Comparison with rules in adjacent states
All adjacent states have similar administrative code provisions.
Illinois — Eligible applicants must have populations of 50,000 or less and must not be located in an urban county or the 38 cities that receive federal “entitlement" funds. Illinois allows two or more municipalities with similar issues to file a joint application, provided they show a joint effort is required to solve the stated problem. Economic Development may be submitted on an “as-need" basis, there are no deadlines. Applications for both `housing stock upgrades' and public facilities do have deadlines. Another DCEO funding category with no deadline is the “Mobility and Accessibility Rehabilitation Supplement," which provides funding for housing improvement to aid the physically impaired. Municipalities are allowed only one application per category, per program year. All funding provided by CDBG for housing renovation must be specifically for single-family owner occupied.
Iowa — Eligible applicants are municipalities and they may apply directly or on behalf of a sub-recipient and they may file a joint application with another eligible applicant. All applications must include a housing needs assessment; all must demonstrate sustainable community activities. In addition, all award amounts are negotiable, and no project shall exceed 24 months in length. Applicants may submit multiple applications for each of the multiple categories of activity. CBDG funds are distributed into five separate funds, each with their own application rules. Categories include: water and sewer set aside, housing fund, job creation (ED), `contingency,' and the `competitive program,' and each category contains specific rules. The competitive program limits the grant amount to a proportion relative to the applying municipality's size.
Michigan — Eligible applicants have less than 50,000 people and are non-entitlement communities. There are four distinct programs that are similar to Wisconsin's CDBG programs, these are `Infrastructure,' ED, Planning, and Blight Elimination. Minimum Leverage Ratios are required of the majority of activities. Blight elimination projects must provide certification from a Licensed Building Inspector that the project sight meets the definition of blight. Economic Development is subject to strict underwriting guidelines that require projects submit cost quotes from independent third parties. Criminal background checks are also required under this category. All projects must be completed within 24 months from the date the funding is awarded. Downtown development is also a distinct category. Downtown development provides funding for façade improvements for small rural communities, funding is also provide for the acquisition, and renovation of a historic “signature building," in small communities.
Minnesota — State of Minnesota CDBG is part of larger program known as “Small Cities Development Program." The state provides CBDG funding to Housing grants, as well as PF grants, and “Comprehensive Grants," which may be used for Housing, PF, or Economic Development. Minnesota does not appear to set aside money for emergency or contingency grant programs. Minnesota requires any single family rehabilitation projects whose loan comes from CDBG Housing Grant program to comply with state building codes, and a state defined single family rehabilitation standard. Minnesota also requires detailed progress reports on October 15th of each year, as well as an `anti-displacement' plan and the submission of a “drug free work place" plan to DEED. Money provided for affordable housing construction must provide a rental market analysis and ensure fair market rents.
Effect on Small Business
The proposed rule chapter will have no direct impact upon small businesses, as the State may only grant funds to units of local government.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The proposed rule will not affect small businesses.
Fiscal Estimate
The proposed rule chapter will have no impact upon the State's fiscal obligations. A copy of the Fiscal Estimate may be obtained from the agency at no charge by contacting Donna Sorenson at the address, phone number, or e-mail address listed on the first page of this Notice, or at: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/emergency_rules/current/emr1309_fe.
Summary of Economic Impact Analysis
Creation of the proposed rule chapter will have a positive impact on the economy of the state by ensuring continued eligibility of the State of Wisconsin to receive additional CDBG grant funds, which are used to promote economic development throughout the state. A copy of the Economic Impact analysis may be obtained from the agency at no charge by contacting Donna Sorenson at the address, phone number or e-mail address listed on the first page of this Notice, or at: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/emergency_rules/current/emr1309_fe.
Small Business Regulatory Coordinator
Joe Knilans
(608) 267-7873
Internet Link to Rule
Contact Person
Lisa Marks
Department of Administration
Division of Housing
101 E. Wilson Street, 5th Floor
Madison, WI 53702
STATE OF WISCONSIN
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
DOA-2049 (R03/2012)
Division of Executive Budget and Finance
101 East Wilson Street, 10th Floor
P.O. Box 7864
Madison, WI 53707-7864
FAX: (608) 267-0372
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
Fiscal Estimate & Economic Impact Analysis
1. Type of Estimate and Analysis
X Original   Updated   Corrected
2. Administrative Rule Chapter, Title and Number
Ch. Adm 93, Small Cities Community Development Program for Community and Economic Development
3. Subject
Community Development Block Grant Program
4. Fund Sources Affected
5. Chapter 20, Stats. Appropriations Affected
X GPR   X FED   PRO   PRS   SEG   SEG-S
s. 20.505 (7) (a), (m), (n)
6. Fiscal Effect of Implementing the Rule
X No Fiscal Effect
Indeterminate
Increase Existing Revenues
Decrease Existing Revenues
Increase Costs
Could Absorb Within Agency's Budget
Decrease Cost
7. The Rule Will Impact the Following (Check All That Apply)
State's Economy
X Local Government Units
Specific Businesses/Sectors
Public Utility Rate Payers
Small Businesses (if checked, complete Attachment A)
