2013 Budget Highlights

As your County Board Supervisor, I spend the end of summer and most of fall participating in numerous meetings and discussions on the Dane County budget.  The following is a brief summary of the 2013 budget.  Many people testified before the County on their priorities and concerns, and I think the budget is a positive reflection of the needs of the County and the county priorities. 

The overall Dane County budget is approximately $525 million, of which more than half is dedicated to human services needs and another quarter dedicated to public safety needs.  The budget also includes provisions that give the county a strong reserve fund of approximately $12 million should another economic downturn occur. 

With respect to the Human Services programs, the county board approved a number of initiatives directed at the homeless, including funding for a temporary winter daytime shelter for the winter of 2012-13 and funding for a permanent daytime shelter for the fall of 2013.  In addition, the budget includes funding towards Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing as a permanent solution to homelessness and funding to keep homeless youth off the streets, replacing federal grant dollars that ceased. 

The county budget also includes funding for our youth in the form of an Early Childhood Intervention (ECI) program with expansion to Sun Prairie, funding to help expand the “Birth to four year old kindergarten” to Leopold School (South Madison / Fitchburg), three additional child protective services positions and a new juvenile delinquency social worker. 

Recognizing and honoring our veterans was also a priority for the county board, and to that the budget increases emergency aid to address homelessness,  provides access to bus passes and improves access to services by streamlining access to benefits and updating technology.   We also included funding for the DAIS housing vouchers for those fleeing domestic violence and reduced the waitlist for developmental disabilities support .  Locally, we were able to help the East Madison and Monona Coalition for the Aging so they can continue their valuable service to our community.

To support our public safety mission, we added funding for four additional drug court slots and expanded it to ensure racial diversity within drug court, we expanded the restorative justice programs to 3 middle schools to keep youth out of criminal justice system, expanded the Alcohol and Other Drug Additions (AODA) programs and updated the Sheriff’s Departments squad car video cameras. 

Other economic and community program support came in the form of funding for Partners for Recreation and Conservation (PARC) grants for municipalities and organizations to improve infrastructure and public spaces for recreation,  funding for BUILD grants which help communities and businesses by fostering job and economic development  and are supporting municipalities throughout the county by providing matching funds for new voter machines throughout the county. 

As a member of the Alliant Energy Center Commission, the Task force for the Expansion of the Aliant Energy Center and as Chair of the Public Works Committee, I am very proud of the support this budget brings to enhance the Alliant Energy Center and move it forward as an economic driver for the area.  To that end, the budget includes funding that will be combined with State and other private partner funding for an expanded animal barn, and funding for improvements to the Coliseum to allow for more intimate concert venues.  Lastly, the budget includes funding (along with funding from the City of Madison and the Greater Madison Visitor and Convention Bureau) to conduct a “visioning” for the future of the AEC.

Lastly, the County budget maintains critical funding for continued environmental improvements, such as efforts to remove carp as part of the County Board’s “Clear Lakes” initiative, adds funding to expand the county fleet that is fueled from Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) generated at our landfill, provides funding for county programs to become more sustainable. 

I’m proud of the balance that this budget brings and the priorities that are maintained in the County. 

Soil Vapors

By now many are aware of the Perchloroethylene (PCE) vapors that have seeped into the Monona Grove High School, most likely from PCE contamination found at the adjacent Klinke Cleaners.   While this is undoubtedly a bad situation, in some ways we should consider ourselves fortunate.  I know that’s an odd statement but consider the following:

·          The drycleaner voluntarily investigated their site and is cooperating with the DNR and the School

The Klinke’s voluntarily investigated their site for contamination in 2008, in time to be eligible for the WI Dry Cleaner Environmental Response Fund program.   The contamination they found was reported to the DNR who oversees investigation and cleanup projects.  The DNR also works with responsible parties to establish a schedule for cleaning up sites.  The most logical time to clean up the Klinke site was when the building was being torn down and reconstructed in 2010 and 2011, giving the Klinke’s more access to remove contaminated soil beneath the building. 

