STATE - Home - La Follette School of Public Affairs€¦ · STATE OF WISCONSIN COMMISSION FOR THE...

STATE OF WISCONSINCOMMISSION FOR THE STUDY OF

ADMINISTRATIVE VALUE AND EFFICIENCY

101 East Wilson Street, 6th FloorPO Box 7868

Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7868

PRINTED ONRECYCLED

PAPER

Citizen • Community • Government

W i s c o n s i n :the 21st Century

COMMISSION FOR THE STUDYOF ADMINISTRATIVE VALUE AND EFFICIENCY

The Honorable Tommy G. ThompsonGovernor of Wisconsin, Madison

James E. Burgess, Chairman, Madison

Recognition for outstanding corporate leadershipDale F. Mathwich, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

American Family Insurance, Madison

Special appreciation goes to Dale F. Mathwich, chairman and chief executive officer of American Family Insurance, Madison.American Family Insurance provided the full-time services of one of its executives, Nancy Johnson, vice president, corporate research.

Ms. Johnson served as deputy director of the SAVE Commission project from January 11, 1994, until January 10, 1995.

Jeff SmollerExecutive Director, Madison

Fredi-Ellen BoveUW Board of Regents Office, Madison

Kathleen GarvinDepartment of Administration, Madison

Staff

Nancy M. JohnsonDeputy Director, Madison

Terry SheltonLa Follette Institute, UW-Madison

John J. BartelmeBrady USA, Inc., Milwaukee

Martin BeilWisconsin State Employees Union, Madison

Roxanne EmmerichEmmerich Training and Consulting, Hudson

Roger L. FitzsimondsFirstar Corporation, Milwaukee

Representative Mark GreenGreen Bay

Representative Doris J. HansonMcFarland

Thomas R. HeftyUnited Wisconsin Services, Inc., Milwaukee

George KaiserHanger-Tight Company, Milwaukee

James R. KlauserSecretary of Administration, Madison

Lisa A. MauerTool Service Corporation, Milwaukee

Senator Gwendolynne S. MooreMilwaukee

Senator Margaret A. FarrowVice Chairman, Elm Grove

Thomas L. LyonVice Chairman, Shawano

January 10, 1995Published by the State of Wisconsin.

Prepared in compliance with 1993 Wisconsin Act 16.State of Wisconsin, Commission for the Study of Administrative Value and Efficiency,101 East Wilson Street, 6th floor, P.O. Box 7868, Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7868.

Printed by Action Advertising, Inc., Fond du Lac, Wisconsin,on Talc 80 lb. Passport Smooth (cover), and White Stone 70 lb. Royal Felt Text (inside).

Book designed by Jeanne Gomoll, Senior Designer, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.Typefaces used: Berkeley, Helvetica Narrow, and Helvetica Black.

About the cover: As Wisconsin approaches the 21st Century, it takes with it the best of its past.The cover’s Art Deco style echoes the Progressive era, when Wisconsin redefined governance. Atthe same time the cover’s electronic production suggests futuristic possibilities. The centerpiecerepresents Wisconsin’s distinctive Capitol. Above it, rays of this Century’s setting sun and the

new millennium’s rising sun illuminate the potential of citizen, community and government. Thethree triangles—symbols of strength—behind the Capitol, remind us that Wisconsin is strong

economically, environmentally and culturally. All these images are contained within a shape thatsuggests rebirth and potential. This collage takes us from the richness of our past to the strengthof the present and the potential of the future. As Washington looks to the states for leadership in

charting a new future for our nation, Wisconsin already is moving Forward.

SPECIAL CONTRIBUTIONS: REPORT PREPARATION

Jeanne Gomoll, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonJanice M. Goss, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonJean B. Meyer, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonBob E. Queen, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonBarbara Samuel, Dept. of Administration, Madison

Terry Shelton, LaFollette Institute, Madison (Project Manager)Velda M. Thornton, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonEvelyn M. Wilson, Dept. of Natural Resources, Madison

Grateful acknowledgement is made to John Chapin, Dept. of Health and Social Services,for contributing the “Results” portions of this report.

Additional copies of the report ($4.95 apiece, while supplies last)and related items may be purchased on a prepaid basis from:

Document Sales202 S. Thornton Avenue, P. O. Box 7840

Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7840.Telephone inquiries may be made to 608-266-3358.

TABLE OF CONTENTSINTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 1

Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................... 2Mission Statement ............................................................................................................................................. 3Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 4Citizens and Public Employees Offer Advice .............................................................................................. 8Report in a Snapshot ..................................................................................................................................... 10

CHAPTER 1: CITIZENS WITH GREAT CAPACITY 1 2Goal 1 (Preamble) Committed Citizenship ...................................................................................... 12Goal 2 Effective Leaders ....................................................................................................................... 14Goal 3 New Wisconsin Idea ................................................................................................................ 16Goal 4 Taking Responsibility .............................................................................................................. 18

CHAPTER 2: A 21ST CENTURY COMMUNITY THAT WORKS 2 0Goal 5 Cooperating Communities ..................................................................................................... 20Goal 6 Generations that Connect ....................................................................................................... 22Goal 7 Land Use ..................................................................................................................................... 24Goal 8 The New Infrastructure ........................................................................................................... 26Goal 9 The Knowledge Economy ....................................................................................................... 28

CHAPTER 3: LIFELONG LEARNING IN A HIGH-TECH AGE 3 0Goal 10 Lifelong Learning ...................................................................................................................... 30Goal 11 Community Learning Centers ............................................................................................... 34Goal 12 Information-Age Utility ........................................................................................................... 36Goal 13 Our University .......................................................................................................................... 38Goal 14 Using Technology ..................................................................................................................... 40Goal 15 Quality Service .......................................................................................................................... 42

CHAPTER 4: BOLD CHANGES TO FIX THE SYSTEM 4 4Goal 16 Continuous Renewal ................................................................................................................ 44Goal 17 Legislative Branch ..................................................................................................................... 46Goal 18 Executive Branch ...................................................................................................................... 48Goal 19 Federal Relations ...................................................................................................................... 50Goal 20 The New System ....................................................................................................................... 52Goal 21 Regulation for Results .............................................................................................................. 56Goal 22 Judicial Branch .......................................................................................................................... 58

APPENDICES 6 0A Enumerated Actions ................................................................................................................ 60B Clarifications from Commission Members ......................................................................... 74C Schedule of Citizen Input Sessions ...................................................................................... 78D Meeting Schedule ..................................................................................................................... 80E Incomplete List of Participants, Donors, Contributors .................................................... 82F Selected Documents Prepared for the Commission ......................................................... 88G Selected Resource Materials Used in Commission Committee Work ........................... 89

TABLE OF CONTENTS

AcknowledgementsSPECIAL CONTRIBUTIONS: STAFF

American Family Insurance,MadisonFull-time loaned executive

Department of NaturalResources, MadisonFull-time loaned executiveAdministrative services

La Follette Institute, UW-Madison, MadisonPart-time loaned executive

UW System Board of Regents,MadisonPart-time loaned executive

SPECIAL SUPPORT FROM FORMER

WISCONSIN GOVERNORS

The Honorable Lee ShermanDreyfus

The Honorable Anthony EarlThe Honorable Patrick LuceyThe Honorable Martin Schreiber

SPECIAL ADVISORS

Harry Boyte, HumphreyInstitute, University ofMinnesota

William Cronon, University ofWisconsin-Madison

Brian Joiner, Joiner Associates,Madison

Donald Kettl, La FolletteInstitute, University ofWisconsin-Madison

Paul Light, Humphrey Institute,University of Minnesota

Charles Savage, Knowledge EraEnterprises, Wellesley, Mass.

Ralph Stayer, Johnsonville Foods,Kohler

The Honorable William Winter,former Governor of Mississippi

SPECIAL CONTRIBUTIONS:FINANCIAL SUPPORT

Reinventing Partner—Gifts of$5,000Ameritech, MilwaukeeConsolidated Papers, Inc.,Wisconsin RapidsDEC International, MadisonFirstar Corporation, MilwaukeeFriday Canning Corporation,New RichmondMenasha Corporation, Neenah

Mercury Marine, Fond du LacSSI Technologies, JanesvilleWisconsin Utilities Association,Madison

Contributor—Gifts Under $5,000Arthur Andersen & Co.,MilwaukeeBradley Foundation, MilwaukeeDewitt, Porter, MadisonFirst Financial FoundationNancy Johnson, MadisonGeorge C. Kaiser, MilwaukeeLa Crosse Footwear, La CrosseLaureate Group, WaukeshaMarcus CorporationFoundation, MilwaukeeSerigraph, Inc., West BendJeff Smoller, MadisonThe Capital TImes/ WisconsinState Journal, MadisonTwin Disc, Inc., RacineUniversal Foods Foundation,MilwaukeeVirchow, Krause & Co.,MadisonWebcrafters, Inc., MadisonWisconsin Hospital Association,Madison

ASSISTANCE WITH FINANCIAL

CONTRIBUTIONS

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences,Arts and Letters

Madison Chamber of Commerce,Madison

Wisconsin Manufacturers andCommerce, Madison

SPECIAL CONTRIBUTIONS:TECHNICAL REPORTS

Section 2: Jack M. Christ,Leadership Institute, RiponCollege, Ripon

Section 3: Charles Savage,Knowledge Era Enterprises,Wellesley, Mass.

Section 3: Brian Joiner, JoinerAssociates, Madison

Section 4: Representative PollyBeal, Milwaukee

Section 7: Employees of Dept. ofAgriculture, Trade andConsumer Protection, Madison

Section 9: Sara Burr, Dept. ofNatural Resources, Madison

Section 9: Rolf Wegenke,Wisconsin Association ofIndependent Colleges, Madison

Section 11: Bill Bula, Flad andAssociates, Madison

Section 11: Boris Frank, BorisFrank Associates, Verona

Section 11: George Kliminski,University of Wisconsin-Madison

Section 11: Judge MoriaKrueger, Circuit Court,Madison

Section 11: Jule Stroik, City ofMadison

Section 14: Daniel Burrus,Burrus Associates, Waukesha

Section 14: Dennis Kuester,M&I Corp., Milwaukee

Section 14: James Matarazzo,Simmons College, Boston

Section 14: Larry Prusak, Ernstand Young, Boston

Section 17: Allison Coakley,State Senate, Madison

Section 17: Dan Fields, Dept. ofNatural Resources, Madison

Section 20: Applied ResearchSystems, Madison

Section 20: Maytee Aspuro,Dept. of Industry, Labor, andHuman Relations, Madison

Section 20: Robin Gates, Dept.of Industry, Labor and HumanRelations, Madison

Section 20: Anne Spray Kinney,City of Milwaukee, Milwaukee

Section 20: La Follette InstituteStudents, University ofWisconsin-Madison

Section 20: Thomas Landgraf,Heartland Properties, Madison

Section 20: Loren Miller, JohnDeere, Horicon

Section 20: Beth Nachreiner,Dept. of Agriculture, Trade andConsumer Protection, Madison

Section 20: Connie Nelson,Public Strategies Group,Minneapolis

Section 21: Judge William Eich,Appellate Court, Madison

Section 21: Marc Eisner,Wesleyan University,Middletown, Conn.

Section 21: Evan Ringquist,Florida State University,Tallahassee, Fla.

SPECIAL CONTRIBUTIONS:EVENTS AND PROJECTS

American Society for QualityControl, Milwaukee

Coordination of managementworkshop

City of Milwaukee Department ofAdministrationAdministrative and printingservicesMeeting host

Department of Natural Resources,MilwaukeeMeeting host

Employees of Dept. ofAgriculture, Trade andConsumer Protection, MadisonSupport for managementworkshop, Oconomowoc

Employees of Dept. of Industry,Labor and Human Relations,MadisonSupport for managementworkshop, Oconomowoc

Esperanza Unida, MilwaukeeMeeting host

Idea Associates, Stevens PointPublic input process

Marketing CommunicationsConsultants, Green BayPublic input process

Promega Corp., MadisonMeeting hostSponsor of ReinventingGovernment speech by DavidOsborne

John Chapin, Dept. of Health andSocial Services, MadisonReport continuity

United Wisconsin Services,MilwaukeeMeeting hostPrinting and video production

University of Wisconsin School ofBusiness, MadisonMeeting host

University of Wisconsin-Extension, MadisonMeeting hostVideo conference

Virchow, Krause & Co., MadisonSponsor of ReinventingGovernment speech by DavidOsborne

Wisconsin Department ofTransportationMeeting hostVideo production

Wisconsin Newspaper AssociationPublic input process

Remsik-Mueller, Inc., MilwaukeePublic input process

Zins, Boelter and Lincoln,MadisonPublic input process

2 CITIZEN • COMMUNITY • GOVERNMENT — WISCONSIN: THE 21ST CENTURY

INTRODUCTION& OVERVIEW

In Wisconsin’s best tradition, we willboldly make choices for state

government, looking to the 21stCentury, by creating a framework to:

B bestablish an atmosphereof continuous renewal

B bbalance public and private initiatives

and responsibilitiesB b

leverage learning and technologyandB b

value good governmentand government service.

CITIZEN • COMMUNITY • GOVERNMENT — WISCONSIN: THE 21ST CENTURY 3

ExecutiveSummary

purchasing, budgeting and management sys-tems.

These and other bold prospects emergedfrom an intensive, public-private workshop on“Post-Bureaucratic Government Reform.” Theoperational changes, and the recommendationto conduct pilot projects, are the core of theCommission’s vision for efficient and effective21st Century government. The vision:

Preamble: Committed Citizenship—Rein-venting citizenship and citizen responsibility aremore important than reinventing Government.Recommendations start the debate about gov-ernment, volunteerism and compromises tomeet the good of the whole, not the specialneeds of the separate parts.

Goal #2: Effective Leaders—Leadershipskills are needed throughout government. Rec-ommendations produce motivated leaders whoare qualified to bring out the best in employeesand citizens. Leadership skills will comethrough a Leadership Institute and a system thatprovides formal learning, ongoing training andincreased networking to serve everyone fromtown hall to the Capitol.

Goal #3: New Wisconsin Idea—The newWisconsin Idea reaches beyond University fac-ulty (who championed the old Wisconsin Idea)to tap the knowledge capacity of citizens inmeeting community, government and businessneeds. Recommendations market knowledgeglobally and lead to more effective use of sci-ence and technology in government.

Goal #4: Taking Responsibility—Citizensmust help meet personal and community needs,or government will face serious fiscal crises bytrying to meet everyone’s unrealistic expecta-tions. Government must remove the barriersthat block citizen and community self-reliance.Recommendations begin a government workforce that does the right things—not everything.Special attention is given to public health.

Goal #5: Cooperating Communities—Citi-zens view government as one system and areangered when they see wasteful governmentfeuds and turf protection. Recommendationsprovide incentives to encourage governmentcooperation and ask tough questions about howmuch government is needed for the 21st Cen-tury.

Goal #6: Generations That Connect—When young and old don’t help and respect



his report is a formal first step to definethe governing role that Wisconsin citizens,communities and government will play inthe 21st Century. It is a vision of notice-ably better citizens, noticeably better com-munities, noticeably better governmentand noticeably better quality of life com-

pared to any other state.Government will be important, but not

necessarily dominant, in achieving the vision.The Commission’s actions affect a wide rangeof government issues and areas of spending. Inthe next biennium, the state may save $200-300 million, assuming implementation ofsweeping actions that reduce levels of the bu-reaucracy and increase shared benefits fromsevere budget constrictions. Long term savingsmay be billions of dollars because possibly 30cents of every dollar spent now is wasted on asystem that is a treadmill of motion. One modelsuggests ultimate savings of $2.37 billion a year.

Specifically, each state employee couldfind at least $1,000 in savings a year for fouryears, if only given the freedom and encour-agement. Businesses use this “budget to save”approach to improve performance. A continu-ously improving system could save governmentdollars, too. The question is whether govern-ment can scrap the treadmill in the personnel,

The Honorable TommyG. ThompsonGovernor of Wisconsin

each other, society pays the price. Recommen-dations result in better focus on generationalservices and alert the state to a significant fiscalchallenge caring for elderly after 2000.

Goal #7: Land Use—Wisconsin citizenslove the state’s landscape and natural resources.Recommendations encourage a serious discus-sion on how to best manage and protectWisconsin’s distinctive land-scape in the years ahead.

Goal #8: The New Infra-structure—Technology andthe need to limit spending anddebt are changing rules onconstructing, owning andmanaging buildings. Recom-mendations say go slow onnew building. They also saytransform the state’s buildingoptions on who builds, pays,owns, uses and manages theinfrastructure.

Goal #9: The KnowledgeEconomy—For Wisconsin tocompete successfully in the21st Century knowledgeeconomy, it must think differently about itseconomic development strategy. Recommenda-tions tap Wisconsin’s exceptional public andprivate sector knowledge assets in a more glo-bal marketing strategy to sell what we know, aswell as what we make.

Goal #10: Lifelong Learning—The formaleducation system was designed on an assem-bly line model that assumed learning stoppedat graduation. The system is not designed todeliver lifelong learning in an economy in whichjobs become obsolete in years, not decades. Rec-ommendations begin restructuring the entireeducational system, anchored in the parent’s re-sponsibility as first teachers and the citizen’s re-sponsibility to learn throughout life, using a“seamless” education system.

Goal #11: Community Learning Centers—Wisconsin’s 2,250 underused school buildingshave great potential to serve the educational andcommunity needs of young and old if they aremanaged as one system. Recommendations of-fer ideas on improving building conditions andproviding all children with equitable teaching,in a quality building that can be used for learn-ing, recreation and gathering—night and day.

Goal #12: Information Age Utility—High-tech, convenient, cost-effective delivery of gov-ernment and educational information is a pre-requisite for the 21st Century. Recommenda-tions stop duplication among existing functionsand create a way to deliver information servicesthrough a specially chartered utility that canmeet a wide range of needs in education, pub-

lic involvement, citizen net-working, government delib-erations, commerce, safety andcourts.

Goal #13: Our Univer-sity—The University of Wis-consin System is a world-classasset that is now, and shouldcontinue to be, central to thestate’s economic future. Itneeds to be given more flex-ibility, while being held ac-countable. Recommendationsspecify where that flexibilityshould occur and challengethe UW to make tough deci-sions on meeting today’s fiscaland educational realities.

Goal #14: Using Technology—Govern-ment support of technology will be a factor inhow effectively citizens are served in the fu-ture. Recommendations outline a funding ap-proach to help state and local government in-corporate cost-saving technology in ways thatprovide better service, lower cost and greatervalue for citizens.

Goal #15: Quality Service—Citizens ex-pect government service to be as efficient andconvenient as they experience in the consumerworld. Recommendations create a “one stopshopping,” customer-driven approach to infor-mation, licenses and simple permits that all stateagencies and even local government can shareto provide convenient, friendly service to citi-zens.

Goal #16: Continuous Renewal—Govern-ment does a good job of starting programs anda poor job of stopping what is unnecessary. Rec-ommendations propose a way to end rules, taxbreaks, programs and committees that we nolonger need. The recommendations also set upa system to ask better questions—especially fis-cal questions—before governments approvecostly ideas in the first place.

“This Commissionhas a place in history.There are others whowould give their right

arm to be at thistable. You have anhistorical calling toexercise with a senseof love for the state.”

David Prosser, Legislator

James E. BurgessChairman, Commissionfor the Study ofAdministrative Valueand Efficiency

Thomas L. LyonVice Chairman,Commission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and Efficiency

Senator Margaret A.FarrowVice Chairman,Commission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and Efficiency

Paul Light, Universityof Minnesota“There are alwayssecond guessers. Themedia, academics,legislators and otherpoliticians, all waiting forfailure and mistakes sothey can criticize. Youmust push the envelopeand take those risks.”


Goal #17: Legislative Branch—In repre-senting the people, the Legislature faces chal-lenges on how to better budget and oversee gov-ernment operations. Italso is faced with in-volving local govern-ment as partners in theprocess since so muchof the spending, includ-ing schools, takes placelocally. Recommenda-tions make changes inthe legislative structureand decision makingprocess to improvepublic confidence inthe institution and effi-ciency of the system. Recommendations alsofocus on the need to debate and enact long termstrategies measured in results.

Goal #18: Executive Branch—With theGovernor as head, the executive branch mustbe efficient, responsive and accountable. Rec-ommendations result in numerous consolida-tions to better align agencies and eliminate out-moded or isolated offices and functions.

Goal #19: Federal Relations—The chang-ing federal scene requires the state to be morefocused and flexible in dealing with Washing-ton. Recommendations seek mandate relieffrom Washington and outline a way to get morefederal money in areas Wisconsin decides areimportant.

Goal #20: The New System—Stategovernment’s system includes personnel, bud-get, procurement and management operations.It was set up to have layers of workers check-ing on, and second guessing, other workers.Recommendations focus on state employees asan untapped asset to give taxpayers results.Reforms change procurement, the civil servicesystem, and the budget process by creating asystem that uses benchmarking, continuous im-provement and activity-based accounting.

Goal #21: Regulation For Results—Rulesand regulations may not be drafted or enforcedin the most effective or equitable way to achievebroad social goals relating to the environment,health, consumer, worker and more. Recom-mendations make the existing system more ef-ficient and open the door to new ways to pre-

vent the very problems regulations are designedto control.

Goal #22: Judicial Branch—The JudicialBranch could benefitfrom improved effi-ciency and by usingtechnology in manyways unique to its mis-sion. Recommenda-tions offer ways for so-ciety to save costs bysolving problems beforethey get to court, as wellas a way to save timeand money through ef-ficiency.

Changing govern-ment for the future means moving beyond thepast. Unfortunately, the Commission foundmany within government resistant—and insome cases antagonistic—to change as theydefended their own bureaucracies. This wasespecially true with elements of Wisconsin’seducational system, reaching from the Univer-sity to school districts throughout the state. TheCommission found that change within the gov-ernment system cannot be left to insiders alone.It also must come from the many excellent tax-payer, citizen advocacy, business and good gov-ernment groups.

The remaining question is who will ana-lyze, debate, lead and go beyond the Commis-sion findings, contained in Appendix A. Itmakes sense that, either at the direction of theGovernor or legislative leadership, a bipartisan,joint committee on government reform be cre-ated for the 1995-97 legislative session. Thisjoint committee would be responsible for pub-lic hearings on the recommendations as well asdrafting appropriate legislation to implementthem.

Finally, whose report is this? TheCommission’s? Yes, in part. But it is really thecitizens’ report. The process used by the Com-mission emphasized listening to the people ofWisconsin and to those state employees “in thetrenches.” Both groups came up with the sameconclusion: big changes are needed, from theschool to the statehouse. Not everyone agreedon what those changes should be or what thedetails might look like. But they said: “The sys-



Jeff SmollerExecutive Director,Commission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and Efficiency

Fred F. Meyer, RiceLake“Running a smallbusiness in this state isno fun any more. Everystate agency promul-gates ever moreregulations.”

“Legislatures get involved invirtually everything that

happens in departments becausethey have no confidence in theinformation they’re getting.”

Paul Light, University of Minnesota


tem is not working the way it must for the fu-ture good of our state. We care about our state;we care about the system. There is a better vi-sion, there are better ways.Go for it!”

In Wisconsin that mes-sage is especially importantbecause we are a nationalleader in good government,a place where other statesand Washington look for in-novation and responsibleconduct. Wisconsin’s 20th Century citizensplaced a high value on good government andexceptional quality of life. Our Commission’sresearch indicates those values still run deep.

Based on that finding, Wisconsin’s 21st Cen-tury vision must not be anti-government, butpro-citizen. Indeed, as envisioned by the Com-

mission, Wiscon-sin’s next era willbe distinguishednot only by citi-zens who valuegovernment but bygovernment thatgives citizens value.

This Executive Sum-mary was prepared by Commission ChairmanJames Burgess and Executive Director Jeff Smoller,December 29, 1994

Jerry Wiessner,Belleville“What we need is lessgovernment, lessgovernment regulation.”

“The schools are failing to instilla sense of citizenship and

responsibility.”Bev Anderson, Mayor, Darlington



Citizensand PublicEmployees

Offer Advice

etween April 30 and November 9, 1994,citizens of Wisconsin were invited toshare their ideas about Wisconsin andits future. During that time, a total of16,276 people offered their ideas by par-ticipating in focus groups, writing letters,sending elec-

tronic mail messages,calling an 800 number,and responding to sur-veys.

Their compositemessage about Wis-consin was:

We value ourquality of life in Wis-consin and considerthe pillars of our qual-ity of life to be education and environment. Wewant thriving commerce, balanced with afford-able schools, safe neighborhoods, clean air,clean water and a healthy landscape. We’re prac-tical and we’re not afraid to work hard.

We worry about an erosion in our qualityof life. We’re concerned about kids, crime, pol-

lution, drugs, welfare immigrants, taxes, infra-structure and health care. We know that reallywe are the government and we’d like to seestronger families and individual responsibility.

Their composite message about Wiscon-sin government was:

We have cleangovernment and we likeit that way. We thinkgovernment’s job is toprotect life and the en-vironment for the com-mon good. We worryabout the common goodand are concerned aboutspecial interests thathave big voices and bigwallets. When we speak,

we wonder if our voices will be heard.We worry about the stewardship of our

tax dollars. Right now, we feel over-regulatedand under-served. We’d like government to dothe right thing—not everything—and we’d likeit done well. We’d like to see value for ourmoney.

“In the recent past, governmenthas gotten more into directing

life business instead of protectinglife and business.”

Daniel J. Katers, Green Bay

Nancy M. JohnsonDeputy Director,Commission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and Efficiency


Public employees have a unique van-tage point in that they are simulta-neously citizens, taxpayers and em-ployees. During August and Septem-ber 1994, some 40 state employeesparticipated in focus groups designedto identify their key issues. During

October and November, state employees—all75,000 of them—wereinvited to respond to asurvey. By November 9,some 15,759 employ-ees, more than 20 per-cent, had completed thesurvey. Responses con-tinued until year-end.

Their composite message about theirworkplace was:

“We like our jobs. We don’t like the sys-tem we’re in.”

Public employees want to make systemsbetter and they have ideas on how to do it. Theysupport streamlining operations such as per-sonnel paperwork (78 percent), reducing lay-ers of management (71 percent), and reducingthe red tape of purchasing (69 percent).

In addition to supporting streamlining,public employees are flexible. They are willingto move within their geographic location (71percent) and some are also willing to move out-

side their geographic location (26 percent) ifthe job required it. They are even open-mindedabout transferring to other agencies (34 per-cent).

Not only are public employees flexible,they also want to be accountable. They sup-port a pay system based on skill and perfor-mance (79 percent), are willing to be judged

by both their peers andsupervisors (52 per-cent) and are comfort-able in having theirperformance reportedto the taxpayers (49percent). To keep theirperformance sharp,

they want to stay up to date. They support theidea of having a state fund for training (50 per-cent).

In short, public employees want to be partof a successful operation and have a good ideaof what a successful operation looks like. Oneemployee put it this way:

“All agencies should have a mission, vi-sion and strategic plan. All agencies shouldknow how to survey customers. All staff shouldbe empowered to own their processes. We needto think of state government as a system in-stead of individual kingdoms. When one agencysuffers, the whole state suffers.”

“Let the people know that stateemployees do work.”

State employee

12 CITIZEN • C OMMUNITY • G OVERNMENT — WISCONSIN: THE21 ST C ENTURY

CHAPTERONE

GOAL #1 (PREAMBLE)

CommittedCitizenshipNoticeably better

citizens

tion in federal power? The answers dependupon the role of the citizen.

The problem: federal programs did notsolve the problems and neither will state or lo-cal programs. Who will pay for the programs,in any event? This will be a hot debate in ourstate because Wisconsin is serious about itsquality of life and because quality—using theold way of thinking—is something governmentmanaged through programs, regulations andmoney (see Goal #21).

The question: will Wisconsin have a con-structive debate that produces consensus for thegood of all? Or will federal delegation, if itcomes, produce a legal and political firestormin Wisconsin fueled by self interest? Will therebe a greater need for conflict resolution, me-diation and neutral ground for dialogue? Onething is sure: there is not enough governmentmoney to take care of everyone’s real, perceivedor “entitled” needs. The only way to meet com-munity needs is through reciprocal citizenshipresponsibility.

RESPONSIBILITIES WITH RIGHTS

Citizenship is a glue that holds us together.We obey laws because it is the right public thingto do. We care for the generations, our chil-dren and our grandparents, because innervoices say it is the responsible thing to do (seeGoal #6).

The Founders assumed that responsibili-ties accompanied rights. The “pursuit of hap-piness” meant happiness for the community, notjust the individual. So citizenship involvesworking for the good of all, not just voting, juryduty and paying taxes.

If that is true, it is time to discuss citizenresponsibilities as the states are challenged ontough social problems: poverty, welfare depen-dence, education (see Goal #5), teenage preg-nancy, drug abuse, crime, public health and theenvironment (see Goal #8). If government can-not solve them, who is responsible? What kindof a discussion must happen to sort that out?(The Wisconsin Rural Development Council isan existing model of such cooperation.) Andhow might the consensus be communicated?One idea: a Constitutional Bill of Responsibili-ties voted on in the 1998 Wisconsin sesqui-centennial. Or is there a better idea?

o effectively move Wisconsin into the 21stCentury, the Commission was told to rein-vent citizenship before reinventing govern-ment. But what does that mean? What iscitizenship?

Is citizenship getting out the vote? Orstaying home because “it only encourages

them”? Is it attending a government hearing?Or discounting hearings as a time when lobby-ists position for power?

Is citizenship debating local business zon-ing? Or bitterness that the land use decisionsare made in the next county? Is citizenship pay-ing taxes? Or is it avoiding taxes by trading workor goods since everyone else has a tax breakand “government” just wastes the money?

Perhaps citizenship is lobbying govern-ment for more money or privilege. Perhaps citi-zenship is working through family, church, not-for-profit, employer and community to becomeself-sufficient. If the government is “us”, canwe list the top ten reasons the Founders wouldcelebrate their creation today?

DUTY, HONOR, COUNTRY AND STATE

As the federal government ponders reduc-ing its reach, states will likewise have to rede-fine their relationships with Washington andconsider new roles for themselves (see Goal#19). What will take the place of any reduc-

Paul Light,University ofMinnesota“Reinvent citizenshipbefore government.Government should notdisplace the citizen’scapacity to solveproblems.”

Kurt Rowe, Merril“The elusive govern-ment we’re talking aboutsits at this table.We’re it.”

HOW TO ACCESS THIS REPORT

Reportin a Snapshot

Name of the chapter. Refer to the tableof contents for an outline of thematerial in the report.

Picture of the voice quoted below.A Commission member or citizen.

The voice of a Commission memberor citizen. This is a report anchored inthe voices of citizens.

First line: The goal number can be usedto cross reference with the detailed listof actions in Appendix A.

Title: The goal and a succinct descripionof the expected outcome of this goal




CITIZEN •C OMMUNITY • G OVERNMENT — WISCONSIN: THE 21 ST C ENTURY 13

Moving tocitizenship will:

1 Make the process of stategovernment more accountableto citizens.

2 Make the employees of theState of Wisconsin more awareof characteristics, beliefs andperspectives of citizens.

RE

SU

LT

S

Actions

1.1

Conduct a citizenresponsibility dialogue.

1.2.

Use technology topromote citizeninvolvement.

1.3.

Promote volunteerism.

1.4.

Find neutral ground toreduce distrust andresolve conflicts.

1.5.

News media shouldnurture civic debate.

WISCONSIN’S “THIRD SECTOR”In addition to public and private sectors,

there is a third sector with untapped capacity.The third sector involves a myriad of civil en-terprises: religious, educational, voluntary, busi-ness, labor and charitable organizations. Theseare the voluntary asso-ciations unique to ourculture but which alltoo often are pushedinto the shadows by for-mal government withbureaucratic programs.

There is no waygovernment can, oreven should, meet allneeds, just as there is noway the helpless shouldbe abandoned by gov-ernment in a civil society. The Commissionasked questions about what government shouldand should not do and if “it” still needed to bedone, who would do it? The third sector mayhave some answers.

Wisconsin can build on the citizenshipprinciples shared through the Public Leader-ship Institute and network to find new oppor-tunities for self-reliant activity in many subjectsand at many levels (see Goal #4). Leaders andtaxpayers also will have the fiscal informationneeded to make better decisions on who canbest do the job at every level (see Goals #5 and#16).

NOTICEABLY BETTER DIALOGUE

For citizens to have confidence in the sys-tem they have to participate in it. Using newtele-democracy technology provided by theInformation Utility, citizens will have new op-portunities to access all levels of government,

as well as their neigh-borhoods, through freecomputer networks.Citizens will debate is-sues by electronic townmeetings and solvecommon problemsthrough video confer-ences.

Who will framethe questions and leadthe dialogue? That isthe elected official’s re-

sponsibility. In the old way, the official and gov-ernment employee made (often excessive)promises and delivered programs. The new wayhas the citizen sharing responsibility (see Goal#4) and the elected official realistically framingexpectations through programs that have mea-surable results.

The role of the media will change. It willindependently and thoughtfully raise publicagenda issues and report the debate in a waythat rejects personality-driven reporting thatnow focuses on conflict over consensus. Thetransformation to this so-called civic journal-ism approach that looks in-depth at public is-sues will challenge politicians to be thoughtfuland the media to be responsible.

“Think about bold goals for thesesquicentennial in 1988.

Perhaps a new charter betweenthe state and people.

Something big.”David Prosser, Legislator

Daniel J. Katers,Green Bay“Voter apathy is adisgrace. We have failedto stress the importanceof participation ingovernment.”

3 Make state government moreflexible, productive andrespectful in its interactions withcitizens.

4 Make the products andcharacter of Wisconsingovernment reflect theresponsibilities as well as theneeds and rights of citizens.

5 Renew the compact betweencitizen and government andincrease the impact citizenshave on government.

6 Make government more costeffective in the long run due tomore citizen involvement andvolunteerism. It will providetaxpayers the services they arewilling to pay for as well as whatthey want.

7 Establish the preconditions forthe ongoing reinvention of stategovernment, driven by continualcitizen interaction.

60 CITIZEN • C OMMUNITY • G OVERNMENT — WISCONSIN: THE21 ST C ENTURY

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

EnumeratedActions

CHAPTER 1: CITIZENS WITH GREAT CAPACITY

GOAL #1: (PREAMBLE) COMMITTED

CITIZENSHIP

1.1

Conduct a citizen responsibility dialogue. Tocelebrate Wisconsin’s sesquicentennial, debatethe responsibilities and rights of citizenship,focused on the development of a “Bill of Citi-zen Responsibilities” to go with the Bill ofRights.

