By Chris Andrews
Faced with choices between fixing roads or paying less in taxes, Michigan voters overwhelmingly opted for smoother streets in the Aug. 3 election. They also opened their wallets for fire and police departments, for senior citizens and libraries.
Across the state, voters approved 86 percent of the 623 ballot proposals affecting how much they would pay in taxes or, in a few cases, fees, according to a Center for Michigan analysis. They OK’d 96 percent of the requests to either renew taxes or restore rates that had been reduced by the Headlee amendment in the Michigan Constitution.
And perhaps most surprising: They supported to 69 percent of the proposals that were flat-out tax increases.
“The findings are pretty stunning,” said Tom Ivacko, manager of the Center for Local, State and Urban Policy at the University of Michigan. “My guess is people are starting to really feel the effect of government cutbacks.”
Douglas Roberts, director of the Michigan State University Institute of Public Policy and Social Research, agreed that the support of tax proposals was surprisingly strong. “Looking at this data, it certainly indicates that at the moment, there doesn’t seem to be a tax revolt.”
There were no statewide ballot proposals in the primary election, but hundreds of cash-strapped counties, cities, townships, villages, schools, and libraries asked voters for money. The outcomes are especially impressive coming against a backdrop of high unemployment, shrinking incomes and plunging home values.
The state does not compile data on the local ballot proposals, as Roberts learned when he was Michigan’s state treasurer. The Center for Michigan analyzed results from county and local websites as well as media reports to compile unofficial results.
Among the key findings:
Local governments have been slammed in recent years by the one-two punch of reduced state aid and, more recently, declining property tax revenue resulting from lower housing values and the foreclosure crisis. The state of Michigan has slashed revenue-sharing to cities, townships and villages by nearly $390 million since fiscal 2001, a 29 percent reduction, according to the Senate Fiscal Agency.
Local officials have had to take a variety of steps to keep the books balanced. Some have reduced personnel costs by layoffs, unpaid furlough days or leaving positions vacant. Some have closed offices on Fridays. Others are paving fewer roads, closing fire stations, plowing snow less often, or cutting back on parks maintenance.
The voters may be coming to understand that they will pay one way or another, CLOSUP’s Ivacko said. If cuts go too far in fire protection, people will pay more on their home insurance. If the roads are crumbling, their cars may end up in the shop.
“The low-hanging fruit were gone a long time ago,” he said. “These are the services that people see. These are things that hit people pretty squarely in the face.”
Roberts said the success of local governments in enacting millages was even more impressive in a primary election, when voter turnout is much lower than in general elections. Voters who are stirred up — for instance, angry about taxes — are more motivated to show up.
“The locals may have done a whole lot better job of selling it, and the compliments should go to the groups that are in effect going to the public and saying, ‘This is what we are using it (tax money) for. We want you to think about it, and we think it’s a good use of your funds,’” he said.
Selective Services
In 95 percent of the proposals, local officials chose to target the money they were requesting for specific purposes. Voters were more skeptical when they didn’t how it would be spent.
A smaller percentage — but still 68 percent — of the general operations proposals passed. Four of seven tax increases for general operations were approved.
Ivacko noted that media reports on pay and benefits for public sector employees have raised concerns about how tax dollars are used. “My guess is most citizens are not interested in raising their taxes if that’s what the money is going to go for,” he said. “So if it was simply a general operating millage that wasn’t earmarked for some specific service, there will be significantly less support among the public.”
Here is a look at how ballot measures for specific purposes fared.
Fighting Fire with Taxes
All proposals: 94 percent of 131 passed
Tax increases: 82 percent of 40 passed
Renewals or Headlee proposals: 99 percent of 91 pass
It’s safe to say that if their houses catches on fire, voters would like someone to come in a hurry with hoses. They resoundingly approved tax measures to support fire departments, including 82 percent of the tax increases.
Fire services were the most commonly requested tax proposals — 131 for fire services, 12 for fire and emergency services and 11 for fire and police services combined. David Bertram, legislative liaison for the Michigan Townships Association, said residents realize that in some cases, fire departments may shut down without the tax support requested in the ballot proposals.
Voters were less likely to support proposals splitting additional revenue between police and fire. They OK’d all six renewals but turned down three of five increases.
Fixing the Roads
All proposals: 85 percent of 136 requests pass
Tax increases: 60 percent of 48 requests pass
Renewals or Headlee rollbacks: 98 percent of 88 requests pass
Next to requests for fire services support, local governments went to the voters most often seeking money for roads. Voters overwhelmingly said yes.
Charles Ballard, an MSU economist, understands why. Voters can see easily enough their roads are falling apart. He noted that Mount Hope Road, a well-traveled road on the southern edge of the MSU campus, is so bad, “I just hope that when I hit those potholes they are not bad enough to activate my airbag.”