·         The drycleaner has the resources available to take the immediate actions needed to protect the school

The Klinke’s have the resources available to hire an experienced consultant and continue their investigation and cleanup of this site.  As their sampling data showed more extensive contamination, they were also directed to investigate potential vapor impacts to the school.   Investigating contamination is an iterative process, in which you expand and refocus your efforts as new data becomes available.   Once vapors were found in the soils under the school, air in the school was immediately sampled and actions were taken to decrease those levels to ensure they were below the health-based standards.

·         Soil vapor intrusion is an emerging issue and WI DNR and DHS are requiring more investigations

Wisconsin is one of a growing number of states that now recognize the potential threats associated with vapors from contaminated soil or groundwater, and as such more frequently requires soil vapor monitoring at sites where the nature of the contamination is of concern (especially when there are nearby residences or other occupied buildings).   In the past, this pathway was not often investigated and people were unknowingly left exposed to contamination.  In fact, New York State has re-assessed contamination sites that were closed without investigating the vapor pathway, with very interesting results (see http://www.dec.ny.gov/regulations/51715.html). 

So with that I say we’re fortunate because you also have to consider the following:

·         Given the nature of the chemicals and the standard drycleaning practices that were used in the 1960’s, 1970’s, 1980’s and even into the 1990’s, almost all drycleaners operating in that timeframe have some level of contamination.  This means there are hundreds if not thousands of drycleaners throughout the state – many closed and abandoned – where contaminants are likely to be found. 

·         While there is a program in WI to address contamination from those drycleaners who like the Klinke’s voluntarily investigated their sites, the fund is a reimbursement fund and a long wait-list exists for those paybacks.    

·         There is currently no federal or state program to identify where historic drycleaning facilities have operated and systematically assess the risks from those facilities (including soil vapor risks). 

The ultimate responsibility for cleaning up contaminated properties in WI is the party which caused the contamination and/ or the landowner.  In many cases, the current land owner may not have even been aware that the property once housed a drycleaning facility and the party causing the contamination is long gone.  Many landowners lack the resources to conduct lengthy investigations and there are inadequate funds at the state, county or city level for investigating or addressing abandoned facilities. 

I am concerned that no one taking a systematic approach to identify which of the known contaminated sites throughout the county are adjacent to schools, daycare centers or residences nor is there adequate funding for a systematic approach to assessing the potential impacts of soil vapors from those sites. 

So yes, this is a bad situation at the high school, but it could be so much worse.   My thanks to the Klinke’s for working cooperatively with the DNR and collaborating with the school to take action to prevent the vapors from getting into the school.   I am confident that they will continue with that cooperation throughout the entire investigation and cleanup process at their site. 

Lastly, I note that for those who wish to understand more about contamination from drycleaning sites, the States Coalition for the Remediation of Drycleaners has a document titled “A Citizens Guide to Drycleaner Cleanup”, which can be downloaded from this site http://drycleancoalition.org/pubs.cfm.

Note:  from 1997 – 2004, I was the DNR Dry Cleaner Environmental Response Team Leader, writing the rules for the program, staffing the Governor’s Council for the Dry Cleaner Environmental Response program and representing WI on the States Coalition for the Remediation of Drycleaners. 

Public Comment sought for Yahara Lakes Advisory Group Recommendations

Public Comments are now being sought on the recommendations drafted by the Yahara Lakes Advisory Group II – or YLAG2.   Appointed by County Executive Parisi, I joined other city, village, town, county and regional planning representatives, user groups, lake associations' representatives and University of Wisconsin educators in carrying out our charge to examine the operation, physical constraints, and changing hydrology of the Yahara chain of lakes and make water level recommendations that balance public and private interests. Public interests include navigation, fish and wildlife habitat, water quality and natural scenic beauty. Private and cultural interests include historic values, riparian and business access and economic development. 

We spent 12 months learning from experts about various topics affecting lake level management – from hazard mitigation to cultural heritage to wetlands and wildlife habitats to hydraulics – to help us carry out our charge.   In the end, we agreed on 41 different recommendations in categories that include water levels, watershed management, in-lake management, analyses and information/education. 

