No. 44

STATE OF MICHIGAN

Journal of the Senate

103rd Legislature

REGULAR SESSION OF 2025

Senate Chamber, Lansing, Wednesday, May 14, 2025.

10:00 a.m.

The Senate was called to order by the President pro tempore, Senator Jeremy Moss.

The roll was called by the Secretary of the Senate, who announced that a quorum was present.

Albert—present Hauck—present Moss—present

Anthony—present Hertel—present Nesbitt—present

Bayer—present Hoitenga—present Outman—present

Bellino—present Huizenga—present Polehanki—present

Brinks—present Irwin—present Runestad—excused

Bumstead—present Johnson—present Santana—present

Camilleri—present Klinefelt—present Shink—present

Cavanagh—present Lauwers—present Singh—present

Chang—present Lindsey—present Theis—present

Cherry—present McBroom—present Victory—present

Daley—present McCann—present Webber—present

Damoose—present McMorrow—present Wojno—present

Geiss—present

Senator Thomas A. Albert of the 18th District offered the following invocation:

In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Hail, Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

The President pro tempore, Senator Moss, led the members of the Senate in recital of the Pledge of Allegiance.

Senators Shink, Singh and Cavanagh entered the Senate Chamber.

Motions and Communications

Senator Lauwers moved that Senator Nesbitt be temporarily excused from today’s session.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Lauwers moved that Senator Runestad be excused from today’s session.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Singh moved that Senators Anthony and Brinks be temporarily excused from today’s session.

The motion prevailed.

Recess

Senator Singh moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.

The motion prevailed, the time being 10:03 a.m.

10:24 a.m.

The Senate was called to order by the President pro tempore, Senator Moss.

During the recess, Senators Brinks, Nesbitt and Anthony entered the Senate Chamber.

By unanimous consent the Senate proceeded to the order of

Third Reading of Bills

Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 184

The motion prevailed.

The following bill was read a third time:

Senate Bill No. 184, entitled

A bill to make, supplement, and adjust appropriations for various state departments and agencies, the judicial branch, and the legislative branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025; to provide for certain conditions on appropriations; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

The question being on the passage of the bill,

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 121 Yeas—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Nays—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Moss

The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.

Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 169

The motion prevailed.

The following bill was read a third time:

Senate Bill No. 169, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of corrections for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

The question being on the passage of the bill,

Senator McBroom offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 44, following line 27, by inserting:

“Sec. 607. From the funds appropriated in part 1, the department shall provide a report by April 1 for the preceding 12 month period on the number of prisoners, that have been incarcerated for a minimum of 5 years, who received suboxone upon release from a correctional facility.”.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator McBroom offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 22, line 3, after “314.” by inserting “(1)”.

2. Amend page 22, following line 13, by inserting:

“(2) Additionally, the department shall submit a monthly report indicating each incident in which an employee was required to work mandatory overtime within the 32-hour period following the beginning of the last overtime shift of more than four hours the employee worked (two hours for employees assigned to 12-hour shifts).

(3) Each violation of the 32-hour mandatory overtime rule as set forth by the department shall result in the reduction in the director’s salary by $50 per violation.”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator McBroom offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 29, following line 3, by inserting:

“Sec. 327. If the department terminates an employee for suspected participation in criminal activity, the department must refer that case to the Michigan attorney general’s office. Criminal activity may include, but not be limited to, the following:

(a) Bringing contraband into a correctional facility;

(b) Physical, mental, or sexual abuse of a prisoner, visitor, or other department staff;

(c) Theft;

(d) Any other activity determined to be criminal according to the Michigan penal code.”.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Lindsey offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 8, line 20, by striking out “100” and inserting “6,000,000”.

2. Amend page 8, line 26, by striking out “18,100,100” and inserting “24,100,000”.

3. Amend page 9, line 1, by striking out “15,600,100” and inserting “15,600,000”.

4. Amend page 9, line 2, by striking out “2,500,000” and inserting “8,500,000” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Outman offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 25, line 28, by striking out all of subsection (7) through line 1 on page 29 and renumbering the remaining subsection accordingly.

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 122 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Moss

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 2, following line 21, by inserting:

“Corrections officer post-secondary grants 5,000,000”

2. Amend page 3, line 4, by striking out “156,200,600” and inserting “161,200,600”.

3. Amend page 3, line 12, by striking out “138,595,200” and inserting “143,595,200”.

4. Amend page 29, line 4, by inserting:

“Sec. 327. The funds appropriated in part 1 for corrections officer post-secondary grants must be allocated by the department to an accredited online postsecondary school to establish a program for assistance with corrections officer post-secondary education. The grant program administered by the department shall pay for up to 15 college credit hours for current corrections officers and new hires that have not completed college coursework required for employment with the department of corrections. The department shall submit a request for proposal and select a postsecondary school that is competency-based and can provide a quality education for the best price available.” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 2, following line 20, by inserting:

“Corrections officer base wage increase 50,000,000”

2. Amend page 3, line 4, by striking out “156,200,600” and inserting “206,200,600”.

3. Amend page 3, line 12, by striking out “138,595,200” and inserting “188,595,200”.

4. Amend page 29, line 4, by inserting:

“Sec. 327. The funds appropriated in part 1 for corrections officer base wage increase must be used by the department to provide a 10% base wage increase in addition to the base wage increase required by the contractual agreements adopted for fiscal year 2025-26. This increase must be applied to the base wages of all corrections officers at facilities, corrections transportation officers and corrections security representatives in the department’s absconder recovery unit.” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 2, line 17, by striking out “2,362,900” and inserting “2,137,900”.

2. Amend page 3, line 4, by striking out “156,200,600” and inserting “155,975,600”.

3. Amend page 3, line 12, by striking out “138,595,200” and inserting “138,370,200”.

4. Amend page 29, following line 3, by inserting:

“Sec. 327. Funds appropriated under part 1 may not be used to fund the salary of the department’s director.” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

The question being on the passage of the bill,

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 123 Yeas—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Nays—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Moss

The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.

Protests

Senators Outman and Albert, under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 169 and moved that the statements they made during the discussion of the bill be printed as their reasons for voting “no.”

The motion prevailed.

Senator Outman’s statement is as follows:

This vote is a difficult one for me. This budget includes things I very much support and have fought for in the past. These workers deserve better than what they’re currently receiving, and some of that is addressed in this budget before us. However, it also cuts funding to local jails that don’t have the staff to monitor in-person visits. I’ve heard from so many officers in our local jails and no matter what way you slice it, without these reimbursements, it’s a funding cut. For that reason, I urge a “no” vote on this budget.

Senator Albert’s statement is as follows:

This is not an easy budget, and the prison system is not easy to manage. There are longstanding challenges in the Department of Corrections that cannot be fully addressed in a single plan or in a single year, but I am voting against this budget primarily as a statement that the department needs new leadership and a new approach to its challenges, such as the chronic shortage of corrections officers. The state of Michigan has faced a dangerous shortage of corrections officers for years. The department’s current leadership did not create this problem, but it has also not done enough to correct it. Improved retirement benefits alone, no matter what form they take, will not be enough to fix this problem or give our dedicated corrections officers the support they need.

There are other troubling signs within the department that signal new leadership is necessary. Just a month or so ago, an Auditor General report disclosed some troubling security concerns, including metal detectors that weren’t catching steel rods and inadequate searches of vehicles and prisoner cells. Then there are the lawsuits—too many to list. Just in the past few weeks, there were lawsuits filed claiming sexual harassment by a former department spokesman and another alleging illegal recording of strip searches of female inmates. These are both highly unacceptable and are going to be incredibly expensive, most likely, to the Michigan taxpayer. There are many good initiatives within the Department of Corrections, such as vocational programs for inmates, and the current director deserves accolades for her role in these programs and her many years of service to the state, but change is needed.

Senators McBroom, Lindsey, Outman, Albert and Irwin asked and were granted unanimous consent to make statements and moved that the statements be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator McBroom’s first statement is as follows:

My amendment seeks to receive from the department a report of who is receiving suboxone, who is still addicted when they’re released from our prisons. Our prisons ought to be an opportune moment to help folks who have addiction problems overcome those problems before they’re released. Yet, reports that I’ve been receiving from staff, employees, and families is that people are still leaving prison, after being there for five years, still addicted and still being supplied with these addictive substances. We ought to be better informed of this so we can make better decisions in the future. I ask for support of my amendment.

Senator McBroom’s second statement is as follows:

Mr. President, as I have said to our body in the past, Corrections continues to struggle with staff issues, and one of the consequences of that struggle is a violation of the 32-hour rule. The 32-hour rule is a rule that’s supposed to inhibit the department from allowing employees to work more than 32 hours in three days, meaning they can’t be double-shifted for three days in a row. Unfortunately, this is happening often but the department does not keep track of these violations—except for some chicken scratch on the time sheet in the hallway at the prisons, there is no official recording of how often this violation occurs. It’s a violation of the contract and it’s a violation of just common decency as employees are forced to work these ridiculous shifts again and again, having less than eight hours to get back home, sleep, spend time with their children, get something to eat, clean up, and then they’re right back to work again. Some of these employees have more than two hours to drive both ways to even get to work. I’m simply asking that we start recording this—that the department be forced to do its job and keep track of when it’s violating the 32-hour rule in an official way. This amendment causes that to happen. I ask for support.

Senator McBroom’s third statement is as follows:

Mr. President, I’d like to first off thank the subcommittee chair, Senator Shink, for her openness to discussions on these issues and for her concerns about Corrections as well. It’s very appreciated and I hope that despite what’s happened to the past two amendments and what I suspect happens with this one, that continuation of those discussions will happen as the budget process progresses.

My third amendment deals with criminal activity that occurs in our prisons by staff. Right now, if a staff person is found to have brought in contraband or to have been involved in altercations or sexual abuse with prisoners, there is not a mandate that they be prosecuted; there’s not a mandate that they even be investigated. Many times they simply lose their job and go on to other things. This does not serve as a proper deterrent against these kinds of acts from happening again. While they are minimal and the officers and other staff are mainly made up of good, law-abiding citizens, the few who disobey these laws and commit these crimes are a black spot on the profession and deserve to be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. My amendment requires such situations to be referred to the Attorney General for investigation. I ask for support of my amendment.

Senator Lindsey’s statement is as follows:

Our ambulances in Michigan have been robbed, literally having provided services and then not being paid due to incompetence or corruption at the Michigan Department of Corrections. Vote for this amendment to make our ambulances whole so they can continue to serve our communities.

Senator Outman’s statement is as follows:

Whether my colleagues will admit it or not, this bill includes a funding cut that takes dollars away from our local jails. Many local jails just don’t have the staff to safely offer and monitor in-person visits, and several officers have already raised concerns about what losing these funds would mean. My amendment would remove the provision that requires county jails to offer in-person visitations or risk losing this essential funding. This provision removing this funding was a key factor in my decision to vote “no” on this bill and I’m offering this amendment in hopes we can come to an agreement to keep our local jails whole and our officers safe. I encourage support for my amendment.

Senator Albert’s first statement is as follows:

We have a critical shortage of corrections officers in our state prison system. It will require a multifaceted approach to fix, and this amendment proposes one of several possible steps. This amendment would provide $5 million to a grant program to help corrections officers meet their postsecondary requirement of having 15 college credits. After talking to corrections officers and others about this, it appears that helping officers meet this requirement may be a better approach than eliminating the requirement altogether. The terms of this amendment call for the state to partner with an accredited online postsecondary school to establish a program helping corrections officers meet their education requirement, and they’ll do so using a competency-based approach. Flexibility is a key for officers who are already working long hours and have a wide range of other responsibilities, so this online approach makes sense. I urge support for this amendment.

Senator Albert’s second statement is as follows:

This amendment provides an opportunity to find common ground to help address the devastating corrections officer shortage in our state prison system. The amendment would set aside enough money to provide a 10 percent across-the-board pay raise for corrections officers. Most of the discussion in this chamber over the past few years has been about improving retirement benefits. I agree something should be done there and I have introduced a plan to offer enhanced benefits. We must acknowledge that improved retirement benefits is only one part of what should be a thorough and comprehensive approach to improving conditions for the men and women serving as corrections officers in our state prisons. Better pay right now would help with recruitment and retention just as much or possibly even more. Please join me in approving this amendment and helping our dedicated corrections officers.

Senator Albert’s third statement is as follows:

This amendment eliminates the salary for the director of the Michigan Department of Corrections, and it does so by removing its equivalent amount of her salary from the unclassified employees line item. I would like to commend Director Washington for her service and commitment but it is time for a change in leadership at the department. She did not create the corrections officer shortage, but she has been in her position since 2015 and she has had ample time to address it without success. The rash of recent lawsuits and audits revealing flaws within the department are even more evidence that the time for change is now. I request my colleagues to support my amendment.

Senator Irwin’s statement is as follows:

I rise to thank my colleague from the 14th District for including an item in this budget that’s very important to me, which is incentivizing our local sheriffs to provide in-person visitation during a time someone is incarcerated in a local jail. This is especially important to me because when I, as a county commissioner—as a young county commissioner—learned that the considerable majority of people in the county jail are not convicted, that was a revelatory moment for me. I don’t know if all my colleagues understand that. If you go down to your county jail, what you’ll find is that most of the people in there have not yet been adjudicated. They are still accused. Here in the United States, even still today with this federal administration, we still believe that you’re innocent until proven guilty.

It’s especially important that we allow people who are accused but not yet convicted to at least be able to see their families. We want to keep families together. We want to keep people employed. We want to keep people housed. In order to do that, during the short time they’re in that jail, they need to have access to in-person visitation. I’ll add that it is especially important that we protect in-person visitation while we’ve got some of the rumblings we have at the federal level about suspending habeas corpus and no longer having the rule of law in this country. This is an incredibly important issue, that when people are taken into custody—under force, under the authority granted by our government—it’s incredibly important that we give them access to their families and their attorneys, and maintaining in-person visitation is the heart of that.

I know there are many colleagues who think there’s infinite money for bullets and badges and busting kids, but there’s never enough money for allowing in-person visitation—that’s not acceptable to me. These county commissions, these sheriffs have to step up and do what’s right if they expect the state to fund their budgets.

Recess

Senator Singh moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.

The motion prevailed, the time being 10:47 a.m.

10:53 a.m.

The Senate was called to order by the Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Geiss.

By unanimous consent the Senate proceeded to the order of

Resolutions

Senator Singh moved that rule 3.204 be suspended to permit immediate consideration of the following resolutions:

Senate Resolution No. 45

Senate Resolution No. 46

Senate Resolution No. 47

Senate Resolution No. 48

The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.

Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following resolution:

Senate Resolution No. 48

The motion prevailed.

Senator Johnson offered the following resolution:

Senate Resolution No. 48.

A resolution to designate May 2025 as Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) Awareness Month.

Whereas, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, or EDS, is an inherited condition that affects the connective tissues of the body; and

Whereas, Connective tissues provide support in skin, tendons, ligaments, blood vessels, internal organs, and bones; and

Whereas, There are 13 types of EDS caused by genetic defects in collagen, one of the major structural components of the body; and

Whereas, Symptoms of EDS may include joint hypermobility, loose, unstable joints that dislocate easily, joint pain, skin that bruises easily, digestive problems, dizziness and increased heart rate when standing up, and problems with internal organs, among others; and

Whereas, Eighty percent of people with EDS also have postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS); and

Whereas, POTS occurs when an individual’s heart rate increases very quickly after getting up from sitting or lying down causing symptoms such as dizziness or light-headedness, fainting or almost fainting, noticeable heartbeats (heart palpitations), chest pain, shortness of breath, and shaking or sweating; and

Whereas, Those suffering from POTS may also have additional medical problems including digestion problems such as feeling or being sick, diarrhea, constipation, bloating and stomach pain, headaches and problems with sight such as blurred vision or tunnel vision, hands and feet looking purple, weakness and extreme tiredness and fatigue, and problems with thinking, memory, and concentration; and

Whereas, It is estimated that the prevalence of all types of EDS combined affect at least 1 in 5,000 people worldwide with recent research indicating that EDS is likely under diagnosed; and

Whereas, EDS may significantly decrease both quantity and quality of life for those affected; and

Whereas, Currently, there is no treatment for EDS and no known cure. Further medical research and awareness can bring hope for those with EDS; and

Whereas, Early and accurate diagnosis can help create lifesaving medical plans and improve overall quality of life; and

Whereas, A network of EDS support groups can help connect those managing life with the disease as well as better inform the health care community and the public; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, That the members of this legislative body designate May 2025 as Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) Awareness Month. We honor those bravely suffering from EDS and encourage scientific research and funding to find a cure.

The question being on the adoption of the resolution,

The resolution was adopted.

Senators Chang, Santana and Theis were named co-sponsors of the resolution.

Senators Johnson and Bumstead asked and were granted unanimous consent to make statements and moved that the statements be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Johnson’s statement, in which Senator Bumstead concurred, is as follows:

I rise to support my resolution to raise awareness about Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, which affects many residents of our state. Ehlers-Danlos is an inherited condition that affects the connective tissue of the body, and it can significantly impact the lives of those affected. There are 13 different kinds of Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, caused by a genetic defect in collagen, one of the major structural components of the body. Symptoms of Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome may include joint hypermobility, loose unstable joints that dislocate easily, joint pain, skin bruising easily, digestive problems, hypotension, dizziness, increased heart rate when standing up, and problems with internal organs, among others.

Eighty percent of the people with EDS also have a condition known as POTS, which is when someone’s heart races or increases very quickly after getting up from sitting or lying down, causing symptoms such as dizziness or light headedness, fainting or almost fainting, heart palpitations, chest pain, shortness of breath, and shaking and sweating. It’s estimated that the prevalence of all types of Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome combined affect 1 out of 5,000 people worldwide, with recent research indicating that Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome is likely very underdiagnosed. While there is currently no known cure, early and accurate diagnosis can provide the opportunity to create lifesaving medical plans that can improve patients’ quality of life.

Senator Bumstead’s statement, in which Senator Johnson concurred, is as follows:

This resolution will recognize May 2025 as Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Awareness Month in Michigan to honor those who are bravely battling this condition and to encourage scientific research and funding to find effective solutions for patients. In the gallery today, I have a special guest, Gabrielle Jones, who is a senior at North Muskegon High School. Gabrielle was diagnosed with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome with hypermobility and POTS in 2021, and she is a member of the Teen Council, which is a branch of the Ehlers-Danlos Society, a nonprofit dedicated to education advocacy. I ask for my colleagues to support this important resolution, and for them to help welcome my special guest, Gabrielle Jones, who is seated in the west Gallery.

Senator Shink asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Shink’s statement is as follows:

Senate colleagues, please take a moment with me to thank Matthew Castilho for his service in my office. He has interned in my office since November of 2023 and has made a positive impact in the lives of my constituents and that of my staff. He is completing his degrees in political science and international studies at the University of Michigan and plans to go on to law school, which I heartily support.

Matthew has been a constant in our office, supporting us with just about any task you can think of: constituent conversations, community outreach, planning events, scheduling, and always remembering to ask, What else can I do to help? He’s been invaluable to our work. We will miss Matthew and we wish him well as he continues on to his next step. Thank you, Matthew.

Recess

Senator Singh moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.

The motion prevailed, the time being 11:01 a.m.

11:11 a.m.

The Senate was called to order by the President pro tempore, Senator Moss.

By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of

Third Reading of Bills

Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 166

The motion prevailed.

