To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 516. This bill exempts a person from the requirement to obtain a construction permit for any equipment, including an engine or generator but excluding certain crushers or grinding mills, at a nonmetallic mineral processing facility if the person has obtained or applied for an air pollution operation permit for the facility.
The intent of this legislation is to streamline the permitting process relative to certain construction permits issued by the Department of Natural Resources. I am supportive of this goal. Earlier this year, I signed into law
2003 Wisconsin Act 118, calling for environmental regulatory reform. This legislation made bold changes in the area of permit streamlining and will ensure that our regulatory process is faster, simpler, and more efficient, while maintaining our high environmental standards.
This bill would implement a piecemeal approach to permit streamlining, rather than a more comprehensive effort. Furthermore, by completely exempting certain types of equipment, this bill would undermine the department's efforts to protect the citizens of Wisconsin from hazardous air pollution. Emissions from diesel engines, including those that would be exempt from regulation under this bill, contain hazardous pollutants that are suspected of causing cancer in humans.
The department is undertaking efforts to streamline the construction permit process utilizing new authority provided by Act 118 that I signed earlier this year. This environmental regulatory reform Act established a new Registration Permit that allows the regulated entity to disclose sources of air emissions to the Department of Natural Resources that have a low potential for emissions. This information will ensure that equipment and its emissions are considered while reviewing the permit application for the facility in question. It is my expectation that certain crushers or grinding mills at a nonmetallic mineral processing facility would be eligible for this new Registration Permit. The treatment of particular equipment or industries is best addressed through a comprehensive and deliberate process in order to ensure that both the economy and the environment are protected.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Doyle
Governor
__________________
April 21, 2004
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 551. The bill allows towns to opt out of county development plans. The bill provides that no county development plan or plan amendment would be applicable in a town unless the town board approves it. The bill also requires a town board to vote to approve or disapprove the county board's action no later than 90 days after the county clerk sends notice of the action. If no vote is taken within this period, the county development plan applies to the town.
I recognize that some town governments are concerned about a county exercising a greater degree of control over towns under the Smart Growth law. The Smart Growth law does not increase the power of counties over towns. Communities can only plan for that program or action for which they are responsible. If a town chooses not to develop a comprehensive plan under the Smart Growth law, the county is not given any additional power over a town. The county is left with the same powers it had without the Smart Growth law.
Local control is an important aspect of Wisconsin government and is reflected in the Smart Growth law itself. The Smart Growth law does not alter the relationship between counties and towns. This bill, however, does alter that relationship and undermines the ability of counties to make appropriate plans for providing required county services.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Doyle
Governor
__________________
April 21, 2004
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 735. This bill requires that the Public Service Commission's biennial strategic energy assessment look forward seven years, rather than three, as required under current law. The strategic energy assessment evaluates the adequacy and reliability of the state's energy supply, including large electric generation facilities and high-voltage transmission lines for which construction is planned.
AB 735 passed the Legislature during an extraordinary session and was not subject to the full legislative process. This bill was not reviewed by the Assembly or Senate Committees on Energy and Utilities and did not receive adequate public scrutiny before passage.
Additionally, the bill limits the Public Service Commission's flexibility to determine the most appropriate time frame for the strategic energy assessment. The Public Service Commission may utilize the administrative rule-making process to gather public input and determine whether a strategic energy assessment process that includes a longer time frame supports the state's efforts to develop sound energy policies.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Doyle
Governor
__________________
April 21, 2004
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
A932
I am vetoing
Assembly Bill 858. The bill extends certain current law limitations on the ability of municipalities and counties to regulate the height and size of buildings and premises to include structures and fixtures. The bill prohibits the use of amortization ordinances, which allow the continued lawful use of an existing building, premises, structure or fixture for only a specified period of time, after which the now nonconforming and unlawful use must be discontinued without any required payment of just compensation.
This bill interferes with the ability of local governments to implement land use policies. It would impair the ability of a local unit of government to effect the removal of land uses that are no longer consistent with a community's interests, growth and future. It hampers the ability of a local government to be responsive to its citizens and the changing needs of the community by narrowing the power of zoning authority. The delicate balance between preserving a current land use and converting to a new use is best weighed by those closest to the issue and its possible benefits or drawbacks.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Doyle
Governor
__________________
April 22, 2004
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I am vetoing Assembly Bill 830. The bill earmarks $378,300 GPR and 5.0 FTE GPR positions for the University of Wisconsin-Platteville. These additional resources are intended for the University of Wisconsin-Platteville to provide engineering instruction at the University of Wisconsin-Rock County 2-year campus.
I am vetoing AB 830 because I object to having the Legislature earmark funding outside of the budget process for campus-specific programs in the University of Wisconsin System. Circumventing the university's normal budget process will harm our ability to consider the overall needs of the entire system. I believe this proposal has great merit and will urge the Board of Regents to include it in their next budget proposal.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Doyle
Governor
__________________
April 22, 2004
To the Honorable Members of the Assembly:
I have approved
Assembly Bill 926 as
2003 Wisconsin Act 310 and have deposited it in the Office of the Secretary of State. I have exercised the partial veto in Section 7, as it relates to s.
281.34 (1)(b) and
(4)(a)intro.
Assembly Bill 926 establishes a comprehensive system for the regulation of high capacity wells and groundwater quantity in the state. This bill will result in vital protections for our state's groundwater resources and reflects the hard work and dedication of the Legislature and individuals representing agriculture, the environment, municipalities and business. The thoroughness of this bill and the consensus that affected interests have achieved should be models for future accomplishments in state government.
I have exercised the partial veto in Section 7, as it relates to s.
281.34 (1)(b), because I object to the potential confusion that could be created by including rate of withdrawal in the definition of high capacity well. The bill defines a "high capacity well" as a well that has a capacity and rate of withdrawal of more than 100,000 gallons per day. Unfortunately, the bill does not define "rate of withdrawal." Because pumping from many high capacity wells varies over time, the term "rate of withdrawal" could be interpreted to refer to the instantaneous rate or to the rate averaged over weeks, months or years. The partial veto is intended to clarify this definition and, as a result, "high capacity well" will mean a well with a capacity of more than 100,000 gallons per day.
I have exercised the partial veto in Section 7, as it relates to s.
281.34 (4)(a)intro., because I object to the potential unintended impact that this language could have on other Wisconsin Environmental Protection Act (WEPA) determinations made by the Department of Natural Resources that do not involve high capacity wells. The partial veto clarifies and limits this review to high capacity well applications only. Further clarifications of the use of the WEPA review process will be made as part of the administrative rule making authorized as part of the legislation.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Doyle
Governor
__________________
Communications
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 195288May 4, 2004
Assembly Bill 209289May 4, 2004
Assembly Bill 554290May 4, 2004
Assembly Bill 628291May 4, 2004
Assembly Bill 709292May 4, 2004
Assembly Bill 730293May 4, 2004
Assembly Bill 755294May 4, 2004
Assembly Bill 925295May 4, 2004
Assembly Bill 932296May 4, 2004
Assembly Bill 306306May 6, 2004
Assembly Bill 728307May 6, 2004
Assembly Bill 732308May 6, 2004
AB 926 (in part)310May 6, 2004
Assembly Bill 396316April 26, 2004
Sincerely,
Douglas La Follette
Secretary of State
