By Gretchen Schuldt

​Two officers who repeatedly told a suspect that he failed a detector test but failed to tell him the results of that test could not be used in court were key to creating the coercion that invalidated the man’s eventual confession, a State Court of Appeals panel has ruled.

"In particular, we caution law enforcement officers that if they plan to rely on polygraph results in order to elicit a defendant’s confession, they need to inform the defendant that those results are inadmissible in court," Appeals Judge Lisa K. Stark wrote for the divided District III Court of Appeals panel.

The State Supreme Court has questioned the reliability and accuracy of the tests, she said.

The ruling upheld a decision by Washburn Circuit Judge John P. Anderson to suppress the confession.

Stark's decision was joined by Appeals Judge Mark A. Seidl; Appeals Judge Thomas J. Hruz dissented.

"I conclude the conduct of the two officers imposed only minimal psychological pressures upon (defendant Adam W. Vice) and was within the boundaries of what due process tolerates for police questioning," Hruz wrote. "Certainly, overt coercion is absent.​...As for 'other improper police conduct,' I see nothing of the sort." 

Vice, then 25, was  first interviewed in December 2014 by Washburn County Sheriff's Investigator William Fisher after a four-year-old girl said Vice indecently touched her two months earlier.

Vice asked if there was anything he could do to clear his name and Fisher suggested taking a lie detector test.

Fisher drove Vice to Eau Claire, where the polygraph test was administered by Eau Claire Police Detective Ryan Lambeseder. Lambeseder read Vice his Miranda rights, including the warning that any statement he made could be used against him, and Vice consented in writing to the polygraph.  

The exam itself took about one hour and 45 minutes, Stark wrote. Afterward, Fisher and Lambeseder questioned Vice in an interview room. Vice was not handcuffed.

"Lambeseder asked Vice how he thought he did on the polygraph examination," Stark wrote. "Vice responded, 'I don’t know. I know for a fact that I’m telling the truth when I was telling the truth.'”

Lambeseder told Vice, who was in special education classes and high school and had minimal previous contact with police, that he had not passed the examination that it was “very clear” Vice was not telling the truth.

It's hard to be in prison at any time and harder still when the  small niceties – a phone call, a turn outdoors – are taken away during a pandemic battle.

The testimonials below have been edited for length, clarity and to protect the writers' identities.
***

I want to bring awareness to the new phone restrictions....This is for my floor and my floor only. Now, on A3 my current housing unit is being restricted to one 20-minute phone slot after 4 p.m. No other housing unit has to abide by this rule. The floor as a whole is being punished due to a few select inmates with no regard and no respect to others. There are more appropriate ways to handle this situation. Like consequences for the individuals that are abusing the phones.

We already lost our visitation with our families and friends with one substitute video visitation
or other forms of communication. Many of us housed here are Mothers and remaining a constant in our children's life is very important. I have two children ages 4 and 9. They are both in 2 different households. I can't call them until after 6 p.m. due to their fathers work schedule.

With this new rule? I am forced to pick and choose each night which one I can call and say goodnight to! That is absurd. I should be able to call both of my children to say goodnight just like anyone else in this institution. We have a memo posted from less than a month ago stating how they are looking into other ways of communication due to the visits being cancelled at this time. This proves to be the complete opposite of that!

***
I received a minor conduct report for disobeying orders, due to another inmate permitting me to share a phone call conversation with a mutual friend, and I was given a disposition of 40 days loss of phone. I was never given a verbal warning, a written warning, a reprimand or a previous minor conduct report for disobeying orders related to phone use.

Nearly five months ago, (the institution) created an unreasonable pre-COVID-19 pandemic policy, which was originally meant to allow everyone access to the phone by limiting phone use to five calls a day per inmate due to some inmates monopolizing the phone. The policy never addressed the reality of an inmate permitting another inmate to use his phone time, especially during this National State of Emergency. (The institution) never attempted to relax on this policy due to COVID-19, but instead chose to continue this unjust policy in limiting our access to our families, friends and loved ones.

2019 Act 97 –  This act makes battery to a nurse or to a person working under the supervision of a nurse a Class H felony rather than a misdemeanor, as was previously the case.

The misdemeanor was punishable by up to nine months in jail and a fine of up to $10,000. The felony is punishable by up to six years in prison and a fine of $10,000 or both.

It previously was a felony to commit battery against an emergency medical care provider. Act 97 expands that Class H felony to cover battery against any health care provider who works in a hospital.