The following bill was read a third time:

Senate Bill No. 166, entitled

A bill to amend 1979 PA 94, entitled “The state school aid act of 1979,” by amending sections 6, 11, 11a, 11j, 11k, 11m, 11s, 11x, 11z, 12d, 15, 20, 20d, 21f, 21h, 22a, 22b, 22c, 22d, 22k, 22l, 22m, 22p, 24, 24a, 25f, 25g, 26a, 26b, 26c, 26d, 27a, 27c, 27g, 27k, 27p, 27r, 28, 29, 30d, 31a, 31d, 31f, 31j, 31n, 31aa, 32d, 32n, 32p, 32t, 33, 35a, 35d, 35m, 39, 39a, 41, 41b, 51a, 51c, 51d, 51e, 51g, 53a, 54, 54b, 54d, 55, 56, 61a, 61b, 61d, 61j, 62, 65, 67, 67a, 67d, 67f, 74, 81, 94, 94a, 94d, 97a, 97g, 97k, 98, 98d, 99, 99c, 99h, 99i, 99s, 99x, 99aa, 99ee, 99ff, 99hh, 99ii, 99jj, 101, 104, 104b, 104h, 107, 111, 147, 147a, 147c, 147e, 147g, 152a, and 161a (MCL 388.1606, 388.1611, 388.1611a, 388.1611j, 388.1611k, 388.1611m, 388.1611s, 388.1611x, 388.1611z, 388.1612d, 388.1615, 388.1620, 388.1620d, 388.1621f, 388.1621h, 388.1622a, 388.1622b, 388.1622c, 388.1622d, 388.1622k, 388.1622l, 388.1622m, 388.1622p, 388.1624, 388.1624a, 388.1625f, 388.1625g, 388.1626a, 388.1626b, 388.1626c, 388.1626d, 388.1627a, 388.1627c, 388.1627g, 388.1627k, 388.1627p, 388.1627r, 388.1628, 388.1629, 388.1630d, 388.1631a, 388.1631d, 388.1631f, 388.1631j, 388.1631n, 388.1631aa, 388.1632d, 388.1632n, 388.1632p, 388.1632t, 388.1633, 388.1635a, 388.1635d, 388.1635m, 388.1639, 388.1639a, 388.1641, 388.1641b, 388.1651a, 388.1651c, 388.1651d, 388.1651e, 388.1651g, 388.1653a, 388.1654, 388.1654b, 388.1654d, 388.1655, 388.1656, 388.1661a, 388.1661b, 388.1661d, 388.1661j, 388.1662, 388.1665, 388.1667, 388.1667a, 388.1667d, 388.1667f, 388.1674, 388.1681, 388.1694, 388.1694a, 388.1694d, 388.1697a, 388.1697g, 388.1697k, 388.1698, 388.1698d, 388.1699, 388.1699c, 388.1699h, 388.1699i, 388.1699s, 388.1699x, 388.1699aa, 388.1699ee, 388.1699ff, 388.1699hh, 388.1699ii, 388.1699jj, 388.1701, 388.1704, 388.1704b, 388.1704h, 388.1707, 388.1711, 388.1747, 388.1747a, 388.1747c, 388.1747e, 388.1747g, 388.1752a, and 388.1761a), sections 6, 97g, and 99ii as amended by 2023 PA 320, sections 11 and 31aa as amended by 2024 PA 148, sections 11a, 11j, 11k, 11m, 11s, 11z, 15, 20, 20d, 21h, 22a, 22b, 22c, 22d, 22l, 22m, 22p, 24, 24a, 25f, 25g, 26a, 26b, 26c, 26d, 27a, 27c, 27g, 27k, 27p, 28, 29, 30d, 31a, 31d, 31f, 31j, 31n, 32d, 32n, 32p, 33, 35a, 35d, 39, 39a, 41, 41b, 51a, 51c, 51d, 51e, 51g, 53a, 54, 54b, 54d, 56, 61a, 61b, 61d, 61j, 62, 65, 67, 67f, 74, 81, 94, 94a, 97a, 97k, 98, 98d, 99h, 99s, 99x, 99aa, 99ee, 99ff, 99hh, 99jj, 104, 104h, 107, 147, 147a, 147c, 147e, and 152a as amended and sections 12d, 27r, 35m, 55, 67a, 67d, 94d, 99, 99c, 99i, and 147g as added by 2024 PA 120, sections 11x, 21f, 32t, and 101 as amended and section 22k as added by 2023 PA 103, section 104b as amended by 2018 PA 265, section 111 as amended by 1997 PA 93, and section 161a as amended by 2006 PA 342, and by adding sections 12e, 12f, 18d, 31c, 32y, 35e, 35f, 61v, 97n, 99o, 99p, 99q, and 99mm; and to repeal acts and parts of acts.

The question being on the passage of the bill,

Senator Damoose offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 173, line 24, after “under” by striking out “subsections” and inserting “subsection”.

2. Amend page 173, line 24, after “(4)” by striking out “and (8)(c)”.

3. Amend page 176, line 13, after “(c)” by striking out “Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5), ensure” and inserting “Ensure”.

4. Amend page 178, line 20, after “personnel,” by striking out “as determined by the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential,” and inserting “as described in subsection (8)(c),”.

5. Amend page 194, following line 19, by inserting:

“(33) If the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential learns from district officials or intermediate district officials that the requirements for credentialing in subsection (8)(c) are barring districts or intermediate districts from placing a sufficient number of individuals in teacher or paraprofessional positions under this section, by not later than January 1, 2026, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall report this information to the governor and the house and senate fiscal agencies as well as to the house and senate subcommittees on school aid. It is the intent of the legislature that if an insufficient number of individuals credentialed under subsection (8)(c) apply for positions as teachers or paraprofessionals under this section for the 2025-2026 school year due to the requirements of subsection (8)(c), the legislature will move toward limiting programs under this section to the number for which sufficient numbers of staff who meet the requirements in subsection (8)(c) can be engaged while prioritizing applicants based on the income status of the families of the applicants. Income status must be determined using the formula in subsection (17).”.

The question being on the adoption of the amendments,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 124 Yeas—16

Albert Damoose Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hauck Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Hoitenga McBroom Victory

Daley Huizenga Nesbitt Webber

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—1

Johnson

In The Chair: Moss

Senator Lindsey offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 182, line 18, after “allocation.” by striking out “Beginning in 2025-2026, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall provide guidance to intermediate districts and consortia of intermediate districts on counting children served by Head Start programming for the purposes of this 30% allocation. For 2024-2025, an” and inserting “An”.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 64, line 25, by striking out all of subsection (14) and renumbering the remaining subsection.

2. Amend page 352, line 18, after “subsections” by striking out “(11) and (12)” and inserting “(10) and (11)”.

3. Amend page 356, line 23, by striking out all of subdivisions (c) and (d) and relettering the remaining subdivision.

4. Amend page 360, line 3, after “subsections” by striking out “(11) and (12),” and inserting “(10) and (11),”.

5. Amend page 361, line 10, by striking out all of subsection (10) and renumbering the remaining subsections.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Damoose offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 125, line 17, after “2025-2026” by inserting a comma and “and from the general fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated an amount not to exceed $1,600,000.00 for 2025-2026” and adjusting the totals in section 11 and enacting section 1 accordingly.

2. Amend page 128, line 2, after “district,” by inserting “nonpublic school,”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 162, line 4, after “2025-2026” by inserting a comma and “and from the general fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated $28,000,000.00 for 2025-2026,” and adjusting the totals in section 11 and enacting section 1 accordingly.

2. Amend page 162, line 5, after “districts,” by inserting “nonpublic schools,”.

3. Amend page 162, line 13, after “money” by inserting “and general fund money”.

4. Amend page 164, line 21, after the second “district,” by inserting “nonpublic school,”.

5. Amend page 164, line 23, by inserting “nonpublic school,”.

6. Amend page 164, line 27, after the second “district,” by inserting “nonpublic school,”.

7. Amend page 165, line 1, after the second “district,” by inserting “nonpublic school,”.

8. Amend page 165, line 7, after “district,” by inserting “nonpublic school,”.

9. Amend page 165, line 22, after “funding.” by inserting “By December 31 of each fiscal year, from the general fund money allocated in subsection (1), the department shall make payments to nonpublic schools that opt in and agree to receive funding in an equal amount per pupil based on the total number of pupils in membership in each nonpublic school that opts in and agrees to receive funding, using pupil counts determined by the department. The department shall ensure that the amount per pupil paid to nonpublic schools does not exceed the amount per pupil paid to districts and intermediate districts.”.

10. Amend page 166, line 2, after “districts,” by striking “and”.

11. Amend page 166, line 3, after “Blind” by inserting a comma and “and nonpublic schools”.

12. Amend page 328, line 8, after the second “districts” by inserting a comma and “and from the general fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated $600,000.00 for 2024-2025 2025-2026 for competitive grants to nonpublic schools,”.

13. Amend page 328, line 28, after “districts” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic schools,”.

14. Amend page 329, line 21, after the first “districts” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic schools,”.

15. Amend page 330, line 23, after the first “district” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic school,”.

16. Amend page 330, line 26, after “district” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic school,”.

17. Amend page 330, line 27, after the second “district” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic school,”.

18. Amend page 331, line 7, after “districts” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic schools,”.

19. Amend page 331, line 10, after “districts” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic schools,”.

20. Amend page 331, line 14, after “districts” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic schools,”.

21. Amend page 331, following line 17, by inserting:

“(6) A nonpublic school that receives a grant under this section may use the funds for either robotics or Science Olympiad programs.

(7) To be eligible to receive funds under this section, a nonpublic school must be a nonpublic school registered with the department and must meet all applicable state reporting requirements for nonpublic schools.” and renumbering the remaining subsections.

22. Amend page 331, line 26, after the first “district” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic school,”.

23. Amend page 331 line 28, after “district” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic school,”.

24. Amend page 401, following line 21, by inserting:

“Sec. 152b. (1) From the general fund money appropriated under section 11, there is allocated an amount not to exceed $1,000,000.00 for 2024-2025 2025-2026 to reimburse actual costs incurred by nonpublic schools in complying with a health, safety, or welfare requirement mandated by a law or administrative rule of this state.

(2) By January 1 of each applicable fiscal year, the department shall publish a form for reporting actual costs incurred by a nonpublic school in complying with a health, safety, or welfare requirement mandated under state law containing each health, safety, or welfare requirement mandated by a law or administrative rule of this state applicable to a nonpublic school and with a reference to each relevant provision of law or administrative rule for the requirement. The form must be posted on the department’s website in electronic form.

(3) By June 30 of each applicable fiscal year, a nonpublic school seeking reimbursement for actual costs incurred in complying with a health, safety, or welfare requirement under a law or administrative rule of this state during each applicable school year must submit a completed form described in subsection (2) to the department. This section does not require a nonpublic school to submit a form described in subsection (2). A nonpublic school is not eligible for reimbursement under this section if the nonpublic school does not submit the form described in subsection (2) in a timely manner.

(4) By August 15 of each applicable fiscal year, the department shall distribute funds to each nonpublic school that submits a completed form described under subsection (2) in a timely manner. The superintendent shall determine the amount of funds to be paid to each nonpublic school in an amount that does not exceed the nonpublic school’s actual costs in complying with a health, safety, or welfare requirement under a law or administrative rule of this state. The superintendent shall calculate a nonpublic school’s actual cost in accordance with this section.

(5) If the funds allocated under this section are insufficient to fully fund payments as otherwise calculated under this section, the department shall distribute funds under this section on a prorated or other equitable basis as determined by the superintendent.

(6) The department may review the records of a nonpublic school submitting a form described in subsection (2) only for the limited purpose of verifying the nonpublic school’s compliance with this section. If a nonpublic school does not allow the department to review records under this subsection, the nonpublic school is not eligible for reimbursement under this section.

(7) The funds appropriated under this section are for purposes that are incidental to teaching and the provision of educational services to nonpublic school students; that are noninstructional in nature; that do not constitute a primary function or element necessary for a nonpublic school’s existence, operation, and survival; that do not involve or result in excessive religious entanglement; and that are intended for the public purpose of ensuring the health, safety, and welfare of the children in nonpublic schools and to reimburse nonpublic schools for costs described in this section.

(8) Funds allocated under this section are not intended to aid or maintain any nonpublic school, support the attendance of any student at a nonpublic school, employ any person at a nonpublic school, support the attendance of any student at any location where instruction is offered to a nonpublic school student, or support the employment of any person at any location where instruction is offered to a nonpublic school student.

(9) For purposes of this section, “actual cost” means the hourly wage for the employee or employees performing a task or tasks required to comply with a health, safety, or welfare requirement under a law or administrative rule of this state identified by the department under subsection (2) and is to be calculated in accordance with the form published by the department under subsection (2), which must include a detailed itemization of costs. The nonpublic school shall not charge more than the hourly wage of its lowest-paid employee capable of performing a specific task regardless of whether that individual is available and regardless of who actually performs a specific task. Labor costs under this subsection must be estimated and charged in increments of 15 minutes or more, with all partial time increments rounded down. When calculating costs under subsection (4), fee components must be itemized in a manner that expresses both the hourly wage and the number of hours charged. The nonpublic school may not charge any applicable labor charge amount to cover or partially cover the cost of health or fringe benefits. A nonpublic school shall not charge any overtime wages in the calculation of labor costs.

(10) Training fees, inspection fees, and criminal background check fees are considered actual costs in complying with a health, safety, or welfare requirement under a law or administrative rule of this state.

(11) The funds allocated under this section for 2024-2025 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2024-2025 are carried forward into 2025-2026. The purpose of the work project is to continue to reimburse nonpublic schools for actual costs incurred in complying with a health, safety, or welfare requirement mandated by a law or administrative rule of this state. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2026.

(12) The funds allocated under this section for 2025-2026 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2025-2026 are carried forward into 2026-2027. The purpose of the work project is to continue to reimburse nonpublic schools for actual costs incurred in complying with a health, safety, or welfare requirement mandated by a law or administrative rule of this state. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2027.

(13) (12) The department shall reimburse nonpublic schools for actual costs incurred in complying with health, safety, or welfare requirements under a law or administrative rule of this state from 2017-2018 through 2022-2023 using work project funds or, if those funds are insufficient to fund reimbursements under this subsection, from the allocation under subsection (1).”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 103, line 20, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential.” and inserting “treasury.”.

2. Amend page 104, line 15, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential.” and inserting “treasury.”.

3. Amend page 105, line 7, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential;” and inserting “treasury;”.

4. Amend page 105, line 10, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential.” and inserting “treasury.”.

5. Amend page 105, line 14, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential.” and inserting “treasury.”.

6. Amend page 105, line 21, after “school” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic school,”.

7. Amend page 105, line 25, after “school” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic school,”.

8. Amend page 105, line 29, after “school” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic school,”.

9. Amend page 106, line 4, after “school” by inserting a comma and “nonpublic school,”.

10. Amend page 106, line 18, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential.” and inserting “treasury.”.

11. Amend page 106, line 22, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential” and inserting “treasury”.

12. Amend page 107, line 7, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential” and inserting “treasury”.

13. Amend page 107, line 9, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential.” and inserting “treasury.”.

14. Amend page 107, line 11, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential” and inserting “treasury”.

15. Amend page 108, line 3, after “the” by striking out “educator fellowship public provider” and inserting “general”.

16. Amend page 108, line 5, by striking out “$20,000,000.00” and inserting “$2,500,000.00”.

17. Amend page 108, line 9, after “a” by striking out “district.” and inserting “public school or nonpublic school.”.

18. Amend page 108, line 10, after “year,” by striking out “state school aid fund money allocated” and inserting “funds”.

19. Amend page 108, line 11, by striking out “is” and inserting “are”.

20. Amend page 108, line 11, after “deposited” by inserting “as follows:

(a) For state school aid fund money,”.

21. Amend page 108, following line 12, by inserting:

“(b) For general fund money, into the educator fellowship private provider fund in section 27e.”.

22. Amend page 108, line 22, after “a” by striking out “district” and inserting “public school or nonpublic school”.

23. Amend page 108, line 28, after “of” by striking out “education, advancement, and potential.” and inserting “treasury.”.

24. Amend page 109, line 1, by striking out “district” and inserting “public school or nonpublic school”.

25. Amend page 109, line 4, after “teacher.” by striking out the balance of the line through “program” on line 11.

26. Amend page 109, line 17, after “their” by striking out “district” and inserting “public school or nonpublic school”.

27. Amend page 109, line 23, after “of” by striking out “education, advancement, and potential” and inserting “treasury”.

28. Amend page 109, line 26 after “a” by striking out the balance of the line through “program.” on line 4 of page 110 and inserting “public school or nonpublic school.”.

29. Amend page 110, line 15, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential” and inserting “treasury”.

30. Amend page 110, line 17, after “of” by striking out “lifelong education, advancement, and potential.” and inserting “treasury.”.

31. Amend page 110, line 21, after “27d” by inserting “or the educator fellowship private provider fund in section 27e, as applicable,”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 169, line 13, by striking out all of section 32d and inserting:

“Sec. 32d. (1) From the state school aid fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated to eligible intermediate districts and consortia of intermediate districts for great start readiness programs an amount not to exceed $609,720,000.00 $603,000,000.00 for 2024-2025. It is the intent of the legislature that this section will support universal great start readiness programs in a future fiscal year. 2025-2026. An intermediate district or consortium shall use funds allocated under this section for great start readiness programs to provide part-day programs, school-day programs, GSRP extended programs, GSRP/Head Start school-day blended programs, or GSRP/Head Start extended blended programs that are comprehensive, free, compensatory classroom programs designed to improve the readiness and subsequent achievement of children who meet the participant eligibility and prioritization guidelines as defined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential. For a child to be eligible to participate in a program under this section, the child must be at least 4, but less than 5, years of age as of September 1 of the school year in which the program is offered and must meet those eligibility and prioritization guidelines. After eligible children who will be 4 years of age as of September 1 are enrolled, a child who is not 4 years of age as of September 1, but who will be 4 years of age by not later than December 1, is eligible to participate if both of the following are met:

(a) The child’s parent or legal guardian seeks a waiver from the September 1 eligibility date by submitting a request for enrollment in a program to the responsible intermediate district.

(b) The child meets eligibility and prioritization guidelines.

(2) From the state school aid fund money allocated under subsection (1), an amount not to exceed $607,720,000.00 $601,000,000.00 for 2024-2025 2025-2026 is allocated to intermediate districts or consortia of intermediate districts based on the formula in section 39. An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving funding under this section shall act as the fiduciary for the great start readiness programs. An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving funding under this section may collaborate with local governments to identify children eligible for programs funded under this section and may contract with local governments to provide services. To be eligible to receive funds allocated under this subsection from an intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts, a district, a consortium of districts, a local government, or a public or private for-profit or nonprofit legal entity or agency must comply with this section and section 39. If, due to the number of GSRP extended program or GSRP/Head Start extended blended program slots awarded, the amount allocated in this subsection is insufficient to award at least the same number of part-day program and school-day program slots as awarded in the immediately preceding fiscal year, there is appropriated from the great start readiness program reserve fund the amount necessary to fully award the same number of part-day program and full-day program slots as awarded in the immediately preceding fiscal year.

(3) In addition to the allocation under subsection (1), from the general fund money appropriated under section 11, there is allocated an amount not to exceed $600,000.00 $350,000.00 for 2024-2025 2025-2026 for a competitive grant to continue a longitudinal evaluation of children who have participated in great start readiness programs. It is the intent of the legislature that the allocation under this subsection will be $350,000.00 for 2025-2026.

(4) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5), to be eligible for funding under this section, a program must prepare children for success in school through comprehensive part-day programs, school-day programs, GSRP extended programs, GSRP/Head Start school-day blended programs, or GSRP/Head Start extended blended programs that contain all of the following program components, as determined by the department: of lifelong education, advancement, and potential:

(a) Participation in a collaborative recruitment and enrollment process to ensure that each child is enrolled in the program most appropriate to the child’s needs and to maximize the use of federal, state, and local funds.

(b) An age-appropriate educational curriculum that is in compliance with the early childhood standards of quality for prekindergarten children adopted by the state board, including, at least, the Connect4Learning curriculum.

(c) Nutritional services for all program participants supported by federal, state, and local resources as applicable.

(d) Physical and dental health and developmental screening services for all program participants.

(e) Referral services for families of program participants to community social service agencies, including mental health services, as appropriate.

(f) Active and continuous involvement of the parents or guardians of the program participants.

(g) A plan to conduct and report annual great start readiness program evaluations and continuous improvement plans using criteria approved by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(h) Participation in a school readiness advisory committee convened as a workgroup of the great start collaborative that provides for the involvement of classroom teachers, parents or guardians of program participants, and community, volunteer, and social service agencies and organizations, as appropriate. The advisory committee shall annually review and make recommendations regarding the program components listed in this subsection. The advisory committee also shall make recommendations to the great start collaborative regarding other community services designed to improve all children’s school readiness.

(i) The ongoing articulation of the kindergarten and first grade programs offered by the program provider.

(j) Participation in this state’s great start to quality process with a rating of at least enhancing quality level.

(5) To help expand access to great start readiness programs, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential may waive the requirements under subsection (4) and a program may be eligible for funding under this section for new or expanding programs if the program demonstrates to the satisfaction of the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential that the program meets all of the following:

(a) Is a licensed child care center or is a licensed program.

(b) Provides the minimum instructional time as required by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(c) Participates in this state’s quality rating improvement system at a level determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(d) Implements a professional educator preparation plan, as defined by the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, for educators not meeting teacher credentialing standards described in subsection (8).

