Democrats unhappy with Senate's passage of emergency financial manager legislation
The Michigan Senate passed controversial legislation today that would grant broader powers to emergency managers appointed to overhaul the finances of struggling cities and schools.
Rebekah Warren
The 26-12 vote, falling along party lines, came after two days of debate and protests by union supporters in the halls of the state Capitol building. Opponents argue the legislation, if it becomes law, would give emergency managers authority to nullify employee union contracts.
Republican Gov. Rick Snyder and his administration have said there needs to be better clarity over the powers of emergency financial managers in both municipalities and schools. Snyder and other supporters argue the legislation is intended to allow earlier intervention by the state before local governments in financial trouble reach a crisis level.
Senate Democrats today united in opposition to the GOP-backed legislation, arguing the bills give unheard of power to unelected individuals without any voice for local voters and with little, if any, oversight throughout the process
“Michigan has a long history of local control," Sen. Rebekah Warren, D-Ann Arbor, said in a statement. "The Senate Republicans’ passage of legislation to vest unprecedented authority in non-elected emergency managers not only flies in the face of this proud tradition, but also allows these outsiders to make deep cuts to vital services without input from the community."
Instead of trying to take over municipalities and schools, Warren said the state should be focused on finding ways to adequately fund them.
The key bill goes back to the House, which approved the legislation last month, to concur with minor changes made in the Senate.
The legislation passed through the House Committee on Local, Intergovernmental and Regional Affairs, which is chaired by state Rep. Mark Ouimet, R-Scio Township.
"We've been talking about this for six years, and this is the first time the state has stepped up to help local officials deal with the financial challenges they have," said Ouimet, a former Ann Arbor City Council member and Washtenaw County commissioner.
"This is a proactive piece of legislation to help support and give our local communities and school systems the tools they need in order to get them in the best financial position they can," Ouimet said. "Before a financial manager is appointed, it would be the third step in a very rigorous process, so it is something that gives the elected officials the tools they need to help manage, and this is really the first time that the state has been supportive of this."
Ouimet said it's not just union contracts that would be focused on.
"It's all contracts," he said. "It could be the contract with the superintendent of schools, the city administrator, the copier company — it's all contracts. And if people have bargained good contracts, then there shouldn't be any concern."
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's e-mail newsletters.
Comments
DonBee
Fri, Mar 11, 2011 : 7:10 p.m.
At some point the question has to be asked. Is government for the benefit of it's employees? If so than the unions are right, they should have the ability to do as they please. No issue. If on the other hand government has some other purpose, than to benefit the employees and the political class, then maybe we need to re-think the relationship between employees and governments. Is the emergency manager act good as written, probably not. Could it be made better, absolutely.
Bob Krzewinski
Fri, Mar 11, 2011 : 4:45 p.m.
Maybe the end of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address should be changed to... "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth - EXCEPT IN MICHIGAN"
Robert
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 7:50 p.m.
Fascism... simple and plain.
kmgeb2000
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 4:24 p.m.
Works of warning from a former President of the United States of America: "You do not examine legislation in the the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered". This seems to be a classic case were this would apply. We are frequently taking a one-sided, short term view of problems and not doing the work needed to evaluate the problem to develop solutions. One case in point is the "new" dashboards, which summarize billions of dollars in state spending and the lives of millions all in a few pages. Forget the details or whether it accurately reflects the issues at had - we have an happy green up arrow or an nasty red down arrow.
Yeah buddy
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 2:10 p.m.
The guy has been in office for 3 months and people are saying he is out to kill Michigan. Get real. This is just like the people who were screaming that Obama was out to Socialize America. How did that one turn out? Give the guy a chance, you gave Granholm 8 years to destroy the place and you won't even give Snyder a year.
Will Warner
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:17 p.m.
I suppose the reason municipalities or school systems get into financial trouble is not always corruption, incompetence or pandering. A chronically suppressed local economy could bring it on. And it may be the case that local officials are doing their jobs and identifying the medicine, but their constituents won't take the medicine. In those cases Sen. Warren's advice to just give the localities more money is not the solution. (It's especially not a good idea if the cause of the trouble is corruption, incompetence or pandering.) No, restructuring is the solution, and the local communities will often not have the political will to see the restructuring through. They may have to be rescued by outsiders with powers they can't veto.
Bear
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 9:31 a.m.