A public meeting was held in late March to start the public input process, and the recommendations are now available for public comment on the web at http://www.countyofdane.com/lwrd/landconservation/ylag.aspx.  Comments will be accepted between April 12 – April 26th.    All public input will be considered by the group and final recommendations will be forwarded to the WI DNR – the agency charged with establishing lake levels for the Yahara chain of lakes.   

I have asked the County to also include on their web page information about lake levels and management strategies so that we can understand what actions they are taking to best manage lake levels.   That information is posted at: http://www.countyofdane.com/lwrd/landconservation/lakelevelpg.aspx.

I always encourage constituents to contact Kevin directly at 224-3731 if they have concerns about the lakes  and of course, they are always welcome to contact me as well at 221-0514. 

District 24 Boundaries

In April, 2012 the boundaries for District 24 are changing and portions of the Districts currently represented by Supervisor Tom Stoebig and Supervisor Dave de Felice will become part of District 24.

Every 10 years when the US Census data is released, local governments adjust their political boundaries to reflect changes in population over that time and to better group communities of interest. Following the recommended process, the Dane County Board redefined many district boundaries to take into account these population
changes and communities of interest.

As the District 24 Supervisor since 2008, I am eager to earn the trust and gain the support for those new to District 24. As second-vice Chair of the Board, I currently work closely with both Supervisor Stoebig and Supervisor de Felice, and am pleased to have both of their endorsements for the spring election.

You will find that I am a strong advocate for
· protecting our most vulnerable populations
· supporting our parks and open spaces
· cleaning up our lakes
· keeping our communities safe
· continuing the Dane County waywhere we treat our workers with respect, value our families and work together to make Dane County the best place to live, raise a family and keep our economy vital and thriving with good paying jobs. Here is a link to the new District 24 boundary:

http://www.countyofdane.com/board/supervisory_district.aspx

April 3, 2012 Election

As a longtime resident with a history of community service, I am proud to
represent District 24 on the Dane County Board.

In the last two years, I worked to:

· Protect our most vulnerable with a new drop-in mental health facility and maintain funding for the Dane County Job Center to connect unemployed residents with job opportunities;
· Bring fiscal responsibility while respecting our employees by renegotiating contracts to reduce health care costs saving taxpayers more than $1 million annually;
· Enhance our lakes and lands with the Clear Lakes Initiative, supporting the purchase of critical lands to protect endangered species and establishing permanent pharmaceutical drop-off locations to keep unused pharmaceuticals out of our landfill and water;
· Support public safety with continued 911 upgrades and fully staffing the 911 center, completing radio interoperability so emergency responders from all over the county can talk with each other, passing an ordinance keeping guns out of County-owned facilities and implementing efficiencies to the criminal justice system to save taxpayers millions; and
· Give Dane County voters a voice by putting a referendum on the Dane County ballot asking whether employees should have the right to collectively bargain for fair pay and safe working conditions.

I am honored to have the endorsements of County Executive Joe Parisi, County Board Chair Scott McDonell and Sheriff Dave Mahoney. I am also pleased to have the endorsement and confidence of the two Supervisors who have represented portions of the new District 24 - Supervisor Tom Stoebig and Supervisor Dave de Felice. Lastly, I have been endorsed by the Fire Fighters Local 311 as well as the Dane County Deputies Association.

During recent times we have come to realize just how important it is to know the values and priorities of those seeking elected office. As the District 24 Supervisor, I will strive to make my votes transparent and to always be accountable to my constituents. Dane County has much to offer to all of us – a healthy environment, strong local economy, a variety of parks and open spaces, safe communities and support for our most vulnerable.

As your County Supervisor, I will continue to work hard on your behalf. I take pride in promptly responding to constituent concerns and updating neighborhoods on County activities.

