‘Essential’ for Michigan to address funding impact of EVs, MAC says

It is “essential” that Michigan quickly identify a new revenue source for public roads in response to the fiscal effects of the growing ranks of electric vehicles (EVs), MAC’s director of governmental affairs told a Lansing press conference on Tuesday.

In her remarks at the event to unveil a study on EVs and road funding, Deena Bosworth also noted, “As the report demonstrates, in 2021 1.9 percent of vehicles on roads in Michigan were electric. While this number may seem small, it is not insignificant. That number will undoubtedly grow, and we will continue to lose gas tax revenue at an alarming rate. We must consider other revenue sources, or we will be left in a hopeless and helpless position.”

The event was hosted by the County Road Association of Michigan (CRA) to unveil the study, which was conducted by the Anderson Economic Group.

As outlined in Public Act 51, roads in Michigan are primarily funded by the tax on motor fuel and vehicle registration fees. EV drivers are clearly not contributing to the gas tax and are paying a reduced registration fee. As more drivers transition to EVs each year, Michigan will see a dramatic decrease in revenue, and we will no longer be able to maintain and repair our roads.

The report came from an EV workgroup coordinated by CRA that includes MAC, other local government groups, business leaders and transportation experts.

Between 2019 and 2021, the report says, EVs on the road cost the state $50 million. By 2030, $65 million to $90 million will be lost annually. The report proposes several potential policy solutions, including an annual flat registration surcharge, mileage-based user fees, per kilowatt-hour fees and tolling. It will ultimately be up to the Legislature and governor to determine which path forward will best serve the people of Michigan. The workgroup plans to work closely with them during the decision-making process.

MAC is dedicated to finding realistic solutions that both promote EV adoption and sustain road systems.

You can find the full report here: The Impact of Electric vehicle Adoption on Road Funding in Michigan.

For more information on MAC’s infrastructure work, contact Madeline Fata at fata@micounties.org

 

Revenue Conference: Dollars keep flowing to state

The state’s economic experts are predicting a mild recession will occur in Michigan in 2023, but this dip will not end the recent trend of generally growing state revenues, according to the Consensus Revenue Estimating Conference held Friday in Lansing.

Since the depths of the Michigan’s recession in the aughts, the state government’s revenues have soared, with a General Fund expected to stay near or above $15 billion through at least fiscal 2025. As recently as 2016, the state General Fund budget was barely exceeding $8 billion.

Unfortunately, those improvements have not translated into similar investments in county revenue sharing or transformational investments in trial court funding, juvenile justice, mental health or other services where counties carry heavy burdens.

For example, in fiscal 2001, the last year before recessionary trends took hold in Michigan, the state had a General Fund of about $10 billion and assigned $228.7 million to county revenue sharing. Adjusting for inflation, that revenue sharing amount today would be $379.2 million. The actual county revenue sharing number for fiscal 2023 is $245.8 million.

Already, during the first week of the 102^nd Legislature, legislators have introduced bills that would reduce state revenues available to invest in counties through a huge increase of the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit and the repeal of the state tax on pension income.

“While much has changed in Lansing since last January, what has not is that counties will have to fight hard to convince legislators to make proper – and long overdue – investments in county services as the competition for dollars will be fierce,” said Deena Bosworth, MAC’s director of governmental affairs. “We can’t stress enough the importance of engagement between the 619 elected commissioners and their state counterparts as the budget process unfolds.”

For more information on MAC’s budget advocacy work, contact Deena Bosworth at bosworth@micounties.org.

 

MAC establishes state legislative priorities for 2023     

Each year, MAC establishes legislative priorities for the upcoming year. These items are based on input and feedback from our membership and center around the more pressing issues our counties are facing. Some items are hold overs from the previous legislative session, and some are new items brought to our attention.

2023 Legislative Priorities

The list covers only a portion of the issues we will work on this year, but these six issues areas are where we will take the lead:

Revamping the Open Meetings Act to allow for pre-pandemic virtual participation in meetings.

Prior to the changes made to the Open Meetings Act (OMA) in 2020 during the pandemic, members of a public body could attend, participate and vote remotely at county board sessions, so long as a quorum of the public body was physically present at the meeting location. The statutory change to allow for full board meetings to be held remotely due to the pandemic expired Dec. 31, 2021, and impacted the pre-pandemic rules by now barring remote participants from voting, even if a quorum is physically present in the meeting room. For questions on this topic, contact Madeline Fata at fata@micounties.org.

Establishing a Revenue Sharing Trust Fund.

Revenue Sharing is the most flexible form of state aid to counties, which makes it the most effective method to fund generational investments in public services — with decisions made at the local level. The legislation will seek to create a statutory earmark of the state sales tax. The money deposited into the fund would stay in the fund for distribution to counties, cities, villages and townships and not lapse to the state General Fund at the end of each fiscal year. The money in the fund would be split, with 50 percent going to county revenue sharing and 50 percent going to revenue sharing for cities, villages and townships; this distribution could potentially increase county revenue sharing in the first year by more than 40 percent. The legislation’s method of carving out a percentage of the sales tax for the fund is what revenue sharing was originally designed to do — share in the state’s revenue. If sales tax revenue goes up, local allocations go up, if sales tax revenue falls, so do allocations, just like it does for constitutional revenue sharing for cities, villages and townships. For questions on this topic, contact Deena Bosworth at bosworth@micounties.org.