"Hospital" has a broad definition under the act and includes any facility devoted to treatment of and medical care for three or more nonrelated individuals.

The law was introduced as Senate Bill 163. The companion bill was Assembly Bill 175.

The lead authors of SB 163 were Senators Dale Kooyenga (R-Brookfield) and Tim Carpenter (D-Milwaukee).

The lead co-sponsors were State Representatives Gae Magnafici (R-Dresser) and Cindi Duchow (R-Delafield).

An amendment to exempt some people with mental illness or brain damage, degenerative brain disorder, or developmental disability from the harsher penalties was defeated in the Assembly along a party line vote.

State Reps. Jonathan Brostrom (D-Milwaukee) and Rob Stafsholt (R-New Richmond) voted against the bill.

​Gov. Evers signed the new law Feb. 5, 2020.

Fiscal estimates:

District attorneys, Department of Corrections, Department of Justice and State Public Defender's Office all said they could not determine how much the new law would cost. 

Excerpts

Testimony for:

Kooyenga  – Workplace violence should not be a part of the job for a nurse. However, the reality we have all seen depicted in the news shows otherwise and unfortunately, earlier this year, a nurse was beaten to death at an area healthcare facility. Workplace violence against nurses can be found in just about every type of practice setting – hospitals, clinics, home care, psychiatric, long term care and correctional health settings. .​

By Gretchen Schuldt
​
This post was updated on May 20 to reflect additional positive coronavirus tests reported by the Department of Corrections.

The number of people incarcerated in state prisons testing positive for the coronavirus jumped 70% this week, from 20 last week to 34, according to Department of Corrections figures.

Meanwhile, the state's prison population still is declining during the coronavirus crisis, but at a much slower pace than it did earlier in the pandemic, DOC figures show.

The biggest virus outbreak is at the Felmers O. Chaney Correctional Center in Milwaukee, where 18 people have tested positive as of Wednesday, up from 13 on Monday. Five tested  positive as of Wednesday at the Marshall E. Sherrer Correctional Center, also in Milwaukee. That number is up one since Monday. Another 116 residents of those two facilities have tested negative.

The DOC last week tested all 125 or so of the people held at those facilities at the time. All of the testing has been completed and the results received. 

Two people incarcerated at Columbia Correctional Institution have tested positive, as have eight at Oshkosh Correctional Institution and one at Waupun Correctional Institution, according to the figures.

Some 1,047 people are in quarantine, meaning they were potentially or directly exposed to the virus, according to the DOC.

During the week that ended Friday, May 15, the number of occupied prison beds fell  by 128, just 52% of the 243-inmate decline recorded the week ending April 10, which saw the biggest drop recorded thus far during the pandemic. 

The number of occupied beds in the prison system has dropped from 23,273 on Feb. 28 to 22,008 on Friday, a decline of 1,265, or 5.4%. The prison system is still about 25% over capacity.

The number of filled inmate beds (as opposed to community corrections beds) at the Milwaukee Secure Detention Facility rose for the sixth week in a row, and stood at 463 as of Friday, up six from the week before and 59 from its lowest pandemic population of 404 on April 3.

The MSDF inmate population still is down 24%, or 144 people, from its pre-crisis level of 607 on March 6. 

The number of people held for alleged probation and parole (including extended supervision) also has dropped significantly, from 905 on Feb. 28 to 315 on Friday, a decline of 65%. 

The first chart below shows the decline in prison population for each week beginning Feb. 28. The other charts show state prison populations over time.

DOC stopped accepting most new inmates on March 23, shifting to countiesThe number of people incarcerated in state prisons testing positive for the coronavirus jumped 35% Monday, from 20 to 27, according to Department of Corrections figures.

Meanwhile, the state's prison population still is declining during the coronavirus crisis, but at a much slower pace than it did earlier in the pandemic, DOC figures show.

The biggest virus outbreak is at the Felmers O. Chaney Correctional Center in Milwaukee, where 13 people have tested positive.  Four have tested positive at the Marshall E. Sherrer Correctional Center, also in Milwaukee.

The DOC tested all 125 or so of the people held there last week. Most of those tests are pending, according to DOC figures. 

Two people incarcerated at Columbia Correctional Institution have tested positive, as have eight at Oshkosh Correctional Institution, according to the figures.

Some 956 people are in quarantine, meaning they were potentially or directly exposed to the virus, according to the DOC.

