Gov. Tony Evers issued a sweeping veto of a bill designed to combat the growing problem of fraudulent service animals, arguing the proposal lacked input from disability advocates — even though supporters say the reforms were modest, common-sense, and urgently needed. The bill would have tightened definitions, protected businesses, and penalized people who knowingly abuse service-animal rules, but Evers rejected it outright, claiming it could create “barriers.”
The bill sought to amend the state’s definition for service animals, which would have limited the category to trained dogs and miniature horses. The bill would have also imposed fines on people who intentionally misrepresent their need for a service animal in public spaces, direct the state’s Department of Workforce Development to create an informational brochure on a businesses rights related to service animals, and create new signage for businesses that specify only “task-trained service animals are welcome.”
“While I share the goal of preventing fraudulent representation of emotional support and service animals, I am vetoing this bill in its entirety because I object to the creation of unnecessary barriers for individuals with legitimate disability-related needs,” Evers wrote in his veto message. (RELATED: Bipartisan State Bills Would Cap Payday Loans In Wisconsin)
“[The bill would create] arbitrary barriers to people with disabilities from getting the support and care they need, and I similarly oppose efforts that could jeopardize safe and reliable housing for individuals who rely on emotional support animals for safety, well-being, and stability,” Evers added.
The legislators who introduced the bill — Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara, and Rep. Paul Tittl — aimed to implement several changes to state laws that surrounded the possession of service animals and emotional support animals.
The bill’s authors stated that their proposal would strike “a balance between the rights of individuals with legitimate needs and the rights of property and business owners to maintain reasonable control.”
As it stands, state law currently defines a service animal as a “dog or other animal that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for an individual with a disability,” in contrast to an emotional support animal, which is defined as “an animal that provides emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship to an individual, but that is not trained to perform tasks for an individual with a disability.”
Currently, landlords and condo associations in Wisconsin may not refuse to rent or sell housing, charge more for housing, evict or harass a person who has a disability and a disability-related need for an emotional support animal.
State law allows landlords and condominium associations to ask for “reliable documentation” of an individual’s need for an emotional support animal, however, the bill would have allowed landlords to require a prescription for the animal from a licensed medical professional.
Under the bill, owners of fraudulent service animals would have been subject to a $500 penalty for providing a false prescription for their service animal, as well as each health care provider who writes a service animal prescription for any service animal that has less than a 30-day relationship with the patient.
The legislation was backed by groups who represented housing interests, restaurants, bars and other businesses, while opposed by Disability Rights Wisconsin. (RELATED: Wisconsin Bill Could End Life-Without-Parole Sentences for Juveniles, Allowing Resentencing After 20 Years)
According to the nonprofit aimed at promoting the importance of trained service animals Canine Companions for Independence, fake service animals have “urinated on expensive furnishings, contaminated food, bitten staff, and driven away paying customers,” which has resulted in legislation to ban all service animals, which affects Americans with disabilities who depend on their trained service animal.
“People who bring fraudulent service dogs in public are making it difficult for real people with disabilities who rely on legitimate service dogs to access the support they need,” the group added.
