News Story

Back Pay Boosted Reinstated Cop to $201K

Cleared of sexual misconduct, officer was highest paid Dearborn employee in 2018

A Dearborn police officer who was suspended without pay for 19 months received reimbursement for his lost wages in 2018, pushing his total wages to $201,047 for the year. The payment came after the officer was cleared of criminal charges involving a traffic stop, and made him the city’s highest paid employee for 2018.

Officer Justin Smith was charged with second-degree criminal sexual conduct in 2016 after he was accused of inappropriately touching a woman during a traffic stop, according to WDIV. Smith is married and has five children. Smith and his family were forced to live with relatives during his suspension, according to WDIV.

Smith was acquitted by a judge on Jan. 10, 2018, according to the city of Dearborn.

City records show that from the first of this year until July 25, Smith earned $47,577.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.

News Story

A DTE Push Poll? Utility Cagey About Ratepayer Survey

Refusing to release questions could allow cherry-picking responses for misleading PR

DTE Energy recently sent an online survey to residential ratepayers asking how they view the electric utility company and whether they approve of its actions and plans related to the environment.

Eric Younan, senior communications strategist for DTE, told Michigan Capitol Confidential that the survey was meant to gauge customers’ opinions on the “environmental progress of the company.” It would also help the company “understand the effectiveness of our customer communications.”

But when Michigan Capitol Confidential asked DTE for a copy of the full survey, the company said it was unable to supply one. Requests to Emicity, the market research firm which created the survey, were not answered.

Michigan Capitol Confidential has obtained parts of the survey from other sources. One question read, “‘Changes in global or regional climate pattern in the mid to late 20th century onwards that have been attributed largely to the increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide produced by the use of fossil fuels’ is often referred to both as ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change.’ Which term is probably the one you would prefer that DTE use in its communications with you?”

Response choices included “Climate change,” “Global warming,” “Doesn’t matter—both terms are clear to me,” and “Neither—I don’t believe it’s a thing.”

Jason Hayes, environmental policy director for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, said that DTE’s unwillingness to share the survey raises questions about its real purpose. The company, he said, could cherry-pick the results and only publicize responses that serve its interests. Hayes recommends the utility release all the questions. “That way people can look at the questions and say, ‘that was actually pretty leading’ or ‘that was pretty fair’,” he said.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.

Commentary

Lawmakers Shouldn’t Bend to Bad Road Funding Policy To Meet Arbitrary Road Deadline

Lack of consensus on road funding not a good reason to shut down the government

The governor and legislative leadership want to make a road funding deal part of the budget for the upcoming fiscal year. If they are unable to pass a budget by October, the state government shuts down and only the “essential” state operations continue until they approve a new budget. That is a good reason to pass a budget before the deadline. But there is no good reason to shut down the government if they can’t find a consensus about road funding.

Legislators have the option to pass a budget without tax increases. The budgets would be likely to include more transportation funding. Both the House and the Senate have already passed their spending plans for the year, and both proposals include more money for roads.

The governor has the power to veto budget bills if they are passed without her recommended tax hikes, or even without a compromise tax hike. And if this happens at or near the deadline, it means that the state government shuts down. Nonessential government workers don’t go to work. Highway construction stops. The state stops transferring money to schools and local governments. Residents who rely on state services don’t get those services. And it’s just inappropriate and disruptive to shut the state government down.

I can see how disputes over major fiscal policies can cause a shutdown. But the transportation funding question is not a major fiscal policy dispute. Legislative leaders and the governor already agree that they want to spend more money on transportation. The conflict is only about how much and whether to raise taxes to do it.

That dispute doesn’t have to be settled by October. Passing a budget without a tax hike would not end the road funding debate. Lawmakers can continue to debate the merits of different tax hike proposals after they approve annual budgets.

It makes sense why the governor wants to put a deadline on a road plan — negotiations can be perpetual if the parties won’t budge from positions which allow no compromise. Deadlines can force hard votes. Residents experienced this in 2007, as a shutdown proved enough justification to get the votes for a tax hike.

The 2007 dispute was about budget cuts versus tax hikes, with various advocates taking opposite stances. This time around, there is agreement in favor of more road funding, and the argument about how much more road funding there will be is a bad reason to shut the state government down.

Or perhaps the dispute is instead about tax increases. If it is, then it also seems inappropriate to shut down the state government. The state budget has grown and is growing, which means that the state is already collecting and spending more each year. Lawmakers can spend more on schools or water infrastructure or other fiscal priorities with the extra proceeds from economic growth. A tax hike just means that those priorities can happen sooner, which is obviously different from whether they happen at all.

There could theoretically be an important reason to get a lot more money quickly. But if there is, tax hike supporters have left that reason unstated. Lawmakers can make road funding a priority for extra, growing revenue, and it’s unclear what taxpayers would get for expedited cash inflows instead.

So, unless there is some reason that emerges before October where the state will face some real harms by not raising a lot of revenue quickly, the state should avoid a shutdown over the road funding debate. Shutdowns are bad policy, and there is no good reason to shut down the state government if legislators approve budgets without a tax hike.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.