Senator Coleman Young Against Detroit Lighting Authority

7/30/2019 Senator Coleman Young Against Detroit Lighting Authority

1/15


2/15


3/15

S04759'11 (S-5) KAS

SB-0970, As Passed Senate, December 4, 2012

SUBSTITUTE FOR

SENATE BILL NO. 970

A bill to amend 1964 PA 284, entitled

"City income tax act,"

by amending section 3 of chapter 1 (MCL 141.503), as amended by

2011 PA 56.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

CHAPTER 11

Sec. 3. (1) The governing body of a city, by a lawfully2

adopted ordinance that incorporates by reference the uniform city3

income tax ordinance set forth in chapter 2, may levy, assess, and4

collect an excise tax on income as provided in the ordinance. The5

ordinance shall state the rate of the tax which shall be the rate6

authorized by 1 of the following:7

(a) The uniform city income tax ordinance under section 11 of8


4/15

2

S04759'11 (S-5) KAS

chapter 2.1

(b) Subsection (2).2

(c) Section 3a, 3b, or 3c of this chapter.3

(2) Except as otherwise provided in subsections (3), (4), and4

(5), in IN a city with a population of more than 600,000, the5

governing body may levy and collect a tax at a rate to be6

determined from time to time, that rate to be not more than 2% on7

corporations and the following maximum tax rates on resident8

individuals and nonresident individuals for the following years:9

(a) Before July 1, 1999, 3.00% on resident individuals and10

1.50% on nonresident individuals.11

(b) Beginning July 1, 1999 and each July 1 after 1999 THROUGH12

JULY 1, 2012 , except for 2008 and 2009, the maximum tax rate under13

this subsection on resident individuals shall be reduced by 0.114

until the rate on resident individuals is 2.0%. The tax rate15

imposed on nonresident individuals shall be 50% of the tax rate16

imposed on resident individuals each year.17

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, for18the 2008 and 2009 calendar years, the city shall impose the same19

tax rate on resident individuals and nonresident individuals as the20

city had imposed for the 2007 calendar year. 21

(D) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED UNDER SUBDIVISION (E),22

BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2013 AND EACH YEAR AFTER 2013, A RATE OF NOT23

MORE THAN 2.40% ON RESIDENT INDIVIDUALS AND 1.20% ON NONRESIDENT24

INDIVIDUALS.25

(E) BEGINNING JANUARY 1 OF THE YEAR IMMEDIATELY SUCCEEDING THE26

YEAR THAT ALL BONDS, OBLIGATIONS, AND OTHER EVIDENCE OF27


5/15

3

S04759'11 (S-5) KAS

INDEBTEDNESS ISSUED BY A LIGHTING AUTHORITY HAVE BEEN FULLY PAID1

AND EACH YEAR THEREAFTER, A RATE OF NOT MORE THAN 2.20% ON RESIDENT2

INDIVIDUALS AND 1.10% ON NONRESIDENT INDIVIDUALS.3

(3) If any 3 of the following conditions exist in a city with4

a population of 600,000 or more, the city may apply to the state5

administrative board for certification that those conditions exist6

and the maximum tax rate under subsection (2)(b) shall not be7

further reduced as provided in subsections (4) and (5):8

(a) Funds have been withdrawn from the city's budget9

stabilization fund for 2 or more consecutive city fiscal years or10

there is a balance of zero in the city's budget stabilization fund.11

(b) The city's income tax revenue growth rate is 0.95 or less.12

(c) The local tax base growth rate is 80% or less of the13

statewide tax base growth rate.14

(d) The city's unemployment rate is 10% or higher according to15

the most recent statistics available from the Michigan jobs16

commission.17

(4) If the state administrative board certifies within 60 days18of application that any 3 of the conditions set forth under19

subsection (3) are met, the maximum tax rate under subsection (2)20

shall not be further reduced from the date of the state21

administrative board's certification until the July 1 following the22

expiration of 1 year after the state administrative board's23

certification unless the city applies for certification that the24

conditions continue to exist. Before the expiration of the25certification, the city may apply to the state administrative board26