Bertram, of the townships association, said he has been telling legislators for years that when they cut revenue-sharing money to local governments, it diminishes their ability to maintain the streets. “We are 50th in the nation in getting money for roads from state and local resources. We’re dead last,” he said. “This is a symptom of that.”
Supporting the Seniors
Total proposals: 100 percent of 45 requests pass
Tax increases: 100 percent of 12 requests pass
Renewals or Headlee rollbacks: 100 percent of 33 requests pass
Arguably the most striking finding of the Center for Michigan analysis is this: In every case, voters supported tax proposals to support senior citizens.
“It’s fascinating that 100 percent would pass. This is a lot of proposals,” said Roberts of MSU’s Institute for Public Policy and Social Research.
Part of the explanation no doubt is the relatively high percentage of seniors who cast ballots. But Ballard, said it is also consistent with other public policies, such as Social Security, Medicare and state income tax laws, all of which treat senior citizens favorably.
“There is a lot of political support for seniors, not just from the seniors themselves, but from throughout the population,” he said. “I think that’s because a lot of people think I’m not old now, but I’d like to be old someday. I’d like to find out what it’s like to be old.”
Levies for libraries
Total proposals: 87 percent of 38 requests pass
Tax increases: 77 percent of 22 requests pass
Renewals or Headlee rollbacks: 100 percent of 16 requests pass
One might expect libraries to fit into the “nice but not necessary” category of taxpayer priorities in tight times, but voters approved every renewal request and the vast majority of proposals raising taxes.
Bertram said the results are yet another example of how cuts in funding are having impacts that citizens can easily see.
“People realize libraries are going to close, fire departments are going to shut down, and local services they desire and want are going to be shut off if these things don’t pass,” he said. “I don’t think anyone is wanting to pay more in taxes. I think it has everything to do with residents feeling boxed in.”
Trusting the Locals
Some of the success in local ballot initiatives is a testament to the confidence that people have in their local governments.
Ballard, the MSU economist, conducts Michigan State University’s State of the State surveys to measure the mood of Michigan residents. Voters typically have more confidence in local government than state government, and more confidence in state government than the federal government. About 39 percent said they trust local government most of the time — not great, but more than twice the confidence in state and federal government.
In the past few years, voters have become fed up with state government as leaders have been unable to resolve budget issues, typically in an atmosphere of partisan bickering. Less than 16 percent trusted state government most of the time in the most recent survey.
“The big story in the last couple of surveys is that trust in local government remains about where it was, while trust in state government has just plummeted,” he said. “If there were statewide ballot proposals, I don’t know how they’d do.”
17 Comments
Ok now spin this into more taxes for Granholm ! Ain’t going to happen !
A wonderful example of those who directly benefit from government expenditures and /or pay very little in taxes (for various reasons) voting to increase taxes. Local governments have become extremely conscious of and adept at targeting tax increases requests in this manner. The residents of Detroit passed every tax increase that came along! Michigan real estate taxes already are amongst the highest in the nation, so your point is that we should not hesitate to raise them even more? That will help get people moving back!
I believe there is a strong tax revolt going on. But, as this article pointed out, the tax increases that were supported had the money earmarked for specifric purpoises. Alos, important in this equation is the money stayed locally, as opposed to sending money to Washington. The people I know, watch carefully how their taxes are being spent and when held locally, they have a the ability to see both where the money is going and to readily holod the elected officials immediately accountable. This does not compare with sending money to Lansing or Washington, where the money goes to support pet projects, organizations and federations and other states.
A different corner heard from…I think the voters are simply much smarter than our state officials give them credit for. The pain of reduced statewide funding is being felt at the local level, and people are stepping up to pay for the services they value. It would certainly be more fair if the state continued to support their part of the revenue sharing bargain, but in the absence of that, most of us would like to have a cop come when we call and, even, be able to take a book out of the library when it gets too expensive to go to the local bookstore. As politicians have been telling us in Washington – if we want it, we have to pay for it.
Interesting report.
Now, I’m interested in reading about how many people supported a tax hike that they didn’t have to pay for?
I’ve spoken to people who supported property tax hikes (i.e. buses and libraries) who didn’t even own property, they rent.
Let us know what you find.
I would like to better understand what were the proposals for seniors that were passed? Is this housing for low income seniors? Where are we spending the money? In general I beleive seniors are among the wealthier individuals in the state but also some of the poorest.
Perhaps voters are finally wising-up. We’re much better off keeping money “local,” where we can spend it locally and keep an eye on it. When we send it to Lansing, they try to keep Detroit afloat (i.e., more money per pupil in K-12), and when we send it to Washington, they do even worse (keeping failing companies and unions afloat). Like Arizona, we’re propping-up the State and Federal Government’s decades and decades failures.
