Taxpayer Defense Plan

October 27, 2018 by Bill Gelineau

The State imposes its will upon the individual in many ways and on many levels. Few impositions are as consistent and offensive as taxation. Among the multiple types of taxes citizens pay, property taxes are some of the most insidious – as a person never truly owns their home. The concept of Fee Simple (a permanent and absolute tenure of an estate) itself never provides secure, permanent ownership to a property owner. By its very nature, this carry-over from feudalism makes these persons a property-holder, instead of a property owner.

Many jurisdictions have been effected. However, we’re highlighting the City of Detroit because better records exist about how the City has been effected. Clearly, our purpose is not to denigrate the People of the City, but rather to show how they’ve been affected by the current law and harmed by the Government.

Graphic is Detroit properties that went through tax foreclosure2002-2016 (Reference).

While a larger discussion of these legal concepts is warranted, our proposal here is designed to address serious problems created by government which create the perception of property as a revenue-producing system to support the plans of those in government. We need government to work our will, not to lead us as masters.

The problems we seek to address are:

1 – Government misuse of assessment power. Without substantive cause or reason, local governments use unjustified and unconstitutional methods of assessment which violate Michigan law. These systems specifically avoid using market-based assessments as required by law.

2 – A consequence of misused over-assessment is many if not most property owners are seriously overtaxed. Excessive property tax assessments continue to be one of the greatest factors inhibiting affordable living spaces.

3 – Michigan law unfairly and inappropriately subsidizes home ownership over rental or lease agreements. Even beyond the unjustified tax breaks afforded home owners by federal tax policy, Michigan has overburdened non-owners in ways which favor those capable of purchasing their residence.

4 – Michigan utilizes an unorthodox tax foreclosure method that favors expediency over natural rights. The eviction of a family from their home should be considered a final measure. The State should not easily become the vector of eviction – and yet, tens of thousands of Michigan residents are forced from their homes each year due to an unjustified process that puts eviction as the paramount method for collecting taxes.

Our proposals will address each of the problems listed above. Some can be addressed by statutory action. Others have aspects which will require Constitutional redress. Several may end up requiring legal action. In any event, our Campaign is committed to our role as the flag-bearer on these issues and force those running for office to provide their answers to these issues.

Let the voters decide who the champion of those oppressed by the State is.

The Plan

Proposal 1: Total reform of the Michigan General Property Tax Act.

Standardization of procedures and provision for assessment of property to market value, regardless of type of jurisdiction.
Simplification and Expansion of Rights of Owners under the appeal process.
The creation of a Taxpayer Ombudsman whose job would be to provide assistance for residents navigating the appeals process.

The entire process of assessment and request for review by home owners needs more daylight and opportunity for home owners to contest which should not require professional legal assistance to be successful. Our plan will provide needed assistance to those most affected.

Proposal 2: Repeal of the Tax Foreclosure Authority in Act 132 of 1999 with regard to any Residential Class Property.

The process by which Michigan Treasurers are now able to certify property as in forfeiture may rank as one of the most resident unfriendly actions of government in the history of our State.
Replacement of the current forfeiture system with a tax-bid system as used prior to 1999. The argument for “urban renewal” and other development-friendly forces have violated the right of peaceful ownership of their residence.
Establishment of a “purchase right” of bona fide renters or leaseholder interests to prevent eviction based on non-ownership of the land.
Require governmental notification of occupants of owner tax delinquency.
Restoration of the 5-year tax period for redemption. On this item, we advocate that the government as a last-resort for non-bid parcels. And then, that the 5-year rule apply without exception.

Most of the rationale for accelerated tax foreclosure was constructed to serve the interests of the government and not to protect the interests of property owners. And it gives no rights whatsoever to non-ownership interests who are burdened by neglectful land owners.

Our plan will establish, for the first time, a legal right of residents to establish and protect their interests.

