House Appropriations Committee cuts work project funding
About $645 million in fiscal 2025 work project funding has been cut by the House Appropriations Committee, utilizing for the first time a provision within the Management and Budget Act of 1984. Under this provision, only one committee is required to vote to reject work project funding. Of the work projects cut, $50 million was part of the Michigan Indigent Defense Commission’s (MIDC) FY2025 appropriation.
The $50 million was not expended by the MIDC in fiscal 2025. In typical years, such funds would have been rolled over into “work project” money for the commission to utilize for the following four fiscal years. This $50 million does not constitute a cut to MIDC. MIDC has utilized the funding necessary for FY25, and they will not be impacted in FY26 by this change.
Currently, MIDC has two work project funds remaining: FY22 work project balance of $38.6 million, set to expire Oct. 1, 2026, and FY23 work project balance of $11.8 million, set to expire Oct. 1, 2027 (see MIDC October 2025 Meeting Minutes).
House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Kalamazoo) and Appropriations Chair Ann Bollin (R-Livingston) have suggested they are open to a supplemental to include the reappropriation of work projects that were cut this week. A supplemental, however, could not take place until February 2026 under the newly enacted Hall Ethics, Accountability and Transparency Plan.
For more information on this issue, contact Samantha Gibson at gibson@micounties.org.
Oral arguments conclude in challenge to state’s plan on mental health oversight
The Michigan Court of Claims wrapped up oral arguments on Dec. 10 in litigation challenging the state’s plan to revamp oversight of local mental health services.
“The Region 10/Centra Wellness” case centers on the state’s new request for proposals (RFP) for Prepaid Inpatient Health Plans (PIHP) that manage Medicaid funds for specialty behavioral health services for residents, operating under contract with the state’s Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS).
Judge Christopher Yates did not issue a ruling from the bench, but his questions offered a clear sense of the issues he is weighing. He pressed both sides on how the RFP aligns with the Mental Health Code, particularly around who is responsible for core functions in the public mental health system. He asked pointed questions about delegation of functions (including contracting authority), how “braided” funding will support Community Mental Health Services Programs (CMHSPs) in carrying out their statutory administrative responsibilities, how substance use disorder services would be administered under the proposal and how the new structure would interact with processes such as involuntary commitment and inpatient hospitalization.
A recurring theme throughout the hearing was the question of remedies. Yates noted more than once that if he finds problems with the RFP, his preference would be to define the legal guardrails and then allow the state, through MDHHS and its Department of Technology, Management and Budget, to identify and work through an appropriate fix rather than immediately ordering the RFP pulled outright. That could mean the state withdrawing and rewriting the RFP, or attempting to revise the current version so that it better fits within the existing framework of Michigan law and the Mental Health Code.
Related: Why did MAC bid on the MDHHS Specialty Behavioral Health Services RFP?
There is still no formal decision at this time. Based on his comments in court, Yates indicated a written opinion will follow in the near future. Once that opinion is issued and analyzed, additional information will be shared on any practical implications for counties, CMHSPs and the PIHP structure going forward.
For more information on this issue, contact Jimmy Johnson at Johnson@micounties.org.
House committee takes testimony on expansion of disabled veterans property tax exemption
A bill to widen the long-standing disabled veterans homestead property tax exemption was discussed in the House Finance Committee this week.
House Bill 4682, by Rep. Jason Woolford (R-Livingston), would widen the exemption so that additional surviving spouses can continue to claim the exemption after a veteran’s death.
Under current Michigan law (MCL 211.7b), a full exemption from property tax on a homestead is available to a veteran who has been determined by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to be permanently and totally disabled as a result of military service (entitled to benefits at the 100% rate), or to certain veterans receiving special-adapted housing assistance. A surviving spouse who has not remarried may continue to claim that exemption only if the disabled veteran was eligible for the exemption immediately before death.
HB 4682 would expand eligibility for the surviving spouse continuation of the exemption, so it includes spouses of veterans who died from service-connected injuries even if the veteran had not previously been designated permanently and totally disabled at the 100 percent VA rate. In short, the bill would allow more surviving spouses whose partners died as a result of military service to receive the existing homestead exemption.
MAC and other local government groups submitted a letter of opposition to the bill, based not on the value of the benefit but on the simple fact that the state should be reimbursing local governments for the loss in property tax revenue.