Implementing the Trial Court Funding Commission’s recommendations for a more equitable and stable funding mechanism for our trial courts.

Local court funding remains caught in a looming statutory sunset, which now is set for May 2024, and is the subject of ongoing litigation before the Michigan Supreme Court. To ensure our local courts do not face a financial emergency, MAC supports the creation of the Trial Court Fund to distribute funding to trial courts based on operational requirements while maintaining local discretion over trial court operational decisions and the establishment of uniform assessments and centralized collections for all trial courts through the State Court Administrator’s Office. The system will maintain judicial discretion for ordering fines, will reduce costs and increase efficiency. For questions on this topic, contact Samantha Gibson at gibson@micounties.org.

Increasing resources for juvenile justice services.

A lack of staff, training and facilities has left a critical shortage of resources to house those in the juvenile justice system. MAC will be seeking an increase in funding for staff recruiting, retention and training, direct funding for additional facilities and an increase in the per diem rate for foster care parents. For questions on this topic, contact Samantha Gibson at gibson@micounties.org.

Compensating local governments for funds diverted by the Veterans Property Tax Exemption.

Since the enactment of the Disabled Veterans Property Tax exemption in 2013, counties have sought reimbursement from the state for the lost local revenues, a hit of tens of millions of dollars each year. MAC supports continuing the exemption — but with the state making up those local losses through a refundable income tax credit payable to local governments. This method of reimbursement was approved in previous legislative sessions by both the Senate and supported by veterans organizations but was never fully enacted. For questions on this topic, contact Deena Bosworth at bosworth@micounties.org.

Revamping the Personal Property Tax (PPT) Exemption to provide annual reimbursement to local governments.

As part of the economic development deal struck at the end of 2021, the Legislature and governor enacted an increase for the PPT exemption for small business, thereby reducing revenue to local governments by approximately $75 million each year. This exemption begins this year without a defined method for reimbursement for local governments that receive PPT funds. MAC worked with the 101st Legislature on a reimbursement methodology, but the bills were not brought up for a vote in the House during the last days of session. MAC will seek the same legislative reimbursement mechanism in new legislation in 2023. For questions on this topic, contact Deena Bosworth at bosworth@micounties.org.

Please watch for MAC advocacy campaigns throughout the year on these items and others so we can succeed helping counties better serve their residents in 2023 and beyond. For more information about MAC’s advocacy strategies, contact Governmental Affairs Director Deena Bosworth at bosworth@micounties.org.

 

New Commissioner School sessions close out with Grayling meeting

MAC Board President Stan Ponstein and Executive Director Stephan Currie led MAC’s contingent to the fourth and final in-person session of the 2022 New Commissioner School, held at Kirtland College near Grayling on Dec. 12.

New and veteran commissioners, and others, filled the meeting room at the session, with attendance reaching near 90. Over the four in-person sites this cycle, nearly 250 county leaders participated.

 

What happened in lame duck?

Details about county-oriented actions in the final days of the 2022 lame duck legislative session can be found in the Dec. 9 edition of Legislative Update.

 

Liquor tax funding change means $25 million boost to counties

A two-bill package designed to extend the capture of liquor tax revenue that counties use for substance abuse programs passed during the last days of the legislative session this week and will soon mean a $25 million boost to counties.

Senate Bills 1222-23, by Sen Wayne Schmidt (R-Grand Traverse), amend the State Convention Facilities Authority Act to extend the sunset on the capture of liquor tax revenue for improvements to the convention facility in Detroit and therefore extend the sunset on the collection of liquor tax revenue for counties.

The issues were tied together when the act was created. Under current law, the collection and allocation of the liquor tax revenue expires once the bonds for the convention facility are paid off. Due to recent increases in liquor tax revenue, those bonds are scheduled to be paid off 13 years early, which would eliminate the future collection of revenue and deplete the allocation to counties. This two-bill package does not extend the 2039 deadline for the bonds to be paid off, but it does allow the facility authority to issue additional bonds for improvements.  

MAC has been working with representatives from the authority to address our need to have counties’ annual allocation reflective of the collection of the liquor tax revenue. Current law states counties receive an increase in their allocation based on a percentage above the previous year’s allocation, not on a percentage of the total tax collected. The excess tax collected is instead allocated to the reduction of the bond debt of the authority. (Again, due to the increase in liquor tax revenue, those bonds are scheduled to be paid off early.)

By allowing the authority to issue additional debt for improvements, the bills do something significant for counties. Beginning in 2023, the baseline allocation in liquor tax dollars for counties will increase by approximately 48 percent — or $25 million. (See county-by-county estimates.) The annual increase will remain the same as current law of 1 percent additional each year, but the baseline will be reset every three years to reflect the increase in revenue from the liquor tax.

Also, current law states 50 percent of the liquor tax revenue received by counties must be allocated to substance abuse programs. SBs 1222-23 will change that requirement to 40 percent (though no less than the amount allocated in FY22). In short, this will be a significant increase in funds toward substance abuse programs and an increase in the amount counties can allocate to their general funds. 

The bills are now headed to the governor for her expected signature.

For more information on this issue, contact Deena Bosworth at bosworth@micounties.org.