"Snyder and other supporters argue the legislation is intended to allow earlier intervention by the state before local governments in financial trouble reach a crisis level." That's a lie. This is a plain, unvarnished grab for power and union busting for political purposes. and grye, your statement about "utilizing an outside unbiased party to straighten things out" is a joke; isn't it? Because that's not what's happening. Unbiased parties come from bipartisan actions, not any actions that are voted upon "along party lines". Any crisis will do when you are ready to push forward your ideological solutions when a crisis opportunity comes up. This is what's happening. This is being shoved down people's throats by a conservative government that has been waiting for the opportunity to push forward their agenda of busting up the middle class. Some of you say, well, even without the unions, there's still a middle class. Well, the unions were pivotal in creating that middle class and conservatives are bent on destroying it. The shrinking middle class is not just a term, but a reality. You want to see Michigan back on track? This isn't the way to do it. It makes me ashamed that those we called heroes yesterday, are now called 'leeches' today. Foolish actions by people today will help further the destruction of our great state for years to come. Just when we've been on the edge of some great things to lift us out of the mud, we have conservatives shoving our faces back into the mud once more and calling it progress. Obscene is what it is. Anyone with half a brain can figure out what's going on. Reminds me of the old John Adams quote about conservatives.....
Bear
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 10:06 a.m.
Forgive me, I misspoke. That was the John Stuart Mills quote about conservatives. I find it quite fitting in this particular case and most of the comments here.
Roadman
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 6:14 a.m.
Two words to describe State Representative Mark Ouimet: Local hero.
David Briegel
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 2:17 p.m.
There are many words that could be used to describe DR Ouimet. Resume padder. Expense account padder. Glad hander.
Bear
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 9:36 a.m.
that's a joke.
margie
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 3:11 a.m.
'Government for the people by the people,'....is one of the most important phrases in our democracy. Unfortunately, it is being destroyed by Michigan Republicans led by the Millionaire Gov. to enact a national republican agenda to destroy the rights of the American people. The saddest part of this is that this is happening because of the misplaced hatred by people for teachers, unions, public workers, schools, etc...in the name of some invented budget crisis. Here's the facts, the state of MI had a budget problem of 1.3 billion, the Millionaire Gov. is giving a tax cut that pushes it over 3 billion. This is the real crisis and stupidity of our budget crisis, which. If this was truly about fiscal responsibility, then our republican fiscal wizards would have accepted changes to at least limit the salary of these so-call managers who would destroy everyone's rights...not just the unions that the haters love to complain about. Throwing words out like, status quo, fiscal crisis, union workers is just pure smoke & mirrors to destroy, control and manipulate the rights of working and professional people. This is only the start in Michigan, instead of allowing a small group of people in this state to jam such a needless bill is wrong. Taxing the pensions or retirees, like your elderly parents is wrong and all the haters can gloat about is how the status quo is going to get it! Wow! Anyone not wealthy is the status quo...don't forget only 400 people in this country have the wealth of more than half of the population in our country. Voters of Snyder....How do you like your Gov. now? and Will you like him better when your rights are taken because of your hatred for unions?
A2K
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:56 p.m.
GOP = Tyrannical Despots. Period. How these backwards-idiots have managed to turn the tide of anger away from where it belongs (WALLSTREET) and onto the backs of poor and middle-class wage slaves (hey, I'm one too!), it beyond me. We MUST organize and fight, this is our time - if not now, when? If not us, who? I say GENERAL STRIKE!
Yeah buddy
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 2:02 a.m.
Yeah, what a terrible idea. Why would anyone want an option to come in and try new ideas? Much better to just let the failed policies and spending continue into oblivion. Why would anyone want to clean out the hundreds of corrupt officials that have run Detroit into the ground? All those terrible GOP members wanting to stop janitors from making 80k just because they have worked somewhere for 20 years. Shame on Snyder for telling people in the debate that he was going to do all of this and somehow winning in a landslide. All those few people that voted for Virg are going to somehow multiply 10x in 3 years to vote him out?
Bear
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 9:55 a.m.