Proposal 3: Restoration of Rights – Michigan Government Atonement Act

Recognition that failures of government have already taken property from residence in violation of their natural liberty – we advocate that displaced home owners are given lottery-choice of any existing properties held in the various County Land Banks. This proposal requires ONLY that they have been displaced by the action of foreclosure under P.A. 132. – either with a demonstrable ownership or rental interest. As such, any citizen choosing to exercise said lottery right would register with a local jurisdiction (need not be the same as when foreclosed) to have PRIORITY ahead of any non-resident bidder.

Nothing being discussed provides any relief to those who have ALREADY been harmed by government action. Our plan provides specific relief and opportunity for those who have previously been affected by the unconstitutional and immoral action of government.

Proposal 4: That the State Legislature put before the Voters of Michigan a modification of Proposal A – Tax Act of 1994

We advocate the re-classification of all residential property with a Primary Residence Exemption. The use (and misuse) of the PRE has created a bureaucratic nightmare in which some residents “qualify” on specific date schedules, others – due to being a renter or leaseholder, do not qualify. As such, rental property owners must pass along this enormous additional cost to those who rent – many of whom are younger and/or low-income. This subsidy is unjustified, morally abhorrent, and should be repealed.
We advocate that all non-residential property would have a floor taxable / SEV ratio of 50% immediately upon enactment of this proposed change – and that each year, the taxable value/SEV ratio would rise by 2% each year until all non-residential property has a floor taxable/SEV ratio of 70%.

The above actions would create huge changes in revenue to the State Education Fund. Libertarians believe that there are enormous opportunities for savings within the State Budget and Education in particular. We believe that another “distortion” created by Proposal A is how taxable value suppression has created large differences in how equivalent businesses are treated under tax law – the only difference being how long that business has owned the property.

These proposed changes are consistent with extensive academic criticism that Proposal A created two serious problem. First, by creating a separate Primary Residence Exemption, the law has unfairly and inappropriately created bias against non-homeowners. But, at the same time, extending the tax suppression/limitation to commercial property creates enormous differentials between similar businesses. This discourages new business creation and locks in inappropriate competitive bias in favor of older established businesses. This Plan seeks to create similar treatment under the law.

Presented: September 26, 2018

Michigan State University

A practical plan for the resurgence of Michigan’s largest city: Rethinking Wayne County

The Gelineau campaign accepts as a given that we can’t have a great Michigan without a great Detroit. For many, the loss of vibrancy and opportunity within the City is one of the truly sad realities of the past 50 years. That is not to say there are not wonderful and diverse people who strive daily to make Detroit better and the groups working to do so find successes despite the structural challenges present as industrial conversion as our more transient American culture chooses other locales.

It’s time we recognize that the decision of many to leave Detroit has causes that must be addressed. Despite bright spots, the depopulation of Detroit; now at 37% of its high point, is real. The reverberation of the city’s 2013 bankruptcy is still being felt and will be for years to come. The creation of the Detroit Public School Community District which deposited all of the public school debt into was a desperate act to address an unacceptable situation for children.

Our goal will allow communities to come together, create efficient, effective, and manageable units of government. This will allow those communities to become free from the history of strife and conflict which has too often been emblematic of the past 50 years. A Gelineau administration envisions the construction of neighborhoods which have entrepreneurial spirit not overshadowed by big government and big bureaucracy.

We envision a bold break from the past which allow residents to choose their own destiny. We believe that this is the only solution which will allow for the long-term success of each person.

1) Bill Gelineau proposes the separation of Wayne County into two counties.

The creation of the County of Detroit, including the cities of Detroit, Highland Park, Hamtramck , Harper Wood, Grosse Pointe, Grosse Pointe Park, Grosse Pointe Farms, Grosse Pointe Shores, and Grosse Pointe Woods. The Cities of Dearborn, Melvindale, River Rouge, and Redford Township would have the option to join either the new County of Detroit – or stay within the current Wayne County.

2) Much like Brexit (Detrexit), our campaign envisions a negotiation assisted by the State of Michigan to divide assets and debt equitably.

