Legislation watch
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Capitol Building

2003 Senate Bill 780

Public Act 17 of 2004

[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Most Recent Comments

1) Rep. Waters' "no vote comment" [by Admin003 on February 12, 2004]
Rep. Waters, having reserved the right to explain her protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:

"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

I voted no on Senate Bill 780 because the health and strength of the state depends on the health and strength of its cities. A number of laws have been enacted over the years to help preserve or refurbish Michigan's struggling urban centers. Unfortunately, a disturbing trend is now taking place in which these laws are being amended - turned on their heads, actually - to provide incentives to growing suburbs, rather than cities. SB 780 is an example of this trend. This bill and too many other bills that this Legislature has before it this session facilitate piece-meal development and sprawl, when the more appropriate policy should be to promote big-picture, healthy land-use."
Reply

Line

2) Rep. Tobocman's "no vote explaination" [by Admin003 on February 12, 2004]
Rep. Tobocman, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:

"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

I voted no on Senate Bill 780 because the health and strength of the state depends on the health and strength of its cities. There are many laws to facilitate this goal. There is a disturbing trend of amending laws that were drafted for struggling urban centers to help attract development to rural greenfields and undeveloped areas. If additional tools are needed for townships to be able to support their tax base, than those tools should be discussed, debated and considered on their merits. SB 780 provides a tool to one township without addressing the systemic problems of either our urban centers or our townships."
Reply

Line

3) Rep. Murphy's "no vote journal comment" [by Admin003 on February 12, 2004]
Rep. Murphy, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:

"Mr. Speaker and members of the House:

I voted no on Senate Bill 780 because many have stressed the health and strength of the state depends on the health and strength of its cities. There are many laws to facilitate this goal. There is a disturbing trend of amending laws that were drafted for struggling urban centers to help their growing suburbs. SB 780 is an example of this trend."
Reply

Line


View Full Conversation