Taxing & Spending

Re: 2011 House Bill 4445 (Adjust current year school appropriations )

Admin003 — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:39:26 GMT

Senator Pavlov's statement is as follows: I wasn't going to speak to this issue, but after the Minority Leader made such an eloquent argument to try to convince even further "no" votes for the group that is trying to be a part of the solution, I just felt that a little bit of background on where this problem existed probably needs to be talked about in this chamber. When you take a look at where Highland Park Schools has been over the last five years, you will see that there are 475 school districts that are below them on the funding level. The revenue to that school district has been increased by over 25 percent, and expenses at the very same time have gone up nearly 47 percent, at a time when they have seen a 59 percent decline in the student population. At what point wasn't somebody watching this situation? When this group comes together to try to offer a solution, whether it be short-term or long-term, the idea is we are putting together a plan today that allows those school doors to be open tomorrow. It gives us an opportunity to fight for further reforms that we are going to need. Let's talk about further educational opportunities for those kids who are in these districts. This is not just an urban district issue. Everybody in this chamber, at some point, is being affected by the impact of education. So let's be true about where the problem came from. Let's be even more accurate about where the solution is going to come from.

Re: 2011 House Bill 4445 (Adjust current year school appropriations )

Admin003 — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:38:47 GMT

Senator Walker's statement is as follows: This is an important piece of legislation we have in front of us right now. It helps facilitate the continued education of 1,000 students in Highland Park, and it's been referenced that somehow the fault of this Legislature that funded K-12 education to the tune of $13 billion in this state. It's almost a quarter of the whole state's revenue. I think that shows a strong commitment on the part of this Legislature and our state for our children's education. We've gone on ad nauseam about this, and people can say the numbers look however they want, but this Legislature is committed to children's education in this state. Constitutionally, we have to do that. That's why we are here. We're here to make sure those 1,000 students have an education. And as far as other schools queued up for possible emergency manager situations, there aren't 40 schools queued up for emergency manager that are in the top 10 level of funding the way this current school is. It's in the top 10 percent of funding for all the schools in our state, and it's in financial trouble. That isn't the state's fault. That's the fault of the people who are managing that school district. They should be held accountable, and we are helping so those students will have an education.

Re: 2011 House Bill 4445 (Adjust current year school appropriations )

Admin003 — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:38:02 GMT

Senators Pappageorge, Walker and Pavlov asked and were granted unanimous consent to make statements and moved that the statements be printed in the Journal. The motion prevailed. Senator Pappageorge's statement is as follows: You know, that was an interesting discussion we just heard, but it has nothing to do with the immediate problem. The immediate problem is not Public Act No. 4. The immediate problem is that we have almost 1,000 kids who won't have a school to go to tomorrow. If you want to talk about Public Act No. 4 or history or whatever else, just remember just because some people missed the boat is no reason to discontinue the service. Today the question is what are we going to do for kids who need to go to school tomorrow? We can talk about all that other stuff anytime after tomorrow. We have a short-term problem and a long-term problem. I am happy to discuss the long-term problem with anybody--in fact, we need to--but tomorrow we need to have kids going into a classroom. That is what is before us.

Re: 2011 House Bill 4445 (Adjust current year school appropriations )