to certify that the conditions continue to exist and if the state27


6/15

4

S04759'11 (S-5) KAS

administrative board so certifies, the certification may continue1

until the July 1 following the expiration of 1 year after the state2

administrative board's certification that the conditions continue3

to exist. The city may continue to apply for certification until4

the conditions under subsection (3) no longer exist.5

(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, if on6

July 1 the maximum tax rate on resident individuals is reduced7

under subsection (2) after a year or years in which the maximum tax8

rate was not reduced because of subsections (3) and (4), the9

maximum tax rate on resident individuals shall be the maximum tax10

rate in effect on June 30 of that year reduced by 0.1 and the rate11

on nonresident individuals shall be 50% of the rate imposed on12

resident individuals. On each subsequent July 1, subsection (2)13

applies to the maximum tax rates, subject to subsections (3) and14

(4).15

(3) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW OR ANY16

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY TO THE CONTRARY, A CITY THAT FORMS A LIGHTING17

AUTHORITY SHALL DEPOSIT AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE SUM OF THE REVENUE18COLLECTED FROM 0.2% OF THE RATE LEVIED ON RESIDENT INDIVIDUALS19

PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (2)(D) AND 0.1% OF THE RATE LEVIED ON 20

NONRESIDENT INDIVIDUALS PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (2)(D) DIRECTLY INTO21

THE BUDGET OF THE CITY'S POLICE DEPARTMENT AND USE IT EXCLUSIVELY22

TO RETAIN OR HIRE POLICE OFFICERS. THE TRANSFER AND USE OF THE23

REVENUE AS PROVIDED UNDER THIS SUBSECTION SHALL CONTINUE UNTIL ALL24

BONDS, OBLIGATIONS, OR OTHER EVIDENCE OF INDEBTEDNESS ISSUED BY A25

LIGHTING AUTHORITY HAVE BEEN FULLY PAID AND REVENUE IS NO LONGER26

BEING PLEDGED FROM TAXES LEVIED UNDER THE CITY UTILITY USERS TAX27


7/15

5

S04759'11 (S-5) KAS

ACT, 1990 PA 100, MCL 141.1151 TO 141.1177, TO THE LIGHTING1

AUTHORITY. AS USED IN THIS SUBSECTION, "LIGHTING AUTHORITY" MEANS A2

LIGHTING AUTHORITY INCORPORATED UNDER THE MUNICIPAL LIGHTING3

AUTHORITY ACT.4

(4) (6) The governing body of a city may adopt the uniform5

city income tax ordinance with the alternative sections as set6

forth in chapter 3 instead of the similarly numbered sections as7

set forth in chapter 2. The uniform city income tax ordinance may8

be lawfully adopted or rescinded by the governing body at any time.9

The adoption of an ordinance is effective on and after January 1 or10

July 1 following adoption of the ordinance, as specified in the11

ordinance, but an ordinance shall not become effective earlier than12

45 days after adoption or until approved by the electors if a13

referendum petition is filed as authorized in this act or a14

referendum is otherwise required. The rescission of an ordinance15

shall become effective on the following December 31. The ordinance16

may be rescinded at any time by the governing body in the same17

manner in which it was adopted and with appropriate enforcement,18collection, and refund provisions with respect to liabilities19

incurred prior to the effective date of the rescission of the20

ordinance. The ordinance shall not be amended except as provided by21

the legislature. A city may amend the ordinance to change the tax22

rate to a rate authorized by this act.23

(5) (7) Petitions for a referendum election on the question of24

adopting an ordinance adopted by the governing body may be filed25with the city clerk not later than the sixth Monday following the26

