Introduced
by
The executive recommendation for the FY 2002-2003 Transportation budget. This would appropriate $3.166 billion in gross spending (funded from all sources, including special state restricted funds, primarily those funded by user fees such as fuel taxes and license fees, and federal pass-through dollars), compared to the current year's $3.109 billion, which was the FY 2001-2002 amount enacted in 2001, excluding any supplemental appropriations. The budget also transfers $90.4 million in gas tax revenue to the Department of State, and $10.2 million to the Department of Treasury. It includes $32.6 million from a proposed four-cent diesel fuel tax hike to a new Commercial Highway Fund intended to fund improvements to truck route, and FY 2001-2002 supplemental spending of $3.2 million to subsidize inter-city commercial bus routes which had been cut in the November, 2001 budget-balancing executive order.
Referred to the Committee on Appropriations
Substitute offered
To replace the executive recommendation with a House version which increases transfers to other departments by $20 million. This is a reduction of $30.7 million from the transfers proposed by the executive version, for a net transfer of $77.1 million in transportation tax revenue to the Departments of State, Environmental Quality, Attorney General, and the Auditor General. The substitute does not include $44 million from a proposed four-cent diesel fuel tax hike, adds another $14.9 million ($948 million total) for local road agencies, adds another $6.5 million ($165 million total) for urban bus subsidies, and adds $1 million for a feasibility study on a proposed Lansing-Detroit passenger rail project. It adds $24 million for critical bridges, but unlike the executive recommendation does not appropriate funds for this purpose from a proposed diesel tax hike. The budget eliminates a $35 million transfer from the state rainy day fund to pay debt on new projects, which had been included in the last few years, but does not include $10 million for debt service from proposed diesel fuel and airport parking tax increases.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require the Department of Transportation to develop a plan to implement the policy suggested by the state transportation commission on noise abatement.
The amendment passed 98 to 0 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To eliminate $1 million for a study of proposed Detroit-Lansing passenger railroad service which would be subsidized with state money.
The amendment failed 23 to 77 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To reduce a transfer of $70 million in road-tax dollars from road projects to the Department of State by $14 million, and spend it instead on road snow and ice removal around the state.
The amendment failed 46 to 47 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To require Amtrak to develop a system to monitor, collect, and resolve customer complaints as a condition of receiving a state road tax subsidy for rail passenger service between Port Huron and Chicago and Grand Rapids and Chicago.
The amendment passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To require reimbursements of sales tax paid on diesel fuel to come from the state general fund, not from road money.
The amendment failed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that “the county of Saginaw shall be exempt from any reduction in the receipt of Michigan transportation fund revenues resulting from an unconstitutional interdepartment grant.” This refers to a proposal in the executive recommendation for this budget to divert $107.7 million in road-tax dollars from road projects to the Departments of State and Treasury, which was offered as a means to balance the budget without cutting spending by these or other departments. The House version of the bill reduces the transfers to approximately $70 million.
The amendment failed 43 to 57 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that “counties of Baraga, Gogebic, Houghton, Iron, Keweenaw, and Ontonagon shall be exempt from any reduction in the receipt of Michigan transportation fund revenues resulting from an unconstitutional interdepartment grant.” This refers to a proposal in the executive recommendation for this budget to divert $107.7 million in road-tax dollars from road projects to the Departments of State and Treasury, which was offered as a means to balance the budget without cutting spending by these or other departments. The House version of the bill reduces the transfers to approximately $70 million.
The amendment failed 44 to 56 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that “the counties of Alger, Luce, Marquette, and Schoolcraft shall be exempt from any reduction in the receipt of Michigan transportation fund revenues resulting from an unconstitutional interdepartment grant.” This refers to a proposal in the executive recommendation for this budget to divert $107.7 million in road-tax dollars from road projects to the Departments of State and Treasury, which was offered as a means to balance the budget without cutting spending by these or other departments. The House version of the bill reduces the transfers to approximately $70 million.
The amendment failed 43 to 56 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that “the county of Wayne shall be exempt from any reduction in the receipt of Michigan transportation fund revenues resulting from an unconstitutional interdepartment grant.” This refers to a proposal in the executive recommendation for this budget to divert $107.7 million in road-tax dollars from road projects to the Departments of State and Treasury, which was offered as a means to balance the budget without cutting spending by these or other departments. The House version of the bill reduces the transfers to approximately $70 million.
The amendment failed 42 to 51 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that “the county of Genesee shall be exempt from any reduction in the receipt of Michigan transportation fund revenues resulting from an unconstitutional interdepartment grant.” This refers to a proposal in the executive recommendation for this budget to divert $107.7 million in road-tax dollars from road projects to the Departments of State and Treasury, which was offered as a means to balance the budget without cutting spending by these or other departments. The House version of the bill reduces the transfers to approximately $70 million.
The amendment failed 42 to 56 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To require the Department of Transportation to work with local governments to address "unmet transit needs," and to provide "demand-response services" throughout the state.
