Last week, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer issued a new shelter-in-place order, extending the stay-home mandate until April 30. The new order unleashed a wave of criticism. Here are five problems with the development and rollout of the new controversial order.

1. The governor neglected a legislative partnership

Political collaboration in an emergency is more than happy talk — it sends a strong message to the people of Michigan: “We’re in this together. We’re tackling the problem in spite of our differences.”

Initially, Gov. Whitmer showed an interest in making legislative leaders her partners in handling this crisis. But a lot of the resulting goodwill evaporated when the governor suggested that the Legislature need not exercise its defined statutory role in emergencies.

Once the goodwill evaporated, simmering concerns erupted in public, with derision following. A New York Times columnist wrote that Gov. Whitmer’s new order was “daft” and a Wall Street Journal editorial labeled her actions the “most excessive decrees” in the country.

2. The order tightened restrictions on people and businesses, without explanation

The new stay-at-home order doubled down on the first and included a broad new mandate to “prohibit in-person work that is not necessary to sustain or protect life.” This came as many Michiganders were still in the process of adjusting to the first stay-at-home order, transitioning to remote work and investing in making workplaces safe. The new orders required everyone to reconsider all the plans they had just developed or were in the process of developing.

In addition, the new order did not explain the reasons why it is necessary to ratchet up these restrictions, aside from citing a snapshot statistic of the number of people who had tested positive for the novel coronavirus and how many of those people had died as of April 8. To be clear, this does not suggest the order was unnecessary, just that the rationale for it was not clearly explained to the public.

3. The order is inconsistent

The governor’s order continues using an essential/nonessential framework when analyzing what work can occur or what items may be advertised and sold. This is causing confusion and inconsistencies. For example, the governor’s website says hardware stores may stay open, but landscaping services may not. So, presumably, according to the order, it is safer for homeowners to go to the hardware store and purchase the materials to do landscape work on their property than it would be to hire someone to do the exact same thing? This is strange, as it seems relatively easy to maintain a strict social distancing policy while doing landscaping work.

Real confusion came over the weekend, after the governor prohibited large department stores from selling certain items, including carpet, flooring, paint, furniture, garden items and plants. The executive order tells stores to “Close areas of the store—by cordoning them off, placing signs in aisles, posting prominent signs, removing goods from shelves, or other appropriate means[.]”

This prohibition appears to ban the sale of “nonessential” items, causing much of the concern and confusion. This is an innately subjective term —  what is “essential” to me might be “nonessential” to you. And while nourishment is essential to sustain life, are pop, ice cream, candy and alcohol really “essential?” We could easily survive without them. Unsurprisingly, this led to massive confusion on the part of grocery, department and hardware stores, evidenced by people sharing social media photos of items behind yellow tape, including seeds, child car seats and American flags.

Michigan House Speaker Lee Chatfield has suggested the state abandon this “essential” vs. “nonessential” dichotomy and instead adopt a “safe or unsafe” matrix. This approach would mitigate the hardship many families face by allowing people to return to work in a safe manner.

4. The orders appear arbitrarily implemented

The new stay-at-home order is 10 pages long. Not even a week after it has been in effect, the governor’s office has published 41 frequently asked questions on this one order. (There are nearly 500 FAQs related to all the governor’s COVID-19 orders.)

The FAQs tackle questions the order fails to address: Are you allowed to attend a political protest? The order is silent, but the FAQs say you can, if you practice social distancing. Can you get a car wash at an automated car wash facility? No mention in the order, but the FAQs say you may not. The order tells people to use delivery services as much as possible, but the FAQs say furniture delivery is not allowed.

The arbitrary implementation is best illustrated with the question of boating. Gov. Whitmer’s original shutdown order, issued March 24, encouraged outdoor recreation but was silent on boating. On April 3, Michigan State Police Lt. Mike Shaw told The Detroit News the order prohibited recreational boating. Only hours later, another state official clarified that boating was, in fact, allowed, and the governor’s website was updated to indicate boating “falls within the outdoor activities permitted under the order.” Last week’s new order said outdoor activity included “kayaking, canoeing, or other similar physical activity[.]” The FAQs issued later, however, said any motorized boating was prohibited, even, apparently, a single-person Jet Ski.

