2007-10-26 Senate Journal

  Information Technology Requirements

Sections 9p, 9rg, 128t [as it relates to s. 16.793 (10) and (11)], 128u, 128w, 736x [as it relates to s. 36.59 (1) (d), (2) and (3)], 9101 (8i), 9101 (8j), 9101 (9q), 9152 (2v) and 9152 (2w)

This budget makes several positive changes in the way the State of Wisconsin will conduct its information technology business. Incorporating improvements suggested by the Legislative Audit Bureau and affirmed by the secretary of the Department of Administration and the state's Chief Information Officer to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the Legislature has established concrete guidelines that will ensure a stronger project planning process and accountability. A partnership has been defined and established that will help ensure that proper oversight and control of large information technology projects occur and that decision makers in both branches of government understand what is involved.

S382 I am singling out a few of the many modifications for attention in my partial veto considerations. These provisions are well-intended. However, I am vetoing the following sections because these provisions will significantly burden the implementation of more efficient and transparent information technology management.

•   Section 9p assigns a default advisory responsibility to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, should the statutory Joint Committee on Information Policy and Technology not be organized.

•   Section 9rg adds to the required duties of the Joint Committee on Information Policy and Technology the review of any executive branch information technology project identified in a new report required to be submitted by the Department of Administration.

•   Provisions under paragraphs of sections 128t, 128u, 128w and 736x require the Department of Administration and University of Wisconsin Board of Regents to promulgate administrative rules in order to use commercially available information products; the Department of Administration to post on the Internet detailed cost and billing information for any services provided, managed or supervised by the department; and setting a limit of 110 percent of cost basis on the methodology used to determine project cost recovery charges.

•   Three provisions under sections 9101 (8i), 9101 (8j) and 9101(9q) and two provisions under sections 9152 (2v) and 9152 (2w) require approval by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee of reports on written policies for information technology projects that the Department of Administration and University of Wisconsin Board of Regents separately must submit to the Joint Committee on Information Policy and Technology; the promulgation of administrative rules pertaining to high-risk information technology projects undertaken by the Department of Administration and University of Wisconsin Board of Regents; and prior completion by the Department of Administration of another study to consolidate network servers in state agencies.

I believe that the value added by fulfillment of these enumerated requirements will be far outweighed by the costs and delays of compliance. I welcome and look forward to working with the statutory joint committee created by the Legislature to represent its interests in the oversight of state information technology projects. The many remaining provisions added in this budget to improve the understanding, authorization and accountability in the management of information technology projects will be a source of state government efficiency that I have been committed to achieving since my first budget.

CIRCUIT COURTS

2.   Technical Modification to Kenosha County Circuit Court Branch 8

Section 9107 (1j)

This provision establishes the initial election term for the Circuit Court judge in Branch 8 in Kenosha County and applicable term dates.

I am partially vetoing this provision because, as drafted, the language erroneously establishes the initial election for the spring of 2008, although the term commences on August 1, 2009. The Legislative Reference Bureau concurs on the necessity of this partial veto, as a revisor's correction would occur too late to fix the error. This veto is intended to establish the initial election date in the spring of 2009.

CORRECTIONS

3.   Juvenile Correctional Services Deficit

Sections 324g, 324h, 3114m and 9409 (2f)

These provisions require:

•   The Department of Corrections, prior to the end of each odd-numbered fiscal year, to estimate projected balances that will remain in the juvenile correctional services appropriation on June 30 of that year.

•   If the estimated balance is projected to be negative, the Department of Administration must include the amount of the estimated deficit in the cost basis for the calculation of the proposed secured correctional facilities' daily rates for the subsequent biennium.

•   The Department of Administration must include 50 percent of any projected deficit in the cost basis for the calculation of daily rates for each year of the subsequent biennium.

•   The Department of Administration secretary must reserve, for the purpose of retiring the deficit, the share of the daily rate revenue that is proportionate to the share of the increased cost basis associated with the estimated deficit. Any revenue reserved for this purpose that exceeds the amount of the deficit must be reimbursed to the counties and the state in a manner proportionate to the total number of days of juvenile placements at the facilities for each county and the state.

I am vetoing sections 324h and 3114m and partially vetoing sections 324g and 9409 (2f) because these sections limit the Department of Corrections' flexibility to effectively manage juvenile corrections programs over time. As I stated when I vetoed these provisions in the 2005-07 biennial budget, these provisions would place an undue burden on counties by requiring the department to charge counties to recover deficits in the appropriation.