adoption of the ordinance. The petitions shall be signed by a27


8/15

6

S04759'11 (S-5) KAS

number of registered electors of the city equal to at least 10%,1

but not more than 20%, of the registered electors of the city2

voting in the last general municipal election prior to the adoption3

of the ordinance by the governing body. If proper petitions are4

filed, the question of adopting the ordinance shall be submitted by5

the governing body to the city electors at the next primary or6

general election or at a special election called for the purpose,7

in any case held not less than 45 days nor more than 90 days after8

the clerk has reported the filing of the referendum petition to the9

city's governing body. The checking of names on the petitions, the10

counting, canvassing, and return of the votes on the question, and11

other procedures for the election shall be as provided by law or12

charter. Upon a favorable vote of the city electors, the ordinance13

shall be effective as specified in the ordinance which may be14

amended by the governing body of the city following the election to15

specify July 1 or January 1 as the effective date of the ordinance,16

if the effective date originally specified in the ordinance is17

considered impractical or inconvenient for any reason. The18provisions in this section for a referendum election, and for19

delaying the effective date of the ordinance if petitions for a20

referendum are filed, are not applicable to a city that on January21

1, 1964 had in effect a valid ordinance levying and imposing an22

excise tax levied on or measured by income. Notwithstanding any23

other provision of this act, if an ordinance becomes effective on24

any date other than January 1, each tax year shall end on December2531, and the provisions of the ordinance based on a full tax year26

are modified accordingly to be applicable to the partial tax year.27


9/15

7

S04759'11 (S-5) KAS

(8) The city shall annualize the rates under this section as1

necessary.2

(9) As used in this section:3

(a) "Consumer price index" means the Detroit consumer price4

index for all urban consumers as defined and reported by the United5

States department of labor, bureau of labor statistics, and as6

certified by the state treasurer.7

(b) "Income tax revenue growth rate" means a number the8

numerator of which is the income tax collections of the city for9

the city fiscal year immediately preceding the city's application10

under subsection (3) and the denominator of which is the product of11

the income tax collections of the city for the city fiscal year12

immediately preceding the city fiscal year used to determine the13

numerator multiplied by 1 plus the corresponding percentage change14

in the average consumer price index for the calendar year ending in15

the city fiscal year used to determine the numerator.16

(c) "Local tax base growth rate" means the total taxable value17

of real property and personal property in the city for the most18recent year for which data is available divided by the total19

taxable value of real property and personal property in the city20

for the second year immediately preceding the most recent year for21

which the data is available.22

(d) "Statewide tax base growth rate" means the total taxable23

value of real property and personal property in the state for the24

most recent year for which the data is available divided by the25total taxable value of real property and personal property in the26

state for the second year immediately preceding the most recent27


10/15

8

S04759'11 (S-5) Final Page KAS

year for which the data is available.1

Enacting section 1. This amendatory act does not take effect2

unless all of the following bills of the 96th Legislature are3

enacted into law:4

(a) House Bill No. 5688.5

(b) House Bill No. 5705.6


11/15

Page 1 of 3 sb970etal./1112

LIGHTING AUTHORITY; DETROIT TAXES S.B. 970 (S-1) & H.B. 5688 (H-1)& 5705 (H-1): FLOOR SUMMARY

Senate Bill 970 (Substitute S-1 as reported)

House Bill 5688 (Substitute H-1 as reported by the Committee of the Whole)House Bill 5705 (Substitute H-1 as reported by the Committee of the Whole)Sponsor: Senator Bert Johnson (S.B. 970)

Representative Maureen Stapleton (H.B. 5688)Representative John Walsh (H.B. 5705)

Senate Committee: Government OperationsHouse Committee: Local, Intergovernmental, and Regional Affairs (H.B. 5688 & 5705)

CONTENT

Senate Bill 970 (S-1) would amend the City Income Tax Act to do the following:

-- For a city with a population over 600,000 (Detroit), specify a maximum tax rate of 2.5%on residential individuals and 1.25% on nonresident individuals (the rates that applieduntil July 1, 2012, when the maximum rate on residents was reduced to 2.4% and thenonresident rate was reduced to 1.2%).

-- Discontinue a requirement that Detroit's maximum tax rate be reduced each July 1 by0.1 until it is 2.0% on resident individuals; and delete provisions allowing the city toapply to the State Administrative Board for certification that the rate not be reduced if specified conditions exist.

