MichiganVotes Bills

‘No reason to fear a charter school,’ West Bloomfield treasurer told school board

But board voted anyway to tear down Roosevelt Elementary, build new school with millage money

When West Bloomfield School District treasurer Carol Finkelstein testified before lawmakers in February, she said the district had to tear down a beautiful and historic elementary school to keep it out of the hands of charter schools.

But when Finkelstein updated her colleagues on the West Bloomfield Board of Education a week later, she told a different story.

“I see no reason to fear a charter school,” Finkelstein said at the March 4 meeting, “especially given the people sitting behind us who are adamantly opposed to it.” Watch the embedded video at the 1:54 mark.

Finkelstein was being asked about the claim she had made in Lansing. Board member Deborah Evans asked if West Bloomfield had reason to believe a charter school would move in. Finkelstein said no.

Earlier Finkelstein quoted Dan Quisenberry, president of the Michigan Association of Public School Academies, advising that charter schools do not go where they are not wanted.

But that’s not what Finkelstein told lawmakers a week earlier. See the linked video at 47:50: 

Roosevelt is a beautiful 104-year-old historic building that is facing demolition because we simply cannot afford to have it become a competing school.

The West Bloomfield school board voted Monday night to demolish Roosevelt Elementary School in Keego Harbor. The board also voted to seek a millage from local taxpayers to build another elementary school. In so doing, it rejected a $1.7 million offer to buy and renovate the century-old building. The Detroit News reports that Roosevelt Elementary is the oldest school building in Oakland County.

House Bill 5025, the legislation Finkelstein supported in her February testimony, would repeal a statewide ban on restrictive covenants for school buildings. At the board table, Finkelstein misrepresented the effect of state law on old school buildings.

“It’s causing buildings to be torn down that could be repurposed for housing,” Finkelstein said.

“Right now, they’re just deteriorating,” a colleague added.

Michigan law does not cause school buildings to be torn down.

The current law simply prohibits schools from attaching restrictive deeds to old buildings they sell. These restrictions keep developers from selling to charter school operators. Rep. Noah Arbit, D-West Bloomfield, introduced the bill. 

But as Finkelstein told colleagues at the March 4 meeting, even if the bill were passed, it wouldn’t take effect until spring 2025. It wouldn’t affect Roosevelt Elementary School, nor save it from the wrecking ball the West Bloomfield school board chose willingly.

In the end, Finkelstein was the one urging caution from her colleagues. Along with Evans, she urged the board to let the renovation offer play out. And in the end, the board decided to embrace the demolition that had been in the works for months.

Finkelstein did not respond to a request for comment.

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 budget isn’t sustainable…Yet

Lawmakers should practice more restraint

Michigan’s budget since the COVID-19 pandemic has ramped up beyond what taxpayers can afford. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s latest budget keeps Michigan at those elevated, unsustainable levels. Legislators should correct this.

Lawmakers shouldn’t have a state budget that increases the state budget faster than the average taxpayer’s ability to pay for it. The question is: What is a good measure of how much taxpayers can afford? Spending an amount people can easily manage would keep the state government affordable, but spending more could be catastrophic, as it crowds out people’s opportunities to thrive.

Elected officials should be cautious when spending scarce taxpayer money. A good measure to use as a maximum growth rate of the budget is the rate of population growth plus inflation. Restraining the budget to less than this measure helps ensure people can afford state government without exacerbating the costly effects of higher taxes.

There are already some limits on what the state government can spend. Unlike the federal government, the state has a balanced budget requirement. This means lawmakers may not authorize spending more than the state taxes in through taxes, plus savings from previous years.

Lawmakers should practice more restraint because they have spent much more than the combined rate of population growth and inflation.

The money the state collects in taxes and fees has risen dramatically since the COVID-19 pandemic, and so has its budget. The state- funds part of the budget, which excludes federal funds, is up from $34.4 billion in 2018-19 to $47.0 billion in 2023-24, a 37% increase. Population growth plus inflation increased by 22% over this period.

Had lawmakers kept the budget at sustainable levels, taxpayers would save $6.5 billion this year. That’s enough to cut the state’s personal income tax rate in half. The increase in spending, by contrast, costs a typical household $1,600 per year.

The state funds budget is up nearly 11% when adjusted for population growth plus inflation but little else in the economy has gone up. The inflation-adjusted median household income remains well below its recent peak of 2019. The number of jobs in Michigan is up just 0.3% since the pandemic lockdowns, the 11th worst performance among the states. And the state’s labor force participation rate of 62.2% ranks 30th in the country. Labor force participation would be even lower had people not left the state for more opportunities to work and raise a family.

What have residents received in return for the state’s unsustainable budget increases? Record amounts of pork. Lawmakers approved $4.4 billion in unfair, ineffective, and expensive corporate welfare spending last year. Surely, more restraint on the part of policymakers would have resulted in better spending habits.

Gov. Whitmer’s executive budget at least recognizes that state budget trends have been unsustainable. Revenue isn’t expected to increase, and she recommends appropriating 1.5% less in the upcoming fiscal year.

The lack of budget growth comes from stagnant tax revenue, not spending restraint. The budget even calls for continued spending based on Whitmer’s interpretation of a tax cut statute, which caused a tax hike. The Michigan Supreme Court will soon decide whether the tax increase will remain in place. Her proposed budget includes spending $700 million more based on it.

The governor’s recommended decrease in spending demonstrates that the growth in state spending could not be sustained. Lawmakers would be in a much better position now had they been much more careful with previous budget increases. Now they will have to revisit their priorities because spending increased faster than the average taxpayer’s ability to pay for it.

Budgeting at sustainable levels would help residents and lawmakers alike. It’s better than appropriating every available dollar and sets up the state for regular growth. It also ensures that more money is in the productive private sector.

Lawmakers ought to practice restraint and pass a budget without assuming that income taxes will increase. This requires setting aside at least $700 million so they don’t spend money that ought to remain with residents.

Doing so would help correct past budget excesses and help provide a sustainable budget that Americans for Tax Reform and others across the country advocate — and ensure that more money can stay in the pockets of hard-working Michiganders.

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.