The amendment passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To earmark $800,000 to relocate County Road 492 between US 41 and Wright street in Marquette.
The amendment failed 38 to 56 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To reduce transfers of transportation tax revenues to other departments by $10 million, and spend the money instead on snow and ice removal from roads.
The amendment failed 46 to 45 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that “all counties in Michigan shall be exempt from any reduction in the receipt of Michigan transportation fund revenues resulting from an unconstitutional interdepartment grant.” This refers to a proposal in the executive recommendation for this budget to divert $107.7 million in road-tax dollars from road projects to the Departments of State and Treasury, which was offered as a means to balance the budget without cutting spending by these or other departments. The House version of the bill reduces the transfers to approximately $70 million.
The amendment failed 41 to 56 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To cut from $5.7 million to $1 a state road tax subsidy for private bus service between Port Huron and Chicago and Grand Rapids and Chicago.
The amendment failed 15 to 85 (details)
Amendment offered
by
To add language stating that “the counties of Delta, Dickinson, and Menominee shall be exempt from any reduction in the receipt of Michigan transportation fund revenues resulting from an unconstitutional interdepartment grant.” This refers to a proposal in the executive recommendation for this budget to divert $107.7 million in road-tax dollars from road projects to the Departments of State and Treasury, which was offered as a means to balance the budget without cutting spending by these or other departments. The House version of the bill reduces the transfers to approximately $70 million.
The amendment failed 42 to 57 (details)
Passed in the House 99 to 1 (details)
The House version of the FY 2002-2003 Transportation budget. This would appropriate $3.124 billion in gross spending (funded from all sources, including special state "restricted" funds, primarily those funded by user fees such as fuel taxes and license fees, and federal pass-through dollars), compared to the current year's $3.109 billion, which was the FY 2001-2002 amount enacted in 2001, excluding any supplemental appropriations or cuts.
Substitute offered
To replace the House-passed version of the bill with a version which makes a number of changes in the funding amounts, and in certain “boilerplate” language requiring or prohibiting various conditions and actions. The substitute does not make any provision to spend projected revenue 4-cent per gallon increase in the diesel fuel tax (the House incuded a $100 “placeholder,” which line would be boosted if the tax hike is later adopted). It adds $1.4 million from transportation tax revenues for motor carrier enforcement, and removes $1 million for a Lansing-Detroit rail project.
The substitute passed by voice vote
Amendment offered
by
To add $1.1 million for startup costs of the Detroit area regional transportation authority proposed by House Bill No. 5467.
The amendment failed 15 to 22 (details)
Passed in the Senate 37 to 0 (details)
The Senate version of the FY 2002-2003 Transportation budget. This would appropriate $3.119 billion in gross spending (funded from all sources, including special state "restricted" funds, primarily those funded by user fees such as fuel taxes and license fees, and federal pass-through dollars), compared to the current year's $3.109 billion, which was the FY 2001-2002 amount enacted in 2001, excluding any supplemental appropriations or cuts.
Failed in the House 0 to 99 (details)
To concur with a Senate-passed version of the bill. The vote sends the bill to a House-Senate conference committee to work out the differences.
Received
Passed in the House 61 to 46 (details)
The House-Senate conference report for the FY 2002-2003 Transportation budget. This would appropriate $3.125 billion in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including special state "restricted" funds, primarily those funded by user fees such as fuel taxes and license fees, and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), compared to the current year's $3.109 billion, which was the FY 2001-2002 amount enacted in 2001, excluding any supplemental appropriations or cuts. The conference report budget includes $1 million in "start up" money for a proposed Detroit Area Regional Transit Authority (DARTA), and transfers $94.6 million in transportation tax revenue to the Department of State, and $10.2 million to the Department of Treasury.
Failed in the Senate 13 to 22 (details)
Passed in the House 92 to 15 (details)
The second House-Senate conference report for the FY 2002-2003 Transportation budget. This would appropriate $3.125 billion in adjusted gross spending (funded from all sources, including special state "restricted" funds, primarily those funded by user fees such as fuel taxes and license fees, and federal pass-through dollars, minus interdepartmental transfers), compared to the current year's $3.109 billion, which was the FY 2001-2002 amount enacted in 2001, excluding any supplemental appropriations or cuts. The conference report contains proposed transfers of $94.6 million in transportation tax revenue to the Department of State, and $10.2 million to the Department of Treasury, but does not contain $1 million in “start-up” money for the Detroit Area Regional Transportation Authority (DARTA) proposed by House Bill 5467. It also adds $7.5 million in fire protection grants to local governments, to restore funding removed from House Bill 5644 by a line item veto. Note: The governor vetoed this item to “send a message” that adoption by voters of three ballot initiatives in November would make it more difficult to balance future budgets, because they contain certain spending mandates that would remove budget discretion from the legislature. See veto override votes in House Bill 5651 for additional details on the vetoes and the initiatives.
Passed in the Senate 37 to 0 (details)
