Detroit Free Press. August 17, 2017
Hey Lansing, how about get this Detroit tax fix done?
Can we please just get this done?
Six years ago would have been great. But now is fine.
That’s at least how long the City of Detroit has been asking the state Legislature to require suburban employers to withhold city income tax from the paychecks of employees who are Detroit residents, and at least how long the Legislature has been saying no.
This legislative truculence is one of those things that defies common sense.
Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan said in an interview late last month that he believes a compromise bill could pass this fall, in part because the city has reached a compromise with the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, a big-spending, pro-business group that proudly proclaims its effectiveness as a lobbying organization, blocked the measure in past legislative sessions.
Detroit residents, whether employed in the city or the suburbs, pay a 2.4% income tax. Non-residents who work in the city are also obligated to pay, at a lower rate of 1.2%.
Because Detroit employers are required to withhold income tax from employees’ pay, the city gets almost all of the money it’s owed.
Not so in the suburbs, where city tax withholding is left entirely to the employer’s - and the employee’s - discretion. Some employers opt to withhold city tax, but not all. With tax withholding required, the city could expect to collect between $10 million and $20 million a year.
The city and the chamber are still working on the details, but the compromise would allow suburban employers to withhold on a voluntary basis, but require their Detroit-resident workers to submit to tax withholding, said Richard Studley, president and CEO of the Michigan Chamber.
Employers, as a matter of course, withhold payroll taxes from workers’ checks - federal and state tax, Social Security tax - along with other payments, like insurance premiums or union dues or parking fees or retirement account contributions. Requiring suburban employers to withhold city tax only requires those businesses to what they’re doing already, for a host of other causes.
It’s not just a few more Detroiters who work outside the city, it’s a lot - 113,449 Detroiters, nearly two-thirds of working city dwellers, work in the suburbs, according to U.S. Census data, compared to 58,738 employed inside the city.
Because their employers aren’t required to withhold city income tax from their paychecks, the burden of estimating, filing (until recently, e-filing wasn’t an option) and paying city taxes is placed on individuals.
When Detroiters “who and work are employed in the suburbs, and they have zero withholding, you send them a bill in April and then they’ve got to write an $800 check …” Duggan said. “For a lot of our residents, writing an $800 check is not realistic.”
Duggan said he thinks the compromise would significantly improve the city’s income tax collection.
Really, any little bit helps.
Requiring universal tax withholding, however, is still off the table, Studley said.
Requiring mandatory tax withholding “would impose a substantial administrative burden on businesses who receive no services from the city,” Studley said, as well as subject those employers to the possibility that Detroit might audit them to ensure they’re doing what they ought.
Business Leaders for Michigan, another prominent business group, hasn’t taken a position on the proposed legislation, a spokeswoman said. The Detroit Regional Chamber would support universal withholding, said President and CEO Sandy Baruah, noting that the city is “rightly owed” those taxes, provided any proposed legislation would create an exception for small employers.
Because the compromise the chamber and the city are still negotiating is voluntary, but offers suburban employers who choose to participate the authority to require Detroiters they employ to have city tax withheld, it’s acceptable, Studley said.
Requiring employers to withhold, Studley said, “probably could and would have had the unintended consequence of stopping some suburban employers from hiring Detroit residents, and obviously we didn’t want to see that.”
Another key provision of the compromise, said Dan Papineau, the state chamber’s director of tax policy, would allow the city to seize state tax refunds to satisfy unpaid city income tax.
For a broke city, this is what we call “low-hanging fruit,” the kind of thing that should have been done at the instant the problem was identified.
The city and the chamber hope a final draft of the compromise can be reached in time for the Legislature to consider this fall.
Hopefully, it won’t take another six years.
___
The Detroit News. August 16, 2017
Court wrong place to enforce literacy
There is no question that too many students at Michigan’s largest school district have received a sub-par education. While Detroit children deserve basic literacy, the courtroom isn’t the place to fix the problems that have plagued the district.
A civil lawsuit brought by seven Detroit students - and represented by the California law firm Public Counsel - was filed a year ago in federal court. U.S. District Judge Stephen Murphy III heard arguments last week.
The lawsuit aims to prove that these students were denied their right of access to literacy, and the lawyers are hoping the case lands before the Supreme Court. Three buildings within the Detroit Public Schools Community District, infamous for its low test scores and poor building conditions, and two charter schools are named in the suit.
Gov. Rick Snyder, the members of the State Board of Education, Superintendent Brian Whiston and other state officials are defendants.
The lawsuit claims Detroit students have not had equal access to literacy and demands a variety of accountability measures such as screening and intervention. The suit is using the 14th amendment to argue for an equal right to literacy and wants to expand on the 1954 Supreme Court case, Brown v. Board of Education.
There is federal precedent, but this case seeks a different outcome. A 1973 Supreme Court decision, San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, found there is no constitutional right to an education.
Mark Rosenbaum, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, says that in the months since the lawsuit was filed, conditions in the district have worsened and he points to the large number of teaching vacancies among other shortcomings as proof.