Like any major change in jurisdictional lines, this proposal would require enacting legislation and approval of voters. Like most large cities in American, Detroit has become a bureaucracy incapable of providing essential services needed by its citizens. Devolution provides opportunity for neighborhoods and neighbors to pull together and create a more effective plan for themselves and their future.

Many countries around the world have recognized the value of maximizing administrative power in the most local unit of government possible.

3) Large neighborhoods within the existing City of Detroit could petition for City Status envisioning new cities within the County of Detroit, thus allowing for the systematic devolution of the City into constituent thriving neighborhoods.

Perhaps large institutions such as universities and hospitals would provide anchor value to a neighborhood ideally between 3-5 square miles and containing one High School and other public school buildings.

Before consolidation and expansion of the City of Detroit many neighborhoods were thriving areas of either unincorporated townships or parts of other towns later absorbed by the ever-growing city. Lincoln Park and other communities incorporated as cities to avoid becoming part of the growth of Detroit.

One example of historic devolution would be the area known as Warrendale on the West side of the City. Drawn slightly larger than its historic boundaries, would include Cody High School and a community anchor.

Detroit Future City in its analysis of needs across a wide spectrum of values, housing, employment, quality of life, opportunity missed the mark by not recognizing the need to empower communities through legal independence.

These neighborhoods need not be treated like boroughs (as done in New York) but, as legally independent entities capable of decision-making as a fully chartered Michigan city.

4) Modern 21^st Century Homestead Plan

Provide real opportunities for people with resources to make improvement to obtain tax foreclosed properties and restore the community. (See: One Block, under Resources)

Fostering opportunity and innovation, perhaps some areas would completely redevelop such things as mobile home communities for seniors, new cultural and business opportunities, and would no longer need to compete for resources with the larger interests of Downtown or other developed areas.

Moving tax foreclosed properties back into the market as soon as possible is the most important element in restoring communities. Not only does it reduce blight, but it also rebuilds the tax base to create more successful communities for people.

Ideally, these new cities within the County of Detroit will petition to create their own neighborhood school districts. Historically, Michigan and the City of Detroit had many magnitudes greater number of school districts empowering parents to provide interest and direction.

Benefits:

Rebuilding a sense of community
Manageable political structure
Independence from the Detroit Income Tax
Local control of schools and city
Neighborhood decision-making
Entrepreneurial opportunities for growth
Foster a 21^st century “Homestead” opportunity

Like everything else in a campaign, we hope to spark conversation about innovative ways to empower people to take control of their lives.

For too long, the people of Detroit have lived with the dysfunctional and divisive Wayne County. It’s time to let the Western Suburbs go their own way and provide services to the rest of the County – leaving the people of Detroit (et al) to rebuild the great area it once and will be again.

Having attended Wayne State University, I believe fundamentally that the rebirth of Detroit is essential to a new and reinvigorated Michigan. This the outline of that plan. Perhaps the Rise of Detroit and a newly minted County will herald a new era of prosperity to come.

Resources:

Princeton University Plan: Rethinking Detroit – https://www.princeton.edu/~erossi/RD.pdf

Detroit Future City: https://detroitfuturecity.com/

Education Week: On Smaller Schools – https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/02/10/small-schools-the-edu-reform-failure-that-wasnt.html

Michigan Radio: http://www.michiganradio.org/post/detroit-foreclosure-buy-back-expansion-faces-time-crunch-funding-uncertainty

Mackinac Center for Public Policy: https://www.mackinac.org/socialism-didnt-make-detroit-great

One Block: https://www.npr.org/2018/10/04/654085265/the-american-dream-one-block-can-make-all-the-difference

MI Way Forward or “23 for me!”

September 18, 2018 by Bill Gelineau

A proposal to provide direct assistance to qualifying persons and incentive-based reproductive choices. An alternative pilot program which requests waiver of the U.S. Medicaid assistance program under Title 42 of US Code, Chapter 7.

For many years now, Michigan and other states have provided Medicaid assistance for a large percentage of live births – generally hovering in the mid 40’s percentage – peaking at 45.3% in 2010. Finding solutions to reduce the dependence on Medicaid as the insurance of last resort has proven problematic.

