Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the Senate on March 18, 2004, to shift the county property tax billing date forward from December to July, phased in between 2005 and 2007. The additional revenue revenue realized by collecting property taxes early will go into a fund that will be used to make revenue sharing payments to counties for the next several years. Note: On Sept. 15 the Detroit News published articles for and against the question of whether this measure is a tax increase

The vote was 23 in favor, 12 opposed and 3 not voting

(Senate Roll Call 612 at Senate Journal 86)

Click here to view bill details.

The Governor's alternative to replace the dollars lost from revenue sharing is definitely an example of Creative Accounting 101. This "shift & shaft" is no more than an additional burden on taxpayers, and is being cleverly disguised as merely a change in timing of payment for county property taxes. The State gets to tell the counties what they can and cannot do with the money, and the counties will be taking the heat from the taxpayers.

In essence , we pay more sooner in taxes. vote NO.

I view this as a "one-time" additional tax burden on the taxpayer. In about five years watch for the date to be changed back to December....

Why bother to address the immediate issue of controling Lansing's spending problem, when you can just shake down the taxpayers to make up the difference. Spending problem solved, they'll have more money to play with, until they find some other way to bribe us with our own money. Lansing got themselves into this mess by not displaying any spending discipline, Lansing can get themselves out of this mess by showing some responsibility, and dare I say, leadership for a change.

Senator Cassis, under her constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill Nos. 1111 and 1112. Senator Cassis' statement is as follows: My "no" vote explanation on Senate Bills 1111 and 1112 are these. What do gimmick shifts, tax increases, and slippery slopes have in common? Well, they are all a proud part of Michigan's 2004-05 budget-balancing act. Specifically, they also relate to the Governor's county revenue sharing suspension proposal which passed this body. Results? First and foremost, the accelerated tax collection, bluntly put, is a broad-based tax increase to all who pay property taxes. Secondly, this is the first big conceptual tweak to Proposal A. It circumvents the goals of Proposal A by reflecting a legislative property tax increase. Thirdly, this tax shift represents a restructuring of the tax code statutory revenue sharing responsibility, without going through the normal legislative process of hearings, debates, discussions, amendments, etc. In effect, the legislative process is bypassed and taxpayer voices are unheard. This also looks a lot like a slippery slope. Once the precedent is established, it can be extended to rationalize removing cities, townships, and villages from statutory revenue sharing. At a time of a fledgling economic recovery, any out-of-pocket tax increase has a dampening effect. Finally, the gimmick, shift, and tax increase does nothing to resolve Michigan's much-mentioned budgetary structural deficit. In fact, it increases and adds to it. For all these reasons, I voted an overwhelming no. It is not good public policy today, tomorrow, or 3, 5, 10 year from now. The previous administration SET acceleration was a one-time and one-time only event. It was also accompanied by a 1.0 mill tax cut, a benefit to the taxpayer. No such benefits result was shifting county revenue sharing responsibility wholly to the taxpayer.

The State must really think that its hand is faster than the eye of the taxpayer. Taxpayer, keep your eye on your $$.

Do you believe in Santa , also.

Regarding Sen. Cassis opposition to the county tax shift: Keep it up!

When this creative accounting shift & shaft initiative was first introduced it was to be implemented in ONE year. Guess what? It would have been a very hard hit to the taxpayers and they could clearly see through it. So....they added a couple of more years, thinking that maybe the vision of the taxpayers would be blurred. Taxpayers, continue to keep your eye on your $$$$.

…for a Governor (and most of the legislature for that matter) whom ran on opposing tax increases for Michigan, this was definitely the year for them. Income tax hikes. Cigarette tax hikes. Casino tax hike. And now a property tax hike. Wow, people. Are there any other taxes that you supposedly still oppose? I wonder what chicanery they’ll try next year when they’re in the same boat again?

Apparently, Sen. Cassis is the only level-headed individual in Lansing these days. How dare you raise taxes and mask it as a simple change in the collection date! I have already paid county taxes 12 months in advance. The state is now going to collect an extra six (6) months worth of taxes I have not agreed to pay. Maybe this nonsense will stop when there are not enough citizens left in this state to pay the politians' salaries.