1.2

Use technology to promote citizen involve-ment. To revive committed citizenship in ahigh-tech age, create increased opportunitiesfor citizens to take part in government at alllevels by using high-tech communicationstools provided through the new Public Infor-mation Utility.

1.3

Promote volunteerism. To reinforceWisconsin’s neighborliness, a culture of vol-unteering should be revived and recognizedin all communities. Given the proper climate,protections and removal of barriers, the peoplehave a capacity to help each other withoutexpert intervention.

1.4

Find neutral ground to reduce distrust andresolve conflicts. To counter distrust, conten-tiousness and fragmentation found amongvarious Wisconsin interests, consider designat-ing “neutral ground” that provides an oppor-tunity for factions that distrust each other tohave a positive discussion. This will require aplace or places that are neither state nor local,

young nor old, black nor white, tribal nor non-tribal, public nor private. The location is a placefor mediation, negotiation, conflict resolutionand planning.

1.5

News media should nurture civic debate. Topromote informed and productive discussionof public issues, the news media should rejectpersonality, conflict-driven journalism in fa-vor of civic journalism.

GOAL #2: EFFECTIVE LEADERS

2.1

Develop a Public Leadership Institute and net-work. To create a government that helps buildthe capacity of its workers and citizens and acitizenry involved in public service, create aPublic Leadership Institute and network tohelp full- and part-time leaders better advancetheir skills as they advance and continue ingovernment service.

2.2

Incorporate a leadership philosophy in themanagement system. To ensure enduringchange and continuous improvement, un-equivocally incorporate a leadership philoso-phy in Wisconsin’s entire system of govern-ment. A leadership government emphasizesresults and partnerships, visionary thinkingand quality management, rather than processand control.

2.3

Prepare managers as mission-driven leaders.To achieve a mission-driven organization, andas part of the flattening of the hierarchy, trainmiddle management in leadership and coach-ing. Managers will translate vision into out-comes and work tasks in a changing world ofambiguous authority where employees andemployer are a team.

GOAL #3: NEW WISCONSIN IDEA

3.1

Link the Department of Development and UWSystem for economic development. To seizethe competitive moment in the knowledgeeconomy, the Department of Developmentshould use the UW as an ongoing resource inthe implementation of a strategy to use thestate’s knowledge capacity to generate wealthfrom global markets (see Goal #9).

3.2

Create a state dialogue to reinvent citizen-ship. To create a new citizenship ideal, theentire state should join in an effort to reinventcitizenship, including a citizenship ethic and

TextThe voice of a Commissionmember or citizen.

Succinct description of actionsrecommended by the Commission.Further information can be found inAppendix A, in selected documentsidentified in Appendix F, and supportreadings in Appendix G.

Compelling results of the actionsenvisioned for the bottom-lineminded person. Results will reflectsaving money, solving problems orenhancing the capacity of the state tomove into the 21st Century.

The number before the decimal refersto the Goal number. The numberafter the decimal refers to its orderwithin the Goal section.


CHAPTERONE

GOAL #1 (PREAMBLE)

CommittedCitizenshipNoticeably better

citizens

tion in federal power? The answers dependupon the role of the citizen.

The problem: federal programs did notsolve the problems and neither will state or lo-cal programs. Who will pay for the programs,in any event? This will be a hot debate in ourstate because Wisconsin is serious about itsquality of life and because quality—using theold way of thinking—is something governmentmanaged through programs, regulations andmoney (see Goal #21).

The question: will Wisconsin have a con-structive debate that produces consensus for thegood of all? Or will federal delegation, if itcomes, produce a legal and political firestormin Wisconsin fueled by self interest? Will therebe a greater need for conflict resolution, me-diation and neutral ground for dialogue? Onething is sure: there is not enough governmentmoney to take care of everyone’s real, perceivedor “entitled” needs. The only way to meet com-munity needs is through reciprocal citizenshipresponsibility.


Citizenship is a glue that holds us together.We obey laws because it is the right public thingto do. We care for the generations, our chil-dren and our grandparents, because innervoices say it is the responsible thing to do (seeGoal #6).

The Founders assumed that responsibili-ties accompanied rights. The “pursuit of hap-piness” meant happiness for the community, notjust the individual. So citizenship involvesworking for the good of all, not just voting, juryduty and paying taxes.

If that is true, it is time to discuss citizenresponsibilities as the states are challenged ontough social problems: poverty, welfare depen-dence, education (see Goal #5), teenage preg-nancy, drug abuse, crime, public health and theenvironment (see Goal #8). If government can-not solve them, who is responsible? What kindof a discussion must happen to sort that out?(The Wisconsin Rural Development Council isan existing model of such cooperation.) Andhow might the consensus be communicated?One idea: a Constitutional Bill of Responsibili-ties voted on in the 1998 Wisconsin sesqui-centennial. Or is there a better idea?

o effectively move Wisconsin into the 21stCentury, the Commission was told to rein-vent citizenship before reinventing govern-ment. But what does that mean? What iscitizenship?

Is citizenship getting out the vote? Orstaying home because “it only encourages

them”? Is it attending a government hearing?Or discounting hearings as a time when lobby-ists position for power?

Is citizenship debating local business zon-ing? Or bitterness that the land use decisionsare made in the next county? Is citizenship pay-ing taxes? Or is it avoiding taxes by trading workor goods since everyone else has a tax breakand “government” just wastes the money?

Perhaps citizenship is lobbying govern-ment for more money or privilege. Perhaps citi-zenship is working through family, church, not-for-profit, employer and community to becomeself-sufficient. If the government is “us”, canwe list the top ten reasons the Founders wouldcelebrate their creation today?

DUTY, HONOR, COUNTRY AND STATE

As the federal government ponders reduc-ing its reach, states will likewise have to rede-fine their relationships with Washington andconsider new roles for themselves (see Goal#19). What will take the place of any reduc-

Paul Light,University ofMinnesota“Reinvent citizenshipbefore government.Government should notdisplace the citizen’scapacity to solveproblems.”

Kurt Rowe, Merril“The elusive govern-ment we’re talking aboutsits at this table.We’re it.”


Moving tocitizenship will:

1 Make the process of stategovernment more accountableto citizens.

2 Make the employees of theState of Wisconsin more awareof characteristics, beliefs andperspectives of citizens.

RE

SU

LT

SActions1 . 1

Conduct a citizenresponsibility dialogue.

1 . 2

Use technology topromote citizeninvolvement.

1 . 3

Promote volunteerism.

1 . 4

Find neutral ground toreduce distrust andresolve conflicts.

1 . 5

News media shouldnurture civic debate.

WISCONSIN’S “THIRD SECTOR”In addition to public and private sectors,

there is a third sector with untapped capacity.The third sector involves a myriad of civil en-terprises: religious, educational, voluntary, busi-ness, labor and charitable organizations. Theseare the voluntary asso-ciations unique to ourculture but which alltoo often are pushedinto the shadows by for-mal government withbureaucratic programs.

There is no waygovernment can, oreven should, meet allneeds, just as there is noway the helpless shouldbe abandoned by gov-ernment in a civil society. The Commissionasked questions about what government shouldand should not do and if “it” still needed to bedone, who would do it? The third sector mayhave some answers.

Wisconsin can build on the citizenshipprinciples shared through the Public Leader-ship Institute and network to find new oppor-tunities for self-reliant activity in many subjectsand at many levels (see Goal #4). Leaders andtaxpayers also will have the fiscal informationneeded to make better decisions on who canbest do the job at every level (see Goals #5 and#16).

NOTICEABLY BETTER DIALOGUE

For citizens to have confidence in the sys-tem they have to participate in it. Using newtele-democracy technology provided by theInformation Utility, citizens will have new op-portunities to access all levels of government,

as well as their neigh-borhoods, through freecomputer networks.Citizens will debate is-sues by electronic townmeetings and solvecommon problemsthrough video confer-ences.

Who will framethe questions and leadthe dialogue? That isthe elected official’s re-

sponsibility. In the old way, the official and gov-ernment employee made (often excessive)promises and delivered programs. The new wayhas the citizen sharing responsibility (see Goal#4) and the elected official realistically framingexpectations through programs that have mea-surable results.

The role of the media will change. It willindependently and thoughtfully raise publicagenda issues and report the debate in a waythat rejects personality-driven reporting thatnow focuses on conflict over consensus. Thetransformation to this so-called civic journal-ism approach that looks in-depth at public is-sues will challenge politicians to be thoughtfuland the media to be responsible.

“Think about bold goals for thesesquicentennial in 1998.

Perhaps a new charter betweenthe state and people.

Something big.”David Prosser, Legislator

Daniel J. Katers,Green Bay“Voter apathy is adisgrace. We have failedto stress the importanceof participation ingovernment.”

3 Make state government moreflexible, productive andrespectful in its interactions withcitizens.

4 Make the products andcharacter of Wisconsingovernment reflect theresponsibilities as well as theneeds and rights of citizens.

5 Renew the compact betweencitizen and government andincrease the impact citizenshave on government.

6 Make government more costeffective in the long run due tomore citizen involvement andvolunteerism. It will providetaxpayers the services they arewilling to pay for as well as whatthey want.

7 Establish the preconditions forthe ongoing reinvention of stategovernment, driven by continualcitizen interaction.


CHAPTERONE

GOAL #2

EffectiveLeaders

Training to transformgovernment and build

community

do. Indeed, an effective leadership system mustbe in place to accomplish the Commission’srecommendations that people take charge oftheir personal needs, community needs andchildren’s education at the closest level to them.

The Wisconsin Public Leadership Insti-tute system will emphasize the practical aspectsof leading the state into the 21st Century. Itwill recognize the changing nature of organiza-tions and the important role that the applica-tion of knowledge will play in addressingsociety’s needs. The mission of the Public Lead-ership Institute will be to:1 . Develop an internationally recognized

institute for the study and developmentof leadership and citizenship behaviorsthat build community capacity ratherthan dependency and that connect partsof community with each other.

2 . Develop paths of communication andopportunities for collaboration amongindividual leaders, organizations andinstitutions, especially within Wiscon-sin.

3 . Encourage and support a leadershipinformation system that encourages aculture of public service, continuousimprovement, problem solving and self-renewal within all public institutions atall levels and within the public servicefunctions of not-for-profits and busi-nesses.

4 . Provide a variety of educational pro-grams and materials and supportservices for the development of leader-ship skills and values.

5. Celebrate, reward,reinforce and shareexemplary models ofenlightened leader-ship and citizenshipin history and con-temporary life,especially withinWisconsin.

Leadership Insti-tute participation will

be required of all new constitutional officers,including the Governor, legislators and othernew leaders, and for state supervisors as a con-

o succeed in the 21st Century as well as ithas in the last 150 years, Wisconsin must“grow” leaders who can effectively guideorganizations and society through turbu-lent change now and in the future. The newWisconsin Public Leadership Institute andnetwork will prepare full- and part-time

officials to develop the potential of citizen, com-munity and government.

The Commission’s leadership recommen-dations adhere to the professional advice whichstates that government cannot be successfullyreinvented without reinventing citizenship andleadership. The Com-mission also agrees withstate employees whowant a governmentalsystem challenged by vi-sion and staffed by lead-ers who can help em-ployees at all levelsachieve that vision asmembers of one work-ing team.

Local government officials want a leader-ship initiative to help them motivate others todo the work that government cannot afford to

“It is a boring report that sayswe need to improve government

leadership, but that isexactly the problem.”

Paul Light, University of MinnesotaJack Christ, RiponCollege“To be genuinelyeffective, leadershipdevelopment must becomprehensive.”

Martin BeilCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner


RE

SU

LT

Sdition of promotion.Funding sources mightinclude savings thatemployees themselvesachieve in a more flex-ible and free manage-ment system. Overtime, a series of certifiable leadership accom-plishment levels will be identified, towardwhich employees and officials will work.

The Institute will be developed in thespirit of a new Wisconsin Idea that involvesinput from governments, business, not-for-profit, academic (private colleges and universi-ties and public higher educational institutions)and citizen interests. It will draw upon the wis-dom and experience of former public officials,legislators, journalists and others. Public em-ployee unions will have a key role in itsconceptualization and employees at all levelswill participate.

The Institute will be entrepreneurial,charging for services. It will have a Madisonand Milwaukee presence and make extensiveuse of the Wisconsin Public Information Util-ity to develop and disseminate materials forcontinuing education through computer net-working, CD-ROM, interactive video and othertraining tools.

An important benefit of the Institute andnetwork will be a reinforcement of the sense ofcommunity that distinguished Wisconsin in the20th Century but threatens to erode in a fast-paced society. The perspectives and experiencesshared by participants representing differentlayers and units of government will result inpriceless partnerships, relationships and trust.

Such trust amongcurrently turf-con-scious levels will becritical if the state is toremain a democraticcommunity during atime of change and in-

creasing heterogeneity. The program could alsoreinforce the government and public-privatesector exchanges recommended elsewhere.

Actions2 . 1

Develop a PublicLeadership Institute andnetwork.

2 . 2

Incorporate a leadershipphilosophy in themanagement system.

2 . 3

Prepare managers asmission-driven leaders.

“State government cares lessabout local government.”

Southeast Wisconsin official

From Managers Who: To Leaders Who:

Are bosses and controllers Are coaches and stewards

Have a “win” mentality Have a “win-win” mentality

Make decisions Create community

Do things right Do the right thing

Focus on organizational inner workings Are equally concerned with thebig picture

Are short term thinkers Think and act in long term

Think in terms of activities, rights Think accomplishments,responsibilities

Know the answers Ask the questions

Know how to express themselves Know how to listen

See the world as cause-effect See the world a connectedsystem

Take charge Know when to lead, follow, takerisks

Only emphasize tangibles Value intangibles of vision,values

Developing effectiveleaders will:

1 Provide the leadership needed toreinvent state government on a dayto day basis.

2 Assure citizens that Wisconsingovernment continues its reputationfor excellence in government byhaving the best state government inthe United States.

6 Make the process of stategovernment reflect the best practicesand knowledge available.

7 Improve the quality of the productsand services of Wisconsin stategovernment.

3 Provide an ongoing source of costsaving innovations to keep thecost of government as low aspossible.

4 Upgrade the quality and accuracyof information provided to citizensby government.

5 Reinforce the pride of stategovernment employees byinvesting in their skills andknowledge.

Joe Martin, ArthurAndersen and Co.”You need a vision andleadership. Then identifyproblems before youjump in and solve thewrong problems.”


CHAPTERONE

GOAL #3

NewWisconsin

IdeaEveryone’s ideas and

shared ideals

The University was “the fourth branch” of gov-ernment in meeting the state’s needs.

After 150 years, however, the Universityno longer is the only recognized holder ofknowledge. Indeed, the private sector, privatecolleges and people throughout Wisconsin havethe information, knowledge and wisdom tocollectively distinguish our state in the nextcentury just as the University almost singularlydistinguished Wisconsin in the early part of thiscentury.

The new Wisconsin Idea will reflect thecapability of citizens who told the Commissionthey place a very high value on education andlifelong learning (see “Citizens and Public Em-ployees Offer Advice”). It will capitalize onWisconsin youth and adults who have provento be more thoughtful, conscientious and ar-ticulate than the competition. It will build onindustry’s stellar survival strategy following themidwest’s manufacturing crisis of the 1980s. Itwill seize the educational experimentation anddiversification taking place in homes, busi-nesses and public and private schools every-where. It will use the breakthrough reformsrecommended by this Commission (see Goal#20) as testimony to our choice of governmentthat produces results not bureaucratic process.

The old Wisconsin Idea was limited bygeography: the boundaries of the campus arethe boundaries of the state. The new Wiscon-sin Idea has no boundaries. The ability to learnhas no limit and the borders of Wisconsin be-come the borders of the world as we link(through the Information Utility, see Goal #12)

with the world eco-nomically and govern-mentally. We are, in-deed, destined to be-come a player in a high-tech global economyand responsible citizenof a global village con-nected through civicpurpose and commerce(see Goal #9).

The new Ideaconsiders knowledge as a commodity with greatvalue and the ability of each of us to know theother’s knowledge capacity as a great ideal. Thenew Idea envisions learning taking place inevery location—home, school, work and com-

“The future will be built withthe natural resources of nature

and the natural talents andcapabilities of people, the real

Wisconsin ideas.”Charles Savage, consultant, Wellesley, MA

he chapter is closing on the old WisconsinIdea that recorded great accomplishmentsof the people—through our University—on our dairy farms, in our factories and ingovernment itself in the 20th Century.Wisconsin’s 1998 sesquicentennial chal-lenges us to redefine that Idea to meet the

realities of the 21st Cen-tury.

What must be dif-ferent about the newWisconsin Idea com-pared to the old? Howcan that new definitionbe so cutting-edge andso special that it distin-guishes Wisconsin glo-bally, just as the oldWisconsin Idea distin-guished us in America, Germany and through-out Europe?

The old Idea leveraged the University’sknowledge and service ethic to cope with cri-ses facing farmers, workers and government.

RichardCarlson, Appleton“In Wisconsin,everything seems towork—government,recreation, business. Itspeople strive to makethings work.”

Nathan Meltz, Superior“If there is a good idea, itshouldn’t be decided bywhich party is going totake it. If it’s a good idea,go with it.”


RE

SU

LT

Sas tools to breach the barriers of profes-sion, bureaucracy, government bound-aries and tradition that prevent us from

seeing each other’scapacity to be self-sufficient and drivento succeed (SeePreamble and Goals#2, #4, #5 and #20).

3. Use the knowl-edge of the Univer-sity, private collegesand business to

develop science and technologypolicy. Government must tap knowl-edgeable players to develop effectivescience and technology policy for the21st Century. Wisconsin can no longertolerate political brinksmanship thatleads to regulatory and legal gridlock.The Governor and Legislature need totap the state’s knowledge in a nationallydistinctive way in drafting policies, lawsand programs (see Goals #8, #13, #17and #18).The new Wisconsin Idea? It is develop-

ing and using the knowledge capacity and ideasof all Wisconsin people. Together we will comeup with our own ideas that give us noticeablybetter citizens, noticeably better communitiesand noticeably better government, all movingForward for a noticeably better quality of life.

Actions3 . 1

Link the Department ofDevelopment and UWSystem for economicdevelopment.

3 . 2

Create a state dialogueto reinvent citizenship.

3 . 3

Tap Wisconsinknowledge to developscience and technologypolicy.

munity. It sees the library system (see Goals #11and #12) as a special asset, serving home,school, business and community. It considersevery citizen’s naturalcuriosity as a survivalskill (see Goal #10).Leading as always, wehave identified ways totap existing assetsthrough concepts suchas youth apprentice-ship, the model K-12Village Partnership anddistance education. These are seeds of ideas andexamples of how we can build on the excel-lence of the past for the challenge of the future.

TANGIBLE WISCONSIN IDEAS

1. Develop a knowledge-based economicstrategy. The world will pay for whatWisconsin knows as well as what itmakes. Wisconsin can adopt a globally-distinctive strategy to use its knowledgepotential and its University alumnisystem as unique assets in an economicdevelopment strategy (see Goal #9).

2 . Use knowledge to solve problems weonce asked government to solve. Aspart of a new citizenship ideal, we willsolve our problems ourselves, usinggovernment as a last resort. We will usenetworking and community education

“No reform will succeed withoutan idealistic vision. Wisconsincan yet again serve as a model

for the rest of the nation.”William Cronon, historian, UW-Madison

Wisconsin RuralDevelopment Council“The Wisconsin Ideaconnotes a civic pride,bringing us together asa community.”

The new Wisconsin Ideawill:

1 Ensure that taxpayer dollars areinvested in knowledge, humancapital and education.

2 Continue Wisconsin’s reputation foreducational excellence beyond thetraditional concept of schooling.

5 Improve the economic well-being ofWisconsin citizens as well as thequality of life.

6 Enable state employees to drawideas from the private and publicsectors to create a governmentconducive to education, science andtechnological growth.

3 Enable citizens, businesses,universities and research centersto participate as full partners with,and not as the subjects of,government.

4 Stress that the solution to newproblems might be newknowledge rather than more lawsor taxes and that solutions cometo government rather than fromgovernment.


CHAPTERONE

GOAL #4

TakingResponsibility

Achieving togetherwhat we cannot

achieve alone

hat one thinks depends upon howone thinks. Moving to a system thatpromotes individual and commu-nity self-reliance—not dependencyon government—will be a conten-tious, confrontational journey. Thatis because we have been convincedthrough three

generations that there re-ally is a free lunch, we areentitled to it and govern-ment—not taxpayers—should pay for it.

On the other hand,compared to other states,Wisconsin already isquite a self-reliant place. We are frugal andknow value. We are neighborly and help ourneighbors.

If government costs are to be controlledand the needs of society met, citizens must dowhat needs to be done for health, safety andcommunity well being. As the Commission wastold: the whole nation must somehow redefinethe role of government and the responsibility

of the individual to meet 21st Century reality.It has to start somewhere; and if any group ofcitizens and any state government can do it, itis Wisconsin’s.

COMMUNITIES AND CITIZENSSERVING EACH OTHER

In the 21st Century, Wisconsin citizenswill look first to themselves, then to family, thento the community and its non-government en-tities for help. Government will be last on thelist. The problem: existing laws, policies andbudgets generally assume government is thefirst, last and always provider. The Legislature’schallenge: moving from government as the greatprovider to something else without hurting thereally vulnerable.

There are obstacles. Codes, rules and pro-fessional advisors present legal and psychologi-cal roadblocks to our taking care of personaland organizational selves. Here are some ex-amples of what has happened:

For the individual: Local building codesmight prevent a grandparent addition or housefrom being built on a son’s or daughter’s land.So the child cannot look out for aging parentsand a grandparent cannot easily care for agrandchild. Or consider the situation when asign ordinance prevents a parent from runninga home business, effectively blocking the op-portunity to earn an income at home while tak-ing care of children.

For the organization: Some tax breakshave been on the booksso long that they havebecome like an entitle-ment even though theyserve a lower priority(see Sweeping Sunsetsin Goal #16).

Public policy: Arule puts a ceiling on

wages as a condition of assistance, or a policyfalls short in meeting the child care needs of aworking parent.

Business policy: Work restrictions preventworkers from spending special moments withchildren, serving the community as mentors,caring for parents or volunteering.

Many little life examples document a rigid,policy driven culture that seems disconnected

“We need neighborhood valuesof trust and sharing. But we

cannot legislate that.”Susan Dreyfus, Waukesha County

Nick Van Der Puy,Eagle River“We need communitiesof people caring foreach other. We need todepend on ourneighbors.”


Actions4 . 1

Find new paths to theself-reliant community.

4 . 2

See the entirecommunity as able toserve.

4 . 3

Government programsand employees becomehelpers.

4 . 4

Return public health tothe public agenda.

from common sensewhen it comes to help-ing individuals care forthemselves and others.The challenge: to changethe government and so-cial culture to free thosewho have greater capac-ity to be self-reliant orhelp others but still pro-tect and care for those who need it.

A SPECIFIC CHALLENGE: PUBLICHEALTH

Government has a responsibility to pro-tect public health from 21st Century threats andgive it a high priority on the state’s policy andprogram agenda.

Local government and dozens of focusedand sometimes competing interests constitutethe core of Wisconsin’s diffused public healthsystem. The Division of Health attempts to fa-cilitate and coordinate activities, and laudableoutreach efforts exist in the University and else-where.

However, Wis-consin is behind otherstates in developing acoordinated health-care system focused onprevention and usingcooperation amonggovernment and non-government interests.Threats are posed by

local, state, national and international changesin policies regarding communicable diseases,reproductive health, child health and environ-mental health. Moreover, changes in popula-tion concentrations, mobility and mega sys-tems—such as public water supplies and de-pressed immunological systems—compoundthe challenge.

The state should place public health highon its agenda but it should reach beyond sim-ply creating an organization. The issue is howto create an effective society of organizationsand interests that have different but interrelatedroles and responsibilities—beginning with theindividual citizen.

“You must affect personalbehavior if you are going toaddress the larger issue of

government and cost ofgovernment.”

Ted Kolderie, consultant, Minneapolis

Marlin Buehler,Forestville“Make the state ofWisconsin a safer placeto live.”

David Prosser,Legislator“How can the stateunleash, promote andreward the potential inpeople, business andnot-for-profits?”

RE

SU

LT

S Taking responsibility will:

1 Reduce the negative view ofgovernment as the creator ofdependency and reduce thenumber of citizens dependent onthe state.

2 Reduce the tax burden of creatingnew entitlements and programs ofsubsidy rather than self-sufficiency.

3 Move the debate about andcontrol over how to solve socialproblems back from stategovernment to the localcommunity, voluntary organiza-tions, family and individuals.

4 Change the products of stategovernment from direct aid,assistance and directions tocreating local and citizen levelpreconditions for self-help.

5 Adopt a public health model ofgovernment service: treat the wholecommunity instead of individualsdirectly; focus on prevention, lookingto create preconditions of health, nottreatment of illness; and shiftresponsibility to individual and familyfor their own health.


CHAPTERTWO

GOAL #5

CooperatingCommunities

Partnerships toenhance community

capacity

systems get in the way. That must change, andit will happen only if the formal governmentsystem is changed.

Local officials have told the Commission:“It is hard to imagine a local government struc-ture that does more to encourage conflict anddiscourage cooperation than the one in Wis-consin.” The Legislative Council’s committee onshared government services recognizes the needfor cooperation. The Commission, however,wants to create a sense of urgency that says toall government units—the state included—thatcooperation is not only desirable but essential.Failure to cooperate has always had a price, butcooperation is crucial now and the politiciansand bureaucrats should know that.

The Commission wants to foster intergov-ernmental and interagency cooperation towardimproving service delivery, saving taxpayerdollars, and meeting the needs of the citizenry.The Commission, therefore, proposes withhold-ing as much as 5 percent of current fundingfrom state agencies, local government and edu-cation—pending a satisfactory answer to howthey will break down barriers that prevent themfrom working together. Cooperation also is whythe state needs an intergovernmental efficiencybroker function. This will be accomplished byjoining the intergovernmental and energy func-tions in the Department of Administration withthe economic and “level of service” skills of thePublic Service Commission.

The brokers will use tools such as con-flict resolution, negotiation, mediation, coop-erative pacts, certificates of cooperation forpublic advantage (a variation of a Maine pro-gram) and other tools to promote cooperation.One barrier that needs attention is restrictionson municipal workers working across munici-pal lines. The key message: government bureau-cratic and jurisdictional lines should be invis-ible when it comes to common sense coopera-tion.

GOVERNANCE COMPONENTS

Shadow governments and non-govern-ment service providers exist in private associa-tions, volunteer groups and neighborhood or-ganizations. Formal government must deal withthese from a positive perspective—coping, en-hancing and connecting. It also has to work

he state’s character begins in thousands ofneighborhoods and communities. Itsstrength comes from a system in which thewhole could be greater than the sum of itsparts, but only if the boundaries that sepa-rate those parts are the same lines wherecommunities meet to begin to working to-gether.Wisconsin’s 2,774 municipalities and

school districts are part of a larger system thathas a nationally envied record of honesty andaccessibility. There are examples where govern-ments share buildings, combine services (likeMilwaukee’s North Shore fire service) and worktogether, especially in emergencies. State gov-ernment once commended cooperation andinnovation, a practice it should resume andexpand to include private sector and not-for-profit community accomplishments and coop-eration.

COOPERATION COULD IMPROVE

Turf protection starts in Madison amongagencies and communities and extends to com-munities around the state. Sometimes whenpeople want to cooperate, they find that stateand local budgets, management and personnel

Harold J. Frogg, LacCourte Oreilles“I hope for qualityresolutions to the manyproblems that our Nativepeoples are faced with.”

Northern resident“Smaller governmentsin northern Wisconsinshould cooperate moreor consolidate.”

Rick Stadelman,Wisconsin TownsAssociation“Some units ofgovernment havecontempt for other unitsof government.”

Mike Harrigan,Whitefish Bay“No one wants torock the boat.”


Cooperating communi-ties will:

1 Require local governments tofocus on service delivery at thelowest possible cost and notpreservation of jurisdictionalboundaries.

RE

SU

LT

SActions5 . 1

Create tension andincentives to encourageintergovernmentalcooperation.

5 . 2

Identify an intergovern-mental efficiency brokerfunction.

5 . 3

Pay once for localgovernment service.

5 . 4

Focus multipleprograms on rebuildingcommunities.

5 . 5

Review the fit betweenlocal government andnew century needs.

harder to cross psychological barriers that sepa-rate rural and urban, city and suburb, schooland city hall. This is what taxpayers expect buttoo seldom receive. Using the state’s brokerfunction, questions about service sharing, costsharing, growth sharing, joint planning andregional cooperation can be addressed.

The private sector is an important part-ner in community development, especially inurban settings. The state has to decide whereto help out (such as in siting state facilities) andwhere to back off. The “help out” question iskey when state jobs can go to cities and laggingrural areas, especially now that technology givesthe state and its employees greater work flex-ibility.

Government success in reaching consen-sus is linked to a state budget process that re-quires an early, meaningful, consultative andeven partnership role among all levels andbranches of government. It is a collaborationthat sees problems, opportunities and infra-structure as one. No turf. No distrust. No ex-cuses to avoid cooperation. That’s what taxpay-ers expect (see Goal #20).

GRASS ROOTS AND FORMALSTRUCTURES

Given neighborhood growth strategies, itmay be possible for state agencies to focus re-sources from numerous functions such asschool rebuilding, small business assistance(more and more in the home), Main Street pro-grams, outdoor recreation, public safety, hous-ing, community education and urban forestry.Packaging might happen through an urban landgrant university function (see Goal #13). Re-

search tells us community infrastructure is con-nected and government agencies should behavethat way.

Overall, local government needs attentionand modernization before it lurches into a cri-sis. There is value in grass roots neighborhooddemocracy, sometimes made easier by computernetworks (from the Information Utility). How-ever, many local units need to ask whether theyare too small, too remote, or too poor to pro-vide their own service or pay for independentoverhead. Is the role of government to “do”things, or is it to help things get done?

Should local government continue to filltechnical or professional offices through gen-eral elections? Are various boards and councilstoo big to be effective? Do we have too manygovernmental units? These and other issuesshould be debated in a local government statu-tory revision commission, concluding its workby 1998, Wisconsin’s sesquicentennial year.

This Commission recalls the themes of the1977 commission on state-local relations andfinancing policy. Giving local governmentgreater flexibility and autonomy still makessense, as does the still-unheeded plea to putsome sense into land use and boundary adjust-ment policies. However, a key difference be-tween then and now is today’s recognition ofthe many stifling layers of government and therealization that government should not be thesole provider of public service. The system looksmore like a web than a layer cake and the webspinners include citizens, not-for-profits, busi-ness and government. This is especially true atthe local level. The challenge (as envisioned inGoal #22) is to have a management system thatstrengthens the individual strands of that weband supports the structure as a whole.

Reuben Harpole,Milwaukee“Parks are importantplaces where we cangather as a community.”

E. G. Nadeau,consultant, Madison“Local governmentsshould be cooperativepartners not competi-tors for scarceresources.”

2 Reduce the number of localunits of government whoseexistence is based on traditionrather than function andefficiency.

3 Allow local taxpayer tax relief tobe based on local as well asstate level savings in the cost ofgovernment.

4 Increase the equality of whatcitizens pay for and get byreducing the parochialism oflocal units of government.

5 Change product focus of localgovernment from what it canprovide to its citizens to what isthe most effective way citizenscan get this service.

6 Reduce the cost of localservices by lesseningduplication and inefficiencies ofsmall scale operations.

7 Change the process of localgovernment from turf protectionto management of localresources and tax dollars.


CHAPTERTWO

GOAL #6

Generationsthat Connect

Youth and olderadults: special needs

and potential

onnection is an important Commissiontheme. Society needs to rethink the way itconnects with, meets the needs of, and usesthe potential capacity of youth and olderadults.

Some youth see themselves as beingdisconnected from the rest of society and

express that feeling through graffiti, gangs anddisrespect. Some olderadults, too, can be dis-connected, cast aside intheir older years as li-abilities, not assets.Some youth opposespending time andmoney on the elderly.Some older adults op-pose spending money and time on youth. Dis-connection and suspicion reign.

Several principles guide recommenda-tions affecting youth and older adults:1 . Government’s approach to youth and

other adults is fragmented, uncoordi-

nated, sometimes duplicative, andgenerally short sighted.

2 . It is no longer acceptable to simplyhand out money instead of tryingactually to solve problems.

3 . There are bureaucratic, legal, andgenerational barriers that prevent oldand young from connecting, and societyfrom meeting the needs of both.

4 . All citizens should believe they havevalue and are connected to somethingimportant or something larger thanthemselves, such as other people, nature(a special value for Wisconsin people)or a social system that values citizensand citizenship.

5 . All human beings have dignity.

CONSOLIDATE YOUTH SERVICEFUNCTIONS

Consolidation or linking of eight highlyfocused youth service programs will reduceduplication, improve service and save money.More importantly, it will open the door to moreeffective attention to youth with special require-ments or great potential.

In some instances, review or the transferof programs might begin with internal ques-tions, such as the new Secretary for Educationasking whether the Youth Initiatives Programis central to the education mission (see Goal#10). In other instances, the transfer will hap-pen as part of a larger strategy, such as alcoholand other drug abuse efforts in Health and So-

cial Services (see Goal#18). In still others,they will be consideredwhen an agency suchas the Department ofNatural Resources isallowed to focus on thecontent of core envi-

ronmental messages and learning, rather thanactually running camps, Chippewa Youth Em-ployment or minority internships.

The federal role in the state 4-H and youthdevelopment programs of the UW-Extensionpresents different questions. Nevertheless, suc-cessful 4-H programs—which foster reliability,

“We are addicts to intervention.The cheapest approach is

prevention.”Jose Vasques, Madison

Senator GwendolynneS. MooreCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner


Generations thatconnect will:

1 Focus government programsdealing with the young and theelderly on efficient delivery, notprogram boundaries or agencyauthority.

RE

SU

LT

SActions6 . 1

Consolidate youthfunctions.

6 . 2

Plan for aging of society.

socialization, stewardship and entrepreneurshipin youth—might have an even greater positiveimpact if they are more closely tied to otheractivities.

Youth apprentice-ship programs and theconservation corps aretwo programs that oper-ate in relative isolationfrom each other and yethave similar objectives,exposing youth to therhythm of work. How-ever, there are questionsabout the ability of the WCC to attract workers.

All of the programs represent a consider-able investment of time, money and effort, yetthey are generally uncoordinated and fail to re-inforce each other and serve youth as a whole.

For youth to connect, they need to be in-volved in the public system. Volunteer effortslike Badger Boys and Girls State and the StriveFoundation provide lessons and questions forelected officials, business owners and all con-cerned about how long we can go with youthbelieving more and more they have no stake inthe system.