During the week that ended Friday, May 15, the number of occupied prison beds fell  by 128, just 52% of the 243-inmate decline recorded the week ending April 10, which saw the biggest drop recorded thus far during the pandemic. 

The number of occupied beds in the prison system has dropped from 23,273 on Feb. 28 to 22,008 on Friday, a decline of 1,265, or 5.4%. The prison system is still about 25% over capacity.

The number of filled inmate beds (as opposed to community corrections beds) at the Milwaukee Secure Detention Facility rose for the sixth week in a row, and stood at 463 as of Friday, up six from the week before and 59 from its lowest pandemic population of 404 on April 3.

The MSDF inmate population still is down 24%, or 144 people, from its pre-crisis level of 607 on March 6. 

The number of people held for alleged probation and parole (including extended supervision) also has dropped significantly, from 905 on Feb. 28 to  315 on Friday, a decline of 65%. 

DOC stopped accepting most new inmates on March 23, shifting to counties the responsibility of housing sentenced inmates. 

The first chart below shows the change in prison population for each week beginning Feb. 28. The other charts show state prison populations over time.

WJI is taking a look at justice-related bills adopted during the 2019-20 session. 

2019 Act 41 –  The state generally required a license to work as a massage therapist or bodywork therapy, to describe oneself as a massage therapist, bodywork therapist, masseur or masseuse, or to use titles related to massage therapy or bodywork therapy. Violations were punishable by forfeitures of not more than $1,000 for each violation.

Act 41 prohibits a person from hiring a person to perform massage services anyone who is not properly licensed or is exempt from the license requirement. The law also authorizes municipalities to enforce local ordinances that prohibit the provision of massage therapy or bodywork therapy by unlicensed individuals and that prohibit unlicensed individuals from calling themselves massage therapists or bodywork therapists.

The penalty for violating the state law was increased to a criminal fine of $1,000, up to 90 days in jail, or both. Municipalities can impose forfeitures of up to $1,000 for each ordinance violation and the board that licenses massage therapists can assess a civil forfeiture of up to $1,000 for each violation of the state law, or may issue a reprimand, a license revocation, a license suspension, or can refuse to issue a license.

The law was introduced as AB ​143; its companion Senate bill was SB 133.

The lead authors of the bill were State Rep. Joe Sanfelippo (R-New Berlin) and Rep. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield). Lead co-sponsors were State Senators Dale Kooyenga (R-Brookfield) and Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau).

​It was signed by Gov. Tony Evers on Nov. 21, 2019.

Fiscal estimate: 

Department of Safety and Professional Services – DSPS does not have sufficient information available to determine what fiscal impact this would have on local governments.

Testimony for

Sanfelippo – Police in West Allis and Waukesha have uncovered prostitution and human trafficking occurring in multiple massage therapy businesses in their cities. Unfortunately, these have not been the only areas in Wisconsin where such illicit activities have taken place. Another recent story indicates that a New Berlin massage therapy business owner was keeping a place of prostitution and could face up to six years in prison. There have also been incidents reported in Greenfield and Franklin, as well as in other communities throughout the state....

The vast majority of businesses that offer massage therapy services are professional, operate with the greatest of integrity, and follow the law. Unfortunately, a few bad actors involved in human trafficking are tarnishing the entire industry. Current statutes are unclear and leave very limited recourse for our local communities to take swift action in the event that an unscrupulous operation is discovered. A

fter City of West Allis officials contacted our office asking for help, we worked with the Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services to come up with a plan that would empower local governments to take enforcement actions while still maintaining the current state level licensure model.

Testimony against

None.

Registering for the bill

American Massage Therapy Association, Wisconsin Chapter; League of Wisconsin Municipalities; and Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association Inc.

Registering against the bill

No one.

By Margo Kirchner

​Incarcerated people cannot be forcibly medicated unless they are a danger to themselves or others – just being too incompetent to refuse the medication is not enough to justify its administration, says the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

The court recently held that a statute permitting administration of medication upon a finding of mere incompetence to refuse was unconstitutional.

Justice Annette Kingsland Ziegler wrote for the court, joined by Justices Ann Walsh Bradley, Daniel Kelly, and Rebecca Dallet.

In 2005, C.S. was convicted of mayhem and sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment plus extended supervision. C.S. suffers from schizophrenia, and during his incarceration in 2012 Winnebago County petitioned to involuntarily commit and medicate him.

