This bill would create a program administered by the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation to award up to $2 million to a political subdivision (defined as a city, village, town, or county) to assist in the costs of redevelopment of University of Wisconsin branch campus buildings and facilities that will no longer be used for an academic purpose. The bill appropriates $20 million GPR to the Joint Committee on Finance supplemental appropriation for the program. Under the bill, grants must contribute to the overall economic improvement and enhancement of the community. The bill requires the political subdivision to: i) submit community letters of support for the grant, ii) match 20 percent of the grant amount from local sources, and iii) submit a report to the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation and the Legislature detailing how grant amounts were spent. The bill also requires that the first award of up to $2 million be made to Richland County, followed by awards of up to $2 million to each of Fond du Lac, Washington and Marinette counties, before awards may be made to other political subdivisions. Further, the bill requires the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation to request that the Joint Committee on Finance supplement the appropriation created by the bill upon receiving a grant application by a political subdivision if the corporation determines that the grant requirements are met. The corporation must submit separate requests for each grant to be awarded.
I have exercised the partial veto with respect to section 3 as it relates to s. 238.145 (2)(a), (2)(c)2., (2)(e) and (2)(f) to remove restrictive requirements that would: i) prohibit the use of grants for the redevelopment of facilities that are or will be used for academic purposes, ii) create the 20 percent matching requirement, iii) require that grants be made to select counties before grants may be made to other political subdivisions and iv) require the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation submit separate requests to the Joint Committee on Finance for each grant to be awarded because I object to these unnecessary and restrictive provisions. I trust local partners to know what is best needed to support economic development in their own communities and they should have as much flexibility as possible to make the decisions necessary. For example, some communities may consider using these facilities for academic purposes in partnership with local school districts or technical colleges, and the state grant program should be open to these partnerships.
I also am not interested in reinforcing the Wisconsin State Legislature's ongoing unconstitutional obstruction of basic government functions through delays at the Joint Committee on Finance. Similarly, I object to the requirements that a certain subset of counties must first receive their awards under the program before any others may receive funding, which could cause delays in certain counties receiving critical funds if the counties required to receive funding first do not submit grant applications in a timely manner. Under the bill, the maximum amount that could be awarded to Richland, Fond du Lac, Washington and Marinette Counties is $8 million, but the remaining $12 million could not benefit any other counties in the meantime. As modified by my partial veto, the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation would still be required to award grants to these counties, but other counties could still submit applications to receive critical resources without experiencing unnecessary delays.
Additionally, I object to the requirement that the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation must submit separate requests for each individual grant to be awarded, again creating unnecessarily cumbersome process that could delay efforts at redeveloping these facilities.
I support the efforts by the Legislature and stakeholders to provide these critical investments to local communities being adversely affected by branch campus closures.
Respectfully submitted,
TONY EVERS
Governor
_____________
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Governor
March 29, 2024
The Honorable, the Senate:
hist195044I am vetoing Senate Bill 608 in its entirety. This bill creates a provisional teacher licensing pathway for individuals who: (a) have worked as school district paraprofessionals in a classroom for at least three days a week for three consecutive school years; (b) have earned at least 60 credits or an associate degree from an accredited institution of higher education or technical college; (c) are enrolled in a teacher preparatory program; and (d) are recommended for a provisional license by the employing school's principal and the school district's administration. The bill prohibits the department from issuing a license under this pathway in certain subject areas. An individual granted this provisional license may only teach in the school district that recommended them and must be mentored by an experienced teacher in their first school year. The provisional license expires after five years, or earlier if the school district notifies the department or the department confirms that the employee left the school district or unenrolled from their teacher preparatory program.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to this bill potentially interfering with our administration's existing teacher apprenticeship pilot program. This collaborative effort between the Department of Workforce Development and the Department of Public Instruction is a more robust and supportive mechanism to accomplish the important goal of providing a way for paraprofessionals to enter the teaching profession. Paraprofessionals play a vital role in schools across Wisconsin, and their expertise and experience can play a critical role in our efforts to retain, recruit, and train talented individuals to work in our schools. Importantly, our effort to increase the number of highly qualified teachers in classrooms and schools across Wisconsin would be greatly aided by the Wisconsin State Legislature approving my requests to provide meaningful, sustainable state funding increases for K-12 education in Wisconsin. I remain hopeful the Legislature will join me in the important work of doing what is best for our kids.
