Financing working capital costs of certain nonprofit institutions
Under current law, WHEFA may issue bonds to finance certain projects of
health, educational, research, and other nonprofit institutions. The bill authorizes
WHEFA to issue bonds for the purpose of financing such institutions' working capital
costs.
Business development tax credit changes
Under current law, the tax benefits WEDC may award to a person certified
under the business development tax credit program include an amount equal to up
to 50 percent of the person's training costs incurred to undertake activities to
enhance an eligible employee's general knowledge, employability, and flexibility in
the workplace; to develop skills unique to the person's workplace or equipment; or
to develop skills that will increase the quality of the person's product. Under the bill,
that criterion for awarding business development tax credits is changed to an
amount equal to up to 50 percent of the person's training costs incurred to undertake
activities to upgrade or improve the job-related skills of an eligible employee, train
an eligible employee on the use of job-related new technologies, or provide
job-related training to an eligible employee whose employment with the person
represents the employee's first full-time job.
Also, under current law, the tax benefits WEDC may award to a person certified
under the business development tax credit program include an amount determined
by WEDC that is equal to a percentage of the amount of wages that the person paid
to an eligible employee in the taxable year, if the position in which the eligible
employee was employed was created or retained in connection with the person's
location or retention of the person's corporate headquarters in Wisconsin and the job
duties associated with the eligible employee's position involve the performance of
corporate headquarters functions. Under the bill, WEDC may award business
development tax credits under that criterion regardless of whether the job duties
associated with the eligible employee's position involve the performance of corporate
headquarters functions.
Base year for the enterprise zone tax credit
The bill modifies the definition of “base year” for purposes of the enterprise zone
tax credit. The amount of the credit for job creation or retention depends, in part,
on the number of the business's employees in the taxable year as compared to the
number of employees in the base year. Current law defines “base year” to mean the
taxable year beginning during the calendar year prior to the calendar year in which
the enterprise zone was created. For businesses that enter into contracts with
WEDC after December 31, 2021, the bill defines “base year” as the 12-month period
prior to the date on which the claimant was certified to claim the tax credit.
Information sharing between WEDC and DOR
The bill allows WEDC and DOR to enter into an agreement under which WEDC
may obtain copies of tax returns and related documents from DOR. The bill also
authorizes WEDC to examine tax returns and related documents held by DOR to the
extent necessary to administer WEDC's economic development programs. Under
current law, WEDC's examination authority is limited to the development zone
program.
Modifications to WEDC reporting requirements
The bill modifies WEDC's reporting requirements to the legislature. First, the
bill alters the requirement that WEDC, prior to the beginning of each calendar year,
report to the legislature on the economic development projects it intends to develop
and implement during the year. Under the bill, the reporting period is the fiscal year,
not the calendar year. Second, the bill repeals the requirement that WEDC report
to the legislature on the economic development tax credit program. This program
ended in 2015, and tax year 2019 is the final year for which taxpayers may claim the
credit under contracts with WEDC.
Increase to WEDC GPR appropriation
The bill increases from $16,512,500 per fiscal year under current law to
$25,012,500 in the 2021-22 fiscal year and $20,012,500 in the 2022-23 fiscal year
the amount WEDC may expend from its GPR appropriation for its economic
development programs.
Changes to WEDC's appropriation from the economic development fund
Current law appropriates moneys to WEDC from the economic development
fund for WEDC's operations and to fund its economic development programs. An
economic development surcharge administered by DOR funds the economic
development fund. Currently, the total amount WEDC may expend from the
economic development fund is limited to surcharge amounts deposited into the fund
by DOR and is limited by the amount of moneys appropriated from the fund to DOR
for purposes of administering the economic development surcharge.
Under the bill, WEDC may expend all moneys from the economic development
fund not expended by DOR for purposes of administering the economic development
surcharge. Those moneys include interest and earnings of the fund and
unencumbered amounts lapsed to the fund at the end of each fiscal year from DOR's
annual appropriation for administration of the economic development surcharge.
Tourism
American Indian tourism marketing
The bill requires DOA to award an annual grant to the Great Lakes
Inter-Tribal Council to provide funding for a program to promote tourism featuring
American Indian heritage and culture. The bill also transfers from the Department
of Tourism to DOA a contract between the Great Lakes Inter-Tribal Council and the
Department of Tourism that relates to the promotion of tourism featuring American
Indian heritage and culture.