No vote was taken on the bill this week.
For more information on this issue, contact Deena Bosworth at bosworth@micounties.org
Commissioner disclosure bill looms in House
County commissioners in Michigan’s 16 largest counties could find themselves subject to financial disclosure rules if House Bill 5091, by Rep. Donni Steele (R-Oakland), moves through the Legislature.
HB 5091 would amend the Public Officers Financial Disclosure Act (2023 PA 281) to require annual financial disclosure reports from county commissioners and county executives in counties with populations greater than 150,000 residents, of which there are 16, and directs the Secretary of State’s Office to develop a standardized electronic form for filing.
The measure would require covered county officials to file annual reports that include income, liabilities and reportable gifts — mirroring many of the items that voters approved for state officers in 2022. Steele was quoted saying the bill is intended to increase transparency and help the public spot potential conflicts of interest. Affected counties would be Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Kent, Genesee, Washtenaw, Ottawa, Ingham, Kalamazoo, Livingston, Saginaw, Muskegon, Jackson, St. Clair, Monroe and Berrien.
Proposal 1 (adopted by votes on the November 2022 ballot) added a constitutional requirement for annual public financial disclosure reports by members of the legislature and certain statewide officers. Proposal 1’s text specifies the kinds of information that must be disclosed annually via an electronic submission to the Secretary of State’s Office:
- Required content for each report, including:
- A description of assets and sources of unearned income.
- Sources of earned income (salaries, wages, bonuses, dividends, pensions, etc.).
- A description of liabilities (mortgages and other liabilities).
- Positions currently held as an officer, director, trustee, partner, proprietor, representative, employee or consultant of any organization (excluding solely religious, social, fraternal or political organizations and honorary positions).
- Agreements or arrangements regarding future employment, leaves of absence, deferral/continuation of payments from prior employers, or continued participation in an employer-sponsored benefits plan.
- Gifts that are reportable under existing lobbyist reporting rules.
- Travel payments and reimbursements required to be reported by lobbyists or lobbyist agents.
- Payments made by a lobbyist or lobbyist agent to a charity in lieu of an honorarium.
- If the spouse earned $1,000 or more, then spouse’s occupation and employer(s).
- Whether the spouse is a registered lobbyist or lobbyist agent.
The bill was up for testimony only this week; however, further action is anticipated.
For more information on this issue, contact Deena Bosworth at bosworth@micounties.org.
Court of Claims rejects preliminary injunction on marijuana excise tax
A request to block the enactment of the 24 percent marijuana wholesale tax before Jan. 1, 2026, was rejected by the Michigan Court of Claims this week. While the court did not approve the cannabis industry’s request for a preliminary injunction, it will allow the challenge to the tax to move forward.
Marijuana industry groups sued the state over the recently passed tax, which is part of the 2025 Road Funding Plan and is estimated to generate $420 million annually to be dedicated to the newly established Neighborhood Road Fund. Industry groups claimed the tax amended the 2018 ballot measure to legalize recreational marijuana, which would require a two-thirds majority vote of legislators. The Comprehensive Road Funding Tax Act passed in October 2025, now Public Act 23 of 2025, did not receive a two-thirds vote. Court of Claims Judge Sima Patel disagreed with industry groups, citing that the new law was “another tax” and not an amendment to the ballot measure.
For more information on this issue, contact Samantha Gibson at gibson@micounties.org.
Bills to remove fees, require law enforcement service of Personal Protection Orders clear Senate
The Michigan Senate advanced legislation this week to alter the service of Personal Protection Orders in ways that concern county governments.
A Personal Protection Order (PPO) is a legal remedy available to individuals seeking protection from stalking, harassment, assault, or domestic violence. Under current statute, once a PPO is signed by a judge, it is enforceable when served upon the respondent. There have been concerns that costs and delays of service are barriers to victims seeking protection.
Senate Bill 611, by Sen. Stephanie Chang (D-Wayne), would eliminate the fee for service of a domestic violence related PPO. Senate Bill 612, by Sen. Ruth Johnson (R-Oakland), would require that a law enforcement agency serve the PPO on a respondent. The bill stipulates how many service attempts must be made within a certain time frame. SB 612 also creates the Personal Protection Order Service Fund, which would reimburse a law enforcement agency $50 for every served PPO. SB 611 and 612 were passed unanimously by the Senate this week.
