Proposal would limit power of Legislature

By Autumn Kelly

Daily Staff Reporter

Local governments would have more of a say in laws that directly affect them if voters say "yes" to Proposal 2.

The proposal would require a two-thirds vote by both houses of the Michigan Legislature to pass laws that would restrict the power of local governments, rather than a simple majority vote.

Ann Arbor Mayor Ingrid Sheldon said the number of restrictive laws passed by the state has increased in the past few years. The proposal was prompted by a state House bill that was recently sent to the table and could curtail local power in 21 separate areas.

As co-chair of the Let Local Votes Count campaign, Sheldon said she believes that the diversity of the state and its needs require greater autonomy on the part of local governments.

The proposal would repeal any laws under its jurisdiction that have been enacted since March 1, including part of an act passed earlier this year that prohibits local governments from suing gun manufacturers. The city of Detroit had pursued a lawsuit against gun manufacturers but was unable to proceed when the law took effect.

Opponents of the proposal acknowledge that local control is important, but say the proposal was not structured or thought out carefully. One problem opponents have with the proposal is its vague wording, especially concerning the term "intervention."

"We really don't know where the line would be drawn," said Martha Johnson, vice president of governmental affairs of the Ann Arbor Chamber of Commerce.

But Sheldon said the proposal is written in a specific manner to have the desired effect.

"Constitutional language is usually quite broad, and this is where Drafters' Notes (for the amendment) come into effect," Sheldon said. "They support and define what we consider to be intervention."

According to the Drafters' Notes on the ballot, a supermajority vote by the Legislature would be necessary for states to intervene in or increase their role in municipal government, property or concerns. Municipalities are defined in the proposal as "a city, village, county, township or any municipal authority."

Opponents argue that because dissenting votes from only 37 representatives or 13 senators would be enough to keep a bill from passing, the proposal would give legislative control to the minority party.

If citizens are unhappy with a piece of legislation, the state's Constitution currently allows them to collect a certain number of signatures to suspend that law until the next general election. According to the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, this is "a more democratic approach" than Proposal 2.

Sheldon said a two-thirds vote is not uncommon in the Legislature, but when a supermajority vote is required, it is usually for an issue that needs serious thought. In this case, she said, the issues deal with the "quality of life" in communities, and the concerns vary by region.

Opponents complain that Proposal 2 would create discontinuity across local borders, in public infrastructure such as road care and storm water management, local billboard ordinances and business regulations. But Proposal 2 supporters believe these are all local issues that should be regulated "according to the needs of a community," Sheldon said.

Proposal 2 would not require a supermajority vote for any legislation granting more control to local governments.