(e) Uses a developmentally appropriate curriculum, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(f) Conducts a developmental screening and referral process, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(g) Commits to participating in program financial review and monitoring, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(h) Provides a plan to implement an approved great start readiness program curriculum and meet additional great start readiness program standards, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(6) A waiver under subsection (5) may be granted for up to 3 years for requirements related to program credentialing and may be granted for up to 2 years for all other requirements, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(7) The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall provide a report to the house and senate appropriations subcommittees on school aid, the state budget director, and the house and senate fiscal agencies that summarizes the number and types of exemptions granted under subsection (5) and progress made by programs granted waivers under subsection (5) by September 30 of each fiscal year. It is the intent of the legislature to review the waiver allowability under subsection (5) before the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027.

(8) An application for funding under this section must provide for the following, in a form and manner determined by the department: of lifelong education, advancement, and potential:

(a) Ensure either of the following:

(i) That the applicant complies with all program components described in subsection (4).

(ii) That the applicant meets the requirements of a waiver under subsection (5).

(b) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, ensure that children participating in an eligible great start readiness program for whom the intermediate district is receiving funds under this section are children who live with families with a household income that is equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines. If the intermediate district determines that all eligible children are being served and that there are no children on the waiting list who live with families with a household income that is equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines, the intermediate district may then enroll children who live with families with a household income that is greater than 400% equal to or less than 300% of the federal poverty guidelines. The enrollment process must consider income and risk factors, such that children determined with higher need are enrolled before children with lesser need. For purposes of this subdivision, all age-eligible children served in foster care or who are experiencing homelessness or who have individualized education programs recommending placement in an inclusive preschool setting are considered to live with families with household income equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines regardless of actual family income and are prioritized for enrollment within the lowest quintile. The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall publish the household income thresholds under this subdivision in a clear manner on its website and the great start to quality website.

(c) Ensure that the applicant only uses qualified personnel for this program, as follows:

(i) Teachers possessing proper training. A lead teacher must have a valid Michigan teaching certificate with an early childhood or lower elementary endorsement or a bachelor’s or higher degree in child development or early childhood education with specialization in preschool teaching. However, except as otherwise provided in this subparagraph, if an applicant demonstrates to the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential that it is unable to fully comply with this subparagraph after making reasonable efforts to comply, teachers or paraprofessionals with at least 5 years of experience as a paraprofessional in a great start readiness program, Head Start, or licensed child care center classroom who have significant but incomplete training in early childhood education or child development may be used if the applicant provides to the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, and the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential approves, a plan for each teacher to come into compliance with the standards in this subparagraph. Individuals may qualify with at least 3 years of experience and significant training in early childhood education or child development, based on the recommendation of the intermediate district after a classroom observation. A teacher’s compliance plan must be completed within 3 years of the date of employment. Progress toward completion of the compliance plan consists of at least 2 courses per calendar year.

(ii) Paraprofessionals possessing proper training in early childhood education, including an associate degree in early childhood education or child development or the equivalent, or a child development associate (CDA) credential. However, if an applicant demonstrates to the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential that it is unable to fully comply with this subparagraph after making reasonable efforts to comply, the applicant may use paraprofessionals who have completed at least 1 course that earns college credit in early childhood education or child development or enroll in a child development associate credential with at least 6 months of verified experience in early education and care, if the applicant provides to the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, and the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential approves, a plan for each paraprofessional to come into compliance with the standards in this subparagraph. A paraprofessional’s compliance plan must be completed within 3 years of the date of employment. Progress toward completion of the compliance plan consists of at least 2 courses, 60 clock hours, or an equivalent of training per calendar year.

(d) Include a program budget that contains only those costs that are not reimbursed or reimbursable by federal funding, that are clearly and directly attributable to the great start readiness program, and that would not be incurred if the program were not being offered. Eligible costs include transportation costs. The program budget must indicate the extent to which these funds will supplement other federal, state, local, or private funds. An applicant shall not use funds received under this section to supplant any federal funds received by the applicant to serve children eligible for a federally funded preschool program that has the capacity to serve those children.

(9) For a grant recipient that enrolls pupils in a school-day program or GSRP extended program funded under this section, each child enrolled in the school-day program or GSRP extended program is counted as described in section 39 for purposes of determining the amount of the grant award.

(10) For a grant recipient that enrolls pupils in a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program or GSRP/Head Start extended blended program, the grant recipient shall ensure that all Head Start and GSRP policies and regulations are applied to the blended slots, with adherence to the highest standard from either program, to the extent allowable under federal law. A grant recipient may request a waiver from the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential to align GSRP policies and regulations with Head Start national standards for quality, including ratios, and the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential may approve the waiver. Not later than March 1 of each year, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential will report to the legislature and post on a publicly available website a list by intermediate district or consortium with the number and type of each waiver requested and approved.

(11) To help expand access to great start readiness programs, the department may allow great start readiness programs to implement Head Start national performance standards for quality as an alternative to great start readiness program policies and regulations if the great start readiness program demonstrates to the satisfaction of the department that the great start readiness program is meeting the requirements of the Head Start national performance standards.

(12) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving a grant under this section shall designate an early childhood coordinator, and may provide services directly or may contract with 1 or more districts or public or private for-profit or nonprofit providers that meet all requirements of subsections (4) and (8).

(13) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts may retain for administrative services provided by the intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts an amount not to exceed 4% of the grant amount. Expenses incurred by subrecipients engaged by the intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts for directly running portions of the program are considered program costs or a contracted program fee for service. Subrecipients operating with a federally approved indirect rate for other early childhood programs may include indirect costs, not to exceed the federal 10% de minimis.

(14) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts may expend not more than 2% of the total grant amount for outreach, recruiting, and public awareness of the program, if the intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts also participates in related statewide marketing and outreach efforts.

(15) Each grant recipient shall enroll children identified under subsection (8)(b) according to how far the child’s household income is below 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines by ranking each applicant child’s household income from lowest to highest and dividing the applicant children into quintiles based on how far the child’s household income is below 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines, and then enrolling children in the quintile with the lowest household income before enrolling children in the quintile with the next lowest household income until slots are completely filled. If the grant recipient determines that all eligible children are being served and that there are no children on the waiting list who live with families with a household income that is equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines, the grant recipient may then enroll children who live with families with a household income that is greater than 400% equal to or less than 300% of the federal poverty guidelines. The enrollment process must consider income and risk factors, such that children determined with higher need are enrolled before children with lesser need. For purposes of this subsection, all age-eligible children served in foster care or who are experiencing homelessness or who have individualized education programs recommending placement in an inclusive preschool setting are considered to live with families with household income equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines regardless of actual family income and are prioritized for enrollment within the lowest quintile.

(16) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving a grant under this section shall allow parents of eligible children who are residents of the intermediate district or within the consortium to choose a program operated by or contracted with another intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts and shall enter into a written agreement regarding payment, in a manner prescribed by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(17) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving a grant under this section shall conduct a local process to contract with interested and eligible public and private for-profit and nonprofit community-based providers that meet all requirements of subsection (4) for at least 30% of its total allocation. For the purposes of this 30% allocation, an intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts may count children served by a Head Start grantee or delegate in a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program, GSRP/Head Start extended blended program, GSRP extended program, and great start readiness school-day program. Children served in a program funded only through Head Start are not counted toward this 30% allocation. An intermediate district or consortium shall report to the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, in a manner prescribed by the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, a detailed list of community-based providers by provider type, including private for-profit, private nonprofit, community college or university, Head Start grantee or delegate, and district or intermediate district, and the number and proportion of its total allocation allocated to each provider as subrecipient. If the intermediate district or consortium is not able to contract for at least 30% of its total allocation, the intermediate district or consortium shall notify the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential and, if the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential verifies that the intermediate district or consortium attempted to contract for at least 30% of its total allocation and was not able to do so, the intermediate district or consortium may retain and use all of its allocation as provided under this section. To be able to use this exemption, the intermediate district or consortium shall demonstrate to the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential that the intermediate district or consortium increased the percentage of its total allocation for which it contracts with a community-based provider and the intermediate district or consortium shall submit evidence satisfactory to the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, and the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential must be able to verify this evidence, demonstrating that the intermediate district or consortium took measures to contract for at least 30% of its total allocation as required under this subsection, including, but not limited to, at least all of the following measures:

(a) The intermediate district or consortium notified each nonparticipating licensed child care center located in the service area of the intermediate district or consortium regarding the center’s eligibility to participate, in a manner prescribed by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(b) The intermediate district or consortium provided to each nonparticipating licensed child care center located in the service area of the intermediate district or consortium information regarding great start readiness program requirements and a description of the application and selection process for community-based providers.

(c) The intermediate district or consortium provided to the public and to participating families a list of community-based great start readiness program subrecipients with a great start to quality rating level of at least enhancing quality level.

(18) If an intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving a grant under this section fails to submit satisfactory evidence to demonstrate its effort to contract for at least 30% of its total allocation, as required under subsection (17), the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall reduce the allocation to the intermediate district or consortium by a percentage equal to the difference between the percentage of an intermediate district’s or consortium’s total allocation awarded to community-based providers and 30% of its total allocation.

(19) To assist intermediate districts and consortia in complying with the requirement to contract with community-based providers, for at least 30% of their total allocation, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall do all of the following:

(a) Ensure that a great start resource center or the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential provides each intermediate district or consortium receiving a grant under this section with the contact information for each licensed child care center located in the service area of the intermediate district or consortium by March 1 of each year.

(b) Provide, or ensure that an organization with which the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential contracts provides, a community-based provider with a validated great start to quality rating within 90 days of the provider’s having submitted a request and self-assessment.

(c) Ensure that all intermediate district, district, community college or university, Head Start grantee or delegate, private for-profit, and private nonprofit providers are subject to a single great start to quality rating continuous quality improvement system. The rating continuous quality improvement system must ensure that regulators process all prospective providers at the same pace on a first-come, first-served basis and must not allow 1 type of provider to receive a great start to quality rating level ahead of any other type of provider.

(d) By not later than March 1 of each year, compile the results of the information reported by each intermediate district or consortium under subsection (17) and report to the legislature and post on a publicly available website a list by intermediate district or consortium with the number and percentage of each intermediate district’s or consortium’s total allocation allocated to community-based providers by provider type, including private for-profit, private nonprofit, community college or university, Head Start grantee or delegate, and district or intermediate district.

(e) Allow intermediate districts and consortia and eligible community-based providers to utilize materials and supplies purchased for great start readiness programs within their facilities for other early care and education activities, in the following order of priority:

(i) Early care and education activities under a federal award.

(ii) Early care and education activities under other state awards.

(iii) Early care and education activities under local or regional awards.

(20) A recipient of funds under this section shall report to the center in a form and manner prescribed by the center the information necessary to derive the number of children participating in the program who meet the program eligibility criteria under subsection (8)(b), the number of eligible children not participating in the program and on a waitlist, and the total number of children participating in the program by various demographic groups and eligibility factors necessary to analyze equitable and priority access to services for the purposes of subsection (3).

(21) As used in this section:

(a) “Child care center” means that term as defined in section 1 of 1973 PA 116, MCL 722.111.

(b) (a) “Federal poverty guidelines” means the guidelines published annually in the Federal Register by the United States Department of Health and Human Services under its authority to revise the poverty line under 42 USC 9902.

(c) (b) “GSRP extended program” means a program that operates for at least the same length of day as a district’s first grade program for a minimum of 5 days per week, 36 weeks per year.

(d) (c) “GSRP/Head Start extended blended program” means a program funded under this section and a Head Start program that are combined for an extended program.

(e) (d) “GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program” means a part-day program funded under this section and a Head Start program, which are combined for a school-day program.

(f) “Licensed child care center” means a child care center that has been issued a license under 1973 PA 116, MCL 722.111 to 722.128, to operate a child care center.

(g) (e) “Part-day program” means a program that operates at least 4 days per week, 30 weeks per year, for at least 3 hours of teacher-child contact time per day but for fewer hours of teacher-child contact time per day than a school-day program.

(h) (f) “School-day program” means a program that operates for at least the same length of day as a district’s first grade program for a minimum of 4 days per week, 30 weeks per year. A classroom that offers a school-day program must enroll all children for the school day to be considered a school-day program.

(22) From the amount allocated in subsection (2), there is allocated for 2024-2025 2025-2026 an amount not to exceed $10,000,000.00 and, from the great start readiness program reserve state school aid fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated for 2024-2025 2025-2026 only an amount not to exceed $18,000,000.00 for reimbursement of transportation costs for children attending great start readiness programs funded under this section. To receive reimbursement under this subsection, by not later than November 1 of each year, a program funded under this section that provides transportation shall submit to the intermediate district that is the fiscal agent for the program a projected transportation budget. The amount of the reimbursement for transportation under this subsection is no more than the projected transportation budget or $500.00 multiplied by the number of children funded for the program under this section. If the amount allocated under this subsection is insufficient to fully reimburse the transportation costs for all programs that provide transportation and submit the required information, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall prorate the reimbursement in an equal amount per child funded. The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall make payments to the intermediate district that is the fiscal agent for each program, and the intermediate district shall then reimburse the program provider for transportation costs as prescribed under this subsection.

(23) Subject to, and from the funds allocated under, subsection (22), the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall reimburse a program for transportation costs related to parent- or guardian-accompanied transportation provided by transportation service companies, buses, or other public transportation services. To be eligible for reimbursement under this subsection, a program must submit to the intermediate district or consortia of intermediate districts all of the following:

(a) The names of families provided with transportation support along with a documented reason for the need for transportation support and the type of transportation provided.

(b) Financial documentation of actual transportation costs incurred by the program, including, but not limited to, receipts and mileage reports, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(c) Any other documentation or information determined necessary by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(24) The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall implement a process to review and approve age-appropriate comprehensive classroom level quality assessments for GSRP grantees that support the early childhood standards of quality for prekindergarten children adopted by the state board. The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall make available to intermediate districts at least 2 classroom level quality assessments that were approved in 2018.

(25) An intermediate district that is a GSRP grantee may approve the use of a supplemental curriculum that aligns with and enhances the age-appropriate educational curriculum in the classroom. If the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential objects to the use of a supplemental curriculum approved by an intermediate district, the director of the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential superintendent of public instruction shall establish a review committee independent of the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential. The review committee shall meet within 60 days of the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential registering its objection in writing and provide a final determination on the validity of the objection within 60 days of the review committee’s first meeting.

(26) The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall implement a process to evaluate and approve age-appropriate educational curricula that are in compliance with the early childhood standards of quality for prekindergarten children adopted by the state board.

(27) From the funds allocated under subsection (1), there is allocated for 2024-2025 2025-2026 an amount not to exceed $2,000,000.00 for payments to intermediate districts or consortia of intermediate districts for professional development and training materials for educators in programs implementing new curricula or child assessment tools approved for use in the great start readiness program.

(28) A great start readiness program, a GSRP extended program, a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program, or a GSRP/Head Start extended blended program funded under this section is permitted to utilize AmeriCorps Pre-K Reading Corps members in classrooms implementing research-based early literacy intervention strategies.

(29) In addition to the allocation under subsection (1), from the state school aid fund money appropriated under section 11, there is allocated an amount not to exceed $25,000,000.00 $30,000,000.00 for 2024-2025 2025-2026 only for classroom start up grants to intermediate districts and consortia of intermediate districts for new or expanding great start readiness classrooms. All of the following apply to funding allocated under this subsection:

(a) To receive funding under this subsection, intermediate districts and consortia of intermediate districts must apply for the funding in a form and manner prescribed by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(b) The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall pay an amount not to exceed $50,000.00 for each new or expanded classroom. If funding is insufficient to fully fund all eligible applicants, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential must prorate the per-classroom amount on an equal basis. If the allocation is not fully paid in the current fiscal year, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential may award any remaining funding during fiscal year 2025-2026 2026-2027 for each new or expanded classroom at an equal amount per classroom, based on remaining available funds, not to exceed $50,000.00 per classroom.

(c) Funds received under this subsection by intermediate districts and consortia of intermediate districts must be paid in full to the entity operating the classroom and may be used for 1 or more of the following purposes:

(i) Costs associated with attracting, recruiting, retaining, and licensing required classroom education personnel to staff new or expanded classrooms.

(ii) Supporting facility improvements or purchasing facility space necessary to provide a safe, high-quality learning environment for children in each new or expanded classroom.

(iii) Outreach material necessary for public awareness that the great start readiness program has openings in the area and for costs associated with enrolling eligible children in new or expanded classrooms.

(iv) Supporting costs in each new or expanded classroom associated with improving a provider’s great start to quality rating.level.

(d) The funds allocated under this subsection for 2022-2023 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2022-2023 do not lapse to the state school aid fund and are carried forward into 2023-2024. The purpose of the work project is to continue support for new or expanded great start readiness classrooms. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2024.The department shall establish a process to ensure that at least 50% of the funding distributed under this subsection for 2025-2026 is used to establish new programs by community-based organizations.

(e) The funds allocated under this subsection for 2024-2025 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2024-2025 do not lapse to the state school aid fund and are carried forward into 2025-2026. The purpose of the work project is to continue support for new or expanded great start readiness classrooms. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2026.

(f) The funds allocated under this subsection for 2025-2026 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2025-2026 do not lapse to the state school aid fund and are carried forward into 2026-2027. The purpose of the work project is to continue support for new or expanded great start readiness classrooms. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2027.

(g) Notwithstanding section 17b, the department shall make payments under this subsection on a schedule determined by the department.

(30) In addition to the funds allocated in subsection (1), there is allocated from the general fund money appropriated under section 11 for 2024-2025 only an amount not to exceed $1,950,000.00 for an intermediate district or a consortium of intermediate districts to partner with the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential and community-based organizations to continue implementing statewide outreach and enrollment campaign activities to raise awareness about the availability of services through the great start readiness program and to promote enrollment.

(31) The funds allocated under subsection (30) for 2024-2025 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2024-2025 are carried forward into 2025-2026. The purpose of the work project is to raise awareness of and participation in great start readiness programming. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2027.

(32) Notwithstanding section 17b, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall make payments under subsection (30) on a schedule determined by the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(33) As used in this section:

(a) “Child care center” means that term as defined in section 1 of 1973 PA 116, MCL 722.111.

(b) “Licensed child care center” means a child care center that has been issued a license under 1973 PA 116, MCL 722.111 to 722.128, to operate a child care center.” and adjusting the totals in section 11 and enacting section 1 accordingly.

2. Amend page 238, line 10, after “department” by inserting a comma and striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

3. Amend page 238, line 21, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

4. Amend page 238, line 24, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

5. Amend page 239, line 11, after “department” by inserting a comma and striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential,”.

6. Amend page 239, line 12, after “department” by inserting a comma and striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential,”.

7. Amend page 239, line 15, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

8. Amend page 239, following line 16, by striking out all of subsections (4), (5), and (6), and inserting:

“(4) The initial allocation to each eligible applicant under section 32d is the lesser of the following:

(a) The sum of the number of children served in a school-day program in the preceding school year multiplied by $10,185.00, $14,000.00, the number of children served in a GSRP extended program in the preceding school year multiplied by $12,222.00, $16,800.00, the number of children served in a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program or a part-day program in the preceding school year multiplied by $5,093.00, $7,000.00, and the number of children served in a GSRP/Head Start extended blended program in the preceding school year multiplied by $6,111.00.$8,400.00.

(b) The sum of the number of children the applicant has the capacity to serve in the current school year in a school-day program multiplied by $10,185.00, $14,000.00, the number of children served in a GSRP extended program the applicant has the capacity to serve in the current school year multiplied by $12,222.00, $16,800.00, the number of children served in a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program or a part-day program the applicant has the capacity to serve in the current school year multiplied by $5,093.00, $7,000.00, and the number of children served in a GSRP/Head Start extended blended program the applicant has the capacity to serve in the current school year multiplied by $6,111.00.$8,400.00.” and renumbering the remaining subsections.

9. Amend page 243, line 8, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

10. Amend page 243, line 10, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

11. Amend page, 243, following line 14, by inserting:

“(8) As used in this section, “GSRP/Head Start blended program”, “GSRP extended program”, “part-day program”, and “school-day program” mean those terms as defined in section 32d.”.

The question being on the adoption of the amendments,

Senator Albert withdrew the amendments.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 163, line 26, after “officers.” by striking out the balance of the subdivision.