MAC continues to work with the Michigan Sheriffs’ Association and the bill sponsors to remedy the unfunded mandates posed by the legislation.
For more information on this issue, contact Samantha Gibson at gibson@micounties.org.
‘Ban on bans’ bill for natural gas approved in House Energy Committee
A bill to prohibit local units of government from imposing a ban on the use of natural gas or installation of natural gas infrastructure ― a “ban on bans” ― was approved by the House Energy Committee this week. House Bill 4486, by Rep. Steve Frisbie (R-Calhoun), specifically prohibits a county, city, village or township from adopting an ordinance, resolution or policy that bans the use of natural gas, or the installation of infrastructure to transport or distribute natural gas. Any ordinance adopted on or after the bill’s effective date would be unenforceable.
MAC opposes HB 4486 and all efforts to preempt local control.
For more information on this issue, contact Samantha Gibson at gibson@micounties.org.
 |
 |
MAC on the road: MAC leadership attends NACo Board session in Texas
MAC President Antoinette Wallace of Macomb (right) and Immediate Past President Melissa Daub of Wayne (left) joined NACo Second Vice President Alisha Bell of Wayne at the National Association of Counties’ Fall 2025 Board of Directors Meeting and County Storytellers Symposium in Wise County, Texas, in early December. “It was a gathering filled with insight, inspiration and a deep appreciation for the power of communication in civic leadership,” Wallace said.
State’s evolving strategy on substance use explained in special Podcast 83 episode
How the state of Michigan is evolving its strategy to address substance use disorder (SUD) is the focus of a new special episode of Podcast 83.
Guest host Amy Dolinky, who leads MAC’s opioid settlement advisory work, interviewed Peter Lindeman, a consultant to the state Department of Health and Human Services for the episode.
“Share with our listeners today a little bit about the big picture of what the state is looking at in terms of utilization related to all of the settlement funds coming in?”
“So, at the start of the settlements coming out, our real priority was addressing the crisis,” Lindeman replied, “and getting dollars out to community organizations, municipal partners and other groups to get naloxone in hand, expand access to harm reduction resources and build up our treatment infrastructure, so that there are places for people to go get treatment. (When state first started spending), we were constantly seeing 3,000 people a year die to overdose in Michigan.
“Now that number in 2024 was much closer to, like, 1,800, which is obviously still far too many people dying due to overdose, but a great improvement from where we saw ourselves a few years ago. …
“Our kind of overall goal (now) is still decrease that fatal overdose rate but also eliminate demographic and geographic disparities. We know that for different Michiganders, the opioid epidemic is still hitting really hard, whether that’s people in very urban communities or very rural communities. …
“So, in prevention, we’re really focused on delaying the average age of first use, because we know that the earlier in life someone uses illicit substances for the first time, the more likely they are to be impacted by substance use disorder later in life.”
To learn more, click here or on the image above to view the full episode, which was recorded on Dec. 5.
Learn how Savi’s loan forgiveness work can help your county attract and retain employees
Join MAC and Savi for a special webinar on Jan. 13, 2026, to learn how your county can create an excellent benefit to help you attract and retain employees.
Did you know that over 9 million public service workers, including full-time county employees, are eligible for student debt forgiveness through the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program? Yet, fewer than 3 percent have received relief.
The real question is: Are they aware of it? Are they maximizing their student debt forgiveness?
Please join us as we speak with student debt forgiveness expert Tony Raffa, who will clear up much of the confusion over:
- Executive orders and what they mean for employees
- Changes in the Department of Education and its impact
- Current student debt relief programs and who is eligible.
- Common issues with applying for and receiving student debt forgiveness
A new tool is available to help your employees calculate their potential student debt relief and cut through the red tape when applying. We will show how the tool helps employees save an average of $2,244 a year, freeing up space for them to hit their financial goals.
Click here to register for the webinar, which will run from 11 a.m. to 12 p.m. Eastern on Jan. 13.
Staff picks
- Alternative Funding for Trial Courts: Implementation Recommendations (Michigan Judicial Council)
- Assessment of the 2025 Michigan Transportation Funding Package (Citizens Research Council of Michigan)
- Stretching small opioid settlement allocations helps funding do more (NACo County News)
- Michigan to use $38M in opioid funds to expand housing for people in recovery (Bridge Michigan)