Section 981e
This section specifies that the duties and responsibilities of the Milwaukee County Comptroller include administering accounts payable, payroll, accounting and financial information systems, in addition to those duties and responsibilities specified under current law.
I am vetoing this section because I object to how the increased specification of duties for the Milwaukee County Comptroller in state law will diminish how the county may best structure its administrative responsibilities.
_Hlk49297546085. County Board Approval for Sale or Lease of Land Owned by Milwaukee County Sections 980s, 980se, 981h, 981m [as it relates to land transactions in Milwaukee County], 982f and 9331 (7t)
These sections specify that, with regard to the sale or lease of property owned by Milwaukee County, the Milwaukee County Executive's action must be consistent with established county board policy and must be approved by the county board to take effect. In addition, these sections provide that the county board may only approve or reject a contract for the sale or lease of county property as negotiated by the Milwaukee County Executive. These sections also delete current law provisions that permit the Milwaukee County Executive, together with either the Milwaukee County Comptroller or an appointed real estate executive, to form a majority to lease, sell or convey any nonpark county property regardless of board policy and without board approval. These changes apply to a land transaction for which a contract has been entered into after September 1, 2018.
I am vetoing these sections [as these sections relate to land transactions in Milwaukee County] because these changes would hinder recent progress made to provide the Milwaukee County Executive with effective and efficient means to conduct the county’s business transactions.
86. Conduit Revenue Bonds
Sections 8s, 177s, 179e, 179f, 179s, 585h, 984g, 984gb, 984gc, 984gd, 984ge, 984gf, 984gg, 984gh, 984gi, 984gj, 984gk, 984gL, 984gm, 984gn, 984go, 984gp, 984gq, 984gqf, 984gr, 984gs, 984gt, 984gu, 984gv, 984gw, 984gx, 984gy, 984h, 984hb, 984hc, 984hd, 984he, 984hf and 984hg
This provision modifies current law as it relates to the Public Finance Authority and its ability to issue bonds in an assortment of ways, including empowering the authority to create one or more business units to carry out, or assist the authority in carrying out, all or part of the purposes or powers of the authority. In addition, the provision modifies the requirements for local approval of financing by the authority; broadens the authority's ability to own or operate property; and extends the existing personal liability law exemptions to officers, employees and agents of the authority and related business units.
I am vetoing this provision because this is nonfiscal policy that should be vetted as separate legislation.
87. Ordinances Conflicting with Statutory Provisions
Section 982t
This provision prohibits cities, villages, towns or counties from enforcing ordinances which either directly conflict with statute or when the intent of the ordinance appears to conflict with statute, either in its intent or its spirit.
I am vetoing this provision because I object to inserting a broad provision which may violate home rule under the Wisconsin Constitution for cities and villages. The statutes already provide the ability to regulate matters of statewide concern that could affect political subdivisions.
Department of Transportation
88. Transfer of State Car-Killed Deer Removal Program
Sections 362n, 578ym and 1222m
_Hlk491433452This provision would transfer, from the Department of Natural Resources to the Department of Transportation, the administration of the car-killed deer removal program that is currently funded on a one-time basis in the 2015-17 biennium by the forestry account of the conservation fund. It would further require that the Department of Transportation's expenses for contracting with vendors or local governments to remove car-killed deer shall be funded from the department's departmental management and operations, state funds appropriation under s. 20.395 (4) (aq) and specify that the removal of car-killed deer is not a routine highway maintenance activity. I am partially vetoing this provision in several ways because I object to the appropriation under which the Department of Transportation is to fund its costs pertaining to the removal of car-killed deer and I object to the restrictions placed on the department’s flexibility to address the removal of car-killed deer.
I am vetoing the requirement to fund the removal of car-killed deer from the department's departmental management and operations, state funds appropriation under s. 20.395 (4) (aq) because this requirement would take funding away from other priorities for the department's operating expenses given that no additional funding was provided to the department for car-killed deer removal. I am vetoing the prohibition that specifies that the removal of car-killed deer is not a routine highway maintenance activity because this prohibition conflicts with current law. Through its routine maintenance agreements for county-performed maintenance on state highways, the department already has the authority under s. 84.07 (1) to perform, "all routine measures deemed necessary to provide adequate traffic service" including the removal of car-killed deer. I am also vetoing the requirement that the department must contract for the removal and disposal of deer killed by vehicles to provide the department with greater flexibility in administering these duties.