8. Would Implementation and Compliance Costs Be Greater Than $20 million?
Yes   X No
9. Policy Problem Addressed by the Rule
Documenting compliance with federally required rules on the Community Development Block Grant Program.
10. Summary of the businesses, business sectors, associations representing business, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule that were contacted for comments.
Will contact and complete a full summary of information provided by units of local government, consultants and past grantees.
11. Identify the local governmental units that participated in the development of this EIA.
Will identify following the full economic impact analysis.
12. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Specific Businesses, Business Sectors, Public Utility Rate Payers, Local Governmental Units and the State's Economy as a Whole (Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
Overall federal funding remains consistent. The rule may impact certain units of general local government, but fiscal impact can not be predicted.
13. Benefits of Implementing the Rule and Alternative(s) to Implementing the Rule
The benefit of implementing the rule, is State's ability to document compliance with federally required rules on the Community Development Block Grant Program.
14. Long Range Implications of Implementing the Rule
To maintain compliance with federal regulations.
15. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Federal Government
N/A
16. Compare With Approaches Being Used by Neighboring States (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota)
Illinois — Eligible applicants must have populations of 50,000 or less and must not be located in an urban county or the 38 cities that receive federal “entitlement" funds. Illinois allows two or more municipalities with similar issues to file a joint application, provided they show a joint effort is required to solve the stated problem. Economic Development may be submitted on an “as-need" basis, there are no deadlines. Applications for both `housing stock upgrades' and public facilities do have deadlines. Another DCEO funding category with no deadline is the “Mobility and Accessibility Rehabilitation Supplement," which provides funding for housing improvement to aid the physically impaired. Municipalities are allowed only one application per category, per program year. All funding provided by CDBG for housing renovation must be specifically for single-family owner occupied.
Iowa — Eligible applicants are municipalities and they may apply directly or on behalf of a sub-recipient and they may file a joint application with another eligible applicant. All applications must include a housing needs assessment; all must demonstrate sustainable community activities. In addition, all award amounts are negotiable, and no project shall exceed 24 months in length. Applicants may submit multiple applications for each of the multiple categories of activity. CBDG funds are distributed into five separate funds, each with their own application rules. Categories include: water and sewer set aside, housing fund, job creation (ED), `contingency,' and the `competitive program,' and each category contains specific rules. The competitive program limits the grant amount to a proportion relative to the applying municipality's size.
Michigan — Eligible applicants have less than 50,000 people and are non-entitlement communities. There are four distinct programs that are similar to Wisconsin's CDBG programs, these are `Infrastructure,' ED, Planning, and Blight Elimination. Minimum Leverage Ratios are required of the majority of activities.. Blight elimination projects must provide certification from a Licensed Building Inspector that the project sight meets the definition of blight. Economic Development is subject to strict underwriting guidelines that require projects submit cost quotes from independent third parties. Criminal background checks are also required under this category. All projects must be completed within 24 months from the date the funding is awarded. Downtown development is also a distinct category. Downtown development provides funding for façade improvements for small rural communities, funding is also provide for the acquisition, and renovation of a historic “signature building," in small communities.
Minnesota — State of Minnesota CDBG is part of larger program known as “Small Cities Development Program." The state provides CBDG funding to Housing grants, as well as PF grants, and “Comprehensive Grants," which may be used for Housing, PF, or Economic Development. Minnesota does not appear to set aside money for emergency or contingency grant programs. Minnesota requires any single family rehabilitation projects whose loan comes from CDBG Housing Grant program to comply with state building codes, and a state defined single family rehabilitation standard. Minnesota also requires detailed progress reports on October 15th of each year, as well as an `anti-displacement' plan and the submission of a “drug free work place" plan to DEED. Money provided for affordable housing construction must provide a rental market analysis and ensure fair market rents.
17. Contact Name
18. Contact Phone Number
Lisa Marks
(608) 267-0770
This document can be made available in alternate formats to individuals with disabilities upon request.