Rep. Drolet, 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: These bills are the culmination of a monument to fiscal irresponsibility that has been under construction in Lansing for a long time. Budget boondoggles and tax schemes have slipped quietly passed the taxpayers over these last few years with limited outrage until the bills came due, but those days are over. This time, the taxpayers are sending a clear message about these raids on their wallets: WE ARE ANGRY! There is no place left to hide. A vote in favor of this scheme sends back an equally clear statement from government to the taxpayers: WE DON'T CARE! A long list of missed opportunities has brought us to this point. While the structural deficit problem was just beginning in Lansing, Michigan families facing reduced revenue were wisely trimming their budgets of things like vacations. But state government kept launching new spending sprees, like the Life Sciences Corridor and the Department of History, Arts and Libraries ­ programs and departments that did not exist and were not necessary even when we did have too much money to spend! Instead of being serious about spending, Lansing dedicated itself to gimmicks and shifty tax schemes. When the federal government gave us nearly a billion dollars to help cover our shortfall, we should have phased out programs and reduced our structural deficit. Instead, Lansing spent the money propping up the bloated budget and sustained the irresponsible spending that continues to cough up large annual deficits. The rainy day fund was entirely emptied. A business tax cut was cancelled, and an unprecedented flow tax was created for businesses that use water. This financial assault on job providers did not halt the loss of jobs. But rather than look at itself as the problem, Lansing tried to lure jobs back with even more spending schemes such as the Cool Cities Initiative. The state failed to cut even the silliest spending. Libraries do not need to digitize old books this year. The books could sit on the shelves and wait for when more money is available, yet millions will be spent on the project right now because too few of us are willing to vote against it. Getting the votes to cut the taxpayer's income has been easier. Michigan leads most of the nation in cigarette taxation due to two huge tax hikes. So-called 'bad driver fees' and two new ticket tax increases were enacted against nearly every driver and vehicle and even some cars and trailers just sitting harmlessly in garages with expired license plates. Now Lansing wants tomorrow's taxes today. It is silly to expect taxpayers to believe that this is anything but another tax increase. Government's credibility regarding the budget has been shredded. We spent our way into deficit and we should cut our way out. That's what the taxpayers want. It is their money. We should follow their example and abide by their wishes."

Rep. Hoogendyk, 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 am voting 'no' because one of my highest obligations as a state representative is to the Michigan economy and to the family budget. By moving up property taxes we are increasing the burden on job providers, families and seniors across the state. This is wrong. In this era of intense competition for jobs this is one more black mark on Michigan's business climate. I would note that since 1995 Michigan ranks 51st out of the 50 states and the District of Columbia for job creation. It is tax schemes like this that have contributed to our poor climate for economic growth. The Governor has falsely claimed that revenue sharing will be cut to all counties if this bill does not pass. Somehow she has found money for arts, foreign trade offices, cool cities initiatives, million dollar grants to private businesses, land give away to a foreign corporation ($25 million) and prisoner education programs. In fact, the Governor's office and the legislative budget were just increased by 7.1 percent (over $8 million). If the Governor could be more concerned about the Michigan economy over protecting her pet projects and government bureaucracies this bill would be unnecessary. The hard working people of Michigan want more than an accounting gimmick. That is why I have proposed a cut of 2 percent General Fund/General Purpose that would enable us to restore revenue sharing."

Kudos on your no vote and your statement against this ridiculous proposal. I wish you could have changed a few of your colleages minds. Please pass along to your yes voting colleages that I, along with many other intelligent voting michigan citizens will remember this issue at election time and will do all we can to assure those voting yes on this issue will be rewarded appropriately for this, yet another, revenue bail out by the individual Michigan property tax payer

This is legislation which should NOT have passed. This surely shows our governor is not for the people but for herself. She should go back to Canada where she came from. There were other solutions to the budget other than revenue sharing, but she wanted a quick fix. Too bad she got it. Now it's up to us to get language approved and petitions in hand and recall Granholm.

Why doesn't the Governor just ask us retirees to send her our social security check to her each month. We sure don't want her to tap the 8.9B dollars in the General Fund. We can always help the goverment but the goverment can never help the residents when we are short of funds. You just keep adding a larger burden on our shoulders. And you wonder why retirees move out of Michigan.

She is a sorry excuse for a governor. I wish also that we could recall her! As a State Employee I have suffered greatly. She takes 4 hours of my pay every 2 weeks, now she increases my property taxes. She is taking too much and doesn't care who she hurts.

Thanks Leon and Joe for voting correctly. Hopefully we can send you some friends the next election cycle.

Since our elected representatives dont hear their voters, why do we bother to vote at all!!!!!!!! typical Goverment crap, the little people trying to survive the lost jobs market, the war and everything else get screwed again!!!!!!!!

How many have heard every candidate PROMISE to go to Lansing and reduce government. Remember your candidate saying, “We can’t balance the budget on the backs of the citizens.” Here is what I propose – let each member of the House and Senate tell their constituents what they reduced in government during their run for office and if they can’t - vote them out. Once they see the trend maybe they will work together to start reducing. This SB1111 is just their way to get more money to fund an oversized government and not fulfill their campaign promise to “reduce government.” And give me a break on their threats to locale communities – they are just Enron and Tyco all disguised in their “honorable” titles!

I ask you if this is a tax pre-payment then when will I get credit for my prepaid property taxes?? The only true answer is when I sell my house AND move out of the State of Michigan. All those who voted yes for this are LAIRS!!!! Enjoy your remaining term, for you will soon be unemployed.