This provision placed an unfunded mandate on the Department of Transportation. Under my partial vetoes, however, removal of deer carcasses could be funded under the Department of Transportation’s routine maintenance appropriation if a need arises.
Under my partial vetoes, the earlier intent to sunset the Department of Natural Resources program for car-killed deer at the end of fiscal year 2016-17 will be maintained.
Section 111
_Hlk491346840This provision allocates funding for state vehicle replacement and the creation of a statewide local transit capital assistance program using Wisconsin’s share of a settlement with Volkswagen related to the company’s fraudulent vehicle emissions practices. I am partially vetoing this provision to eliminate the $10,000,000 cap on Volkswagen settlement funds that may be used for state fleet vehicle replacement because I object to limiting the funds for state vehicle replacement to an amount below the state's potential replacement needs. As a result of my partial veto, Volkswagen settlement funds sufficient for the replacement of all eligible state vehicles will be available for this purpose. This partial veto will not, however, impact the total $32,000,000 in funding set aside for a statewide local transit capital assistance program because the state can fully fund this amount by allocating a portion of the final third of Wisconsin’s share of settlement funding that it will gain access to in the 2019-21 biennium.
This provision provides the Department of Transportation with $2,500,000 SEG in fiscal year 2017-18 to enter into a contract not to exceed that amount for a tolling implementation study. The study is to include an analysis to support the completion of a federal tolling application process; a tolling concepts of operations plan that outlines the policies, procedures and operations needed to govern roadway tolling; a traffic and revenue analysis including the revenue needed to support toll revenue-supported debt; and an evaluation, or reevaluation of federal environmental requirements, including needed documentation.
I am vetoing this provision to eliminate the requirement for the department to enter into a contract for a tolling study. This provision is unnecessary as the Department of Transportation may further study tolling under its own administrative authority at its discretion.
I am directing the Department of Transportation to continue to monitor and evaluate federal actions and directives that would impact Wisconsin's highway funding and review the need to further study tolling.
To make the $2,500,000 SEG that was provided for this study more immediately available, I am lining out the amount under s. 20.395 (4) (aq) for fiscal year 2017-18 and writing in a smaller amount that excludes this funding. In doing so, I am vetoing the part of the bill that funds this provision. I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary not to allot these funds. This action will increase the transportation fund’s ending balance for the biennium by $2,500,000. Section 1460m
This section specifies that no county, city, village or town airport or spaceport protection ordinance may prohibit the use of a physical barrier in lieu of compliance with a 48-hour drainage requirement for a storm retention pond that is located in a residential subdivision underlain by natural clay soil.
I am vetoing this section because it creates a safety hazard by increasing the risk of wildlife strikes to airplanes. The purpose of the 48-hour drainage requirement rather than a physical barrier is to prevent standing water from attracting wildlife that may pose a hazard to aircraft operations. This is a recommended practice under federal and state guidelines. I am also vetoing this section because it may conflict federal wildlife hazard management plans required by the Federal Aviation Administration administrator.
_Hlk49297377392. State Highway Rehabilitation – State Highway 154 (Sauk County) Section 9145 (10c)
This section requires the Department of Transportation to complete state highway rehabilitation work on STH 154 in the 2017-19 biennium in Sauk County, from the Richland/Sauk County line to the village of Loganville.
I am vetoing this section because it interferes with the department’s ability to prioritize rehabilitation work. Moreover, since the department has this work programmed for fiscal year 2019-20, this project could already be advanced into the 2017-19 biennium should funding become available.
93. Enumerate I-94 between USH 12 and STH 65 (St. Croix County)
Section 1212m
This section enumerates the 7.5-mile segment of I-94 between USH 12 and 130th Street near STH 65 in St. Croix County in the statutes as a major highway development project.
