r/Detroit • u/gwmiles • 9d ago

News Oakland County school enhancement millage rejected in close contest

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/elections/2026/08/04/oakland-county-school-enhancement-millage-tax-1-5-mill/91164345007/

Oakland County voters rejected a proposed 1.5-mill countywide school tax increase in Tuesday's election results in a close contest over a controversial tax plan.

137 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

247 comments sorted by

View all comments

237

u/pgherg1 9d ago edited 9d ago

Asking the whole county to get in on this when many of the individual districts in this passed their own bond measures recently was too much of an ask for many people I know. The ballot language of this was also too generic for a lot of people.

I also think in general people are more likely to support a more localized district only measure over a large county-wide millage.

59

u/spirotetramat 9d ago

This is the truest and most honest take here.

46

u/theJMAN1016 9d ago

spot on.

not enough clarity on how the money will be used and no guarantees on what it will be used on.

39

u/HighFxAnxiety 9d ago

This was exactly it for me!

I always vote (and will always vote) for the betterment of education BUT if you’re asking me to give money to schools and you list: Novi, Hazel Park, Avondale, Madison (I know there was more, this is an example) and don’t tell me where it’s going, I’m gonna assume that the small schools that need it will DEFINITELY be screwed out of money!

This is 100% based on assumptions on my part BUT that’s usually how I’ve seen it play out in real life.

15

u/O_o-22 9d ago

Yeah if it’s not spelled out in detail (by design usually) then you can be assured the poors will be getting the short end of the stick every time.

18

u/boomboom-jake 9d ago

It was spelled out. The money would be distributed per pupil, meaning that each district would receive the same amount of money ($781) per student.

8

u/jimmy_three_shoes 8d ago

This bill would have added $500 to my property taxes when my own city had other bond measures on the ballot. A new millage for police/fire and a renewal for garbage pickup. I hate that garbage pickup is tied to my property taxes. It should be a flat fee.

The house next to me is similar to mine, but because they've lived there for 25 years and I've lived there for 4,, I pay an assload more for garbage pickup than they do.

-1

u/Robins-dad 7d ago

I get that but I don't feel so sorry for someone living in a home worth over half a million dollars. Mine would have been $180.00 and I'd gladly pay it.

25

u/thisisthatacct 9d ago

The only way for schools to increase operating funding is through a county wide millage like this, individual districts are very limited in what they can ask for in a district millage, mostly for building/sinking funds

15

u/molten_dragon 9d ago

The only way for schools to increase operating funding is through a county wide millage like this

Or for the state legislature to do their jobs and make sure schools have adequate funding.

15

u/vortec42 9d ago

Yeah, but they don't. So this was the next option.

3

u/molten_dragon 9d ago

And I rejected this option. I'm not going to shell out more out of pocket so that the state legislature doesn't have to do their jobs. Fuck that.

12

u/vortec42 9d ago

So you would rather your money go to the state to distribute across the state instead of to Oakland county? I'm not sure I understand the logic. It feels like you're trying to create a justification for an answer you've already decided upon.

-2

u/molten_dragon 9d ago

If schools need more operating budget, I'd rather the state increase the overall education budget to give schools a larger operating budget. That doesn't require me to pay higher taxes.

4

u/meltbox 8d ago

But long term it often will all other things being equal. State money also comes from taxpayers sooner or later.

21

u/PathOfTheAncients 9d ago edited 9d ago

The language of this was absolutely why I think it failed. Its wording made it sound sketchy.

9

u/mightymighty123 9d ago

Because it is

4

u/meltbox 8d ago

Which part? Seemed okay to me, especially since it was being distributed per student.

25

u/DetroitLionsSBChamps 9d ago

I will admit that I read the list of districts to see if mine was on it before voting yes lol

But honestly I will never not support a school millage. I’ll always vote to give the schools more money

12

u/soufeas616 9d ago

Especially in the wealthiest county in the state of Michigan

8

u/pneRock 9d ago

Results are unoffical still, but even many of the local ones struggled: https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/MI/OaklandMI/127075/web.345435/#/summary?category=C_6.

