Total spending under this bill will be $1,497.5 million in fiscal year 1995-96 and $1,510.5 million in fiscal year 1996-97. Net spending from segregated transportation fund revenue will be $959.6 million in fiscal year 1995-96 (a 3.3% increase) and $964.7 million in fiscal year 1996-97 (an increase of 0.5%), for a total of $1.9 billion. Spending for operations decreases to reflect a 5.9% reduction in spending from base.
This bill increases state aid to local governments for transportation-related costs by 3% annually for calendar years 1996 and 1997. The share of the state funded transportation budget allocated to local road aids increases over 3% under this bill. On the other hand, the non-highway operations (State Patrol, Motor Vehicles and general department operations) share of the budget declines almost 8%. Funding for accelerating the Highway 29 project is included to ensure that this key transportation artery is completed by December 31, 2000.
I am signing this bill with a total of 11 vetoes. Some of these vetoes are technical in nature and clean up conflicting language or drafting problems. Other vetoes establish more reasonable timelines for the several new one-time reports, studies, or legislative approvals created by the Legislature for the Department of Transportation. I have continued to recognize the importance of these reports by requesting a later completion date in the veto message.
The partial vetoes I am executing will also provide more funding for state highway rehabilitation efforts through the revenue certification procedure included in the bill. Assuming no change in current revenue estimates, my vetoes will increase funding for highway rehabilitation by over $1,900,000 in fiscal year 1996-97. This funding will help to offset the minimal increases provided in the bill for this crucial program.
We need to face the reality that our transportation system has critical needs that require long-term solutions. I have offered proposals to address these needs. I look forward to the time when we can face the difficult decisions and resolve them. It is my hope that some of the provisions included in this bill, particularly the creation of a transportation finance study committee, can generate the consensus necessary to address these issues. Sustaining our economic vitality demands that we continue to make prudent investments in transportation infrastructure.
A summary of the major provisions of the transportation budget bill follows:
Local Assistance
•
Increases general transportation aid to counties, municipalities and towns by 3% annually.
•
Replaces the statutory requirement to support 42% of local transit costs with a five-tiered formula (Milwaukee, Madison, Waukesha, cities over 50,000 in population and cities under 50,000 in population) that will provide, within each tier, a uniform percentage of combined federal and state support for local transit costs.
•
Increases funding for elderly and disabled transportation assistance by 11% in fiscal year 1995-96.
•
Increases the county forest road aid rate per mile by 50%.
•
Allocates $500,000 SEG in fiscal year 1996-97 to accelerate completion of improvements at the Fond du Lac County airport.
State and Local Highways
•
Provides $33 million to accelerate completion of the Highway 29 expansion by December 31, 2000.
•
Authorizes DOT to supplement highway rehabilitation costs associated with building a new stadium in Milwaukee.
•
Requires that any additional transportation user fee revenues above those estimated in this bill be used for highway rehabilitation projects.
Other Provisions
•
Reduces department operations budgets by $32 million over the biennium.
•
Eliminates 40.0 FTE vacant positions associated with highway design and production functions.
•
Directs DOT to request federal funding for replacement of the Main Street Bridge in Green Bay.
•
Establishes a joint executive-legislative committee to study possible transportation revenue sources.
•
Requests the Legislative Audit Bureau to conduct a performance evaluation of all DOT programs by September 1, 1996.
•
Establishes a pilot program for furnishing a private firm with uniform traffic citation and accident records.
•
Prohibits the use of photo radar speed detection equipment to determine compliance with state or local speed restriction laws.
Respectfully submitted,
Tommy G. Thompson
Governor
__________________
Assembly Bill 557
ITEM Vetoes
1. Bonding Authorization for Major Highway Projects
A691
Section 57 increases the revenue obligation limit for transportation administrative or operating facilities and for major highway projects to reflect anticipated bond issues over the next two to four years. Section 1 [as it relates to s.
20.395 (3) (br)] includes the appropriation that authorizes the expenditure of proceeds generated from the issuance of revenue obligation bonds for major highway development projects. Although there is no language in the bill that authorizes this increase, funding for this purpose was included in a Committee of Conference motion.
The revenue obligation limit and appropriation level in the bill reflect actions by the Legislature to provide $40,000,000 in additional revenue bonding authority over the 1995-97 biennium to replace anticipated decreases in federal highway aid. I object to this increase in bonding authority because it does not reflect sound fiscal management of the transportation fund. This additional bonding authority contributes to increasing the share of the major highway program funded from revenue bond proceeds from the historical 55% to almost 75%. Furthermore, this additional amount of borrowing for infrastructure projects presents problems for future transportation budgets. Prudent financial management demands that debt be balanced with sufficient revenues. Replacing declining federal aid primarily with bond proceeds will divert limited future transportation fund revenues for debt service. By vetoing the revenue obligation limit established under s.
84.59 (6) and writing in a smaller amount that deletes the $40,000,000 increase in bonding authority, I am vetoing the increase of the revenue obligation limit. By vetoing the Department of Transportation's appropriation under s.
20.395 (3) (br) and writing in a smaller amount that deletes the $20,000,000 SEG-S funding in each fiscal year of the 1995-97 biennium, I am vetoing the authorization to expend proceeds of revenue obligations issued under this increase in the revenue obligation limit. I am also requesting the Department of Administration Secretary not to allot these funds.