I am vetoing this section because I object to efforts to sidestep the current prioritization of major highway projects. In addition, the enumeration of this project at this time may create expectations that work may be undertaken on this project earlier than is likely to occur. As a result of my veto, the Department of Transportation will be able to consider this project in the context of all other projects which are under consideration – thereby allowing a comprehensive statewide approach to be applied.
_Hlk49297383594. State Highway Construction – "Replace-In-Kind" Alternative Requirement Sections 1221m and 9345 (4t)
These sections require the Department of Transportation to study, consider and provide a cost estimate for a "replace-in-kind" alternative when developing state highway construction projects plans. These sections define "replace-in-kind" alternatives as plans that would not include bicycle lanes, added lanes of travel or significant design modifications that would include any of the following: (a) geometric or safety modifications, (b) changes to highway alignment, or (c) changes to access points. These sections would first apply to a highway improvement project commenced on the effective date of the bill.
I am vetoing these sections because placing these requirements in statute is both unnecessary and potentially costly. The provisions are unnecessary because the Department of Transportation has already adopted a "replace-in-kind" approach as a standard strategy to limit the scope and cost of construction projects. This provision is also potentially costly because the placement of this requirement in statute may force the development of plans that will be known from the start as imprudent if clear safety or congestion needs unquestionably merit something beyond a "replace-in-kind" project plan.
_Hlk49297389395. Initial Applicability of the Repeal of Prevailing Wage Law Section 9452 (2w)
This section establishes when the bill’s repeal of the state’s prevailing wage law goes into effect. This section specifies, for a project of public works that is subject to bidding, the prevailing wage repeal first applies to a project for which the request for bids is issued on or after September 1, 2018. In addition, this section specifies that for a project of public works that is not subject to bidding, the prevailing wage repeal first applies to a contract that is entered into on or after September 1, 2018.
I am vetoing this section because I object to making the taxpayers of Wisconsin wait for nearly a year before they can begin to benefit from the cost savings to be created by the repeal of the state’s prevailing wage laws. As a result of my veto, the delay of the repeal to September 1, 2018, will be deleted, so that the repeal of the state’s prevailing wage law will, instead, be effective with the effective date of the 2017-19 budget bill as a whole – and consequently, the effective date will be the day after publication of this budget act rather than nearly a year from now.
96. Transportation Projects Commission Temporary Changes
Sections 8bt, 8c, 8d, 8e, 8f, 8g, 8h, 8i, 8j, 8k, 8L, 8m, 8n, 183 [as it relates to s. 20.395 (4) (ab) and s. 20.865 (4) (a)], 362m, 507d, 1216bg, 1216bi, 1757m, 9145 (1f), 9145 (2f) and 9445 (1f) These provisions make numerous changes to the Transportation Projects Commission and the Department of Transportation’s duties pertaining to the commission. These changes include modifying the membership of the Transportation Projects Commission, providing staff and funding for the commission, specifying duties and the authority of the commission, requiring the Department of Transportation to provide specific information to the Transportation Projects Commission, requiring the commission to produce certain reports, and requiring an independent engineering firm to prepare a report reviewing the department’s construction standards and project prioritization. These provisions also create a new biennial appropriation with $150,000 GPR in fiscal year 2017-18 to fund the initial costs for the Transportation Projects Commission and include an additional $550,000 GPR in fiscal year 2017-18 in the Joint Committee on Finance's supplemental appropriation to fund costs associated with staff for the commission. Certain duties and the statutory specification of the membership of the commission, under these provisions, sunset after June 30, 2021. The commission is initially provided 3.0 FTE GPR positions and may request an additional 4.0 FTE GPR positions through the Joint Committee on Finance.
I am fully vetoing these provisions as they pertain to the Transportation Projects Commission and the positions for the commission because I object to the creation of the duplicative functions and duties that these provisions create. I am also vetoing these provisions to eliminate wasteful and unnecessary spending.
I am retaining, however, the requirement that the department contract with an independent engineering firm to prepare a report reviewing the department’s construction standards and project prioritization. I am partially vetoing the section that specifies the scope and due date of the independent engineering report, however, to eliminate the requirement that the department undertake the engineering study in consultation with the commission. I am making this partial veto because it is unnecessary to specify that the department must consult with the commission especially once the unneeded staffing for the commission is eliminated.