Admin003 — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:37:33 GMT

Senator Johnson's statement is as follows: I'm glad we are telling some truth about where these systemic problems come from. When you look at the number of enclaves across the state of Michigan that are under the act of emergency management, some of which were there with Public Act No. 72, but certainly with the more draconian Public Act No. 4. I think it is important to note that one common denominator that exists is not that they are mostly poor, mostly people of color, or mostly disadvantaged areas. The reason we are talking about Highland Park today--I'm glad we are talking about Highland Park because it is a city I represent and live in--the interesting thing about Highland Park is that today she serves as an anomaly to really teach this entire chamber about how, in fact, we got here. It's forty years of systemic disinvestment on the part of people and businesses who have all left these enclaves and left whoever stayed to deal with the residue of what is left has us here. You can post numbers about $14,000 or $16,000 going into any school. I think it is the Republican Caucus that believes in not throwing good money after bad. We can put that one in the box and set it to the side and have a real conversation about why we are here and what this state needs to be about the business of to make sure we never come back here. It is true there are scores more school districts headed to this same problem. There are dozens more cities that are on the precipice of insolvency. If this chamber believes that Public Act No. 4 is simply to be debated and made the scapegoat for these problems, and if you think that as Democrats that's what we have been railing about all along, then you are sorely misguided. What we are railing about is disinvestment practices that this state--doesn't matter who has been in charge--has over the years seen and failed to remedy. When we hear about Governors--Democrat and Republican--going off to China, going off to the Middle East courting businesses, asking them to come back into the United States and especially to the state of Michigan; when we talk about the number of pension dollars that are overseen in other markets and not overseen by Michigan-based companies; when we talk about the amount of investment that we provide to corporations to the tune of $35 billion a year, and this chamber is not yet ready to examine any one loophole that would bring one of those public tax dollars home and simply provide for kids so they can go to school for free once they have a diploma in their hand, this state has a problem with its own moral fiber. Because we are having this conversation today about emergency management, and the backdrop is very real that next week, there will be petition signatures filed, and the people of this state will speak. I have heard people around this chamber fear that, and I will tell you today that is an occupational hazard that we all live with. If at some point people believe what we do here does not work, they have both the opportunity and the right to petition their government for redress. If those petition signatures get filed; if, in fact, they get ratified, and if this law gets stayed, then we have a major problem on our hands. That is not because Democrats inherited it or built it, but because when we asked the Republican Caucus to be at the table building out any measure that was going to deal with emergencies financially in this state, we were ignored. When we posted amendment after amendment after amendment after amendment and made cogent arguments about the inaccuracy of this policy, we were ignored. When people from the community spoke, when they rose up in committees, when they marched out and stomped out our beautiful grass outside this Capitol, they were ignored. When you receive scores and maybe into the hundreds of e-mails and information from the public that said this are a wrongheaded approach, they were ignored. You put the policy forward. Today we will live with whatever happens beyond that. I just want to point out something that if I was an economics professor and I said there was a difference between a commodity, an investment, and a capital asset, I will point out to you that capital assets in poor urban areas are children who, in fact, in those poor urban areas hope to go off to school and bring something back and invest in the community and build it out. When you overcharacterize districts and you are making sure that money goes to private hands and you don't do it the proper way, then essentially what you have is what you have today.

Re: 2011 House Bill 4445 (Adjust current year school appropriations )

Admin003 — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:35:53 GMT

Senators Whitmer, Hunter, Hood, Gleason, Young and Johnson, under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against concurring in the House substitute to the Senate substitute for House Bill No. 4445. Senators Whitmer and Johnson moved that the statements they made during the discussion of the bill be printed as their reasons for voting "no." The motion prevailed. Senator Whitmer's statement, in which Senators Hunter, Hood, Gleason and Young concurred, is as follows: I rise to explain the "no" vote I'm about to cast on this bill. We've got a school district and we have many school districts in the state of Michigan that are in crisis right now. There are a lot of reasons for those crises. Let's be very clear. What we are addressing today is a symptom of what ails our education system in Michigan. Last year, I saw many of you very proudly pass Public Act No. 4 and claim that you had done something that is going to be wonderful for the people of this state. That was the emergency financial manager act--I'm sure you are aware. You created this process. Then we saw you pass a budget that stole $1 billion out of the School Aid Fund. So not one person around here should be surprised that we have a school district in this situation, nor should you be surprised if we have to do this again next month or the month after. There are reports that there are upwards of 48 to 70 school districts that are in the queue right after Highland Park. Every time your emergency financial manager law doesn't work the way you thought it would, are you going to put a patch on it? Or are we going to do the right thing by our schools and ensure that they have the funding they need to educate the kids of Michigan? I would submit that if kids really were your No. 1 priority, you wouldn't have taken $1 billion out of the School Aid Fund in the first place. You wouldn't be wallpapering over the real problem by passing patches along the way. Your Governor wouldn't lie to the people of the state of Michigan and say that he has an increase for our schools when, in fact, the current budget is an additional cut because .8 percent is not an increase when inflation in and of itself is 3.3 percent--it's a cut. This is what happens; you have school districts in crisis. It is not just about districts. This is about children--all children--in the state of Michigan, not just one district that we are talking about today. Accordingly, I am going to vote "no." When you are serious and ready to talk about making an investment in education--recognizing that education is economic development--I'm ready to have that conversation.

2011 House Bill 4445 (Adjust current year school appropriations )

Votes Admin — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:34:36 GMT

Introduced in the House on March 15, 2011, to reduce current-year school aid appropriations by approximately $180 million to reflect lower student enrollment, revised revenue estimates and other detail changes

The vote was 86 in favor, 24 opposed and 0 not voting

(House Roll Call 74 at House Journal 0)

Click here to view bill details.