When the choice is to turn roads to gravel, close fire departments, eliminate road officers, it says that we’ve cut to the bone. Reversing this trend isn’t a love for taxes as much as deciding that having services AT ALL is worth a small increase in taxes.
Yes, this will translate to Lansing as we start to close schools, state patrol units, road projects, prisons, etc. These services will be continued. Even if it requires more revenue. By the way, let’s close the holes in the “winners and loser” tax system, so everyone is unhappy, before we increase for the people that pay taxes now.
What this “proves” is that localities are better able to solve local problems than waiting for the overbloated state government to solve them. It is not a mandate for more statewide taxes. Citizens when faced with a speciifc problem that they see the need for it, will support it. No one, except the state political hacks, supports more money going into the “black hole” of Lansing. State governement’s increasingly unionized, bureacratic overhead is ineffecient. Small towns and city governements are too small to deal with multijurisditional problems. The solution is to reduce state government, consolidate rural, township, city governements into a county system that eliminates duplications and overlap run by a county executive. Then we will have effective governement that the state of Michigan can afford and derive better services without red tape. By becoming less expensive to administer, rediucing costs and ultimately the cost burden per capita, we will attract new job providing companies to the state without resorting to “giveaway” deals.
I think there are two very big lessons here.
First is that these were local issues where the elected officials are accessible. You call them and usually speak with them not some faceless staffer. The voters see them on a daily basis at the market, etc. Let this be a lesson to those advocating consolidation.
The other is that these issues were for very specific uses not to merely add some revenue to some big pot going for some things you are in favor of and others you oppose.
I continue to struggle reading your stories because of the gray font. I don’t really have any special visual needs, it is just too much work. The comments are so much easier to read since they are black. Why not make your wonderful website visually friendly? Maybe I am the only person who has this problem.
Thanks,
Nancy
Don’t leap to conclusions. The tea party movement does reflect how many people feel about federal government spending. I’m smart enough to know that if we want public services, we have to fund them. On a local or state level, I know where the money is going and can vote on the specific issues. At the federal level, 2000 plus page bills allow for hidden spending and funding of programs I personally would never support and that have nothing to do with what the bill states on the surface. If Michigan residents had less federal taxes to pay, we could afford to pay our own teachers, police, etc. We could “bail” out our own state.
What a well written and comprehensive analysis of what voters are thinking. Thank you for writing and researching this piece. Our village govt is considering eliminating its library spending. I hope a copy of this story convinces them to let voters decide before they cut libraries. I personally do not understand how why so many people undervalue libraries. I feel they are necessities for our young people, for books, research, computer access & study spaces.
I agree that the pain of reduced state funding and reduced tax revenue at the local level, mostly due to plunging home values is being felt and recognized by Michigan voters. Michigan voters are a smart group, recognizing that they can ‘fix things’ at the local level while the term limited Michigan legislature continues to be bogged down in partisan politics and lobbyist influence. I was charined at best to read your assesment that libraries are a “nice but not necessary” public service. Run that by the millions of people who visited public libraries both in person and virtually over the past year and you will get a resounding “not so”. Public libraries provide an indespensible service to their communities in terms of free access to information via their print and virtual collectons. Most public libraries in Michigan provide some type of job and career search support, provide support to local small businessses and entrepreneurs, provide a place where people who are unemplyed can file for their unemployment benefits, and work collabaoratively with other agencies in their communities to build the local economy and improve the quality of live for the citizens they serve. Call the director at your local public library. She/he can tell you more about the value of libraries in their communities.
I really think that people like it when the tax increase is earmarked so they know what their money is being spent for.
Dale W.
Bottom line is we can’t trust politicians like Jennifer Granholm to spend tax dollars prudently. We need to demand MORE transparency which they want nothing to do with.
Passing all of these voter options is great BUT they still don’t cover the needed normal services to make a community attractive to retain the workers we need for the future. Property tax revenues are declining faster then any Headlee override can help, and when home values start going up we will be limited to inflation (negative last year) or 5% whichever is lower. There is no “popup”. Dick Headlee never thought about a recession. Yes we can do libraries, public safety, roads — but as others have said what about low-cost housing, what about more than basic library services, what about parks, what about the arts, culture, the museums, public transit — these are what help us retain young college educated residents and atrract new corporate investment. Investors go where the young brains are.
All of these things are great – but they are very limited. We still need our Lansing “leaders” to act on fixing the revenue and taxation system — it’s broken and has been for many years. We need to revisit the giveaways in taxes to the corporate and public, as well as the revenue generating taxes. Public education has to deliver quality services for all of our children, higher education has to be more affordable, and communities need to be more liveable.
A skilled and educated workforce plus 21st century communities can be the draw card for the newer knowledge-based economy that will drive Michigan forward.