Respectfully submitted,
TONY EVERS
Governor
_____________
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Governor
March 29, 2024
The Honorable, the Senate:
hist195045I am vetoing Senate Bill 613 in its entirety. This bill would create a $1,000,000 cap on the total noneconomic damages a person may recover from a commercial motor vehicle carrier in a tort action for loss, including injury or death, arising from an act or omission of one of its employees acting within the scope of their employment.
I am vetoing this bill for several reasons. First, I am vetoing this bill because I object to arbitrarily capping the noneconomic damages that a person may recover in tort actions involving a motor vehicle carrier. A fundamental principle of our legal system is that everyone is entitled to remedies in the law for all injuries, and when it comes to remedy, the law should redress a party's injury, not repress an injured party.
I am also vetoing this bill because I object to legislation that violates constitutional principles. A fundamental principle, outlined in article I, section 9 of the Wisconsin Constitution, is that everyone is entitled to remedies in the law for all injuries. I am concerned this bill fundamentally violates this principle as well as equal protection guarantees and due process rights under the United States and Wisconsin Constitutions. Finally, I am vetoing this bill because I object to legislation that is inconsistent with current law. Even if the bill withstood constitutional scrutiny, its incongruity with current law will create implementation issues and make it subject to litigation. For instance, unlike current statutory caps, the bill does not define "noneconomic damages," it does not address or contemplate multiple parties or occurrences and it does not cross reference wrongful death actions. Courts would almost certainly face challenges implementing the bill's provisions as this incongruity welcomes continuous litigation.
Respectfully submitted,
TONY EVERS
Governor
_____________
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Governor
March 29, 2024
The Honorable, the Senate:
hist195046I am vetoing Senate Bill 617 in its entirety. This bill creates a requirement for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to issue unique license plates to identify hybrid and nonhybrid electric vehicles powered by greater than 50 volts as electric vehicles.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to creating requirements that are duplicative, unworkable, and may run counter to industry best practices. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation has already begun issuing stickers identifying hybrid and nonhybrid electric vehicles regardless of voltage power under criteria that are workable for the department. This identifier, which accurately identifies hybrid and nonhybrid electric vehicles by affixing the sticker to the vehicle's existing license plate, allows first responders to properly assess the risks these vehicles pose during an emergency.
Additionally, the department does not have a reliable way to identify the vehicles that would be issued the type of license plates required under the bill. Further, because license plates are manufactured and stocked in advance of being assigned to a vehicle so applicants can receive license plates in a timely manner, the requirements in this bill would require a significant increase in the number of license plates the department procures from the Department of Corrections' Bureau of Correctional Enterprises, increasing costs and complexity to address a problem the Legislature and I have already worked to address in my most recent state budget.
Finally, adding a second set of stacked lettering on a vehicle license plate violates standards issued by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, designed to ensure readability and safety for those who need to be able to quickly and easily read or scan license plates, such as first responders and law enforcement.
Respectfully submitted,
TONY EVERS
Governor
_____________
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Governor
March 29, 2024
The Honorable, the Senate:
hist195047I am vetoing Senate Bill 641 in its entirety. This bill would repeal the current prohibition against selling, transporting, manufacturing, possessing or going armed with electric weapons, and in its place would prohibit their possession by those who generally may not possess a firearm.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to further enabling dangerous weapons to be possessed and used in Wisconsin. Current law already provides numerous exceptions to the prohibition against electric weapons: if a person wants to secure an electric weapon for self defense in their home, there is an exception; if a person wants to carry one for self-defense and obtains a license to carry a concealed weapon, there is an exception. I cannot support legislation that will further enable dangerous weapons to be carried and used-and perhaps concealed and possessed in public-by individuals who may have little to no training, potentially endangering Wisconsin's kids, families, and communities and making them less safe.