D.   HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES AND INSURANCE

HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES

  Demonstration Waiver for Health Opportunity Accounts Under BadgerCare

Section 1559e

This section requires the Department of Health and Family Services to request a federal waiver in order to offer health opportunity accounts to BadgerCare recipients and to provide the Joint Committee on Finance an implementation plan upon receipt of federal approval of the waiver. The Committee must approve the plan prior to implementation.

I am vetoing this section because I object to this limitation on the department's ability, in collaboration with a wide array of health care experts, to develop reforms that are in the best interest of providers, recipients and the state. Under current law, the department may request a waiver to offer health opportunity accounts under BadgerCare if it is determined to be beneficial by the department, with the advice of the BadgerCare Plus Advisory Committee.

S383 2.   Disease Management Program

Sections 1559g and 1641d

These sections require the Department of Health and Family Services to develop and implement disease management programs for conditions identified by health risk assessments for recipients and requires that the programs be similar to programs developed and used by the Marshfield Clinic under the Physician Group Practice Demonstration.

While I support the intent of encouraging the appropriate use of preventive care and expanding disease management, I am partially vetoing these sections because they are excessively prescriptive on the design of the programs. Many physicians and other health care providers that participate in the Medical Assistance program have existing disease management programs and health screening tools in place that meet the intent of the program. Requiring all providers to use a single program model would hinder further development and innovation in the design of disease management programs. Therefore, I am deleting the reference to the Marshfield Clinic Physician Group Practice Demonstration.

3.   Dispensing Fee Increase for Certain Generic Prescriptions

Section 9121 (7j)

This section requires the Department of Health and Family Services to provide supplemental reimbursement to pharmacies participating in the Medicaid, BadgerCare and SeniorCare programs to compensate for any reduction in drug product cost reimbursement resulting from the implementation of the federal Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. The supplemental reimbursement is contingent on receiving federal approval, and the section further requires the department to apply for an amendment to the Medicaid State Plan in order to implement this change.

I am vetoing this section because it is administratively burdensome on the department. Furthermore, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is unlikely to approve such a state plan amendment as the intent of the federal Deficit Reduction Act was to set reasonable limits on drug product cost reimbursement and substituting decreases in product costs with increases in dispensing reimbursements is in conflict with the intent of the Act.

4.   Report on FoodShare Employment and Training Program Participation

Section 9121 (7k)

This section requires the Department of Health and Family Services by January 1, 2009, to deliver a report to the Joint Committee on Finance analyzing the changes in participation in the FoodShare Employment and Training Program after participation becomes voluntary.

I am vetoing this section because it creates a burdensome, unnecessary reporting requirement since the department already collects and publishes data on FoodShare participation. Given the unclear need for this additional data, I am vetoing this reporting requirement.

5.   Reducing Fetal and Infant Mortality and Morbidity

Sections 405f, 9121 (6d) and 9421 (8c)

These sections sunset, at the end of the 2008-09 biennium, a new appropriation that aims to reduce fetal and infant mortality and morbidity. The biennial budget provides $250,000 GPR in each fiscal year to the city of Racine Health Department to collaborate with health care staff, and identify, develop and promote models of care to address and improve services and birth outcomes for high-risk pregnancies.

I am vetoing sections 405f and 9421 (8c) to delete the sunset of this important program. It is my intent that the program continue beyond the 2007-09 biennium, and retaining the appropriation for this purpose will facilitate the retention of this program.

I am partially vetoing section 9121 (6d) to remove specific references to fiscal years 2007-08 and 2008-09 consistent with my intent to make the funding ongoing. I am also vetoing the dates in this section that require a report in each fiscal year of this biennium, so that the health department would report on its progress each year that it receives funding.

6.   Council on Developmental Disabilities

Sections 9221 (1q) and 9255

Section 9221 (1q) would decrease expenditure authority in the Department of Health and Family Services by $728,200 PR-F in fiscal year 2007-08 to reflect a reduction in authorized positions. Section 9255 would decrease expenditure authority in the Department of Children and Families by $728,200 PR-F in fiscal year 2008-09 to reflect a reduction in authorized positions.

I am vetoing these provisions because the language duplicates expenditure and position authority changes that are accomplished elsewhere in the budget bill. These changes reflect the creation of the Board for People with Developmental Disabilities.