Mass burial monument at UW–Stevens Point
The bill appropriates $100,000 to the Arts Board to provide a grant to a Native
American artist through the Wisconsin Woodland Indian Art Initiative for the
design, production, and installation on the UW–Stevens Point campus of a
permanent marker in recognition of the Native Americans who died due to a scarlet
fever epidemic.
New PR-S appropriation
The bill creates a new appropriation for the Department of Tourism to expend
moneys the department receives from other state agencies for the purposes for which
those moneys are received.
correctional system
Adult correctional system
Extended supervision
Under current law, when a person is sentenced to prison, the person is given a
bifurcated sentence, with the first portion of the sentence served in confinement in
prison and the second portion of the sentence served in the community on extended
supervision. DOC may not discharge a person from extended supervision until the
entire term of the bifurcated sentence is completed. Under certain circumstances,
the sentencing court may reduce the confinement portion of the bifurcated sentence,
but current law does not allow the sentencing court to reduce the period of extended
supervision. The bill allows the sentencing court to reduce the term of a person's
extended supervision if all of the following apply:
1. The person has served the lesser of three years or 50 percent of the term of
extended supervision without violating the conditions and rules of supervision.
2. The person has met all of his or her financial obligations to the victim of the
crime.
3. The person is not required to register as a sex offender and is serving a
sentence for a crime that is not a crime against life or bodily security or a specified
crime against a child.
Earned compliance credit
The bill creates an earned compliance credit for time spent on extended
supervision or parole. Under current law, a person's extended supervision or parole
may be revoked if he or she violates a condition of the extended supervision or parole.
If extended supervision or parole is revoked, the person is returned to prison for an
amount of time up to the length of the original sentence, less any time actually served
in confinement and less any credit for good behavior. Under current law, when
extended supervision or parole is revoked, the time spent on extended supervision
or parole is not credited as time served under the sentence.
Under the bill, an eligible inmate receives an earned compliance credit for time
served on extended supervision or parole. The earned compliance credit equals the
amount of time served on extended supervision or parole without violating any
conditions or rules of extended supervision or parole. Under the bill, a person is
eligible to receive the earned compliance credit only if the person is not required to
register as a sex offender and is serving a sentence for a crime that is not a specified
violent crime or a specified crime against a child. Under the bill, if a person's
extended supervision or parole is revoked, he or she may be incarcerated for up to
the length of the original sentence, less any credit for time served in confinement, any
credit for good behavior, and any earned compliance credit.
Revocation of probation, parole, or extended supervision
Under current law, if a person violates a condition or rule of probation, parole,
or extended supervision, the Division of Hearings and Appeals (DHA) in DOA, or
DOC if a hearing is waived, may revoke that person's probation, parole, or extended
supervision and return the person to confinement. Under the bill, a person's
probation, parole, or extended supervision may not be revoked for a rule violation
unless one of the following conditions is met:
1. The person committed three or more independent rule violations during his
or her term of probation, parole, or extended supervision.
2. The person violated a condition prohibiting contact with a specified
individual.
3. The person is a registered sex offender.
4. When the person committed the rule violation, the person also allegedly
committed a crime.
5. The person failed to report for supervision for more than 60 consecutive days.
Sanctions for violating a condition or rule of probation, parole, or extended
supervision
Under current law, if a person admits to violating a rule or condition of
probation, parole, or extended supervision, DOC may sanction the person with
imprisonment for up to 90 days instead of revoking probation, parole, or extended
supervision. The bill changes the sanction procedure.
Under the bill, if the person does not admit to committing the rule violation,
DHA holds a hearing on the violation. If DHA determines that the person committed
the violation, DHA may sanction the person with imprisonment for up to 30 days, or
up to 90 days if the rule violation meets the grounds for revocation. Under the bill,
if the person admits to the alleged rule violation, DOC may impose the 30-day or
90-day sanction without a hearing.
Earned release
Under current law, an eligible inmate may earn early release to parole or
extended supervision by successfully completing a substance abuse program. An
inmate is eligible for earned release only if the inmate is serving time for a crime that
is not a violent crime and, for an inmate who is serving a bifurcated sentence, the
sentencing court determines that the inmate is eligible.
The bill expands the earned release program to include educational, vocational,
treatment, or other qualifying training programs that are evidence-based to reduce
recidivism. The bill also provides that DOC, not the sentencing court, determines
eligibility for all inmates.
Reports
The bill requires DOC to submit the following annual reports to the governor,
the legislature, and the director of state courts:
1. A report on early discharges from extended supervision and the reduction
in incarceration due to the earned compliance credit.