OLDER ADULTS

Many of the state’s programs and relation-ships with older adults are driven by federalprograms and rules. The aging of society willresult in major fiscal challenges to the federalgovernment, state government and, of course,all taxpayers. (Wisconsin will see a sharp in-crease in older adults after the year 2000.)

Under the Commission’s theme of self-reliance and shared responsibility, questionsmust be asked at all levels of government and

in all sectors aboutwhat barriers exist toolder adult self-reli-ance.

In a bureaucraticsense, barriers havebeen erected unwit-tingly in the Depart-ment of Health andSocial services throughdifferent and compet-

ing cultures and purposes in different divisions.This leads to counter-productive competition,duplication and poor coordination.

In a larger sense, the issue of how to copewith an aging society reaches from Green Laketo Milwaukee County. It is important for theentire state to address the challenge. However,the assumption that “government can do it all”is no longer operative. Now families, includingextended families (as was the case years ago),have primary responsibility for elder care. Thus,a review of the barriers to families caring forolder adults is needed.

Equally important is tapping the capacityof seniors for continued service in household,community and school. Many seniors now serveas mentors, storytellers, classroom aides andvolunteers. The system could be in place wheremany more would volunteer if legal, schedul-ing, transportation and structural barriers wereremoved.

“With the breakdown of thefamily and educational system

we are guaranteeing thecontinued recycling of poverty.”

Martin Schreiber, former governor

2 Change the focus of programsfor youth and elderly to includeusing the population asparticipants and problemsolvers, not just servicerecipients.

3 Enable state governmentemployees to ask not what theirprogram can do for youth andthe elderly, but what should bedone across problems incooperation with thesepopulations.

4 Bring youth and elderly intoprograms as fellow citizens, notas clients, and treat them withdignity and respect.

5 Allow the family, linking acrossall generations, to be viewed asthe focus entity instead of foursocial workers for each personin the family.

6 Reduce the cost of servicesthrough program consolidationand coordination.

Judge Moria Krueger“The entire juvenilejustice system shouldbe focused on how togo out of business, howto develop preventionand interventionstrategies that reducethe number of clients inthe system.”

Gerald Whitburn,DHSS Secretary“The aging populationrepresents a significantfiscal challenge to thestate in the long term.”

John A. Huebscher,Madison“State government hasa vital role as a buffer toprotect those inWisconsin who aredisadvantaged by birth.”

Tom Frazier, Madison“We need a culture ofself-reliance when itcomes to older adults.”


CHAPTERTWO

GOAL #7

Land UseCoping with a rapidly

changing landscape

But the Commission finds little consen-sus—even among state agencies—about howto cope with the changes. The complex systemof government and land ownership makes itimpossible to focus on a common approach.

Unlike before, much is known about thelink between land use and other parts of theenvironment, such as lakes, groundwater andwildlife. However, no expert or entity has allthe information or the ability to provide com-prehensive advice or direction. It is also im-portant to consider the rights of those who payproperty taxes on, and earn a living from, theland.

The Commission’s land use recommenda-tions are not a laundry list of what should hap-pen. Rather, they are more a list of questionsand tools that the private sector, governmentand landowners themselves might consider intheir different roles.

State agencies, such as the departmentsof Natural Resources and Agriculture, Trade andConsumer Protection, are challenged to con-sider land use more comprehensively, lookingbeyond their organizational boxes to the land-scape outdoors. Land use and environment-re-lated programs should be scrutinized and evalu-ated on the basis of certain outcomes and stan-dards. Programs that fail to achieve desired re-sults should be replaced with others that aremore innovative in approach and for which re-

sults are perhaps moretangible.

Most governmentdecisions affecting landuse are made locally.The Commission dis-covered, however, thatlocal government doesnot always cooperatevery effectively. In somecases, there is counter-productive feudingacross town, county

and municipal lines. Local governments are re-minded that their disputes over annexation andservice delivery can have a lasting impact onthe land and on the cost of providing service.The impact of local government decisions onthe loss of prime agricultural land is a specialconcern.

State government has established an in-

“We have a very pristine statehere and tourism is the numberone attraction in this area. Yetthere are no long range goals

about how we’re going topreserve our natural resources.”

Gaiashkibos, Tribal Chair, Lac Courte Oreilles

istening sessions held throughout the statefound that citizens hold few things moreimportant than our natural resources. ButWisconsin’s landscape is changing, raisingnew questions about land management andpublic policy.

Land use change fueled Wisconsin’slast major political reform era one hundredyears ago. As the state experienced massive log-ging, a crisis erupted in the economy, naturalresources and local government. The crash ofWisconsin’s then wheat-based farm economycreated another crisis.Industry-governmentreforestation partner-ships, innovative for-estry laws, rural zoningand UW System dairyscience programs savedthe state and providedthe foundation fortoday’s forest productsand agribusiness econo-mies.

Now, a century later, Wisconsin’s land-scape is changing again with impacts on localeconomies, government service costs, daily lifeand aesthetics. This time it is scattered devel-opment, sale of large forest tracts, urban sprawland farm expansions that are causing new con-flicts among neighbors and adding costs to lo-cal government.

Northern resident“We needincentives for goodland use up here.”

Sandra Wright,Superior“We have clean water,clean air, a safeenvironment. If weworked on our tourism,we could have fullemployment.”

Willard Nett, GreenBay“Our very own planet isan endangered species.”


Actions7 . 1

Examine tax policyimpacts on land use.

7 . 2

Reduce the illogicalimpact of boundaries onservice.

7 . 3

Evaluate the impact ofinfrastructure changes.

7 . 4

Play an active role infederal decisionsaffecting land.

7 . 5

Reward good behavior.

7 . 6

Require results forconservation programs.

7 . 7

Force local governmentto be better neighborson annexation.

7 . 8

Broaden membershipon state government’sland use committee.

teragency land use com-mittee to make long termrecommendations. Thiscommittee, now com-posed of state govern-ment representatives,should also involve rep-resentatives from busi-ness, land developmentand environmental interests, agriculture, localgovernment, community groups and others.

Land use issues affect urban as well asrural Wisconsin. For example, the productive

“Tax base competition betweengovernments results in bad land

use and animosity amonglocal governments.”

Tom Harnish, Wisconsin Towns Association

development of urbanareas with contami-nated lands is impor-tant to jobs in the city.Reasonable approachesare needed in urban in-fill situations. A varietyof taxation issues andoptions need evalua-

tion not only in terms of their impact on rev-enue, but also their impact on land use, espe-cially when the viability of farm operations isconcerned.

Land use recommenda-tions will:

1 Involve more citizens in the processof debate on land use and not limitthe debate to narrow jurisdictionalissues.

2 Create incentives for stewardshiprather than restrictions viaregulations for achievement ofvoluntary compliance.

RE

SU

LT

S 3 Put land use on the list of issuescommunities must cooperate tosolve.

4 Empower State Interagency LandUse Committee as the appropri-ate forum rather than create newstructures.

5 Focus more on consensus buildingof the entire community on all levelsof debate—federal, state and local—rather than special interest discourseon individual issues.

6 Focus on overall tax policy and itsimpact on land use.


CHAPTERTWO

GOAL #8

The NewInfrastructure

Technology andknowledge change the

way we think

buying licenses from their homes,workplaces or malls. Technology alsowill reduce the need for office space andallow employees to work from home,car and field.

2 . Employee numbers will stabilize or bereduced; some employees will beredefined as team players who movearound or work from home rather than“doers” who stay in one place.

3 . Distance learning, using ever changingtechnology, will reduce the need forclassroom space and allow more effi-cient use of existing space.

4 . More government services will takeplace in high use areas such as shoppingmalls, requiring lease arrangements orlocating where there is a need foremployment or community develop-ment.

5 . Taxpayers will demand of all levels ofgovernment that they share facilities asmuch as possible, joining local, state,federal and educational activities forcustomer convenience, one-stop-shopping or program coordination.

6 . Large buildings with permanent walls—the kind government likes to build—areoften incompatible with rapid techno-logical changes, requiring retrofittingand remodeling. Like the private sector,government may consider these “assets”to be liabilities and sell them.These and other changes will require the

Legislature and the Governor to rethink the roleof the State Building Commission and budgetprocess, especially as it relates to infrastructureplanning in concert with other governments(see Goal #20).

Because of technology, the state is at thesame decision point it was at when it decidedto set up an extensive university campus sys-tem. The criteria for building at that time weredifferent than today, raising questions about therole of campuses in relative proximity to eachother. The criteria for cost effective infrastruc-ture in the 21st Century will be much differentthan the criteria in the 20th Century.

tate government calculates its capital as-sets at $15 billion, but it fails to includein its calculations the knowledge assets ofstate workers. Someone who did includethose assets in an estimate for the Com-mission put their worth at $150 billion.There is a need for a systematic plan tobetter manage or develop both assets inthe 21st Century.Wisconsin citizens rightly demand high

quality services and infrastructure. As a result,our state highways, parks, buildings, ports, air-ports and public facilities compare favorablywith other states. However, the rules of physi-cal infrastructure are changing, in terms of whatis an asset or liability, in terms of their manage-ment and even in terms of their ownership.

BUILDING FOR EFFICIENCY ANDVALUE

Public facilities represent a significant as-set of and cost to state government, includingthe UW System. The state should take a cau-tious, go-slow approach on new buildings forseveral compelling reasons:1 . Technology will permit citizens to get

the information they need and allowthem to make easy transactions such as

State buildingofficial“There is a desirenot to engage insharing facilities.”

James R. KlauserCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner


The new infrastructurewill:

1 Allow technology to bringgovernment to citizens ratherthan require citizens tophysically go to governmentoffices for services.

RE

SU

LT

SCOORDINATE CORRIDOR PLANNING

The processes of planning energy, trans-portation and communications corridors havemuch in common. At present, the planning isfragmented and com-plex, resulting in numer-ous challenges, disputesand misunderstandings.An integrated approachto corridor planning willcome from a high levelpublic-private commis-sion to recommend 21stCentury apparatus tomanage such corridors.

NEW APPROACHES TOINFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT

In times long ago, infrastructure develop-ment was handled solely by the private sector:canals, plank roads and such. In more recentyears, government has had a monopoly on in-frastructure development. The new way to de-velop infrastructure will focus on choosing thebest and most efficient way from private andgovernment sectors.

Government leaders must be aware ofdebt limits and limited resources as never be-fore (see Goal #16). It has to look at lifetimeinfrastructure costs and how they can be mini-mized. New ways of facility and infrastructuredevelopment will be considered, including:lease and sale/lease-back agreements; build/operate/transfer and build/transfer/operate op-tions; and turnkey procurement. This will af-fect our airports, roads, water systems, build-

ings, ports and wastewater systems. The bestway to go may mean having someone else owna facility that serves a public purpose or usingnew mechanisms to assign costs and guaranteebenefits. In all cases, however, public employ-

ees always shouldhave a fair opportunityto compete on a levelplaying field with pri-vate bidders.

Responsibi l i tyfor helping state andlocal governmentsfind cost efficient andeffective answers to

infrastructure questions may come from differ-ent areas of state government, but coordina-tion will be through the efficiency broker func-tion (see Goal #5). This function will be cre-ative, innovative and flexible in helping gov-ernment find new ways to meet infrastructureneeds, including addressing mandates such asunfair building standards for public facilities.

GOVERNMENT’S KNOWLEDGEINFRASTRUCTURE

Although referenced elsewhere, it is im-portant to consider public employees them-selves as infrastructure assets. Under existingmanagement systems and accounting mecha-nisms, this asset is not being fully valued orused. One management system expert esti-mated that only 15 percent of the estimated$150 billion in state employee knowledge as-sets is being tapped: only about $22.5 billionof that total. The new management system willaddress that untapped potential.

Actions8 . 1

Coordinate planning forenergy-utility-transportation rights ofway.

8 . 2

Go-slow on statebuilding and rethinkinfrastructure needs.

8 . 3

Consider marketmechanisms and othernew tools to achieveinfrastructuredevelopment andoperation goals.

“Infrastructure reform needsserious attention. A plan is

needed and decisions made toimplement the plan.”

Anthony Earl, former governor

2 Focus on state employeeknowledge as a state asset thatmust be maintained andenhanced as much as thephysical assets of government.

3 Reduce the public impression ofgovernment as a place wherebureaucrats sit to a resourcethat can be tapped from thehome and community.

4 Require state employees toassess their participation in thecompetitive bid process as towho can most effectivelyoperate and own facilities thathave been traditionallygovernment only.

5 Ensure that long term debt isstrictly limited in terms ofcreating infrastructure throughbonding obligations that mustbe paid back by futuregenerations.

6 Make the private sector apartner in large scaleinfrastructure planning.

George KaiserCommission for theStudy of AdminitrativeValuend EfficiencyCommissioner


CHAPTERTWO

GOAL #9

TheKnowledgeEconomy

Sell what we know aswell as what we make

Under a knowledge economy initiative, theDepartment of Development will link the Uni-versity and others—including state agencies—together to sell what we know to get revenuewe all need.

When combined and made available tothe world, these knowledge assets will create aworld class product to be marketed by a con-sortium, perhaps known as Expert Wisconsin.Commission research suggests a public-private,higher education partnership that can sell ex-pert advice on topics such as manufacturing,service, health systems, agriculture and govern-ment. Here is how it could work:

Somewhere in the world, investors wantto develop an economy or business such aspaper making. Wisconsin is the nation’s paperleader and our universities and governmentknow a lot about the business, too, includinggrowing the trees paper mills need. We alsomake paper machines and are experts in print-ing.

In addition, our government knows howto work with business to protect the environ-ment while keeping paper making economicallyviable. If Wisconsin becomes a 21st Centurymerchant in knowledge markets, it would de-liver a range of expert advice, services and prod-ucts—even products not obvious, such as howto regulate the industry—to global customers.We would even get paid for it.

How would theknowledge be deliv-ered? In person, by sat-ellite, by CD-ROM, orInternet, made pos-sible through the Pub-lic Information Utility(see Goal #12).

Some of this ac-tivity is happening al-ready. The challenge isto identify our market

niches and develop a long term strategy.Who is the competition? In the case of

paper, it is the Scandinavians. But whatever thecompetition, Wisconsin would distinguish it-self by the level of customer service and throughother advantages, such as neighborliness (anasset for the Far East), cultural ties (with Eu-rope) or continuing educational opportunitiesthrough the University. It would take advan-

“The creation of knowledgestems from analysis and

action—the key is time. In thejust-in-time data era, time is

the global currency.”David Manshel, IQ Inc., Maynard, MA

isconsin’s 21st Century economywill emphasize selling what weknow in our heads, as well as wellas what we make with our hands.Wisconsin’s 21st Century govern-ment willvalue the

knowledge capital of itsworkers just as it valuesthe building assets itowns today.

We know Wiscon-sin works smarter andhas a better educatedwork force than otherstates. Why not take ad-vantage of our qualitiesas a national if not global player in the knowl-edge economy? We also have a world class uni-versity and state government that can be bettertapped by other countries inventing their owneconomies and governments to serve publichealth, and environmental, educational andother social needs.

As the University does a good job of sell-ing its knowledge, so should state government.

Andy Machuda,Teltech,Minneapolis“Knowledge is thestrategic resource of the1990s. The knowledgeworker is the worker ofthe future.”

Roxanne EmmerichCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner


tage of the worldwide University of Wisconsinalumni network to develop markets.

Even though it is unconventional, whydoes this approach make sense? It plays toWisconsin’s strengths: smart work force, qual-ity products, honest relationships, great Uni-versity and good gov-ernment. It accepts thefact that in a global mar-ketplace knowledge iseasily transportable,important for us in theMidwest.

There are barriers,not the least of which isthat this is a new wayto think about economic development. Thereare issues of proprietary information, statepolicy, logistics and accounting. The potentialis clear, however, because of the clear globalfocus on an image of the new knowledge-ageeconomy as envisioned by Peter Drucker andothers.

Also, there are spin-off opportunities.There could be a more organized partner cityprogram or special cooperative efforts withother world class universities. Some of the for-eign customers may want to come to Wiscon-sin for continuing education, tourism or jobtraining.

For the public employee, this strategymeans an increased emphasis on lifelong learn-

ing and the need to be connected to the infor-mation superhighway. The reward for advisingothers on how to clean the environment, pro-tect public health or teach children goes be-yond a paycheck. The work values the publicemployee for her or his knowledge capacity (see

Goal #20).For the University,

it means finding waysto integrate and rewardfaculty participation inthe process and beingon call to meet cus-tomer needs (see Goal#13).

For state govern-ment, it will require looking at the benefits andrisks of creating a privately managed bufferbetween the state employee and the private sec-tor. It will mean looking for ways to encourageknowledge sectors of the economy. It will meanbeing comfortable with a high-tech, customer-driven consortium which will organize and mar-ket Wisconsin knowledge.

The firm will use a variety of electronic,fiber optic, digitized and wireless channels togain access to the knowledge information itneeds and distribute it to customers (see Goal#12). In the end, Wisconsin can become a rec-ognized participant not only in the worldeconomy, but in the world community.

Actions9 . 1

Sell intellectual capitalin the knowledgeeconomy.

9 . 2

Aggressively tapWisconsin’s KnowledgeCapacity for state use.

Leona Fitzmaurice,Bioissues, Madison“To transfer theirresearch to themarketplace, universityresearchers mustbecome entrepreneurialor align with organiza-tions already engaged inentrepreneurial efforts.”

Ralph Stayer,Johnsonville Foods,Kohler“Government’s role is topromote the free tradeof knowledge.”

The knowledgeeconomy will:

1 Impact citizens by improving thenational and international market forWisconsin knowledge.

2 Change the contribution ofgovernment to economicdevelopment by focusing on therole of government as investor andpromoter of knowledge.

RE

SU

LT

S 3 Improve the equality of contribu-tions that all sectors of Wisconsincan make to the knowledgecapital of the state: not amonopoly, but a consortium.

4 Change the contribution of thestate university system as asource of knowledge to a sourceof human capital network for theprivate and public sector.

5 Change the view of state employeesfrom regulators of the economy tocontributors and participants, asgood government becomes amarketable commodity.

6 Remove government as a barrier tothe growth of new environmentallysafe products of Wisconsin industry.

“The Japanese use the libraryfunction and technology together

to accomplish business andorganizational goals.”

James Matarazzo, consultant, Boston, MA


CHAPTERTHREE

GOAL #10

LifelongLearning

A need for new statethinking, new local

responsibility

BUILDING A LIFELONG LEARNINGSYSTEM

Lifelong learning begins in the earliestyears and continues each day, in many loca-tions, from many teachers and through manymeans. The Commission sees the buildingblocks of lifelong learning as including:1 . Parents take responsibility. Parents

begin the teaching process at home byinfusing values, work ethic, a sense ofcuriosity and discipline needed to learn.The state, especially through evolvinginformation technology, can help in animportant way. But the parent is incharge!

2 . The community owns education. Thecommunity, with parents at the core, isin charge of the school, not distantbureaucrats. The principal, teachers,board, parents and community teachthe child using the philosophy that “thevillage” teaches the child, as in othercultures. The state provides help,networking opportunities and recogni-tion for accomplishments.

3 . The school is a community place.School buildings must meet highstandards, be technologically currentand be open to the community as a

special place whereeveryone can meet,learn, recreate, readand socialize through-out the day and night,if the communitychooses. The statehelps ensure schoolbuilding equity

through creative approaches (see Goal#11).

4 . Teachers teach. Although schoolbuildings should serve communityneeds, the teachers should be allowed tofocus on teaching and not be expectedto fill dozens of other roles. The sameapplies to the state education agency.The state should encourage reassigningsocial service, transportation, nutritionand like duties to specialists in those

“We have eight schooladministrators in a county of

16,000. That’s too many.”School Board Member

ifelong learning is the most important sur-vival course in the knowledge economy;the structure and system now in place can-not deliver it.

From class-room culture to in-terscholastic athlet-

ics, the system was de-signed to condition andconform workers for theIndustrial Age. TheCommission has foundthe people of Wisconsinworried about what and whether their childrenare learning.

The Commission’s bold recommendationsare the beginning of major changes Wisconsinmust make in the structure and process of edu-cation if we are to successfully compete in the21st Century (see Goal #9). We must continueto instill, nurture and satisfy a thirst for learn-ing that has been a hallmark of Wisconsin’scharacter but seems, according to our studies,to be eroding.

Lisa A. MauerCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner


areas, including vendors competing on alevel playing field with public employ-ees.

5 . Technology isaggressivelytapped. Technol-ogy is revolution-izing learning inform and format,and Wisconsinmust not take aback seat toanyone. Learning content can bedeveloped locally. The state mustprovide a convenient, cost effectivedistribution system, ensure training(especially of teachers) and promoteWisconsin-relevant content (see Goals#12 and #14).

6 . Learning happens any time, any place,in many ways. Learning, especiallyusing interactive technology, should bepermitted to take place anywhere,anytime. Employers, teachers, entrepre-neurs, private schools, home schools,cooperatives, charter schools and placesyet to be invented all will contribute tolearning. The state promotes thisdiversity and creativity as part of thenew Wisconsin Idea (see Goal #3).

7 . The state is a helping hand. The stateeducationalfunction shouldshift from con-trolling K-12formal educationto leading thepolicy crusade forlifelong learningas it can bedelivered bymany providers in many places throughnew, exciting technological means. Thestate will still need to assess and evalu-ate, but focus on results, not paperworkand not with a heavy fist, but a guidinghand.

8 . The state education governance systemis seamless. The state’s educationalstructure, from pre-school to higher

education, must evolve into a seamlesssystem. That concept may seem unob-tainable given the pride and protective-

ness of existinginstitutions, but itmust happen. Theremust be a newoversight system thatmeets the 21stCentury definition ofeducation and de-taches, once and for

all, from a model that traces its roots tothe days of King Arthur.

A SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION

The first step into educational leadershipfor the future will come with creation of a Sec-retary and Department for Education that havea vision beyond existing interests and institu-tions. The Governor will appoint the Secretary,in partnership with a citizen board, confirmedby the Senate.

The Secretary will lead an agency com-mitted to and held accountable for educationalexcellence. The position will have a role quitedifferent from the current Superintendent ofPublic Instruction. The current office focuseson control of formal K-12 education. The Sec-retary will see education as something every-one should be involved in, not just certified

public educators, ad-ministrators and teach-ers.

This new leaderfor education will seeeducation as beginningbefore the classroom,in the home and at daycare and preschool.The state will be ahelper and advocate for

early childhood education, using tools such asthe Public Information Utility (see Goal #12).The Secretary also will be a strong advocate forthe Village Partnership concept, the model fordecentralized and parental ownership in schoolsite education now being tested in the state.

Finally, the Secretary will championschool-to-work transition programs and be apartner with business, private teachers and

Actions1 0 . 1

Create a Departmentfor Education, headedby a cabinet secretary.

1 0 . 2

Prepare educationalboards for greatereffectiveness andaccountability.

1 0 . 3

Study administrativeefficiencies.

1 0 . 4

Consider county ormulti-county educa-tional administrationunits.

1 0 . 5

Direct the state CESAsystem to achievegreater localcooperation betweenK-12 districts andTechnical Colleges.

“I’d like to see the vocationalschool system develop more job

training for economicallydisadvantaged people.”

Anthony Vang, WausauLinda McMullin, LaCrosse“All school boardmembers should take atwo-day workshop ontheir role andresponsibilities.”

Jill Reiche, Wausau“We need to take a lookat the schools and makekids our priority.”

“There are too many local unitsof government, including

school districts.”Mark Rogacki, Wisconsin Counties Association


CHAPTERTHREE

technical colleges, as well as public educators,in promoting and providing lifelong learning.

As part of the transformation to a culturefocused on educational results, the Legislatureshould promptly review and eliminate low pri-ority, unnecessary mandates and reporting re-quirements that generate unnecessary work andpaperwork for the state educational agency andlocal schools.

The new Secretaryshould promptly reviewagency functions to deter-mine which ones directlyrelate to the educationalmission and what couldbe eliminated or reas-signed. A partial list ofwhat should be reviewedincludes: aid distribution;youth, nutrition and socialservices programs; tele-communications and li-brary services; teacher li-censing; tech-prep administration; and jobtraining.

THE BOARD FOR EDUCATION

Educational continuity has a strong tra-dition. Similar to other states, Wisconsin shouldhave a citizen board that is concerned aboutformal education of youth in the K-12 system,focusing on issues such as curriculum. Thegubernatorial appointed board will consist ofseven members who will be appointed to six-year staggered terms, subject to Senate confir-

mation. The staggered terms will promote con-tinuity, which will be important as the boardcoordinates among all educational institutions.

LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS ANDDISTRICTS

Serving on local school and technical col-lege boards is a challenging and, too often,

thankless task. Thereis a significant need toupgrade the capacityand capability of localboards through train-ing, technical assis-tance and leadershipsupport.

Local schoolboard membersshould be included aspart of the PublicLeadership Institute

and network (see Goal #2). Local boards mustbe held accountable for operating districts asbusinesses, using nationally evolving ap-proaches that measure cost versus educationalperformance. Over time, school districts andtaxpayers will have the data they need to bettermanage and judge managers usingbenchmarking and other information providedby the state (see Goals #16 and #18).

In paying for education, taxpayers alsofinance the overhead of 427 school districts.Many of the same administrative functions andservices performed by technical colleges, local

“Nearly 20 percent of the state’schildren are not educated inpublic schools. [We should]

focus on educating allchildren—not just those ingovernment run schools.”

Sharon L. Schmeling, Association of Non-Public Schools

RE

SU

LT

S Lifelong learning will:

1 Decrease the size of noneduca-tional bureaucracy and bureaucraticdecision making over stateeducation.

2 Help citizens feel that localeducational leadership has thetraining and expertise to deal withlocal decision making on educa-tional issues.

3 Reduce taxation withoutrepresentation by the election oflocal technical college boards.

4 Increase the efficient use of statefunds to consolidated administra-tive services.

5 Result in an educational leadershipthat is responsive to the demands ofall citizens and which can leveragethe power of the executive branch tobring about change.

6 Focus the product of government,not on educational regulations but onleadership for lifetime education andcoordination among educationalsystems.


government, county government and specialdistricts are performed by schools. This is inef-ficient and costly.

The state should provide incentives toencourage school district consolidation on acounty or even multi-county basis (see Goal#5). This consolidation of administrative func-tions fits with the recom-mendation that localschools will have greaterfreedom to manage theirsite, requiring less over-sight.

The CooperativeEducational ServiceAgency (CESA) systemcan help achieve greater cooperation betweenremaining districts, between K-12 districts andtechnical colleges, and between educationalgovernment and general purpose government.Guidance might be sought from the governmentefficiency brokering function (see Goal #5). TheLegislature should review the CESA’s results atan appropriate point to determine their effec-tiveness.

ELECT TECHNICAL COLLEGE BOARDS

The existing approach to appointing lo-cal technical college boards is complicated bya variety of difficulties. In addition, the techni-cal college districts, because they are taxingunits, should be accountable to taxpayers. Re-

gional technical col-lege boards should beelected, not ap-pointed, but careshould be taken to en-sure that various di-verse communitieshave representation.Therefore, not all of

the positions on the board should be at-large.In addition, technical college districts

should combine similar administrative func-tions with other districts or units of govern-ment. Functions to consolidate include, but arenot limited to personnel, legal, procurementand data processing. Several examples of com-bined services already exist.

“A major challenge is to create aseamless web of educationalopportunity for our citizens.”

Katharine Lyall, UW System president

Footnote: The Commission for the Study of Administrative Value and Efficiency acknowledges the manyfine ideas and excellent work of the Commission on Schools for the 21st Century, chaired by Ody J. Fish.


CHAPTERTHREE

GOAL #11

CommunityLearningCenters

A place for schooland community

will meet established building criteria, but bedesigned and operated to reflect local condi-tions and community needs, including K-12education. It will be neutral, safe and acces-sible from early morning until late at night, forthe activities the community wants.

The Centers will be places where a com-munity comes together, a joint effort acrosspublic, private and not-for-profit sectors. Ex-periments have taken place in Texas, New Yorkand Rhode Island in which community-basedmodels emphasize self-sufficiency, diversity,prevention and public accountability.

THE CENTER:£ Is not merely a school, although educa-

tion for children and adults can takeplace, allowing foster grandparent andvolunteer programs to help teachers andchildren in traditional K-12 programs,early childhood, parent education,literacy classes, personal enrichmentand college-credit courses.

£ Is not a medical facility, althoughmedical, dental and social service clinicsmay be found there, convenient tostudents and parents, who won’t have toleave work for a child’s appointment.

£ Is not an office building, although smallbusinesses (as part of a school-to-worktransition, for example) and not-for-profits may have space there.

£ Is not a day care site, although it mayinclude a place for child care and adultday care to keep seniors involved andout of nursing homes, also savingmoney.

£ Is not a recreational facility, althoughthere may be a gym, weight room andpool, available to all youth and adultsfor physical education and lifetimesports, as well as room for culturalexhibits, crafts, music, theater andmeetings.

£ Is not a library, although there may be alibrary branch on site, connected to theinformation superhighway, as are theclassrooms, which could be used byother instructors for night instruction.

isconsin’s approximately 2,250underused and, in some cases,undermaintained public schoolbuildings have great potential to befocal points of community for citi-zens of all ages. A number ofchanges in how Wisconsin uses and

manages school buildings can save money andnaturally build structures, service and commu-nities around school.

Wisconsin school buildings are an $11billion asset that, on average, are used 21 per-cent of the time. In addition, the future cost ofcompliance with building codes and safety lawswill greatly increase the cost of maintaining andservicing that asset.

BUILDING OPTIONS

As part of a long term strategy to buildcommunity around school, Wisconsin shouldtransform schools—now almost entirely dedi-cated to formal education—into CommunityLearning Centers. In Wisconsin, the Centers

Local governmentfinancial expert“Wisconsin schoolbuildings are at least tenyears behind otherstates in terms ofrepairs and moderniza-tion.”


Community learningcenters will:

1 Provide an opportunity toexplore more cost effectivemaintenance and operationssolutions to community schoolbuilding upkeep, renovation andconstruction.

RE

SU

LT

SFor parents in need, the schools can serve

as a place to go without the baggage associatedwith visiting social services, health care or le-gal offices.

SCHOOL BUILDINGS

The system for managing school build-ings in 427 districts falls short of meeting health,safety, regulatory, and teaching needs. As a steptoward standardizing operations in an equitableway, a strategy should be devised, involvingbusiness, government and educators to putschools into system-wide management.

The strategy also will address other non-educational matters, freeing local teachers, par-ents, principals and school board members toworry more about learning and less about leakyroofs. This will leave local control of curricu-lum and building use with local citizens.

This strategy will examine at least threeareas:£ A review of how

school facilities,referenda andother non-educationalmatters are beingaddressed.

£ A study of ways toshift infrastructure and facility manage-ment issues to building experts.

£ A means to incorporate best practices inschool facility management, operationand maintenance to meet health, safety,energy efficiency, space and other needs.

PUBLIC LIBRARIES’ FUTURE

Libraries around the state represent a con-tinuing expense for taxpayers, but more impor-tantly, an asset with significant potential in theknowledge society. In the long term, school li-braries might become the branch libraries con-nected to the information superhighway. Pub-lic library service from the school fits into thelong term needs of the state in several ways:£ The cost of technology is not duplicated

between the public library and schoollibrary.

£ The Public Information Utility will beattuned to serving school systems andcan serve merged libraries with littledifficulty.

£ Libraries will be more convenient to adultsutilizing community education, recre-

ation and servicefunctions in theCommunity LearningCenter.

Library serviceshave had difficultybreaking away fromtheir stereotypical im-age as a reading roomsurrounded by shelves

of books. As part of the Information Utility, pub-lic, academic, special and research system li-braries will have an advocate to better meet the21st Century needs of students, adults, educa-tors and businesses.

“How are we going to use[school] technology if we’re

strapped just to keep thephysical plant going?”

Bill Hogue, Eau Claire

Actions1 1 . 1

Transform schools intoCommunity LearningCenters.

1 1 . 2

Manage schoolbuildings as a systemwith local control.

George Kliminski,Madison“School buildings areused 21 percent ofclock time.”

Ed Huck, WisconsinAlliance of Cities“The school is a part ofcommunity. Take it awayand you lose commu-nity.”

2 Change the process ofcommunity school buildingdecision making to expandscope and purpose of facility tomeet community wide needs.

3 Save taxpayers money withmore consolidated manage-ment and multiple revenuesources beyond local tax levies.

4 Increase citizen participation incommunity activities andrefocus school as center ofcommunity.

5 Connect schools and librarieswith information highway ascenters of distance learning.

6 Provide greater citizen accessto community centered facilitiesand greater use of publicfacilities.


CHAPTERTHREE

GOAL #12

Information-Age Utility

All government unitscan electronicallyconnect with ease

Education will be incorporated into the Utilityand, presumably, expanded to meet the knowl-edge economy needs of the state (see Goal #9),according to the business plan of the Utility.

Also, consistent with a knowledge-economy strategy that formally links the Uni-versity with the Department of Development(see Goal #3), the library assets of the Univer-sity will be tapped, opening up the capacity ofthat system to the state, its businesses, privatecolleges and citizens.

The growing information needs of citi-zens, business and government, as well as theinflux of new telecommunications technology,set the stage for the new type of utility and thepartnership opportunities it presents. The ap-proach will meet the commercial, educationaland communication challenges of a state fo-cused on a new Wisconsin Idea that uses itsknowledge capacity to better live, learn, gov-ern and compete (see Goal #3).

Accordingly, the Utility will have the flex-ibility to help people connect with their Legis-lature and other levels of government. This toolwill be especially useful in helping Wisconsinschools and Community Learning Centers con-nect with their government in civics and gov-ernment learning (see Goals #6 and #11).

Interactive television and free network andother technology services also will help peopleconnect locally and with state government. At-tached to the Department of Administration,the Utility will draw its strength from the com-munities and interests it serves. A summary of

service categories in-cludes:1. Delivering distanceeducation to all publicand private educationalconcerns and connect-ing school to work-

place (see Goal #10).

2 . Connecting instructors and experts inbusinesses with educators, students,public agency personnel and othersdoing public business as part of astrategy to teach and learn smarter (seeGoal #10).

“We have to stop putting 1990sequipment on a 1950s system.”

Independent expert

he Wisconsin Public Information Utilitywill be a shared telecommunications op-eration that provides easy access to elec-tronically stored information, the informa-tion superhighway and the high-tech con-nections required for 21st Century learn-ing, governance and commerce.The Utility will consolidate technology

hardware decisionsnow diffused throughgovernment, reducingduplicative costs andcompetition amongagencies. The consoli-dation will come at aparticularly crucial stage in Wisconsin’s entryinto the electronic age and, therefore, the sav-ings opportunities it presents and the potentialfor service will be exceptional.