2. Amend page 305, following line 9, by inserting:

“Sec. 97b. (1) From the state school aid fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated for 2025-2026 an amount not to exceed $50,000,000.00 to public schools, districts, and intermediate districts as prescribed in this section. It is the intent of the legislature that, for 2026-2027, the allocation from the state school aid fund money appropriated in section 11 for purposes described in this section will be $25,000,000.00.

(2) To receive funding under this section, a public school, district, or intermediate district must apply for the funding to the department of state police, grants and community services division, in a form and manner prescribed by the department of state police.

(3) The department of state police shall not award funding under subsection (1) to a public school, district, or intermediate district in relation to the same school building more than once in a single grant application period. If a district submits an application under subsection (2) relating to a school building and a public school within that district also submits an application for funding in relation to that same school building, the department of state police shall not allocate funding under subsection (1) twice for that school building. If a public school, district, or intermediate district submits more than 1 application, the department of state police shall first consider the most recent application submitted in considering funding under subsection (1).

(4) A public school, district, or intermediate district that receives funding under this section shall use the funding only to ensure that the public school, district, or intermediate district has at least 1 school resource officer employed by the school, district, or intermediate district that performs 1 or more of the following duties as part of the school resource officer’s service at the school, district, or intermediate district:

(a) Assists school administration in ensuring the physical safety of school buildings of the school, district, or intermediate district and the individuals inside the school buildings.

(b) Works with school administration to develop safety procedures for potential threats in school buildings of the school, district, or intermediate district.

(c) Welcomes, counsels, and mentors students.

(d) Educates students about law-related topics, as appropriate.

(e) De-escalates aggression that occurs between students or between students and school, district, or intermediate district staff.

(f) Mentors students as an advisor and role model.

(5) Funds allocated under this section may be used to hire new school resource officers or to increase the hours for current school resource officers. This funding may be used whether the school resource officers are hired from public employers or from private security companies.

(6) Funds allocated under this section for 2025-2026 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2025-2026 are carried forward into 2026-2027. The purpose of the work project is to continue providing funding to support public schools, districts, and intermediate districts in having school resource officers at schools, districts, or intermediate districts. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2030.

(7) Notwithstanding section 17b, the department shall make payments under this section on a schedule determined by the department.

(8) As used in this section, “public school” means that term as defined in section 5 of the revised school code, MCL 380.5.” and adjusting the totals in section 11 and enacting section 1 accordingly.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Theis offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 49, following line 25, by inserting:

“Sec. 18e. (1) The board of a school district or intermediate school district or board of directors of a public school academy that participates in interscholastic athletic activities shall designate interscholastic athletic teams and sports based on the sex of the participants, with separate teams for participants of the female sex within female sports divisions, separate teams for participants of the male sex within male sports divisions, and, if applicable, co-ed teams for participants of the female and male sexes within co-ed sports divisions. A school district or intermediate school district shall not knowingly allow individuals of the male sex to participate on athletic teams or in athletic competitions designated for only participants of the female sex. This subsection must not be construed to restrict the eligibility of any student to participate on any interscholastic athletic teams or in interscholastic athletic activities that are designated as male or co-ed.

(2) As used in this section:

(a) “Female” means an individual of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing eggs (ova).

(b) “Male” means an individual of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing sperm.

(c) “Sex” means an individual’s immutable biological classification as male or female.”.

2. Amend page 81, following line 12, by inserting:

“(h) Comply with section 18e.”.

The question being on the adoption of the amendments,

The Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Geiss, resumed the Chair.

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 125 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

The President pro tempore, Senator Moss, resumed the Chair.

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 53, line 14, after “school,” by striking out “80%” and inserting “100%”.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Protests

Senators Camilleri, Singh, Geiss, Polehanki, McCann, Bayer, Wojno, Cavanagh, Shink, McMorrow, Brinks, Moss, Anthony, Hertel, Klinefelt and Santana, under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against adoption of the amendment offered by Senator Albert to Senate Bill No. 166.

Senator Camilleri moved that the statement he made during the discussion of the amendment be printed as his reasons for voting “no.”

The motion prevailed.

Senator Camilleri’s statement, in which Senators Singh, Geiss, Polehanki, McCann, Bayer, Wojno, Cavanagh, Shink, McMorrow, Brinks, Moss, Anthony, Hertel, Klinefelt and Santana concurred, is as follows:

The Senator from the 18th District wants it both ways. On the one hand, he wants traditional public schools to not have any virtual days, because virtual learning is not acceptable for students in traditional public schools. We did lower it, because I think that there should be some flexibility in our budget recommendation to allow for some of those instances where virtual learning may be acceptable for traditional public school kids. But on the other hand, he wants any student who attends a cyber charter school to receive a full foundation allowance, because somehow cyber charter schools are acceptable forms of virtual learning. They just don’t make sense, right? You can’t have it both ways.

When we’re looking at cyber charter schools, they are literally fully online schools. I don’t believe that that is a good form of education. I believe that there should be some version of in-person instruction, because we know that when kids are in a classroom with a teacher, with a paraprofessional, and with other adults, they learn the best. Cyber charter schools do not have the same cost structure. Yes, that is very obvious. They not only don’t pay utilities; they don’t pay building costs, they don’t pay for transportation, they don’t offer lunch, they don’t offer athletics, they don’t offer after-school programs, and they don’t have lab equipment. The only thing they do offer is one-to-one technology, which our traditional public schools offer as well. And so when we’re looking at a fair cost structure for cyber charter schools, I believe that 80 percent is a fair amount of money that they can use to continue to operate their schools.

There are some students who, yes, benefit from a fully virtual program. I will always concede to that argument because I want individualized learning plans that fit best for those families and for those students, but that doesn’t mean that it costs the same amount of money to educate that kid in a virtual platform as it does for a kid at Belleville High School. Those are different costs, different structures, and different models. This is a fair way to address this problem, and I just want to be very clear if we’re going to be consistent. You can’t take away virtual options for traditional public schools for seven days, but think the entire 180 days of a school system should be okay for virtual learning for cyber charter schools. I ask for a “no” vote.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 87, following line 20, by inserting:

“Sec. 22e. (1) From the state school aid fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated for 2024-2025 2025-2026 only an amount not to exceed $57,000,000.00 for payments to public school academies in an amount per pupil equal to 3.9% of the public school academy’s foundation allowance under section 20 for 2024-2025. It is the intent of the legislature that payments under this section be used to support student mental health, school safety, educator workforce, and academic interventions.

(2) To be eligible for funding under this section, a public school academy must not be a participating entity of the Michigan public school employees’ retirement system under the public school employees retirement act of 1979, 1980 PA 300, MCL 38.1301 to 38.1437. As used in this subsection, “participating entity” means that term as defined in section 147c.”.

2. Amend page 402, line 24, after “20f,” by striking out “22e,”.

3. Amend page 402, line 26, after “388.1620f,” by striking out “388.1622e,”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 396, following line 21, by inserting:

“(2) In addition to the funds allocated under subsection (1), from the MPSERS retirement obligation reform reserve state school aid fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated for 2024-2025 only $250,000,000.00 2025-2026 an amount not to exceed $641,500,000.00 for payments to participating entities of the Michigan public school employees’ retirement system. The amount allocated to each participating entity under this subsection must be based on each participating entity’s proportion of the total covered payroll for the immediately preceding fiscal year. A participating entity that receives funds under this subsection shall use the funds solely for purposes of this subsection. Each participating entity receiving funds under this subsection shall forward an amount equal to the amount allocated under this subsection to the retirement system in a form, manner, and time frame determined by the retirement system. The retirement system shall recognize funds received under this subsection as additional assets being contributed to the system and shall not categorize them as unfunded actuarial liability contributions or normal cost contributions.” and renumbering the remaining subsection.

2. Amend page 399, line 22, by striking out all of section 147g.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Theis offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 296, following line 16, by inserting:

“(f) Ensure that all districts located within the intermediate district’s geographic boundaries have equitable access to the intermediate district’s coordination activities and services, intermediate district-wide or regional meetings, regularly scheduled superintendent meetings, programming, events, email distribution lists, listservs, or other coordination or collaboration activities organized by or hosted at the intermediate district. In ensuring that all districts located within the geographic boundaries of the intermediate district have equitable access to services, meetings, programming, events, email distribution lists, listservs, or activities as described in the immediately preceding sentence, the intermediate district shall ensure that districts that are public school academies that are located within the intermediate district’s geographic boundaries are not excluded from the services, meetings, programming, events, email distribution lists, listservs, or activities organized by or hosted at the intermediate district if districts that are not public school academies that are located within the geographic boundaries of the intermediate district are not excluded.”.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 145, line 16, after “districts.” by striking out the balance of the subsection.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 250, line 18, after “exceed” by striking out “$2,216,096,100.00” and inserting “$2,245,796,100.00” and adjusting the totals in section 11 and enacting section 1 accordingly.

2. Amend page 266, line 7, after “(a)” by striking out the balance of the subdivision and inserting ““Capped local special education property tax revenue” means the amount of revenue that would be received if an intermediate district levied the maximum millage rate permitted for that intermediate district under section 1724a of the revised school code, MCL 380.1724a, capped at the statewide average special education millage rate.”.

3. Amend page 266, line 13, after the second “levied” by inserting “in the immediately preceding fiscal year”.

4. Amend page 266, following line 15, by inserting:

“(c) “Special education head count” means, for a particular fiscal year, the total special education head count of an intermediate district and the districts constituent to the intermediate district from the fall pupil membership count day of the immediately preceding year, except that if a district has elected not to come under part 30 of the revised school code, MCL 380.1711 to 380.1741, special education head count of the district is not included in the special education head count of the intermediate district.

(d) “Statewide average special education millage rate” means the statewide levy amount divided by the statewide taxable value.

(e) “Statewide average taxable value per unreimbursed costs” means the statewide taxable value divided by the statewide unreimbursed costs.” and relettering the remaining subdivision.

5. Amend page 266, line 9, after “district,” by inserting “in the immediately preceding fiscal year,”.

6. Amend page 266, line 21, after “district.” by inserting “Taxable value also includes both of the following:

(i) The value of personal property exempt under the local community stabilization authority act, 2014 PA 86, MCL 123.1341 to 123.1362, and reimbursed to the intermediate district under section 17 of the local community stabilization authority act, 2024 PA 86, MCL 123.1357.

(ii) Tax increment property captured by a brownfield redevelopment authority under the brownfield redevelopment financing act, 1996 PA 381, MCL 125.2651 to 125.2670, and reimbursed to the intermediate district under section 15b of the brownfield redevelopment financing act, 1996 PA 381, MCL 125.2665b.

(g) “Unreimbursed costs” means the sum of costs reported on the SE-4094 and SE-4096 reports for all districts in the intermediate district, less the amount of reimbursement received under section 51c, and less the capped local special education property tax revenue.”.

7. Amend page 266, line 23, after “exceed” by striking out “$40,008,100.00 for 2024-2025 and $40,008,100.00” and inserting “$92,708,100.00”.

8. Amend page 267, following line 5, by striking out the balance of the section and inserting:

“(3) The department shall provide payments under subsection (2) to each intermediate district described in this subsection as follows:

(a) The department shall first calculate a reimbursement for those millages levied in the immediately preceding fiscal year at an amount per special education head count, by subtracting the intermediate district’s taxable value per special education head count from the statewide average taxable value per special education head count, and multiplying the resulting difference by the immediately preceding fiscal year millage rate levied, capped at the statewide average special education millage rate.

(b) The department shall then calculate a reimbursement for unreimbursed costs by subtracting the quotient of the intermediate district’s taxable value and the statewide average taxable value per unreimbursed costs from the intermediate district’s unreimbursed costs.

(c) The calculation under subdivision (a) must be greater than $0.00 for an intermediate district to receive reimbursement under this subsection. For those intermediate districts whose calculation under subdivision (a) is less than or equal to $0.00, the amount in subdivision (b) is $0.00 for purposes of the calculation in subdivision (d).

(d) The department shall then calculate the average of the amounts calculated under subdivisions (a) and (b) for each intermediate district. For the purpose of this calculation, calculations in subdivision (a) or (b) that result in negative totals are treated as $0.00.

(e) The amount reimbursed under subsection (2) is the 3-year average of the amount calculated under subdivision (d) for the 3 most recent fiscal years.

(4) If total payments calculated under subsection (3) exceed the amount allocated in subsection (2), the department must prorate the payments on an equal percentage basis.”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Protest

Senator Irwin, under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against adoption of the amendments offered by Senator Albert to Senate Bill No. 166 and moved that the statement he made during the discussion of the amendments be printed as his reasons for voting “no.”

The motion prevailed.

Senator Irwin’s statement is as follows:

I rise to oppose amendment No. 15. It’s interesting hearing this amendment come forward in this chamber after all my many years of service in Michigan’s Legislature, because during my time in Michigan’s Legislature, there have been a lot of conversations about redistribution of wealth. What we see here before us is another one: an effort to redistribute wealth, redistribute funding from some communities to other communities based on one member’s idea of equity—same member who often speaks against other members’ calls for equity. Now, this is within the context of a system where, by and large, my residents and residents in other more populated counties are subsidizing the roads, the healthcare, the schools, the electrification, and the broadband for rural areas. And here we have an amendment that will again punctuate that subsidization from certain communities to others.

Now, I think that’s an important conversation for us to have, because there are many ways in which our communities need to work together, and I think that these conversations about redistribution of wealth are not out of bounds. In fact, I’ve suggested that before in the past, but it’s particularly ironic to have my Republican colleagues suggesting this kind of socialism here today on the floor. But there’s another problem with it. The problem isn’t just that this seeks to socialize revenues and send them from one community to another, which may be appropriate in some circumstances, but also it fails to recognize that these millages are approved by local voters. Not only are you asking some communities to tax themselves more and then have that wealth redistributed from their community to other communities, but you’re asking them to continue to approve millages? As donor communities to communities that refuse to approve millages? I don’t know how you can expect that to continue. I don’t know how you can expect communities that are taxing themselves to support their local special ed operations to continue to vote “yes” on taxing themselves to support their local special ed operations when that money won’t even stay local anymore.

I think this is going to be, if this gets adopted in some future budget or in this budget, it’s going to be something that actually reduces the amount of special ed funding across the state, because there’s a lot of communities that aren’t going to want to continue sending money to other counties as a result of them being willing to step up to meet the special ed needs of their own communities.

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 49, following line 19, by inserting:

“Sec 16b. (1) For the 2025-2026 school year only, there is allocated an amount not to exceed $25,000,000.00 from the state school aid fund money appropriated in section 11 to address chronic absenteeism in buildings that have a chronic absenteeism rate of 20% or more. All of the following apply to money paid under this section:

(a) Districts shall apply for funding under this section in a form and manner determined by the department.

(b) Payments under this section must be made on an equal per-pupil basis.

(c) Buildings that receive funding under this section may use those dollars for any purpose permitted under section 22b, but must reserve a portion of funding to address the causes of chronic absenteeism. Funding may be used for purposes including, but not limited to, resources for students and their families, attendance administrative staff, and marketing campaigns.

(2) Notwithstanding section 17b, the department shall make payments under this section on a schedule determined by the department.” and adjusting the totals in section 11 and enacting section 1 accordingly.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 49, following line 19, by inserting:

“Sec. 16g. (1) The curriculum used by a district or intermediate district must not, in any way, include the promotion of any form of race or gender stereotyping or anything that could be understood as implicit race or gender stereotyping. As used in this subsection, “race or gender stereotyping” means a set of statements, beliefs, or ideas that conform wholly or in part with the following general or particular statements:

(a) That all individuals comprising a racial or ethnic group or gender hold a collective quality or belief.

(b) That individuals act in certain ways or hold certain opinions because of their race or gender.

(c) That individuals are born racist or sexist by accident of their race or gender.

(d) That individuals bear collective guilt for historical wrongs committed by their race or gender.

(e) That cultural norms or practices of a racial or ethnic group or gender are flawed and must be eliminated or changed to conform with those of another racial or ethnic group or gender.

(f) That racism is inherent in individuals from a particular race or ethnic group or that sexism is inherent in individuals from a particular gender.

(g) That a racial or ethnic group or gender is in need of deconstruction, elimination, or criticism.

(h) That the actions of individuals serve as an indictment against the race or gender of those individuals.

(2) State funding must not be used for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives or programs as outlined in Executive Order No. 14190, “Ending Racial Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling”.

(3) The board of a school district or intermediate school district or board of directors of a public school academy that participates in interscholastic athletic activities shall designate interscholastic athletic teams and sports based on the sex of the participants, with separate teams for participants of the female sex within female sports divisions, separate teams for participants of the male sex within male sports divisions, and, if applicable, co-ed teams for participants of the female and male sexes within co-ed sports divisions. A school district or intermediate school district shall not knowingly allow individuals of the male sex to participate on athletic teams or in athletic competitions designated for only participants of the female sex. This subsection must not be construed to restrict the eligibility of any student to participate on any interscholastic athletic teams or in interscholastic athletic activities that are designated as male or co-ed. As used in this subsection:

(a) “Female” means an individual of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing eggs (ova).

(b) “Male” means an individual of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing sperm.

(c) “Sex” means an individual’s immutable biological classification as male or female.

(4) A parent must receive a written notification from the minor child’s school if a request is made by the minor child to change the minor child’s name, pronouns, title, or other word used to identify the minor child.

(5) If a district or intermediate district fails to meet the requirements of this section, the department shall withhold 5% of the total funds for which the district or intermediate district qualifies under this article until the district or intermediate district complies with this section. If the district or intermediate district does not comply with this section by the end of the fiscal year, the department shall place the amount withheld in an escrow account until the district or intermediate district complies with this section.”.

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Albert withdrew the amendment.

Senator McBroom offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 350, line 6, after “allocated” by striking out “$100.00” and inserting “$13,744,600.00” and adjusting the totals in section 11 and enacting section 1 accordingly.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Bellino offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 215, line 14, after “fund” by inserting “and an amount not to exceed $1,000,000.00 from the general fund” and adjusting the totals in section 11 and enacting section 1 accordingly.

2. Amend page 226, line 5, after “the” by striking out “allocation” and inserting “state school aid fund money allocated”.

3. Amend page 226, line 7, after “only” by inserting a comma and “and from the general fund money allocated under subsection (1), there is allocated an amount not to exceed $1,000,000.00 for 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 only”.

4. Amend page 226, line 9, after “to” by striking out “educators” and inserting “certificated public school and nonpublic school teachers”.

5. Amend page 226, line 10, after “to” by striking out “educators” and inserting “certificated public school and nonpublic school teachers”.

6. Amend page 226, line 11, after “additional” by inserting “public and nonpublic”.

7. Amend page 226, line 11, after “school” by striking out “educators” and inserting “certificated teachers”.

8. Amend page 226, line 12, after “certificated” by inserting “public school and nonpublic school”.

9. Amend page 226, line 15, after “the” by striking out approved and inserting “department-approved”.

10. Amend page 226, line 18, after “The” by striking out approved and inserting “department-approved”.

11. Amend page 226, line 19, after “3” by inserting “certificated public school or nonpublic school”.

12. Amend page 226, line 21, after “1” by inserting “certificated public school or nonpublic school”.

13. Amend page 226, line 21, after “The” by striking out approved and inserting “department-approved”.

14. Amend page 226, line 22, after “remaining” by inserting “public school and nonpublic”.

15. Amend page 226, line 24, after “The” by striking out approved and inserting “department-approved”.

16. Amend page 226, line 26, after the second “the” by inserting “public school and nonpublic”.

17. Amend page 226, line 27, after “(10),” by inserting “the department shall approve”.

18. Amend page 226, line 28, after “LETRS” by striking out “is” and inserting “as”.

19. Amend page 227, line 1, after “provides” by inserting “certificated public school teachers, nonpublic school teachers, and other public school and nonpublic school”.

20. Amend page 227, line 6, after “direct” by inserting “certificated public school teachers, nonpublic school teachers, and other public school and nonpublic school”.

21. Amend page 227, line 12, after “for” by inserting “certificated public school teachers, nonpublic school teachers, other public school and nonpublic school”.