It wouldn't be bad, if it was a 'new' idea and one that didn't destroy the fabric of our society. Let me put it this way, according to your position, a house with termites, that the usual methods didn't work, should be burned down, because that's a new idea to try. Show me a janitor making 80k. Your statement here is full of holes. Just because they have worked for 20 years at the same job? What kind of argument is that? Hey, let's just have everyone work at their job for one year and then go somewhere else and train someone else to do the job and hope they stick around long enough to learn the ins & outs of the job to get real good at it. None of your arguments make any sense. And if you think that Snyder's victory was all about his ideas being right, then you don't pay much attention to politics, in my opinion. There's much more involved in that than your simplistic explanation that you portray.. Mocking the opposition shows a lack of class and your arguments show a lack of basic understanding of the issues. But then, you will find out what's going on in a couple of years when you see the effects start to take hold and try to find a way to blame someone else for your woes. It's not going to be pretty. We aren't going to magically become a place where everything is sunshine. It's going to get worse. a lot worse, unfortunately. See then where your hero Snyder is and whom he will blame. Conservatives are in power and the good citizens of Michigan are watching.
talker
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 2:40 a.m.
I may not have pressed "submit" for an additional message, so I'll comment now. When unions and local autonomy are attacked, non-union middle class people are next. Forget about the century of working condition improvements. Large corporations that can hire production workers in low wage countries without American safety standards will still cut American jobs. Will you have to take a minimum wage job? What minimum wage? Some Congressional Republicans want to get rid of it. If you are a small business owner who relies on middle class customers, forget about it. Fewer people will be able to afford products, services, or meals out. One aim is to get rid of the little guys so that necessities have to be bought from big corporations. You won't get paid when you miss work because you got food poisoning because of fewer food inspectors. Each step to weaken the middle class makes it less likely there will be someone who can help you later. There's a quote and I'll approximate it. " First they came for the ____ but they didn't come for me so I didn't speak up. Then they came for the ____but ....I didn't speak up. Then they came for me, but there was noone left to speak up for me. It's a "slippery slope." Don't fall for "Divide and Conquer." The tactic is to pit segments of the middle class against each other and then conquer them all. The middle class needs to unite. Union strength means better conditions and wages for non-union people, too. I'm not a union member, but I support both private and public sector unions.
Lynn Luke
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:51 a.m.
Average Joe: You obviously are unaware of Rachel Maddow's academic credentials or her outstanding research team. Here is a link to the content of Senate Bill 153-158 from the office of the sponsor of the bill Phil Pavlov. <a href="http://www.poam.net/files/Senate-Bill0153-F.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.poam.net/files/Senate-Bill0153-F.pdf</a> I believe it supports my original analysis of what is possible under this legislation. Interesting how trusting you are that this is just a tweak of the original legislation and there is no intention to bust union contracts and to merely work with institutions to remain solvent. It could have far reaching implications when you combine it with the cuts to schools and revenue sharing in the proposed budget. We only have to look to the actions of the legislature in Wisconsin this evening. It was never about the budget as the public employees had already made the monetary concessions requested of them. Wake up and smell the flowers.
talker
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:43 a.m.
I wish it were as benign as some have suggested. Instead of helping school districts with resources, one step of emergency managers will be to strip the school districts of resources and hand out money from middle class taxpayers via vouchers that aren't enough to send a child to private school but enough to reduce the cost of private school. Thus, the richest will run away from the robbed public schools, but people who can't afford to add money to the vouchers will be left behind. Also, Rachel is extremely logical and thorough and her presentation is well worth watching and reading. I urge those with open minds to do so.
David Briegel
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 2:09 p.m.
Good luck finding open minds amongst the naysayers. They only believe what Ruperts blondes tell them. Not what a Rhodes Scholar who actually does reasearch and is quite well informed would conclude! I had FAUX News on for most of a whole day and was appalled at the misinformation and outright lies as they sat there and giggled and flipped their pretty hair! John Stewart and Stephen Colbert point out their lies almost daily!
average joe
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 12:19 a.m.
Lynn Luke- Why should anybody believe someone like R. Maddow. She knows nothing about the laws in michigan, & just spouts off like she is an expert. If she was completely truthful about this subject, she would have acknowledged that this proposal simply gives just a little more teeth in a law that has been in effect since 1990. This isn't a new thing that Gov. Snyder dreamed up. No one is "coming to your town & removing elected officials. The E. manager simply works along side the current local administration to find a remedy to their financial situation. Do some research on your own. Don't be so easily swayed by someone who isn't informed, but quite obviously was put on the news by certain political groups as a scare tactic.
snoopdog
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 9:01 a.m.