Hardware and related software purchaseswill shift from the Educational CommunicationsBoard, the University, the technical college sys-tem and the new Department for Education tothe Utility. The ECB will be phased out, its em-ployees given opportunities with the Utility. Thelibrary service function of the Department for

Anonymous“Create a legislativeversion of C-SPAN sointerested citizens canfind out what is goingon.”


Information ageutility will:

1 Provide cost effective standardsthat will make informationaccess uniform across regions,educational institutions,government agencies andindividual organizations.

RE

SU

LT

S3 . Delivering community programming

such as public affairs, lifelong learning,public involvement and cultural net-working (see Preamble).

4 . Providing local and state governmentcoverage and service, such as legislativecoverage andpublic hearings(see Preamble).

5 . Delivering train-ing and informa-tion to publicemployees (seeGoal #20).

6 . Allowing user-friendly transac-tions with govern-ment on functions such as licenses andpermits (see Goals #15 and #21).

7 . Creating partner-city relationshipslinking Wisconsin with cities and states(see Goal #9).

8 . Connecting Wisconsin knowledgeproviders with customers around theworld as part of an intellectual capitalstrategy (see Goal #9).

9 . Serving the court system in all dimen-sions, from taking depositions to costeffectively taking expert testimony fromdistant points (see Goal #22).

10. Putting government information on-linein a cost effective, revenue-neutralfashion (see Goal #16).Statewide service will be responsive to re-

gional interests, which will have communityownership and be responsible for content de-

velopment. The con-sortium might involvevocational schools, K-12 systems, not-for-profits and others.Programming and thelocal infrastructurewill be financed by avariety of means, in-cluding commercialpresentations, userfees, subscriptions and

government underwriting.An important part of the Utility will be

making library services, both electronic andtraditional, accessible to every citizen, whichwill be possible through on-line electronic com-munications to homes, schools and businesses.Computer visionary Bill Gates talks of the highschool student looking up a homework assign-ment on pre-Colombian art by surfing thestacks of libraries around the world—all thewhile sitting on his kitchen stool. The Infor-mation Utility will be there to help the studentsurf Wisconsin and the entire world ofknowledge.

Actions1 2 . 1

Create a PublicInformation Utility.

1 2 . 2

Transform libraries intodistance learningpartners.“Agency agendas, schedules,

reports and activities should beon computer to facilitatecommunication between

citizens and government.”Thomas Steele, La Crosse

2 Save taxpayer money byreducing the capital costs ofdistance learning throughavoidance of duplicative andincompatible technologyacquired by different levels ofgovernment and education.

3 Decrease the cost of access byconsolidating distance learningprograms and technologycurrently spread across manyagencies.

4 Increase citizen access to theknowledge and information ofthe next century independent ofthe barriers of distance oreducational institution affiliation.

5 Make the library resources ofthe University System availablefor all citizens of the state.

6 Reduce the time and cost ofcitizen access to governmentinformation at a level of detailunavailable currently to all butspecialists in Madison.

7 Change the role of stateemployees to both providers ofinformation to citizens andconsumers of information fromcitizens.


CHAPTERTHREE

MANAGEMENT FLEXIBILITY

In a series of discussions with System per-sonnel and the Department of Administration,the Commission found instances in which theSystem could be given greater decision flexibil-ity without the executive branch unduly relin-quishing its responsibility and authority tomanage government as a system.

In building construction, for example, theUW System will have authority to renovate,remodel and maintain buildings without enu-meration through the state building process.Projects that are funded 100 percent by gifts,grants and program revenue will have specialflexibility, but the Regents are advised to exer-cise caution because new projects contain longterm staffing and maintenance costs.

An important component with this flex-ibility, however, is the reality that System build-ings are part of Wisconsin’s government infra-structure which should be considered as one(see Goals #8 and #18). The UW System shouldbe required to cooperate with other governmentunits to share facilities, especially given that onestudy showed System buildings operate at 60percent capacity.

Greater decentralized flexibility in areassuch as procurement, personnel and budget-ing are recommended, as is decoupling of aca-demic and faculty staff from the rest of the statecivil service system, to allow the University tocompete better.

FACULTY PERFORMANCE

The Commission has reflected on thevalue of faculty tenure, especially as it relatesto academic freedom to teach and to research.It also heard the need expressed by citizens andlegislators to restore public confidence in fac-ulty through even more improved accountabil-ity and documented performance.

Regents should examine additional op-tions to enhance performance and the report-ing of performance using objective and testedmethods.

The Commission also was told of seriousproblems in keeping faculty current in theirfields. Meeting this need is important to theentire System’s proficiency and reputation, es-

GOAL #13

OurUniversity

More freedom withaccountability

he University of Wisconsin System shouldhave greater flexibility to manage its highereducation affairs, be held accountable forresults and be alerted to better serve Wis-consin in the 21st Century.

One of Wisconsin’s world-importantassets, the UW System, under pressure fromthe executive and legislative branches, hasworked to improve its image and customerresponsiveness. More work is needed, but in areport on how “everything has changed,” theUniversity documented its efforts to change andbe held accountable for results in specific indi-cator categories.

At the same time, the Commission foundthat to achieve even greater results, the Univer-sity needs added flexibility to manage its ownaffairs. In return, the System will be held ac-countable. Should it experience financial diffi-culty, the System will have to deal with the prob-lem without necessarily returning to the Gover-nor and Legislature.

Roger L. FitzsimondsCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner


pecially given the fact that the private sector,think tanks and knowledge entrepreneurs nowrepresent credible competition with faculty.

A LAND GRANT UNIVERSITY FORMILWAUKEE

The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee,and other Universityassets in the metropoli-tan region represent animportant componentof the urban commu-nity. The Commissionsupports designatingthe UW-Milwaukee as aland grant urban Uni-versity, driven by mis-sion and held accountable for results.

EFFICIENCY CHOICES AND 21STCENTURY RELEVANCE

In different ways, all other governmentsin Wisconsin are challenged with incentives anddisincentives to reinvent themselves for the 21stCentury. The University should not be exemptfrom this challenge and, given the historic sig-nificance of the Wisconsin Idea and its impor-

tance to the state, should hold itself to a higherstandard.

By 1997, the Regents should complete thefirst phase of management questions relatingto equity, efficiency and accountability through-out the System. Chancellors will have moreauthority to act and be accountable, and nu-merous programs, schools, functions and ad-

ministrative costs willhave been reviewed.

The real challenge,perhaps met by the ses-quicentennial in 1998,is for the Regents to cre-ate a vision for a 21stCentury university at-tuned to a knowledgeeconomy and cognizant

of the fact that, unlike 150 years ago, it is nowone of many actors producing research, teach-ing and outreach functions important to Wis-consin. Regents should be mindful that theUniversity mission may be delivered withoutcampuses or classrooms.

Administratively, the Regents also shouldbe mindful of a growing public opinion thatuniversities’ missions, governance and opera-tions are dangerously anchored in behaviormore relevant to the 19th and 20th centuriesthan the 21st.

Actions1 3 . 1

Increase systemmanagement flexibility.

1 3 . 2

Increase buildingconstruction flexibilitywhile meeting systemneeds.

1 3 . 3

Delegate and manageefficiently.

1 3 . 4

Establish UW-Milwaukee asWisconsin’s land grantmission-driven urbanuniversity.

1 3 . 5

Improve inter-campuscredit transfer.

1 3 . 6

Document facultyperformance.

“There needs to be a newphilosophy of public service in

Wisconsin and throughoutgovernment.”

Katharine Lyall, UW System president

Our university will:

1 Be responsible for its ownproducts and productivity withinbudget limits and accountable,not only to its students, but to allcitizens of the state.

RE

SU

LT

S

Kim Waldman,Wausau“A priority has to beeducation. If educationis improved, that willlead to improvements inmany other areas.”

2 Provide the most affordablequality education experience toWisconsin citizens as the UWSystem is allowed to manageits own resources.

3 Make citizens of the state feelthat university campuses arepart of their legacy to the nextgeneration, a statewideendowment that citizens caninvest in.

4 Decentralize the operationaldirection of campus resourcesto levels of decision that haveresponsibility for performance.

5 Make urban citizens ofWisconsin a part of the missionof the University, just as ruralWisconsinites have felt in thepast.

6 Require faculty, as citizensserving the state within thecontext of a public institution, toreexamine their performanceand productivity and be thedriving force in the University’sown efforts to reinvent itself forthe benefit of Wisconsin.


CHAPTERTHREE

GOAL #14

UsingTechnologyHelp employees use

technology’s fullpotential

State government generally is on the righttrack in coordinating information managementfunctions. Standards are being set while agen-cies do implementation. A caution: staffing lev-els need monitoring, especially given the op-portunity for better workload distribution andcompetition.

THE TECHNOLOGY FUND AND ITS USE

A revolving technology fund should helpagencies and local governments, including li-braries and Community Learning Centers (seeGoal #11), apply technology to “real life” situ-ations. The multi-million dollar revolving fundwill offer local governments access to front-endmoney needed to invest, in spite of limitedfunds.

The fund will help pay for hardware, soft-ware, training and experiments in the develop-ment and use of technology. A heavy emphasiswill be placed on investments that improve ef-ficiency, especially in the Legislature and itspublic input process, including rule making.Other priority uses: process re-engineering,enhanced effectiveness and better customerservice.

Also, there should be a significant effortto train public employees in using technology,infusing technology into leadership training.Employees will learn how to work smarter us-ing technology.

Much attention has focused on technol-ogy as a management or data processing tool.However, technology also has potential as acommunication, education, training and pre-sentation device. Employees need to use the fullpotential of the visual and interactive dimen-sions of technology, especially as young peopleraised on high-tech visuals come of age. Thiswill require not only training, but also relianceon skills of teachers, trainers, artists and au-dio-visual and computer graphics specialists.State government is poorly prepared at this timeand there are many bureaucratic barriers.

GET GOOD ADVICE FROM OUTSIDEGOVERNMENT

The state, through the Department ofAdministration, has created an InformationTechnology Board for outside advice on using

Dan Burrus, futurist,Waukesha“If you are going to usetechnology, you have tochange the culture ofgovernment.”

Steve Nelson, CrayComputers, ChippewaFalls“The informationsuperhighway is apipeline, and you reallydon’t know what[material] you’re going toput into it for theschools.”

Bill Binn, Madison“The bureaucracyshould resist thetemptation to discouragetechnological innova-tions because theyrepresent risk.”

ardened bureaucratic arteries have in-hibited developing the potential of tech-nology to bring better service to citizens,more value to taxpayers and greaterpotential to public employees. Takentogether, these recommendations beginto address the challenge for state, local

and educational government to use technologymore effectively and creatively while avoidingcostly mistakes.

Effectively using technology is more thanhaving a computer at a desk or in a classroom.Technology is more than computers, as tech-nologist and futurist Dan Burrus told the Com-mission. Using technology to its fullest extentwill also involve a range of tools, from micro-waves to micro mechanics, from satellites tolasers. Technology is more than wires andscreens that allow us to be overwhelmed withdata and information. It is a tool to increaseknowledge, even wisdom. The challenge togovernment is to have elected officials, manag-ers and employees who understand that.

Officials of information-age governmentmust appreciate the impact of technology on theirpower and potential. Information technology isnot only transforming how managers manage, buthow they govern. So officials, from the Governoron down, must be able to ask the right questionsand get answers from a wide range of advisors,not only hardware advocates and vendors.


Using technology will:

1 Enable citizens to interact withgovernment faster and cheaper.

2 Enable government to be moreresponsive to citizens and toimprove the quality as well astimeliness of their response bygiving citizens remote access toboth government andeducation.

RE

SU

LT

SActions1 4 . 1

Create a statetechnology fund.

1 4 . 2

Train and recultureemployees for thetechnological age.

1 4 . 3

Affirm informationtechnology as the majorpresentation device.

1 4 . 4

Create a high leveltechnology advisoryfunction.

1 4 . 5

Coordinate distancelearning.

1 4 . 6

Revamp purchasinglaws covering high-tech.

technology. More input should be sought, how-ever, by creating a high level advisory functionthat goes beyond just planning.

Advice should cover the full range of con-verging technologies, heeding the advice of DanBurrus and the recent Carnegie Commissionthat advised state government on technology’suse. The input should go beyond the businessplanning process, toward helping state govern-ment look at its technology system from theoutside in. The advice also should help stateand local government work as one system, notas a collection of independent agencies. Thiswill focus coordination on program results andnot just hardware and systems.

Compared to youth, many adults are in-adequate in thinking creatively about technol-ogy. Therefore, youth might advise the state inusing technology. Young people have beenraised on multi-media games such as SimCityand Carmen Sandiego. They can guide adults,especially educators, on how to use technol-ogy for effectiveness, not efficiency. Youth alsocan help adults break out of their industrial-age thinking and can guide the them on choicesfor educational software to benefit Wisconsin.

COORDINATE DISTANCE LEARNING

Educational agencies are using distancelearning as a part of cost effective teaching.However, the potential generators of distancelearning content, inside and outside Wiscon-sin, present a coordination problem. Inside thestate, the University of Wisconsin should bedesignated a distance learning content coordi-nator for state agencies, including the technical

colleges and new Department for Education.The coordination should not involve con-

trol of content, but focus on best use of systemcapacity and avoiding duplication whereverpossible. Simply put, there should not be twohalf-filled distance learning classes at the sametime.

REVISE TECHNOLOGY PROCUREMENT

Costly procurement mistakes have beenmade in the public and private sector becausepurchasing policies use an industrial age modelof product uniformity, mass production anddistrust. The result of this lack of sophistica-tion, especially in a large state bureaucracy, canbe substantial.

Wisconsin’s rigid procurement policiesneed overhauling to meet high-tech realities.Procurement specialists, essentially hired andrewarded for processing paper in a system thatsometimes inhibits those who want to use tech-nology, need to be transformed and retrained,along with the process.

The result of this transfer: technologypurchases made for value and total cost, notjust unit price. As one employee said, thatmeans changing the practice that prohibits asmall office from buying a locally sold computerwith a good service agreement and forces it tobuy a computer off a list with a poor serviceagreement.

In a larger sense, management must askbetter technology-related questions and gettraining on how to make information technol-ogy policy and procurement decisions to avoidrepeating past mistakes.

State Employee“Educate uppermanagement in theproper application oftechnology. All theyknow are buzzwords.”

3 Encourage state government toinvest in the technologicaltraining and equipping of itsmanagers and employees sothey are able to take advantageof information technology to dotheir jobs better.

4 Even out the technologicalsophistication of servicesacross state government, whichcurrently varies from very hightechnology to primitive.

5 Require significant initialinvestment which will be paidback in long term productivitygains and reduced operatingcosts compared to laborintensive, non-technologicaldelivery of services.

6 Continue to move Wisconsingovernment products out of thepaper and printed form age andinto the electronic informationage.


CHAPTERTHREE

GOAL #15

QualityService

One stop shopping;customer driven

on his rights. Public policy may be served inthis instance, though, if the regulation appro-priately protects a public good. In this case, the“customer” is a citizen first and as such has aduty to obey the law, like it or not.

ONE STOP SHOPPING

State government can do better. For ex-ample, public convenience regarding simpletransactions and information requests can beimproved. A centralized customer service func-tion serving all agencies is warranted, much likesome of the mail order, airline and insuranceservices the Commission reviewed. Citizensshould have access to a “one stop shopping”,toll free, 24-hour service that should provide:1 . Information on a range of general topics

most frequently raised by in-state andout-of-state callers (other states havedata to set up such a system);

2 . Convenient and efficient filling ofrequests for materials (brochures,booklets, tapes) from all agencies,including the university; and

3. Multi-agency license and small businesstransaction services for simple thingssuch as recreation, motor vehicle,simple permits.The same services should be available on-

line and by fax. The high-tech customer ser-vice function also will manage and staff the in-teractive, multi-media computers and kiosks inpublic areas such as shopping malls, librariesand community centers.

Because of unique missions, state agen-cies suggest difficulty in coordinating customerservice efforts. However, the citizen sees theprivate sector coordinating much more com-plexity and wonders about the competency ofgovernment. Reluctance of agencies to cooper-ate on activities such as toll free lines, efficientmaterials distribution and one stop licensingdoes not build confidence in government.

CUSTOMER-FRIENDLY MANAGEMENT

In addition to the one stop shopping con-cept, other recommendations speak to manage-ment system recommendations. Using inputfrom La Follette Institute students enrolled in

ost reinventing government initiativespay much attention to the concept ofthe citizen as a customer and recom-mend creating customer driven cul-tures and systems within government.As Wisconsin’s “reinventing govern-ment” effort, the Commission accepts

some of the citizen-as-customer rhetoric, butnot all.

In some respects, government can act likea business. Government performs transactions,such as selling fishing licenses. If an anglercatches a fish, there is probably a satisfied cus-tomer, but not always—especially if a wardenissues a ticket for fishing out of season. Like abusiness owner, the warden who hands out theticket must honor basic service principles, suchas courtesy.

However, government also is unlike busi-ness. Consider the citizen/customer who learnsthe state requires a permit for a certain activity.It may not matter that the permit is issued by afriendly, efficient government worker if the citi-zen/customer thinks the permit is an intrusion

State employee“Hire employeeswho are sensitive to theclients we actuallyserve.”

Representative DorisJ. HansonCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner


Public Affairs 878 at the UW-Madison, thesethree key actions are offered:

1 . Incorporate customer service into themanagement system. By July 1, 1997,the state should be on a new manage-ment system that focuses on outcome-based work planning and results-oriented budget-ing. A revisedhuman resourcessystem is plannedfor that time,building on pilotprograms. Thepilot effortsshould helpestablish cus-tomer service benchmarks from whichagencies can work.

2 . Measure customer feedback. Agen-cies generally do little in the way ofmeasuring customer satisfaction andeven less in designing products orservices with scientific customerinput. By July 1, 1997, the customerfeedback dimensions of the systemshould be in place to serve all agen-cies on a continuing basis.

3 . The Legislature should focus onpolicy, not customer service. As hashappened in the U.S. Congress, electedstate representatives have become thecustomer complaint desks of government.That has taken valuable time and energyfrom more important planning, policy and

fiscal responsibilities.Unfortunately, stateagency performanceoften is such that thecitizen has littlerecourse but to call thelegislator who getsresults.

The system, whenin place, should have the

integrity to ensure that agencies are held ac-countable for meeting the service criteria es-tablished by standards, including the one stopshopping function. Conversely, legislatorsshould not promote themselves as customerservice representatives (which may be attrac-tive to voters), but as statespersons.

The executive branch should establish ameans to report customer service performance tothe general public in the state’s new annual reportcard as a part of the management system, and in aspecial way to the Legislature and its committees.

Actions1 5 . 1

Establish a “one stopshopping” servicefunction.

1 5 . 2

Integrate customerservice in themanagement system.

1 5 . 3

Measure customerfeedback.

1 5 . 4

Let executive branchserve customers;legislators make policy.

“Quality service is possible ifinternal and external customer

groups perceive thatinput is valued.”

Jay Sorensen, Midwest Express, Milwaukee

Quality service will:

1 Bring government service andinformation directly to citizens intheir communities.

2 Change the process ofgovernment to focus onmeasuring impact and outcomeand redefining service to thecustomer as the measure ofsuccess.

RE

SU

LT

S

David S. Baum, SSITechnologies,Janesville“To empower people toperform, without fear, isthe ultimate challenge.The benefits to eachdepartment can beenormous.”

3 Allow state employees to feelthat they are providing aneeded and wanted publicservice and allow them to knowhow good a job they are doingwith immediate customerfeedback.

4 Provide citizens with a meansfor letting the administrativeagencies know what they want,like and need without having toseek legislative intercessions.

5 Make the product of govern-ment accessible to citizensindependent of where they arein the state.

6 Reduce the distance citizensfeel is between them and theirgovernment by bringinggovernment to them in a costeffective fashion.


CHAPTERFOUR

GOAL #16

ContinuousRenewal

Know the cost beforeyou start and be able

to stop

SWEEPING SUNSETS ANDBASE CLOSING MODEL

Elected officials have a difficult time get-ting accurate and complete information onwhen programs have outlived their usefulnessor should end. Agencies, beneficiaries and otherstockholders who benefit from spending arereluctant to hurt themselves. Even with goodinformation, the vote to replace an agency,eliminate a rule, sell a building or end a taxbreak seldom comes. Lobbying to block changecan come from anywhere and everywhere.

The Commission recommends a perma-nent, independent, highly visible process ofSweeping Sunsets that periodically question thevalue of a wide range of decisions. The deci-sions include, but are not limited to: adminis-trative rules, laws, offices and buildings, fees,entitlements, tax breaks, numbers of local gov-ernments, numbers of local boards, and advi-sory bodies to agencies.

First consideration for Sweeping Sunsetsare agency advisory groups, each of whichshould sunset by July 1, 1997, unless it justi-fies its existence to the Legislature.

Second, with a 1998 sunset date, shouldbe unfunded state mandates imposed on localgovernment. Mandates are defined by the Leg-islative Fiscal Bureau as any state action thatwould require local government to take someaction or provide some service not required un-

der current law. By theWisconsin sesquicenten-nial, they should beeliminated or funded.

Sunsetting mayneed to include shuttingoff the lights on somestate facilities, includingsome university facilities,although that should beleft to Regents to begin.Technology, transporta-

tion and organization management trends sug-gest less need for large, centralized buildings,especially those occupied by one unit. The stateshould go slow on new buildings, includinguniversity facilities (distance learning affectshigher education). It should support consoli-dation of functions among agencies and local

“Stop making all these new lawsand regulations. Get rid of about

100,000 old ones and let usget back to living our

own free lives.”Louis Graf, Burlington

overnment needs to shut off the lightson some programs as well as launchnew initiatives, build buildings andpass laws. It also must evaluate closelybefore it leaps into new spending andlearn to value the things that are im-portant.

From the beginning, the Commis-sion asked: “Whatshould governmentdo? What should gov-ernment not do?” If itneeded doing, look tothe citizen, not-for-profit, business and,finally, government.But what if “it” was al-ready being done andneeded stopping?

G o v e r n m e n tdoes a poor job at continuous renewal, stop-ping programs once they have begun or “clean-ing the closet.” That is why reorganization com-missions come and go. This Commission rec-ommends a continuous renewal process thatgovernment can use so the state will never againneed another reinvention commission.

Legislator“The ultimate costcontrol is you don’t do itin the first place.”

Representative MarkGreenCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner


RE

SU

LT

SActions1 6 . 1

Establish a SweepingSunsets process.

1 6 . 2

Apply the SweepingSunsets test to advisorybodies.

1 6 . 3

Adopt full accrualaccounting.

1 6 . 4

Adopt “Truth inSpending” evaluationprinciples everywhere.

1 6 . 5

Adopt an ongoingprocess to sellunnecessary buildingsand other infrastructure.

governments and have a strategy for downsizingthe $15 billion state building asset, which couldbe a liability in a high-tech age. It should startgetting more out of its $150 billion employeeknowledge asset, now tapped at a fraction ofits potential.

CALCULATE TRUE COSTS ANDREAL ASSETS

Government gets into fiscal trouble be-cause it has trouble counting. Unlike business,it manages by a method called cash account-ing, which essentially is paying today’s bills to-day. It is less aware of the cost of today’s spend-ing decisions on futuretaxpayers.

State and localgovernment shouldadopt full accrual ac-counting that gives amore accurate pictureof the cost of decisionsagainst present and fu-ture taxpayers. An ex-ample would be calcu-lating the cost of healthbenefit or pension decisions. That bill has tobe paid in the future and decision makersshould know the cost before they vote.

Wisconsin is not in as bad shape as Wash-ington, which has difficulty calculating its totaldebt. But there is a need for better informationhere as well; the state should have a reportingsystem simple enough for the non-accountantto understand. Debt, for example, could be

periodically compared to an index, such as eco-nomic growth. The new media, taxpayer groupsand average citizens should have the informa-tion they need, in the form they need it, beforespecific spending decisions are made that willburden their children.

Linked to full accrual accounting will bea “truth in spending” function that serves leg-islative and executive branches. The functionwill be charged with keeping a running tally ofpresent and future costs, not only in genericterms, such as to all taxpayers, but to specifictaxpayer groups.

For example, the truth-in-spending func-tion would know and communicate the con-tinuing tax, fee and liability burden on differ-

ent kinds of house-holds, business groupsor property owners. Itwould cost out deci-sions on the basis ofgeneration groups—so-called generational ac-counting. Conversely, italso would add lifetimecosts of entitlement, in-frastructure, pension

and tax break decisions, potentially controver-sial, but necessary for better decision making.

Essentially, government accounting mustrethink its work, much of it now focused onimplementing the system of checks and re-checks. In the long term, it will be able to cal-culate the value of employees’ knowledge capi-tal (a current research project). It will be a trans-formation for a method of calculation that nowfocuses on price, not cost, and seldom on value.

“Programs that have outlivedtheir usefulness continue to driftalong. Force a periodic, carefulreview of every existing state

program.”Anonymous

Mark Rogacki,Wisconsin CountiesAssociation“Pensions are a longterm fiscal problem thatdemand state and localattention.”

Continuous renewal will:

1 Allow the state to shut off the lightson outdated programs that are nolonger useful.

2 Begin the process of continualsunsetting on agencies, taxexemptions, councils, programs andmore.

3 Review unfunded state mandatesimposed on local governments,eliminating or funding all by 1998.

4 Force the state to manage by fullaccrual, not cash, accounting.

5 Begin a truth in spending function tokeep a running tally of present andfuture costs for all taxpayers.


CHAPTERFOUR

GOAL #17

LegislativeBranch

Lawmakers’ decisionsimplement strategyand require results

century ago, legislative reformers trans-formed a “discredited and corrupt” Wis-consin Legislature into a globally re-spected and historically revered body. Acentury later, new reforms are needed togive honest and honorable lawmakersnew tools to produce the results voters

demand and to restore the respect elected offi-cials once had and still deserve.

Without major improvements in the leg-islative process and the state management andbudget process, taxpayers will remain skepti-cal of government performance. Lawmakers willcontinue to promise results from a system thathas difficulty defining the word “results” andthe once-sterling reputation of the WisconsinLegislature will diminish through no fault ofits own.

This century’s legislative reforms arrivedthrough the help of the University expertiseunder the Wisconsin Idea of service. Laws werepassed that we now take for granted as part ofWisconsin’s government, community, businessand agricultural landscape.

The 21st Century reforms will come fromthe Legislature itself, with help from businesses,

citizens and private colleges, as well as theUniversity. As one researcher reported, the oldWisconsin Idea is dead in many legislators’ eyes.

The reforms directly affecting the Legis-lature are described throughout this report. Thereinvention of citizenship, found in the pre-amble, is central to the Citizen Legislature, andany debate about citizen responsibilities, as wellas rights, must involve lawmakers. Also, thedevelopment of effective leaders, including leg-islative leaders, is central to the reinvention ofleadership in government and to the manage-ment reforms the Commission recommends.

Key sections of this report affecting theLegislature include those on citizenship, lead-ership, continuous renewal, and the new man-agement system. Each recommendation hereand in other sections will be debated on itsmerits, but there are several overriding prin-ciples integral to helping the Legislature thinkabout its 21st Century work:1 . Think long range. The Legislature

needs the freedom, incentive andcapacity (provided through a newculture and focused training) to thinkand act long range, debate strategy andinvest strategically. The emphasis ontwo-year cycles is as risky for govern-ment as it is for business. Citizens, themedia and lobbyists need to acknowl-edge this risk and give the Legislaturerecognition for thinking long rangerather than acting to please or appeasethe pressure of the moment.

2. Legislate for results. The process ofpassing laws and budgets must shiftfrom inputs (debating how muchmoney to spend) to outputs (whatresults do we want for our money). TheLegislature and state agencies mustreinvent the budget process to focus onresults with accountability. The budgetshould implement strategic investmentsthat respond to the real world, notagency needs. Two other tools are theLegislative Impact Statement and Truth-in-Spending information that shouldcome from technical staff with enhancedcapacity. Finally, the Legislature mustpreside over the adoption of a stategovernment management system that

Actions1 7 . 1

Encourage a focus onstrategy, not details.

1 7 . 2

Remove policies thatkeep lawmakers inMadison and inhibittheir contact with theirhome districts.

1 7 . 3

Improve training forlegislators and staff.

1 7 . 4

Study the impact of off-cycle elections.

Legislator“You are theKellett Commis-sion of the nextcentury. Thinkbig.”


has a common language, usesbenchmarking and, like business,provides for activity-based accounting.

3 . Institute Sweeping Sunsets. Govern-ment must continuously renew itself,stopping what does not work andclosing the door on work that is com-plete. The Legislature is challenged toestablish a Sweeping Sunset and baseclosing process that is credible andimplementable. The U.S. Congress andelected officials everywhere havedifficulty making tough decisions thataffect their districts or special interests.By adopting the Sweeping Sunsetsprocess, the Legislature can slow theprocess of throwing good money afterbad.

4 . Require excellence in deliberation. TheLegislature represents the grass rootswisdom of the people. The way itdefines its work, solicits input, hires anddirects its staff, schedules debate andevaluates its products will determinehow well it meets the needs of thisgeneration and future generations. The21st Century role of leaders is more topaint vision and frame issues thanprovide answers. The role that informeddeliberation plays in the Legislatureshould be improved and the level ofdebate enhanced.

5 . Reject the temptation to managedetails. Legislators want to provideconstituent service, but the existingsystem of government has almost forcedthem into the primary role of govern-ment service representative. The newmanagement system for state agenciesshould require agencies to deliversatisfactory service, freeing legislatorsfor policy discussion. Agencies andlegislators each should redefine theirroles and relationships.

6. Become better equipped to deal withscience. Major policy issues and budgetdecisions will be directly affected bynew scientific discovery and technology.Just as the reforms a century agorequired a major rethinking about what

kind of technical expertise the Legisla-ture needed to be effective, legislatorsfor the new century must have thecapacity to evaluate highly emotionaland sometimes scientifically subjectiveissues involving ethics, risk analysis,liability, personal rights and other issuesthat are redefined almost daily bychanging technology.

7 . It’s one government system; it shouldwork together. As part of the recom-mended reforms, the budget, manage-ment and personnel process ideasassume the taxpayer expects govern-ment to act as one system, not steppingon one another but working togetherwhen it makes sense. Today’s practicesand relationships between and amongunits and levels of governments arebuilt more on distrust and turf protec-tion than collaboration. The Legislaturehas the singular responsibility on astatewide basis to address that problem,as well as to see that the state’s publicand underutilized infrastructure are partof one system, without regard to whoowns the title.The news media also are a factor in effec-

tive lawmaking. The media, sometimes temptedby politicians, can have an even shorter atten-tion span than elected officials. Moreover, themedia is driven by a desire to report the quickhits of conflict and corruption rather than themore difficult in-depth, solution-focused, civicjournalism.

As with the other parts of society, themedia’s Constitutionally protected rights maycome with implicit responsibilities. In a statelike Wisconsin, where government is good andpeople are capable of taking government seri-ously, the media may have a special obligationto give citizens steak along with the hot sauce.That might mean, for example, asking not justwhat a program costs, but also asking what isits value.

To address the need for better public un-derstanding of the legislative process, the Com-mission endorses current efforts underway inthe Legislature to use technology, public edu-cation and other tools to help restore under-standing about and respect for that institution.

1 7 . 5

Delay appointments tostate positions.

1 7 . 6

Develop a modern viewof public input.

1 7 . 7

Place the Legislature ona sum certain budget.

1 7 . 8

Require non-legislatorsto pay for bill drafting.

1 7 . 9

Participate in sharedexperiences to gainunderstanding.

1 7 . 1 0

Achieve “higher level”campaign as conditionof public financing.

1 7 . 1 1

Require legislativeimpact statements.

1 7 . 1 2

Reduce number ofcommittees and requireterm limits oncommittee chairs.

1 7 . 1 3

Require 24-hour coolingoff period between billintroduction and vote.

1 7 . 1 4

Prohibit proxy voting.

1 7 . 1 5

Limit the number of billsa legislator mayintroduce.

1 7 . 1 6

Require public hearingson all bills before floorvote.


CHAPTERFOUR

GOAL #18

ExecutiveBranchStreamline,eliminating

anachronisms andlook to the future

As recommended for other branches ofgovernment, the Governor’s office should beplaced on a sum certain budget basis.

Under Wisconsin’s administrative system,both the state treasurer and secretary of statehave little to do with policy making. Therefore,the constitutional offices of secretary of stateand state treasurer should be eliminated andtheir administrative functions transferred toexisting agencies.

Throughout the country, the trend towardgiving chief elected officials the authority to dothe job—and then holding them accountable—is gaining ground. The latest major report onimproving state and local government—theWinter Commission—strongly urges that gov-ernors have the ability to set state policy agen-das and have the team in place to carry out thoseagendas.

Three state agencies now governed by citi-zen boards that appoint the secretaries of thoseagencies and set their policies should becomepart of the cabinet system. The agencies are:Department of Veterans Affairs; Department ofNatural Resources; Department of Agriculture,Trade and Consumer Protection. Each one ofthe agencies, because of public interest in theiractivities, should continue to have citizen ad-visory boards to provide guidance.

As part of its review of regulatory andconsumer protection functions, the Commis-sion found a concern about uneven adminis-tration of programs, duplication, competitionand varied quality in such areas as administra-tive rules (see Goal #21) and consumer protec-

tion. Specifically men-tioned was the confu-sion that exists in theconsumer protectionarea.

The Commissionis not prepared to gofurther than to say thatconsolidation of likefunctions, includingbusiness regulation

and consumer protection, should be on theagenda. However, formal prosecution relatingto both those functions should remain in theDepartment of Justice.

At the present time, six state agencies haveas many as 19 job training programs. The func-

Actions1 8 . 1

Eliminate the offices ofsecretary of state andstate treasurer.

1 8 . 2

Allow a gubernatorialcandidate to choose arunning mate.

1 8 . 3

Place the Governor’sOffice on a sum certainbudget.

1 8 . 4

Consolidate functionswhere possible.

“Create a structure thatencourages and assists strong

executive leadership…to createa clear policy agenda andestablish accountability.”

William Winter, chairman, Winter Commission

overnment reorganizations and reinven-tions center around themes and visions.The theme of the Commission’s effort isefficiency and the vision is governmentthat is logically structured and userfriendly in terms of where the state isheaded in the next century.

The executive branch involves both Con-stitutional and executive agencies.