ATTACHMENT A
1. Summary of Rule's Economic and Fiscal Impact on Small Businesses (Separately for each Small Business Sector, Include Implementation and Compliance Costs Expected to be Incurred)
n/a
2. Summary of the data sources used to measure the Rule's impact on Small Businesses
n/a
3. Did the agency consider the following methods to reduce the impact of the Rule on Small Businesses?
Less Stringent Compliance or Reporting Requirements
Less Stringent Schedules or Deadlines for Compliance or Reporting
Consolidation or Simplification of Reporting Requirements
Establishment of performance standards in lieu of Design or Operational Standards
Exemption of Small Businesses from some or all requirements
Other, describe:
4. Describe the methods incorporated into the Rule that will reduce its impact on Small Businesses
n/a
5. Describe the Rule's Enforcement Provisions
n/a
6. Did the Agency prepare a Cost Benefit Analysis (if Yes, attach to form)
Yes X No
Notice of Hearing
Employment Relations Commission
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission will hold a public hearing regarding promulgated emergency rules and the proposed creation of permanent rules to create Chapters ERC 70, 71, and 80, relating to annual union certification elections.
Hearing Information
Date:   Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Time:  
10:00 a.m.
Location:
  4868 High Crossing Blvd.
  Madison, WI
Appearance at Hearing and Submission of Written Comments
The hearing site is accessible to people with disabilities. However, if you have special needs or circumstances that may make communication or accessibility difficult at the hearing, please contact Peter Davis at 608 243-2421 or peterg.davis@wisconsin.gov.
Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted by November 22, 2013, and can be faxed to (608) 243-2433, emailed to peterg.davis@wisconsin.gov, or mailed/hand-delivered to 4868 High Crossing Blvd., Madison, Wisconsin 53704-7403.
Analysis Prepared by the Commission
Statutes interpreted
The promulgated emergency rules and proposed permanent administrative rules interpret ss. 111.70 (4) (d) 3. b. and 111.83 (3) (b), Stats.
Statutory authority
Sections 111.71, 111.94, 227.11, and 227.24, Stats.
Explanation of agency authority
The Municipal Employment Relations Act and the State Employment Labor Relations Act both require that the Commission adopt administrative rules to regulate various proceedings. In addition, ss. 111.70 (4) (d) 3. b. and 111.83 (3) (b), Stats., require that the Commission assess a fee for each annual certification election and the fee level must be established by administrative rule.
Related statute or rule
None.
Rule summary
By these promulgated emergency rules and proposed rules, the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission created and proposes to permanently create chs. ERC 70, 71, and 80 concerning the cost, timing, and procedures for any requested annual certification elections required by 2011 Wisconsin Act 10 and 2011 Wisconsin Act 32 to determine whether a bargaining unit of general (i.e., non-public safety and non-transit) employees in the municipal or state sector that is represented by a labor organization for collective bargaining with the employer involved shall continue to be represented by that organization or by another organization or shall not be so represented.
These rules do not require the retroactive conduct of elections that would have been conducted on or before December 1, 2012, and May 1, 2013, but for a March 2012 federal court order enjoining such elections under the State Employment Labor Relations Act and the Commission's related March 2012 determination to suspend the conduct of such elections under the Municipal Employment Relations Act until the federal court litigation was concluded.
These rules are not applicable to the plaintiffs in Case 11CV3744 unless and until the Circuit Court's decision is no longer in effect.
Under these rules, a labor organization continues to represent employees (and thus is eligible to file a certification election petition under these rules) unless that organization lost an initial annual certification election conducted by the Commission or was required to but failed to file a petition for an annual certification election prior to March 2012.
2011 Wisconsin Act 32 requires that the Commission charge a fee for conducting any requested election. These rules require that the labor organization or organizations requesting the election should pay the fee and that the following fee structure applies.
$200: 1 to 100 eligible voters
$350: 101 to 250 eligible voters
$500: 251 to 500 eligible voters
$750: 501 to 1000 eligible voters
$1500: 1001 to 3000 eligible voters
$2000: over 3000 eligible voters
Under these rules, the timing of requested elections is as follows:
No later than December 1 for units of all general state employees who, as of August 30, are not covered by a collective bargaining agreement or are covered by a collective bargaining agreement entered into on or after June 29, 2011 (covered in ch. ERC 80). Unions wishing to continue as the collective bargaining representative must file an election petition and applicable fee on or before August 30;
No later than December 1 for units of general municipal school district employees who, as of August 30, are not covered by a collective bargaining agreement or are covered by a collective bargaining agreement entered into on or after June 29, 2011 (covered in ch. ERC 70). Unions wishing to continue as the collective bargaining representative must file an election petition and applicable fee on or before August 30;
No later than May 1 for units of general municipal employees who, as of January 30, are not covered by a collective bargaining agreement or are covered by a collective bargaining agreement entered into on or after June 29, 2011 (covered in ch. ERC 71). Unions wishing to continue as the collective bargaining representative must file an election petition and applicable fee on or before January 30.