Based on final Federal Highway Administration estimates, Wisconsin will receive approximately $330 million in federal highway assistance for federal fiscal year 1995-96. This $10 million increase above the amount estimated in the bill further reduces the need and rationale for this additional borrowing. DOT plans to allocate this funding to the major highway program in order to replace the borrowing I have vetoed.
2. State Highway Rehabilitation Reserve Accounts
Section 57m
This section creates two reserve accounts in the transportation fund from which funds may be expended subject to the approval of and release by the Joint Committee on Finance. One reserve account is established in the amount of $15,000,000 SEG and may be used to supplement the state highway rehabilitation appropriation under s.
20.395 (3)(cq) either for infrastructure work related to a new stadium for the Milwaukee Brewers or for construction activities relating to rehabilitation of the East-West Freeway from downtown Milwaukee to Waukesha. The other reserve account is established in the amount of $13,349,000 SEG annually for fiscal years 1995-96 and 1996-97 and may be used to supplement the East-West Freeway rehabilitation project. This section also prohibits DOT from using any funds in addition to those set aside in these reserve accounts for either of these projects, with the exception of funds received under a federal demonstration grant. This section sunsets on June 30, 1999.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove Joint Committee on Finance oversight of the reserve account funding for the infrastructure work related to a new stadium because the oversight would delay implementation of this crucial project. The Legislature has thoroughly reviewed the need for a new stadium in Milwaukee and recognizes that the project must be completed within a short period of time. The state's commitment is clear and this veto will allow DOT to proceed with the infrastructure improvements necessary to meet the aggressive timetables established for completion of the stadium construction project.
3. Transportation Financing Committee and Study
Section 9155 (3y)
This section requires the Department of Transportation to create a joint legislative-executive branch committee to study transportation financing. The committee will consist of three members appointed by the Department of Transportation Secretary and one member each appointed by the majority and minority leaders of each house. The committee is charged with making findings, conclusions and recommendations regarding revenue sources for transportation, the impact of different tax rates of states on border area retailers, and state and local revenue sources for mass transit and alternative funding formulas for mass transit aid.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove the July 1, 1996 deadline for submitting the report because I believe the committee will need more time to address these significant issues. Instead, I am requesting the committee to submit its report by December 1, 1996. I fully support this effort and look forward to receiving the proposals of the committee.
4. Tax Exemption for Railroad Rolling Stock
Sections 40t, 40u, 40v, 40w, 40x, 9348 (3xg) and 9448
A692
These sections establish an exemption from the state utility tax for railroad rolling stock, beginning with taxes paid in May 1997. I am vetoing these provisions because, while I remain fully committed to a thriving rail transportation sector, I do not believe an exemption from state utility taxes is appropriate in this case and may establish a poor precedent for other economic sectors. My continuing commitment to rail programs is evidenced by the funding allocated from the transportation fund for freight rail service preservation, freight rail infrastructure improvement loans, rail crossing improvement and maintenance aid and other rail-highway crossing programs. Funding related to these and other rail programs is equivalent to the $10 million in transportation fund revenues received from the railroad industry. In future budgets, it is my intention that this revenue, including proceeds from the utility tax for railroad rolling stock, continue to be used for rail development and rail crossing programs.
I recognize the economic needs associated with rebuilding the railroad industry in our state and nation. In keeping with the goal of enhancing the viability of the rail transportation sector, I am requesting the Department of Transportation Secretary and the Department of Revenue Secretary to form a study committee consisting of rail industry and shipping representatives and state agency administrators and staff to review taxes on railroads and the level of state support for rail programs. This committee should make recommendations regarding any modifications and enhancements necessary to address the competitiveness of the railroad industry.
5. High-Cost Bridge Program
Section 56m
This section defines a high-cost bridge and requires DOT to administer a program for rehabilitating these bridges. DOT is prevented from encumbering funding in an amount that is less than the amounts listed for each of the next 4 fiscal years beginning with fiscal year 1995-96 without approval of the Joint Committee on Finance under a 14 day passive review process.
I am vetoing this provision because it limits the department's flexibility to address programmatic needs. The department must be able to react quickly to rehabilitation needs on the state trunk highway system, including roadways and bridges. Earmarking funds for specific elements of the system sets a poor precedent and ignores the need for maintaining and rehabilitating a functional system of highways and bridges.
6. Commuter Rail Study
Section 9155 (3tx)
This provision requires the Department of Transportation to conduct a study on the feasibility of extending commuter rail service between the cities of Beloit and Janesville and the state of Illinois. DOT is required to submit a report summarizing its findings and recommendations no later than July 1, 1996.
I am partially vetoing this section to remove the requirement that DOT complete this study by July 1, 1996 because the department may need additional time to complete a study of this magnitude. Instead, I am requesting the Department of Transportation Secretary to complete the study by December 31, 1996.
7. Fencing, Farm Crossing and Cattle Guard Costs
Section 9146 (1)
Section 9146 (1) directs the Commissioner of Railroads to develop a plan for phasing in state reimbursement of 100 percent of the costs incurred by railroads for fencing, farm crossings, and cattle guards.
I am partially vetoing this provision to eliminate the requirement that the plan include state reimbursement of 100 percent of these costs because it limits the Commissioner's flexibility in fashioning a reasonable and effective plan. The findings and conclusions of the Commissioner's study may determine that this level of reimbursement is not commensurate with the responsibilities of taxpayers in this area. This veto ensures that the Commissioner can review the full spectrum of reimbursement options.
8. High-Speed Rail Study