MI – Way Forward is a direct-payments assistance incentive program which provides subsidy to qualified individual women who choose to delay family development for a specified number of years.

This pilot program would seek a waiver from federal statutory rules to initiate the opportunity for program participants to receive payment under the plan. The program seeks waiver for 5000 program participants in first year of implementation.

The goals of this program are quite simple.

To encourage young women to delay first pregnancy. Social science shows that young girls who give birth have greater likelihood to remain in various social welfare programs for a longer period of time. Increased age and educational attainment provide greater likelihood of successful parenting without social welfare assistance.
Reduce long-term expenses to the Medicaid and other Social Welfare Systems. With an average initial cost exceeding $10k, the expenses to the Medicaid Fund is substantial and crowds out other needs. Exact long-term costs are difficult to measure, as social service benefits often access multiple programs, with estimates sometimes exceeding $50k lifetime benefits.
Equalize behavior-related taxpayer subsidies across socio-economic classes. Government programs in support of middle and upper-middle quintile persons provide direct, measurable subsidies which are widely accepted as “public good”. For example, the average payments to Michigan universities (2018) are $5500 per student * (FYES)

* January 2018 House Fiscal Agency Report

The Plan

Qualifying Individuals: Girls 15 or 16 years old who have themselves been on public assistance* as dependent of one or more resident parents for a period of 5 years or more.

Girls must register with parental or guardian consent before their 16^th or 17^th birthday and participate in a local “Way Forward” support program.

Annual physical examination and physician certification of non-pregnancy filed with the next regular Michigan State Tax Return.

Payment on the following scale as a fully refundable credit.:

Registered 15 year old upon reaching 17^th birthday	$2000.00
Registered 16 year old reaching 18 / Year 1 participant to 18	$1500.00 / $2000.00
Upon reaching 19	$3000.00
Upon reaching 20	$4000.00
Upon reaching 21	$4000.00
Upon reaching 22	$5000.00
Upon reaching 23 plus full program bonus $2k	$7000.00
Total for Registered 15 year old completing program	$27,000.00

While free to begin their families after age 23, in addition to the cash awards…..provide 7 years (through age 30) of Michigan Income Tax Credit (up to $75k in income) — requires residency.

Age 30. Automatic qualification for MSHDA down payment assistance. 5% to $100k.

Total 7 year cost (5000 participants) = $135 million. Program costs $15 million (nominal) 50% efficacy = $55 m. Estimated 5 year annual cost w/ management = $10.5 – 13 million.

2016 Medicaid Expenses (Estimate) per MDHHS. – 49,884 births @ $8700 / birth – $434 million. 5 year estimated cost 2.2 Billion

Program cost = 0.6% of current budget Break even = 1494 / 5000 = 29.8%. Break even against all social service costs* 260 / 5000 = 5.2%

*Based on estimated $50,000 lifetime costs.

Time Magazine: http://ideas.time.com/2013/03/12/want-to-prevent-teen-pregnancy-pay-teens-not-to-get-pregnant/

The Brookings Institution: https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/three-simple-rules-poor-teens-should-follow-to-join-the-middle-class/

Drop the Cap (Lower the cap)

March 2, 2018 by Bill Gelineau

What is “the cap”? The cap is a spending limit or cap limiting the number of dollars the state can spend. Michigan has a spending cap? Most voters don’t know this but yes Michigan has a spending cap! Taxpayer advocate Richard Headlee’s landmark amendment to the Michigan Constitution (Article IX, Section 26 – Headlee Amendment)- sets a limit of 9.49% of personal income as the absolute spending limit on our State Government.

The problem is that recent acceleration in spending could make government expansion a key problem down the road.

My “Gelineau Plan” has three key parts:

“Drop the Cap” (lower the cap) from the current 9.49% to 8.55% – a 10% reduction. —- Since state spending is now hovering around 8.1% – this is not a radical proposal. But, it is an important proposal to ensure state spending does not revert to the problems we had in the past.
Eliminate the Michigan Strategic Fund.
Legalize marijuana use.