Respectfully submitted,
TONY EVERS
Governor
_____________
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Governor
March 29, 2024
The Honorable, the Senate:
hist195048I am vetoing Senate Bill 667 in its entirety. This bill would generally create domestic asset preservation trusts as a new type of trust. The bill requires -such trusts to contain a spendthrift provision, but the bill modifies current trust law with respect to these provisions to permit the settlor placing assets in the trust to also be the beneficiary of the trust. The bill also modifies current trust law by generally prohibiting creditor claims: (1) against a person transferring assets into a domestic asset preservation trust; (2) against the trustee of such a trust; (3) or against any assets held by such a trust, except in limited circumstances. These limited circumstances include actions taken against asset transfers that were made with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor, and actions brought by creditors within a specified period of time from the date of the asset transfer.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to allowing domestic asset preservation trusts to be created under Wisconsin law. I am concerned these trusts are likely to be a tool largely used by wealthy individuals to shield their assets from creditors while perpetuating dynastic, intergenerational transfers of wealth. The general, underlying principle of current trust law that prevents a settlor-someone who creates a trust-from being a beneficiary of said trust to receive asset protection from creditors is sound and informed by experience. Further, the bill provisions purportedly aimed at tempering some of the risks associated with these trusts are insufficient.
Respectfully submitted,
TONY EVERS
Governor
_____________
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Governor
March 29, 2024
The Honorable, the Senate:
hist195049I am vetoing Senate Bill 688 in its entirety. This bill applies competitive bidding requirements to school district contracts with an estimated cost greater than $150,000 for supplies, materials, construction, repair, remodeling, or improvement of a public school building or facility. The bill requires a school district to advertise and notice contracts up for bid and accept the lowest responsible bidding without preference for geographic location or other criteria. The bill also provides an exception to competitive bidding requirements for a school board that passes a resolution declaring that the public health or welfare of the school district is endangered by damage or threatened damage to a building or facilities.
Further, this bill increases the estimated cost threshold for county and municipal public work projects for which competitive bidding is required. The bill also adds competitive bidding requirements for certain county and municipal public highway projects. Additionally, this bill clarifies and expands exceptions to procurement requirements for projects that involve donated materials or construction or volunteer labor.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to undermining the local decision of a school board to choose voluntary collaboration with local contractors to build the best value projects to support students. School boards under current law may use competitive bidding if they deem it appropriate. School districts currently choose different methods to provide the best projects for their students and communities, and the state should not interfere in this local decision making.
Respectfully submitted,
TONY EVERS
Governor
_____________
State of Wisconsin
Office of the Governor
March 29, 2024
The Honorable, the Senate:
hist195050I am vetoing Senate Bill 836 in its entirety. This bill would allow a juvenile court to impose restrictions on a juvenile's conduct during the time between a plea hearing and the conclusion of any fact-finding or disposition hearing for youth not being held in custody.
I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to codifying criminal procedural concepts into the Juvenile Justice Code. The Juvenile Justice Code reflects its origin in the Children's Code and recognizes that children are not adults. Currently, under both the Children's Code and the Juvenile Justice Code, if a youth is in custody and the court finds that they should continue to be in custody, it may place them with a parent or other responsible person and may impose reasonable restrictions on the youth's travel, association with others or places of abode during the period of placement. For pretrial releases under the Criminal Procedure Code, courts may impose conditions reasonably necessary to secure appearance in court, protect members of the community from serious harm or prevent witness intimidation. However, unlike these current predisposition and pretrial situations, the bill would give judges the discretion to impose any reasonable restriction after a plea and through the conclusion of any fact-finding or disposition hearing. I am concerned this bill provides no criteria for a court to consider when imposing restrictions, does not require that the restriction be related to the alleged offense, lacks clarity regarding how any restrictions would be enforced, and is broad and unmoored from any justice or public safety purpose.