-- Require the city each year to deposit the revenue collected from 0.2% of the rate leviedon residents and 0.1% of the rate levied on nonresidents into the budget for the city'spolice department, and use it exclusively to retain or hire police officers.

-- Require this transfer and use to continue until all bonds, obligations, or other evidenceof indebtedness issued by a lighting authority (incorporated under the Municipal Lighting

Authority Act) had been fully paid and revenue was no longer being pledged to thelighting authority from taxes levied under the City Utility Users Tax Act.

House Bill 5688 (H-1) would create the "Municipal Lighting Authority Act" to do thefollowing:

-- Allow one or more cities, villages, or townships to adopt articles of incorporation by amajority vote of their governing bodies and incorporate an authority for the purpose of acquiring, owing, improving, constructing, operating, or maintaining a lighting systemand providing lighting services.

-- Provide that a lighting authority would be a public municipal corporation.-- Prohibit an authority from paying net proceeds or profits to its constituent local

governments, but permit it to pay them for services provided.-- Require an authority to be governed by a board consisting of five or eight members

appointed as provided in the Act (described below).-- Provide that an authority board would be subject to the Open Meetings Act and the

Freedom of Information Act.-- Require an authority board to implement a best value supply chain and procurement

practice, and report annually to the governing body of each constituent localgovernment.

-- Require a board, by March 15 after it was created and then every two years, to preparea plan for the next three years and submit it to the governing bodies of its constituentlocal governments.


12/15

Page 2 of 3 Bill Analysis @ www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa sb970etal./1112

-- Require the plan to include a budget, among other items, and require the budget toprovide that any money derived from the collection of rates and charges would beapplied and used in the manner and priority set forth in the Act.

-- Allow the governing bodies of the constituent local governments to vote to accept orreject the plan, and provide for the plan to be revised and resubmitted if it wererejected.

-- Allow an authority, after initial service rates were established and contracts forconstruction, purchase of power, and related services were executed, to borrow moneyand issue revenue bonds and notes for the purpose of constructing, acquiring,improving, or extending a lighting system.

-- Limit the aggregate principal amount of the bonds and notes at any time to 5% of thetotal State equalized valuation of the property assessed in the local governmentscomprising the authority.

-- Provide that bonds issued under the Act could not mature more than 30 years from thedate of the original issuance.

-- Require bonds issued under the Act to be sold to the Michigan Finance Authority.-- Authorize an authority to enter into ancillary facilities (various types of financing or

investment agreements) for specified purposes, as it determined necessary orappropriate.

-- Allow an authority and any local government to enter into a contract providing for the

construction, acquisition, improvement, or extension of a lighting system; and require acontract to provide for the rates and charges for each local government.-- Allow a local government to pledge its full faith and credit for the payment of the

obligation and, if it did so, to include in its annual tax levy an amount sufficient to paythe portion of the obligation falling due before the following year's tax collection.

-- Provide that the tax could be in addition to any tax that the local government otherwisecould levy and could be imposed without limitation, if the local electors had approvedthe contract or an unlimited tax pledge in support of the contract.

-- Allow the contract to provide for other funds to be raised and pledged by eachcontracting local government by the following methods: the levy of special assessments;the levy and collection of charges to users and beneficiaries of the services furnished bythe lighting system; a pledge of revenue that the local government otherwise wouldreceive under the City Utility Users Tax Act; the receipt of money from the imposition of

taxes by the State, except as prohibited by the State Constitution; and the receipt of other funds that could be validly used for this purpose.

-- Provide that, if an authority issued bonds to be paid from revenue from a contract, alocal government could pledge revenue it would receive under the City Utility Users TaxAct to bonds of the authority issued pursuant to the contract, after it first entered into atrust agreement with the authority, the Michigan Finance Authority, and a trustee.

-- Provide that a local government could not enter into a contract pledging utility users taxrevenue that would result in outstanding bonds secured by the pledged revenue havingan aggregate annual debt service that exceeded $12.5 million in any one year takinginto account any anticipated Federal credits.

