Introduced by Rep. Marc Shulman (R) on February 11, 2004, to provide a "template" or "place holder" for a Fiscal Year 2004-2005 state police budget. This bill contains no appropriations, but may be amended at a later date to include them.
Referred to the House Appropriations Committee on February 11, 2004.
Reported in the House on March 30, 2004, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered in the House on March 30, 2004, to replace the executive proposal for this budget, contained in House Bill 5613, with a budget that expresses policy differences between the Republican-majority in the House and Governor Jennifer Granholm on certain spending items and funding sources. See House-passed version for major features, and House Fiscal Agency analysis for detailed analysis (the “Text and Analysis” at the top of this bill’s MichiganVotes.org page is a link to this). The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on March 30, 2004.
Amendment offered by Rep. Tupac Hunter (D) on March 30, 2004, to establish as the intent of the legislature that the Detroit police department crime laboratory be funded with an amount sufficient to clear the current state DNA backlog, contingent upon the enactment of the 81 cent cigarette tax increase proposed by House Speaker Rick Johnson. The amendment failed in the House by voice vote on March 30, 2004.
Passed in the House (103 to 4) on March 30, 2004, the House version of the Fiscal Year 2004-2005 state police budget. (Note: Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s proposed budget for this department is House Bill 5613.) This appropriates $457.0 million in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including special state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), compared to $443.0 million, which was the FY 2003-2004 amount enrolled in 2003. Of this, $245.4 million will come from the general fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the FY 2003-2004 amount of $247.6 million. The House version authorizes approximately $1 million more in gross spending than the governor recommended. Much more information on Michigan’s budget is available at Hot Topics: Michigan’s Budget Challenge at www.mackinac.org/4964. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the Senate on March 31, 2004.
Referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee on March 31, 2004.
Reported in the Senate on June 1, 2004, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered in the Senate on June 2, 2004, to replace the House version of this budget with a Senate version which expresses policy differences between the bodies on certain spending items. The Senate amended the substitute to restore a cut to payments by the State Police to the Department of Information Services (DIT). All other departments have had their DIT payments cut by seven percent. See Senate-passed version for more details. The substitute passed in the Senate by voice vote on June 2, 2004.
Passed in the Senate (36 to 1) on June 2, 2004, the Senate version of the Fiscal Year 2004-2005 state police budget. (Note: Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s proposed budget for this department is House Bill 5613.) This appropriates $457.1 million in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including special state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), compared to $443.0 million, which was the FY 2003-2004 amount enrolled in 2003. Of this, $245.6 million will come from the general fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the FY 2003-2004 amount of $247.6 million. The Senate version authorizes approximately $1.1 million more in gross spending than the governor recommended. Much more information on Michigan’s budget is available at Hot Topics: Michigan’s Budget Challenge at www.mackinac.org/4964. [Vote Details and Comments]
Passed in the Senate (32 to 2) on September 9, 2004, the House-Senate conference report for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2004-2005 state police budget. This appropriates $475.8 million in unadjusted gross spending, compared to final FY 2003-2004 amount of $454.1 million. Of this, $244.3 million will come from the general fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the final FY 2003-2004 amount of $234.7 million. The budget requires the training of additional troopers, so as to maintain an at-post trooper strength of 1,075. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the House on June 10, 2004.
Passed in the House (106 to 1) on September 8, 2004, the House-Senate conference report for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2004-2005 state police budget. This appropriates $475.8 million in unadjusted gross spending, compared to final FY 2003-2004 amount of $454.1 million. Of this, $244.3 million will come from the general fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the final FY 2003-2004 amount of $234.7 million. The budget requires the training of additional troopers, so as to maintain an at-post trooper strength of 1,075. [Vote Details and Comments]
Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on September 28, 2004.
1) 2004 House Bill 5526 (Appropriations: 2005 State Police budget) [by admin on January 1, 2001] Introduced in the House on February 11, 2004, the House version of the Fiscal Year 2004-2005 state police budget. (Note: Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s proposed budget for this department is House Bill 5613.) This appropriates $457.0 million in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including special state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), compared to $443.0 million, which was the FY 2003-2004 amount enrolled in 2003. Of this, $245.4 million will come from the general fund (funded by actual state tax revenues), compared to the FY 2003-2004 amount of $247.6 million. The House version authorizes approximately $1 million more in gross spending than the governor recommended. Much more information on Michigan’s budget is available at Hot Topics: Michigan’s Budget Challenge at www.mackinac.org/4964
The vote was 103 in favor, 4 opposed and 2 not voting