Mixed match

The proposal, set for a May 5 vote is dense and inherently incomplete, throwing together a tax increase, new education funding, money for job training programs, changes in the earned income tax credit and more, all bundled in 76 words of legal jargon. State Elections Director Chris Thomas, who wrote it, called the proposal the most complex he´s seen in his 34-year tenure. State law requires that such measures are constructed in 100 words or less. But it could be 1,000 words long and it wouldn´t help.

Former state Rep. Tom McMillan, representing the Concerned Taxpayers for Michigan, and who offered wording for the proposal that was rejected by Thomas, noted that 10 new laws are tied to the passage of the measure.

Said McMillan: “Each of these laws was carefully worded to have specific legal meaning that affects all citizens of Michigan. It is the position of Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan that state law requires voters be informed of each and every subject addressed by each of the laws that take effect and only if the proposal passes, as well as the direct effect of the constitutional amendment itself. State officials have a legal and moral obligation to present a true and complete statement of the proposal´s effect to voters.”

Given what they had to work with, they seem to have done their best. But full disclosure isn´t really possible with a ballot proposal, certainly not as specifically as McMillan wants. Then again, most constitutional ballot proposals are cleaner, dealing with a single issue like casinos, renewable energy requirements or same-sex unions.

Here´s what we´ll vote on in May, in the minute or less most of us spend filling out an off-cycle ballot.

“A proposal to amend the State Constitution to increase the sales/use tax from 6% to 7% to replace and supplement reduced revenue to the School Aid Fund and local units of government caused by the elimination of the sales/use tax on gasoline and diesel fuel for vehicles operating on public roads, and to give effect to laws that provide additional money for roads and other transportation purposes by increasing the gas tax and vehicle registration fees.” {76 words}

The proposed constitutional amendment would:

– Eliminate sales / use taxes on gasoline / diesel fuel for vehicles on public roads.

– Increase portion of use tax dedicated to School Aid Fund (SAF).

– Expand use of SAF to community colleges and career / technical education, and prohibit use for 4-year colleges / universities.

– Give effect to laws, including those that: – Increase sales / use tax to 7%, as authorized by constitutional amendment.

– Increase gasoline / diesel fuel tax and adjust annually for inflation, increase vehicle registration fees, and dedicate revenue for roads and other transportation purposes.

– Expand competitive bidding and warranties for road projects.

– Increase earned income tax credit. Should this proposal be adopted? Yes or no?

Or, huh? Read it again.

It´s a lot easier to vote no on this tortured proposal than to vote yes. That this confusing measure with all that it entails is reduced to a simple yes or no response isn´t fair to the small number of Michiganders who will actually vote, or to most of those in the state, who won´t.

We have a body to deal with complex issues: a well-paid State Legislature. And if voters reject the proposal to raise the sales tax to fund $1.2 billion in road repairs, the issues will be back where they belong, in the Michigan House and Senate.

With new leadership in both houses, there may be more willingness to make some hard fiscal decisions, especially after the damage to roads brought on by another brutal winter. Ultimately, it´s a Republican issue. The party controls the House, the Senate, the Governor´s Office, the Supreme Court and other state-wide elected offices. But it´s from the party´s ranks that springs the most aggressive anti-tax fervor. Certainly, this shaped the last legislative session.

But there is at least one encouraging sign that this session could be different. Before the last session ended, the Senate voted itself a new and expensive office building. The Michigan Strategic Fund was authorized to sell up to $70 million in bonds to purchase most of the Capital View Building on Townsend Street, adjacent to the Capitol, and for other costs associated with the move.

The whole process was shrouded in secrecy, buried deep inside the office of term-limited Senate President Randy Richardville. Because the Legislature has exempted itself from Freedom of Information Act disclosures, the superiority of the bid submitted by The Boji Group, a substantial donor to Republican candidates and causes, was merely an assertion, a selfserving one at that.

But the new Senate president, Alan Meekhof, shifted course.

"In the interest of transparency, I´m going to release the bids so people will be able to see it was a fair and open process," he said in a report by MLive´s capital reporter Jonathan Oosting. And the release showed that the Boji Group bid was the most favorable for the state.

Meekhof´s decision may reflect a more pragmatic approach to governing and a willingness to make decisions and live with the consequences. It may well be needed on May 6, if the Legislature has to sort through the wreckage of a failed ballot proposal, and must find a politically challenging, but necessary way to fix the damn roads.