Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on September 24, 2008

Click here to view bill details.

No more taxes! What in the sam hill are you idiots thinking????

I take it that Rep. Jim Marleau (my representative) only has one lot so he will not be harmed and taxed more with his proposed legislation. Never mind the fact that the poor soul who has been in his home for many years will suddenly be hit with a tax increase because he or she has another lot in the back of their property. Gee, maybe we can send more homeowners into foreclosure. No, I do not have acreage or another lot, but I cannot see taxing my neighbor more so that Lansing can get a bigger chunk of the taxing pie --- A PIE that is taxing people out of hearth and home!

Hmm? Is that what our representatives are supposed to do -- Think?

Is that what are representives supposed to do -- Think?

Obviously, you blowhards did not even bother to read the proposed amendment to the current law. Currently, if your neighborhood wanted to petition the township to form a road maintenance SAD under PA 139, the costs could only be assessed on a road frontage basis. This could unfairly burden land owners with corner lots or larger lots that contained mostly wetlands and unfairly benefit those with lots on cul-de-sacs that have small road frontages. This change allows the neighborhood the flexibility to choose how the costs should be spread among those benefiting from the improvements. If a township attempted to form an SAD under this act without a petition from those affected, the landowners could file a petition in opposition to the SAD and stop the process. Lastly, this change gives those of us who live on private roads the same flexibility that already exists for people who live on public roads.

I would like it better if it was "instead of" rather than "in addition to"

Again, I would suggest that you look at the text of the actual bill not the description that a clerk has entered and is shown above. First of all, under PA 139, the citizens must petition for the SAD. A township could not initiate the action on their own. Secondly, the language does state that the "allocation of cost to be spread against all of the owners in the district benefiting on a pro rata frontage OR PER LOT basis".