Drop the Cap and reducing the limit of spending to 8.55% is a necessary first step telling investors, taxpayers, and the legislature that we don’t want to return to being a high-spending state. With focus on the proper priorities, we can repair our infrastructure, make needed repairs and make needed investments without blowing the budget wide open. This little-known aspect of our budget exists due to the efforts of the late Dick Headlee, who in 1978 spearheaded an effort to ensure that Michigan got off the gravy-boat tax & spend ride it had been on.

The problem is that the limit turns out to still give lots of room for political shenanigans. I hope to bring this issue to light for the legislature to put on the ballot. And, until that occurs, I’ll use the veto pen to help motivate the legislature to see the wisdom of Mr. Headlee’s vision.

Eliminating the Michigan Strategic Fund. This agency wields enormous power within Michigan government. Deciding on tax abatement, distribution of grant funds, and loans to developing businesses. This “autonomous agency” operates under the framework of the DTED – but, enormous outlays continue to spend precious taxpayer money on businesses.

Businesses should not be subsidized by the taxpayer. Profitable businesses don’t need and should not get taxpayer subsidy. So-called future businesses should develop their own markets without taxpayer subsidy. Along these lines, we should work to eliminate the Michigan Economic Development Corporation – which manages our state image agency, known for PURE Michigan (a nice sounding name)….it’s mostly PURE B.S.. This is a nice subsidy for the business community – handing out advertising contracts that promote tourism and such. In my view, the business that want customers to buy their products or visit their region should organize together to pay this expense. Most of what this agency does is not the province of government and should be eliminated.

Legalize marijuana use. It’s time we dispense with the failed war on cannabis. Too many of our citizens, especially young people, have had their lives affected by a marijuana conviction. And yet, the marketplace continues to thrive. Let’s get rid of the mindless and expensive prohibition mentality that says we can control all forms of human behaviour. I believe that responsible use of marijuana should be treated just like responsible use of alcohol. The logic of this the “King in his castle” theory of law. Adults should be left alone in their own homes, as invited friends homes, or businesses that allow this activity. The State has no interest in preventing the free exercise of this activity.

You can read more on marijuana on my Issue’s Page: Marijuana Policy

National Guard

March 2, 2018 by Bill Gelineau

April 10, 2018 – Special Note: There has been considerable debate on Facebook regarding this position. It is my contention that the LAW, as currently written, prevents the President from using the National Guard in actions that do not have the requisite Declaration from Congress either of War OR a National Emergency.

It is important to say that this is not a discussion about whether giving that power to the President is a good idea – or the merits of using The Guard in overseas or domestic actions. The law was changed in 2007 to give President Bush wide authority to use the National Guard. All 50 Governors objected as a usurpation of power. In 2008, the law was reversed to restore the prior condition.

Below my statement, I’ve outlined the relevant section of the US Code governing the use of reserve components, the NDAA of 2007 relevant sections, and the NDAA of 2008 sections which cite repeal and restore Section 12301 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code.

If elected Governor, I’ll stop the misuse of our National Guard.

I will use every available means to prevent the President of the United States from federalizing our National Guard Troops for use in a foreign conflict that has not had a Declaration of War by the United States Congress.

Over many generations, my family has had many members serve in various branches of the military. My father served in the U.S. Navy….. grandfathers (both) in the U.S. Army. I have a niece serving now.

I believe that often we’ve been too quick to war. But, even if the conditions were such that the use of military forces could be considered appropriate — a Governor of this State should do all in their power to ensure that our National Guard protected from misuse by the President. Our Constitution relies on the Congress to pass a Declaration before the President can use National Guard Troops — whose primary mission is internal — and acts at the prerogative of the Governor.

