No Names in State Budget, But 36 Recipients Getting $38 Million

'A birthing barn at a county fairgrounds located in a county with a population of between 43,000 and 43,300’

Grand Rapids Civic Theater. Image from Facebook.

Taxpayers cannot tell from reading the state budget that just went into effect which 36 organizations and municipalities are sharing $38.6 million worth of state tax revenue under a special one-time line item.

That’s because legislators have a way of getting their pet projects paid for without naming names — or running afoul of the Michigan Constitution. Rather than name the cities or counties that get the state tax revenue, beneficiaries are described by census data.

One recipient, for example, is the Sanilac County Fairgrounds in Sandusky. It is getting $35,000 for a “Miracle of Life” birthing barn, but the name of the fairground is nowhere to be found.

Here’s how the payment is described in the Michigan Enhancement Grants section of this year’s budget bill:

“From the one-time fund appropriated in part 1 for Michigan enhancement grants, $35,000 shall be awarded for a birthing barn at a county fairgrounds located in a county with a population of between 43,000 and 43,300, according to the most recent federal decennial census.”

Stay Engaged

Receive our weekly emails!

That lengthy description does not name the county. If it did, it would be considered a “local act” under the state constitution — and local acts need a two-thirds vote to pass.

The same device is used to designate the Grand Rapids Civic Theater for a payment of $1 million.

That appropriation reads: “$1,000,000.00 shall be awarded to a civic theater in a county with a population between 600,000 and 610,000 and in a city with a population over 185,000 according to the most recent federal decennial census.”

Each of the other 34 grant recipients is described in a similar manner.

Senator Arlan Meekhof, R-West Olive, who is majority leader of the Senate, and Sen. Dave Hildenbrand, R-Lowell, who is chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, didn’t respond to emails seeking comment.

Related Articles:

Millions For Local Earmarks, But Not A Cent To Right An Injustice?

Millions Borrowed And Spent For Enviro Cleanups – But Did They Happen?

State Spends $660 Million In Public Debt, But For What?

Despite Record State Revenue, Spending Interests Predict Budget Meltdown

Governor’s Budget Pays for Medicaid Expansion with a Gas Tax

Stay Engaged

Simply enter your email below to receive our weekly email:


There aren’t many policies that get near unanimous support from economists, but free trade is one of them. Despite this, a central theme of the 2016 presidential campaign, heard from both political parties, was that free trade was somehow harmful to the United States and corrective action was needed. Mark Perry, an economics professor at the University of Michigan-Flint and scholar with the American Enterprise Institute, makes the case for why President Trump’s assessment of free trade is misguided.

Related Sites