The Michigan Court of Claims is set to deliberate on a pivotal legal challenge questioning a routine, yet contentious, component of the state’s budgeting practices. The focus of the lawsuit is the alleged circumvention of constitutional requirements by the Michigan Legislature, brought to light by the Mackinac Center, a free-market research organization.
Filed by the Mackinac Center, the lawsuit contends that the Michigan Constitution mandates a two-thirds supermajority for appropriations concerning specific local projects. However, the House and Senate allegedly bypassed this rule by crafting overly precise criteria that effectively designate funds for particular purposes without explicit naming. Such a maneuver allowed for a contentious $2.5 million allocation targeting sports stadiums in Lansing and Utica.
Patrick Wright of the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation, in a statement from June, emphasized the need for transparency, noting, “Michigan’s budget process fell short of the transparency and accountability that taxpayers deserve… Greater transparency and following the supermajority voting requirement would help ensure that state spending reflects the priorities of all Michigan residents, not just a select few.”
Robert Schneider from the Citizens Research Council of Michigan, a nonpartisan group, acknowledged that these types of allocations are a staple in Lansing’s budget practices. He remarked to Michigan Public Radio, “But that does seem to be a workaround of the plain reading of the language that’s in the constitution.”
The Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity (LEO) stands as the defendant in this case. In its defense, the department stated in its brief opposing a preliminary injunction that the Mackinac Center selectively targeted two appropriations from the entire budget and misplaced its legal challenge. The brief elucidates, “The Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity (LEO) did not enact the appropriations; did not choose the grant recipients; and does not have discretion in how the grants are administered.” LEO claims merely to execute the legislative conditions set for fund allocation.
The lawsuit seeks judicial intervention to halt these expenditures, with Judge Brock Swartzle presiding. Swartzle, with previous experience as a legal counsel and chief of staff for the state House Republican majority, brings informed insight to the proceedings.
—
Read More Michigan News