As the chief executive of the state, the Gov-ernor should have theright to choose the in-dividual who is secondin command. While thathas been long acceptedon the national levelwith the President andVice President, Wiscon-sin’s Governor does nothave the ability to selecther or his running mate.That is done by the voters through the primaryprocess. The Constitution should be amendedto allow the Governor to select a running mateof her or his choosing to ensure that, shouldthe need for succession arise, the policies ofthe administration will be fully carried out.


Changing the executivebranch will:

1 Give the Governor power to appointcabinet level secretaries so statepolicy agendas can be advanced—and a governor can be held totallyaccountable for the success andfailure of the decisions.

2 Put the executive branch on a sumcertain budget, as are otherbranches.R

ES

UL

TS

tional consolidation of job training programs—as a part of a welfare-to-work strategy and alarger employment strategy—will take place inthe Department of Industry, Labor and HumanRelations.

To reflect on the serious nature of somejuvenile crimes, transfer management respon-sibility for the institu-tions serving theyouths adjudicateddelinquent by thecourts from the De-partment of Healthand Social Services to the Department of Cor-rections. The Commission takes care in advis-ing that other standing committees on juvenilecrime are developing recommendations thatwill address this issue.

The relationship between the parks andtourism functions in Wisconsin has been long-standing. The tourist promotion function wasmoved to the Department of Development inthe 1970s. However, the tourism function mightbetter grow outside of that organization. Study-ing the value of consolidating the parks andtourism functions also should include evalua-tion of how to best leverage the tourism valueof arts and historic site activities.

Collection of resources is scatteredthroughout state government and occur withvarying degrees of efficiency. If government isto run efficiently in a high-tech age, consolida-tion of the function is necessary in an agencythat could best be described as the state’s “elec-tronic banker.”

The Department of Revenue will becomethe state’s electronic banker, working with agen-cies, local governments, the private sector, ven-

dors and others to eventually establish an elec-tronic financial transfer system that reducescosts, improves accuracy and provides bettercustomer service to all involved.

Numerous state agencies will reassign re-sponsibility and appropriate resources to the De-partment of Revenue under this recommendation.

In addition, the De-partment of Revenue willbe authorized, beyond itspresent authority, to workwith the private sectorand others, to accelerate

revenue collection for tax delinquency and de-linquency in payments in other areas. At thesame time, all tax collecting units of govern-ment in Wisconsin should have the authorityto sell unpaid taxes to the private sector forcollection.

Consolidation of state lending in the Wis-consin Housing and Economic DevelopmentAuthority will be studied as part of the strategyto consolidate similar functions. Numerousagencies are currently involved in lending ac-tivity for a variety of business development, en-vironmental protection and other purposes.

To generate general fund revenue, the stateshould evaluate the sale of General ExecutiveFacility One, the Hill Farms State Office Build-ing and the Thornton Avenue warehouse of theDepartment of Administration

To streamline government, the PublicLands Commission should be eliminated andresponsibilities transferred to the Departmentof Justice, which is the officer of the Commis-sion after the offices of the Secretary of Stateand State Treasurer have been eliminated.

1 8 . 5

Consolidate employ-ment and trainingprograms.

1 8 . 6

Rename a Departmentof Licensing.

1 8 . 7

Transfer responsibilityfor serious juvenileoffenders to theDepartment ofCorrections.

1 8 . 8

Study consolidation ofparks and tourismfunctions.

1 8 . 9

Consolidate collectionsin Department ofRevenue.

1 8 . 1 0

Eliminate the PublicLands Commission.

1 8 . 1 1

Accelerate and privatizesome delinquentpayment collection.

1 8 . 1 2

Study consolidation ofall state lending inWHEDA.

1 8 . 1 3

Consolidate alcohol anddrug abuse programs.

1 8 . 1 4

Consolidate youthservices activity.

1 8 . 1 5

Consolidate agingfunctions.

1 8 . 1 6

Develop 21st Centurypublic health system.

1 8 . 1 7

Sell state facilities.

1 8 . 1 8

Establish cabinetagencies.

“Break down agency fiefdoms.”Joe Martin, Arthur Andersen and Co.

3 Eliminate constitutional offices ofSecretary of State and StateTreasurer.

4 Help consolidate employment andtraining programs; allow transfer ofjuvenile corrections responsibility;and further study tourism and parkfunctions.

5 Consolidate revenue collection inthe Department of Revenue as thestate’s electronic banker.

6 Eliminate the Public LandsCommission.

7 Help consolidate state lending intoone authority.


CHAPTERFOUR

GOAL #19

FederalRelations

Focus efforts to getmore funds and use

new authority

ENHANCE THE STATE’S FEDERAL WATCH

State government’s contacts with Congressand federal agencies are generally decentralizedand low key. Laudable efforts have been madeby governors and congressional representativesto “look out for the state” but, generally speak-ing, voters have said lobbying for federal moneyis not a top priority.

For the immediate future, state and localgovernments should accelerate their federalwatch as Congress and the administration de-centralize. Wisconsin needs to help Washing-ton ask the right questions about the directionit is taking (as Professor William Cronon ad-vised the Commission). Why? Because how thefederal bureaucracy is dismantled will havegreat consequence, especially for Wisconsin,which has high quality services.

Wisconsin could benefit significantly fromfederal delegation that begins giving away au-thority through pilot projects. States like Wis-consin that take human services, education,environmental protection and transportationseriously could be in a better position to be reallaboratories of democracy. On the other hand,Wisconsin and other high service states couldbe hurt if decisions on the future of the blockgrant and other programs don’t recognize stateefforts.

The state also should be watchful becausethe dismantling of federal programs may comewithout the relief necessary in the law, federalcode or bureaucratic reporting procedures. Thatwould be like opening a present that has noth-ing inside. Unless the state is alert, delegationcould open a fiscal and legal mess.

Wisconsin also has to be careful not tomimic Washington’s narrowness. State and lo-cal governments (including schools) are capableof protecting their own turf and not seeing thebig picture. Delegation presents an opportunityto look at what results the states want to achievewith money and authority, but there is a realrisk that state agencies will adopt the narrowthinking of their federal cousins.

Finally, the state’s federal relations func-tion must be tied into the state managementsystem and its relation to local government.That will ensure that Washington’s narrow viewsare not sustained here at home.

isconsin must act with speed and de-termination to get more federalfunds in the categories we think areimportant, while noting the possibledownsides and unwanted strings at-tached to the funds. The state alsomust avoid being too narrow-

minded and tied up by red tape as we plan toact on the new autonomy that may be unleashedby the federal government. Finally, we must say“stop” to unfunded mandates at federal andstate levels and stop the flow of regulations thatprefer paperwork over results.

Like other states, Wisconsin’s relationshipwith the federal government is changing dailyas our national government tries to downsizeand begins plans to return to the states powersassumed since the 1930s. While this delega-tion of authority and responsibility is not com-pleted, it is welcome; state and local govern-ments should thoughtfully consider what theyare going to do with it.

The Commission suggests three actions:1) give more time and attention to federal is-sues; 2) get more federal money for the thingswe think are important; and 3) seek mandaterelief at federal and state levels.

Stateemployee“We mustconform tofederal regulations andmandates, sopaperwork reductionstarts at the top.”

Thomas R. HeftyCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner


FOCUS FEDERAL FUNDING

The Commission was struck by the factthat Wisconsin ranks 22nd in per capita incomebut 49th in per capita federal aids returninghere. There are many reasons for that disparity,including the fact that we are not a big defensestate.

However, a review of how the state setsfederal funding prioritiesrevealed the need for anoverall strategy. Currentagency practices allowstate employees to makea major decision to rejectmillions of “no stringsattached” dollars simplybecause of the paper-work. At the same time,progress has been madein keeping tabs on federal money and granttracking through the Department of Adminis-tration.

The state should look at some obviousareas to increase federal dollars, especially incategories where the federal agencies give statescredit for effort—which is considerable in Wis-consin. One example would be if Wisconsinsimply instituted a provider tax on hospitals.That will result in an increase of tens of mil-lions of dollars in Medicaid money.

From a strategy standpoint, the state shouldfocus on targeted areas where federal money couldbe used to meet the state’s strategic economic,environmental, human resources and other ob-jectives. Such an approach is compatible with thestrong recommendations made in Goal #22 onchanging the state’s budget process to a more logi-cal, results-oriented approach.

SEEK MANDATE RELIEF

Unfunded mandates need immediate at-tention, especially those for local government.

Wisconsin’s Congressional delegationshould join with government back home inseeking relief by either eliminating the require-ments or providing full payment for the cost ofthe programs and their administration. The

Legislature shouldmeet annually with theCongressional delega-tion to coordinatestrategy.

In addition, thestate should increasethe attention it gives tomandates from thecourts, such as the de-cision requiring over-

time pay for paramedics. As the cost of localgovernment increases due to mandates andcourt decisions, greater pressure will be placedon elected officials, employees and unions tocome up with new solutions to providing ser-vice.

Like the federal government, state gov-ernment should provide mandate relief to lo-cal government. Mandates should be subjectto Sweeping Sunsets, with a target date of 1998,the sesquicentennial. Any new mandate shouldbe funded.

Other ideas offered include allowing lo-cal governments to opt out of state mandatesby unanimous vote of the governing body, es-tablishing a mandate appeals board for localgovernment to turn for relief and creation of ajoint survey committee on local mandates.

Actions1 9 . 1

Enhance stategovernment’s federalwatch.

1 9 . 2

Secure federal revenuewith coordination anddetermination.

1 9 . 3

Seek federal mandaterelief.

“State and federal mandates forone jurisdiction may not applyto another or at least not to the

degree.”Gary H. Mayer, Winnebago County

Changing our federalrelations will:

1 Focus more effort on getting federalfunds in those categories deemedimportant.

2 Reduce the impact of unfundedfederal mandates.

RE

SU

LT

S 3 Allow the state to change itsrelationship with lower levels ofgovernment.

4 Give more time and attention tofederal issues.

5 Expand state authority in new areasof influence and control.


CHAPTERFOUR

GOAL #20

The NewSystem

Deliver value andvalue employees

A Commission advisor who is experiencedin developing efficient and effective organiza-tions estimated the annual cost of Wisconsin’sexisting civil service and management systemat $2.37 billion. That is all waste, he said, be-cause the system involves checkers checkingthe checkers. Wisconsin has approximately a30 percent penalty on every dollar it spendsdue to this oversight. The 30 cents pays for thepaperwork that taxpayers don’t need and gov-ernment workers don’t want.

The paperwork and regulations are an at-tempt to keep state employees honest, the sys-tem fair and quality high throughout—a goodobjective. The irony, according to theCommission’s advisor, is that Wisconsin is, byculture and tradition, a state with high qualityworkers and work products and exceedinglyhigh ethics and honesty. So the state does a veryeffective (and costly) job of regulating its ownbehavior that, for the most part, is unneces-sary.

THE SYSTEM WE WANT

The new system will adopt the best man-agement principles from the private sector withan eye on the next century. Based on an inten-sive management reform workshop involvingthe public and private sectors, expert help fromnationally recognized management experts andthe insights of thousands of state employees,an entirely new management system is recom-mended. Some of the reforms will be achievedthrough prompt executive or legislative action.Others will take more time to review, analyze,test and debate.

AN IMPORTANT PILOT PROJECT

Large organizations do not change quickly.It will take time to transform state governmentand even longer to create a true partnershipsystem among all levels of government that needto work together.

As a beginning, there will be several pilotprojects involving state agencies and agencyunits. The pilots will be launched to demon-strate not only the waste in the current systembut the benefits of an entirely new system inwhich employees can focus on results and re-alize their potential. In all cases, the workers—

John J. BartelmeCommission for theStudy of AdministrativeValue and EfficiencyCommissioner

isconsin government in the 21stCentury must be radically differentthan today’s government. There isno choice. Taxpayers want it. Pub-lic employees want it. The timesrequire it. These recommendationsboldly move all Wisconsin policy

making and taxing bodies—state, local andeducational—into the 21st Century. How farand fast they get where they need to go is up tothe citizens. This report begins the journey.

The new system emphasizes measurableresults over meaningless process. It will givethe taxpayer and customer value for today’sdollar and constantly work to give better valuefor tomorrow’s dollar. It will see the citizen as acompetent partner and the public employee asa qualified helper. The new system will place ahigh value on the capacity of everyone to worksmarter. It also will place high value on the po-tential to use knowledge to plan better.

THE SYSTEM WE HAVE

Today’s bureaucratic system came from anera when there was a need to professionalizegovernment work and insulate governmentworkers. Over the years, a system evolved thatinsulated the government workers from the re-ality, as well as the pressure, of the outside andtrapped them in a process so rigid that theyseldom could realize their full potential.


directly and through their union representa-tives—will be involved in planning, implement-ing and evaluating the pilot.

The pilots will be discrete operating unitsthat will be chartered to produce measurableresults with a given set of customers in returnfor freedom from many of the rules, regulationsand burdens that are costing taxpayers billionsof dollars and restricting employees and agen-cies.

With outside help from experienced ex-perts in organizational change, the employeesand their management will set up what theywant to do, how they will do it and what theywill learn from the process. The learning expe-rience will be used by the agencies themselvesto do a better job, but also by the Legislature inits complete reform of the state managementsystem over the next two biennia, beginningwith periodic progress reports by July 1, 1997.This will include civil service, budget, procure-ment and evaluation.

BUDGET REFORM: SPENDING FORRESULTS

The budget is the main decision-makingprocess in state government and it needs ma-jor reform if it is to deal with the efficiency andeffectiveness needs of the next century. Ironi-cally, by today’s standards, the Wisconsin pro-cess is among the best of any state governmentin the nation.

The professionalism of the Legislature andits Joint Committee on Finance, as well as thesupport staff in the executive and legislativebranches, all have been commended by inde-pendent evaluators. However, reform is neededso the focus is on results, not spending, and onthe needs of citizens, not agencies.

The Constitution requires that state bud-gets be balanced and prohibits the state fromborrowing for operations. A strong statutoryrequirement will force the Legislature, in co-operation with local and educational govern-ments, to adopt a process that is driven by astrategy; that is, what you want to accomplish,not how much you want to spend.

Budget strategies will focus on areas suchas public safety and they will define, with realnumbers, what the Legislature wants to hap-

pen. For example: what should the crime ratebe and whose help is needed to get to that goal?The “help” might come from police, socialworkers, schools, not-for-profit organizations,businesses and churches. Under the budgetprocess, state and local agencies would have towork together, not in competition, to come upwith a strategy to produce results. The resultsin Wisconsin would be benchmarked againstresults elsewhere.

As the budget is implemented by state andlocal governments (which get shared revenue),the hard numbers will be produced and theLegislature will evaluate the results, making surethe money is being well spent, and learningfrom the experience. The results of all majorstrategies will be published in a series of easyto understand, accurate performance scorecardsfor taxpayers.

The new approach will carve out new rolesfor standing legislative committees and legisla-tive oversight functions, and for the technicalstaffs supporting the Legislature as well as theGovernor.

Finally, agencies and their employees willbe rewarded for saving money, and discouragedfrom spending all their money before the endof a budget year.

CIVIL SERVICE REFORM:PERFORMANCE, NOT PROCESS

The civil service system needs top to bot-tom reform. The old system was founded onstructured distrust and an Industrial Age as-sumption that employees work under closesupervision, using their hands, not their heads.The new system will be built on respect for theemployee and what she or he does with skills,talents and capacity, both as an employee and amember of a team.

The old system required lots of paper-work, legions of supervisors, thousands of re-stricting job titles and hours of low value or novalue paper processing. The new system re-quires none of the above. The new civil servicesystem will be designed to give dignity to theworker and value to the citizen. It will:1 . Focus on the mission of the organiza-

tion. The mission of the agency, unit orfacility will determine the kind of

Actions2 0 . 1

Establish pilot projectsand a goal of a newmanagement system byJuly 1, 1997.

2 0 . 2

Adopt a strategy-drivenbudget process.

2 0 . 3

Budget for results not bybureaus.

2 0 . 4

Reform infrastructurebudgeting, decisionmaking and use.

2 0 . 5

Reward employees andagencies for savingmoney.

2 0 . 6

Evaluate more reliablelong term revenuesources.

2 0 . 7

Establish one electronicgovernment transactionservice.

2 0 . 8

Eliminate Constitutionalrestrictions onpurchasing.

2 0 . 9

Modernize procurementpractices top to bottom.

2 0 . 1 0

Let purchasing agentsbecome helpers andcompete.

2 0 . 1 1

Use strategicpartnerships likebusiness.

2 0 . 1 2

Revamp simplisticpurchasing lawscovering high-tech.

Continued on next page


CHAPTERFOUR

workers and type of work needed. Sojob titles, working conditions and workitself will be for the people involved todecide, not a distant “specialist”. Thismeans personnel authority, with ac-countability, will be decentralized to thelowest possible level.

2 . Have fewer management layers.Because employees will be treated moreprofessionally, fewer supervisors will beneeded. Those middle mangers whoremain will have the job of helpingemployees achieve, together, the mis-sion of the organization based onperformance standards and agreed uponresults. Managers will be leaders, notcontrollers.

3 . Pay for skill and performance. Ifgovernment employees are supposed towork smarter they need to be paidaccordingly. Because the budget processwill emphasize results, the workers willbe paid for performance, individually oras members of a team. Poor perfor-mance, when it occurs, will similarly beaddressed. Compensation will becompetitive, taking into account totalpay and benefits.

4 . Restore respect to public service.State employees believe they are notproperly understood and their work isnot appreciated. As the managementsystem produces governmentscorecards, the value of public employ-ees will become better known. Inaddition, a visible effort involving thestate, unions and private enterpriseshould be considered.

PROCUREMENT THAT DELIVERSVALUE

Most state employees complain aboutpurchasing practices that force them to usecostly and time consuming paperwork anddeny them the flexibility to buy what they needto do their work, even if it costs less.

Procurement reforms will modernize theentire system, delegating to the lowest possiblelevel the responsibility and authority to buywhat’s needed to do the job, as long as the em-ployee stays within budget. A new system oflegislative and executive oversight will need tobe designed, but it should not be designed onthe model of the current system, which micro-manages.

At the same time, employees should beequipped to become smart buyers. This is thenew service role—as opposed to the existingcontrolling role—that will be played by pro-curement specialists in state government. Inaddition, the employees will become “buyers”of procurement services, requiring the procure-ment functions, for the most part, to competefor business within the state government sys-tem.

Other key areas of reform include majorchanges in the way technology is purchased (theexisting system makes it difficult to buy forvalue), increased use of partnerships and theuse of “sunshine”—or open government report-ing—as a tool insiders can use to do compari-son shopping and outsiders can use to monitorcosts.

2 0 . 1 3

Decentralize personnelauthority withaccountability.

2 0 . 1 4

Reduce managementlayers.

2 0 . 1 5

Restore respect topublic service work.

2 0 . 1 6

Reform total market-sensitive compensationto reward results andskills.

2 0 . 1 7

Maintain corecompetencies;otherwise invitecompetition.

2 0 . 1 8

All employees shouldcontribute.

2 0 . 1 9

Institute a stategovernment manage-ment model andcommon language.

2 0 . 2 0

Re-examine delivery ofcertain state govern-ment services.

2 0 . 2 1

Contract out collectivebargaining.

RE

SU

LT

S Delivering a new manage-ment system will:

1 Emphasize measurable results overmeaningless process.

2 Give the taxpayer more value fortoday’s dollar and today’s service.

3 Eliminate $2 billion in waste in theexisting civil service andmanagement system fromduplicative checking and distrust.

4 Bring in the best managementprinciples from the private sector,beginning with exhaustive pilotprojects, chartered to producemeasurable results in return forfreedom from many rules,regulations and burdens thatrestrict other agencies.

5 Reward employees for savingmoney.

6 Change civil service by getting rid ofmanagement layers, focusing on themission of an agency and payingworkers for skills and performance.

7 Restore respect to public service.

Patricia A. Patros-Hanson, Eau Claire“The policy of an agencyhaving to spend allfunding allocated isidiotic.”


NEW MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

State government already has a budgetsystem. Now it needs a management system thatuses one management language so agencies areall speaking out of the same manual. It alsoneeds a system that places a high value on mea-surable results.

At the top of the system will be the com-mon mission, not only for state agencies, butall of state government. Under the strategy, thestate will develop the large share of its programsbased on the assumption that citizens have re-sponsibilities as well as rights and that withthose citizenship responsibilities comes the ex-pectation that there will be some things you dofor yourself. Government cannot do everythingfor you.

Under the mission, budgets will be de-veloped based on the results that the Governorand Legislature want. Where possible, bench-marks will be set, against which agency perfor-mance will be measured. The best examples ofperformance in and out of state service will beshared so state workers know what they arecompeting against. Then management will getout of the way and measure the results at ap-propriate times.

In the end, the results will be reportednot only to the Legislature and the Governor,but also to taxpayers in a new report card. Thereport card will have the information neededto know not only results that have beenachieved but also the per unit costs of the re-sults.

Over time, the system will tell the Gover-nor and Legislature whether they are gettingtheir money’s worth and whether other alter-natives, including the use of private vendors orother public employees, are in order, assuminga level playing field with public employees.

Footnote: The Commission appreciatesthe time taken by thousands of state employ-ees whose opinions helped form these recom-mendations, especially in the areas of civil ser-vice, procurement and management systemsreform. Wisconsin is fortunate to have publicemployees who are generally performing ex-cellent work in an antiquated system undersometimes difficult conditions.

From a budget system that: To a budget system that:

Is line item focused Is strategic and output focused

Appropriates in minute detail Funds for specific results

Has incentives to spend Has incentives to save

Decides infrastructure piecemeal Plans and integrates infrastructure

Funds by agency requests Funds by core result areas

Tolerates units’ under-performance Moves work to performing units

Reports spending to citizens Reports results to citizens

From a civil service system that: To a human resource servicesystem that:

Devalues and disrespects workers Respects workers’ potential

Centralizes authority Delegates appropriate authority

Has 2,400 job classes Has broad bands of job classes

Pays for time worked Pays for skills and results

Dictates pay by job class Ties compensation to total marketrate

Hides true costs of paperwork Rejects non-value-added red tape

Ignores workers’ knowledge Values knowledge as capital asset

From a management system that: To a self-managing system that:

Runs by rules Operates with strategic guidance

Protects bureaucratic turf Cooperates across agencies

Manages the budget inputs Manages for strategic results

Has little unit-cost data Knows costs and benchmarks

Fixes only what is broken Continuously improves

Has incompatible systems Has all conform to comprehensivestandards

Has layers of impeding oversight Has trust in a verified system

From a procurement system that: To a procurement system that:

Focuses on process Focuses on customer

Has checkers checking the checkers Holds everyone accountable

Focuses on price alone Calculates total value

Disregards the time of paperwork Believes time is money

Is adversarial by nature Uses partnerships to deliver value

Uses micro management Gives freedom; requires results

Procurement specialists control Lets workers manage the budget


CHAPTERFOUR

GOAL #21

RegulationFor ResultsLaws and rules arethe means, not the

ends

ton (see Goal #19) and breakthroughs in moni-toring and related regulatory technology (seeGoal #14) provide a unique reform opportu-nity.

Citizens strongly support concepts suchas a clean environment and good education,but don’t confuse that support with love forbureaucracies or bureaucratic processes. Moststate employees—including regulators—caredeeply about the state and its people. The lawsand the system are much of the problem andmany employees know it.

A new system will transform regulatorsfrom controllers to coaches. A new governmentculture will see citizens as self-reliant, respon-sible partners, not helpless deviants. The sys-tem will have a Legislature that enacts inte-grated, results oriented laws after evaluatingscience, costs, benefits, comparative risks andcompeting priorities. The Legislature should beassisted in moving in that direction, throughits organization and staffing. Further, agenciesare not prepared for a system that demands re-sults, evaluates costs and benefits, focuses on edu-cation before enforcement and believes that citi-zens as well as government can find solutions.

There is an ultimate goal of self-regula-tion: people, businesses and government do-ing the right things right. However, reality sug-gests there will be an enforcement need forthose who violate the public trust. The responsenow is to have restrictive processes and regula-tions. Another approach—one successfullyused by former Wisconsin Insurance Commis-sioner Spencer Kimball—is to have strong,swift, sure and consequential enforcement.

Another way to get results is to share per-formance data in easily understandable terms.That is happening in some environmental pro-grams.

The marketplace also can achieve resultsin areas like controlling costs and protectingthe environment, but the state does not oftenuse or know how to use market forces to ac-complish social good. Professional and businessassociations and codes of conduct, ethical stan-dards and peer pressure can be effective, espe-cially in a state where honesty is the culture.

Many problems in the regulatory systemoriginate with the inability of the Congress,Legislature and agencies to set priorities, focuson results and integrate efforts across commit-

Actions2 1 . 1

Reform lawmaking.

2 1 . 2

Eliminate or reviseirrelevant rules.

2 1 . 3

Increase the use ofeducation as aprevention tool.

2 1 . 4

Agencies must developmissions with perfor-mance indicators.

2 1 . 5

Agencies shouldearmark funds for publicliaison.

2 1 . 6

Designate the JointCommittee for theReview of AdministrativeRules as the state’sregulatoryombudsperson.

egulations and regulators must becomeuser friendly and results oriented. Theymust also respect the fact that most citi-zens, businesses and local governmentswant to do the right thing. Lawmakersmust define and quantify the goal of aproposed law, as well as the benefits and

implications and how it compares to other pri-orities.

The Commission found that citizens feelstrongly about having high quality air, water,health, consumer protection and working con-ditions. The state must not abandon its goalsin these areas. However, citizens also say theywant a results oriented regulatory system thatunderstands the big picture and doesn’t haveone regulator tripping over another. Also, theywant a shift to preventing problems, finding costeffective solutions and better involving every-one concerned in decisions.

A century ago, Wisconsin citizens andworkers were mad about the risks and nuisanceof dangerous water, bad air and unsafe work-ing conditions. They forced legislators to passinnovative, progressive laws to protect health,the environment and the workplace. Pressurehas been building for new ways to accomplishthe same ends without the red tape. The Com-mission outlines ways Wisconsin will transforma regulatory system of red tape to one focusedon results. Increased flexibility from Washing-


tee or state agency jurisdictional lines. Amongthe problems in the legislative and executivebranches:£ Excessive delegation without clear

definition of policy priorities;

£ Overly stringent implementationtimetables;

£ Under-funded or unfunded expansionsof agencymissions;

£ Contradictorypolicy goals;

£ No system ofregulatorypriorities; and

£ Too many bills and too many new lawswith regulatory consequences.Regulatory reform will be part of a per-

formance budgeting system that focuses onstrategies and results (see Goal #20). Anothertool will be the legislative impact statement (seeGoal #17). As part of management reform,agencies will produce results expected by theLegislature and will be held accountable.

Reform also will be part of the SweepingSunset process (see Goal #16). One stop shop-ping could be applied to regulatory permits is-sued by state and local governments, especiallyto small businesses (see Goal #15).

The Commission found problems in thetechnical quality of the rules—such as conflict-ing legal definitions—and poor enforcementcase preparation. Handling the role of the state’sregulatory ombudsperson will be the existingJoint Committee for the Review of Administra-tive Rules. This role will provide an incentive

to agencies to better coordinate and do home-work on enforcement.

Agencies will shift regulatory emphasisand resources toward more education, morepublic involvement and more sharing of bestpractices. With a focus on prevention, preven-tive environmental auditing and innovation,agencies will find new ideas from business,communities and citizens. With flexibility, regu-

lators will applaudinnovations, not re-sist them.

Convenient,quality and consis-tent regulatory ser-vices will becomeavailable throughincreased profes-

sional development, integrated permitting, in-ter-agency cooperation and a regulatory circuitrider system that will issue on-site permits serv-ing multi-agency functions.

In addition, most far-reaching recommen-dations are tied to reinventing citizenship (seePreamble). Citizens, not regulators, will takecharge of the education, environment, publichealth and safety in their communities. Theregulatory system misleads us to believe thatgovernment is the sole protector, provider orprofessional able to achieve social goals. Thereality is that the citizen has the responsibilityand capacity to do what is right. Governmentmust clearly communicate the goals, offer ahelping hand and applaud results.

Footnote: The Commission is grateful to state em-ployees, businesses, citizens and others who con-tributed to the section on regulatory review thatwas overseen by the Honorable William Eich of theWisconsin Court of Appeals.

2 1 . 7

Use meaningfulparticipative techniques.

2 1 . 8

Create exchanges toenhance understanding.

2 1 . 9

Leverage technology toenhance participationand education.

2 1 . 1 0

Create a system ofregulatory circuit riders.

2 1 . 1 1

Use performance, notprocess, for regulatorysystems.

2 1 . 1 2

Set enforcementpriorities.

2 1 . 1 3

Promote regulatoryinnovation.

2 1 . 1 4

Promote professionaldevelopment.

2 1 . 1 5

Coordinate andreorganizate regula-tions.

2 1 . 1 6

Create an integratedpermitting system.

2 1 . 1 7

Consolidate agencyfield offices and trainstaff.

2 1 . 1 8

Create an electronicsystem for ruledevelopment andadministration.

2 1 . 1 9

Use environmentalauditing as a tool toprevent problems.

“I have seen rules so poorly orconfusingly drafted as to be largelyincapable of rational interpretation

and application.”Chief Appellate Judge William Eich

Regulating for resultswill:

1 Change rules and regulationsso they are user friendly andresults oriented.

2 Respect citizens, businessesand others as people who wantthe right thing done in the rightway.

RE

SU

LT

S 3 Change regulators fromcontrollers to coaches.

4 Reform regulations to avoidcontradictory goals, establishpriorities for enforcement, avoidoverly stringent implementation oftimetables and restrictunderfunded expansions ofagency missions.

5 Hold agencies accountable forresults expected by the Legislature.


CHAPTERFOUR

GOAL #22

JudicialBranch

Efficient operationsand effective planning

lthough it is one of three separate butequal branches of government, the judi-cial branch has not had the same extentof management scrutiny as the executiveand legislative branches. However, theCommission’s responsibility to look at ef-ficiency and technology caused it to view

the courts even in its limited tenure.The Commission was told the courts of-

fer the same opportunities for efficiency, coop-eration, planning, management systems andtechnological improvements as other branches.State and local governments spend at least$227.8 million annually for the judicial system.Taxpayers pay again when they go to court fora legal fix that might have been avoided throughmediation.

SYSTEM EFFICIENCY

Technology provides opportunities forgreater efficiency in tracking and moving casesthrough the civil court system and the criminalcourt system (especially its overworked casesthat move from police officer, to district attor-ney, to court, to corrections facility or homemonitoring). It also offers new challenges thatmay redefine the work of all involved.

The courts should use existing technol-ogy to streamline work. Innovations such aselectronic bulletin boards, satellite courthouses,E-mail and electronic record keeping, comput-erized scheduling, video conferencing, datasearches and more, coordinated through thenew Public Information Utility, can help thoseresponsible for prosecuting and passing judg-ment. Video conferencing especially, already inthe experimental phase, will save time andtravel for all parties. Lawmakers and citizensshould view high-tech tools as essential court-room investments, although that might have tobe discussed in line with new revenue sources.

Technology also can prevent problems.Law enforcement should be able to access digi-tized visual information, case law and otherresources to reduce mistakes in prosecutiondecisions made out on the street, lake or field.This could save money by improving efficiencyand reducing the state cases that get dismissedor are lost. The same data also would be avail-able to state attorneys, making them more effi-cient.

However, archaic laws, professional atti-tudes and procedures may discourage efficiency.Paper, procedures and personal appearances,not electronics, drive the legal system. The le-gal profession and the Legislature need to ad-dress these issues.

Also important to savings is how the sys-tem is organized and operates. “Turf protection,”jurisdictional barriers, and lack of administra-tive sophistication and coordination affect somecourts. Some serious problems of inefficientcase management exist. The judiciary and clerksoffices should address their own inefficienciesbefore others step in.

As recommended to the Commission, civiland criminal information should be more com-prehensively systematized and available to allin the system at any time. There are successes,but the record could be better.

The Commission also heard about thewaste and problems in the assignment of mul-tiple social workers to the same child or family.These frequently are working directly for, orunder contract to, different agencies: correc-tions, schools, courts, welfare and more. Theaverage number of social workers per child wasfour. The common sense approach is one perchild.

Actions2 2 . 1

Courts should plan forthe future like otherbranches of govern-ment.

2 2 . 2

The court systemshould embracetechnology for efficiencyand service.


Focusing on the judicialbranch will:

1 Treat the judicial branch with thesame management scrutiny asother branches.

2 Bring it as a full partner into thetechnology age.

RE

SU

LT

SA comprehensive family maintenance sys-

tem also makes sense, perhaps administered bya single agency for a county on a competitivebasis, open to public employees, the privatesector and not-for-profit organizations, assum-ing there is a “level playing field” allowing fairtreatment for all.

EFFECTIVENESS

In successful re-engineering, a requiredquestion is whether the system itself is bad. Thecourts are tradition-honored processes in a timeof rapid change. Finding answers to basic sys-tems questions may be difficult because thecourts are not only distant from other branches,but they also don’t have the same sense of needfor change.

The courts and other branches shouldstrategically plan, sometimes together. From atechnological standpoint alone, the planning isbadly needed. Scientific evidence is valued asmuch as eye-witness accounts. Tools such asvirtual reality, animation and genetic testing aredismantling the paper-driven system. Histori-cally, courts lag behindscience and the recentCarnegie Commissionsuggests wise steps.

Government growthis slowing. The courtsshould ask the question other branches must ask:how do we get out of this business? For thecourts, that is a huge question to undertake,since it means taking steps to reduce the levelof litigation.

The legal profession and the Legislatureshould reflect on whether some practices, such

as large awards for punitive damage, encour-age lawsuits and detract from the credibility ofthe system. They also should study how to co-operate on issues such as sentencing laws todetermine their true costs before implementa-tion.

Together, the branches should look foranswers to shared questions that have their ori-gins in science and technology, such as thoseinvolving computer crime and the humangnome. Not all legislatures and courts are pre-pared to debate science and related ethics is-sues.


Another challenge is the way people viewthe whole legal and political system. Currently,the court’s role is defined in terms of rights.But we have to ask how our Founders wantedto deal with responsibilities to balance thoserights. That is a question for public dialoguethat the legal profession should ponder.

Another part of that dialogue might ex-plore whether law isthe modern equiva-lent of lowest com-mon denominatormorality. If so, doesthe legal professionhave an obligation todiscuss how to take

higher ethical ground or encourage resolvingissues outside the court, through conflict reso-lution or mediation for the sake of communityfabric? Might the attorneys also lead a discus-sion on the long-term effects of pursuing per-sonal, rather than community, happiness?