2. A report on the expanded earned release program.
3. A report on revocation of parole, extended supervision, and probation.
Each of these annual reports is required to include an accounting of the cost
savings resulting from the relevant programs under the bill. The bill requires DOC
use the amount of the cost savings reported to pay for the extended supervision,
earned release, and revocation programs under the bill.
The bill also requires DOC to conduct a onetime review and report to the
governor, the legislature, and the director of state courts on all of the following:
1. The efficacy of DOC's standard conditions and rules of supervision.
2. DOC's evidence-based risk assessment tool.
3. DOC's training of community supervision officers.
4. The aging and elderly population in Wisconsin's prisons and possible options
for alternatives to prison for that population.
Reduction of mandatory minimum sentences
Under current law, a sentencing court may reduce the confinement portion of
a bifurcated sentence if the inmate qualifies for a sentence adjustment, earned
release, or compassionate release.
In State v. Grazma, 2020 WI App 100, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals limited
the sentencing court's ability to reduce the confinement portion of a bifurcated
sentence if the person was serving a sentence for a crime that carried a mandatory
minimum term of confinement. The court held that under the earned release
program, an inmate's term of confinement may not be reduced below an applicable
mandatory minimum sentence. The bill specifies that an inmate's term of
confinement may be reduced below a mandatory minimum if the inmate qualifies for
a reduction based on a sentence adjustment, earned release, or compassionate
release.
Sentencing for youthful offenders
Under current law, a person who is under the age of 17 and is alleged to have
violated a criminal law is generally under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and,
upon being adjudged delinquent of such an act, is subject to one of the dispositions
under the Juvenile Justice Code. However, a person who is age 10 or older who is
alleged to have committed certain crimes may be under the jurisdiction of the
criminal court and, upon conviction, subject to sentencing under the criminal code.
The bill creates a sentence adjustment procedure for a “youthful offender,”
defined under the bill as a person who committed a crime before he or she turned 18
years old and is subject to sentencing by the criminal court. The bill prohibits a court
from sentencing a youthful offender to life imprisonment without the possibility of
parole or release to extended supervision, and creates new mitigating factors in the
sentencing criteria when sentencing a youthful offender. Finally, the bill eliminates
statutory mandatory life sentences without parole for youthful offenders in order to
align with federal constitutional law.
Under current law, an inmate can petition to reduce the confinement portion
of his or her bifurcated sentence after serving a certain proportion of the sentence.
An inmate who is serving a life sentence can petition to be released to extended
supervision or parole after serving at least 20 years of his or her sentence or after
another date set by the sentencing court. The bill creates a new procedure for a
youthful offender, including a youthful offender who is serving a life sentence, to
receive a sentence adjustment after serving 15 years of his or her sentence. Under
the bill, one year before the inmate is eligible to petition for the sentence adjustment,
DOC is required to notify the youthful offender of his or her eligibility. The court may
reduce the term of imprisonment for the youthful offender and may modify the
conditions of parole or extended supervision if the court determines that the interests
of justice warrant a reduction, taking into account the factors enumerated in the bill.
If the court denies the petition under the bill, the youthful offender may petition
again every five years, up to five times. Under the bill, DOC is required to send a
notice to all youthful offenders who have served at least 14 years of their sentences
within six months after the bill takes effect.
Under current law, when a court makes a sentencing decision, it must consider
certain guidelines, including whether there were any aggravating factors present.
Under the bill, when a court is sentencing a youthful offender, it must also consider
mitigating factors related to the age and maturity of the youthful offender. These
sentencing guidelines for youthful offenders take effect retroactively under the bill,
meaning that they apply to any conviction for which sentencing has already
occurred.
Under current law, if a person is convicted of a serious felony on three separate
occasions or a serious child sex offense on two separate occasions, the person is
subject to a mandatory life sentence without the possibility of parole or extended
supervision. However, in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), the U.S. Supreme
Court held that imposing a mandatory life sentence without parole for a minor
constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and therefore violates the eighth
amendment of the Constitution. The bill clarifies that the statutory mandatory
sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or extended
supervision for repeat offenders does not apply to youthful offenders. The bill also
prohibits a court from imposing a life sentence without the possibility of parole or
extended supervision for a youthful offender. These changes to sentencing also apply
retroactively under the bill.