“In 2017, no child should be forced to ask a court to enforce his or her fundamental right to be given the opportunity to learn, grow and participate in society. Yet here we are,” Rosenbaum said in statement following the hearing.
The case, however, fails to recognize substantial changes that have taken place in the last year. The state bailed out the district last summer, sending a $617 million lifeline as well as a return to local control. An elected school board took over in January and new superintendent Nikolai Vitti started his post in May.
State officials have asked the judge to toss the case, rejecting the legal right to literacy. That doesn’t mean the state is supporting bad schools. Snyder has tried to put different turnaround strategies in place in Detroit, even though those efforts largely flopped. But the governor has also backed more investment in early literacy, as well as legislation to ensure students are reading by third grade.
In its motion to dismiss last November, the state argued that the implications of the case are far-reaching:
“(They) ask this court to serve as a ’super’ Legislature tasked with determining and dictating educational policy in every school district and school building throughout the United States where an illiterate child may be found,” the state’s legal team wrote.
The ACLU of Michigan in 2012 filed a lawsuit saying Highland Park students were denied their right to read. But the state constitution only specifies the state provide the infrastructure for education, so the lawsuit was dismissed.
Federal courts have traditionally been reluctant to intervene in local school decisions, including how districts are funded and operated.
The solution here is not to turn over the schools to the court, but rather to shut the failing schools and provide the children with the resources necessary for them to attend better schools.
That could form the basis of a settlement that gets the children what they need, without giving up local control of the schools.
___
Times Herald (Port Huron). August 19, 2017
Drinking water wells need state’s protection
A confluence of recent headlines leaves a bad taste in our mouths - and worse.
First, a project by journalism students at Arizona State University reveals that very nearly all the 45 million Americans who rely on private wells for their drinking water have no idea what they are putting into their bodies. Public water systems are required to test their source water, to purify it to federal standards, and to provide detailed reports on contaminants.
There are no similar requirements for private wells.
Private wells, and the aquifers they draw water from, can and do become contaminated. The mechanics are simple and obvious. Groundwater aquifers have long provided clean, safe drinking water because they are isolated from the activities on the surface by dozens or hundreds of feet of soil, clay and rock. Every well drilled through those layers of rock and soil, however, exposes that underground reservoir of clean water to surface contaminants.
Those contaminants include human waste, pesticides and fertilizers, industrial chemicals and byproducts of petroleum extraction. It’s not a theoretical concern. The Berlin and Farro Superfund Site in Genesee County sits above groundwater contaminated when illegally dumped toxic waste leaked into abandoned wells.
It is why farmers are warned to site wells far away from crop fields and from animal operations. Anyone who has both a private water well and private septic system needs to be checking the health of both frequently.
Wells put aquifers at risk.
That’s why Michigan has regulations for the installation of water wells and for their closure. The law is mostly mute on what happens in between, though.
But there is a class of wells that the law ignores. In fact, its website says, “The DEQ does not have authority to regulate their installation under the state well code.”
That’s the second headline: Contractors are drilling hundreds of wells for a geothermal heating system for the Capitol in downtown Lansing into the aquifer that provides the city’s drinking water. And there are no rules.
Geothermal heating have been around for decades. There are likely thousands in Michigan. Each threatens someone’s drinking water. Yet there are no rules.
That is something lawmakers need to think about next time their throats feel a little dry.
___
The Mining Journal. August 18, 2017
Possible Vista theater restructuring seems the right decision
Being financially prudent often makes sense, but it can come with difficulty.
The Peninsula Arts Appreciation Council has a plan to restructure the operations of the Historic Vista Theater in Negaunee, basically separating the theater’s players and producers from the people raising funds for the renovation and upkeep of the 91-year-old facility.
PAAC, since forming in 1973, has been unique in that it’s a single organization combining the business and artistic aspects.
Both typically are necessary to run a successful theater.
However, financial concerns regarding the Historic Vista Theater resulted in the elimination earlier this month of its sole paid position held by the former executive director, Andrew Tyler, who made $12,000 per year.
Losing a position is difficult for many people, but Tyler acknowledged on his personal Facebook page that he understood the decision was necessary if the theater were to remain financially solvent.
The proposed plan also has a goal of increasing accessibility to the venue for economy-boosting events. If formed, the new non-profit performing group could produce up to four shows annually, and although it would receive start-up funding from the Vista Theater organization, it would have to be self-sufficient after that.
What’s good to hear is that the creative and financial entities would operate separately but still be cooperative. Obviously, they share a common interest - the theater - but that means ensuring there’s a viable brick-and-mortar establishment as well as players to perform in it.
Some people probably are better at raising funds but don’t have the desire to act, and vice versa.
It’s hard to believe, though, that one could survive without the other. The Historic Vista Theater, in a way, is like just about any other business; different skill sets are needed to make it work.
Although there’s no timetable set for the proposed plan, we believe this is the right direction for the Historic Vista Theater.
Its legacy, as stated on its website at vistatheater.org, is “to enrich those in the Upper Peninsula through means of story telling and performance arts of all kinds.”
We hope the theater has a long, enduring future, and this plan hopefully ensures that legacy.
___
Please read our comment policy before commenting.