Who is Rachel Maddow ? Oh, that gal that disparages anyone who might disagree with her opinions. She's a big force eh, she and the 5 folks that watch her show each night. Good Day
macjont
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 3:28 a.m.
R. Maddow probably knows more about Michigan's situation than you do.
rcastentman
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 11:29 p.m.
In response to Sen. Warren's concerns......maybe, just maybe, this new law will encourage school boards and local government to think twice before spending money unnecessarily? If not, then maybe they ought to lose the right to spend public money. Just sayin'.....
David Briegel
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 2:02 p.m.
All definitions will originate from Rick and Mark!
macjont
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 3:27 a.m.
Yes, we all agree that money should not be spent "unnecessarily." Now define what is "necessary" and what is "unnecessary."
Lynn Luke
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 11:16 p.m.
The Governor's budget proposal will cut taxes on corporations and raise taxes on pensions and the poor, cut exemptions for individuals and cut revenues to school districts and local government to pay for them. The cuts to schools and local government will create budget shortfalls which will leave them vulnerable to state takeover by emergency managers with no cap on their compensation and/or corporate oversight. If you investigate the new triggers outlined in the legislation, you will find some of them are extremely arbitrary when it comes to defining what criteria will be used in determining who is deemed in crisis. They will have the authority to dismiss local elected officials and school boards, privatize support services and will not be accountable to the local electorate. Perhaps some of you could stop blaming unions long enough to objectively look at the bigger picture, read the legislation and consider what effect this GOP political power grab will have on all residents and what options we will have once enacted.
baitm
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:26 p.m.
To all democrats: start planning your revenge now. The common working class people Will put you back in control asap! Focus on the rich and privileged. Raise their taxes so it hurts as proportionally as the republicans are doing to common people now. Trample All republicans with constitutional laws that restrict individual contributions to elections and include those rich candidates that BUY elections. Tyrants will be accountable to the people that elect them! Target all republicans for recalls if they have any ethics violations and redistrict so republicans may never even elect a dog catcher. Put "sin" taxes on rich peoples' vices like wine, caviar and such. Tricky Rick has alienated the seniors in Michigan so go get them. Repeal their senior tax and tack it on anyone making over a million a year! Make all elected officials sign a document banning them from working in Pacs or as consultants to Pacs. Call it the Engler law!
Bear
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 10:18 a.m.
"The big joke is that their uninformed supporters are jumping on the bandwagon with no real appreciation of the implications of this legislation." and let me clarify that by saying the uninformed supporters are those who are wholeheartedly embracing this union bashing by conservatives. Let me also raise the question of why, the party who just a few years ago were harping about 'local' control & supporting small businesses are now abandoning those principles? Because this is nothing short of that. And that's just one of the questions, real questions, I have been asking about these wolves in sheep's clothing.
Bear
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 10:14 a.m.
hey snoop, what's to prevent all the middle class union people here from leaving Michigan. Our prosperity would suffer greatly. Our small businesses don't necessarily cater to the uber-rich. They depend upon the middle class. Destroy that & you destroy small businesses. And all baitm is saying is along the similar vein of Yeah Buddy when he said, "Why would anyone want an option to come in and try new ideas?" Doesn't mean it's right, or that it will work, but it IS a new idea. lol. Fortunately ( or unfortunately, some would say ) most progressives are looking for positive ways to improve things, not by cannibalizing the state and giving the tax breaks to their cronies in order to press forward with their ideological aspirations and plans. The big joke is that their uninformed supporters are jumping on the bandwagon with no real appreciation of the implications of this legislation. But they're all for it, whatever it is. Obscene.
snoopdog
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 8:57 a.m.
ROFL, and you are serious, I hope not ! I was beaten to the punch but you cannot single out rich Republicans, there are a lot of rich Democrats too. Either way, it won't raise as much money as you think it would and the rich would just leave this state and then we would lose all their tax money. Good Day Good Day
magnumpi
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 11:36 p.m.
so what about rich democrats, how do they fit into your master plan? i'm pretty sure i know some democrats who drink wine another vices.
InsideTheHall
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:22 p.m.
Elections have consequences. This is not controversial, it is the will of the majority to create a sustainable future Michigan.
macjont
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 3:25 a.m.
Where the hell does this come from? A revival meeting?
Thinktanker
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:18 p.m.
So, as long as the people do what our political leaders want its "freedom of choice' - but if there's a diverging of opinions then its "daddy knows best"?