E.   STATE GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

  Disciplinary Procedures for Law Enforcement Officers and Firefighters

Sections 1867, 2666f, 2679i, 9315 (1f) and 9355 (1f)

S384 These sections make changes to appeals procedures which firefighters may use to appeal disciplinary decisions made by the fire or police board, expand collective bargaining rights of firefighters to include alternative disciplinary procedures, and define prohibited subjects of bargaining between municipal employers and firefighters. Under current law, all disciplinary decisions made by a police or fire commission may only be appealed to a Circuit Court and the decision of the court is final. Sections 2666f and 2679i permit collective bargaining agreements between firefighters and municipal employers to contain dispute resolution procedures as an alternative to the Circuit Court appeals process. In addition, municipal employers are prohibited from refusing to collectively bargain with firefighters over arbitration, or attempting to bargain over disciplinary due process and compensation rules pertaining to discipline which are currently included in state statutes. Section 1867 amends current law to preclude law enforcement officers from these alternative appeal procedures to a Circuit Court.

I am partially vetoing the language contained in these sections to restore my original intent of allowing both firefighters and law enforcement officers the opportunity to use collectively bargained alternative disciplinary appeal procedures instead of Circuit Court, and to extend the prohibited collective bargaining subjects in the bill to be applied to contracts between municipal employers and law enforcement officers. Permitting both law enforcement officers and firefighters to use alternative disciplinary appeal procedures will help relieve the court system work load, expand the opportunities of law enforcement officers and firefighters to select appeals procedures, and allow employers and employees to settle their disputes quickly and effectively.

F.   TAX, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND TRANSPORTATION

REVENUE

  Three-Tier Liquor Distribution System

Sections 2757r, 2759c, 2759cm, 2759d, 2759e, 2759em, 2759f, 2759g, 2759h, 2759i, 2759j, 2759k, 2759kc, 2759kg, 2759kh, 2759ki, 2759km, 2759L, 2759m, 2759mm, 2759n, 2759o, 2759p, 2759pg, 2759pr, 2759q, 2759r, 2759s, 2759t, 2759u, 2759v, 2759w, 2759x, 2780b, 2780d, 2780e, 2780em, 2780f and 9441 (13d) [as it relates to s. 139.11 (4) (a)]

These provisions replace the current law distribution system for wine with a three-tier distribution system which requires the sale of wine through a wholesaler in most cases. The provisions also create a “direct wine shipper's permit" that authorizes holders to ship wine directly to individuals of legal drinking age. Each individual may receive up to 108 liters of wine in a year and may not resell the wine. In addition, the provisions authorize the holders of “Class A" licenses and manufacturers or rectifiers, with the consent of a “Class A" licensee to offer free shots of alcohol, other than wine, to customers and visitors. Finally, the provisions modify requirements relating to the publication of production and sales statistics by the Department of Revenue.

I am vetoing sections 2757r, 2759c, 2759cm, 2759d, 2759e, 2759em, 2759f, 2759g, 2759h, 2759i, 2759j, 2759k, 2759kc, 2759kg, 2759kh, 2759ki, 2759km, 2759L, 2759m, 2759mm, 2759n, 2759o, 2759p, 2759pg, 2759pr, 2759q, 2759r, 2759s, 2759t, 2759u, 2759v, 2759w, 2759x, 2780b, 2780d, 2780e, 2780em and 2780f, and partially vetoing section 9441 (13d) [as it relates to s. 139.11 (4) (a)] because I object to the inclusion of policy of this nature in a budget bill. While the changes to the distribution system included in these sections may help address some concerns with sales of alcohol to minors, they also may have stifling economic effects on the small wineries around the state, forcing them out of business. Also, I strongly object to permitting free shots of alcohol to be distributed in places such as grocery stores.

While I am vetoing these provisions, I support the concept of a three-tier distribution system. The language included in the bill, however, does not adequately address the needs of small entrepreneurial wineries. Therefore, I am directing the appropriate agency secretaries to begin immediately to work with the Legislature to adopt a new version of this proposal that provides a workable and equitable approach that meets the intent of the three-tier distribution system while supporting new and small businesses.

2.   Inventory Tax for Moist Snuff

Section 2838d

This section requires that an inventory tax based on the new weight-based method of taxation not be levied on moist snuff.

I am partially vetoing this section because I object to exempting moist snuff from the inventory tax. This veto will make the inventory tax consistent for cigarettes and moist snuff.

SHARED REVENUE AND PROPERTY TAX RELIEF

3.   Levy Limit

Sections 1880, 1881, 1882, 1892 and 1896

These sections reauthorize the levy limit program to apply to property taxes levied in 2007 and 2008. The sections limit a county's or municipality's levy increase to the greater of either two percent or the percentage change in its January 1 equalized value due to new construction less improvements removed between the previous year and the current year.