Under my veto, both the appropriation for $150,000 GPR for the Transportation Projects Commission and the initial 3.0 FTE GPR positions are eliminated. In addition, I am writing down the GPR supplemental appropriation for the Joint Committee on Finance by $550,000 in fiscal year 2017-18 by lining out the amount under s. 20.865 (4) (a) for that fiscal year and writing in a smaller amount to eliminate the funding set aside for additional Transportation Projects Commission staffing costs. I am also requesting the Department of Administration secretary to not allot these funds. I am further vetoing the provision allowing the commission to request up to an additional 4.0 FTE GPR positions under a 14-day passive review request to the Joint Committee on Finance. I am, however, directing the department to create an Office of Inspector General. The sections pertaining to the Transportation Projects Commission include numerous problems and duplications. The staff provided to the commission would duplicate the duties of existing department positions. Permanent year-round positions for the commission are also wasteful because the activity of the commission is cyclical. The broad authority that these provisions give to the commission staff to access any record of the department means personal information from driver licenses, driver medical records and law enforcement investigations is available to the commission – thus jeopardizing the state’s compliance with confidentiality laws. Changing the membership of the commission whereby the secretary of the Department of Transportation is potentially not a member creates a potential gap in program prioritization and the flow of information. Requiring commission staff to produce reports which are redundant with Department of Transportation duties is unnecessary. Sunsetting provisions pertaining to the commission’s membership and duties after June 30, 2021, creates unnecessary disruption to highway programming activities and oversight.
97. Transfer of Segregated Funds
Sections 359p and 9145 (4w)
These provisions require the Department of Transportation to study and report on the effects of consolidating SEG in the surface transportation program and replacing these funds with FED from the state highway program. This report is required to be submitted to the Joint Committee on Finance no later than May 1, 2018. These provisions further permit the department to submit a s. 13.10 request to the Joint Committee on Finance that would accomplish such transfers and would require such requests to include an estimate of the potential savings or costs to local governments. In addition, these provisions create a SEG continuing appropriation under which funds could be transferred to implement any actions by the Committee. I am partially vetoing these provisions because I object to the limitations created in this budget on the allocation of segregated funds among highway projects. The limitations placed on the amounts provided for the southeast Wisconsin freeway megaprojects and the major highway projects, in particular, will inhibit the department’s ability to allocate funds in the most advantageous manner especially in light of the I-94 north-south corridor project funding provided for in separate legislation.
As a result of my partial vetoes of these sections, the department will be able to make dollar-for-dollar reallocations among all state and local road and highway projects – including the southeast Wisconsin freeway megaprojects. My veto will ensure that the state can maximize the use of federal matching dollars and begin to implement state efforts to reduce local government’s costs immediately. While no overall increase in spending will be permitted by my partial vetoes, critical reallocations, especially to advance the southeast Wisconsin freeway megaprojects will be enabled. None of these reallocations, however, will hinder my earlier commitment to keep all major projects on schedule to the highest degree possible within the overall funding provided under the budget bill.
I am also partially vetoing the Joint Committee of Finance review of reallocations under this provision because such review may impede the speed of the department’s efforts to bring projects to completion. I am further partially vetoing the requirement that the department provide a report on the consolidation of funds to the Committee by May 1, 2018, because the study of such consolidation should remain as an ongoing function. My partial vetoes retain, however, the requirement for the department to study the effects of consolidating state moneys in the surface transportation program as our efforts to examine means to reduce local government costs must continue.
98. Railroad Corporation Condemnation Authority
Sections 585i and 585k
These sections require that prior to a railroad corporation acquiring any property through condemnation that exceeds 100 feet in width, the Legislature must enact a law that states a legislative finding that the railroad corporation's acquisition serves the public interest, and that authorizes the acquisition of the property or property interest.
I am vetoing these sections because it is possible that this limitation may be deemed an unreasonable interference with railroad transportation, which is prohibited by federal law. In addition, I am vetoing these sections because the requirement that the Legislature must enact a law prior to the acquisition of property through condemnation may cause excessive delays in railroad projects necessary for economic growth in the state.