-- Provide that the property of an authority and its income and operations would beexempt from all taxes and special assessments of the State or a political subdivision.

-- Provide that an authority could hold, manage, sell, exchange, or lease its property, but if the property came from a constituent local government, the authority could not disposeof it unless the other party to the transaction were the local government.

If an authority had only one local government (other than Detroit) as a member, theauthority board would have to consist of three residents of the local government appointedby the chief executive officer and two residents appointed by the governing body of the localgovernment.

If an authority had only one local government as a member, and that local governmentwere Detroit, the board would have to consist of one member appointed by the Governor,


13/15

Page 3 of 3 Bill Analysis @ www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa sb970etal./1112

one member appointed by the Governor upon the recommendation of the Senate MajorityLeader, one member appointed by the Governor upon the recommendation of the Speakerof the House, and five residents of Detroit appointed by the city's governing body.

If an authority had more than one local government as a member, the board would have tobe appointed as provided in the authority's articles of incorporation.

House Bill 5705 (H-1) would amend the City Utility Users Tax Act (which authorizes Detroitto levy a tax of up to 5% on the amount paid for certain utility services and requires therevenue to be used to hire or retain police officers) to do the following:

-- Require the city, if it formed a lighting authority, to pay $12.5 million annually to thatauthority from the proceeds of the utility users tax.

-- Provide that, if the lighting authority issued bonds pursuant to a contract with the cityand pledged revenue from the city utility users tax, the revenue would have to bedeposited and used as provided in the Act.

All of the bills are tie-barred to each other.

MCL 141.503 (S.B. 970) Legislative Analyst: Suzanne Lowe

141.1152 et al. (H.B. 5705)FISCAL IMPACT

Senate Bill 970 (S-1) would increase local income tax revenue in the City of Detroit andrestrict the distribution of that revenue. The city's income tax rate was identical to thatspecified in the bill until July 1, 2012, when the rate was reduced by 0.1 percentage point asrequired by the Act. The bill would reinstate the rate that had been in effect before July 1,and prevent future reductions. The bill also would require a portion of the revenuegenerated by the tax to be deposited into the police department budget for the retention orhiring of police officers, rather than being left in the general fund for appropriation to thepolice department or other departments and expenditures.

The bill would have no impact on State revenue or expenditures.

House Bills 5688 (H-1) and 5705 (H-1) would increase both local unit revenue andexpenditures by an unknown amount depending upon the number of communities thatcreated or joined a lighting authority, the operational decisions of the authorities, and theterms of any bonds and/or revenue pledges related to the authorities. House Bill 5705 (H-1) would reduce city utility users tax revenue to the City of Detroit police departmentbudget by approximately $12.5 million per year and direct it to a lighting authority. HouseBill 5688 (H-1) would limit the aggregate annual debt service on any bonds issued by anauthority to $12.5 million. The debt service limit would apply to all lighting authorities, not

just an authority associated with the City of Detroit.

The bills would have no impact on State revenue or expenditure.

Date Completed: 8-7-12 Fiscal Analyst: David Zin

Floor\sb970This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute anofficial statement of legislative intent.


14/15

Search legislation

20 12 Sena te B ill 970: A llo w hig her Detroit city incometax (Sen ate Ro ll Call 799)

Pas sed 20 t o 18 in t he Senat e on December 4, 2012, to allow Detroit tosusp end a st ate-man dated gr adual re duction of its city i ncome ta x to themaximum rate allowed for other cities (1 percent for residents and 0.5 percentfor non-residents). This would allow the current the city to keep its current ratesof 2.4 percent and 1.2 percent, repectively, until debt incurred to fix brokenstreetlights is repaid (see House Bill 5688). When the mandated tax ratereduction was first enacted Detroit's income tax took 3 percent from residentsand 1.5 percent from nonresidents who work in the city.View All of Senate Bill 970: History, Amendments & Comments

The vote was 20 in favor, 18 against, and 0 not voting.(Senate Roll Call 799)