A few months ago I went to the drug store to get eye drops for my glaucoma. Out of curiosity I asked how much the drops were. I was told that they cost $65. Then the woman behind the counter said that there were many folks that had to make the decision to not eat or not have the drops. Now the Michigan government in its wisdom to balance it's books has increased our taxes again. Now people will have the choice to either not eat and get their medication, or loose their home? True, it takes a while to loose ones property for non payment of taxes, but what about the voters that have to make a decision to give up something else from their fixed income. Why does the government think that it is ok to balance the budget by voting a raise by stealth? Why does it think that it is for a higher good? It is only a few more dollars to each voter. It won't hurt them. I think this one will be remembered by the voters. They will have a reminder for the next three years.

What kind of BS is this? How could anyone support this? The reason the State is in trouble is because the same idiots cannot exercise fiscal responsibility. This is just another example of spend, spend, spend; who cares where the money comes from. They truly are spending it faster than they can get thier grubby little hands on it!! They should all have to wait 3 months to get thier paychecks, that would truly help the state!!!!!

I thought "maybe she would fix some things" I'm new to this forum and have not followed my government as close as I should - shame on me. I like the perception being spun on the surface that paaints our Governor as doing the responsible thing for our state. However, I cannot make out "responsibility" in pulling ahead taxing windows and disrupting the budgets of Michigan residents. This is merely the transfer of pain from Lansing to the citizens. Why do we have to feel the pain of the squandering of our tax dollars. We did not make the poor budgetary decisions that got us in this mess! I do get to decide in November, however. This will not be forgotten!

I have never been a political person. I vote. The first time I ever wrote my elected officials was in response to sb1111. Seeing it pass has encouraged me to get more politically active. I believe a few recall elections are in order. Being a simple person facing a $3000.00 per year tax bill on a $40,000yr income I have no idea of how to start the process, but hear me when i say I AM WILLING TO LEARN. whos with me??

The Governor signed the new budget Oct. 1 and as far as Lansing is concerned, there is nothing more to talk about. This issue is not dead though! There are a lot of us out here that are still very upset. There continues to be least one negative letter daily regarding this tax in the Times Herald (St. Clair county)everyday. How can we ALL get together and make an "impact" on Lansing to persuade them to change this "shift"? Time is short because tax bills are coming out in December.

Start off by getting a listing of those who had voted for and against jacking the residents, and compare it to those who are running in your district on November 2nd. If your representative voted FOR the bill, get in contact with whomever their opponent is, and offer them as much support as you can during the next month financial and time-wise. It will help them immensely if they have any lit drops that highlight where their loyalities lie regarding this issue, with the governor or the residents. If your representative voted AGAINST the bill, be sure to thank them for having the courage to stand up to the governor and her republican accomplices (i.e. Speaker Johnson and Majority Leader Sikkema), and do the suggestion mentioned in the paragraph above for their campaign. There was a lot of arm twisting going on during the four hour vote it took to get this bill passed and many threats and promises were made to sway votes. Let them know that their stand was not taken in vain. Finally, keep your eyes and ears open. There just might have enought of a backlash over this issue to institute a recall of her from office. Stay tuned.

You can get the listing of those who voted either way on www.wjr.com also thanks to Frank Beckmann. I am now supporting my district's candidate by passing flyers and signs. It doesn't take much time and effort to support those who should be elected.

Just enter the bill numbers (1111 and 1112) over on the right*, click "Vote details" at the end of the House and Senate votes, and voila' - the roll call appears, underneath the percentages for R's and D's. *Or go to the home page and enter the bill numbers under "Search Legislation."

My senator was the one to propose bill 1111. I can't figure out how we are resprented if the majority of the people are against this bill and he proposed it. He is definitely out in my vote and many others.

WE SHOULD SEND HER PACKING BACK TO CANADA,FOR GOOD,SHE SHOULD UP THE SALES TAX,SO EVERY ONE CAN PAY.NOT THE MIDDLE AND LOW INCOME PERSON. SHE WELL NEVER BE ELECTED AGAIN IN THIS STATE.COOL

...our guv's approval rating is sinking faster than the Titanic. Stunts like this only guarantee the fact that she'll only be a one-termer.

Check the voting record on these bills. It's not only the Governor at fault here but all those that voted for the tax payment advance. All voted for this lame bill: Allen (R) Basham (D) Birkholz (R) Brater (D) Clarke (D) Emerson (D) Garcia (R) George (R) Hammerstrom (R) Hardiman (R) Jacobs (D) Jelinek (R) Johnson (R) Kuipers (R) Leland (D) Olshove (D) Prusi (D) Schauer (D) Sikkema (R) Stamas (R) Switalski (D) Thomas (D) VanWoerkom (R) and those against: Barcia (D) Bishop (R) Brown (R) Cassis (R) Cherry (D) Cropsey (R) Gilbert (R) Goschka (R) McManus (R) Patterson (R) Sanborn (R) Toy (R) The ones that voted for this STOLE from us all. Plain and simple.