Robin

2012 Dane County Budget

As I and other County Board Supervisors worked to finalize the Dane County budget we had to balance many factors – we had to account for unprecedented cuts from Governor Walker’s state budget coupled with uncertain sales tax revenues at the same time that many residents are seeing their incomes decrease. We strove to ensure this budget reflects “the Dane County way” of providing a safety net for the needy and security for those who live and visit the county. To me, doing things the Dane County way means maintaining Dane County as a place where people want to live, raise a family, educate their children and have unique natural resources preserved for future generations. It means providing services to those who are in crisis as well as funding programs that help keep people out of crisis situations. It means maintaining public safety as efficiently as possible, using appropriate technology and risk-based decision-making. It means cleaning up our lakes and keeping our roads plowed and well maintained.

Here’s more detail on parts of the County budget:

The County serves as the safety net for people in crisis. Human Services programs comprise 50% of the county budget, with various point of service agencies implement various programs. Some of the programs funded include:
• Preventative programs such as Joining Forces for Families, including funds for the Children’s Service Society, which can use that money to leverage additional federal funds.
• The Early Childhood Initiative, which helps hundreds of moms and dads find jobs to help support their families.
• Women in Transition case management, the Family Preservation Program, the Employment and Training Housing Initiative, the Foreclosure Prevention Program and partial funding for the Tenant Resource Center.
• Funding a new Mental Health Drop-in Clinic modeled after a small program that dispenses medications and has met with success in alleviating pressure on inpatient services. The new drop in clinic will include other mental health and addiction services for those who are currently not served, thereby reducing waiting lists.
• Adding a $250,000 contingency fund to protect the Human Services Department against unanticipated state or federal funding reductions
• Full funding for Youth Resource Centers, the Salvation Army’s Warming House and the Briarpatch program for runaway youths.
• Senior adult day care centers including the Colonial Club in Sun Prairie and Oregon Senior Center’s Adult Day Care program.

The County Jail, the 911 Center and the Sheriff’s Department are all included in the Public Safety budget. This budget includes funding to continue upgrades to the 911 center, continuing with the implementation of audit recommendations.

This budget incorporates a number of efficiencies from streamlining the criminal justice system and funds the Criminal Justice Council (comprised of the County Executive, the County Board Chair, the Sheriff, the District Attorney, the Chief Judge and the Clerk of Courts) to identify and implement future efficiencies. For example, 40% of all people booked into the Dane County jail are released within 24 hours – and the cost of booking is the largest cost associated with that 24 hour period. This budget includes a new risk assessment position at the jail to conduct this assessment before booking – thus eliminating booking costs for those deemed to be low risk. Another savings includes closing one floor of the Huber Center, and plans are underway to establish a day reporting center that will eventually lead to the closing of the Huber Center saving even more money in the long term.

The budget also caps overtime for the Sheriff’s Department at 6.6% of total salaries, anticipated to save the county over $300,000. Lastly, we included funds for the Sheriff to replace their records management system so that the Sheriff will be better able to manage various aspects of the Department in the future.

This budget includes several programs aimed at cleaning up the Yahara chain of lakes (including Lake Monona). Funding for Land and Water Resources positions were restored in this budget and funding for weed cutting was maintained.

The budget also included funding for a five-part initiative to protect and enhance the lakes, including:
1. An effort to remove carp and reduce sediment, focusing first on Cherokee Marsh and Mud Lake;
2. An additional $1.65 million for a program which cost-shares municipal improvements of storm drain outlets that dump untreated storm water and litter into county lakes, rivers, and streams;
3. A $3.4 million fund for acquisitions that improve the water quality of Yahara River lakes and their tributaries;
4. Initial funding to implement recommendations from the Yahara CLEAN initiative to reduce phosphorus, sediment loadings, and beach pollutants; and
5. A clean beach effort to partner with municipalities to address water quality at two beaches each year.

To offset cuts from the state to the transportation budget, we are planning on using trained parks staff to help keep the roads open in the winter. While they won’t be able to help with road maintenance in the summer, at least there should be adequate staff during winter storms. This is another example of how our county employees are willing to work with us to solve our budget problems.

To begin upgrades at the Alliant Energy Center, the County Board included a budget amendment for a feasibility study to increase animal housing capacity for the World Dairy Expo during the annual event. We anticipate that this will help jump-start additional public/private efforts to keep World Dairy Expo in Wisconsin, which contributes an estimated $18.7 million to Dane County’s economy.