22. Amend page 227, line 12, after “educators” by inserting a comma.

23. Amend page 227, line 12, after “and” by inserting “public school and nonpublic school”.

24. Amend page 227, line 24, after “Support” by inserting “certificated public school teachers, nonpublic school teachers, and other public school and nonpublic school”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 169, line 13, by striking out all of section 32d and inserting:

“Sec. 32d. (1) From the state school aid fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated to eligible intermediate districts and consortia of intermediate districts for great start readiness programs an amount not to exceed $609,720,000.00 $603,000,000.00 for 2024-2025. It is the intent of the legislature that this section will support universal great start readiness programs in a future fiscal year. 2025-2026. An intermediate district or consortium shall use funds allocated under this section for great start readiness programs to provide part-day programs, school-day programs, GSRP extended programs, GSRP/Head Start school-day blended programs, or GSRP/Head Start extended blended programs that are comprehensive, free, compensatory classroom programs designed to improve the readiness and subsequent achievement of children who meet the participant eligibility and prioritization guidelines as defined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential. For a child to be eligible to participate in a program under this section, the child must be at least 4, but less than 5, years of age as of September 1 of the school year in which the program is offered and must meet those eligibility and prioritization guidelines. After eligible children who will be 4 years of age as of September 1 are enrolled, a child who is not 4 years of age as of September 1, but who will be 4 years of age by not later than December 1, is eligible to participate if both of the following are met:

(a) The child’s parent or legal guardian seeks a waiver from the September 1 eligibility date by submitting a request for enrollment in a program to the responsible intermediate district.

(b) The child meets eligibility and prioritization guidelines.

(2) From the state school aid fund money allocated under subsection (1), an amount not to exceed $607,720,000.00 $601,000,000.00 for 2024-2025 2025-2026 is allocated to intermediate districts or consortia of intermediate districts based on the formula in section 39. An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving funding under this section shall act as the fiduciary for the great start readiness programs. An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving funding under this section may collaborate with local governments to identify children eligible for programs funded under this section and may contract with local governments to provide services. To be eligible to receive funds allocated under this subsection from an intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts, a district, a consortium of districts, a local government, or a public or private for-profit or nonprofit legal entity or agency must comply with this section and section 39. If, due to the number of GSRP extended program or GSRP/Head Start extended blended program slots awarded, the amount allocated in this subsection is insufficient to award at least the same number of part-day program and school-day program slots as awarded in the immediately preceding fiscal year, there is appropriated from the great start readiness program reserve fund the amount necessary to fully award the same number of part-day program and full-day program slots as awarded in the immediately preceding fiscal year.

(3) In addition to the allocation under subsection (1), from the general fund money appropriated under section 11, there is allocated an amount not to exceed $600,000.00 $350,000.00 for 2024-2025 2025-2026 for a competitive grant to continue a longitudinal evaluation of children who have participated in great start readiness programs. It is the intent of the legislature that the allocation under this subsection will be $350,000.00 for 2025-2026.

(4) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (5), to be eligible for funding under this section, a program must prepare children for success in school through comprehensive part-day programs, school-day programs, GSRP extended programs, GSRP/Head Start school-day blended programs, or GSRP/Head Start extended blended programs that contain all of the following program components, as determined by the department: of lifelong education, advancement, and potential:

(a) Participation in a collaborative recruitment and enrollment process to ensure that each child is enrolled in the program most appropriate to the child’s needs and to maximize the use of federal, state, and local funds.

(b) An age-appropriate educational curriculum that is in compliance with the early childhood standards of quality for prekindergarten children adopted by the state board, including, at least, the Connect4Learning curriculum.

(c) Nutritional services for all program participants supported by federal, state, and local resources as applicable.

(d) Physical and dental health and developmental screening services for all program participants.

(e) Referral services for families of program participants to community social service agencies, including mental health services, as appropriate.

(f) Active and continuous involvement of the parents or guardians of the program participants.

(g) A plan to conduct and report annual great start readiness program evaluations and continuous improvement plans using criteria approved by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(h) Participation in a school readiness advisory committee convened as a workgroup of the great start collaborative that provides for the involvement of classroom teachers, parents or guardians of program participants, and community, volunteer, and social service agencies and organizations, as appropriate. The advisory committee shall annually review and make recommendations regarding the program components listed in this subsection. The advisory committee also shall make recommendations to the great start collaborative regarding other community services designed to improve all children’s school readiness.

(i) The ongoing articulation of the kindergarten and first grade programs offered by the program provider.

(j) Participation in this state’s great start to quality process with a rating of at least enhancing quality level.

(5) To help expand access to great start readiness programs, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential may waive the requirements under subsection (4) and a program may be eligible for funding under this section for new or expanding programs if the program demonstrates to the satisfaction of the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential that the program meets all of the following:

(a) Is a licensed child care center or is a licensed program.

(b) Provides the minimum instructional time as required by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(c) Participates in this state’s quality rating improvement system at a level determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(d) Implements a professional educator preparation plan, as defined by the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, for educators not meeting teacher credentialing standards described in subsection (8).

(e) Uses a developmentally appropriate curriculum, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(f) Conducts a developmental screening and referral process, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(g) Commits to participating in program financial review and monitoring, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(h) Provides a plan to implement an approved great start readiness program curriculum and meet additional great start readiness program standards, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(6) A waiver under subsection (5) may be granted for up to 3 years for requirements related to program credentialing and may be granted for up to 2 years for all other requirements, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(7) The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall provide a report to the house and senate appropriations subcommittees on school aid, the state budget director, and the house and senate fiscal agencies that summarizes the number and types of exemptions granted under subsection (5) and progress made by programs granted waivers under subsection (5) by September 30 of each fiscal year. It is the intent of the legislature to review the waiver allowability under subsection (5) before the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027.

(8) An application for funding under this section must provide for the following, in a form and manner determined by the department: of lifelong education, advancement, and potential:

(a) Ensure either of the following:

(i) That the applicant complies with all program components described in subsection (4).

(ii) That the applicant meets the requirements of a waiver under subsection (5).

(b) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, ensure that children participating in an eligible great start readiness program for whom the intermediate district is receiving funds under this section are children who live with families with a household income that is equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines. If the intermediate district determines that all eligible children are being served and that there are no children on the waiting list who live with families with a household income that is equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines, the intermediate district may then enroll children who live with families with a household income that is greater than 400% equal to or less than 300% of the federal poverty guidelines. The enrollment process must consider income and risk factors, such that children determined with higher need are enrolled before children with lesser need. For purposes of this subdivision, all age-eligible children served in foster care or who are experiencing homelessness or who have individualized education programs recommending placement in an inclusive preschool setting are considered to live with families with household income equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines regardless of actual family income and are prioritized for enrollment within the lowest quintile. The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall publish the household income thresholds under this subdivision in a clear manner on its website and the great start to quality website.

(c) Ensure that the applicant only uses qualified personnel for this program, as follows:

(i) Teachers possessing proper training. A lead teacher must have a valid Michigan teaching certificate with an early childhood or lower elementary endorsement or a bachelor’s or higher degree in child development or early childhood education with specialization in preschool teaching. However, except as otherwise provided in this subparagraph, if an applicant demonstrates to the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential that it is unable to fully comply with this subparagraph after making reasonable efforts to comply, teachers or paraprofessionals with at least 5 years of experience as a paraprofessional in a great start readiness program, Head Start, or licensed child care center classroom who have significant but incomplete training in early childhood education or child development may be used if the applicant provides to the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, and the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential approves, a plan for each teacher to come into compliance with the standards in this subparagraph. Individuals may qualify with at least 3 years of experience and significant training in early childhood education or child development, based on the recommendation of the intermediate district after a classroom observation. A teacher’s compliance plan must be completed within 3 years of the date of employment. Progress toward completion of the compliance plan consists of at least 2 courses per calendar year.

(ii) Paraprofessionals possessing proper training in early childhood education, including an associate degree in early childhood education or child development or the equivalent, or a child development associate (CDA) credential. However, if an applicant demonstrates to the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential that it is unable to fully comply with this subparagraph after making reasonable efforts to comply, the applicant may use paraprofessionals who have completed at least 1 course that earns college credit in early childhood education or child development or enroll in a child development associate credential with at least 6 months of verified experience in early education and care, if the applicant provides to the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, and the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential approves, a plan for each paraprofessional to come into compliance with the standards in this subparagraph. A paraprofessional’s compliance plan must be completed within 3 years of the date of employment. Progress toward completion of the compliance plan consists of at least 2 courses, 60 clock hours, or an equivalent of training per calendar year.

(d) Include a program budget that contains only those costs that are not reimbursed or reimbursable by federal funding, that are clearly and directly attributable to the great start readiness program, and that would not be incurred if the program were not being offered. Eligible costs include transportation costs. The program budget must indicate the extent to which these funds will supplement other federal, state, local, or private funds. An applicant shall not use funds received under this section to supplant any federal funds received by the applicant to serve children eligible for a federally funded preschool program that has the capacity to serve those children.

(9) For a grant recipient that enrolls pupils in a school-day program or GSRP extended program funded under this section, each child enrolled in the school-day program or GSRP extended program is counted as described in section 39 for purposes of determining the amount of the grant award.

(10) For a grant recipient that enrolls pupils in a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program or GSRP/Head Start extended blended program, the grant recipient shall ensure that all Head Start and GSRP policies and regulations are applied to the blended slots, with adherence to the highest standard from either program, to the extent allowable under federal law. A grant recipient may request a waiver from the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential to align GSRP policies and regulations with Head Start national standards for quality, including ratios, and the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential may approve the waiver. Not later than March 1 of each year, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential will report to the legislature and post on a publicly available website a list by intermediate district or consortium with the number and type of each waiver requested and approved.

(11) To help expand access to great start readiness programs, the department may allow great start readiness programs to implement Head Start national performance standards for quality as an alternative to great start readiness program policies and regulations if the great start readiness program demonstrates to the satisfaction of the department that the great start readiness program is meeting the requirements of the Head Start national performance standards.

(12) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving a grant under this section shall designate an early childhood coordinator, and may provide services directly or may contract with 1 or more districts or public or private for-profit or nonprofit providers that meet all requirements of subsections (4) and (8).

(13) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts may retain for administrative services provided by the intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts an amount not to exceed 4% of the grant amount. Expenses incurred by subrecipients engaged by the intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts for directly running portions of the program are considered program costs or a contracted program fee for service. Subrecipients operating with a federally approved indirect rate for other early childhood programs may include indirect costs, not to exceed the federal 10% de minimis.

(14) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts may expend not more than 2% of the total grant amount for outreach, recruiting, and public awareness of the program, if the intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts also participates in related statewide marketing and outreach efforts.

(15) Each grant recipient shall enroll children identified under subsection (8)(b) according to how far the child’s household income is below 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines by ranking each applicant child’s household income from lowest to highest and dividing the applicant children into quintiles based on how far the child’s household income is below 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines, and then enrolling children in the quintile with the lowest household income before enrolling children in the quintile with the next lowest household income until slots are completely filled. If the grant recipient determines that all eligible children are being served and that there are no children on the waiting list who live with families with a household income that is equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines, the grant recipient may then enroll children who live with families with a household income that is greater than 400% equal to or less than 300% of the federal poverty guidelines. The enrollment process must consider income and risk factors, such that children determined with higher need are enrolled before children with lesser need. For purposes of this subsection, all age-eligible children served in foster care or who are experiencing homelessness or who have individualized education programs recommending placement in an inclusive preschool setting are considered to live with families with household income equal to or less than 400% 250% of the federal poverty guidelines regardless of actual family income and are prioritized for enrollment within the lowest quintile.

(16) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving a grant under this section shall allow parents of eligible children who are residents of the intermediate district or within the consortium to choose a program operated by or contracted with another intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts and shall enter into a written agreement regarding payment, in a manner prescribed by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(17) An intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving a grant under this section shall conduct a local process to contract with interested and eligible public and private for-profit and nonprofit community-based providers that meet all requirements of subsection (4) for at least 30% of its total allocation. For the purposes of this 30% allocation, an intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts may count children served by a Head Start grantee or delegate in a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program, GSRP/Head Start extended blended program, GSRP extended program, and great start readiness school-day program. Children served in a program funded only through Head Start are not counted toward this 30% allocation. An intermediate district or consortium shall report to the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, in a manner prescribed by the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, a detailed list of community-based providers by provider type, including private for-profit, private nonprofit, community college or university, Head Start grantee or delegate, and district or intermediate district, and the number and proportion of its total allocation allocated to each provider as subrecipient. If the intermediate district or consortium is not able to contract for at least 30% of its total allocation, the intermediate district or consortium shall notify the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential and, if the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential verifies that the intermediate district or consortium attempted to contract for at least 30% of its total allocation and was not able to do so, the intermediate district or consortium may retain and use all of its allocation as provided under this section. To be able to use this exemption, the intermediate district or consortium shall demonstrate to the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential that the intermediate district or consortium increased the percentage of its total allocation for which it contracts with a community-based provider and the intermediate district or consortium shall submit evidence satisfactory to the department, of lifelong education, advancement, and potential, and the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential must be able to verify this evidence, demonstrating that the intermediate district or consortium took measures to contract for at least 30% of its total allocation as required under this subsection, including, but not limited to, at least all of the following measures:

(a) The intermediate district or consortium notified each nonparticipating licensed child care center located in the service area of the intermediate district or consortium regarding the center’s eligibility to participate, in a manner prescribed by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(b) The intermediate district or consortium provided to each nonparticipating licensed child care center located in the service area of the intermediate district or consortium information regarding great start readiness program requirements and a description of the application and selection process for community-based providers.

(c) The intermediate district or consortium provided to the public and to participating families a list of community-based great start readiness program subrecipients with a great start to quality rating level of at least enhancing quality level.

(18) If an intermediate district or consortium of intermediate districts receiving a grant under this section fails to submit satisfactory evidence to demonstrate its effort to contract for at least 30% of its total allocation, as required under subsection (17), the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall reduce the allocation to the intermediate district or consortium by a percentage equal to the difference between the percentage of an intermediate district’s or consortium’s total allocation awarded to community-based providers and 30% of its total allocation.

(19) To assist intermediate districts and consortia in complying with the requirement to contract with community-based providers, for at least 30% of their total allocation, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall do all of the following:

(a) Ensure that a great start resource center or the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential provides each intermediate district or consortium receiving a grant under this section with the contact information for each licensed child care center located in the service area of the intermediate district or consortium by March 1 of each year.

(b) Provide, or ensure that an organization with which the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential contracts provides, a community-based provider with a validated great start to quality rating within 90 days of the provider’s having submitted a request and self-assessment.

(c) Ensure that all intermediate district, district, community college or university, Head Start grantee or delegate, private for-profit, and private nonprofit providers are subject to a single great start to quality rating continuous quality improvement system. The rating continuous quality improvement system must ensure that regulators process all prospective providers at the same pace on a first-come, first-served basis and must not allow 1 type of provider to receive a great start to quality rating level ahead of any other type of provider.

(d) By not later than March 1 of each year, compile the results of the information reported by each intermediate district or consortium under subsection (17) and report to the legislature and post on a publicly available website a list by intermediate district or consortium with the number and percentage of each intermediate district’s or consortium’s total allocation allocated to community-based providers by provider type, including private for-profit, private nonprofit, community college or university, Head Start grantee or delegate, and district or intermediate district.

(e) Allow intermediate districts and consortia and eligible community-based providers to utilize materials and supplies purchased for great start readiness programs within their facilities for other early care and education activities, in the following order of priority:

(i) Early care and education activities under a federal award.

(ii) Early care and education activities under other state awards.

(iii) Early care and education activities under local or regional awards.

(20) A recipient of funds under this section shall report to the center in a form and manner prescribed by the center the information necessary to derive the number of children participating in the program who meet the program eligibility criteria under subsection (8)(b), the number of eligible children not participating in the program and on a waitlist, and the total number of children participating in the program by various demographic groups and eligibility factors necessary to analyze equitable and priority access to services for the purposes of subsection (3).

(21) As used in this section:

(a) “Child care center” means that term as defined in section 1 of 1973 PA 116, MCL 722.111.

(b) (a) “Federal poverty guidelines” means the guidelines published annually in the Federal Register by the United States Department of Health and Human Services under its authority to revise the poverty line under 42 USC 9902.

(c) (b) “GSRP extended program” means a program that operates for at least the same length of day as a district’s first grade program for a minimum of 5 days per week, 36 weeks per year.

(d) (c) “GSRP/Head Start extended blended program” means a program funded under this section and a Head Start program that are combined for an extended program.

(e) (d) “GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program” means a part-day program funded under this section and a Head Start program, which are combined for a school-day program.

(f) “Licensed child care center” means a child care center that has been issued a license under 1973 PA 116, MCL 722.111 to 722.128, to operate a child care center.

(g) (e) “Part-day program” means a program that operates at least 4 days per week, 30 weeks per year, for at least 3 hours of teacher-child contact time per day but for fewer hours of teacher-child contact time per day than a school-day program.

(h) (f) “School-day program” means a program that operates for at least the same length of day as a district’s first grade program for a minimum of 4 days per week, 30 weeks per year. A classroom that offers a school-day program must enroll all children for the school day to be considered a school-day program.

(22) From the amount allocated in subsection (2), there is allocated for 2024-2025 2025-2026 an amount not to exceed $10,000,000.00 and, from the great start readiness program reserve state school aid fund money appropriated in section 11, there is allocated for 2024-2025 2025-2026 only an amount not to exceed $18,000,000.00 for reimbursement of transportation costs for children attending great start readiness programs funded under this section. To receive reimbursement under this subsection, by not later than November 1 of each year, a program funded under this section that provides transportation shall submit to the intermediate district that is the fiscal agent for the program a projected transportation budget. The amount of the reimbursement for transportation under this subsection is no more than the projected transportation budget or $500.00 multiplied by the number of children funded for the program under this section. If the amount allocated under this subsection is insufficient to fully reimburse the transportation costs for all programs that provide transportation and submit the required information, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall prorate the reimbursement in an equal amount per child funded. The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall make payments to the intermediate district that is the fiscal agent for each program, and the intermediate district shall then reimburse the program provider for transportation costs as prescribed under this subsection.

(23) Subject to, and from the funds allocated under, subsection (22), the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall reimburse a program for transportation costs related to parent- or guardian-accompanied transportation provided by transportation service companies, buses, or other public transportation services. To be eligible for reimbursement under this subsection, a program must submit to the intermediate district or consortia of intermediate districts all of the following:

(a) The names of families provided with transportation support along with a documented reason for the need for transportation support and the type of transportation provided.

(b) Financial documentation of actual transportation costs incurred by the program, including, but not limited to, receipts and mileage reports, as determined by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(c) Any other documentation or information determined necessary by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(24) The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall implement a process to review and approve age-appropriate comprehensive classroom level quality assessments for GSRP grantees that support the early childhood standards of quality for prekindergarten children adopted by the state board. The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall make available to intermediate districts at least 2 classroom level quality assessments that were approved in 2018.

(25) An intermediate district that is a GSRP grantee may approve the use of a supplemental curriculum that aligns with and enhances the age-appropriate educational curriculum in the classroom. If the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential objects to the use of a supplemental curriculum approved by an intermediate district, the director of the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential superintendent of public instruction shall establish a review committee independent of the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential. The review committee shall meet within 60 days of the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential registering its objection in writing and provide a final determination on the validity of the objection within 60 days of the review committee’s first meeting.

(26) The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall implement a process to evaluate and approve age-appropriate educational curricula that are in compliance with the early childhood standards of quality for prekindergarten children adopted by the state board.

(27) From the funds allocated under subsection (1), there is allocated for 2024-2025 2025-2026 an amount not to exceed $2,000,000.00 for payments to intermediate districts or consortia of intermediate districts for professional development and training materials for educators in programs implementing new curricula or child assessment tools approved for use in the great start readiness program.

(28) A great start readiness program, a GSRP extended program, a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program, or a GSRP/Head Start extended blended program funded under this section is permitted to utilize AmeriCorps Pre-K Reading Corps members in classrooms implementing research-based early literacy intervention strategies.

(29) In addition to the allocation under subsection (1), from the state school aid fund money appropriated under section 11, there is allocated an amount not to exceed $25,000,000.00 $30,000,000.00 for 2024-2025 2025-2026 only for classroom start up grants to intermediate districts and consortia of intermediate districts for new or expanding great start readiness classrooms. All of the following apply to funding allocated under this subsection:

(a) To receive funding under this subsection, intermediate districts and consortia of intermediate districts must apply for the funding in a form and manner prescribed by the department. of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(b) The department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall pay an amount not to exceed $50,000.00 for each new or expanded classroom. If funding is insufficient to fully fund all eligible applicants, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential must prorate the per-classroom amount on an equal basis. If the allocation is not fully paid in the current fiscal year, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential may award any remaining funding during fiscal year 2025-2026 2026-2027 for each new or expanded classroom at an equal amount per classroom, based on remaining available funds, not to exceed $50,000.00 per classroom.

