News Story

City Taking In More But Manager Cries Poverty

Municipalities with growing revenue blame state for not adding even more dollars

At a town hall meeting in October 2017, Sterling Heights City Manager Mark Vanderpool echoed a refrain often heard from municipal officials and the organization that lobbies for them in Lansing. Cities, the complaint goes, aren’t getting enough of the tax revenue raised by the state, and the system for distributing that money to local governments is broken.

Vanderpool said that his city has managed to stay afloat largely due to budget cuts, reforms and two voter-approved millages.

“Cities cannot cut their way out of this ongoing crisis,” Vanderpool said. “In our case we have lost over $44 million in state shared revenue resulting in the need to eliminate over 200 full-time positions. In addition, we have eliminated pensions, retiree health care, privatized numerous services and it still was not enough.”

The city’s audited financial statements do not paint a picture of revenue decline, however.

From 2012 to 2017, Sterling Height’s total revenue increased from $93.9 million in 2012 (the equivalent of $100.2 million in 2017 dollars) to $116.1 million in 2017, a gain of $15.9 million after adjusting for inflation.

Part of that revenue increase is due to rapidly growing property tax collections. These rose from $51.7 million in 2012 ($55.2 million in 2017 dollars) to $57.3 million in 2017, a net gain of $2.1 million after inflation.

Jennifer Varney, the finance and budget director for Sterling Heights, said the increase in property tax revenue from 2012 to 2017 was entirely attributed to the passage of a street millage.

“This millage contributed an additional $6.8 million to General Fund Property Tax Revenue in fiscal 2017 and an additional $3.2 million to our Local Roads Fund which is dedicated to reconstructing neighborhood roads,” Varney said in an email. “The bottom line is that although our tax revenue has grown, it is from an increased millage, not an increase in taxable value.”

“So although State Equalized Value has increased over the time period in question, Proposal A has held down Taxable Value growth, and it is millage increases that have allowed the City to return General Fund Property Tax revenue to 2008 levels,” Varney said.

And Sterling Heights is not the only local government to collect more revenue.

The amount of property tax revenue collected by all forms of tax jurisdictions in the state rose from $12.8 billion in 2012 to $14.0 billion in 2017, according to a recently released State of Michigan report.

Still, the main lobbyist for municipal governments says there is a financial funding crisis in Michigan.

“The total amount of property tax levied in 2017 is still less than it was in 2007,” said Anthony Minghine, executive director of the Michigan Municipal League. “It is foolish to think that this allows the communities in Michigan to compete with places in surrounding states for talent. Continuing to deny that we have a broken municipal finance system in Michigan is devastating to our communities and permanently damaging our economy.”

Minghine continued: “With the exception of 2016, the average tax rate used to generate the 2017 tax levies is at the highest level of anytime in the last 20 years. This demonstrates a shift of tax burden from the state to local government and their residents. We continue to divert dollars away from local services to fund the state bureaucracy.”

Editor's note: This story was updated to include comments from the city of Sterling Heights.

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

Michigan’s Long 'Bad Driver Tax' Nightmare Will Finally End

A revenue-grab from the state's lost decade left a trail of social costs and broken lives

In 2003, as Michigan was accelerating into what would later be dubbed an economic “lost decade” and tax collections were in decline, legislators were desperate to avoid hard decisions on necessary spending cuts. It was a time of accounting gimmicks and fund shifts, but as one pundit put it, “They’ve turned over all the couch cushions and there’s no more change left to find.”

One of the most unfortunate consequences of the revenue scramble was a new law that imposed “driver responsibility fees” of up to $2,000 for individuals responsible for certain serious or multiple traffic violations. Supporters gave lip service to the notion that this was about traffic safety, but everyone knew it was really a revenue grab.

At the time many predicted the “bad driver tax” burdens would fall most heavily on those at the lower end of the income spectrum, and that the state would never collect the $65 million in annual revenue the measure was projected to extract. Both predictions came true as a House committee heard last fall in testimony on a bill to terminate the fees and cancel the debt of individuals who fell behind paying them. Some examples:

  • A district court judge described a homeless father of five who came before him and who owed $7,000 in delinquent fees and fines.
  • The judge also reported that 45 percent of those before his court for driving without a license lost their license because they could not afford to pay driver responsibility fees.
  • A city of Detroit official reported that some 76,000 city residents owed more than $124 million with an average liability of $1,629. He said most of it will never be collected.
  • As of August 2017 the total liability for unpaid bad driver taxes was $637 million, of which probably half was uncollectable due to individuals inability to pay.
  • Michigan’s current secretary of state was a member of the House when the law authorizing the fees was passed. She told the committee, “I thought they were unfair then and I think they are unfair now. Get rid of them.”

“Get rid of them” is just what happened this week as the House and Senate both approved and sent to Gov. Rick Snyder for approval a package of bills that repeals the fees and forgives all liability for unpaid amount.

This agreement also resolves tensions that erupted at the same committee hearing last fall when a state treasury official said the administration opposed the original versions of the repeal bills, in part because they didn’t want to lose the revenue.

This came after a number of speakers had described the social damage and wrecked lives left behind by the law, which caused the committee chairman and others to bristle at the seemingly misplaced priorities. The official quickly backed up and expressed the administration’s willingness to work on a solution. With the governor’s expected signature the repeal and debt forgiveness will go into effect next Sept. 30.

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.