“The judiciary generally escapesreform efforts, but is a major

cost factor.”Joe Martin, Arthur Andersen and Co.

2 2 . 3

Address artificialbarriers that discourageefficiency.

2 2 . 4

Examine the concept ofresponsibilities withrights.

2 2 . 5

Aggressively develop astate alternative disputeresolution strategy.

2 2 . 6

Address juvenile crimeand violence.

2 2 . 7

Provide adequateinformation to justicesystem professionals.

2 2 . 8

Calculate the costs ofcrime and punishment.

2 2 . 9

Evaluate new ways ofsecuring funding forcourts.

2 2 . 1 0

Adopt a competitivelydriven social servicesmodel.

2 2 . 1 1

Place the court systemon a sum certainbudget.

2 2 . 1 2

Eliminate archaicprocedural require-ments.

3 Move the courts from a paperbased system to an electronicbased system.

4 Reduce turf battles among statecourts.

5 Save taxpayers money as high-tech efficiencies are implemented.

6 Streamline delivery of socialservices to families to avoidduplication and waste.


APPENDIX A

EnumeratedActions

CHAPTER 1: CITIZENS WITH GREAT CAPACITY

GOAL #1: (PREAMBLE) COMMITTED

CITIZENSHIP

1 . 1

Conduct a citizen responsibility dialogue. Tocelebrate Wisconsin’s sesquicentennial, debatethe responsibilities and rights of citizenship,focused on the development of a “Bill of Citi-zen Responsibilities” to go with the Bill ofRights.

1 . 2

Use technology to promote citizen involve-ment. To revive committed citizenship in ahigh-tech age, create increased opportunitiesfor citizens to take part in government at alllevels by using high-tech communicationstools provided through the new Public Infor-mation Utility.

1 . 3

Promote volunteerism. To reinforceWisconsin’s neighborliness, a culture of vol-unteering should be revived and recognizedin all communities. Given the proper climate,protections and removal of barriers, the peoplehave a capacity to help each other withoutexpert intervention.

1 . 4

Find neutral ground to reduce distrust andresolve conflicts. To counter distrust, conten-tiousness and fragmentation found amongvarious Wisconsin interests, consider designat-ing “neutral ground” that provides an oppor-tunity for factions that distrust each other tohave a positive discussion. This will require aplace or places that are neither state nor local,

young nor old, black nor white, tribal nor non-tribal, public nor private. The location is a placefor mediation, negotiation, conflict resolutionand planning.

1 . 5

News media should nurture civic debate. Topromote informed and productive discussionof public issues, the news media should rejectpersonality, conflict-driven journalism in fa-vor of civic journalism.

GOAL #2: EFFECTIVE LEADERS2 . 1

Develop a Public Leadership Institute and net-work. To create a government that helps buildthe capacity of its workers and citizens and acitizenry involved in public service, create aPublic Leadership Institute and network tohelp full- and part-time leaders better advancetheir skills as they advance and continue ingovernment service.

2 . 2

Incorporate a leadership philosophy in themanagement system. To ensure enduringchange and continuous improvement, un-equivocally incorporate a leadership philoso-phy in Wisconsin’s entire system of govern-ment. A leadership government emphasizesresults and partnerships, visionary thinkingand quality management, rather than processand control.

2 . 3

Prepare managers as mission-driven leaders.To achieve a mission-driven organization, andas part of the flattening of the hierarchy, trainmiddle management in leadership and coach-ing. Managers will translate vision into out-comes and work tasks in a changing world ofambiguous authority where employees andemployer are a team.

GOAL #3: NEW WISCONSIN IDEA

3 . 1

Link the Department of Development and UWSystem for economic development. To seizethe competitive moment in the knowledgeeconomy, the Department of Developmentshould use the UW as an ongoing resource inthe implementation of a strategy to use thestate’s knowledge capacity to generate wealthfrom global markets (see Goal #9).

3 . 2

Create a state dialogue to reinvent citizen-ship. To create a new citizenship ideal, theentire state should join in an effort to reinventcitizenship, including a citizenship ethic and


personal responsibility focus, through a dia-logue of a Citizens Bill of Responsibilities, assuggested in the Preamble.

3 . 3

Tap Wisconsin knowledge to develop scienceand technology policy. To address public policyquestions presented by scientific discovery andapplication, a consortium of public and pri-vate higher educational institutions should joinwith business to assist government in answer-ing 21st Century questions.

GOAL #4: TAKING RESPONSIBILITY4 . 1

Find new paths to the self-reliant community.It is not government’s role to provide for all.Therefore, initiate a serious dialogue about howto design a new social sector involving thepublic sector, business, not-for-profits and citi-zens to which all contribute and from whichall benefit.

4 . 2

See the entire community as able to serve. Tofully tap everyone’s capacity to meet individualor community needs, identify and remove theinappropriate barriers that prevent not-for-profits, businesses and others from serving thecommunity good. Ensure a level playing fieldand fair competition for both public and pri-vate providers by evaluating total cost to pro-vide service.

4 . 3

Government programs and employees be-come helpers. To help people do things forthemselves, government programs and pro-gram workers should be guided by the visionof helping citizens become self-sufficient andhelping communities reach social goalsthrough cooperation and partnerships.

4 . 4

Return public health to the public agenda. Tocope with serious 21st Century threats to pub-lic health, develop a state-led strategy that re-vives and reorganizes—through new partner-ships—an approach to public health that isdriven by preventive measures and personalresponsibility.

CHAPTER 2: A 21ST CENTURY COMMUNITY THATWORKS

GOAL #5: COOPERATING COMMUNITIES

5 . 1

Create tension and incentives to encourageintergovernmental cooperation. To encourage

intergovernmental and interagency coopera-tion, withhold as much as 5 percent of all1995-97 funding sources, except federal funds.Reallocate a portion of withheld funds back tothe governmental unit when documentationof measureable results of cost savings, efficien-cies and cooperation are provided.

5 . 2

Identify an intergovernmental efficiency bro-ker function. To save money and improve ser-vice, assign a high level intergovernmental ef-ficiency broker function in the Dept. of Ad-ministration that would use data as a point ofdialogue. It would use tools, such as a certifi-cate of convenience, to validate cooperation,do economic analyses, assess risk and promoteinnovation under federal delegation.

5 . 3

Pay once for local government service. Toachieve tax fairness and encourage broad co-operation, require that local taxpayers pay oncefor service. This benefits communities that payfor their own police, health and other servicesprovided by the county. It would cost com-munities that use county services without pay-ing for them. This recognizes that some ser-vices benefit all, even though they are not pro-vided directly.

5 . 4

Focus multiple programs on rebuilding com-munities. To make best use of the broadestrange of community development ingredients,adopt a results-driven clearinghouse approach.Include: Community Learning Centers (seeGoal #11); Main Street Program; state facilityplacement in central cities and regions; oppor-tunities for state employees to work out ofhomes or cars; urban forestry; recreational aids;infrastructure investment; housing and smallbusiness help; public safety; community edu-cation; and urban university service (see Goal#13).

5 . 5

Review the fit between local government andnew century needs. To bring local governmentinto the modern age, by 1998, call a local gov-ernment statutory revision convention to:evaluate the number and size of governments,school districts, technical college boards andCESAs; evaluate incentives to merge; judge thesize of boards and councils; appoint, not elect,professional offices such as treasurer, sheriffand surveyor; and address barriers to publicservice. Ask, “Would we design it this way ifwe did it again?” (see Goal #10).


GOAL #6: GENERATIONS THAT CONNECT

6 . 1

Consolidate youth functions. To reduce du-plication and provide a focal point for futureyouth initiatives, consolidate and coordinateservices including employment, recreation,corrections, pregnancy prevention, mentalhealth, youth alcohol and drug abuse, and edu-cation.

6 . 2

Plan for aging of society. To cope with theanticipated “crisis” of great numbers of the veryelderly, static resources and desire for indepen-dence, all parties involved with older adultsshould work more closely to unify policies andpurpose. This will require closer coordinationof: financial resources, quality assurance andindependent lifestyle. As part of the strategy,reduce duplication and provide a focal pointfor initiatives and responsibilities associatedwith older adults.

GOAL #7: LAND USE

7 . 1

Examine tax policy impacts on land use. Toassess the link between taxes and land use,examine state policies which affect the valueof land, including urban in-fill areas and openspace, and recommend findings to existingcommittees studying land use.

7 . 2

Reduce the illogical impact of boundaries onservice. To protect open space from poorlyplanned development, communities shouldthink about the good of the entire area whendeciding the most cost effective and environ-mentally responsible service delivery system.

7 . 3

Evaluate the impact of infrastructure changes.To provide decision makers with better infor-mation, greater attention should be paid to thetotal community impact of infrastructurechanges.

7 . 4

Play an active role in federal decisions affect-ing land. To better protect the state’s economicand environmental interests, the state shouldbetter coordinate its position on federal pro-grams as they affect land use, especially as fed-eral direction undergoes major change.

7 . 5

Reward good behavior. To promote steward-ship partnerships, agencies concerned withland use should promote voluntary programssuch as the Conservation Credit initiative as

applied in Pepin County and partnerships withgroups that provide credits to landowners withenvironmentally sensitive land.

7 . 6

Require results for conservation programs. Tocomply with Legislative Audit Bureau recom-mendations, the state’s investments in water-shed and erosion control should produce mea-surable outcomes or be discontinued.

7 . 7

Local government should be better neighborson annexation. To reduce distrust and con-tentiousness, local governments should bemore creative and collaborative toward reso-lution of annexation issues.

7 . 8

Broaden membership on state government’sland use committee. To ensure that non-stategovernment interests can participate in discus-sions about land use policies, the state shouldinvolve business, agricultural, development,environmental, local government and citizeninterests on its committee.

GOAL #8: THE NEW INFRASTRUCTURE

8 . 1

Coordinate planning for energy-utility-trans-portation rights of way. To reduce duplicativeplanning costs and concentrate intensified landuse, develop an integrated approach to corri-dor planning for compatible energy, commu-nications, utility and transportation functionswith safeguards. Establish a high level public-private commission to recommend 21st Cen-tury approaches to better corridor planning.

8 . 2

Go slow on state building and rethink infra-structure needs. To take a cautious approachto new state buildings in a time of governmentand higher educational “rightsizing”, considerpublic infrastructure, state and universitybuildings as possible liabilities, not assets.Owning “single use” facilities in a high-tech,distance-learning age may be very costly. Re-view the process of planning, approving, build-ing and using structures and go slow on newconstruction in the meantime.

8 . 3

Consider market mechanisms and other newtools to achieve infrastructure developmentand operation goals. To open the door to newways of thinking about planning, financing andmanaging public infrastructure, we shouldstudy, experiment with and apply new toolssuch as congestion pricing or regional “certifi-


cates of transportation convenience” to helpstate and local government makes cost effec-tive decisions.

GOAL #9: THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY

9 . 1

Sell intellectual capital in the knowledgeeconomy. To capitalize on the next wave ofeconomic growth that will turn businesses intoeducators and states into global profit centers,sell Wisconsin’s intellectual capital in partner-ships involving businesses, public colleges andthe UW’s international alumni.

9 . 2

Aggressively tap Wisconsin’s knowledge ca-pacity for state use. To fully use public andprivate sector potential, implement past stateand Carnegie Commission recommendationsto aggressively tap knowledge in areas such astechnological sciences, micro-machinery, com-posites, medicine and environment.

CHAPTER 3: LIFELONG LEARNING IN AHIGH-TECH AGE

GOAL #10: LIFELONG LEARNING

1 0 . 1

Create a Department for Education, headedby a cabinet secretary. To provide new lead-ership for education that begins in early child-hood and lasts throughout life, create a de-partment that recognizes and works with alleducational activities, including formal K-12public schooling, as well as learning in thehome, workplace and community. The Secre-tary should be appointed by the Governor andthe new state Board of Education, subject toSenate confirmation. The decision also in-cludes:a. Create a citizen K-12 Board for Educa-

tion. To provide continuing attention toeducational issues, create a governor ap-pointed, staggered six-year term board ofseven persons representing educational,business, parental, technical college anduniversity interests.

b. Plan for long term inter-educational sys-tem coordination. To address the continu-ing educational turf issues while recogniz-ing the need for seamless, lifelong learn-ing, the long term objective of the stateshould be to create an effective mechanismthat will result in one, results-driven sys-tem.

c. Eliminate the Constitutional Office of Su-

perintendent of Public Instruction. Thisoffice is replaced by the new Secretary forEducation.

1 0 . 2

Prepare educational boards for greater effec-tiveness and accountability. To provide forgreater taxpayer accountability and effective-ness on the part of local educational boards:a. Require that technical college district

boards be elected. To provide greater ac-countability to taxpayers and eliminate theunrealistic mix of detailed requirements fortechnical school board members, elect theboards to govern the state’s 16 technical col-lege districts, with some seats designatedfor certain constituencies and diversity.

b. Train all local educational board membersto enhance their effectiveness. To encour-age board member development in techni-cal college and K-12 districts, provide in-tensive technical and leadership training.

c. Relieve local school boards of low prioritymandates and reporting. To achieve localcontrol and reduce paperwork, eliminatestate mandates and reporting requirementsthat inhibit site-based management andresult in unnecessary paperwork and costsat all levels.

1 0 . 3

Study administrative efficiencies. The newSecretary for Education and state Board forEducation should study ways to improve effi-ciency and effectiveness while reducing du-plicative staffing. Among these services are:a. The transfer of aid distribution, including

transportation aids;b. The transfer of health, nutrition and social

services programs;c. The transfer of telecommunications opera-

tion and library services;d. The transfer of teacher licensing and revo-

cation;e. The transfer of tech-prep administration;

andf. The transfer of job training functions.


1 0 . 4

Consider county or multi-county educationaladministration units. To achieve administra-tive and oversight efficiency while emphasiz-ing school site based management and iden-tity, use incentives and other approaches toconsolidate 427 school districts into county-wide units or levels of community integrity.The units would be grouped in logical clus-ters around common interests.

1 0 . 5

Direct the state CESA system to achievegreater local cooperation between K-12 dis-tricts and technical colleges. To bring aboutadministrative efficiency by combining simi-lar administrative and educational program-ming functions, the state Cooperative Educa-tional Service Agencies should aggressivelywork to save money through increased coop-eration. Also, direct the technical college dis-tricts to combine like administrative functionswith other districts or units of government,where feasible, including, but not limited to,worker’s compensation, personnel, legal, pro-curement and data processing.

GOAL #11: COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS

1 1 . 1

Transform schools into community learningcenters. To more fully use school buildings thatare now used 21 percent of the time, commu-nities should consider the long term goal ofhaving the facilities include multi-purpose usesduring all hours of the day. Possible uses in-clude: community education, health care, daycare, recreation, public library, senior programsand nutrition.

1 1 . 2

Manage school buildings as a system with lo-cal control. To make about 2,250 K-12 schooland library buildings safe and accessible, man-age them as a quality-assured, locally con-trolled system, assessing improvement andrepair needs and establishing a statewide sys-tem of high-tech sites for school, community,business and government.

GOAL #12: INFORMATION AGE UTILITY

1 2 . 1

Create a Public Information Utility. To effi-ciently meet the need for a dynamic, non-bu-reaucratic technological distribution system,abolish the Educational CommunicationsBoard and create a Public Information Utilityproviding hardware, software and support toserve, educate, inform and interact through

television, data delivery and free networks.Serve all levels and branches of government.

1 2 . 2

Transform libraries into distance learningpartners. To bring library services into thehigh-tech age and serve all taxpayers, incor-porate library functions in the Department forEducation and the University into the PublicInformation Utility. Use the utility’s flexibilityto provide service to citizens, communities,public and private schools, businesses and ag-riculture.

GOAL #13: OUR UNIVERSITY1 3 . 1

Increase system management flexibility. Torefocus oversight on results, give the UW moreflexibility in personnel, procurement, budget-ing, program generated revenue (except tu-ition), and purchasing categories. De-couplesalaries for academic staff and faculty and al-low the University to work with state govern-ment to reduce paperwork and reporting.

1 3 . 2

Increase building construction flexibility whilemeeting system needs. To give the UW flex-ibility, grant authority to renovate, remodel andmaintain buildings without enumeration, sen-sitive to inflation. However, the buildings arepart of state’s infrastructure and should be con-sidered as such, meeting standards relating tocooperation and cost effectiveness. Exemptprojects funded 100 percent by gifts, grantsand program revenue from review but exer-cise caution because new projects contain longterm staffing, program and maintenance costs.

1 3 . 3

Delegate and manage efficiently. To achieveequity, efficiency and accountability through-out the state system and to demonstrate re-sponsible management, by 1997, Regentsshould specifically delegate management au-thority. Regents also should identify potentialareas for evaluation of duplicative program-ming, staffing and funding, which may include,but not be limited to: the School of Educa-tion, UW Hospital and Clinics, VeterinarySchool, business programs, liberal arts pro-grams, two year campuses and UW Extension,and central Administration budget andstaffing.

1 3 . 4

Establish UW-Milwaukee as Wisconsin’s landgrant mission-driven urban university. To givestature and attention to the teaching, researchand outreach needed to meet Wisconsin’s ur-


ban challenges, designate the University ofWisconsin - Milwaukee as Wisconsin’s landgrant mission-driven urban university, withfocused purpose similar to the land grant des-ignation for agriculture. The designation re-quires program and organizational changes.The UW-Milwaukee would focus on mission-driven results and be held accountable.

1 3 . 5

Improve inter-campus credit transfer. To bet-ter serve students and business, continue toimprove consistency of course listings amongcampuses, as well as flexibility of credit trans-fers within the system. Progress has been made,but more review and change are needed, withrevisions completed by 1997.

1 3 . 6

Document faculty performance. To restoreconfidence in the UW and its faculty, whilerecognizing the special value of tenure, Regentsshould examine options to achieve faculty ac-countability and documented performance tousers of the system, using objective criteria andconsidering experiences at other higher edu-cational institutions. The Regents should en-force post-tenure review policies and areas ofaccountability.

GOAL #14: USING TECHNOLOGY

1 4 . 1

Create a state technology fund. Create a re-volving fund to help agencies and local gov-ernments, including libraries, educational in-stitutions, and Community Learning Centers,apply technology to “real life” situations. Ma-jor, multi-year projects will improve service,re-engineer systems, improve efficiency orquality and open the door to remote work inurban and rural areas. The fund is for hard-ware, software, training and experiments. Itassumes repayment, in most cases.

1 4 . 2

Train and reculture employees for technologi-cal age. As part of leadership training, the stateshould help and train employees, includingteachers and faculty, at all levels to rethink theirwork and relationships in the information age.Employees from management to the front linewill be able to ask better questions about thevalue and application of technology and useof data that technology can deliver.

1 4 . 3

Affirm information technology as the majorpresentation device. To more efficiently andeffectively communicate, the state should usethe potential information technology in all its

visual and interactive dimensions to commu-nicate facts and ideas, inform decisions andfacilitate input, using the creative capacity ofemployees and distribution capacity of thePublic Information Utility.

1 4 . 4

Create a high level technology advisory func-tion. To tap citizens with technological exper-tise, state government should create a high leveladvisory function, attached to the Departmentof Administration, to address many converg-ing technologies and their potential effect onwork, workplace, community, culture, servicedelivery, training and learning.

1 4 . 5

Coordinate distance learning. To reduce du-plication and ensure full use of the public andprivate sectors, the UW should coordinate dis-tance learning content generated and deliveredby all state government educational systemsdirectly or through the Public Information Util-ity, which is responsible for message delivery.

1 4 . 6

Revamp purchasing laws covering high-tech.To fix a procurement process that inhibits useof high-tech, move beyond the simplistic as-sumptions of current laws covering the pur-chase of technology and sophisticated services.Purchase for value, including service, not pricealone (see Goal #20).

GOAL #15: QUALITY SERVICE

1 5 . 1

Establish a “one stop shopping” service func-tion. To increase citizen access and make gov-ernment more user friendly, establish a onestop shopping service function. Building onDILHR’s model, the function would be cus-tomer-driven and supervise a toll free line, on-line service, kiosks and materials distribution.

1 5 . 2

Integrate customer service in the managementsystem. To achieve results, instill a service cul-ture and system that lets service happenthrough committed employees.

1 5 . 3

Measure customer feedback. To continuouslyimprove service, repeatedly measure servicesatisfaction. Survey results should be part of asystem, predicated upon goals and related tothose who do receive (existing customers) orshould receive service (potential customers).Data will be included in the annual report card.


1 5 . 4

The executive branch serves customers; leg-islators make policy. To free the Legislaturefor more substantive duties, hold the stateagencies accountable for service and complaintmanagement directly and through the “onestop shopping” service function. Disengagelegislators from customer service and refocuson policy making (see Goal #17).

CHAPTER 4: BOLD CHANGES TO FIX THE SYSTEM

GOAL #16: CONTINUOUS RENEWAL

1 6 . 1

Establish a Sweeping Sunsets process. To ad-dress the problem of government adding andseldom subtracting, there should be a cred-ibly developed system that challenges the sta-tus quo in state statutes, agencies, programs,rules, regulations, tax policy, entitlements, feesand the number of local governments.

1 6 . 2

Apply the Sweeping Sunsets test to advisorybodies. To force the discipline of review, sun-set all advisory committees, councils and bod-ies by July 1, 1997. These citizen bodies mayhave the opportunity to justify their existenceto the Legislature and provide valid reasonswhy they should not be discontinued.

1 6 . 3

Adopt full accrual accounting. To more fullycomprehend the cost of decisions and liabilityagainst present and future taxpayers, all gov-ernment (state, local, school) should stop man-aging by cash accounting. Adopt and practicefull accrual accounting, recognizing the presentvalue cost of future services, i.e. health carefor retired employees, etc.

1 6 . 4

Adopt “truth in spending” evaluation prin-ciples everywhere. To more honestly evaluatethe cost of all actions over the lives of build-ings, changes in criminal law, programs, gen-erations or biennia, require the practice of“truth in spending” economic principles in theexecutive and legislative branches. The analy-sis should come from legislative and execu-tive experts. The “truth reports” should be userfriendly and distributed widely for taxpayer,legislator and media use.

1 6 . 5

Adopt an ongoing process to sell unnecessarybuildings and other infrastructure. To rightsizethe considerable infrastructure when high-

tech, decentralization and reduced resourcesmake some buildings a liability, adopt thebuilding equivalent of the federal military baseclosing model as part of Sweeping Sunsets, assuggested by Brian Joiner.

GOAL #17: LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

1 7 . 1

Encourage a focus on strategy, not details. Toachieve greater results and credibility, the Leg-islature should adopt a system that focuses oncritical goals and holds agencies strictly ac-countable for results, not details on fiscal in-puts.

1 7 . 2

Remove policies that keep lawmakers inMadison and inhibit their contact with theirhome districts. To assist the Legislature in rep-resenting constituents, remove the legal, pro-cedural, technical and compensation barriersto lawmakers spending more quality time andworking in private sector jobs in home dis-tricts, away from Madison. Implementationcould include changes in policies or practiceson pay, ethics, per diem, electronic hearings,employer release time, home office technol-ogy, etc.

1 7 . 3

Improve training for legislators and staff. Toimprove effectiveness, legislators and staffshould be better trained in subjects such asproblem analysis, debate, leadership, longrange strategy-making, consensus building andasking questions. They also should be trainedto understand technical areas that coincidewith committee duties. Aside from confer-ences, legislative training is lacking and shouldbe a cornerstone to enhanced respect and pro-ductivity.

1 7 . 4

Study the impact of off-cycle elections. Evalu-ate the number and consequences of off-cycle,off-year special elections and whether they fa-vor insiders. If so, find options, such as re-stricted gubernatorial appointment power, toensure representation and a competitive seat.

1 7 . 5

Delay appointments to state positions. To en-hance legislative credibility, prohibit a legisla-tor from taking an appointed position in stategovernment for 12 months after leaving of-fice. (Not applicable to teaching or civil ser-vice jobs.) Restriction is similar to prohibitionagainst a legislator lobbying after leaving of-fice.


1 7 . 6

Develop a modern view of public input. Togain access to more unbiased information andenhance credibility, the Legislature should usea variety of citizen input techniques and tech-nologies (using the Public Information Util-ity) in addition to legally required hearings.Hearings should be more convenient to thepeople and less intimidating to the public.

1 7 . 7

Place the Legislature on a sum certain bud-get. To treat all branches equally, place theLegislature on a sum certain budget. This willencourage spending discipline and encourageoffice and system efficiency.

1 7 . 8

Require non-legislators to pay for bill draft-ing. To recover costs, require non-legislatorsto pay for bill drafts.

1 7 . 9

Participate in shared experiences to gain un-derstanding. To reduce the enmity and cul-ture gap between state and local, public andprivate, agency and Legislature, job sharing orjob loaning should be practiced as part of a“walk in the other’s shoes” strategy. The reverseadvice is true and others will benefit from un-derstanding legislative burdens.

1 7 . 1 0

Achieve “higher level” campaign as conditionof public financing. Campaign finance reformis left to other commissions. However, to es-tablish a “higher level” of campaign conduct,campaigns receiving public financing shouldbe required to adhere to a higher legal andethical standard of conduct. Campaigns shouldbe issue-oriented, as guided by an indepen-dent body, such as the State Elections Board.This should not infringe on free speech, but isa condition of a government grant.

1 7 . 1 1

Require legislative impact statements. To in-crease the quality of bills, require a legislativeimpact statement before introduction. Ques-tions will address: duplication of existing pro-grams, total administrative costs, impact onall citizens and long term costs. Contactsshould involve numerous agencies, interestsand perspectives.

1 7 . 1 2

Reduce the number of committees and requireterm limits on committee chairs. To ensurenew thinking and fair issue treatment, limitthe terms committee chairs can serve. Fewer

committees would be structured to compre-hensively focus on complex issues rather thansmall niches of fiscal or policy control. Alsorecommended is proportional partisan repre-sentation on committees.

1 7 . 1 3

Require 24-hour cooling off period betweenbill introduction and vote. To discourage a rushto judgment that invites mistakes, require a24-hour cooling off period between the intro-duction of a bill and a floor vote.

1 7 . 1 4

Prohibit proxy voting. To enhance the cred-ibility and accountability of legislators, requirethat casting a vote in committee be done inperson and that the prohibition against cast-ing another legislator’s electronic vote be en-forced.

1 7 . 1 5

Limit the number of bills a legislator may in-troduce. To encourage priority setting and re-duce low priority paperwork, limit the num-ber of bills a legislator may introduce. As anescape clause, a legislator may submit legisla-tion above the ceiling if the cost of researchand preparation comes from the legislator’spersonal budget.

1 7 . 1 6

Require public hearings on all bills beforefloor vote. To enhance public involvement andavoid hastily made mistakes, all bills shouldhave a public hearing before a floor vote.

GOAL #18 EXECUTIVE BRANCH1 8 . 1

Eliminate the offices of Secretary of State andState Treasurer. To streamline government,eliminate the outdated Constitutional officesof Secretary of State and State Treasurer andtransfer remaining administrative functionselsewhere.

1 8 . 2

Allow a gubernatorial candidate to choose arunning mate. To bring the state in line withthe national executive branch electoral pro-cess, allow a gubernatorial candidate to selecta running mate, eliminating the separate pri-mary election for lieutenant governor.

1 8 . 3

Place the Governor’s Office on a sum certainbudget. To treat all branches equally, place theGovernor’s Office on a sum certain budget toencourage priority setting and efficiency.


1 8 . 4

Consolidate functions where possible. Con-solidate like functions, including businessregulation and consumer protection.

1 8 . 5

Consolidate employment and training pro-grams. To better deliver a variety of job train-ing programs and transition to work programs,consolidate all such programs in DILHR.

1 8 . 6

Rename a Department of Licensing. To re-flect its duties, rename the Deptartment ofRegulation and Licensing to the Departmentof Licensing.

1 8 . 7

Transfer responsibility for serious juvenile of-fenders to the Department of Corrections. Toreflect the serious nature of some juvenilecrimes, transfer management responsibility foryouths adjudicated delinquent by the courtsfrom the Department of Health and Social Ser-vices to the Department of Corrections.

1 8 . 8

Study consolidation of parks and tourismfunctions. To discover more opportunity forcooperation, study the consolidation of parks,tourism, arts and historic sites into one statefunction.

1 8 . 9

Consolidate collections in the Department ofRevenue. To take advantage of technologicalefficiency and enhanced collection opportu-nities, consolidate collections from all agen-cies in the state’s “electronic banker,” the De-partment of Revenue.

1 8 . 1 0

Eliminate the Public Lands Commission. Tostreamline government, eliminate the PublicLands Commission and transfer functions tothe Justice Department.

1 8 . 1 1

Accelerate and privatize some delinquentpayment collection. To accelerate revenue col-lection, privatize, where appropriate, the col-lection of tax and other delinquent accountsand provide enabling legislation to permit alltax collecting units of government to sell un-paid taxes to the private sector.

1 8 . 1 2

Study consolidation of all state lending inWHEDA. To consolidate like functions, theconsolidation of all state lending in the Wis-consin Housing and Economic DevelopmentAuthority should be studied. The consolida-tion might be organizational, with WHEDA

in charge; or WHEDA might provide a lend-ing service to agencies.

1 8 . 1 3

Consolidate alcohol and drug abuse pro-grams. See Goal #4.

1 8 . 1 4

Consolidate youth services activities. See Goal#6.

1 8 . 1 5

Consolidate aging functions. See Goal #6.1 8 . 1 6

Develop 21st Century public health system.See Goal #4.

1 8 . 1 7

Sell state facilities. To generate general fundrevenue, the state should investigate sellingGEF 1 to the federal government, Hill Farmsto the (segregated funded) Department ofTransportation and the Thornton Avenue ware-house to the City of Madison.

1 8 . 1 8

Establish cabinet agencies. To improve gov-ernment accountability and integrated agencyplanning, place the Department of NaturalResources, the Department of Agriculture,Trade and Consumer Protection and the De-partment of Veterans Affairs in the ExecutiveCabinet. Secretaries should be appointed bythe Governor, providing for strong advisoryboard roles in rule making and other mattersin each agency.

GOAL #19: FEDERAL RELATIONS

1 9 . 1

Enhance state government’s federal watch. Toproperly take advantage of anticipated delega-tion, significantly enhance the federal liaisonfunction. This increased attention will be anoutcome-driven, results-oriented approach toapplying federal resources in Wisconsin. Thefunction also should look at how Wisconsinwill cope in a changing economic and politi-cal world.

1 9 . 2

Secure federal revenue with coordination anddetermination. To improve Wisconsin’s rank-ing for per capita federal expenditures, con-solidate and strengthen and elevate the pro-cess of making decisions on seeking federalfunds.

1 9 . 3

Seek federal mandate relief. To accommodatethe state’s move toward locally sensitive pri-orities and results-oriented strategies, aggres-sively seek relief from proscriptive federalmandates and programs.


GOAL #20: AN ENTIRELY NEW SYSTEM

2 0 . 1

Establish pilot projects and a goal of a newmanagement system by July 1, 1997. For re-sults-oriented government that allows employ-ees to function efficiently and effectively, re-form the budget, civil service organizationalmanagement system and procurement process.Steps to be taken include:a. Create a cabinet-level government redesign

position to provide visible leadership inimplementing all aspects of governmentreform, especially improving the person-nel system.

b. Immediately commence at least two pilotreform projects that demonstrate the abil-ity of labor and management to achieveresults in a mission-driven organization byidentifying and removing barriers to per-formance. The Governor and Legislaturemust provide direction, freedom and over-sight. Insights learned from the pilots willbe continuously plugged into the reformprocess.

c. Commence implementation of the newmanagement system by July 1, 1997.

2 0 . 2

Adopt a strategy-driven budget process. Toachieve budgets that demand results and seegovernment as one system, state law shouldrequire strategically developed budgets thatinvolve many government interests focused onmajor objectives. To be effective, strategiesmust involve state, local and education gov-ernment, with legislative and executive in-volvement. The first new budget should be in1997-99.

2 0 . 3

Budget for results, not by agency. To facilitateoutcome budgeting, biennial budgets shouldbe based on results in core areas such as safety,health, learning and tourism, not by agency.Agencies will focus on results, rather than pro-tecting turf. Agencies failing to budget for re-sults should risk losing the assigned responsi-bilities and associated budget dollars and staff.

2 0 . 4

Reform infrastructure budgeting, decision-making and use. To make infrastructure bud-geting meet reality, end government units’ ex-clusive use of buildings and other infrastruc-ture. Reform the infrastructure decisions toforce interagency, state-local and technical andpolitical interests to see one system (see Goal#8).

2 0 . 5

Reward employees and agencies for savingmoney. To encourage frugality, employees andtheir work units should be allowed to keep aportion of allotted funds they save. Somemoney should be given to employees andemployee teams under certain conditions.Units should be able to spend some of the sav-ings on priority tasks for at least one time.

2 0 . 6

Evaluate more reliable long term revenuesources. To bring tax policy more in line with21st Century economics, examine existing taxsources in light of other, emerging alternativesthat, because of economic, technological orother changes, are better able to meet state andlocal goals.

2 0 . 7

Establish one electronic government transac-tion service. To reduce paperwork, all state,local and educational governments should beon one electronic, financial transaction system.The system should be used for other informa-tion needs such as grant applications, man-agement guidance, best practice sharing, etc.

2 0 . 8

Eliminate Constitutional restrictions on pur-chasing. To eliminate unnecessary paperworkand give added purchasing flexibility, abolishoutdated Constitutional restrictions on stateprinting procurement.

2 0 . 9

Modernize procurement practices, top to bot-tom. To get greater value, eliminate overly de-tailed state procurement laws, giving flexibil-ity to employees to buy for best value. Main-tain credibility through oversight based on re-sults and regular disclosure of costs, not de-tails, and through commitment to minorityparticipation.

2 0 . 1 0

Purchasing agents should become helpers andcompete. To help units be better buyers, pro-curement personnel should focus on training,planning, coordination and partnering. Theirservice becomes largely self-funded but stateagency “customers” could buy procurementservices elsewhere.

2 0 . 1 1

Use strategic partnerships like businesses. Togive government the same quality and valueas business customers, ease restrictions on stra-tegic partnerships, joint ventures and contracts.Partnerships often produce long term savingsthat are difficult to achieve through currentgovernment bidding.


2 0 . 1 2

Revamp simplistic purchasing laws coveringhigh-tech. To fix the serious problem of a pro-curement process that inhibits use of high-tech,move beyond the simplistic assumptions ofcurrent laws governing the purchase of tech-nology and sophisticated services. Purchase forvalue, including service, not price alone (seeGoal #4).