Thinktanker
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:14 p.m.
"State employes will now be responsible for removing publicly elected officials from office. Almost cannibalism" Touche - in fact, did you know that local government is constantly at odds with the federal govt agenda? Can you say 'Silence of the Lambs?"
DonBee
Fri, Mar 11, 2011 : 7:04 p.m.
They already are, the IRS, FBI, and other Government agencies have removed hundreds of public officials from office. In the case of Belle, CA most of those folks are headed for a free vacation in a Federal Country Club. As we have seen in Detroit, the removal of public officials by government employees continues. Nothing new here.
Cash
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:56 p.m.
The Republicans love this right now. Wait until the tables turn. Remember....when Democrats return to power...and they will......they can come into your town and take over your government in the same way. When the people you voted for lose all power and the governor appoints his/her choice above your voted choice, you may not be so happy.
DonBee
Sat, Mar 12, 2011 : 3:33 a.m.
They already have Cash, it is called Public Sector Unions. They really run the government and schools. (-:
Cash
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:50 p.m.
Senator Warren is in favor of a graduated income tax in Michigan. Eight states (Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee) apply a flat tax rate to all taxable income....even millionaires. A graduated tax would bring the state more revenue, but Republicans would choke on their tea before they would ever approve that! They'd rather take away incentives to the working poor.
David Briegel
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:38 p.m.
"if people have bargained good contracts, there shouldn't be any concern." As decided by Slick Rick and Dr Ouimet!? Wow, I really feel better now.
yourdad
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:15 a.m.
Oh goody... since the local gov't agreed to the contract it must be good enough. Thanks R-Ouimet!!! I wonder if you are trying to lower the population along with the breaking of unions... hmmm
Lynn Luke
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:33 p.m.
This article from Sarah Jones of "Politicsususa" details Rachel Maddow's coverage from last night and discusses the effect this legislation will have as it relates to Governor Snyder's proposed budget. May I suggest that before you take sides on this issue you educate yourself on what is truly at stake for MI. residents if the GOP agenda is enacted. <a href="http://www.politicususa.com/en/rachel-maddow-michigan" rel='nofollow'>http://www.politicususa.com/en/rachel-maddow-michigan</a>
InsideTheHall
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:43 a.m.
Rachel Maddow....LOL.
Top Cat
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:32 p.m.
"Instead of trying to take over municipalities and schools, Warren said the state should be focused on finding ways to adequately fund them." Translation....Ms. Warren wants our income tax increased to payoff the public employee unions that support her.
Lynn Luke
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:57 p.m.
Top Cat: I see no place in Ms. Warren's response that suggests taxes would be raised. The Governor's budget proposal will cut taxes on corporations and raise taxes on pensions and the poor, cut exemptions for individuals and cut revenues to school districts and local government to pay for them. The cuts to schools and local government will create budget shortfalls which will leave them vunerable to state takeover by emergency managers with no cap on their compensation and/or corporate oversight. If you investigate the new triggers outlined in the legislation, you will find some of them are extremely arbitrary when it comes to defining what criteria will be used in determining who is deemed in crisis. They will have the authority to dismiss local elected officials and school boards, privatize support services and will not be accountable to the local electorate. Perhaps you could stop blaming unions long enough to objectively look at the bigger picture, read the legislation and consider what effect this GOP political power grab will have on all residents and what options we will have once enacted.
catfishrisin
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:29 p.m.
Anyone who voted for Snyder: Buyers remorse?
snoopdog
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 8:51 a.m.
Not at all, could not be happier. The guy is doing exactly what we elected him to do. So far, so good ! Good Day
Ryan J. Stanton
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:18 p.m.
Please note that I was able to get Mark Ouimet on the phone and have added comments from him to the story.
Cash
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:05 p.m.
Taxation without representation. You vote for someone to make choices for your governmental entity...and the state governor's handpicked choice will step in and take away their power....and in turn YOUR power to choose an elected official. Taxation without representation.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 8:49 p.m.
"When a school system or local govt is in financial trouble, will throwing more money at them resolve the problem or will utilizing an outside unbiased party to straighten things out be a better solution? I choose the later." School districts and local governments are in financial trouble primarily because Prop A took away their abilties to control their own revenue streams and the state government, over the subsequent 20 years, has failed to keep its promises regarding replacing that lost revenue. Only the feeble minded or the agenda driven see this as a problem caused by public employees. Good Night and Good Luck
DonBee
Sat, Mar 12, 2011 : 3:32 a.m.