Involuntary commitment is a separate matter from involuntary medication. Those who are involuntarily committed, whether in prison or not, have a general right to refuse unwanted medication and treatment.

The Winnebago County Circuit Court committed C.S. and ordered involuntary medication after finding that C.S. was incompetent to refuse it himself.

In prior litigation C.S. unsuccessfully challenged his involuntary commitment. The recent case instead challenged the involuntary medication orders.

Those orders were based on findings that C.S. was incapable of understanding his condition and could not make an informed choice about medication. At no point in the proceedings did the court determine that C.S. was dangerous.

C.S. argued that the statute allowing medication of an incarcerated person was unconstitutional because, unlike the law governing those not in prison, it did not require the judge to find that the person is a danger to himself or others.

Winnebago County argued in response that it had an interest in the care of mentally ill and incompetent inmates, which justified the statute.

The Department of Corrections announced Friday that it would test all inmates and staff at the Felmers O. Chaney  Correctional Center, with a population of 86 inmates, and the Marshall E. Sherrer Correctional Center, which houses 43 incarcerated people.

Both facilities are in Milwaukee.

When those additional 129 folks are tested, the state will have tested a whopping 1.3% of state prison inmates. Thus far, the DOC has tested about 0.7% of the 22,136 imprisoned people. 

Six of seven people previously tested at the Chaney site tested positive for the coronavirus;  all four inmates tested at the Sherrer Center tested positive, according to DOC information. 

The testimonials below are from inmates at different state prisons. They were edited for length and clarity.

​Well, since Tuesday 5/5/2020 I am now in COVID isolation; yet, ironically, housing us in about the most heavily trafficked area in the [north] cell hall: the showers (and we are not allowed to shower for at least 2 weeks).

It appears that everyone that attended library on Monday afternoon 5/4/2020 is down here with me, less a few that were taken to the hole for the something they said (trivial comments). The irony here is that I was allowed to move about and came into contact with a number of prisoners and staff within the almost 24-hour span between Mon. and Tue.'s quarantine, none of whom are down here. Some staff and inmates were not even wearing masks or PPE. 

On a moment's notice they required me to carry all my property down two flights of stairs unassisted, literally speed walking with two 30-40# bags, a dozen trips. I have tested recently to be malnourished and have serious chronic medical conditions. I wasn't even allowed to eat my lunch, i.e. unless I wished to forfeit my property or go to the hole (which is one and the same).

The isolation cell they put me in was filthy, containing the leftover "mattress," or the old uncovered, no-stuffing, ripped, urea-smelling sack of plastic the last COVID patient laid upon.  In fact, one of these guys has already been down here for quarantine before(!) and back again.  Then, having lost my single-cell, I will be coerced into moving back into a double-cell which they know I will refuse for medical & safety concerns, and will proceed to be thrown in the hole, incidentally forfeiting my recent approval for a medium.

So, allow me to intrigue you with this premise: Guards and inmates alike are free to wear masks/PPE at their discretion, yet even though I don masks/PPE and observe proper protocol, I am put in isolation and deprived law library/court access....

Keep in mind they aren't actually testing us, only screening and monitoring, and they are simply going to throw possible asymptomatic carriers right back into the population and law library, over and over again. And what about staff, some of whom invariably associate with these "Liberate Wisconsin" protests?

***

I have just over 9 months left. They have the COVID cases on one unit at this point. It seems to me that it is staying on that one unit, thank God. But we have guards who work in that unit that then go to another unit later that week. They don't seem to realize that its that carelessness that spreads this disease. We have maybe one or two guards who actually follow the mask ideas and they seem to be getting power hungry now that they have to keep us from being in contact with each other.

***

As of today's date, we have no cases of COVID-19 here. This institution takes the rules of social distancing very seriously. Starting on March 26 we were placed on a modified lockdown. Then a week later we started a full-blown rule change for everything... Starting with day-room time. Where as we used to get almost 13 hours out every day, we now see only 4.1 hours because our day room is broken into 3 groups of out time..(group 1, 2, and 3). Each group consists of anywhere from 30-40 inmates and the times are 1.5 hours for two of the periods and a final 50 minute period to finish off the night.

Inmates are only allowed to sit two to a table, maintain six feet apart, we eat in our cells, we lost the gym for rec, weight room, and library, because it's too close in quarters. But we still have the walking track where we are allowed to walk, jog or run every other day, but only with our group, and no more than 40.

