Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Sen. Dave Hildenbrand (R) on April 14, 2011, to expand to townships the power of other local governments to impose “business improvement district” property tax hikes on nonresidential property in the district area, with the extra revenue used for spending that benefits businesses in the area. In particular, the bill would affect Cascade Township in Kent County.
- Referred to the Senate Economic Development Committee on April 14, 2011.
- Reported in the Senate on August 4, 2011, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on May 17, 2011, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance as previously described. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on May 17, 2011.
- Referred to the Senate Economic Development Committee on April 14, 2011.
- Passed 35 to 3 in the Senate on May 18, 2011.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on May 18, 2011.
- Referred to the House Commerce Committee on May 18, 2011.
- Reported in the House on October 4, 2011, without amendment and with the recommendation that the bill pass.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Tom McMillin (R) on December 6, 2012. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 6, 2012.
- Substitute offered by Rep. Ken Yonker (R) on December 6, 2012. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on December 6, 2012.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Richard Hammel (D) on December 6, 2012. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 6, 2012.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Richard Hammel (D) on December 6, 2012. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 6, 2012.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Tim Greimel (D) on December 6, 2012. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 6, 2012.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Tim Greimel (D) on December 6, 2012. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 6, 2012.
- Referred to the House Commerce Committee on May 18, 2011.
- Passed 54 to 50 in the House on December 14, 2012.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Comments
1) Re: 2011 Senate Bill 334 (Expand selective “business improvement district” tax breaks ) by changeagent on April 28, 2011[quote user="Dave Scerbak"]I hope that Sen. Hildenbrand has kept this bill within the spirit of a level playing field for all, rather than being yet another tool of government to pick winners and losers.[/quote]
Of course it's about picking winners and losers, otherwise the word "selective" would not appear. Clearly our legislators understand that lower taxes attract business and jobs. They just can't allow themselves to give everyone the same opportunity.
This bill is an example of giving tax breaks to businesses based on the
hope they will create jobs. As John McCain is fond of saying, "hope is not a strategy."
I found this Bill lengthy and hard to read -especially within trying to monitor a sea of innumerable other bills being circulated at a local, State and Federal level.
I know we have a lot to cleanup in our state.
I hope that Sen. Hildenbrand has kept this bill within the spirit of a level playing field for all, rather than being yet another tool of government to pick winners and losers.
I guess I need to buck up and try again to wade my way through it.
Your new comments should be made in the box below.