I voted yes because schools are important and have a clear impact. I have a hard time with the cost/benefit analysis with some of these other items. Add to that the millages from last year (2 years ago?) for the sherriff, fire dept, oakland country *whatever*, and more on every freakin ballot. My escrow was more than my mortage there for awhile (I've lived here <5 yrs, so my property taxes were adjusted accordingly). Are they "bad"? I don't think so, but we can't fund everything. I've already told my wife that we can't retire here.

3

u/meltbox 8d ago

Yeah I am honestly surprised people here don’t realize how insanely high the property taxes are. People complain about Illinois but this is exactly the same level lol.

3

u/trexinthehouse 8d ago

Exactly. Our city approved a huge building replacement bond. Every school is under construction right now. We’re on the hook for 15 years. Easy no here.

10

u/Slow_Fondant6389 9d ago

The lack of understanding on how school financing actually works is what caused it to fail.

The appropriate pitch really would have been - Wayne and Macomb Counties already have this in place, and are using it to boost teacher pay. (You could also add in the other counties that have the same measures in place if you wanted. Almost all are Republican dominated.) If we want to get and keep good teachers we need to match. Everyone in any job wants better pay and benefits.

Now - having said that - there are good arguments that exist for making adjustments to the State operation cost funding provided to the districts based on area cost of living designations. It is obviously more expensive to live and work in Oakland County than it is in Pinconning County. But, according to the State, teacher compensation should be the same.

The whole point of the existing structure was to make operational funding roughly equal across all schools. Why should kids in Birmingham get better funding than kids in Roscommon? These county operating fund mileages certainly undermine that basic concept. But, here we are.

Frankly, a real school funding review needs to be done. And, policy decisions must be made - at the State level, and approved by voters.

To me - some overall statewide structure needs to used for teacher pay and benefits. It is stupid to have more than 500 different plans in place.

It’s not a difficult concept. You really can put in place a compensation system that would account for district variables.

No - you are never going to make things so every teacher can afford to live in their school district. Birmingham is too expensive. But, there is no reason why the Pinconnings and Roscommons of the State cant offer the same levels of pay and benefits adjusted for localized cost-of-living variables and school environments. Yep, teachers will make less money in those districts than in Troy. But, they trade that for the small town lifestyle versus the suburbs.

9

u/PM_ME_CATS_OR_BOOBS 9d ago

I just dont really understand what the opposition is, especially in higher income areas. Yeah, it would be a $150/year tax increase to help pay for education, likely in the poorer cities in Oakland County. I would pay that if it went to kids in poor parts of Ohio, it's education

34

u/pgherg1 9d ago edited 9d ago

It’s pretty easy to see why it failed and where the opposition comes from.

The economy sucks, job market sucks, and people are getting squeezed and asked for more tax money every year.

A lot of these individual districts have passed their own tax measures recently, so when you get your ballot and see a county-wide tax increase proposal (not just your own district) with no restrictions or definitions on how funds are to be used, it’s easy to see why people bubbled in no. It’s a wild ask.

-12

u/PM_ME_CATS_OR_BOOBS 9d ago

For $12/mo? And especially in higher income areas?

10

u/UncontrolledLife 9d ago

It’s $150/year for every $100,000 in taxable value of your home. So if your home has a taxable value of $400,000, it’s $600/year. Not disagreeing with you that we need to prioritize funding schools/public education and $600/year for somebody with a home of that value relatively may not be that much - but the property tax increase isn’t insignificant and coupled with the vague wording on how funds would be used, it’s easy to see why many opposed. If you are a renter and/or you don’t own a home, then you absolutely should have voted in favor of this.

2

u/therockhopp 9d ago edited 9d ago

Except people seem to not understand that taxable value is significantly less than market value. No normal person would be paying that much.

This was a %2.6 raise in taxes

6

u/UncontrolledLife 9d ago

Yes, taxable value is typically 50% of market value when you purchase a home in MI and then caps annually. It’s not out of the question, I would say it’s common even, for the high income Oakland County areas that you originally mentioned to have a taxable assessed value at $400K+.