​​"Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications. WJI also will continue to profile former Gov. Scott Walker's appointees who are still in office. 

Name: Beau Liegeois

Appointed to: Brown County Circuit Court
Appointment date: Sept. 20, 2019. (Elected to a six-year term in April 2020)
Education:
   Law School – Valparaiso University, Valparasio, IN
   Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin Madison
   High School – Green Bay West High School
   Judge Advocate General training – U.S. Army JAG's Legal Center and School
         
Recent legal employment:
   2008-present – Brown County District Attorney's Office
   2010-2018 – Wisconsin Army National Guard
   2007-2008 – Brown County Corporation Counsel's Office
     
Bar and Administrative Memberships:
State of Wisconsin
​
General character of practice before becoming a judge: Mostly criminal prosecution; also active in developing treatment court as an alternative to incarceration.
 
Describe typical clients: Represented military personnel as a defense counsel while a JAG. Also assisted with family law issues, wills, and powers of attorney.

Number of cases tried to verdict or judgment: 27 jury trials, 50+ court trials.

Describe up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years:

State v. Riemer – 2015 – Wisconsin Army National Guard – recruiter misconduct – I was assigned as Assistant Trial Counsel (military prosecutor). This was the first General Court Martial in the history of the Wisconsin National Guard. The recruiter committed offenses that were not civilian crimes so the local district attorney was unable to prosecute. However, they were very serious military crimes, so the Adjutant General wanted the offenses prosecuted in a military criminal court. The co-Trial Counsel, CPT Criag Lambert, and I had to draft many court documents from scratch because we were utilizing the Wisconsin Code of Military Justice, Chapter 322 of the Wisconsin Statutes, for the first time in our state's history. The defendant pied guilty to felony offenses and received the first jail sentence in the history of the Wisconsin National Guard. At the conclusion of the case, Craig and I received a meritorious challenge coin from the Adjutant General, Major General Donald Dunbar. 

State v. Brittany Mefford – Brown County case 13CF295 – 1st degree reckless homicide – delivering drugs – My role was the prosecutor at the jury trial where the defendant was found guilty. This was a complicated case where mulitple (sic) individuals delivered the heroin in a chain before the heroin reached the overdose victim. This defendant was the highest in the chain of deliveries and the first drug dealer in the chaine (sic) who was actually profitting (sic) from the sale of heroin. The overdose victim's family was very involved in the case. The victim's grandmother attended every court hearing, but his mother was so emotionally devastated that she was unable to even walk into the courtroom. The defendant was found guilty at trial and sentenced to 6 years of initial confinement in prison.

State v. Maria J. Patino – Brown County case 12CF1570 – Conspiracy to deliver THC – My role was the prosecutor at the jury trial where the defendant was found guilty. This case was part of a large-scale drug trafficking organization that shipped drugs and firearms from California to Brown County. The most significant participants in this conspiracy ended up pleading guilty and received long prison sentences. This conspirator went to trial on her case. It was a difficult case to try because there was no evidence that the defendant ever actually handled the drugs. Her role was laundering hundreds of thousands of dollars that were the proceeds from drug transactions to support the drug trafficking organization. She was sentenced to 2 years of initial confinement in prison. 

Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: Represented defendants and the government before the administrative separation board 

Previous runs for political office: Ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2018.

Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None

All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last six years:

Tony Evers, governor
Tammy Baldwin, U.S. Senate
Mandela Barnes, Lt. governor
Josh Kaul, attorney general
Sarah Godlewski, state treasurer
David Lasee, Brown County district attorney

All of the endorsements were in 2018.

WJI is taking a look at justice-related bills adopted during the 2019-20 session. 

2019 Act 33 – Expands the activities for which a person can be prosecuted on felony charges related to trespassing or damaging utility property.

Prior to adoption of this law, damaging another's property without consent of the owner was generally a misdemeanor punishable by 9 months in jail, a fine of up to $10,000, or both.  The same actions became a felony punishable by up to six years in prison and a $10,000 fine if the property was owned by an energy provider and the person caused or intended to cause significant disruption to operations. The law said energy provider property had to be part of an electric generation, distribution, or transmission system or part of a natural gas distribution system. 

The new law expands the penalty to cover damage to property owned, leased, or operated by water utilities; water production cooperatives, and companies that run gas, oil, petroleum, refined petroleum product, renewable fuel, water, or chemical generation, storage transportation, or delivery system.