2 0 . 1 3

Decentralize personnel authority with ac-countability. To eliminate unnecessary delays,decentralize personnel authority to the lowestpossible level, using experience gained in thepilot efforts. Downsized personnel services inagencies will be accountable and becomelargely self-funded and subject to competition.

2 0 . 1 4

Reduce management layers. To move re-sources and authority to the front line, requireagencies to increase span of control by at least30 percent by July 1, 1995, substantially in-creasing span of control according to bestmanagement practices.

2 0 . 1 5

Restore respect to public service work. To im-prove government employee effectiveness andconfidence of the public in government, ini-tiate a public-private-union promotional part-nership aimed at restoring respect for govern-ment employees, using specific performanceinformation from an annual government op-erations report card.

2 0 . 1 6

Reform total market-sensitive compensationto reward results and skills. To achieve out-puts linked to mission, reform the compensa-tion system to reward performance, results andskills. Total compensation, including benefits,will be based on market-sensitive rates, recog-nizing the bargaining process.

2 0 . 1 7

Maintain core competencies; otherwise invitecompetition. To keep a cadre of highly trainedand motivated employees, hire, pay and keeptrained the best people to be found who cancontribute to the unit’s mission and goals.Agencies should have mission-driven humanresources strategies.

2 0 . 1 8

All employees should contribute. To enhancerespect for public employees, all employeesshould work and contribute in a positive en-vironment that requires constructive contri-bution from all. The environment should

quickly identify each person’s current capac-ity and propensity for public service and posi-tion them for optimum personal job satisfac-tion, positive impact on co-workers and citi-zens, and maximum benefit to the good of thestate.

2 0 . 1 9

Institute a state government managementmodel and common language. To achieve amanagement system based on results:a. Define mission-driven goals that are

achieved through strategies and measuredby results.

b. Establish performance standards based onbenchmarks, applied uniformly and evalu-ated constantly. Best-in-class examples areshared; unexcused failures raise remedialand outsourcing issues.

c. Establish an activity-based budget modelthat allows the Governor and Legislatureto evaluate state and local government effi-ciency.

2 0 . 2 0

Re-examine delivery of certain state govern-ment services. Review existing governmentoperations and functions to determine whichentity from potential public and private sourcesis best suited to deliver services and performfunctions. The review must be a fair competi-tive analysis which evaluates whether inter-ested parties can meet fiscal quality, accessi-bility and other public service goals. Further-more, any comparison between public andprivate sector parties should include consid-eration of current in-house costs attributableto department overhead and other costs thatwould continue, even if services were con-tracted out, and should focus on measurableperformance standards. The state should per-form such comparisons for such operationsas: Medicaid/medical assistance administra-tion; mail processing; fleet and air fleet man-agement; comparative employee compensationinformation (class and comp); child supportcollection (part of shift to DOR); local roadmaintenance and related garage work; waste-water management facilities; public water sys-tems; State Fair; data entry and informationmanagement services; DOT state flight instruc-tor training; DNR nurseries; state health facili-ties; and higher education aids administration.

2 0 . 2 1

Contract out collective bargaining. Examinebenefits of privatizing collective bargaining toreduce or eliminate positions and costs that


are accrued throughout the year, even whenbargaining is not underway, in DER’s Divisionof Collective Bargaining. This is one area wherethe private sector already supports many highlyskilled practitioners who could operate underDOA oversight.

GOAL #21: REGULATION FOR RESULTS

2 1 . 1

Reform lawmaking. To address the source ofrule inefficiency, the Legislature will be requiredto use the new legislative impact statementprocess to consider more fully the implicationsof their initiatives and the resulting rules andregulations. The statement will address dupli-cation, truth in cost, cost-benefit, comparativerisk and whether the law is drafted for the ex-ception, instead of the norm.

2 1 . 2

Eliminate or revise irrelevant rules. To allowgovernment to focus on results, not process,irrelevant rules and the paperwork they requiremust be discontinued or modified in a delib-erate, ongoing process, with input. The pri-vate sector, local government and citizensshould participate, under deadline pressure,in an honest assessment of all regulations, in-cluding licensed professions.

2 1 . 3

Increase the use of education as a preventiontool. To effectively allow citizens to do the rightthing, regulatory agencies should redirect re-sources from micro-scrutiny of process andpaperwork to education that gives citizens,businesses, local governments and communi-ties the information they need to do the rightthing.

2 1 . 4

Agencies must develop missions with perfor-mance indicators. To be effective, agenciesmust have mission statements that result inmission-critical goals that drive actions andinvestments. Agencies have missions but theydon’t always have appropriate impact on man-agement systems.

2 1 . 5

Agencies should earmark funds for public li-aison. To address a serious shortcoming inmost regulatory agencies, strategy-driven liai-son efforts should address serious misinforma-tion about the goals, content and administra-tion of administrative rules. Failure to do sowill further undermine agency credibility.

2 1 . 6

Designate the Joint Committee for the Reviewof Administrative Rules as the state’s regula-tory ombudsperson. To address serious com-plaints from businesses, local governments andthe legal profession about poor technical qual-ity of rules and agency coordination in ruledevelopment, designate and equip the JointCommittee for the Review of AdministrativeRules as the state’s regulatory ombudspersonand quality control entity.

2 1 . 7

Use meaningful participative techniques. Toopen up the regulatory process to the people,regulatory bureaucracies should more aggres-sively use citizen participation techniques andadvisory bodies (subject to Sunset).

2 1 . 8

Create exchanges to enhance understanding.To achieve a greater appreciation for condi-tions “on each side of the fence”, regulatoryagencies, local governments and businessesshould exchange staff in work experiences.

2 1 . 9

Leverage technology to enhance participationand education. To enhance public input andeducation, agencies should use their own re-sources as well as the Public Information Util-ity in rule development, training, coaching andproblem solving.

2 1 . 1 0

Create a system of regulatory circuit riders.To provide more convenient services and ad-dress uneven application of rules across thestate, create a circuit rider function that canresult in on-site, consolidated permits basedon the needs of the site, not the state agency.

2 1 . 1 1

Use performance, not process, for regulatorysystems. To move toward results-driven regu-lations, agencies and the Legislature shouldadopt cost effectiveness, comparative risk anda total regulatory impact analyses system andtools before setting priorities or making deci-sions. This will require major changes in bud-geting, culture, skills and process in the Legis-lature and agencies and result in significantallocations of positions.

2 1 . 1 2

Set enforcement priorities. To make best useof enforcement resources, set priorities and ameans to address complaints and infractionsof varying severity. Little is being done in thisarea now.


2 1 . 1 3

Promote regulatory innovation. To achievegreater cost effectiveness and use of technol-ogy, agencies and local governments shouldannually share their regulatory innovations,consistent with the Wisconsin Idea.

2 1 . 1 4

Promote professional development. To keepstaff current with technical trends, agenciesshould do a better job of staff training and pro-fessional development.

2 1 . 1 5

Facilitate regulatory coordination and reor-ganization. To better address the world as itexists, agencies should be less turf protectiveand set up mechanisms developed withinagencies and between agencies to facilitate in-tegration and cooperation. The initiativeshould have carrots and sticks, as the privatesector complained vigorously about lack ofintra- and interagency coordination and turfprotection.

2 1 . 1 6

Create an integrated permitting system. Toprovide better service to businesses, landown-ers and local governments, consider creatingan integrated permitting system that will pro-vide those who need permits “one stop shop-ping,” either through the information super-highway or in walk-in state and local govern-ment permit centers, such as the consolidatedjob centers that already exist.

2 1 . 1 7

Consolidate agency field offices and train per-sonnel. To provide uniform and informed an-swers and decisions to local governments, busi-nesses and citizens, state agencies should con-sider consolidating offices and enhance train-ing of field staffs. Other means to provide uni-form service might be through the informa-tion superhighway.

2 1 . 1 8

Create an electronic system for rule develop-ment and administration. To eliminate con-siderable waste, transform the rule process toelectronic by the 2001 biennium. Implemen-tation should accomplish greater public inputand processing efficiency. Rules’ electronichomes should eventually include digitized vi-sual and adjudication guidance to inform theregulated, the Legislature, the bureaucrats andenforcement personnel.

2 1 . 1 9

Use environmental auditing as a tool to pre-vent problems. To develop a more preventiveand user friendly approach to environmentalprotection, the state should transfer regulatoryenergy from focusing on detailed form pro-cessing to facilitating comprehensive environ-mental audits for businesses and governments.Audits would generally result in corrective, notenforcement action.

GOAL #22: JUDICIAL BRANCH2 2 . 1

Courts should plan for the future as do otherbranches of government. To better plan forthe future, the court system should look tofuture needs, have a vision and plan what thesystem should look like in the next century.The planning process should involve morethan just “officers of the court,” however, andmeaningfully involve the people as equals.

2 2 . 2

The court system should embrace technologyfor efficiency and service. To achieve signifi-cant savings, the courts and the entire law en-forcement system should become electronicin function and culture. In doing so, the legalprofession should initiate a cleansing of stat-utes and procedures predicated upon outdatedprocedural practices that have little to do withjustice in a high-tech age.

2 2 . 3

Address artificial barriers that discourage ef-ficiency. To end the same inefficient, turf-pro-tective practices that affect other branches, thecourts should conduct an examination of themanagement, financial and jurisdictional sys-tem and make recommendations of conse-quence. Failing that, the Legislature should doit.

2 2 . 4

Examine the concept of responsibilities withrights. To give balance in a system focused onrights over responsibilities, the legal profession,a defender of rights, should lead a dialogue oncommunity rights that incur individual respon-sibilities. This dialogue might be in tandemwith the discussion about a Bill of Responsi-bilities (see Preamble). The dialogue also mayinvolve the question, as applied to Wisconsin,whether the law is replacing morality as guid-ing behavior.


2 2 . 5

Aggressively develop a state alternative dis-pute resolution strategy. To reduce the costsof litigation, the courts, as part of an effort in-volving all branches and levels of government,should initiate a dialogue on alternative dis-pute resolution and its application, from neigh-borhood to corporate board room.

2 2 . 6

Address juvenile crime and violence. To sup-port existing efforts in addressing youth crimeand violence, the court system should considernew ways to deal with first offenders, violentoffenders and the community and family en-vironments that can contribute to or discour-age criminal behavior.

2 2 . 7

Provide adequate information to justice sys-tem professionals. To protect the safety of pro-fessionals and better serve the needs of indi-viduals in the system, develop a meaningfulinformation set for individuals in the system.This is not a technology issue, but a systemsissue ranking high in the view of police, socialworkers, the courts and the corrections sys-tem.

2 2 . 8

Calculate the costs of crime and punishment.To get a more accurate assessment of the costof crime and punishment, as part of a truth inspending and legislative impact process, con-

sider the value of different ways of calculatingfor and meeting the costs of incarceration tokeep the cost of punishment affordable.

2 2 . 9

Evaluate new ways of securing funding forcourts. To meet increasing court costs (includ-ing ADA compliance and security), considernew funding sources, such as punitive awardsgoing into a new fund, a sales tax on legal ser-vices, etc.

2 2 . 1 0

Adopt a competitively driven social servicesmodel. To eliminate duplication and providemore effective social work services, adopt asocial services competitive model that focuseson a single service provider rather than mul-tiple providers to individuals and families.

2 2 . 1 1

Place the court system on a sum certain bud-get. To treat all branches equally, place the courtsystem on a sum certain budget.

2 2 . 1 2

Eliminate archaic procedural requirements.To bring the legal system into the high-techvisual age, eliminate the requirement that cer-tain functions or proceedings involve face toface contact and hard copy (as opposed to elec-tronic copy). This will generate the greater dia-logue necessary on questions of rights, pro-cess, efficiency and cost effectiveness.


APPENDIX B

Clarificationsfrom the

Commission Members

ohn Bar telme:

When we started, we challenged ourselves to be bold,to break out of the conventional, to launch real change.We knew we could only start and could not do italone. In our research, we found that, in isolated cir-cumstances, small groups and individuals haveachieved success at making change work.

One of the Commission’s goals, the most im-portant in my opinion, is to create the statewide envi-ronment and culture in which thoughtful, responsiblepeople drive continuous renewal and improvement froma citizen focused understanding. If we were successful,then we have launched an irreversible chain reaction thatwill spread across the state, throughout all branches andon into county and local units. Think about it! That pro-action will eliminate wasteful action, replacing it withcoordinated value of life enhancing results.

Success at creating this dynamic result is containedin the new system defined in Goal 20 and its supportingdetail. It can drive the rest of the recommendations inthis report. But it needs to be embraced in total by cur-rent and future leaders. So we pass on a challenge for abold commitment to the current leaders to evolve it intoa working system. We challenge the next leaders to sus-tain it, to make it a way of life. We challenge the futureleaders to review and renew it, to keep it meaningful andrelevant to our future way of life.Marty Beil:

Withholds support for Actions numbered: 4.2, 5.1, 5.5,10.1, 13.1, 13.3, 14.5, 18.11, 20.20, 20.21 and 21.6.

During the last 13 months I, along with 14 othercitizens, legislators and policy-makers, engaged in amonumental task of “re-inventing,” “re-formatting” and“re-engineering” government through the SAVE Com-mission. From the outset I realized that this would not

be an easy task, but felt a certain challenge that was his-toric and buoyed our efforts beyond everyday reality.Throughout, I viewed the work and deliberations of theCommission as a golden opportunity to take a fresh newlook at government, its services, its workers and its in-teraction with constituents. A forum to make bold, sub-stantive decisions and recommendations that would as-sist Wisconsin in the transition to the 21st Century.

In spite of media reports and election year harangu-ing, this process was relatively free of external politicalpressures. The time was right, the climate was right andthe will to change was right, but something went wrong.Somewhere in the continuum we as a Commission gotenmeshed in a process that drove the substance of ourwork. After months of lectures by futurists and academ-ics I felt more like a graduate student in public policythan an agent for change. I truly feel that my fellow com-missioners approached their responsibilities with a highlevel of expertise, experience and desire to facilitate anew way of government doing business—unfortunatelythose resources were not fully tapped in the end prod-uct. Pragmatism gave way to theory and theory gave wayto esoteric ponderances. That kind of spin makes the jobof implementation much more difficult. No one constitu-ency (e.g. citizens, legislators, policy makers, bureaucrats,workers, leaders, etc.) are willing to take this “shot in thedark” without having established an orderly, credible,meaningful measure of outcomes and evaluation. Gov-ernment does not need another academic exercise.

I feel quite strongly that the work of this Commis-sion is far from over. We have only scratched the surface,if that. The Commission and the Commissioners need tocontinue in their charge and find new real ways of chang-ing government. Changes that effect outcomes rather thanjust change. This valuable opportunity of private/publicsector mix of resources should be tapped by the Gover-nor and the Legislature to continue its work. If govern-ment in Wisconsin is going to transition into the 21stCentury, then we cannot squander this resource.

In closing, I would like to express my apprecia-tion and thanks to my colleagues on the Commissionand the staff. From the outset, the challenge was tremen-dous and all involved performed “yeoman” duties, how-ever we just never got to where we had to be.Roxanne Emmerich:

John F. Kennedy had a vision to put a man on the moon.At that time, we had only 15 percent of the informationto accomplish the vision. Because people knew in theirhearts that this was the right direction, the vision cametrue. The same will happen with this report. The taxpay-ers and employees of the state know in their hearts thatthis is the vision that must happen for the good of thestate.

We can ensure progress and productivity throughresults-focused government. We get what we reward. Weneed to shift from a model of structured distrust wherework is monitored multiple times in a process, to a sys-tem that allows people to do what needs to be done whenit needs to be done. The knowledge economy requires


that we no longer dictate the process, but plan the visionthat government is there for their customer’s success andshould be driven by principles rather than process. Asone state employee shared, “Our only product is pro-cess.”

There are billions to be saved when we removethe process barriers and let people serve the mission bybeing held accountable to results and not process. The re-port driven by the Oconomowoc convention where spe-cialists in business and government suggested a systemfor different management, budgeting, procurement andhuman resource systems will revolutionize this state ifimplemented.

As a specialist and consultant in organizationalchange, I anticipate the next stages of implementation.In the denial stage, many will find detail flaws in thereport that they disagree with and therefore discount thatthis will happen. It will happen because it is driven by thepeople. Chaos will follow, but will lead to a system thatworks much better and nobody will want to go back tothe old way.

It’s time to give the government back to the peopleof the state of Wisconsin—A government that is drivenby results, easy for customers to use and does the rightthings well.

Reports don’t change things, people do. We needyour help.Margaret Farrow:

Withholds support for Actions numbered: 4.3 and 17.4.The SAVE Commission was created after several

years of personal effort to have the state conduct a re-view of its management and spending. The Commissionwas charged with “studying government operation, effi-ciency and productivity.” After a year’s work with someof Wisconsin’s most dedicated professionals, I am clearlyaware of the challenge overhauling government presents.

The Commission was the beneficiary of input andexpertise from Wisconsin’s private sector and citizenry.Sadly, it received little cooperation within governmentitself. Government’s reluctance to assist our effort andthe burdensome, bureaucratic process the Commissionwas subject to, both affirm the need to change the waygovernment operates.

Some will criticize this report as too “pie in thesky.” A closer look at the report’s appendix, however, willreveal a blueprint for the future. The appendix containsrecommendations that must be quantified and imple-mented to institute day-to-day change in government.

The implementation effort should be a formal one.This will require the involvement of citizens who are com-mitted to making Wisconsin government work for people.They must be people who are willing to look at new waysof solving problems. As Albert Einstein said, “the signifi-cant problems we face cannot be solved at the same levelof thinking we were at when we created them.”

To reach the goal of relevant, affordable govern-ment, the SAVE Commission has proposed a number offirst steps. The appendix to our report defines those steps

and charts a course for the remaining journey. I look for-ward to working with the Commission members, legis-lative colleagues and dedicated citizens to make Wiscon-sin the model for 21st Century government.Mark Green:

Withholds support for Actions numbered: 11.2, 17.4,17.5, 19.2 and 21.6.

I would hope citizens keep two thoughts in mindas they read this report. First, this document’s founda-tion is consensus, not unanimity. While I formally with-held support on only a few recommendations, I haveconcerns over aspects of others—concerns that this for-mat does not permit me to address. In some cases, whileI support the broad concept of a recommendation, I amuncomfortable with how that idea is stated or illustrated.In other cases, I have not yet seen the costs and details ofimplementation.

Second, I believe this document should be seen asmerely an outline of SAVE’s vision for Wisconsin. As al-ready noted, many recommendations lack the specificsnecessary for immediate implementation. In some cases,this was due to broadness of topic and shortness of time.In other cases, the Commission simply lacked the neces-sary outside resources and staff support.

To get a real sense of SAVE’s vision—a vision thatholds great promise for Wisconsin—readers should re-view (a) the notes and memoranda of SAVE’s subject com-mittees and (b) the many letters and reports contributedto SAVE from outside sources. In these materials, onecan find ideas that are more far reaching and more de-tailed than the consensus report.

Finally, to fulfill the promise that is contained inthis report, I would hope that we create a formal imple-mentation mechanism—an office or committee that cangrab SAVE’s broad ideas and turn them into specific pro-posals.

SAVE’s vision provides us with a framework for a“new Wisconsin Idea.” We owe it to ourselves and futuregenerations to take the next step and continue Wisconsin’stradition of innovative government reform.Doris Hanson:

Withholds support for Actions numbered: 16.3, 17.2,17.13, 17.14, 17.16, 18.6, 18.7 and 20.1.

I withhold support for the following:16.3—Adopt full accrual accounting. A mandate

on local units of government and schools—state dollars—will never be appropriated to cover future liabilities. Theissue has been debated and rejected several times.

17.2—Remove policies that inhibit reality perspec-tive and keep lawmakers in Madison. This statement im-plies a move to part-time legislators. It exacerbates thefinancial difficulties legislators already face in runningfor office, could set up a narrow legislature of wealthyindividuals, and concentrate power in the executivebranch and legislative staff.

17.13—Require 24-hour cooling off period be-tween bill introduction and vote.


17.14—Prohibit proxy voting.17.16—Require public hearings on all bills before

a floor vote. Legislative prerogative—rules in each houseshould dictate.

18.6—Rename a the Department of Licensing. TheDepartment of Regulation and Licensing provides directregulation and licensing of certain occupations and ac-tivities with and through the boards attached to the de-partment.

18.7—Transfer responsibility for serious juvenileoffenders to the Department of Corrections. There areseveral studies presently reviewing the juvenile code.Therefore this recommendation is premature and lacksappropriate study.

20.1—Establish pilot projects and a new manage-ment system by July 1, 1997. The concept is valid butthe implementation and related costs are enormous. Plan-ning and programming budgeting (performance basedbudgeting) was tried in the late 1960s and early 1970sbut perished on its own. The idea was not embraced byeither the executive or legislative branch.

The notion that the Legislature should be inter-ested in “results” rather than costs is very naive. Legisla-tors have to be concerned about a balanced budget. Fur-thermore, legislators may be troubled by losing their leg-islative check on agency spending.

Performance budgeting is easy to define, but diffi-cult to implement. Legislators and agency heads mustagree on performance targets and measures and the in-formation must be readily available and useful.

I suggest the following: 1) DOA could review thepresent state budgeting system for potential improvement.Currently, a statewide accounting system is being imple-mented. This, along with the statewide payroll systemthat has been completed and oversight by the Secretaryof DOA, accomplishes some of the goals of performancebased budgeting. (The State of Florida is considering re-vamping a version of “performance-based budgeting”agency by agency over the next seven years). 2) The Leg-islative Audit Bureau could increase program evaluations.Thomas Hefty:

Withholds support for Action number: 10.4.Although the SAVE Commission report is an ex-

cellent vision statement for Wisconsin, it lacks the spe-cific savings recommendations that many would haveexpected. That lack of detail reflects the actions by stateagencies. Rather than provide fiscal estimates, agencieslobbied to save their programs.

Two issues in particular deserve attention. The firstis the relationship between federal, state and local gov-ernments. The report makes a strong statement to ag-gressively seek relief from federal mandates. The state-ments on local mandates are far more timid. With regardto receipt of federal dollars, Wisconsin ranks 49th of 50states. Moving up just ten rankings would provide $300million in new state funds.

The second issue is welfare reform, a topic highon the national agenda. Although the report addresses

those issues, it lacks a focus on the failings of the systemand the cost to society. During hearings, the testimonyindicated that the typical child has three or four differentsocial workers. This not only is inefficient but provideslittle value to the child. There already are excellent mod-els of focusing social service accountability in a singleagency, such as Lutheran Social Services.

The duplication in effort also can be addressed bythe simple elimination of agencies that have outlived theiroriginal purpose. Wisconsin has three youth conserva-tion programs. Today, with a robust economy, the Wis-consin Conservation Corps, the largest of the three, mustresort to conscripting state prisoners to fill its positions.

Finally, the best social service is a good job. Newstate jobs should be put into areas of high unemploy-ment.George Kaiser :

Withholds support for Actions numbered: 5.1, 10.2(a),18.9 and 18.18 (DNR/DATCP).

I have dissented from several recommendations—5.1 because I believe 5 percent is too large a withholdingand because I believe the basis for return of dollars shouldbe more substantive—for example, by matching localinvestments creating cooperation or by matching sav-ings realized through cooperative efforts.

Recommendation 10.2a implies our voc. tech sys-tem needs change. Elected boards are like “motherhood,”but the present system is one of the best in the coun-try—don’t fix it if it ain’t broke!

Regarding cabinet government. I believe that theDNR, the DATCP and the new Department for Educa-tion should all have boards rather than gubernatorialappointed Secretaries in order to maintain a strong sys-tem of checks and balances between legislative/execu-tive branches of government as well as between politicalparties.

The recommendations relating to a new manage-ment system and to changing the civil service system areextremely important and will have strong cost savingsimplications long term. I strongly believe that the ab-sence of a comprehensive system of comparing civil ser-vice pay, including all fringe benefits, with the private sec-tor is a serious weakness in the present system whichneeds to be corrected and I recognize that it will showboth under and overpayment of employee job classifica-tions. I also share the concern of other commissionersthat too many jobs are concentrated in Madison and ef-forts should be made to place state jobs in areas of higherunemployment, such as was done in Milwaukee withthe DNR District office.Thomas Lyon:

Withholds support for Action number: 18.18.Although inadequate time and staff size placed sub-

stantial constraints on embellishing and detailing somerecommendations of the SAVE Commission, I believe thereport can make a major contribution toward initiatingdebate and providing direction in enhancing the respon-


siveness of government.Throughout the Commission’s information-gath-

ering process, certain themes were constant:Wisconsin citizens place great value on educational

opportunities and environmental preservation in evalu-ating their quality of life.

Citizens feel their views are not heard, respectedand incorporated into the operation of government.

Citizens want public employees to be compensatedand have job security similar to private sector positions.

Citizens desire having the routine services of gov-ernment decentralized to the greatest extent possible.

And, government workers want greater freedomto act independently, and are desirous of taking greaterresponsibility for their actions.

Specific to the SAVE recommendations, I stronglyfavor the continuation of the gubernatorial appointedboard system for the Department of Natural Resources,the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Pro-tection, and the Department of Veterans Affairs (Goal18.18); and would favor a similar governance system forthe newly-recommended Department of Education (Goal10.1). These agencies have considerable policy-makingand regulatory authority, and I believe the current sys-tem provides the greatest opportunity for continuity ofmission and citizen involvement.

While the Commission could not reach agreementas to how the regulatory responsibilities of several agen-cies should best be consolidated, I strongly encourageour executive and legislative branches of government topursue this issue further (Goal 18.4). Citizens are notwell served through the increasing fragmentation of theseresponsibilities.

While the Commission devoted considerable studyto K-12 and higher education issues, little time was de-voted to how these systems can best be integrated withvocational and technical studies. This area needs greaterstudy.

In the short term, considerable opportunity forsavings without curtailing services would be through pro-viding incentives for consolidating local government func-tions, and costing the employee benefits of public work-ers at levels with the private sector.

I appreciate the opportunity to serve as a memberof the SAVE Commission, and truly enjoyed my associa-tion with other Commission members and staff.Lisa Mauer:

Withholds support for Actions numbered: 19.2 and 21.6.Thank you for the opportunity to share my per-

sonal thoughts regarding the final SAVE Commission

report. In the context of the following remarks, it’s im-portant to note that the report and its individual recom-mendations are the culmination of a process based onconsensus, thereby resulting in a less than perfect docu-ment for all involved.

As one reviews the report, it’s critical that it berecognized for what it is, our vision. It serves as a frame-work for some of the long term structural, process andcultural changes that must take place for long termchange. Throughout our deliberations and effort to chal-lenge the status quo, the Commission walked a fine linebetween the temptation to “micro manage” change andthe trap of offering very broad recommendations. Unfor-tunately, our lack of specificity may initially jeopardize anumber of very good initiatives.

As a result, it’s imperative that some type of initia-tive be advanced by legislative directive or executive or-der that would create an oversight mechanism. The na-ture of the report and its recommendations require alonger term strategy and vigilance for its implementa-tion.

While the report contains a number of importantlong term initiatives, I believe the Commission came upshort in identifying short term savings or spending cuts.I am particularly troubled by the lack of fiscal analysis inour efforts to identify potential targets for spending re-ductions, consolidation of services and/or programs, aswell as new initiatives. This lack of attention results in areport ripe with fiscal unknowns.

I have also chosen to withhold support from twospecific recommendations: 19.2 —To recommend in-creased diligence in capturing federal funds without alsoacknowledging the downside risks is not prudent, par-ticularly as the federal government reexamines its ownspending policies, programs and revenue sharing; 21.6—As originally drafted, the recommendation created anindependent Office of Regulatory Ombudsman to serveas an intermediary between agencies and regulated par-ties. Designating the Joint Committee for the Review ofAdministrative Rules as that entity severely compromisesthe original recommendation.

Finally, an area that did not receive attention butdeserves serious review is the state pension or retirementsystem. In addition to its obvious impact on state andlocal government liabilities, a close examination of boththe administrative and legislative activity resulting inbenefit enhancements should be undertaken.Gwendolynne Moore:

Withholds support for Actions numbered: 10.1, 18.7,18.8, 20.20 and 20.21.


Characteristics ofcitizen participants ingroup meetings

£taxpayers (rural,urban)

£tourists£government

employees£new immigrants£visiting scholars£entrepreneurs£businesses (large,

medium, small)£non-profits£residents of

reservations within thestate

£religious leaders£municipal leaders

(school, village, town,city, county)

£senior citizens£non-government

organizations£minorities£students (elementary,

high school, college)£vendors to govern-

ment£people who use

government services£former legislators,

state governmentemployees, lobbyists,members of the press,and current registeredlobbying organiza-tions.

Note: Some 454 media outlets, electronic and print, informed the public about how to communicate ideas to the Commission. Total circulation: 2,876,860.

Date Location Participants Method

30 April La Follette Institute Local gov’t. officials Interviews9 May Rhinelander Citizens Group meeting9 May Rhinelander Elementary students Group meeting

10 May Superior Citizens Group meeting11 May Hayward Teens Group meeting11 May Hayward Local gov’t. officials Interviews16 May Beloit Citizens Group meeting17 May Onalaska Citizens Group meeting8 June Lac Courte Oreilles Citizens Group meeting

16 June Milwaukee Teens Group meeting16 June Milwaukee Citizens Group meeting21 June Appleton Citizens Group meeting22 June Wausau Citizens Group meeting10 Aug Madison WSP Union Focus group18 Aug Madison WPEC Union Focus group29 Aug Madison AFSCME Union Focus group1 Sept Madison UP Union Focus group

19 Sept Madison “Close-up” citizens Group meeting26 Sept Madison “Close-up” citizens Panel

Sept-Oct Statewide contacts “Close-up” citizens SurveySept-Oct UW system All employees SurveySept-Oct State agencies All employees SurveySept-Oct Statewide contacts Citizens LetterSept-Oct Statewide contacts Citizens E-mailSept-Oct Statewide contacts Citizens Toll free line

APPENDIX C

Schedule ofCitizen Input

Sessions


Other Voices

Ed Huck, WisconsinAlliance of Cities“There should be someneutral ground wherelocal governments cango to talk aboutcooperation.”

Anthony S. Earl,former Governor“There needs to be abig shakeup ingovernment, perhapsthrough a ConstitutionalConvention.”

State employee“Good public policydoes not always equalpopular public policy.”

Walton A. Henderson,consultant, Wheaton,IL“Partnerships are criticalto government and theprivate sector.Partnerships are built ontrust, relationships andshared goals.”

Thomas L. Consigny,Wisconsin Power andLight, Madison“The most visibleexample of ineffective-ness is duplication andoverlap of police, fire,planning, taxing andother services of localgovernment.”

James B. Nyman,Webster“Every dollar the stategets in its hot little handcomes from taxes andshould be spent withgood management.”

Linda Davidson,Rhinelander“Government should livewithin its budget.Corporations andfamilies live within theirbudgets.”

State employee“How about a systemthat promotes savingmoney.”

State employee“It is an anti-personnelsystem, not a personnelsystem.”

State employee“It takes forever [foranything to get done inthe system], even whenthe agency has theauthority.”

State employee“They gave us flexibilityin procurement but myagency won’t comply.”

State employee“We spend a lot of timeundoing duplication.”

Brian Joiner, Joinerand Associates,Madison“Understand the hugebenefits of workingupstream.”

Bill Binn, Madison“One of the greatestsources of frustration isto submit a permitapplication and thenwait months before anyaction. Often the actionis a request for moreinformation.”

Leroy A. Bley,Ozaukee CountyBoard, Port Washing-ton“Too often we see aconfrontational attitudefrom various stateregulatory agencies thatcould serve much betterif an attitude ofcooperation were used.”

Professor MarcEisner, regulatoryreviewer“There is a distinct lackof intra-agencycoordination in thepolicy area.”

Michael Giese,Onalaska“The unique challengefor government is tostep back and look forthe common good.”

Citizen caller“You’ve got to make iteasier for communitiesto merge.”

Jim Ryan, HalesCorners“There are no incentivesfor county governmentto create their ownfuture.”

Anonymous“Wisconsin ought toimpose an outside limiton the number of daysof its legislativesessions.”

Legislator“The Legislature needsto be hit on the side ofthe head with a 2 x 4.Do it.”

Legislator“We have too manylocal governments.Maybe we have toomany legislators.”

State employee“Collaboration is verydifficult. Create a sub-cabinet that fostersagency cooperation.”

Kathryn Bloomberg,Mayor, Brookfield“Persons working inagencies should dointernships with localgovernment. There is alack of understanding.”

State employee“It goes into the[agency] personneloffice and it dies. It’s likethey learned it from[another agency]”

State employee“There are so many[personnel] bureaucraticsteps and people youhave to go through. It isjust incredible.”

State employee“Top heavy? We havebureau directorssupervising only eightemployees.”

State employee“Section chiefs andbureau directors aresupervising two, three,four, five and sixpeople.”

State employee“It will take me sixsignatures and fourmonths and I’ll pay $300for [computer softwear] Ican get now for $70.”

Tom Landgraf,Heartland Properties,Madison“We need to focus ongoals achieved ratherthan mistakes avoided.”


APPENDIX D

MeetingSchedule

Date Morning Afternoon

Nov. 19, 1993 Gov. Tommy G. Thompson James Morgan, Wis. Taxpayers AllianceCapitol, Madison Prof. Donald Kettl, La Follette InstituteDec. 17, 1993 Carol Skornicka, Sec., Dept. of Industry, Labor & Human Relations Marc Saperstein, General Electric Co.Madison* Dale Cattanach, Legislative Audit Bureau John Christman, General Electric Co.