In summary, 15.5 County positions were eliminated in this budget. The 2012 budget, as approved by the County Board, will result in an increase of $28.24 in county taxes on an average Madison home of $239,239. Taxes to support county government services, including the Sheriff’s Office and the jail, human services for children, the disabled, and the elderly, emergency radio interoperability, and county roads and bridges, will total about $687 for the average homeowner in 2012.

State Budget Impacts to Dane County

The Governor signed the 2011-2013 budget into law on June 26, 2011. The following is a summary of the new state budget and its impact on Dane County. Clearly the County will be struggling to continue to provide the same level of service, especially to our most vulnerable populations, but we will continue to streamline and increase efficiencies as much as possible. The county budget process will start in late August as County Executive Parisi develops his budget and public input on the budget occur into the fall.

Property Tax Levy Limit: For each year in the biennium, each county/municipality is required to adopt a levy limit that allows a levy increase equal to the greater of 0% or the increase in equalized value due to net new construction. This percentage increase would be based on the prior year actual levy. Unused levy authority could be carried forward but only to a maximum of 0.5% of the prior year levy and only with a ¾ affirmative vote by the County Board. If no carry forward is adopted for 2011-2012, the county would not have to reduce its levy that year under the debt service adjustment on debt issued before July 1, 2005. The county tax rate limit would be suspended for 2011 through 2013, but beginning in 2013-2014 the tax rate limit would revert back to the 1992-1993 tax rates.

Impact: Save Dane County $1.3 – 2.9 million if the county is not required to reduce its levy for reductions in debt issued prior to July 1, 2005.

Child Support: The state budget reduces child support funding by $12.5 million per year which then lessens federal matching funds. In addition, the budget requires DCF to distribute the reduced funding based on county performance.

Impact: Funding reduction of $840,000 (state & federal matching) per year.

Dane County RTA: The budget bill includes language that eliminates all RTAs including the Dane County RTA.

Income Maintenance: Income Maintenance programs are now required to be implemented by at least 10 separate multi-county consortia statewide. Each consortia must have a plan in place by Oct. 1, 2011, approved by DHS by Oct. 31, 2011, and DHS must enter into contracts with the consortia starting Jan. 1, 2012. The State will perform other administrative duties including relocating the document processing unit outside of Dane County no later than July 1, 2012. Counties would contribute their Income Maintenance overmatch to their IM consortia. Dane County is early in the negotiation process with other counties.

Impact: Estimated funding loss of $200,000 per year and 2-3 staff positions.

Badger Prairie Health Care Center: The budget includes a $1 million increase to supplemental payments to municipal nursing homes, including Badger Prairie Health Care Center.

Impact: Estimated increase of $31,000 per year for Badger Prairie Health Care Center.

Treatment Alternative Diversion Program: The budget reduces the Treatment Alternative Diversion Program by 10% and requires any county receiving a grant by 1/1/2012 to provide a 25% match. Starting in the 2012 budget, the TAD program grants will be available to new counties through a “competitive grant process”. Prior TAD counties would be able to re-apply.

Impact: In 2010-2011, Dane County received $154,427 in TAD funding. With the 10% reduction and the 25% match requirement, it is uncertain whether the Dane County DART program will still be viable.

W-2: The state budget reduces grants by $20 per month to recipients who receive them and tightens program timelines.

Impact: The negative impact will be on Dane County W-2 consumers. Dane County will operate the program in compliance with State rules and regulations and within the funds contracted to us for the program benefits, services and administration.

Wisconsin Quality Home Care Authority: The budget eliminates $1million in funding for the Authority and the Dane County Quality Home Care Commission. The statutory language creating the Authority and Commission was repealed in WI Act 10 (Budget Repair Bill). The Dane County Quality Home Care Commission would be dissolved.

Youth Aids & Juvenile Corrections Institutions (JCI) Daily Rates: The budget reduced Youth Aids by 10%. The state daily rates for juvenile correction institutions have been increased to $284 in 2011-2012 and $289 in 2012-2013, and the increases include $17 to offset juvenile corrections deficit.