I beg to differ. For a handful of districts the increases have been small. The rest have done fairly well. Don't believe me? Check out: <a href="http://www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa/Departments/DepartmentPublications/FoundationHistory94to07.pdf" rel='nofollow'>www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa/Departments/DepartmentPublications/FoundationHistory94to07.pdf</a>
McGiver
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 12:20 p.m.
Prop A was passed by the voters of this state, not elected officials. We have to live with it. Also, it only affects school districts not local governments and clever school districts have figured out clever ways to shift operating expenses into bond issues. Saline attempted this twice with their 22 million extension. Any parent who has looked at private schools will tell you it is not spending per pupil that is the problem it is typical overspending by government period.
Basic Bob
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 2:13 a.m.
Prop A DID happen, however it did not completely level the finances, due to some clever loopholes. Had it finished the job, the rich districts would have to address their expenses, just as they have in the poorest communities. Once again, you are misrepresenting the loss of income to upper middle class government workers as a working class struggle.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 11:32 p.m.
In2009 A2 had $9700 per pupil from the state; Detroit received $7500. At: <a href="http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080723/SPECIAL01/80723001" rel='nofollow'>http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080723/SPECIAL01/80723001</a> Some balance. But there are people who still believe in fairy tales. Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 11:06 p.m.
Prop A did NOT balance funding in the state. "Per pupil state funding — which varies by district from about $7,500 to $9,000 locally — makes up the bulk of each district's general fund dollars." At: <a href="http://www.annarbor.com/news/local-school-officials-concerned-about-cuts-to-public-education-in-gov-rick-snyders-proposed-budget/">http://www.annarbor.com/news/local-school-officials-concerned-about-cuts-to-public-education-in-gov-rick-snyders-proposed-budget/</a> That was, indeed, the justification for Prop A. But well-informed people know it never happened. Good Night and Good Luck
Basic Bob
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:36 p.m.
Only a feeble mind believes that rich school districts *deserve* better funding than poorer districts. Prop A balanced funding throughout the state, but unfortunately, rich school districts continue to overpay their employees relative to neighboring districts. This loss of self-control is responsible for the problems we are seeing. But, hey, maybe we can just evict the whole city of Detroit (Flint, Pontiac, Benton Harbor...). Problem solved.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:05 p.m.
Let me clarify my last, Bob. My "You are likely correct" comment is a bit non-responsive. I think it likely that today many communities would vote down millage renewals, much less increases. But over the last 20 years? No. And promised state funding has never kept pace with inflation since Prop A went through, and there were many years that funding went down in real dollars. That would not have happened had local districts had control of their own funding. School funding is absolutely ridiculous. No school district in the state enters the school year certain of their revenue stream for the coming school year. Several times in the past decade the state has cut back on its PROMISED state funding in the middle of the school year. The schools had already budgeted that money, hired teachers based on the state's promise, etc...., and then they lost the money. This is ridiculous, and it must change. Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:42 p.m.
Bob, At this point in time in these economic circumstances? You are likely correct. But over the last 20 years? Absolutely. Good Night and Good Luck
Bob Martel
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:31 p.m.
ERMG, so by implication are you suggesting that all (or most, or many) of the municipalities who are (or will be) in trouble because of dwindling money from Lansing, Washington and their own lowered tax bases would actually step up to the plate and increase their own taxes if only they were given the opportunity? I think that is not so likely.
grye
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 8:34 p.m.
When a school system or local govt is in financial trouble, will throwing more money at them resolve the problem or will utilizing an outside unbiased party to straighten things out be a better solution? I choose the later. Those that created the problem are not usually those with the solutions. Fraser's involvement? Maybe not the best choice.
David Briegel
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:57 p.m.
unbiased? according to whom? Rick? Mark?
treetowncartel
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 8:27 p.m.
Note to households with public employees, the new administration is going to balance the budget by taking away your benefits, the one thing that attracted you to the job and kept you in the state. It is time to look into taking your income taxes elsewhere.
A2Since74
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 8:25 p.m.
Just think. Our very own City Administrator Roger Fraser will be involved with the administration of the state's emergency financial manager program. State employes will now be responsible for removing publicly elected officials from office. Almost cannibalism.