(c) Funds received under this subsection by intermediate districts and consortia of intermediate districts must be paid in full to the entity operating the classroom and may be used for 1 or more of the following purposes:

(i) Costs associated with attracting, recruiting, retaining, and licensing required classroom education personnel to staff new or expanded classrooms.

(ii) Supporting facility improvements or purchasing facility space necessary to provide a safe, high-quality learning environment for children in each new or expanded classroom.

(iii) Outreach material necessary for public awareness that the great start readiness program has openings in the area and for costs associated with enrolling eligible children in new or expanded classrooms.

(iv) Supporting costs in each new or expanded classroom associated with improving a provider’s great start to quality rating.level.

(d) The funds allocated under this subsection for 2022-2023 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2022-2023 do not lapse to the state school aid fund and are carried forward into 2023-2024. The purpose of the work project is to continue support for new or expanded great start readiness classrooms. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2024.The department shall establish a process to ensure that at least 50% of the funding distributed under this subsection for 2025-2026 is used to establish new programs by community-based organizations.

(e) The funds allocated under this subsection for 2024-2025 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2024-2025 do not lapse to the state school aid fund and are carried forward into 2025-2026. The purpose of the work project is to continue support for new or expanded great start readiness classrooms. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2026.

(f) The funds allocated under this subsection for 2025-2026 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2025-2026 do not lapse to the state school aid fund and are carried forward into 2026-2027. The purpose of the work project is to continue support for new or expanded great start readiness classrooms. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2027.

(g) Notwithstanding section 17b, the department shall make payments under this subsection on a schedule determined by the department.

(30) In addition to the funds allocated in subsection (1), there is allocated from the general fund money appropriated under section 11 for 2024-2025 only an amount not to exceed $1,950,000.00 for an intermediate district or a consortium of intermediate districts to partner with the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential and community-based organizations to continue implementing statewide outreach and enrollment campaign activities to raise awareness about the availability of services through the great start readiness program and to promote enrollment.

(31) The funds allocated under subsection (30) for 2024-2025 are a work project appropriation, and any unexpended funds for 2024-2025 are carried forward into 2025-2026. The purpose of the work project is to raise awareness of and participation in great start readiness programming. The estimated completion date of the work project is September 30, 2027.

(32) Notwithstanding section 17b, the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential shall make payments under subsection (30) on a schedule determined by the department of lifelong education, advancement, and potential.

(33) As used in this section:

(a) “Child care center” means that term as defined in section 1 of 1973 PA 116, MCL 722.111.

(b) “Licensed child care center” means a child care center that has been issued a license under 1973 PA 116, MCL 722.111 to 722.128, to operate a child care center.” and adjusting the totals in section 11 and enacting section 1 accordingly.

2. Amend page 238, line 10, after “department” by inserting a comma and striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

3. Amend page 238, line 21, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

4. Amend page 238, line 24, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

5. Amend page 239, line 11, after “department” by inserting a comma and striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential,”.

6. Amend page 239, line 12, after “department” by inserting a comma and striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential,”.

7. Amend page 239, line 15, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

8. Amend page 239, following line 16, by striking out all of subsections (4), (5), and (6), and inserting:

“(4) The initial allocation to each eligible applicant under section 32d is the lesser of the following:

(a) The sum of the number of children served in a school-day program in the preceding school year multiplied by $10,185.00, $14,000.00, the number of children served in a GSRP extended program in the preceding school year multiplied by $12,222.00, $16,800.00, the number of children served in a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program or a part-day program in the preceding school year multiplied by $5,093.00, $7,000.00, and the number of children served in a GSRP/Head Start extended blended program in the preceding school year multiplied by $6,111.00.$8,400.00.

(b) The sum of the number of children the applicant has the capacity to serve in the current school year in a school-day program multiplied by $10,185.00, $14,000.00, the number of children served in a GSRP extended program the applicant has the capacity to serve in the current school year multiplied by $12,222.00, $16,800.00, the number of children served in a GSRP/Head Start school-day blended program or a part-day program the applicant has the capacity to serve in the current school year multiplied by $5,093.00, $7,000.00, and the number of children served in a GSRP/Head Start extended blended program the applicant has the capacity to serve in the current school year multiplied by $6,111.00.$8,400.00.” and renumbering the remaining subsections.

9. Amend page 243, line 8, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

10. Amend page 243, line 10, after “department” by striking out “of lifelong education, advancement, and potential”.

11. Amend page, 243, following line 14, by inserting:

“(8) As used in this section, “GSRP/Head Start blended program”, “GSRP extended program”, “part-day program”, and “school-day program” mean those terms as defined in section 32d.”.

The question being on the adoption of the amendments,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 126 Yeas—18

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hertel Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Hoitenga McBroom Victory

Daley Huizenga Nesbitt Webber

Damoose Johnson

Nays—18

Anthony Chang McCann Santana

Bayer Cherry McMorrow Shink

Brinks Geiss Moss Singh

Camilleri Irwin Polehanki Wojno

Cavanagh Klinefelt

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Moss

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 49, following line 19, by inserting:

“Sec. 16g. (1) The curriculum used by a district or intermediate district must not, in any way, include the promotion of any form of race or gender stereotyping or anything that could be understood as implicit race or gender stereotyping. As used in this subsection, “race or gender stereotyping” means a set of statements, beliefs, or ideas that conform wholly or in part with the following general or particular statements:

(a) That all individuals comprising a racial or ethnic group or gender hold a collective quality or belief.

(b) That individuals act in certain ways or hold certain opinions because of their race or gender.

(c) That individuals are born racist or sexist by accident of their race or gender.

(d) That individuals bear collective guilt for historical wrongs committed by their race or gender.

(e) That cultural norms or practices of a racial or ethnic group or gender are flawed and must be eliminated or changed to conform with those of another racial or ethnic group or gender.

(f) That racism is inherent in individuals from a particular race or ethnic group or that sexism is inherent in individuals from a particular gender.

(g) That a racial or ethnic group or gender is in need of deconstruction, elimination, or criticism.

(h) That the actions of individuals serve as an indictment against the race or gender of those individuals.

(2) State funding must not be used for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives or programs as outlined in Executive Order No. 14190, “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling”.

(3) The board of a school district or intermediate school district or board of directors of a public school academy that participates in interscholastic athletic activities shall designate interscholastic athletic teams and sports based on the sex of the participants, with separate teams for participants of the female sex within female sports divisions, separate teams for participants of the male sex within male sports divisions, and, if applicable, co-ed teams for participants of the female and male sexes within co-ed sports divisions. A school district or intermediate school district shall not knowingly allow individuals of the male sex to participate on athletic teams or in athletic competitions designated for only participants of the female sex. This subsection must not be construed to restrict the eligibility of any student to participate on any interscholastic athletic teams or in interscholastic athletic activities that are designated as male or co-ed. As used in this subsection:

(a) “Female” means an individual of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing eggs (ova).

(b) “Male” means an individual of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing sperm.

(c) “Sex” means an individual’s immutable biological classification as male or female.

(4) A parent must receive a written notification from the minor child’s school if a request is made by the minor child to change the minor child’s name, pronouns, title, or other word used to identify the minor child.

(5) If a district or intermediate district fails to meet the requirements of this section, the department shall withhold 5% of the total funds for which the district or intermediate district qualifies under this article until the district or intermediate district complies with this section. If the district or intermediate district does not comply with this section by the end of the fiscal year, the department shall place the amount withheld in an escrow account until the district or intermediate district complies with this section.”.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

The question being on the passage of the bill,

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 127 Yeas—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Nays—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Moss

The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.

Protests

Senators Theis and Albert, under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 166 and moved that the statements they made during the discussion of the bill be printed as their reasons for voting “no.”

The motion prevailed.

Senator Theis’ statement is as follows:

Michigan students continue to fall behind their peers across the country, and while there may be many reasons for this, a lack of money is not one of them. Our state is spending 40 percent more on public K-12 education this year than it did just five years ago. Fifty-four percent more than a decade ago. Despite this increase in spending, student academic performance has gotten significantly worse. In 2024, Michigan ranked 44th in the nation for fourth grade reading on standardized testing—the NAEP—a significant drop from 32nd in just 2019. The 2024 Nation’s Report Card also revealed that 75 percent of Michigan’s fourth graders and 76 percent of eighth graders are unable to read at grade level. Sixty-three percent of fourth graders and 76 percent of eighth graders are not proficient in math.

Rather than enacting proven policies to support struggling students and improve student outcomes, this plan relies on the same approach we’ve seen before: spend more money and simply hope for better results. Well, unlike my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I will not stand idly by and just hope things get better for our students. I urge a “no” vote and hope we can refocus the discussions on real solutions that push Michigan students first.

Senator Albert’s statement is as follows:

I cannot support this budget because it doubles down on the same mistakes that have been repeated year after year. We are spending more money without doing enough to ensure it leads to better outcomes for students. It just doesn’t make sense. I did not love the Governor’s School Aid budget proposal, but it was better than what we’re voting on today. At least she acknowledged that the status quo is not working and that changes were needed. As she noted in her State of the State address, Michigan invests more per pupil than most states, and achieves a bottom-ten result. The Governor presented some accountability and transparency ideas that our Democratic colleagues have ignored with the proposal before us today. For example, the Senate proposal does not include the Governor’s call for roughly $230 million for tutoring and intervention for low-performing districts and accompanying accountability and transparency measures.

This budget before us today would mandate that half of the per pupil foundation increase go to raise educator salaries. How would that work in the context of an already locally negotiated collective bargaining agreement? More importantly, why are there no accountability measures to tie those pay increases to improved student outcomes? I am more than willing to explore raising teacher pay, but the result must be a better education for our students. Democrats have gone the other way in recent years by weakening the teacher evaluation system and making it less dependent on student achievement.

As I have discussed earlier, the plan here for the Great Start Readiness Program does not ensure that openings are created in communities where they’re actually needed; statewide, there are already thousands of slots unused. I support GSRP and want to see it grow, but this plan does not support growth in a logical or efficient way. This budget does not do enough to address chronic absenteeism. The bottom line is kids aren’t going to learn if they’re not in the classroom. Our state is spending 29 percent more on public K-12 schools this year than it did five years ago, and 50 percent more than a decade ago. Despite this increased spending, results have worsened. I am all for investing in education but the spending must support a plan that truly benefits our kids and helps them achieve. This budget falls short.

Senators Damoose, Lindsey, Albert, Theis, Moss, Geiss, Irwin, McBroom and Bellino asked and were granted unanimous consent to make statements and moved that the statements be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Damoose’s first statement is as follows:

It’s been stated before, and I’m going to state it again right now, that our education outcomes are not performing anywhere near where they should be. The policies enacted throughout our state are too often failing our kids. Watered down standards for teachers are not helping. We all want more qualified people to enter the field, but lowering the bar for those mentoring our children is not the way to go about it. Removing training requirements in early childhood development and education is a step in the wrong direction. Michigan’s Great Start Readiness Program model has been considered a national model for success. Given our position on the national stage, the proposal to water down this gold standard is very concerning at every level. I ask that my colleagues support my amendment to maintain GSRP’s high standards and give every student the strong start they deserve.

Senator Lindsey’s statement is as follows:

Three years I’ve served in Lansing now, three budget cycles, and three times I have watched attempts by the Democratic majority to attack and target for elimination our preschool providers in this state. My amendment would stop the latest Democratic scheme to destroy preschools in Michigan. Please vote “yes.”

Senator Albert’s first statement is as follows:

By now, everyone in this chamber should realize the academic performance of Michigan students has slipped compared to students in most other states. We’ve got a chance to do more, and we’ve got to do more, to increase the amount of time that kids are in the classroom so they can catch up. This amendment would roll back changes made in recent years that allowed more virtual learning days and exemptions for professional development days. Current law allows for up to seven professional development days, and 15 virtual days, to count toward instructional time. This is simply unacceptable and will not lead to improved student outcomes.

I am glad to see the proposed Senate budget does reduce these exemptions somewhat, but it is not enough. The fact of the matter is that Michigan students are struggling. Three out of every four 4th and 8th graders are not reading at grade level. Sixty-three percent of 4th graders and 76 percent of 8th graders are not proficient at math. Our students need to be in the classroom if we expect to move Michigan students from the bottom 10 to the top 10 in the nation. My amendment would help to give students more time in the classroom by removing individual school authority to provide these virtual learning days, and no longer count these professional development days as instructional days.

Let’s make sure our students are in the school to learn the basics so they can excel and have brighter futures. Please support this amendment as one step toward bringing kids toward improving their student achievement.

Senator Damoose’s second statement is as follows:

Listening to people back at home, the provisions we’ve made in recent years for lunches for all students in public schools have been extremely popular. On the one hand, the program has ensured that no child goes hungry in our public schools, and that nobody feels stigmatized by having to ask for a free lunch. On the other hand, it has proven a great way to return money directly to our hard-working taxpayers, but we can do better. Right now, students in nonpublic schools do not have access to the same free lunch program. Many kids in those schools go hungry too, and if this is a priority for our state to ensure our kids are well cared for at school, the program should be available to everyone. If we are really going to once again fund universal breakfast and lunch for our students, then let’s make this effort truly universal. My amendment would simply extend the school meals program to include both our public and nonpublic schools. Hunger does not discriminate based on where kids go to school. Neither should we.

Senator Albert’s second statement is as follows:

Education is not a one-size-fits-all endeavor, but when it comes to funding, it should at least be fair. Nonpublic schools provide opportunities for academic success to our kids throughout all of our state, and it’s for all backgrounds of races, religions, and socioeconomic statuses. Unfortunately, this budget leaves nonpublic school students out of funding that provides mental healthcare and school safety resources. My amendment would restore some fairness to this school funding budget by providing $28 million for school safety and mental health grants, $600,000 for robotics, and $1 million for health and safety reimbursements. We have done all of these funding line items in the past. There is no reason why we shouldn’t work together to keep our kids safe and provide reimbursements for basic mandates that the state requires, and for helping kids and robotics, things that are going to help grow our state as a whole anyway. So I urge my members to support all Michigan students and vote “yes” on this amendment.

Senator Albert’s third statement is as follows:

This amendment relates to the future educator scholarship and the student teacher stipend program. These are good programs, and I was glad to have a role in helping create them when I served as the House Appropriations chair. Both programs help address the teacher shortage by helping new teachers afford the education and classroom experience they need to start their careers. But the current version of these programs treat teacher prep students and student teachers differently, depending on where they are assigned or hired.

The student teacher stipend program is only open to student teachers assigned to public schools. It creates an awkward and unfair situation where two student teachers from the same college program are treated differently depending on where they are assigned to teach. A student teacher assigned to a private school does not get any help through this program, even though they face the same costs as their classmate assigned to a public school. Recipients of the future educator scholarship can only teach at public schools, or they risk having to give some of the scholarship money back if they are hired by a nonpublic school. That was not the case when the program was created, but Democrats have changed these programs to treat some teachers unfairly. We need to get more teachers into the teacher pipeline. Many teachers start their careers at private schools and may later move to public schools. We need to help all these teachers, and all the kids they are working hard to help.

My amendment would ensure these worthy teacher preparation programs are open to teaching both in public and nonpublic schools. There is no reason why we need to use the public purse to create a two-tier education pipeline in the state of Michigan. We should be trying to get as many teachers as possible in all Michigan schools, rather than putting nonpublic schools at a huge disadvantage. Thank you, and I ask my colleagues to support this amendment.

Senator Albert’s fourth statement is as follows:

This amendment restores a line item specifically dedicated to help districts hire school resource officers. This is like a government unicorn, a budget line item that Democrats actually cut. This elimination was a mistake. Yes, it is true that school resource officers are a permissible use of funds within the broader school safety budget, but we need a specific line item for school resource officers to ensure continuity. When funding is diluted or allowed to be shifted to other purposes, it may leave these officer positions vulnerable moving ahead. We should not be cutting funding anywhere related to school security. Administrators regularly tell me that their school resource officers are vital members in their school community. Students, teachers, and staff count on seeing them every day as they help create a safe and positive school environment. Let us make sure school resource officers are able to stay on the job and help keep kids safe. I urge support for this amendment.

Senator Theis’ first statement is as follows:

Fair competition is vitally important to protecting opportunities for girls and ensuring their safety. Title IX was passed over 50 years ago for that very reason, to give girls a truly equal opportunity. Half a century ago we knew what we recently seem to have forgotten: there are fundamental differences between male and female athletes. Girls and women have fought for over five decades to have their own playing field. Allowing biological males to compete in girls’ sports is unfair and dangerous. It denies girls the equal opportunity to participate and excel in competitive sports and denies them the rewards of their hard-earned successes. If even one girl is denied a place on the team, denied the opportunity to play, denied a place on the winner’s podium, denied their collegiate scholarship opportunity, or worse, injured due to playing against a biological male, it is one girl too many. And it should never happen. Fifty years ago we knew this. It’s why Title IX was passed in the first place. My amendment stands up for our female student athletes by withholding funding from any Michigan school that allows biological males to participate in girls’ sports. I urge a “yes” vote.

Senator Moss’ statement is as follows:

Obviously I had to step down and give my remarks in opposition to this amendment. Personally, I think every child should be able to live freely in this country and express themselves how they see fit. In particular to this issue, which seeks to enshrine this issue in our state budget, right now, through the Michigan High School Athletic Association, there are zero waivers that have been requested or granted for trans athletes to participate in high school sports. This is literally a non-issue. I also don’t believe crocodiles should be barbers, but I don’t write up an amendment to place it in the budget, so I do not support this amendment. I do not support enshrining this rhetoric in a budget document, and I urge a “no” vote.

Senator Albert’s fifth statement is as follows:

Charter schools have helped make a tremendous difference in the lives of countless Michigan students. We need all students to have a fair baseline of funding. At a time when students are struggling across the board, we need to continue expanding opportunities for kids to obtain a quality education. Charter schools have been under intense, unwarranted scrutiny in recent years, and this year’s K-12 budget further reflects that double standard. Just because cyber schools have a different cost structure, it does not mean they should see their funding cut below a fair baseline of funding for their students. These cyber schools offer education for many types of students with very diverse backgrounds and for many different reasons. Charters as a whole have performed well and have provided a major benefit to the communities that house them and to the students who attend them. My amendment would fully fund cyber charter schools and reestablish our commitment to providing any and all opportunities for students to succeed. I ask you to support this amendment.

Senator Albert’s sixth statement is as follows:

I’m very appreciative of the previous speaker and his comments because it’s able to give me an opportunity to further explain why I don’t base my decisions based on ideology. I’m able to look at the situation between two different circumstances and differentiate them. It’s two totally different situations. The virtual options that are seen in traditional K-12 are very different than the virtual option we see at cyber charter schools. Well, how are they different? Let’s look at the two different situations. Cyber charter schools specialize in offering an online education specifically to kids and parents who want that form of instruction. It’s very limited. In those specific situations where it’s best for those students, there’s typically something going on. I’ve heard many, many different situations. Sometimes it’s bullying at school, sometimes it’s the kid has autism and they struggle in the classroom dealing with the social interactions so this works better. Cyber charter schools specialize in this type of education, and they do it really, really well. Not all the time—if they’re poor at it, they actually get shut down, unlike traditional K-12 schools.

OK, let’s look at the other side of the coin. How well did traditional K-12 schools do with the school lockdowns with virtual instruction? Let’s look at the data, shall we? We’re bottom 10. We’re miserable. We’re horrible. They did a terrible job at it. They don’t specialize in it. The teachers don’t have specific across-the-board instruction on how to do online instruction. They didn’t learn it at the higher ed university they went to get their certification. Across the board, the data is pretty clear. They did terrible at it. Why would we allow for 22 days—over three weeks—of school instruction to be done outside of the classroom, or them not even being in the classroom. Why would we allow that? We’re so far behind. Why would we allow our kids to be out of the classroom in a traditional K-12 setting? Why would we allow them to be outside of their seats with their teachers in front of them teaching? That is not going to lead to better outcomes.

I really appreciate the opportunity to explain the difference of governing through ideology and through experience. I’m able to differentiate the different circumstances here and look at how the experience actually works in the real world. The previous speaker gave a really clever speech, but it’s not based in facts and it’s not based in reality, and most importantly, it’s not based on what’s best for the students, and that’s what’s most frustrating for me.