Impact: Dane County will see a loss in Youth Aids funds of $355,000 in 2011 and $710,000 in both 2012 and 2013. The state will charge Dane County $53,4234 more in 2011, $161,835 in 2012 and $180,000 in 2013 for juvenile institution placements.

Family Care: The budget put an enrollment cap on Family Care participants and prohibits expansion to new counties. Dane County has not yet implemented Family Care. The budget fully funds Aging and Disability Resource Centers (ADRCs) started in the 2009-2011 biennium, and it funds the new ADRCs in 13 counties starting 2011-2012, providing them with $379,400 in 2011-12 and $5.9 million in 2012-2013.

Impact: Dane County may be among the 13 counties eligible in the State budget for funding of operating costs for an ADRC in Dane County ($2.8 mil State funds and $1.2 mil in medical assistance) starting some time in 2012. County staff are working on determining if this Center can be started and operated for the funds available and with no additional local contribution. A Center would most certainly have a positive service impact, but any fiscal impact is hard to determine.

Shared Revenue: The state budget reduces shared revenue for counties and municipalities by $76.8 million in FY 2012. In the past, local governments were required to continue public safety and fire protection funding lo lower than the previous year’s levels (termed Maintenance of Effort). The state budget repeals local government maintenance of effort requirement for public safety.
Impact: Under this budget, Dane County’s shared revenue would be reduced by $525,000 for 2012 and beyond.

Working Lands Initiative: The state budget repeals the conversion fee and PACE bonding authority ($12 million), however, statutory authority for the program as well as the PACE gifts, grants and working lands appropriations and agricultural enterprise areas were maintained. The budget does delete the DATCP requirement for PACE applications, and uses $5.2 million in Stewardship funds for 16 farms approved in 2009. The budget calls for a study to develop a less expensive program. Conversion fees collected by a political subdivision for 2011 (prior to budget bill) are to be retained by that political subdivision.

Impact: If Dane County is allowed to keep state’s portion of conversion fees, it would retain the $84,718 collected for 2011-12. If the county is not allowed to keep state portion, then Dane County will need to reduce budgeted revenues by $25,000.

Stewardship Funds: The state budget reduces bonding authority under the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program from $86 million to $60 million each fiscal year and prevents unused money from being rolled over. The Joint Finance Committee will oversee purchases of $250,000 or more via passive review. DNR is required to set aside $6 million for dam safety grants to counties. For stewardship fund proposed acquisition, local governments may adopt a nonbinding resolution in support or opposition to the land acquisition.

Impact: Over the biennium, $2.5 million is transferred from the Conservation Fund to the General Fund.

Recycling Grants: The state budget provides $19 million per year for the recycling grant program. Another $1 million will be split between all the municipalities that enter into cooperative agreements for recycling services. The entire recycling surcharge tax ($23.4 million annually) was renamed economic development fund.

Impact: The same amount of fees will be collected from our landfill, but local municipalities’ recycling grants have been cut by 40%. Over the biennium, $46.8 million is transferred from the Recycling Fund to new “Economic Development Fund”. In addition, the budget transfers $16.1 million from the Recycling Fund to the Environmental Fund, and transfers $21 million from the Environmental Fund to the Transportation Fund.

Transportation Aids: The budget maintains funding for the General Transportation Aids for 2011, and provides a 10% reduction in aids for 2012 and no increase for 2013. The budget also increases the bicycle/pedestrian facilities grant program by $1 million each or $3.7 million per year. Funding for town road projects (but not counties) was increased by $5 million.

Impact: Dane County will lose $346,417 in both 2012 and 2013.

The budget also includes a provision that
a) prohibits a county from using its own workforce for a highway improvement project in another county or a municipality in a different county unless
1) a portion of the project lies within the county doing the work and no portion of the project extends beyond an enjoining county; or
2) the project lies within a municipality that lies partially within the county doing the work; and
b) prohibits a county from using its own workforce to perform a highway improvement project for a city or village with a population over 5,000, except as allowed in limited circumstances under the local roads improvement program.”

