Introduced by Sen. Michael Switalski (D) on March 2, 2005, the executive recommendation for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2005-2006 school aid budget. This appropriates $12.81 billion in gross spending (funded from all sources, including special state restricted fund and federal pass-through dollars, and more), compared to $12.53 billion, which was the FY 2004-2005 amount enrolled in 2004. It would increase the state foundation grants to schools by $175 per pupil. Special education spending would rise to $1.38 billion, and Intermediate School District appropriations to $80 million. Much more information on Michigan’s budget is available at Hot Topics: Michigan’s Budget Challenge at www.mackinac.org/4964.
Referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee on March 2, 2005.
Reported in the Senate on June 14, 2005, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered in the Senate on June 16, 2005, to replace the executive proposal for this budget with one that expresses policy differences between the Republican-majority in the Senate and Governor Jennifer Granholm on certain spending items and funding sources. The Senate concurs with the governor's proposed $175 per student foundation grant increase and her special education increase, but does not concur with her proposal to cut the "Freedom to Learn" student laptop computer program and to increase "at risk" student funding. The Senate also cuts funding for two-year kindergarten programs, and cuts an extra $15 million that had been given to the Detroit School District in the last several years. The budget increases depend in part on extra revenue that a proposed increase in state tax auditors is supposed to generate. For much more detail see analysis from the non-partisan Senate Fiscal Agency. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on June 16, 2005.
Amendment offered by Sen. Deborah Cherry (D) on June 16, 2005, to add $6 million for two-year kindergarten programs. The amendment failed 18 to 19 in the Senate on June 16, 2005. Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Amendment offered by Sen. Irma Clark-Coleman (D) on June 16, 2005, to allow the Detroit school district to use up to 15 percent of the extra money it gets for "at risk" students (those who qualify for the federal free lunch program) to provide school security. The amendment passed by voice vote in the Senate on June 16, 2005.
Passed 33 to 4 in the Senate on June 16, 2005, the Senate version of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2005-2006 school aid budget. This appropriates $12.73 billion in gross spending, compared to the FY 2004-2005 amount of $12.47 billion. See Senate substitute for some highlights. Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Received in the House on June 21, 2005.
Referred to the House Appropriations Committee on June 21, 2005.
Reported in the House on June 28, 2005, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered in the House on June 29, 2005, replace the Senate-passed version of this budget with one that “strips” all actual appropriations. This version was subsequently superceded by another substitute that uses the bill to correct a "glitch" in the current School Aid budget. The substitute failed by voice vote in the House on June 29, 2005.
Substitute offered by Rep. Scott Hummel (R) on June 29, 2005, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that corrects a mismatch between certain appropriations and their specified revenue source in the current school aid budget. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on June 29, 2005.
Amendment offered by Rep. Judy Emmons (R) on June 29, 2005, to allow for one more year an Intermediate School District (ISD) funding scheme in which certain special education staff are employed by both the ISD and the regular school district. This "shared-employment" allows the ISD (but not the staffers) to get more state money. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on June 29, 2005.
Passed 106 to 0 in the House on June 29, 2005, to use the bill as a legislative "vehicle" to correct a mismatch between certain appropriations and their specified revenue source in the current school aid budget. The bill no longer proposes an FY 2005-2006 school aid budget. Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Received in the Senate on June 30, 2005.
Passed 36 to 0 in the Senate on June 30, 2005, to use the bill as a legislative "vehicle" to correct a mismatch between certain appropriations and their specified revenue source in the current school aid budget. The bill no longer proposes an FY 2005-2006 school aid budget. Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on July 21, 2005.
1) Sen. Clark-Coleman's "no vote journal explanation by Anonymous Citizen on June 17, 2005 There we go again.
Another "It's for the children" brainwashing attempt.
Throwing more money at a problem never cures the problem, but accountability in our public schools does! Reply
2) Sen. Clark-Coleman's "no vote journal explanation" by Admin003 on June 17, 2005 Senator Clark-Coleman, under her constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No.279.
Senator Clark-Coleman's statement is as follows:
I'd like to thank my colleagues for their support and their hard work on the school aid budget. Restoration of 20 money is critical to the survival of some of our district. However, the denial of additional help to at-risk youth is unacceptable. This budget does not include the increase in at-risk funding recommended by the Governor.
Statewide, more of our youth come from single-parent households and need early childhood development and after-school activities, as well as additional learning opportunities to keep pace with their classmates.
The Governor also recommended a $50 increase in per pupil funding for high school students. Again, a sensible suggestion was not adopted. We all know that it takes more money to educate a child in high school than it does a child in elementary school. Also it does not include an increase for the ISDs.
The future of our state is in our hands now. We must be careful to avoid politicizing the learning process of our youth. We must provide all of the elements necessary to ensure student success. Who wants to be held accountable for erecting barriers to education in this state? I don't and I hope you don't either.
3) Increase in school funding by Anonymous Citizen on June 16, 2005 Michigan public schools get one third of the Michigan budget. Plus the lotto money and at least half of property taxes.The Feds spend more money on public education then they do on defense.
And the schools need more money? For what?
The increase in health care benefits and retirement. And who pays for all this. Taxpayers like my self who pay for their own.
Enough is enough!