Trespassing offenses were treated similarly. In most instances, before Act 33, trespassing was civil violation punishable by a fine of up to $1,000. Trespassing on energy provider property, however, carried the safe felony sanctions as damaging a provider's property.

This section of the bill also expanded the types of properties where trespassing is a felony to include those also included in the damage-to-property provisions.

Exemptions to the penalties were included for monitoring compliance statutory requirements, taking part in otherwise legal picketing or protests that arise out of labor disputes, taking part in legal union organizing activities, and exercising legal free speech and or assembly. 

The law was introduced as AB ​426; its companion Senate bill was SB 386.

​It was signed by Gov. Tony Evers on Nov. 20, 2019.

Fiscal Estimates

​No fiscal estimates were filed.

Excerpts

Testimony for: 

Rep. David Steffen (R - Green Bay) – Critical infrastructure is a term used by the government to describe assets that are essential for the functioning of a society and economy. Most commonly associated with the term are facilities for: shelter, agriculture, water supply, public health, transportation, security services, electricity generation, transmission and distribution (ie. Natural gas, fuel oil, coal, nuclear power) and telecommunication.

In recent years, critical infrastructure sites throughout the Midwest have been the
recipients of worker harassment and millions of dollars of vandalism and damage. Acts such as
these do not only negatively affect the property being damaged but is also putting nearby
communities and environment as risk.

Sen. Van H. Wanggaard (R-Racine) – As you know, our power grid and related infrastructure is a target that can be damaged and/or sabotaged. A single person could create a problem that could disrupt energy services for hundreds of thousands of people. This is danger to our economy and our safety.

​We saw this happen earlier this year in Madison with the MG&E fire. I know the MG&E fire was an accident, but you can see the impact the accident caused. Now imagine, the impact ifthat fire was intentional. The damage could have been far greater and widespread. 

American Chemistry Council, American Petroleum Institute, Construction Business Group, International Union of Operating Engineers Local 139, Mechanical Contractors Association of Wisconsin, Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce, Midwest Food Products Association, Plumbing and Mechanical Contractors Association of Milwaukee and Southeastern Wisconsin, Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors' Association of Milwaukee, U.S. Venture, Wisconsin Building Trades Council, Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation, Wisconsin Grocers Association, Wisconsin Independent Businesses, Wisconsin Independent Businesses Agri-Business Coalition, Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group, Wisconsin Laborers District Council, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, Wisconsin Paper Council, Wisconsin Pipe Trades, Wisconsin Propane Gas Association, Wisconsin Restaurant Association, Wisconsin Rural Water Association, Wisconsin Transportation Builders Association, Wisconsin Underground Contractors Association, Wisconsin Utilities Association – In recent years, critical infrastructure worksites in the Midwest have seen millions of dollars of construction equipment set on fire, hydraulic fluid leaked onto the ground due to vandalism, intimidation of labor on worksites, and individuals using force to break into facilities and unsafely turn off this critical infrastructure. Unfortunately, those causing this damage and disruption often either do not fully understand the harm they cause or simply don't care. Workers - usually skilled, union tradesmen and tradeswomen - are increasingly feeling unsafe and are seeing their equipment and even their own personal property being damaged. Attempts to improperly turn off or sabotage critical infrastructure is also putting our communities and environment at risk, and, in some cases, putting the lives of those doing the vandalism in jeopardy.

To address these serious and growing concerns, the Worker Safety and Energy Security Act adds petroleum, renewable fuel, chemical and water infrastructure to the existing criminal statute protecting our critical infrastructure from trespassing and damage, giving these types of critical infrastructure the same protections as electric and natural gas infrastructure. Nothing in this legislation impacts first amendment rights to organize, protest or picket, and to make that clear language has been included to ensure this legislation does not violate those rights.

Testimony against:

ACLU of Wisconsin – We understand that there is a difference between exercising one’s First Amendment right to assemble and breaking the law. Legislators must recognize, however, that the Constitution firmly protects protests even when – and especially when – they stir anger, question preconceptions, challenge government policy, and induce dissatisfaction with the status quo.

The First Amendment safeguards protesters’ rights to awaken passions, to make the public aware of their positions and opinions. America’s robust tradition of free speech allows us all to effect change by making our voices heard. This is crucial to ensuring that the government remains responsive to the will of the people; it is what sets our country apart and is the reason it must be carefully and consistently protected....