Senator Geiss’ statement is as follows:

I want to correct the record and the reality that there are public school districts that do indeed have virtual learning academies that are attached, and part of, their school district. So the assertion that only the people who—that the only place for parents and students who need that type of education system are in charter cyber schools, is patently incorrect and false. Everyone here and in the state of Michigan needs to understand that the truth and the reality is: there are public school districts that do have virtual learning academies.

Senator Albert’s seventh statement is as follows:

This amendment is designed to ensure that public school charter academies in Michigan receive funding equity compared to traditional K-12 public schools. It ensures public charters receive the equivalent per-student foundation that they have always received and that their students are not cheated out of funding. Last year, Democrats did an accounting gimmick within the MPSERS system, so traditional K-12 schools got an immediate cash windfall at the expense of the School Aid Fund as a whole. To offset this accounting imbalance, charter schools received an equalization payment last year. Unfortunately, this proposed budget does not continue the payment equalization, which is shortchanging charter students by hundreds of dollars per student.

My amendment would ensure funding equity and ensure charters are not left behind. Charter schools are public schools that provide desperately needed options for families, particularly in economically disadvantaged communities where the traditional public school system is failing. Earlier this year, I visited the Jalen Rose Leadership Academy in Detroit to personally see the good work done by charters. Schools like this are doing great things despite being at a huge disadvantage when it comes to state funding. It is worth noting that per-pupil funding does not even cover all of the staffing salaries at this particular charter I visited, so the school is required to make up the difference by raising revenue elsewhere. Failing to close this accounting gap will make matters worse and reduce opportunities for disadvantaged kids. We must ensure charter schools are not left behind. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Senator Albert’s eighth statement is as follows:

We wouldn’t be working on K-12 if I didn’t bring up MPSERS at some point in time. This amendment attempts to reverse a terrible budget decision made by the Legislature last year. This amendment would restore more than $640 million in the school employee retirement system payments that should be made in this upcoming fiscal year. Last year, Democrats raided the MPSERS retirement fund to balance their budget and to fund new programs. This raid continues with this budget proposal before us today.

As I have explained previously, this raid skirts the state law that I sponsored as a member of the House of Representatives. The law I wrote, and was subsequently signed into law in 2018, was designed to ensure the overall retirement system debt payments are not reduced from one year to the next. This floor-funding provision applies to overall debt in the school employee retirement system and does not distinguish between different forms of debt. The MPSERS system includes pension benefits and retiree healthcare, often called OPEB, which stands for other post-employment benefits. Democrats incorrectly separated the required floor funding systemwide liability into two separate pods—one applied to the pension, and the other to the OPEB. This incorrect interpretation of state law allows Democrats to spend more money right now instead of putting more money toward paying down debt.

This policy change is going to cost Michigan taxpayers far more money over the long run. The teacher retirement system still has over $30 billion in unfunded liabilities overall. If we pay off less of that debt now, we will end up paying more later—much more. That is going to raise the costs, and we’re going to see less money being able to go into the classroom to support our kids and to support our teachers’ retirement system that they’re going to need to support the benefits they were promised. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Senator Theis’ second statement is as follows:

This amendment simply reinstitutes language that prohibits ISDs from discriminating against charter schools. These protections shouldn’t have been removed in the first place. Let’s ensure all Michigan students have opportunities to succeed regardless of where they’re enrolled.

Senator Albert’s ninth statement is as follows:

A competitive grant should be competitive. The language in this bill earmarks certain school districts to receive funding to reduce class sizes. If these districts are in the greatest need, then they will be eligible when they apply for the statewide grant.

Senator Albert’s tenth statement is as follows:

This amendment gives the Senate another chance to properly fund special education in Michigan. This amendment provides a property tax equalization payment to ensure better funding for special education across the state. Overall, it provides an additional $18 million to support districts that lose out or are shortchanged under the current special education funding system. This is an approach that had broad support during the budget process last year and never made it to the finish line. The Governor proposed it again for this upcoming year. I ask that you consider it again and adopt it now for the benefit of Michigan children and special education programs so all students have the best chance of success.

Senator Albert’s eleventh statement is as follows:

Just to respond to the previous speaker’s comments, section 56, from my experience, is the most complicated and difficult-to-understand line item in the entire—out of all the budgets. It’s very difficult to get. It takes a lot of time to try to unpack to see how it works. I appreciate the previous speaker’s comments, but they were off on almost every point that was made, and I respect the sense that they’re coming from because I don’t believe in redistribution of wealth. I don’t think it’s helpful, but that’s not what this does at all. This is an equalization payment. We’ve been doing it for many, many, many years. If you go back to Proposal A, special ed was something that was left off to the side because pre-Proposal A, school districts raised basically all of their funding—and I’m generalizing here—nearly all of their funding was raised at the local level and what we did is we changed that. We kind of capped what the locals could raise, and then we increased the sales tax, so we started collecting more money at the state government; and then we redistributed it out to the districts to try to create an equalization—more of an even playing field for all of our kids.

When we did that, we left special ed off to the side. It was too complicated. If you look at where special ed funding comes from at a district level, they get about a third of their funding from their local millage, you get about a third from the state, and you get about a third from the feds. Why this is difficult and why this equalization payment is needed, well, you have millage rates across the board that are different from one community to the next; not only is the millage rate different, the property tax value within those communities is different. You could have Ionia County with over 4 mills that’s raising less money than some other districts that are raising 2 mills. I mean, it’s really complicated. It takes a lot of time to try to dig in and understand. Section 56 does a good job because it takes that one-third of the local funding—where districts are at a huge disadvantage, likely because they have low property tax values—and it’s trying to help them to get them over the top.

There’s also a quirky part of the law. When we passed Proposal A, we capped how much districts could raise with their local millages. I can’t remember the exact amount, but they can only go up whatever they raised in 1992 for their millage rate; they can only go up a certain amount above that. A lot of districts are stuck. They can’t—even if they wanted to raise more at their local school district level to help with special ed, they can’t because state law prevents them. This isn’t redistribution of wealth, this is funding equalization, something we’ve done for many, many years. I’m also just really confused because it’s my understanding, if I remember right, the Senate Democrats and the House Democrats both had this in their proposed budget last year. The Governor had a version of this with some mistakes in her budget, so it seemed like all the Democrats were on board for supporting this last year and then, by some great mystery, it wasn’t included in anybody’s final budget when it reached the finish line.

I’m confused why it wasn’t done this year. I’m confused why there’s animosity toward it this year. This is something we should all get behind. It helps all of our kids. It helps our communities that are disadvantaged. I understand it’s a difficult topic, and hopefully something we can work on and get something better to the finish line when we get our final budget done this year.

Senator Irwin’s statement is as follows:

I just want to point out—I appreciate my colleague’s words, but funding equalization is just a euphemism for redistribution of wealth and socialism. Now, look, I—I’m not against that. We do that a lot here in Michigan. We do it in the school aid budget. We do it in every other budget. So, I’m not against doing that, and I think to meet the needs of all kids, sometimes we have to do that. I just like to point it out when it’s happening.

Senator Albert’s twelfth statement is as follows:

This amendment addresses one of the biggest challenges facing students in Michigan schools today—chronic absenteeism. It would provide $25 million to help school districts improve attendance in buildings and to reach a target chronic absenteeism rate of 20 percent or more, which is what we saw pre-pandemic. Kids can’t learn if they’re not in the classroom. Chronic absenteeism must be brought back down to pre-pandemic levels at a minimum, and we aren’t even close. Last academic year, roughly 30 percent of Michigan students missed 10 percent or more of the school year. It’s unacceptable and it threatens our kids’ chances of success in the future. Many communities across the state realize this massive problem, and they’re already working on it. In my district, for example, the Allegan area, ESA is making significant efforts at reducing absenteeism that hold promise. Districts could apply for these grants and use funds for attendance, focused administrative staff, marketing campaigns, or other initiatives that get kids in the classroom regularly. Thank you, and ask support for my amendment.

Senator McBroom’s statement is as follows:

The current bill we’re voting on has a placeholder in it regarding this issue. My amendment simply puts a dollar amount in regarding the issue. It’s in relation to a school in Menominee that has been through a whole series of both natural disasters and con jobs from certain entities that were brought in to do some construction on the school. The school finds itself in a very difficult position right now while they wait for lawsuits and insurance to come through. The dollars would allow them to continue to operate, and the amendment also includes a claw back for the time when they would successfully accomplish both insurance and lawsuits to regain their money. I ask for support.

Senator Bellino’s statement is as follows:

Reading is critical to a quality education, is essential to academic success, and success in life. This doesn’t matter whether you go to private school or public school. The Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling program is a proven initiative to help give early childhood and elementary educators the knowledge and skills to become a literacy expert in the science of reading. As of many of us know in this chamber we changed the science of reading years ago, and it sucked. It was almost like an alligator, who was a barber, came up with this program and sold it a bill of goods to the public schools. As Michigan students continue to struggle with reading, we need to dedicate our time and resources to things that have a track record and positive results. My amendment would support the LETRS program and empower more teachers, whether public or private, to access the reading-focused training to meet the needs of our students. I urge a “yes” vote.

Senator Albert’s thirteenth statement is as follows:

I fully support the Great Start Readiness Program and have for years. My amendment is designed to ensure this preschool program operates more efficiently and helps those who need it most. The current program is not working in the way it is being messaged publicly. Overall, the state has funding for thousands more slots than are actually being filled. Seats are being created in some communities that don’t need more capacity, while some communities still have waitlists because they don’t have the room for every child who wants to attend. Simply put, there is no universal preschool in the state of Michigan. The ability to meet need may vary by community, so it is a complete disservice to label this as universal pre-K as some have done. It isn’t universal and the current setup may have us creating new seats and communities that don’t need them and still leaving some communities underserved. Merely eliminating eligibility requirements did not create the capacity needed to meet the needs within every community statewide.

My amendment would raise the per-pupil funding of GSRP to $14,000 per pupil. This added funding will help districts and underserved areas either create their own programs or partner with community based organizations. They would have the resources they need to add staff or build space accordingly from the ground up. This amendment also ensures that we do not weaken program requirements or lower standards. Finally, it moves administration of the program back to the Michigan Department of Education, where it belongs. Thank you and I urge support for this amendment.

Senator Albert’s fourteenth statement is as follows:

This amendment would provide an incentive to keep divisive race and gender politics out of schools. A school district or intermediate school district would see five percent of its state funding held in escrow if it does not comply with certain practices. Once the school adopts these policies, then the funding would be distributed. For example, schools must keep their curriculum free of race and gender stereotyping. State funding can’t be used for DEI initiatives or programs outlined in President Trump’s executive order from earlier this year entitled “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling.” Schools could not knowingly allow biological boys to participate in sports specifically designated for girls. Parents must receive written notification from their school if their minor child requests a pronoun change. Thank you, and I ask support for this commonsense amendment to keep our schools free from polarizing identity politics.

Recess

Senator Singh moved that the Senate recess until 12:45 p.m.

The motion prevailed, the time being 12:14 p.m.

The Senate reconvened at the expiration of the recess and was called to order by the Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Geiss.

Recess

Senator Singh moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.

The motion prevailed, the time being 12:46 p.m.

1:08 p.m.

The Senate was called to order by the Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Geiss.

Senator Singh moved that the Senate return to consideration of the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 172

The motion prevailed.

The following bill was read a third time:

Senate Bill No. 172, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of natural resources for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

The question being on the passage of the bill,

Senator McBroom offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 13, following line 26, by inserting:

“Mine repairs and renewal 13,000,000”

and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

2. Amend page 35, following line 11, by inserting:

“ONE-TIME APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 1201. (1) Funds appropriated in part 1 for mine repairs and renewal shall be awarded to a city with a population of between 800 and 900 and in a county with a population of between 11,000 and 12,000 according to the most recent federal decennial census, that wants to renew a local mine with a passive abatement system.

(2) The unexpended funds appropriated in part 1 for mine repairs and renewal are designated as a work project appropriation, and any unencumbered or unallotted funds shall not lapse at the end of the fiscal year and shall be available for expenditure for the project under this section until the project has been completed. The following is in compliance with section 451a of the management and budget Act, 1984 PA 431, MCL 18.1451a:

(a) The purpose of the project is to aid in the repair and renewal of a mine with a passive abatement system.

(b) The project will be accomplished by utilizing state employees, contracts, or both.

(c) The total estimated cost of the project is $13,000,000.00.

(d) The tentative completion date is September 30, 2030.”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

The question being on the passage of the bill,

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 128 Yeas—19

Anthony Cavanagh Irwin Santana

Bayer Chang Klinefelt Shink

Brinks Cherry McCann Singh

Bumstead Geiss McMorrow Wojno

Camilleri Hertel Moss

Nays—16

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Daley Huizenga McBroom Victory

Damoose Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—1

Polehanki

In The Chair: Geiss

The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.

Protest

Senator Theis, under her constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 172 and moved that the statement she made during the discussion of the bill be printed as her reasons for voting “no.”

The motion prevailed.

Senator Theis’ statement is as follows:

This budget proposal takes aim at Michigan’s outdoorsmen and women by increasing deer hunting licenses by 25 percent and fishing licenses by 20 percent. On top of that, Democrats are also pushing a vehicle registration fee hike, costing drivers over $400 million. Governments shouldn’t keep squeezing hardworking Michigan families for more of their hard-earned money. It’s time to go back to the drawing board, tighten our belt straps, and set our sights on wasteful spending. I urge a “no” vote.

Senator McBroom asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator McBroom’s statement is as follows:

My amendment is in regards to a site in Iron County—Caspien Township—that I recently toured with some local residents. It is an old iron mine that has a passive system to deal with acid water systems and that was draining into the Iron River for many years. The system is over 40 years old and is in need of significant renewal. It’s simply: out of all the different former mine sites I’ve been to—many of which are beautiful sites that people do tourism around and have no real environmental consequence—this one is one of those sites that needs attention. I have worked with the department to put together a dollar amount that they need in order to renew this site so the system continues to operate. I ask for your support.

By unanimous consent the Senate proceeded to the order of

General Orders

Senator Singh moved that the Senate resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole for consideration of the General Orders calendar.

The motion prevailed, and the Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Geiss, designated Senator Klinefelt as Chairperson.

Recess

Senator Singh moved that the Committee of the Whole recess subject to the call of the Chairperson.

The motion prevailed, the time being 1:17 p.m.

1:22 p.m.

The Committee of the Whole was called to order by the Chairperson, Senator Klinefelt.

After some time spent therein, the Committee arose; and the Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Geiss, having resumed the Chair, the Committee reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 173, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the legislature, the executive, the department of the attorney general, the department of state, the department of treasury, the department of technology, management, and budget, the department of civil rights, and certain other state purposes for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026; to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations; to provide for the disposition of fees and other income received by the state agencies; and to declare the effect of this act.

Substitute (S-2).

The following are the amendments to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole:

1. Amend page 25, following line 7, by inserting:

“Liability reimbursement 100”

and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

2. Amend page 27, line 28, by striking out “Community crime reduction initiative” and inserting “community aid for responders and emergency services”.

3. Amend page 27, line 28, by striking out “60,000,000” and inserting “70,800,000” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

4. Amend page 31, line 24, by striking out “Community crime reduction initiative” and inserting “community aid for responders and emergency services”.

5. Amend page 31, line 24, by striking out “40,000,000” and inserting “47,200,000” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

6. Amend page 33, line 2, by striking out “community crime reduction initiative” and inserting “community aid for responders and emergency services”.

7. Amend page 125, line 28, after “for” by striking out “community crime reduction initiative” and inserting “community aid for responders and emergency services”.

8. Amend page 126, line 8, after “more” by inserting “and less than 600,000 according to the most recent decennial federal census”.

9. Amend page 126, following line 10, by inserting “(c) $18,000,000.00 to a city with a population greater than 600,000 according to the most recent decennial federal census for the purposes described in subsection (4)”.

10. Amend page 126, line 11, after “the” by striking out “community crime reduction initiative” and inserting “community aid for responders and emergency services”.

11. Amend page 126, line 17, after “the” by striking out “community crime reduction initiative” and inserting “community aid for responders and emergency services”.

12. Amend page 126, line 24, after “the” by striking out “community crime reduction initiative” and inserting “community aid for responders and emergency services”.

13. Amend page 127, line 8, after “receive” by striking out “community crime reduction initiative” and inserting “community aid for responders and emergency services”.

14. Amend page 128, line 4, after “the” by striking out “community crime reduction initiative” and inserting “community aid for responders and emergency services”.

15. Amend page 133, following line 15, by inserting:

“Sec. 949o. (1) From the funds appropriated in part 1 for liability reimbursement, the department shall reimburse county treasurers on a case-by-case basis for the cost of liabilities due to a court order or settlement issued for actions taken by a county treasurer that was in compliance with state law.

(2) In order to receive a reimbursement as described in subsection (1), a county treasurer must demonstrate in writing to the department of treasury that the liability is due to a court order or settlement resulting from action that was in compliance with Michigan statute at the time it occurred.”

The Senate agreed to the substitute as amended recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of

Motions and Communications

The following communication was received:

Civil Service Commission

May 9, 2025

Enclosed is the Fiscal Analysis Report for the Civil Service Commission for fiscal year 2024.

This report is provided in accordance with Article XI, Section 5 of the Constitution of the State of Michigan.

Sincerely,

John Gnodtke

State Personnel Director

The communication was referred to the Secretary for record.

The following communication was received:

Office of Senator Ed McBroom

May 12, 2025

Per Senate Rule 1.110(c), I am requesting that my name be added as a co-sponsor to SB 288 introduced on May 7, 2025, by Veronica Klinefelt.

Sincerely,

Ed McBroom

State Senator

38th District

The communication was referred to the Secretary for record.

Senator Singh moved that the rules be suspended and that the following bill, now on the order of Third Reading of Bills, be placed on its immediate passage:

Senate Bill No. 173

The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.

By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of

Third Reading of Bills

Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 173

The motion prevailed.

The following bill was read a third time:

Senate Bill No. 173, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the legislature, the executive, the department of the attorney general, the department of state, the department of treasury, the department of technology, management, and budget, the department of civil rights, and certain other state purposes for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

The question being on the passage of the bill,

Senator Theis offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 11, line 9, by striking out “31,728,300” and inserting “31,978,300”.

2. Amend page 11, line 10, by striking out “32,174,800” and inserting “32,424,800”.

3. Amend page 13, line 1, by striking out “22,069,800” and inserting “22,319,800”.

4. Amend page 70, following line 19, by inserting:

“Sec. 624. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for auditor general field operations, a total of $250,000 of additional funding provided for fiscal year 2025-26 must be used by the office of the auditor general for the purpose of conducting more audits to clear backlogged cases with the goal of completing more audits in a fiscal year.”.

The question being on the adoption of the amendments,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 129 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

Senator Nesbitt offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 3, line 14, by striking out “119,429,600” and inserting “119,529,600”, and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

2. Amend page 61, following line 24, by inserting:

“Sec. 327. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for operations, the department of attorney general shall expend no less than $100,000.00 GF/GP to investigate foreign national voting in Michigan elections.”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Lindsey offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 133, following line 15, by inserting:

“Sec. 949o. From the funds appropriated in part 1, the department of treasury shall ensure that state funds are withheld from any entity not in compliance with Executive Order 14151 issued by President Donald Trump on January 20, 2025.”

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 130 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

Senator Hauck offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 43, following line 20, by inserting:

“Sec. 225. It is the intent of the legislature that the department maximize the efficiency of the state workforce and, where possible, prioritize in-person work, and post its in-person, remote, or hybrid work policy on its website.”

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 131 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 37, line 9, by striking out all of subsection (d).

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 56, line 22, by striking out “Sec. 314. The department of attorney general may spend not more than $2,697,100.00 of the funds appropriated in part 1 from the lawsuit settlement proceeds fund for the payment of 1 or more of the following:

(a) Court judgements, orders, settlements, arbitration awards or other administrative decisions.