While some believe this is radical, most would understand that the Tenth Amendment reserves powers to the States. Only under a proper Declaration of War would the President then request the cooperation of the State to bring the National Guard into Ready Reserve. The last several decades have witnessed a misuse of Presidential Authority by both Democratic and Republican Presidents. We must ensure that the blood of our men and women is not sent afield without forethought and commitment. Our representatives in Washington owe us that.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Here are the sections of Title 10, the NDAA of 2007, and the NDAA of 2008

10 U.S. Code § 12301 – Reserve components generally

(a) In time of war or of national emergency declared by Congress, or when otherwise authorized by law, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may, without the consent of the persons affected, order any unit, and any member not assigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit, of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of that Secretary to active duty for the duration of the war or emergency and for six months thereafter. However a member on an inactive status list or in a retired status may not be ordered to active duty under this subsection unless the Secretary concerned, with the approval of the Secretary of Defense in the case of the Secretary of a military department, determines that there are not enough qualified Reserves in an active status or in the inactive National Guard in the required category who are readily available.

(d) At any time, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may order a member of a reserve component under his jurisdiction to active duty, or retain him on active duty, with the consent of that member. However, a member of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States may not be ordered to active duty under this subsection without the consent of the governor or other appropriate authority of the State concerned.

National Defense Authorization Act of 2007.

[For Fiscal 2007… passed October 17, 2006]

SEC. 1076. USE OF THE ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES.

(a) USE OF THE ARMED FORCES AUTHORIZED

(1) IN GENERAL

.—Section 333 of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

‘‘§ 333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law

‘(a) USE OF ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES

.—

(1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to—

‘‘(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that— (continues)

[Over the objections of ALL 50 State Governors, this law was passed which allows the President, for the first time, to unilaterally order the armed forces, including the National Guard into a wide range of activities.]

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 – HR 4986 PL 110-181 Eff. 1-28-2008

(Sec. 1068) Revises federal provisions concerning the use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies to discontinue the executive authority to deploy active and reserve personnel during domestic response incidents. Repeals the authority of the President to direct the Secretary to provide supplies, services, and equipment to persons affected by major public emergencies.

Repeal of provisions in section 1076 of Public Law 109–364 relating to use of Armed Forces in major public emergencies (sec. 1068) The House bill contained a provision (sec. 1054) that would repeal section 1076 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109–364) and revive the provisions of sections 333 and 12304(c) of title 10, United States Code, as they were in effect prior to the effective date of that Act, and repeal section 2567 of title 10. The Senate amendment contained a similar provision (sec. 1022).

The Senate recedes.

SEC. 1068. REPEAL OF PROVISIONS IN SECTION 1076 OF PUBLIC LAW 109-364

RELATING TO USE OF ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES.

(a) Interference With State and Federal Laws.– [details not shown]

(b) Repeal of Section Relating to Provision of Supplies, Services, and Equipment.–

(c) Conforming Amendment.–Section 12304(c) of such title is amended by striking “Except to perform” and all that follows through “this section” and inserting “No unit or member of a reserve component may be ordered to active duty under this section to perform any of the functions authorized by chapter 15 or section 12406 of this title or, except as provided in subsection (b),”.

(d) Effective Date.–The amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

The problems we seek to address are:

1 – Government misuse of assessment power. Without substantive cause or reason, local governments use unjustified and unconstitutional methods of assessment which violate Michigan law. These systems specifically avoid using market-based assessments as required by law.

2 – A consequence of misused over-assessment is many if not most property owners are seriously overtaxed. Excessive property tax assessments continue to be one of the greatest factors inhibiting affordable living spaces.

3 – Michigan law unfairly and inappropriately subsidizes home ownership over rental or lease agreements. Even beyond the unjustified tax breaks afforded home owners by federal tax policy, Michigan has overburdened non-owners in ways which favor those capable of purchasing their residence.

The Plan

Proposal 1: Total reform of the Michigan General Property Tax Act.

Standardization of procedures and provision for assessment of property to market value, regardless of type of jurisdiction.

Simplification and Expansion of Rights of Owners under the appeal process.

The creation of a Taxpayer Ombudsman whose job would be to provide assistance for residents navigating the appeals process.

The entire process of assessment and request for review by home owners needs more daylight and opportunity for home owners to contest which should not require professional legal assistance to be successful. Our plan will provide needed assistance to those most affected.

