On May 5, Michigan voters will choose whether or not to raise state taxes by $2 billion to fix crumbling roads and infrastructure.
Although Proposal 1 would increase the amount of state money Hillsdale County receives for road work by 70 percent in 2018, many residents say the bill is too complicated for them to vote yes.
“It’s a priority of mine to repair the roads, but I don’t believe this is the best way to do it,” Councilperson Patrick Flannery said. “We should expect better of our legislature. The major hang up for me is the number of things attached to it that are not connected to roads.”
These extras include: an increased sales and use tax rate from 6 to 7 percent, a higher wholesale fuel tax, increased vehicle registration fees, raised earned income tax credits, and more public school funding, according to a March 25 Mackinac Center policy brief.
The brief added that the average Michigan household should expect a state tax increase of between $477 and $525 in 2016, but these numbers depend on a “household’s actual purchases of taxable goods.”
Michigan Rep. Eric Leutheuser said he hears three main objections to Proposal 1: it is too complicated, too big, and that a tax increase is not needed at all. Leutheuser admits the bill is “more complicated and messier” than he would like, but a redeeming quality is that the money is allocated specifically.
“It’s not going into a black hole, and if it does pass, the county road commission and city would see quite a lot more revenue coming in,” Leutheuser said.
Roughly one-third of the new revenue would go to non-transportation projects, such as public schools.
Hillsdale County Road Commission Manager Stan Clingerman estimates Hillsdale County would receive about $7 million per year — up from $1.4 million now — by 2018 under the proposed tax system.
Another complaint about the bill is that it requires four changes to the Michigan Constitution and is “tie-barred” to eight legislative bills that will go into effect if passed.
“This proposal probably raises more taxes than it needs to and gives less money to roads than it could,” Professor of Political Economy and former Michigan Deputy Treasurer Gary Wolfram said. “What is preferred is a proposal that doesn’t require a constitutional amendment and is a straight increase in the gas tax and vehicle registration.”
While Leutheuser, who joined the state legislature after it passed Proposal 1, said he sympathizes with frustrations about the bill, he recognizes improving Michigan roads is urgent. He added there is not a backup plan if the proposal fails.
“There’s not something we can just pull out of our pockets the next day. I want people to be aware of that,” Leutheuser said. “But I am in the optimistic, honeymoon phase as a freshman that we would all roll our sleeves up and get right after it again.”
Wolfram said he also believes the legislature will propose another road-funding option if this fails in May.
“We have a different, more free market legislature now than what passed this bill,” Wolfram said. “I don’t believe it will be three years until another solution comes along.”
Wolfram said he intends to research the bill more before deciding how he will vote, but he only gives it a 40 percent chance of passing since many dislike its complexity.
“It will be a difficult decision,” Wolfram said. “There are better propositions that could be put together but are there better propositions that could get 56 votes in the legislature? This is the question, and with this new legislature, I don’t think we know. If you think you’ll get a better deal, vote no, but you don’t know if you will — that is the uncertainty.”
Clingerman agreed with Wolfram that the proposal faces harsh odds.
“In my professional opinion, it’s an uphill battle,” Clingerman said.