This policymaking whiplash does not inspire confidence for people who have been asked to suspend their livelihoods and activities until at least April 30.

5. The order is not consistently enforced

Because these orders are so confusing, state and local officials are struggling to enforce them consistently.

Local governments are openly questioning the governor’s order. The city of Roseville’s Facebook page advises residents to ignore the governor and attorney general if they need to use a lawn service, so they can continue to comply with city ordinances related to lawn care.

The sheriffs of four counties in the northwest Lower Peninsula, meanwhile, have said the governor’s order creates a vague framework of emergency laws that only confuse Michigan citizens.” They will, they say, deal with situations on a case-by-case basis. I am not condoning these acts of defiance, but we will likely see more of them.

Together, these problems suggest that Gov. Whitmer should reevaluate her latest order and give special consideration to its effectiveness in the face of what could become widespread public disapproval. Clarity is needed, and governing via FAQs seems inadequate to address the grave concerns the order has created.

For more on what the state should do, the Mackinac Center and the Michigan Chamber of Commerce released nine guiding principles for restarting Michigan’s economy.

Michigan schools will soon be able to tap into extra money from Congress to address the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic. As these funds become available, state officials should focus as much as possible on the needs of students without regard to what kind of school they attend.

The federal CARES Act, signed into law on March 27, opens up two new streams of emergency funding for public schools across the nation. As of April 14, state leaders are able to start applying for the first stream: Governor’s Emergency Education Relief Fund Grants. The $89.4 million Michigan is now able to apply for can be split up among K-12 and higher education needs, but the law gives state leaders a great deal of flexibility in how the funds are doled out. They should take advantage of that flexibility to address some of the educational needs that the new distance learning plans from Michigan’s schools may miss.

A share of the federal grant dollars should be set aside to offer scholarships to young learners who were already a year behind on their latest reading assessment. Florida’s Reading Scholarship Accounts provide a model, allowing families to direct the funds for tutoring services, curriculum materials or summer school programs that suit their student’s needs. These funds, administered through a nonprofit organization, could underwrite more in-person learning options that will be safely available in future months.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s April 2 executive order suspended a newly implemented requirement designed to give extra help to students who aren’t reading proficiently by the end of third grade. Even if schools are operating under less-than-ideal circumstances, the state should focus on helping those students who are not ready to advance to the next grade.

State leaders also should strongly consider students who attend nonpublic schools for a share of these resources. Tuition relief that allows more private schools to remain open would not only give these students greater continuity in their learning but also ease the state’s fiscal strain by limiting the number of transfers into the public system.

As of 2017, there were 112,000 students enrolled in Michigan’s private schools. At the current minimum foundation allowance rate of $8,111 per student, the state treasury would have to pay an extra $90.8 million if just 10% of those students were to transfer in, more than is available through the relief grants. The state would also be responsible for additional costs that may be associated with educating that influx of students.

Funds from the Governor’s Relief Fund Grants could also be used for other purposes, including helping to defray the costs for 12th-graders who may need remedial education as they move on to college in the fall and find they fell through the cracks of their district’s distance learning program.

The larger K-12 funding stream of the CARES Act will come from a $13.5 billion relief fund, of which Michigan will likely receive about $390 million. At least $350 million of that must pass through the state education department to local districts and public charter schools, based on how much a school already receives from the Title I federal poverty funding formula.

Public district and charter schools that serve larger concentrations of low-income students will benefit most from this federal cash infusion. While some portion of these funds may be put to effective use now, schools would do well to set aside money to shore up gaps in state funding in next year’s budget. In other words, hold the line on spending right now and repurpose fuel and utilities funds as buildings go largely unused. They should save as much money as possible for next year, when less state money is likely to be available as Michigan recovers from an economic collapse.

It’s too soon to know the extent of the fiscal impacts from the various shutdowns designed to slow the spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus. But reduced employment and economic activity mean the state is bringing in significantly less income and sales tax, which together cover two-thirds of the state’s School Aid Fund, on which many districts and all charter schools heavily depend.

An influx of federal funds is coming to the state. It’s incumbent on state officials to take a broad and flexible approach to meet students’ needs, while local officials do their best to save for future expenses.