Proposal 2: Repeal of the Tax Foreclosure Authority in Act 132 of 1999 with regard to any Residential Class Property.

The process by which Michigan Treasurers are now able to certify property as in forfeiture may rank as one of the most resident unfriendly actions of government in the history of our State.

Replacement of the current forfeiture system with a tax-bid system as used prior to 1999. The argument for “urban renewal” and other development-friendly forces have violated the right of peaceful ownership of their residence.

Establishment of a “purchase right” of bona fide renters or leaseholder interests to prevent eviction based on non-ownership of the land.

Require governmental notification of occupants of owner tax delinquency.

Restoration of the 5-year tax period for redemption. On this item, we advocate that the government as a last-resort for non-bid parcels. And then, that the 5-year rule apply without exception.

Proposal 3: Restoration of Rights – Michigan Government Atonement Act

Nothing being discussed provides any relief to those who have ALREADY been harmed by government action. Our plan provides specific relief and opportunity for those who have previously been affected by the unconstitutional and immoral action of government.

Proposal 4: That the State Legislature put before the Voters of Michigan a modification of Proposal A – Tax Act of 1994

We advocate that all non-residential property would have a floor taxable / SEV ratio of 50% immediately upon enactment of this proposed change – and that each year, the taxable value/SEV ratio would rise by 2% each year until all non-residential property has a floor taxable/SEV ratio of 70%.

Presented: September 26, 2018

Michigan State University

A practical plan for the resurgence of Michigan’s largest city: Rethinking Wayne County

We envision a bold break from the past which allow residents to choose their own destiny. We believe that this is the only solution which will allow for the long-term success of each person.

1) Bill Gelineau proposes the separation of Wayne County into two counties.

2) Much like Brexit (Detrexit), our campaign envisions a negotiation assisted by the State of Michigan to divide assets and debt equitably.

Many countries around the world have recognized the value of maximizing administrative power in the most local unit of government possible.

3) Large neighborhoods within the existing City of Detroit could petition for City Status envisioning new cities within the County of Detroit, thus allowing for the systematic devolution of the City into constituent thriving neighborhoods.

Perhaps large institutions such as universities and hospitals would provide anchor value to a neighborhood ideally between 3-5 square miles and containing one High School and other public school buildings.

One example of historic devolution would be the area known as Warrendale on the West side of the City. Drawn slightly larger than its historic boundaries, would include Cody High School and a community anchor.

Detroit Future City in its analysis of needs across a wide spectrum of values, housing, employment, quality of life, opportunity missed the mark by not recognizing the need to empower communities through legal independence.

These neighborhoods need not be treated like boroughs (as done in New York) but, as legally independent entities capable of decision-making as a fully chartered Michigan city.

4) Modern 21st Century Homestead Plan

Provide real opportunities for people with resources to make improvement to obtain tax foreclosed properties and restore the community. (See: One Block, under Resources)

Fostering opportunity and innovation, perhaps some areas would completely redevelop such things as mobile home communities for seniors, new cultural and business opportunities, and would no longer need to compete for resources with the larger interests of Downtown or other developed areas.

Moving tax foreclosed properties back into the market as soon as possible is the most important element in restoring communities. Not only does it reduce blight, but it also rebuilds the tax base to create more successful communities for people.

Ideally, these new cities within the County of Detroit will petition to create their own neighborhood school districts. Historically, Michigan and the City of Detroit had many magnitudes greater number of school districts empowering parents to provide interest and direction.

Benefits:

Rebuilding a sense of community

Manageable political structure

Independence from the Detroit Income Tax

Local control of schools and city

Neighborhood decision-making

Entrepreneurial opportunities for growth

Foster a 21st century “Homestead” opportunity

Like everything else in a campaign, we hope to spark conversation about innovative ways to empower people to take control of their lives.

For too long, the people of Detroit have lived with the dysfunctional and divisive Wayne County. It’s time to let the Western Suburbs go their own way and provide services to the rest of the County – leaving the people of Detroit (et al) to rebuild the great area it once and will be again.