I am partially vetoing sections 1880, 1881, 1882 and 1892 and vetoing section 1896 because I object to the restrictiveness of the limit for 2007, which would negatively effect the provision of police and fire services. Due to the late passage of the budget bill, local governments have already made significant progress in preparing, reviewing and setting their own budgets for the upcoming year. Requiring communities to limit their levy growth to two percent at this time may result in cutbacks in necessary services. This veto will allow local governments to increase their levies for 2007 by either the percentage increase due to net new construction or 3.86 percent.

TRANSPORTATION

4.   Reports and Approvals

Sections 85b, 85c, 85e, 85f, 687f, 2541r [as it relates to the opening language referring to s. 16.50 (1) (c)], 2542p and 2550p

Sections 85c, 85e, 85f and 2541r [as it relates to the opening language referring to s. 16.50 (1) (c)] prohibit the Department of Administration from approving allotment adjustments to the Department of Transportation's federal appropriations unless the Joint Committee on Finance has approved the adjustment.

Sections 85b and 687f prohibit the executive budget bill from amending, repealing or otherwise drafting around the provisions of s. 25.40 (3), Wisconsin Statutes, which states that no transportation fund revenues may be transferred out of the transportation fund or used for any nontransportation-related purpose.

Section 2542p requires the Department of Transportation to submit, with each biennial budget request, a plan describing the department's bonding strategy for the upcoming ten years.

S385 Section 2550p requires the Department of Transportation to develop a plan to eliminate a biennial deficit in the transportation fund when a deficit is estimated to exceed $30,000,000. The plan must eliminate the deficit by reducing all transportation SEG appropriations, other than those for debt service and sum sufficient appropriations, as equitably as possible. The plan would be reviewed and approved by the Joint Committee on Finance under a 14-day passive review.

I am vetoing sections 85b, 85c, 85e, 85f, 687f and 2542p and partially vetoing section 2541r [as it relates to the opening language referring to s. 16.50 (1) (c)] because they infringe on the executive branch's authority to manage programs and are unnecessary. The existing allotment and biennial budget processes provide sufficient oversight and protection of the use of federal and state transportation monies.

In addition, I am partially vetoing section 2550p because the plan requires elimination of the deficit by reducing all transportation SEG appropriations, rather than those determined most appropriate by the Department of Transportation. This hampers the department's flexibility to address any projected deficit and protect those programs with the greatest need at any particular point in time and as such infringes on the executive branch's authority to manage agency finances.

5.   State Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program

Section 177 [as it relates to s. 20.395 (2) (ov) and (ox)]

This provision includes funding for grants to localities for bicycle and pedestrian transportation projects through new, dedicated appropriations. A significant portion of the federal money for the new program is from the congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program and transportation enhancement activities program.

While I believe that funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects is important, I am reducing funding in the new, dedicated appropriations by the amounts that would have been transferred out of congestion mitigation and air quality and transportation enhancement activities programs. Transferring funds out of these appropriations reduces the Department of Transportation's ability to decide between grant applications for a variety of transportation projects in the event that bicycle and pedestrian facility grant applications decline. Further, bicycle and pedestrian facility projects also already can be funded through the existing programs.

I am lining out the dollar amounts in appropriations under s. 20.395 (2) (ov) and (ox) and writing in $0 in fiscal year 2007-08 and $2,720,000 SEG-F and $680,000 SEG-L in fiscal year 2008-09, so that the congestion mitigation and air quality and transportation enhancements funds will be available for use in those programs via the allotment process. I am directing the secretary of the Department of Transportation to work with interested parties to ensure that funds from both the existing appropriations and new appropriations are used for bicycle and pedestrian facility projects to the extent possible and appropriate.

6.   Value Engineering for Highway Improvement Projects

Sections 2524p, 2531c, 2531e, 9348 (11f) and 9448 (11f)

These sections require the Department of Transportation to use “value engineering" for highway projects estimated to cost $5,000,000 (to be adjusted annually) or greater. “Value engineering" is the systematic analysis of a project to determine which course of action results in the largest net reduction of costs, essentially finding the design of a project that produces the best value. In addition to using the value engineering analysis methodology, the sections require the department to submit an annual report to the Governor and Legislature regarding the department's use of value engineering and any instances in which the secretary of the department has waived value engineering for compelling reasons.