Suzanne Kelley, General Electric Co.Jan. 7, 1994 Prof. William Cronon, UW-Madison Mission Statement DevelopmentMadisonJan. 21, 1994 Review mission and work ideas Marlene Cummings, Sec., Dept. of Regulation & LicensingMadison State agency discussionFeb. 4, 1994 Joseph Martin, Arthur Andersen Co. Representative David ProsserMadison Former Governor Anthony S. EarlFeb. 18, 1994 Ted Kolderie, Minneapolis Ralph Stayer, Johnsonville FoodsMadisonMar. 4, 1994 George Meyer, Sec., Dept. of Natural Resources Cathy Zeuske, State TreasurerUWSI Alan Tracy, Sec., Dept. of Agriculture, Trade & Consumer Protection James Doyle, Attorney GeneralPewaukee Former Governor Martin Schreiber Douglas LaFollette, Secretary of StateMar. 18, 1994 Daniel Burrus, Burrus Research Committee workPewaukeeApr. 7, 1994 James Morgan, Jr., Wisc. Assoc. of Manufacturers and Commerce Committee workMilwaukee Paul Light, Humphrey Institute

Walton Henderson, Business ResearchApr. 21, 1994 Dwight York, Wis. Technical College System Committee reportsMadison Robert Trunzo, Sec.,Dept. of Development Charles Thompson, Sec.,Dept. of Transportation

John Benson, Supt., Dept. of Public Instruction Cheryl Parrino, Chair, Public Service CommissionKatherine Lyall, Pres., UW System

May 5, 1994 Gerald Whitburn, Sec., Dept. of Health & Social Services Wisconsin Towns AssociationMadison Michael Sullivan, Sec., Dept. of Corrections Wisconsin Counties AssociationMay 19, 1994 League of Wisconsin Municipalities Mark Bugher, Sec., Dept. of RevenueMadison Wisconsin Alliance of Cities Jon Litscher, Sec., Dept. of Employment Relations

James Klauser, Sec., Dept. of AdministrationJune 6, 1994 Committee work Committee workMadisonJune 20, 1994 Regulatory Reform Report: Information Highway LegislationCapitol Judge William Eich Committee workMadison Prof. Marc Eisner

Prof. Evan RingquistJuly 7, 1994 Committee work Highlights from First Citizen MeetingsPromega Public Input PlanMadison Committee work

Rural DevelopmentLabor and Workplace Trends

July 20, 1994 Video conference demonstration Committee workWisconsin Center Andy Machuda, Teltech, Minneapolis, MNMadison Jay Sorenson, Midwest ExpressAug. 5, 1994 Judge Moria Krueger, Madison Committee workMadisonAug. 22, 1994 Community Success Panel Committee workEsperanza Unida Harry Boyte, Humphrey InstituteMilwaukee


Date Morning Afternoon

Dec

’93

Jan

’94

Feb

’94

Mar

ch ’9

4Ap

ril ’9

4M

ay ’9

44Ju

ne ’9

4Ju

ly ’9

4

Aug

’94

Sept

’94

Oct

’94

Nov

’94

Dec

’94

Jan

’95

Feb

’95

Mar

ch ’9

5Ap

ril ’9

5M

ay ’9

5

June

’95

July

’95

Tim

elin

e

1 2 4 7 8

3

5

6

9

Orientation

Define Mission

Gather Information

1

2

3

Committee Work

Citizen Input

4

5

Identify Options

Make Choices

6

7

Report

Communication

8

9

Sept. 8-9, 1994 Commission retreat Brian Joiner, FacilitatorMadison College Charles Savage, Facilitatorof Business Donald Kettl, Luncheon SpeakerMadisonSept. 26, 1994 Discussion of themes Committee workMadison Lori Gibson, TDS Telecom, Madison

FacilitatorSept. 26, 1994 Special event: speech on Reinventing Government by David OsbornePromegaMadisonOctober Individual committee meetings**October 28-29 Government Operations Reform workshopOconomowocNov. 11, 1994 Public input summary Committee 4 reportMadison Committee 2 report Committee 3 report

Committee 1 reportNov. 17, 1994 First round of consideration of consolidated decision topicsUWSIPewaukeeDec. 1, 1994 Continue first round of consideration of consolidated decision topicsMadisonDec. 8, 1994 Continue first round of consideration of consolidated decision topicsUWSIPewaukeeDec. 15, 1994 Second round of consideration of consolidated decision topicsMadison Governor Tommy G. ThompsonDec. 22, 1994 Continue second round of consideration of consolidated decision topicsDept. ofTransportationOfficesMadison

* Unless otherwise noted, Commission meetings were held in the St. Croix Room, Dept. of Administration, 101 E. Wilson St., Madison.** Committees often met between regularly scheduled full Commission meetings noted above.


APPENDIX E

IncompleteList of ThoseWho Helped

Berard, David, HaywardBerby, Judy, RhinelanderBergersen, Jon, Quad/Tech Inc., SussexBerman, Lisa, Harley Davidson Co., MilwaukeeBertelsen, Barry, HolmenBeveridge, Mark, Shared Computer Center, Fond du

LacBeyer, Jane, City of Milwaukee, MilwaukeeBinger, Lydia, SuperiorBirren, David, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonBishop, Jim, Dept. of Natural Resources, SpoonerBlahnik, Glen, Dept. of Employment Relations,

MadisonBlanks, Deborah, City of Milwaukee, MilwaukeeBloomberg, Kate, Mayor, City of Brookfield, BrookfieldBorgh, Karin, BioPharmaceutical Technology Center

Institute, MadisonBoyd, Tayisha, MilwaukeeBrandl, Brenda, Dept. of Administration, MadisonBraun, Ronald J., SEABredeson, Peg, BeloitBrink, Gene, Sun PrairieBrink, Mary Jo, Sun PrairieBrinson, Diane, Dept. of Naural Resources, MadisonBrodkey, Dan, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonBrody, Marc, China Environmental Fund, Mount

HorebBrown, D’Araun, MilwaukeeBrown, Senn, Wisconsin Association of School Boards,

MadisonBryson, Tina, Dept. of Natural Resources, MilwaukeeBuchholz, Ronald, Dept. of Industry, Labor, and

Human Relations, MadisonBula, Bill, MadisonBullard, Susan, Dept. of Public Instruction, MadisonBurr, Sara, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonButler, Debbie, HaywardByars, Debra, Oscar Mayer Foods Corporation,

MadisonCady, Dean J., Dept. of Administration, MadisonCady, William, Andersen Consulting, MilwaukeeCahoon, John, APV Crepaco, Lake MillsCarlson, Richard, AppletonCasebolt, Myrna, Dept. of Health and Social Services,

MadisonCassady, Mary, Dept. of Corrections, MadisonCattanach, Dale, Legislative Audit Bureau, MadisonChapin, John, Dept. of Health and Social Services,

Madison

Aasen, Susan, CouderayAbrahamsen, Jan, Dept. of Administration,MadisonAcheson, Patricia, HaywardAdamany, David, Wayne State University, Detroit,MIAddis, Jim, Dept. of Natural Resources, Madison

AFSCME Council 24, MadisonAhner, Betsy, Chamber of Commerce, BeloitAlbert, Fritz, MadisonAllsen, Diann, Legislative Audit Bureau, MadisonAmacher, Sam, MadisonAnderson, Nicole, MilwaukeeAnderson, Ron, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonArmajani, Babak J., St. Paul, MNArts, Jim, Cooperative Development Services, MadisonArtus, John, MarathonAspuro, Maytee, Dept. of Industry, Labor, and Human

Relations, MadisonBaggot, Erin, Dept. of Natural Resource, MadisonBalakhovsky, Beverly, Dept. of Corrections, MadisonBarbic, Bill, Dept. of Administration, MadisonBarkelar, Craig, Legislative Audit Bureau, MadisonBass, Melissa, Humphrey Institute, Minneapolis, MNBauer, Jere, Jr., Legislative Fiscal Bureau, MadisonBeal, Representative Polly, MilwaukeeBeck, Joan R., Attorney, West BendBeckwith, David, UW Regent President Emeritus,

MadisonBegay, Gene, HaywardBegay, Lynn Nell, HaywardBelmas, Gene, Principal, Pine Lake School,

Rhinelander


Chapman, Esther, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade andConsumer Protection, Madison

Chilsen, Walter, WausauChrist, Jack, Leadership Institute, Ripon College, RiponChristenson, Stephen, Dept. of Industry, Labor and

Human Relations, MadisonChristenson, David, Deputy Commissioner of Savings

and Loan, MadisonChristian, Shannon, Dept. of Health & Social ServicesChurchill, Susan, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonCiske, Thom, Chamber of Commerce, AppletonCoakley, Allison, State Senate, MadisonCoggs, Milele, MilwaukeeCoplien, Kim, MadisonCosgrove, Howard, Lindsay-Stone, MadisonCosh, Bill, Wisconsin Association of School Boards,

MadisonCottrell, Harry S., RhinelanderCullen, Tim, MilwaukeeCurtis, Tom, Teltech, MilwaukeeDaniels, Richard E., Mayor, MarshfieldDarden, Deborah, Right Alternative Family Center,

MilwaukeeDary, Todd, La Follette Institute Student, UW-MadisonDavidson, Linda H., RhinelanderDavidson, Melvin L., RhinelanderDavis, Buzz, MadisonDean, Richard, Commissioner of Banking, MadisonDeBroux, Richard, Mayor, AppletonDelaney, Corrine, HaywardDenton, Frank, Editor, Wisconsin State Journal,

MadisonDokken, Janet, Dept. of Administration, MadisonDonoghue, Sheehan, MadisonDrach, Dawn, MerrillDraws, Jackie, Virchow Krause & Co., MadisonDreyfus, The Honorable Lee Sherman, WaukeshaDuChateau, Sharon, AppletonDummer, Kathleen, HolmenDummer, Mike, National Farmers OrganizationDumonsau, Frank R., Jr., SuperiorDums, Aricca, HaywardDyson, Christopher, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonEarl, The Honorable Anthony, MadisonEberhardy, Judith, AppletonEckberg, Cathryn, Amherst JunctionEcklund, Karen, Dept. of Health and Social Services,

MadisonEcker, Jack Aarol, City Council, Port Washington,

Eggers, William, Reason Foundation, Los Angeles, CAEhley, Kent, Creative Quality Solutions, WauwatosaEich, The Honorable William, Wisconsin Court of

Appeals, MadisonEisner, Marc Allen, Wesleyan University, Middletown,

CTEliasoph, Nina, MadisonEllingstad, Marc, La Follette Institute Student, MadisonElliott, Theresa, Dept. of Industry, Labor and Human

Relations, MadisonEndres, Paul, Dept. of Public Instruction, MadisonErickson, Barbara, SuperiorErickson, Donald, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonErickson, Stephen B., SuperiorErickson, Richard, USAA Insurance, San Antonio, TXFarmiloe, Mary, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonFarnham, Stanley E., SSI Technologies, JanesvilleFauerbach, Neil, Virchow, Krause & Co., MadisonFay, Margaret, MadisonFerris, Dave, Virchow Krause & Co., MadisonFields, Dan, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonFischer, R. Scott, National Academy of Public Adminis-

tration, Washington, D.C.Fisher, Joseph, RhinelanderFitzpatrick, Mary, GE Medical Systems, PewaukeeFoeste, Art, MadisonFogel, Richard, U.S. General Accounting OfficeForbes, Anne, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonFranch, Debbie, MadisonFrogg, Harold, Stone LakeFrank, Boris, VeronaFrazier, Thomas, Coalition of Wisconsin Aging GroupsFulcher, John, Chief, Menomonee Falls Fire Dept.Gaebler, Ted, Municipal Resource Consultants, San

Rafael, CAGaiashkibos, Tribal Chair, Lac Courte Oreilles Tribe,

HaywardGarman, James, Arthur Andersen & Co., MilwaukeeGates, Robin, Dept. of Industry, Labor and Human

Relations, MadisonGattine, Drew, Maine Dept. of HealthGauger, Sharon, WausauGehrig, Ray, JanesvilleGenng, DebbieGibson, Gar, Dept. of Transportation, MadisonGibson, Lori, TDS Telecom, MadisonGiese, Michael, OnalaskaGold, Steve, Center for Study of the States, Albany, NYGomoll, Jeanne, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonGordon, Rick, DE Business Solutions, Middleton


Goss, Janice M., Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonGray, William, Harley Davidson Motor Co., MilwaukeeGregg, Steve, BeloitGrossenbach, Fred, Grossenbach Associates, MadisonGrover, Bert, ShawanoGutknecht, Karl, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and

Consumer Protection, MadisonHaidinger, Shirley, MadisonHamel, Mary, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonHammond, Ken, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonHangartner, Bill, President, Quality Calibration Service

Inc., West AllisHankwitz, John, Quad/Graphics, River HillsHanna, Donald E., University of Wisconsin, MadisonHanson, Dennis, Dept. of Public Instruction, MadisonHanson, Howard, City Attorney, HaywardHarris, Doug, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonHartman, Don, Dept. of Transportation, MadisonHarwood, Ken, AppletonHaupt, John M., Mayor, RiponHaverkampf, Kelly, Rural Development Council,

MadisonHeidel, Sandy, OnalaskaHenkes, Jonathan, UW-System, MadisonHeuer, Kathy, Dept. of Revenue, MadisonHoffmann, Loren, Dept. of Administration, MadisonHoffman, Marlene, Wisconsin Association of School

Boards, MadisonHolman, Shirley, OnalaskaHolperin, The Honorable James, Eagle RiverHornik, James, Integration Planning Services, MadisonHoward, Thomas, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and

Consumer Protection, MadisonHuitt, Frank, Dept. of Transportation, MadisonHummel, Barb, MAQIN, MadisonHutchinson, Peter, Public Strategies Group, St.Paul,

MNHynum, Jill, MadisonIsensee, Chris, HaywardIsham, Michael J. Jr., Stone LakeJames, Ellen, UW System, MadisonJelinski, David, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and

Consumer Protection, MadisonJohnson, Matt, STRIVE Foundation, MilwaukeeJohnson, Rich, Los Angeles County CourtsJohnson, Ross, Eau ClaireJohnson, Samuel, MilwaukeeJohnson, William, Hayward

Joiner, Brian, Joiner Associates, MadisonJonen, Michael, Office of Senator Margaret Farrow,

MadisonJones, Dale, MadisonJones, Megan, John F. Kennedy School, Harvard

University, Cambridge, MAJordan, Casey, MadisonKellett, William, NeenahKellor, Eileen, Dept. of Employment Relations,

MadisonKelly, Dan T., City Manager, BeloitKennedy-Parker, DeWayne, MadisonKettl, Donald F., La Follette Institute, UW-MadisonKhademian, Anne, La Follette Institute, UW-MadisonKing, Douglas, Dept. of Administration, MadisonKing, Steve, La Follette Institute Student, MadisonKinney, Anne Spray, City of Milwaukee, MilwaukeeKinney, Sandy, Nicolet College, RhinelanderKinzler, Ross, Wisconsin Manufactured Housing

Association, MadisonKliminski, George, UW-MadisonKnox, Carol Ward, Morgan & Myers, JeffersonKohl-Riggs, John, Isthmus Engineering and Manufac-

turing, MadisonKolb, Charlie, Washington, D.C.Kraus, Bill, MadisonKrause, Joanne, MadisonKrome, Margaret, Wisconsin Rural Development

Center, Mt. HorebKrueger, The Honorable Moria, Circuit Court Judge,

MadisonKuester, Dennis, M&I Bank, MilwaukeeKulibert, Gary, Dept. of Natural Resources, RhinelanderKuykendall, Marie, HaywardKuziej, Jamie, HaywardLacy, Anne, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonLake, Michael, Virchow Krause & Co., MadisonLandgraf, Thomas, President, Heartland Properties,

MadisonLang, Bob, Legislative Fiscal Bureau, MadisonLauer, Noreen, Channel One, MilwaukeeLavigna, Bob, Dept. of Employment Relations,

MadisonLeard, Elizabeth, OconomowocLeabman, Sylvan, Leabman and Associates, BaysideLeard, Marshall, OconomowocLee, Mordecai, MilwaukeeLefebvre, Daniel, OnalaskaLeibowitz, Alice, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

Madison


Lichterman, Paul, MadisonLiconna, Ruby, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonLighten, Christopher, Maine Attorney General’s officeLillge, Eugene, Outgamie County, AppletonLorang, Dick, Dept. of Health and Social ServicesLovejoy, Michael, Dept. of Transportation, MadisonLozoff, Dan, BaysideLucey, The Honorable Patrick J., MequonLue-Hing, Rose, MilwaukeeLuljak, Thomas, United Wisconsin Services, Milwau-

keeLutz, Tom, HaywardMaday, Thomas, Commissioner of Credit Unions,

MadisonMadigan, Michael, PSG, CedarburgMadison Chamber of CommerceMadison Junior College of Business, MadisonMaloney, John, AmeritechMarkusen, Jessica, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonMarshall, Jim, Marketing Communications Consult-

ants, Green BayMartin, Joseph, Arthur Andersen Co., Roseland, NJMartin, Larry, SuperiorMason, Tony, Legislative Fiscal Bureau, MadisonMatarazzo, James, Simmons College, Boston, MAMatera, Ray, MadisonMaupuy, Marjorie, American Society for Quality

Control, MilwaukeeMayberry, Kris, HaywardMeyer, Jean B., Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonMcDermid, Mark, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonMcGillis, Eugene G., SuperiorMcHugh, Colene, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonMcKenzie, Ellyn, Wisconsin Federation of Coopera-

tives, MadisonMcLaughlin, John, Education Investing, Inc., St.

Cloud, MNMcMahon, Paul, Dept. of Administration, MadisonMeaney, Mark, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonMeier, Patrick, Dept. of Administration, MadisonMeltz, Nathan, SuperiorMercer, James, Mercer Group, AtlantaMerrill, Nancy, WebsterMestelle, Erica, HaywardMeyer, Dan, Consolidated Papers, Wisconsin RapidsMeyer, Jean B., Dept. of Natural ResourcesMilkelson, Tom, Legislative Audit Bureau, Madison

Miller, Lauren, The Executive Committee, HoriconMiller, Michael, Mayor, Fond du LacMiller, Stephen R., HaywardMishler, Florence, BeloitMoore, Michael, Wisconsin Education Association

Council, MadisonMorgan, James Jr., Wisconsin Association of Manufac-

turers and Commerce, MadisonMorgan, James Sr., Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance,

MadisonMorse, Stuart, Dept. of Administration, MadisonMorstad, Steven, Montgomery Morstad Inc., MiddletonMosgaller, Tom, City of Madison, MadisonMueller, Carl, MilwaukeeMueller, Janice, Legislative Audit Bureau, MadisonMugan, Karen, Sun PrairieMueller, Gerald R., SEAMunson, Bruce, Revisor of Statutes, MadisonMurphy, Kathleen M., State of Wisconsin Supreme

Court, MadisonMurray, Aleta, MadisonMuzik, Ed, The Association of University of Wisconsin

Faculties, MadisonMyers, Jeff, McFarlandMylrea, Sharon, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and

Consumer Protection, MadisonNachreiner, Beth, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and

Consumer Protection, MadisonNadeau, E.G., Cooperative Development Services,

MadisonNaylor, Joe, HaywardNiebler, Marybeth, American Society for Quality

Control, MilwaukeeNekich, Timonthy J., City Council, WaukeshaNelson, Connie, Public Strategies Group, St. Paul, MNNelson, Ed., Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonNelson, Lewis, HaywardNelson, Linda, Dept. of Administration, MadisonNelson, Mary Jane, HolmenNelson, Tiffany, HaywardNeumann, Thomas, MilwaukeeNimz, Lynn, Wisconsin Counties Association, WausauNovak, Ron, Dept. of Natural Resources, MilwaukeeNuenfeldt, Phil, AFL-CIO, MilwaukeeNystrom, Richard B., SuperiorO’Brien, Pat, PoynetteOdden, Allen, UW Education Administration, MadisonOden, Harry, Milwaukee Public Schools, MilwaukeeOhman, Laurie, Public Strategies Group, St. Paul, MNOmokunde, Sowande, Milwaukee


Olson, Ken, MadisonOnorato, Nic, MilwaukeeOrton, Herbert, Dept. of Development, MadisonOsborne, David, Boston, MAOstermann, Eric, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonOtto, Sherry, Dept. of Natural Resources, RhinelanderOulahan, Richard, Esperanza Unida, MilwaukeePagel, Connie, MerrillPaquette, Mary, SuperiorPatel, Neelan, FranklinPetchenik, Jordan., Dept. of Natural Resources,

MadisonPetroske, Carolyn, SuperiorPlache, Kim, La Follette Institute Student, State

Representative, MadisonPlaisted, Mike, Wisconsin Federation of TeachersPlummer, Betty A., Pepin County Land Conservation

Dept., PepinPoss, Thomas, HaywardPoulson, Dan, Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation,

MadisonPowless, Lloyd E. Jr., Oneida Tribe of Indians of

Wisconsin, OneidaPrange, JoAnne, Dept. of Health ad Social Services,

MadisonProchaska, Ben, Straus Printing Co., MadisonProsser, David, Representative, AppletonPurchatzke, Mike, Brown County, Green BayQueen, Bob E., Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonRamer, Marge, Dept. of Administration, MadisonRath, John, Milwaukee County Dept. of AdministrationReddin, Mary, Milwaukee County, MilwaukeeReed, Craig N. Jr., MilwaukeeReiche, Jill, WausauReising, Jack, A.O. Smith, MilwaukeeRemsik, Jeffrey J., Remsik-Mueller, Inc., MilwaukeeRicco, Philip, Dept. of Revenue, MilwaukeeRiorden, Sue,Wisconsin Gas Co., MilwaukeeRingquist, Evan J., Florida State University, Tallahassee,

FLRobarts, Ruth, MadisonRobinson, Skip, Boys and Girls Club of Greater

Milwaukee, MilwaukeeRomine, Van, Center for the New West, Ontario, CARowe, Jane, MerrillRowe, Kurt, MerrillRuocco, Joe, GE Medical Systems, WaukeshaSaam, Rob, Thompson Consulting, BrookfieldSamuel, Barbara, Dept. of Administration, Madison

Savage, Charles, Wellesley, MASheahan, Pat, Dept. of Natural Resources, FitchburgSchmidt, Robert J., HaywardSchoenike, Jerald, Clintonville Schools, ClintonvilleSchrantz, Roger, Dept. of Transportation, MadisonSchraufnagel, Allen, Former District Administrator,

Elroy-Kendall-WIlton School DistrictSchreiber, The Honorable Martin, MilwaukeeSchreier, Ron, AppletonSchubring, Ben, HaywardScott, James, 100 Black Men of Milwaukee, Inc.,

MilwaukeeSeemeyer, Linda, Dept. of Administration, MadisonSell, Steve, Office of Justice AssistanceSensenbrenner, Joseph, Sensenbrenner Associates,

MadisonSimpson, Victoria, Kettering FoundationSkoloda, David, HolmenSlemrod, Sonia, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonSmith, Don, HaywardSnow, April, HaywardSobocinski, Philip Z., University Industry Research

Program, MadisonSoellner, Jeff, Dept. of Natural Resouces, MadisonSorenson, Jay, Midwest Express, MilwaukeeSorenson, Robert P., UW-MadisonSouba, Heidi, HaywardSpencer, Professor Kenneth, University of Birmingham,

Birmingham, EnglandStaley, Phil, Dept. of Transportation, MadisonStanford, Jason, MilwaukeeStanford, Jermaine, MilwaukeeStark, Faye, Dept. of Public Instruction, MadisonStayer, Ralph C., Johnsonville Foods, KohlerStedman, Robert, Chief, City of Waukesha Fire Dept.,

WaukeshaSteeger, Daniel, Dept. of Corrections, MadisonSteinhoff, Steve, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and

Consumer Protection, MadisonSteinkellner, William P., BeloitStenstrup, Al, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonSterr, Troy, La Follette Institute Student, UW-MadisonStevenson, John, Survey Lab, U-W MadisonStewart, Marie, Wisconsin Science Professionals,

MazomanieStingley, Ronda Nicole, MilwaukeeStolzenberg, John, MadisonStone, Debra, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonStoner, Nadine, Beloit


Strand, Richard, Dept. of Administration, MadisonStroik, Jule, MadisonStuiber, Paul, Legislative Audit Bureau, MadisonSullivan, Edward, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonSundberg, Rick, HaywardSyverson, Anders, HaywardTeichmiller, Erwin, RhinelanderTeitgen, Fred, Flad and Associates, MadisonTeschendorf, Arno, RhinelanderTeschendorf, Nancy, RhinelanderThayer, Lee, Tyron, NCThieme, Richard, President, Life Works, MilwaukeeThornton, Velda, Dept. of Natural Resouces, MadisonTimmons, Richard, Rhinelander Daily News,

RhinelanderToivola, Gloria, SuperiorTowne, Loyal W., Mayor, HaywardTetreault, Ann Louise, MadisonTrettin, Don, HaywardTaylor, Kay, Dept. of Administration, MadisonToussaint, Carol, consultant, MadisonTveten, Gary, Wisconsin Professional Employees

CouncilTwadell, Deborah, MGIC, MilwaukeeTyler, Jean B., Public Policy Forum, MilwaukeeUlichny, Barbara, MilwaukeeVan Der Puy, Nick, RhinelanderVang, Anthony, SchofieldVang, Cheng, MilwaukeeVan Sistine, James, Dept. of Transportation, MadisonVelazquez, Jose, Esperanza Unida, MilwaukeeVickers, Dennis, Dept. of Administration, MadisonVogel, Barbara, RhinelanderVoos, Paula, professor, UW-MadisonWaite, Debbie, Wisconsin Hospital Association,

MadisonWaldman, Kim, WausauWaldman, Peter, Wausau

Warner, Scott, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade andConsumer Protection, Madison

Warnick, Joel, MadisonWatters, Steve, Dept. of Health and Social Services,

MadisonWeening, Richard, Quaestus, MilwaukeeWegenke, Rolf, Wisconsin Association of Independent

Colleges, MadisonWeigell, Carl, MilwaukeeWendt, Bob, MinocquaWierzba, James, Andersen Consulting, MilwaukeeWilhelm, Chuck, Dept. of Health and Social Services,

MadisonWilliams, Bob, Ideas Associates, Stevens PointWiesen, Donald, HaywardWillis, L.M., MilwaukeeWilson, Evelyn, Dept. of Natural Resources, MadisonWinter, The Honorable William, Former Governor of

MississippiWisconsin Academy of Arts, Letters and Sciences,

MadisonWisconsin Association of Manufacturers and Com-

merceWittenmyer, Jayn, Wisconsin Survival Coalition,

MadisonWitwer, Ernest, Dept. of Transportation, MadisonWright, Sandra, SuperiorWu, Stella, Oak CreekWylie, Val, AppletonYazzie, Richard, Dept. of Transportation, MadisonYoung, Donald, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts,

Austin, TXZeinemann, Robert, La Follette Institute Student, UW-

MadisonZeuske, Cathy S., State Treasurer, MadisonZink, Sherwood K., State Attorneys AssociationZins, Al, MadisonZopp, Amanda, HaywardZoromski, David, Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and

Consumer Protection, Madison

* Some individuals had a contribution to make but did not wish to be acknowledged in a public way. Their contribu-tions are appreciated. Listing names does not constitute an endorsement of the report.


APPENDIX F

SelectedDocuments

Prepared for theCommission

Results of Focus Groups of State Employees,Applied Research Systems, Madison, Dec.1994.

Toward a Communitarian Future: RegulatoryReform Recommendations for the State ofWisconsin, Marc Eisner and EvanRingquist, Aug. 1994.

The Role of Government in Land Use Deci-sions; discussion paper, WI Dept. ofAgriculture, Trade and Consumer Protec-tion with comments from the WI Dept. ofNatural Resources, Oct. 1994.

Fiscal Analysis: Draft Recommendations of theStudy on Administrative Value andEfficiency, Legislative Fiscal Bureau, Dec.1994.

Post-Bureaucratic Government for Wisconsin:Report of the Government OperationsReform Workshop, Oct. 28-29, 1994,Oconomowoc, WI, Nov. 1994.

Government Operations Reform Pilot ProjectDiscussion Document; LeadershipDynamics, Dec. 1994.

Public Information Utility, working paper, Nov.1994.

Creating a Public Information Utility, workingpaper, Jan. 1995.

The Wisconsin Idea in the Twenty FirstCentury, William Cronon, Jan. 1994.

Invisible Hands to Visible Heads (WisconsinIdeas), Charles Savage, Dec. 1994.

Letter from William Winter, former Governorof Mississippi, Nov. 22, 1994.

Common Refrains: Strategic Opportunities forHuman Resources; Connie Nelson, Oct.1994.

Community Learning Centers: Common Sensefor Communities, George Kliminski, et al.,Dec. 1994.

* All of these documents are available throughDocument Sales. See page 2 for instruc-tions.

apers prepared by students of PublicAffairs 878, UW-Madison, Oct. 1994.

£ State of Wisconsin Procurement: Intothe 21st Century.

£ Budget Process Reform Options forWisconsin.

£ Performance Management: A Recom-mended Approach for Wisconsin.

£ Relevance of Customer Service toGovernment...

£ Technology Innovation.

Gaining the Initiative in the KnowledgeMarkets: A Marketing Game Plan forWisconsin, Sara Burr and Rolf Wegenke,Dec. 1994.

Exchange of letters among Commissioners,UW President Katharine Lyall,DOA Secretary James Klauser,UW-Extension Chancellor Don Hannaand UW Regent President Michael Grebe,Jun.-Nov. 1994.

Recommendations for Establishing a Leader-ship Institute to Serve the People ofWisconsin, Jack M, Christ, Ripon College,Sept. 1994.

Survey of State Employees, Applied ResearchSystems, Madison, Dec. 1994.


COMMITTEE TWO: VISION

Michigan Public-Private Sector PartnershipCommission; final PERM Report; 1992.

Employment and Job Training Programs;Legislative Audit Bureau; November 1994.

Impacts of Unfunded Federal Mandates onWisconsin; Dept. of Administration;January 1994.

Texas Tomorrow: The State Strategic Plan;State of Texas; April 1994.

New Jersey State Audit Annual Report; NewJersey Governor’s Management ReviewCommission; 1993.

Leadership and State Government: An Analy-sis and a Plan; Joel Arnick; April 1994.

The Blue Book of the States; Council of StateGovernments; 1994-95.

A Cabinet is Proposed; Wisconsin LegislativeReference Bureau; October 1973.

Personnel and Purchasing Classification;Wisconsin Dept. of Employee Relations;November 1994.

Summary of Tax Exemption Devices; Wiscon-sin Dept. of Revenue; February 1993.

Board of Government Innovation and Coop-eration; Minnesota Statutes.

Report of the Task Force on State Mandates;State of Wisconsin; May 1993.

An Action Agenda to Redesign State Govern-ment; National Governors Association;1993.

The Crisis in America’s State Budgets: ABlueprint for Budget Reform; AmericanLegislative Exchange Council; July 1993.

New Design for Education in Wisconsin;Commission on Schools for the 21stCentury; December 1990.

APPENDIX G

SelectedResourceMaterials

Used inCommission

Committee Work

OMMITTEE ONE: STRUCTURE

The Book of the States, 1994-95; Councilof State Governments.

State Education Governance Structures,Martha McCarthy; Education Commissionof the States.

Review of Legislative Operations of theWisconsin Legislature; Rich Jones;National Conference of State Legislatures;May 1994.

Wisconsin’s Financial Regulatory Agencies;Wisconsin Legislative Audit Bureau; 1994.

Government Reorganization in Wisconsin;Temporary Reorganization Committee(Kellett Commission); January 1977.

State of Wisconsin Blue Book; LegislativeReference Bureau.


COMMITTEE THREE: TECHNOLOGY

Courtroom 21; College of William and Mary.

Central Courts Video Project; Los AngelesMunicipal Court; March 1991.

Meeting the Information Needs of Society;American Library Association; 1993.

Low Bid Hazards in a High Tech World;Charles Mahthesian; Governing; March1994.

Science, Technology and Government for aChanging World; The Carnegie Commis-sion; 1992.

Information Technology Management inWisconsin; Information TechnologyAdvisory Board; November 1990.

Marking Government Work: ElectronicDelivery of Federal Services; Office ofTechnology Assessment; 1993.

Revitalizing State and Local Public Service;Commission on State and Local Govern-ment Service (the Winter Commission);1993..

Using Technology to Support EducationReform; U.S. Dept. of Education; 1993.

Reinventing Government; David Osborne;Addison Wesley.

The Village Partnership, Changing Wisconsin’sSchools; 1993 report; The Village Partner-ship; Box 352, Madison, WI 53201.

COMMITTEE FOUR:OPERATIONS

1994 Plan and Budget Summary, City ofMilwaukee, 1994.

The Age of Paradox; Charles Handy; HarvardBusiness Press; 1994.

Leadership is an Art; Max DePree; 1990.

Intellectual Capital; Thomas Steward; Fortune,Oct. 3, 1994.

Fifth Generation Management; Charles Savage;Digital Press.

Technotrends; Daniel Burrus; Harper BusinessPress.

The Fifth Discipline; Peter M. Senge;Doubleday.

Regulatory Politics in Transition; Marc Eisner;Johns Hopkins Press.

Reengineering the Corporation; MichaelHammer; Harper Press.

The Knowledge Based Information Economy;Gunnar Eliasson; Stockholm.

The Knowledge Executive; Harlan Cleveland;Ditton Press.

Report of the National Performance Review;Times Books; 1993.

Recommendations of the Wisconsin Commis-sion on State and Local Relations andFinancing Policy; Harry Wallace; January1977.

Community Politics; The Kettering Foundation;1993.

Fourth Generation Management; Brian Joiner;McGraw-Hill.

The Concord Coalition; Citizens for America’sFuture; September 1992.

Who Killed the Wisconsin Idea; Bryant Kearl;March 1992.

The Dawn of the Knowledge Era; CharlesSavage; OR/MS Today; December 1994.

The New Society of Organizations; PeterDrucker; Harvard Business Review; Sept.-Oct. 1992.

Financing State Government in the 1990s;National Conference of State Legislatures;1993.


The Age of Social Transformation; PeterDrucker, Atlantic Monthly, November1994.

The Theory of the Business: Peter Drucker;Harvard Business Review; Sept.-Oct.1994.

After the Pay Revolution, Job Titles Won’tMatter; Andrea Gabor; New York Times;May 17, 1992.

Restoring Public Confldence in InfrastructureInvestment; Thomas Downs; Intergovern-mental Perspective; Fall, 1994.

The Spirit of Community, Rights and Responsi-bilities; Amiti Etzioni; Crown.

Our Outmoded Tax Systems; Ronald Snell;State Legislatures; August 1994.

Budgeting for Performance, Alice Rivlin;Intergovernmental Perspective; Fall 1994.

Public Management in Lean Years; JamesMercer; Quorum.

Reengineering of Acquisition, Payment,Information and Disposition Systems;Dept. of Industry, Labor and HumanRelations; January 1994.

The End of the Job; William Bridges; Fortune;Sept. 19, 1994.

Strategic Human Resource Management; JamesPerry; La Follete Institute; 1994.

America’s Anxiety Attack; Ronald Brownstein;Los Angeles Times; May 8, 1994.

“This work is just the beginning.The system cannot change itself.

We all must make it happen.”James E. Burgess, Chairman,

Commission for the Study of Administrative Value and Efficiency

STATE - Home - La Follette School of Public Affairs€¦ · STATE OF WISCONSIN COMMISSION FOR THE...

Documents

Transcript of STATE - Home - La Follette School of Public Affairs€¦ · STATE OF WISCONSIN COMMISSION FOR THE...