Allow higher Detroit city income tax

IN FAVOR

SENATE DEMOCRATS

Gleaso n (D) Gregory (D) Hun te r (D) Johnson (D) Smith (D)

Warr en (D) Whitmer (D)

SEN ATE REPUBLICANS

Booher (R) Caswell (R) Jansen (R) Kahn (R) Kowall (R)

Marleau (R) Meekhof (R) Nofs (R) Pappageorge (R) Proos (R)

Richardville (R) Schuitmaker (R) Walker (R)

AGAINST

SENATE DEMOCRATS

Anderson (D) Bieda (D) Hood (D) Hopgood (D) Young (D)

Home Create an account Advanced searches Scorecards Links About Log on
http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=206http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5345http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1509http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5356http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1468http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10891http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10891http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=255http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1480http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=16759http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1486http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10876http://michiganvotes.org/http://michiganvotes.org/Account.aspxhttp://michiganvotes.org/Search.aspxhttp://michiganvotes.org/ListIndices.aspxhttp://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http://michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=633468&Print=truehttp://michiganvotes.org/http://michiganvotes.org/http://michiganvotes.org/http://twitter.com/home?status=Currently%20reading%20http://michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=633468&Print=true%20:%20Senate%20Roll%20Call%20799http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http://michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=633468&Print=truehttp://michiganvotes.org/ListIndices.aspxhttp://michiganvotes.org/Search.aspxhttp://michiganvotes.org/Account.aspxhttp://michiganvotes.org/http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10892http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1483http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=115http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1465http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=11http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1509http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5345http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=206http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5344http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=186http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=21485http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10882http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5264http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=138http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5351http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=122http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1468http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5356http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=255http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10891http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=4709http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10876http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1486http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=16759http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1480http://michiganvotes.org/2012-SB-970http://twitter.com/home?status=Currently%20reading%20http://michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=633468%20-%20%20Senate%20Roll%20Call%20799http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http://michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=633468&t=Senate%20Roll%20Call%20799http://michiganvotes.org/


15/15

SENATE REPUBLICANS

Brandenburg (R) Casperson (R) Colbeck (R) Emmons (R) Green (R)

Hansen (R) Hildenbrand (R) Hune (R) Jones (R) Moolenaar (R)

Pavlov (R) Robertson (R) Rocca (R)

SENATE LEGISLATORS ALL VOTES

n Anderson (D) n Bieda (D) Y Booher (R) n Brandenburg (R) n Casperson (R)

Y Caswell (R) n Colbeck (R) n Emmons (R) Y Gleason (D) n Green (R)

Y Gregory (D) n Hansen (R) n Hildenbrand (R) n Hood (D) n Hopgood (D)

n Hune (R) Y Hunter (D) Y Jansen (R) Y Johnson (D) n Jones (R)

Y Kahn (R) Y Kowall (R) Y Marleau (R) Y Meekhof (R) n Moolenaar (R)

Y Nofs (R) Y Pappageorge (R) n Pavlov (R) Y Proos (R) Y Richardville (R)

n Robertson (R) n Rocca (R) Y Schuitmaker (R) Y Smith (D) Y Walker (R)

Y Warren (D) Y Whitmer (D) n Young (D) Senate Roll Call 799 on 2012 Senate Bill 970

Copyright 2012 Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Terms of use
http://michiganvotes.org/Terms.aspxhttp://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10892http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=255http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10891http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1509http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=4709http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5345http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5260http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1498http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=206http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5344http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5346http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=186http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=21485http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1492http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10882http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5264http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=138http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5351http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5324http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=10876http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=122http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1486http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1485http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1483http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=115http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5349http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5355http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=16759http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=99http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1480http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1474http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=27232http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1468http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1467http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1466http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5356http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1465http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=11http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5260http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1498http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5346http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1492http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5324http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1485http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5349http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=5355http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=99http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1474http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=27232http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1467http://michiganvotes.org/Legislator.aspx?ID=1466

Documents

Senator Coleman Young Against Detroit Lighting Authority