Impact: Highway and Transportation staff are continuing to review the impact of this provision

The budget require that whenever a county, city, village or town “lets a public contract by bidding, the bidding must be on the basis of sealed competitive bids, the contract must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, and the local government may not use a bidding method that gives preference based on the geographic location of the bidder or that uses other criteria for selecting the lowest responsible bidder.”

Impact: This provision makes the County’s “Best Value” ordinance illegal. Corporation Counsel Office is reviewing the best value ordinance in light of this provision.

The budget also provides $15 million in 2011-2012 for the state highway maintenance program and provides for a 2% increase for 2012-2013. Alter definitions of highway maintenance activities performed by counties.

Impact: The impact to Dane County will depend upon how the funds are distributed.

Prevailing Wage: The budget includes language that the prevailing wage threshold applies to $100,000 “multiple-trade”(no single trade accounted for 85% of labor costs) municipal/state projects.

Repeal prevailing wage rates for publicly funded private construction projects. Prevailing wage rates do not apply to governmental unit projects that do not compensate any individual performing work on the project. The budget also voids any local government prevailing wage ordinance upon the effective date of the budget bill.

A local government public works project for erection, construction, repair, remodeling, or demolition of residential property (two dwelling units or less) is not subject to prevailing wage. Prevailing wage does not apply to a residential development approved by a government authority for work paid for by the developer and dedicated over to a municipality for road, street, bridge, sanitary sewer or water main projects. All the prevailing wage changes are effective the date that the budget bill is effective.

Collective Bargaining: The budget bill subjects new public safety employees hired on or after the effective date of the bill to the requirement that they pay the same amounts toward their pensions as general occupation employees under Act 10. The design and selection of health coverage plans by the municipal employer for public safety employees is no longer a subject of collective bargaining. The budget also provides the required local employee retirement contribution for all employees, be deducted from the employee’s pre-tax income for purposes of federal/state income taxes (not FICA).

Buy Local Program: The budget funds the Buy Local Buy Wisconsin program at $200,000 per year.

Septic System Changes: The budget amends the sewage replacement requirements rules to alter the circumstances under which an owner must replace/rehabilitate a failing residential private sewage system. It also changes the grant program by increasing eligible replacement costs from 60% to 75% and raising the allowed maximum family income from $45,000 to $67,000 for a family of four. Under the changes, 450 families would be eligible at $5,200 per grant through a “highest priority” system based on an enforcement order.

Impact: This provision weakens enforcement of failing septic systems and expands the eligibility for the grant program while decreasing funding 17%. The weakened enforcement will come into effect when a family earning less than 300% of poverty level has a failing septic system but there is insufficient money in the fund to refund the family 75% of the cost of their system. Currently, the program at existing funding levels is prorating grant awards due to the high volume of applicants around the state. It is expected that grant applications will increase but with less money, applicants will receive much less than 75% of the cost of their system.

Assembly/Senate deleted these provisions.

Phosphorus Rules: Provisions to eliminate the phosphorus rules were removed from the budget.

Alliant Energy Center: The budget reduces the state’s share of debt payment for the Alliant Energy Center by10% and by $20,600 in 2012 and 2013.
Impact: Since the Alliant Energy Center operations are not funded by the County budget, this amount will have to come from Alliant Center operations. During the downturn in the economy, bookings at the Alliant Center have been less and thus their funding has declined. There may need to be county funds to help the Alliant Center make up this difference.

Circuit Courts: The budget reduces the Circuit Court Block Grant, Guardian ad litem fees and Victim Witness funding by 10%. The budget also eliminates the self help center on court information.

Impact: Circuit Court Block grant is reduced by $74,063 in 2011 and by $148,125 in 2012 & in 2013. Guardian ad litem fees are reduced by $16,290 in 2011 and by $32,580 in 2012 and 2013. Victim Witness funding is reduced by $27,375 in 2011 and by $54,750 in 2012 and 2013.


Small Claims Cases: The budget increases the jurisdictional amount for small claims cases from $5,000 or less to $10,000 or less. Current jurisdictional amounts would still apply to third party complaints, personal injury claims or tort claims.

Impact: This provision increases caseloads for Court Commissioners without any additional funding.