Brinks Supports Tax Money Collected at the Pump Going to Roads; Schools Growing More Anxious

Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) supports having all state tax money collected at the gas pumps go to road improvements, her spokesperson said. It’s a lightly advertised sentiment she shares with House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township) and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer as the duo attempt to craft a long-term road funding deal along with the Fiscal Year (FY) ’26 budget.

At the moment, sales tax is collected when drivers buy gasoline, which is disbursed through the regular sales tax formula, with 73 percent going to schools. The plan Hall is bringing back from prior sessions that Whitmer is supporting would keep the state taxes collected from gasoline sales the same, but have all the taxes go to road construction. Schools would receive money from the General Fund to make up whatever they lost.

Behind the scenes, Brinks and Senate Democrats aren’t crazy about roping a long-term road funding solution in with the budget negotiations because they don’t want their vulnerable members hung with being the impetus for the tax increases they feel are inevitable to backfill the School Aid Fund while finding the desired $3 billion in new road construction money.

Hall has long claimed the $3 billion can come from the existing budget, but the Senate D’s aren’t budging on negotiations until the House passes a budget in which these numbers add up.

However, the fact that Hall, Brinks and the Governor agree on one segment of a deal is viewed as a start.

Whitmer spokesperson Bobby Leddy reiterated that the Governor believes it’s important that a school budget and long-term road funding plan get passed in unison “to ensure that every penny drivers pay at the pump goes to fix the roads while we are also backfilling the School Aid Fund budget to hold it harmless.”

He said the administration will continue budget negotiations with both chambers over the summer as “we work toward an agreement that will make another historic investment in our kids, enact a long-term road funding solution, and supports our local governments and services like fire, police and EMTs.”

Over in the House, spokesperson Gideon D’Assandro said, “It’s great to hear the Senate Leader is joining Speaker Hall and the governor in supporting this,” said Hall spokesperson “It’s common sense, and it’s what the people want.

“It does raise the question, though. If the Senate is finally willing and able to take a position on this, why can’t they pass an entire roads plan? Why are the House and the governor still sitting and waiting at the table for the Senate to show up?”

Tracy Wimmer spokesperson for the House Democratic caucus, hinted at an answer to these questions when she said her caucus members recognize that any sustainable roads plan is predicated on new revenue coming in.

“While we are open to many avenues for road funding, shifting money alone is not an answer, especially if doing so would mean other critical services like education or public safety losing dollars because of a half-answer plan,” she said.

Over on the Senate Republican side, Leader Aric Nesbitt (R-Lawton) said “it’s just common sense that 100% of taxes collected at the gas pump should go to fix our crumbling roads and bridges.”

The standoff over road funding and the budget has school officials tapping their fingers.

School Groups Struggling With Wildly Different Passed Budgets

Peter Spadafore, executive director of the Michigan Alliance for Student Opportunity (MASO) called all of this a manufactured crisis. The Legislature blew through its July 1 deadline to pass a budget not due to lack of resources or outside factors.

Education groups tend to advocate against changing the sales tax structure since the School Aid Fund depends on it. The House says they will hold schools harmless by giving SAF first priority of the sales tax revenue, but schools are nervous.

Spadafore said as more and more dollars from SAF are used to pay for higher education, to remove sales tax on fuel, to pay for roads, to pay for anything other than K-12, that policy makers have set up a “false choice” between roads and students.

Holding up the budget to pave the way for a roads deal is unacceptable. He’s not alone in that sentiment.

“We are putting concrete over kids,” said Tina Kerr, executive director of the Michigan Association of Superintendents. “It’s been stated that we will not see a school budget until we see a roads budget. We are building roads on the backs of our children. Think about that. Think about your children being second place to roads. This is not potholes versus preschoolers,” Kerr said.

However, Spadafore said no one at Tuesday morning’s education press conference was interested in playing the “blame game” of who is responsible for the budget hold up.

Four weeks after the statutory July 1 budget deadline, education groups say not only is the lack of a budget a problem, but also the discrepancy between budget proposals regarding categoricals and per-pupil foundation allowances will create winners and losers.

Wendy Zdeb, executive director of the Michigan Association of Secondary School Principals (MASSP), said the differences of the education budgets passed by the House and Senate and the one proposed by the governor are creating unpredictability for school districts that are trying to staff and program for the year.

Spadafore said some categoricals fund vendor-specific programs, and some categoricals are designed to correct for imperfections in the funding system. He said research indicates a district should receive more money when they have a higher percentage of special education students, and the same if they have higher transportation costs than normal.

“Those categoricals are essential in making sure that the playing field is equal and equitable. Just increasing the foundation allowance alone and eliminating all of those categoricals designed to address systemic imperfections, that’s what’s going to create winners and losers in our state,” Spadafore said.

Kerr is a proponent of less categoricals if it means a higher per-pupil allowance that puts local control in the hands of superintendents, but “less” does not mean “none.”

“You have to make sure you’re comparing apples and apples. If you had categoricals that totaled x, and now the district is only getting an increase in the foundation, that does create those winners and losers,” Kerr said.

The uncertainty of what to expect is causing districts to create and internally approve budgets based on last year’s per-pupil funding, said Piper Bognar, superintendent of Van Dyke Public Schools.

Article courtesy MIRS News for SBAM’s Lansing Watchdog newsletter

Click here for more News & Resources.