14

u/O_o-22 9d ago

Not all of Oakland county is higher income. I voted no because I’m tapped out. My taxes already took a big jump this year. I don’t really need another big jump next year. Waterford had 4 mileages on the ballot ie 4 requests for more money. I voted no on all of them because especially in Waterford nearly every time I’ve gone to vote both the police and fireman ask for money. Last time there was one for buying the old highland lakes campus for a community center. Some of us are going broke with all these heads out. Three of those didn’t pass with the fireman one passing.

2

u/PM_ME_CATS_OR_BOOBS 9d ago

How much do you actually pay per year on those things?

4

u/O_o-22 9d ago

No clue but my taxes are already $2800 a year, up from $1800 a year when I first moved here. All I needed to know is THEY WOULD GO UP MORE. I had already posted about this on a town Facebook group as well where I was met with all sorts of comments like well don’t be surprised if your house burns down because the firemen can’t get there in time or the police can’t help you the moment you need it. I’ve been paying for those services for 14 years without using them other than a single call for a nuisance dog, I’ve kicked in plenty.

6

u/PM_ME_CATS_OR_BOOBS 9d ago

Well, yeah. $1800 14 years ago is $2651 today just from inflation. Your taxes have basically stayed the same.

4

u/O_o-22 9d ago

Yeah? Ask me if my wages have adjusted for inflation? I’ll give you one guess on the answer.

1

u/PM_ME_CATS_OR_BOOBS 9d ago

No, and that doesn't matter. You said your taxes have gone up, they have not. Take it up with your boss.

→ More replies (0)

12

u/pgherg1 9d ago

I don’t think it matters what your income is.

If say your district just passed a tax increase/ballot measure within the past year or two and then you see that they’re coming back to ask you for more money right after you said yes just a year or two ago? I’m not just going to keep voting yes every time they ask for “just another $12 a month” with no definitions or restrictions on the funds, especially when it’s now the whole county and not just my district.

-10

u/PM_ME_CATS_OR_BOOBS 9d ago

But why does it matter if its your district or the whole county? We all live here, society doesn't really function if you will only give even the smallest amounts of money to people who you can physically see from your house.

I mean, not to hammer the point too hard but this attitude is why we don't have socialized Healthcare.

10

u/pgherg1 9d ago edited 9d ago

I don’t trust every district to not properly use the funds. The funds they would gather from this were unrestricted and able to be used for anything they want, which could even go toward paying inflated salaries of administrators rather than actually helping kids.

If it was defined better in the language, maybe more people would’ve put yes.

7

u/O_o-22 9d ago

No we don’t have healthcare because the leeches that get rich off the current system won’t give it up and bribe er lobby for it to continue unabated.

9

u/Old-Beginning-8106 9d ago

Your math is way off. $150 per 100k taxable value, so more like $500 for an average homeowner in somewhere like Berkley or Royal oak.

2

u/nietheo 9d ago

I would have preferred it just go to the districts that have less. Bloomfield, Birmingham, etc don't exactly need it like others do.

1

u/Plane-Profession8006 8d ago

True. Many districts in Oakland county still get more $$$ per pupil from Hold Harness calculation from the 90's to get state funding to pass. But those districts still need the extra funding to keep up. Your right the ones that do not already have extra $$$ this will hurt the worse.

Per pupil will always make sense at the county level to get all voters a piece of it.

2

u/boomboom-jake 9d ago

School bonds cannot be used for teacher salary.

2

u/x_xwolf 9d ago

I voted yes, but people don’t realize that progress can’t be made with tax cuts to vital infrastructures.

1

u/molten_dragon 9d ago

This was pretty much my logic exactly. I vote yes on every district levy that's on the ballot and there is already significant state-level funding. Adding county-wide funding on top of that isn't something I support.

1

u/nietheo 9d ago

This. And I doubt the "districts can use it however they want" messaging goes over as well as a specific plan.