May 17, 2000
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 587 in its entirety. This bill expands the kinship care and long-term kinship care programs by adding second cousin to the definition of a kinship care relative.
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 587 because no funding was provided to finance this expansion of the kinship care program. The Legislature should not expand a program without appropriating sufficient funding. If the demand for program funding exceeds a county or tribe's kinship care allocation, the county or tribe would be forced to use its own funds or put relatives on waiting lists. Additionally, expansion of kinship care eligibility to second cousins may set a precedent for further expansion of the program beyond the original intent of compensating relatives formerly under the AFDC Nonlegally Responsible Relative program.
Sincerely,
Tommy G. Thompson
Governor
May 18, 2000
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 663 in its entirety. This bill allows the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction to disclose pupil records received from school boards to appropriate state agencies and local education agencies as determined by the State Superintendent. The bill permits the Department to charge a fee to cover the direct costs of complying with data requests. It also allows individuals to view, but not obtain a copy of state assessment instruments.
I support the provisions of Assembly Bill 663 that control access to state assessment instruments. Protecting the confidentiality and security of our state examinations is an important step in our drive for greater accountability in Wisconsin's schools. I intend to reintroduce this proposal for the improvement of public policy in my 2001-03 biennial budget.
I support the idea of clarifying the circumstances under which the State Superintendent can release pupil records. Impartial and fair evaluations of the state's educational programs require that researchers be able to examine confidential pupil records. As drafted, however, the bill would create two categories of investigators (State employes and all others) whose access to data would not be uniform. Researchers employed by State agencies could have access to the entire group of pupil records necessary to conduct a complete evaluation, while other researchers from private or non-public institutions and universities would only be allowed to review redacted portions of the total data set.
This bill, in its current form, therefore would have prevented researchers from private institutions of higher learning from assessing some of the claims regarding the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) made by researchers hired by the Department. Without equitable access, agencies could be accused of doing the State's business under the cover of darkness. As Wisconsin continues be a leader in educational innovations, we must be wary of any inference that these important evaluations are not available for public scrutiny. It is imperative the public, the legislature, and policy makers receive evaluations and research able to stand the test of intense and valid analysis.
As new alternatives to traditional education programs evolve, the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction must be vigorous in its oversight of educational programs. This veto will not in any way hinder the ability of the State Superintendent to monitor or collect data on individual programs over which the department has statutory responsibility. Because the bill deals with the release of pupil records and not financial audits or other accountability requirements, this veto will also do nothing to impede the Department from approving schools to participate in the MPCP or removing them from the program should the need arise. I believe alternative exemptions to the confidentiality provisions currently in state law, such as those included in federal statute, can be drafted to balance the privacy of students and educational researchers' legitimate needs to review pupil records without privileging particular categories of researchers. I encourage the Department to explore such alternatives.
Respectfully submitted,
Tommy G. Thompson
Governor
__________________
May 18, 2000
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 690 in its entirety. This bill allows the State Historical Society to establish a Heritage Trust Program, establishes definitions regarding the program and sets limits on grants made to the Wisconsin Trust for Historic Preservation and grants for preservation. The bill provides $20 million in bonding revenue over ten years to the Society for this purpose and $33,800 GPR in FY01 to administer the Heritage Trust Program. I have long supported the objective of preserving historic properties in Wisconsin, and I am proud of my track record on this issue. However, the state's bond counsel has raised serious questions regarding the constitutionality of the bill.
When I vetoed an identical provision from being included in Assembly Bill 133, the biennial budget bill, my veto message cited the fact that the proposal had not been included in the state's strategic plan for capital financing as the primary reason for the veto. Assembly Bill 690 also did not undergo a systematic review of how the bonding authority authorized in the bill would fit into the state's comprehensive bonding plan. As a result, the state's general obligation bond counsel did not have an opportunity to comment on the bill prior to its passage.
The state's bond counsel has two concerns with the bill as drafted. First, the state's bond counsel cannot offer the unqualified opinion that the bill is constitutional. An unqualified opinion is required for the state to sell its bonds. Second, federal tax law sets strict limits on the investment of revenue from tax exempt bonds. As a result, the state may be required to issue taxable bonds, which would require the state to make significantly higher interest payments.
I believe that alternative options to using bond revenue to fund historic preservation can be developed that will balance the legitimate preservation needs of the state, local governments and nonprofit organizations with the need for the state to maintain sound constitutional and financial practices.
Attached is the state's bond counsel's opinion on the constitutionality of the bill.
Respectfully submitted,
Tommy G. Thompson
Governor
May 18, 2000
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 827 in its entirety.
Assembly Bill 827 requires a railroad train, operating in Wisconsin, to have two persons in the lead controlling locomotive cab at all times when the train or locomotive is in motion except for the purpose of switching. Under current law (
1997 Wisconsin Act 42), all locomotives or trains operating in Wisconsin must have on board a federally certified railroad engineer and a qualified railroad trainperson. The Office of the Commissioner of Railroads may, by rule, waive this requirement if it will not endanger life or property. The requirement also does not apply if it is contrary to federal laws or regulations.
Wisconsin is the only state in the country with a law that requires two person crews. I signed
1997 Wisconsin Act 42 because I believe safety is paramount. The requirements under current law set the standard for the nation and balance safety concerns with the goal of increased railroad service and employment.