Having attended Wayne State University, I believe fundamentally that the rebirth of Detroit is essential to a new and reinvigorated Michigan. This the outline of that plan. Perhaps the Rise of Detroit and a newly minted County will herald a new era of prosperity to come.

Resources:

Princeton University Plan: Rethinking Detroit – https://www.princeton.edu/~erossi/RD.pdf

Detroit Future City: https://detroitfuturecity.com/

Education Week: On Smaller Schools – https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/02/10/small-schools-the-edu-reform-failure-that-wasnt.html

Michigan Radio: http://www.michiganradio.org/post/detroit-foreclosure-buy-back-expansion-faces-time-crunch-funding-uncertainty

Mackinac Center for Public Policy: https://www.mackinac.org/socialism-didnt-make-detroit-great

One Block: https://www.npr.org/2018/10/04/654085265/the-american-dream-one-block-can-make-all-the-difference

A proposal to provide direct assistance to qualifying persons and incentive-based reproductive choices. An alternative pilot program which requests waiver of the U.S. Medicaid assistance program under Title 42 of US Code, Chapter 7.

MI – Way Forward is a direct-payments assistance incentive program which provides subsidy to qualified individual women who choose to delay family development for a specified number of years.

This pilot program would seek a waiver from federal statutory rules to initiate the opportunity for program participants to receive payment under the plan. The program seeks waiver for 5000 program participants in first year of implementation.

The goals of this program are quite simple.

* January 2018 House Fiscal Agency Report

The Plan

Annual physical examination and physician certification of non-pregnancy filed with the next regular Michigan State Tax Return.

Payment on the following scale as a fully refundable credit.:

While free to begin their families after age 23, in addition to the cash awards…..provide 7 years (through age 30) of Michigan Income Tax Credit (up to $75k in income) — requires residency.

Age 30. Automatic qualification for MSHDA down payment assistance. 5% to $100k.

Total 7 year cost (5000 participants) = $135 million. Program costs $15 million (nominal) 50% efficacy = $55 m. Estimated 5 year annual cost w/ management = $10.5 – 13 million.

2016 Medicaid Expenses (Estimate) per MDHHS. – 49,884 births @ $8700 / birth – $434 million. 5 year estimated cost 2.2 Billion

Program cost = 0.6% of current budget Break even = 1494 / 5000 = 29.8%. Break even against all social service costs* 260 / 5000 = 5.2%

*Based on estimated $50,000 lifetime costs.

Recommended reading:

Time Magazine: http://ideas.time.com/2013/03/12/want-to-prevent-teen-pregnancy-pay-teens-not-to-get-pregnant/ The Brookings Institution: https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/three-simple-rules-poor-teens-should-follow-to-join-the-middle-class/

It’s time we revisit the idea of Death with Dignity.

I hope people take time to read this report and decide for themselves.

The problem is that recent acceleration in spending could make government expansion a key problem down the road.

My “Gelineau Plan” has three key parts:

“Drop the Cap” (lower the cap) from the current 9.49% to 8.55% – a 10% reduction. —- Since state spending is now hovering around 8.1% – this is not a radical proposal. But, it is an important proposal to ensure state spending does not revert to the problems we had in the past.

Eliminate the Michigan Strategic Fund.

Legalize marijuana use.

The problem is that the limit turns out to still give lots of room for political shenanigans. I hope to bring this issue to light for the legislature to put on the ballot. And, until that occurs, I’ll use the veto pen to help motivate the legislature to see the wisdom of Mr. Headlee’s vision.

You can read more on marijuana on my Issue’s Page: Marijuana Policy

4) Modern 21^st Century Homestead Plan

Foster a 21^st century “Homestead” opportunity

Time Magazine: http://ideas.time.com/2013/03/12/want-to-prevent-teen-pregnancy-pay-teens-not-to-get-pregnant/

The Brookings Institution: https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/three-simple-rules-poor-teens-should-follow-to-join-the-middle-class/