Under these rules, if a union does not timely file an election petition and fee, the union loses its status as the collective bargaining representative as of the filing deadline.
In each of the new chapters, the first section, Section ERC xx.01, describes the general policy and purpose of chapter.
Section ERC xx.02, include definitions of terms as used in the chapter and defines the scope of application of the chapter as is outlined above.
Sections ERC xx.03(1) limit the right to file a petition to the existing representative and other any labor organization interested in representing the bargaining unit. No provision is made for petitions by employees or by the employer because decertification automatically results if no timely petition is filed by a labor organization.
Sections ERC xx.03(5) provide that no showing of interest is required to support a petition filed by the existing exclusive representative of the bargaining unit, but that a petition filed by another organization must be supported by a 30% showing of interest. The practice and procedure for submission and determination of the showing of interest is made parallel to that in existing s. ERC 11.05 (2), which generally involve a commission determination as to the sufficiency of the showing of interest in the context of the employee personnel data provided by the employer, without providing a copy of the showing of interest to any party other than the party that submitted it.
Sections ERC xx.03(7) specify the time by which a petition must be filed and the consequences that follow from no timely petition being filed by any labor organization. Sections ERC xx.03 (7) (c) each provide that the commission will issue a notice equivalent to a decertification upon the request of any interested party or any affected employee.
Sections ERC xx.04 provide the procedures and consequences of a withdrawal of a petition. Each provides that if withdrawal of a petition leaves no pending timely petition, the consequences are the same as if the existing representative filed the only timely petition, an election was conducted, and no representative achieved the support of 51% of the eligible voters.
Sections ERC xx.05 describe the obligation of the employer and petitioning union(s) to provide the Commission with lists of proposed eligible voters and related information.
Sections ERC xx.06 provide for commission issuance of a direction of election or other dispositional order without an intervening hearing to resolve possible disputes concerning voter eligibility or other matters. In cases where the commission is directing an election, the direction shall provide that all individuals on the list provided by the municipal employer and on the list, if any, provided by the petitioner or any other interested party, shall be allowed to complete and submit a ballot, subject to the right of any interested party to challenge the eligibility of the voter during post-balloting procedures.
Sections ERC xx.07 provide that all elections are to be conducted by secret ballot and under the supervision of the commission or impartial agents designated by the commission, with the commission determining on a case by case basis whether the secret balloting shall be conducted on-site, by mail or automated telephone system. Each chapter also contains provisions generally paralleling those in s. ERC 11.09, regarding notice of election, observers, challenge of voters, and count and tally of ballots.
Sections ERC xx.07 (6) provide that if more than one proposed representative appears on the ballot and if at least 51% of the eligible voters favor representation but no single representative receives the votes of at least 51% of the eligible voters, the commission, on receipt of a timely request of any party, may conduct a runoff election as provided in ss. 111.70 (4) (d) 4. or 111.83 (4), Stats.
Sections ERC xx.08 and xx.09 provide procedures concerning the commission's certification of results of election and the filing and service of objections to election.
Sections ERC xx.10 provide procedures for commission action on challenges or objections, including the conduct of a hearing if one is needed.
Sections ERC xx.11 list the consequences of no representative achieving support of 51% of the eligible voters in the election. Those consequences are that the commission will issue a certification of the results of the election decertifying the existing representative, and providing that for 12 months from the date of decertification the affected employees shall be nonrepresented and shall not be included in any substantially similar bargaining unit.
Sections ERC xx.12 outline the procedures by which any person aggrieved by a final order of the commission may file and have processed a petition for rehearing.
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulations
None.
Comparison of proposed rules with rules promulgated by adjacent state labor relations agencies
Not applicable. A review of the following adjacent state rules reveals none providing procedures for certification elections conducted on an annual or other regularly periodic basis.
AGENCY Name and Source of Rules:
Minnesota Bureau of Mediation Services
Minnesota Rules,
Chapter 5505 - Private Rules
5505.0100 Definitions.
5505.0200 Purpose, Construction, And Waiver.
5505.0300 Request For Investigation.
5505.0400 Required Information.
Loading...
Loading...
Links to Admin. Code and Statutes in this Register are to current versions, which may not be the version that was referred to in the original published document.