This expanded definition sends a message to protesters, who are often members of Native tribes and the organizations that support them, that the government is watching them and wants them to stop vigorously protesting the impending damage to their lands, homes, and livelihoods. The bill also will create additional uncertainty regarding which “energy providers” are covered by the prohibition. The existing law has significant problems that would be greatly exacerbated by expanding the entities covered. What does it mean to intend to substantially interrupt or impair any service? If a person is part of a human chain blocking the access road for a delivery truck as an act of civil disobedience, could they become a felon?

National Lawyers' Guild-Madison Chapter​ - The justification for this legislation, “worker safety” is a smokescreen for companies like Enbridge and Husky Oil, which have already polluted Wisconsin lands and waters and brought death and injury to workers and residents near their facilities across the U.S. Enbridge is responsible for at least two fatalities from exploding gas pipelines in the U.S. and Husky Oil’s refinery explosion in Superior in April 2016 injured workers and caused a mass evacuation in the city. Wisconsin legislators have stripped workers of collective bargaining rights, unemployment compensation and other protections over the last eight years, so expressions of concern for their wellbeing ring a bit hollow.....

Leased property, which is included in the bill, usually refers to privately owned property that the pipeline company arranged to lease voluntarily or obtained through eminent domain, which was historically only used by public agencies. Leased property is often not marked consistently and oil and gas pipelines are buried underground, so a person might not know where it is. Lessees may not have the legal authority to prohibit others from entering property that is not exclusively used by them, in fact the expired easement Enbridge had in the national forest expressly allowed people to travel through the easement for hunting, gathering and recreation. The “critical infrastructure” bills that have proliferated in states since 2016 threaten civil liberties and public oversight of pipeline operations, which frequently violate the law and employ militarized police to intimidate activists. 

Glory Adams: This is a bill that was written by ALEC and forwarded by corporate entities (eg. Enbridge). It is designed to give energy corporations (including pipelines) extraordinary protections at the expense of citizens. It allows an energy company to call law enforcement and demand arrests and charges against a citizen. There have been almost no incidents of vandalism perpetuated by protestors in the state of Wisconsin. However, Enbridge has operated without permits which did result in two protestors being charged. No employees were injured by protestors. Enbridge is currently being sued by the Bad River Reservation for operating illegally on the reservation since 2013. It is clearly not citizens that need extraordinary charges brought against them, but the corporation committing illegal acts.

The real problem between protestors and energy servers is the lack of empowerment given to citizens. There is virtually nothing a citizen can do to stop the use of eminent domain, destruction of the environment, and loss of property values. Trying to do so means hiring high priced lawyers for multiple court appearances and endless paperwork.

Corporations like Enbridge are quick to say they provide energy for Wisconsin. They do not. Their pipelines simply run through the state. This bill is over-kill. There is no justifiable reason to have it in the state of Wisconsin. There are already laws regarding trespassing and vandalism. This bill also has taxpayers paying for the protection of an energy server. That is a misuse of taxpayer money.

Justin Novotney: We will never forgive you.

Registering for the bill: The American Chemistry Council, American Petroleum Institute, BNSF Railway, Construction Business Group, Cooperative Network, EDP Renewables, International Union of Operating Engineers Local #139, Mechanical Contractors Association of Wisconsin, Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce, North Central States Regional Council of Carpenters, Plumbing and Mechanical Contractors Association of Milwaukee and Southeastern Wisconsin, Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors' Association of Milwaukee, Waukesha County Business Alliance, Wisconsin Central Ltd.,  Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation, Wisconsin Independent Businesses, Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group, Wisconsin Laborers District Council, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, Wisconsin Paper Council, Wisconsin Pipe Trades Association, Wisconsin Railroad Association, Wisconsin State AFL-CIO, Wisconsin Transportation Builders Association, Wisconsin Utilities Association.

Registering against the bill: ACLU of Wisconsin, Ho-Chunk Nation, League of Women Voters of Wisconsin Inc., Midwest Environmental Advocates, Sierra Club – John Muir Chapter, Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.

The main authors of the bill were Steffen and State Rep. Jason Fields (D-Milwaukee).

The lead cosponsors were Wanggaard and Sen. Janet Bewley (D-Mason).

Vote: Reps. Jonathan Brostroff (D-Milwaukee), Nick Milroy (D-South Range), Tod Ohnstad (D-Kenosha), and Chris Taylor (D-Madison) voted against the bill, as did Senators Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay) Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee),  Mark Miller (D-Monona_ and Fred Risser (D-Madison).