Treatment of pregnant and postpartum person in prison and jail
The bill limits the use of physical restraints on pregnant and postpartum people
who are in the custody of a correctional facility. Under the bill, a pregnant person
may not be restrained unless the restraints are reasonably necessary for the
legitimate safety and security needs of the person, correctional staff, other inmates,
or the public, and any restraints used must be the least restrictive possible under the
circumstances. In addition, the bill requires that every woman in the custody of a
correctional facility be offered testing for pregnancy, and, if pregnant, be offered
testing for sexually transmitted infections. The bill also requires the correctional
facility where the pregnant or postpartum person is being confined to provide
information related to pregnancy, labor, and the postpartum period, and to provide
access to certain health services related to pregnancy, labor, and the postpartum
period.
Huber release for individuals on probation, parole, or extended supervision
Under current law, a probationer who is detained in a county jail or other county
facility for a probation violation may participate in Huber release for
employment-related or medical purposes only if his or her probation is due to a
misdemeanor conviction and the probation violation for which he or she is detained
is not a crime.
The bill allows all probationers, parolees, and individuals on extended
supervision who are detained pending disposition of revocation proceedings,
investigation of a rule violation, or for a short-term sanction to participate in Huber
release for any Huber purpose.
Baccalaureate degree program for prisoners
The bill requires the UW System and DOC to provide a baccalaureate degree
program for prisoners. Prior to expending any funds appropriated for such a
program, the UW System and DOC must submit a plan for implementing the
program to DOA for approval.
Reimbursement for law enforcement investigative services
Under current law, DOC must reimburse counties for certain expenses related
to an action or proceeding involving a prisoner in a state prison or a juvenile in a
juvenile correctional facility in the county. The bill adds that DOC must also
reimburse any county, city, village, or town that provides law enforcement
investigative services for an incident involving a prisoner in a state prison or a
juvenile in a juvenile correctional facility.
Juvenile correctional system
Age of adult court jurisdiction
Under current law, a person who is alleged to have violated a criminal law is
generally subject to the jurisdiction of the criminal court if the person is at least 17
years old, and is subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court if the person is under
the age of 17. A person who is under the jurisdiction of the criminal court is subject
to the procedures specified in the Criminal Procedure Code and, on conviction, is
subject to sentencing under the Criminal Code. A person who is under the
jurisdiction of the juvenile court is subject to the procedures specified in the Juvenile
Justice Code and, on being adjudicated delinquent, is subject to an array of
dispositions under that code. The bill raises from 17 to 18 the age at which a person
who is alleged to have violated a criminal law is subject to the jurisdiction of the
criminal court and, on conviction, to sentencing under the Criminal Code.
Similarly, under current law, a person who is alleged to have violated a civil law
or municipal ordinance is subject to the jurisdiction and procedures of the circuit
court or the municipal court, if the person is at least 17 years old, and, with certain
exceptions, is subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court if the person is under
the age of 17. The bill raises from 17 to 18 the age at which a person who is alleged
to have violated a civil law or municipal ordinance is subject to the jurisdiction and
procedures of the circuit court or, if applicable, the municipal court.
The bill creates a sum sufficient appropriation under DCF for youth
aids-related purposes, but only to reimburse counties, beginning on January 1,
2022, for costs associated with juveniles who were alleged to have violated a state or
federal criminal law or any civil law or municipal ordinance at age 17.
Age of delinquency
Under current law, a child age 10 or over may be adjudged delinquent by the
juvenile court for an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult. Under the
bill, only a child age 12 or over may be adjudged delinquent by the juvenile court for
an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult.
Adult court jurisdiction over a juvenile
Under current law, the juvenile court generally has exclusive jurisdiction over
a juvenile, who is a person under the age of 17 who is alleged to have violated a
criminal law. However, under certain circumstances, a juvenile may automatically
be under the jurisdiction of the adult court or may be waived into adult court
jurisdiction through a petition to the court. The bill changes the circumstances for
adult court jurisdiction over a juvenile.
Original jurisdiction of the adult court over a juvenile
The bill eliminates original adult court jurisdiction over a juvenile. Under
current law, the adult court has original jurisdiction over a juvenile who meets any
of the following criteria:
1. A juvenile who is over the age of 10 and is alleged to have committed or
attempted to commit first-degree intentional homicide or committed first-degree
reckless homicide or second-degree homicide.
2. A juvenile who is alleged to have committed assault or battery while placed
in a secured juvenile facility or to have committed battery against a probation,
aftercare, community supervision, parole, or extended supervision officer.
3. A juvenile who is alleged to have attempted or committed a violation of any
state criminal law in addition to an offense listed under item 1 or item 2, if the
violations may be joined into a single criminal case.