However, I am concerned that Assembly Bill 827 has several shortcomings that may degrade safety and diminish opportunities for expanded railroad commerce and employment in the state. These concerns have been echoed in correspondence I have received from over two dozen local law enforcement officials, mayors, railroad shippers and railroads. Wisconsin has already set the standard on national railroad safety with the current requirement for two person train crews. There must be time to evaluate the impact of that requirement on safety while fostering passenger and freight rail service and employment expansions.
One key concern is the potential impact on METRA commuter rail service extensions into Wisconsin. METRA service includes considerable operating requirements and mechanical redundancies to ensure the highest possible level of safety. However, METRA has identified the provisions in this bill as too limiting on staff deployment and would considerably reduce, if not eliminate, the ability of METRA to provide cost-effective service in southern and southeastern Wisconsin.
Currently, METRA provides service to Kenosha under certain grandfather provisions included in the transfer of passenger rail authority to METRA. METRA is considering service extensions from Harvard, Illinois to Clinton, Wisconsin and from Kenosha to Racine and Milwaukee. These extensions will require approval by the Illinois Legislature based on recommendations from METRA. I want to ensure Wisconsin is in the best position possible to support METRA in its efforts to secure that approval. This expansion, and other future passenger rail service expansions, will provide Wisconsin citizens with greater transportation options and increase railroad employment.
I am very concerned that Assembly Bill 827 will reduce railroad safety in the Fox Valley due to its impact on "push-pull" trains. This type of train format utilizes locomotives at both ends of the train each staffed by one engineer. This approach has been approved by the Federal Railroad Administration for operation between Green Bay and Stevens Point, through Neenah, and has been in service since 1994. Use of this approach has reduced the switching operation in Neenah from one hour to 10 minutes. Considerable traffic delays and disruption of traffic patterns have been eliminated due to this change.
The bill would force Wisconsin Central to discontinue "push-pull" service on this line due to prohibitive costs. According to local elected and law enforcement officials and experts from the East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, use of a standard train set (a locomotive at one end of the train) will cause the return of traffic delays and backups that could lead to increased accidents and diminished traffic safety.
Supporters of this bill identified the size of train crews associated with freight rail service in northern Wisconsin as a reason for enacting these provisions. I have been assured by Wisconsin Central that it will begin to provide two person crews on that line within the next few weeks. I believe this action will address some of the concerns expressed by the railroad operating engineers union. In order to ensure implementation of this commitment, I will personally monitor the actions of Wisconsin Central on this issue in consultation with the Office of Commissioner of Railroads
While there are procedures under current law that would allow the provisions in Assembly Bill 827 to be waived by the Office of the Commissioner of Rails. I do not believe it is sound government to adopt a requirement and then provide a series of waivers to address multiple conditional uses. Current law provides a safety standard that exceeds the rest of the country. I am requesting the Office of Commissioner of Railroads to monitor railroad safety issues over the next several months and provide a report to me by January 1, 2001. That report will serve as the basis for identifying any additional safety issues and the need for action in the next legislative session. I will also confer with the Office of Commissioner of Railroads, the United Transportation Union, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and the railroad industry in reviewing that report and providing input on the need for additional legislative action.
My goal is to ensure a thriving passenger and freight rail system in Wisconsin with a safety record that is second to none. That goal can be achieved by continuing to dialogue on infrastructure needs, service opportunities and safety issues. The measures outlined in this message will provide a framework for evaluating railroad safety issues in concert with capitalizing on Wisconsin's passenger and freight rail service opportunities.
Sincerely,
Tommy G. Thompson
Governor
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Secretary of State
Madison
To Whom It May Concern:
Acts, Joint Resolutions and Resolutions deposited in this office have been numbered and published as follows:
Bill Number Act Number Publication Date
Assembly Bill 471177June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 561178June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 137179June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 751180June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 700182May 24, 2000
Assembly Bill 742183June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 968184June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 967185June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 969186June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 942187June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 402189June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 504190June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 538191June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 778192June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 841193June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 860194June 1, 2000
Assembly Bill 796197June 2, 2000
Sincerely,
Douglas La Follette
Secretary of State
__________________
Referral of Agency Reports
State of Wisconsin
Department of Health and Family Services
Madison
May 12, 2000
To the Honorable, the Assembly:
The attached combined report is submitted to the Legislature pursuant to s.
46.27 (11g) and s.
46.277 (5m) of state statutes. State statutes require the Department of Health and Family Services to submit an annual report for the Community Options Program (COP) and for a combined report on the Home and Community Based Waivers (COP-W/CIP II). The attached report describes the persons served, program expenditures, and services delivered through the COP, COP-Waiver and CIP II programs in calendar year 1998.
The Community Options Program provides services to all target group populations. COP is closely coordinated with all of Wisconsin's Medicaid Home and Community Based Waivers. With the Department's oversight county agencies are able to ensure that a comprehensive and individualized care plan is provided, while maintaining program flexibility and integrity and maximizing federal matching funds.
Sincerely,
Joe Leean
Secretary
Referred to committee on Health.
__________________
State of Wisconsin
Department of Administration
Madison
May 15, 2000
To the Honorable, the Legislature:
Included with this correspondence, I am submitting the report of the Department of Administration, Division of Gaming (Gaming), for the quarter ended March 31, 2000. As required by s.
562.02(1)(g), Wis. Stats., the attached materials contain pari-mutuel wagering and racing statistical information, as well as the revenues for the program areas of Racing, Charitable Gaming and Indian Gaming. Please note that Bingo revenues are now captured in a new appropriation (836) and therefore are shown on a separate chart from the rest of Charitable Gaming.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact me at (608) 270-2560.