(b) Attorney fees, litigation costs, or investigation costs incurred by the office of the governor, the department of attorney general, the governor, the attorney general, a department, an agency, or a principal officer of a department, when acting in an official capacity.”.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 8, following line 3, by striking out lines 4 through line 1 of page 13 and inserting the following:

“Sec. 104. EXECUTIVE OFFICE

(1) APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

Full-time equated unclassified positions 10.0

Full-time equated classified positions 86.2

GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 9,337,100

Interdepartmental grant revenues:

Total interdepartmental grants and intradepartmental transfers 0

ADJUSTED GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 9,337,100

Federal revenues:

Total federal revenues 0

Special revenue funds:

Total local revenues 0

Total private revenues 0

Total other state restricted revenues 0

State general fund/general purpose $ 9,337,100

(2) EXECUTIVE OFFICE OPERATIONS

Full-time equated unclassified positions 10.0

Full-time equated classified positions 86.2

Unclassified salaries–FTEs 8.0 $ 1,621,800

Governor 159,300

Lieutenant governor 111,600

Executive office–FTEs 86.2 7,444,400

GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 9,337,100

Appropriated from:

State general fund/general purpose $ 9,337,100

Sec. 105. LEGISLATURE

(1) APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 231,881,000

Interdepartmental grant revenues:

Total interdepartmental grants and intradepartmental transfers 7,334,800

ADJUSTED GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 224,546,200

Federal revenues:

Total federal revenues

Special revenue funds:

Total local revenues

Total private revenues $ 467,700

Total other state restricted revenues 7,898,400

State general fund/general purpose $ 216,180,100

(2) LEGISLATURE

Senate $ 50,540,800

Senate automated data processing 3,194,200

Senate fiscal agency 4,736,300

House of representatives 74,223,800

House automated data processing 3,194,200

House fiscal agency 4,736,300

GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 140,625,600

Appropriated from:

State general fund/general purpose $ 140,625,600

(3) LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Independent citizens redistricting commission $ 2,992,300

Legislative corrections ombudsman 1,585,800

Legislative council 16,472,500

Legislative service bureau automated data processing 3,712,100

Michigan veterans facility ombudsman 368,600

National association dues 703,700

Sentencing commission 100

Tribal legislative liaison 500,000

Worker’s compensation 177,100

GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 26,512,200

Appropriated from:

State general fund/general purpose $ 26,512,200

(4) LEGISLATIVE RETIREMENT SYSTEM

Actuarially determined contribution $ 100

General nonretirement expenses 6,280,100

GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 6,280,200

Appropriated from:

Special revenue funds:

Court fees 1,461,400

State general fund/general purpose $ 4,818,800

(5) PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

Binsfeld Office Building and other properties $ 9,865,000

Cora Anderson Building 6,825,000

GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 16,690,000

Appropriated from:

State general fund/general purpose $ 16,690,000

(6) STATE CAPITOL HISTORIC SITE

Bond/lease obligations $ 100

General operations 6,574,100

Restoration, renewal, and maintenance 3,961,100

GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 10,535,300

Appropriated from:

Special revenue funds:

Private – gifts and bequests 467,700

Capitol historic site fund 3,961,100

State general fund/general purpose $ 6,106,500

(7) OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL

Unclassified positions--FTEs $ 433,500

Field operations 30,804,200

GROSS APPROPRIATION $ 31,237,700

Appropriated from:

Interdepartmental grant revenues:

IDG, commercial mobile radio system emergency telephone fund 44,900

IDG, contract audit administration fees 77,000

IDG, deferred compensation funds 110,800

IDG, emp ben div postemployment life insurance benefit 23,000

IDG from LEO, self-insurers security fund 97,000

IDG from MDHHS, human services 37,400

IDG from MDLARA, liquor purchase revolving fund 116,900

IDG from MDMVA, Michigan veterans facility authority 105,000

IDG from MDOT, comprehensive transportation fund 47,100

IDG from MDOT, Michigan transportation fund 382,400

IDG from MDOT, state aeronautics fund 37,000

IDG from MDOT, state trunkline fund 888,300

IDG, legislative retirement system 31,900

IDG, Michigan economic development corporation 152,800

IDG, Michigan education trust fund 67,000

IDG, Michigan finance authority 321,900

IDG, Michigan justice training commission fund 50,000

IDG, Michigan strategic fund 238,500

IDG, office of retirement services 1,019,600

IDG, other restricted funding sources 26,400

IDG, state sponsored group insurance fund 84,700

IDG, single audit act 3,375,200

Special revenue funds:

21st century jobs trust fund 116,800

Brownfield development fund 34,200

Game and fish protection account 38,000

MDTMB, civil service commission 215,400

Michigan state housing development authority fees 137,600

Michigan veterans’ trust fund 2,000

Michigan veterans’ trust fund income and assessments 23,000

Motor transport revolving fund 8,900

Office services revolving fund 12,300

State disbursement unit, office of child support 69,400

State services fee fund 1,804,600

Waterways account 13,700

State general fund/general purpose $ 21,427,000”

and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 81, following line 4, by inserting:

“Sec. 720. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for election regulation, the MDOS shall submit a report to the standard report recipients that must include information on the steps the MDOS has taken to correct and improve the online accessibility and availability of campaign finance reports. The report must include a listing of the steps the MDOS has taken to fix and improve the webpage along with steps taken to comply with online accessibility requirements in the Michigan campaign finance act.”.

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 132 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 88, following line 12, by inserting:

“Sec. 822f. From the funds appropriated in part 1, the MDTMB shall submit a monthly report to the house of representatives and senate appropriations committees detailing the daily employee occupancy rate of each state-owned or leased building for the prior month. The first report must be submitted by November 30, 2025.”

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 133 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 19, line 21, after “137.0” by striking out “50,080,400” and inserting “75,080,400” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

2. Amend page 93, following line 15, by inserting:

“Sec. 827a. (1) From the funds appropriated in part 1 for Michigan public safety communications system, $25,000,000.00 shall be used for matching grants to local units of government for the construction of new public safety communication towers. The Michigan public safety communications system (MPSCS) shall coordinate with the department of treasury to develop a grant program for this purpose. The grant program must be structured as follows:

(a) Grants shall be awarded to local units of government on a competitive basis. The MPSCS shall have the authority to review applications and select grant recipients from applications received.

(b) In order to be eligible for a grant under this section, a local unit of government must commit $1.00 for every $1.00 of grant funding received for the purposes described in subsection (1).

(c) The department of treasury shall administer the payment of grants on behalf of the MPSCS. The department of treasury shall expend not more than 1% of the funds allocated in part 1 for public safety facility grants for administrative purposes.

(2) The MPSCS shall develop and post a grant application on a publicly accessible page of the department website no later than November 15, 2025.

(3) The MPSCS must set a deadline for receipt of applications of December 31, 2025. Funds must be awarded no later than March 15, 2026.

(4) The MPSCS must give priority to areas that have the greatest demonstrated need for communication towers and that demonstrate the ability to meet the matching requirement in subsection (1)(b).

(5) The unexpended portion of funds appropriated to the Michigan public safety communications system for grants for new public safety communications towers is designated as a work project appropriation, and any unencumbered or unallotted funds shall not lapse at the end of the fiscal year and shall be available for expenditure for the project under this section until the project has been completed. The following is in compliance with section 451a(1) of the management and budget act, 1984 PA 431, MCL 18.1451a:

(a) The purpose of the project is to provide grants to support the construction of new public safety communications towers by local units of government.

(b) The project will be accomplished by utilizing state resources, grants, contracts with service providers, or some combination thereof.

(c) The total estimated cost of the project is $25,000,000.00.

(d) The tentative completion date is September 30, 2030.”

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 31, following line 25, by inserting:

“Public safety facility grants 50,000,000”

and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

2. Amend page 149, following line 19, by inserting:

“Sec. 991. (1) From the funds appropriated in part 1 for public safety facility grants, the department of treasury shall establish and administer a program to provide matching grants to local units of government for the purpose of consolidating or renovating local law enforcement or fire fighter facilities. The grant program must be structured as follows:

(a) Grants shall be awarded to local units of government on a competitive basis. The department of treasury must prioritize demonstrated need and cost savings when selecting grant recipients.

(b) In order to be eligible for a grant under this section, a local unit of government must commit $1.00 for every $1.00 of grant funding received for the purposes described in subsection (1).

(c) The maximum award for a grant shall be $5,000,000.00 per local unit of government.

(d) The department of treasury shall expend not more than 1% of the funds allocated in part 1 for public safety facility grants for administrative purposes.

(2) The department of treasury shall develop and post a grant application on a publicly accessible page of the department website no later than November 15, 2025.

(3) The department of treasury must set a deadline for receipt of applications of December 31, 2025. Funds must be awarded no later than March 15, 2026.

(7) The unexpended portion of funds appropriated for public safety facility grants are designated as a work project appropriation, and any unencumbered or unallotted funds shall not lapse at the end of the fiscal year and shall be available for expenditure for the project under this section until the project has been completed. The following is in compliance with section 451a(1) of the management and budget act, 1984 PA 431, MCL 18.1451a:

(a) The purpose of the project is to provide grants to support the consolidation and renovation of law enforcement and fire department facilities owned and operated by local units of government.

(b) The project will be accomplished by utilizing state resources and grants.

(c) The total estimated cost of the project is $50,000,000.00.

(d) The tentative completion date is September 30, 2030.”

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 140, line 19, by striking out all of subsection (6).

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 134 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

Senator Albert offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 127, line 15, by striking out all of subsection (6).

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 135 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

Senator Theis offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 3, line 14, by striking out “119,429,600” and inserting “118,429,600”, and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 136 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

Senator Hauck offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 40, following line 13, by inserting:

“Sec. 214. The department shall maintain, on a publicly accessible website, information that identifies, tracks, and regularly updates key metrics that are used to monitor and improve the agency’s performance.”

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator McBroom offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 81, following line 14, by inserting:

“Sec. 723. From the funds appropriated in part 1, the MDOS must update its software to allow for the inclusion of a capital letter anywhere in between the first and last letter of the last name or to make all letters in a last name capital letters, whichever is most cost-efficient. This provision must be applied to all correspondence regarding elections or other voter materials, and state-issued driver licenses, personal identification cards, enhanced driver licenses, or enhanced personal identification cards.”.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Lindsey offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 25, following line 7, by inserting:

“Liability reimbursement 83,000,000”

and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

2. Amend page 133, following line 15, by inserting:

“Sec. 949o. (1) From the funds appropriated in part 1 for liability reimbursement, the department shall reimburse county treasurers on a case-by-case basis for the cost of liabilities due to a court order or settlement issued for actions taken by a county treasurer that was in compliance with state law.

(2) In order to receive a reimbursement as described in subsection (1), a county treasurer must demonstrate in writing to the department of treasury that the liability is due to a court order or settlement resulting from action that was in compliance with Michigan statute at the time it occurred.”

The question being on the adoption of the amendments,

Senator Lindsey withdrew the amendments.

Senator Theis offered the following amendment:

1. Amend page 81, following line 14, by inserting:

“Sec. 723. Beginning on October 1, 2025, all state-issued driver’s license, state-issued personal identification cards, state-issued enhanced driver’s license, or state-issued enhanced personal identification cards shall only recognize two genders.”.

The question being on the adoption of the amendment,

Senator Lauwers requested the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendment was not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 137 Yeas—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Nays—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

The question being on the passage of the bill,

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 138 Yeas—19

Anthony Chang Klinefelt Santana

Bayer Cherry McCann Shink

Brinks Geiss McMorrow Singh

Camilleri Hertel Moss Wojno

Cavanagh Irwin Polehanki

Nays—17

Albert Hauck Lauwers Outman

Bellino Hoitenga Lindsey Theis

Bumstead Huizenga McBroom Victory

Daley Johnson Nesbitt Webber

Damoose

Excused—1

Runestad

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Geiss

The Senate agreed to the title of the bill.

Protest

Senator Albert, under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill No. 173 and moved that the statement he made during the discussion of the bill be printed as his reasons for voting “no.”

The motion prevailed.

Senator Albert’s statement is as follows:

This is what we commonly refer to as a first chamber budget. Sometime, in the months ahead, we will be voting on a revised and final plan after a compromise is reached with the House of Representatives and the Governor’s office. I certainly hope the upcoming version is better than the one we are voting on today.

There are some elements of this budget that I support, but overall this budget is just more of the same failed strategy we have seen from Michigan Democrats over the last few years. It’s more big government and centralized planning. It spends more money, expands bureaucratic power, and caters to political supporters—all at taxpayer expense. Anyone who has followed population trends knows Michigan isn’t getting any bigger. By many measures, our economy isn’t getting any stronger, yet our state government grows all the time and has expanded its bureaucracy by thousands of positions in the last couple of years alone—paid for by everyone else in the state.

This General Government budget, which is just a slice of the overall state budget, proposes adding another 54 jobs itself in the next fiscal year. It proposes spending about 4.5 percent more money than this current fiscal year. It doesn’t make our government any more efficient or responsive to taxpayers. It does not make Michigan a better place to live, work, and raise a family. We can do better, and hopefully when we are voting on the budget again a few months or a few weeks, we will do better.

Senators Theis, Nesbitt, Lindsey, Hauck, Albert, Cherry and McBroom asked and were granted unanimous consent to make statements and moved that the statements be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Theis’ first statement is as follows:

I offer this amendment to further build on efforts to improve transparency within state government. While the recent reforms were a good start, we can do more to ensure residents are receiving the best bang for the buck from their government. We’ve seen many examples of frivolous spending, from a $4,500 taxpayer-funded coffeemaker to corporate welfare benefitting our global adversaries. It’s time we reel in this out-of-control, unchecked spending and restore taxpayer confidence in state government. My amendment would offer a small, additional funding measure for the Office of the Auditor General to identify waste, improve transparency, and make sure government is working in the best interest of Michigan residents. Instead of continuing the status quo of wasteful spending, we can focus on efforts that matter—like improving our roads and bridges, and taking care of our most vulnerable residents. This is a small investment that has the likelihood of offering a massive return on investment. I ask for support.

Senator Nesbitt’s statement is as follows:

Two months before the 2024 election, our Secretary of State testified before the United States Congress. She said, “There is no evidence that noncitizens are voting.” About a month later, we found out that a Chinese national voted in our election here in Michigan, and his vote counted. There were no checks; there were no red flags. He wasn’t even caught. He actually voluntarily turned himself in. We never would have known about it if he didn’t do that. That’s the only reason we knew about it. The Secretary of State now admits that many more noncitizens actually voted in our election last year. Fortunately, the House Oversight chair has been doing some investigations—he’s a former clerk himself—he’s revealing that numbers will continue to grow.

One of our top priorities should be ensuring that our elections are secure—one person, one vote—and that our citizens shouldn’t have to worry about foreign nationals cancelling out their vote. My amendment would simply appropriate funds for the Attorney General to actually investigate this very serious problem. I only hope that, after monumental failures of our Secretary of State to secure our elections, our Attorney General will do her job and investigate how this dangerous assault on our democracy continues to happen. I ask for a “yes” vote on my amendment.

Senator Lindsey’s statement is as follows:

Merit should govern employment decisions, not discriminatory practices like DEI, especially when President Trump has led with such clarity on this issue through his executive actions. Please support my amendment to stop state funding of DEI.

Senator Hauck’s first statement is as follows:

One of our key duties as lawmakers is to ensure government runs efficiently. The taxpayers of this state rightfully expect their government to work for them. My amendment would require state departments to post their in-person, remote, or hybrid work policies on their website. For years, there have been complaints of government inefficiency, long wait times for services, and even inquiries to state departments going unanswered. Residents and businesses are often required to jump through hoops in the name of government compliance. The least we could do is work to improve government efficiency. Government is designed to be of the people and for the people, and unfortunately the Lansing bureaucracy has lost focus on that goal. I ask for your support of this amendment.

Senator Albert’s first statement is as follows:

This amendment eliminates newly proposed language that calls for the state to give preference to goods and services made in facilities that employ union members. This seems to be another attempt to steer the state’s business toward unions for purely political purposes. The state should buy goods and services at the best price or best value whenever possible. These goods should be made in Michigan or the United States whenever possible, regardless of whether or not it comes from a union shop. Roughly 13.5 percent of Michigan’s workforce was unionized in 2024. The other 87 percent of Michigan workers and businesses deserve a fair opportunity to do business with the state of Michigan. I ask for support for this amendment.

Senator Albert’s second statement is as follows:

The budget bill before us today appears to allow the Attorney General, the Governor’s office, and state departments to redirect some funding without sufficient oversight from the Legislature. The amount in question is up to $2.7 million from lawsuit settlement proceeds. The Attorney General is currently authorized to use this for expenses related to the declaration of emergency due to drinking water contamination. The budget bill before us today appears to allow that money to be spent on investigation or court costs by any state department. Worse, the bill removes the requirement for the Legislature to be informed of how the money is spent. This is poor precedent. My amendment would remove this section and allow the Legislature to retain a say on how the money is spent. I urge my colleagues to support.

Senator Albert’s third statement is as follows:

This amendment is an attempt to show some fiscal responsibility and respect for the taxpayers of Michigan in an overall budget that, for the most part, lacks it. This amendment would eliminate the 3 percent budget increase allotted for the executive and legislative branches. Instead, it would keep spending in the Legislature and the executive branch at the level of the current year. Most Michigan taxpayers, families, and businesses can’t just magically increase their spending by 3 percent every year. They have to actually budget. If they have to spend more in one area, they may have to cut back in another to make ends meet. Government shouldn’t be any different. We should make some attempt within this state budget to lead by example. A good starting point is to ask the Legislature and the executive branch to at least hold the spending level at the status quo and show that we can actually work within our budget. I ask support for this amendment.

Senator Albert’s fourth statement is as follows:

This amendment calls on the Department of State to inform the Legislature about the steps it is taking to correct and improve online accessibility and availability of campaign finance reports. The state invested millions of dollars to supposedly upgrade this website—and apparently things are getting worse, not better. At some points within the last month or so, the site was not providing access to some reports or allowing for some simple online searches. This is completely unacceptable. Please approve this amendment aimed at bringing some accountability to this process and to fix the website.

Senator Albert’s fifth statement is as follows:

I’m a bit perplexed at how this happens. Every year, Democrats add to the number of state government employees, but every year, fewer and fewer people appear to be working in state offices in downtown Lansing and elsewhere in the state. I am not sure when knowing what percentage of state employees are coming into the office became a state secret, but here we are.

This amendment seeks to shed light on the issue for taxpayers who simply want to know how their money is being spent. The amendment would require DTMB to report once a month on the employee occupancy rate of each state-owned or leased building. This amendment isn’t about the debate between working in the office or working remotely. It’s about determining how the state spends taxpayer money and whether we can accelerate efforts to end leases and sell buildings that aren’t being used. It’s about finding ways to save money. The state of Michigan shouldn’t ask taxpayers to pay for building space that it doesn’t use. It’s wasteful and insulting. I urge support for this amendment.

Senator Albert’s sixth statement is as follows:

This amendment would address a critical public safety need in many of our communities across Michigan. It would provide an additional $25 million to help improve and maintain the radio tower public safety communications system that emergency responders and law enforcement rely on every day. In recent years, more than 30 Michigan communities have expressed interest in constructing additional towers and sites to help improve emergency communication coverage. Several counties in my district need these towers, and requests have also come in areas from the Upper Peninsula, Northern Michigan, Southwest Michigan, the Thumb, and all across our state. This grant would be based on the greatest need and would include a 50‑50 match. I hope we can all agree that emergency responders should be able to communicate with each other on a stable and secure network in all parts of our state, especially during an emergency. I support this amendment and ask my colleagues to vote “yes.”

Senator Albert’s seventh statement is as follows:

We have an opportunity to make our communities safer every time we determine a new state budget. In that spirit, I offer this amendment. This amendment would provide $50 million statewide for what would be called a Public Safety Facility Grant. These funds could be used to renovate or consolidate law enforcement and firefighter facilities in our local communities. The grant would be awarded competitively and would require a 50-50 match. In Battle Creek, which is in my district, the newest fire station is roughly 50 years old, and some are more than 100 years old. Modernization and maintenance are massive challenges. A competitive matching grant program such as this could provide Battle Creek and other communities across our state one more option to help them meet public-safety needs. I realize and appreciate that there are other public-safety initiatives in this budget, but a matching program specifically for renovating and consolidating facilities is desperately needed. It certainly would be a better investment of Michigan tax dollars than the status quo. I ask for your support.

Senator Albert’s eighth statement is as follows:

This amendment would remove some broad language that potentially could cheat some Michigan cities, villages, townships, and counties out of vital revenue-sharing funds. Revenue sharing helps pay for local police, fire, and other services, but language inserted by Democrats gives the Attorney General power to take away revenue sharing if they decide a local municipality isn’t complying with the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. The Fifth Amendment covers all sorts of self-incrimination, double jeopardy, and due process situations. The Fourteenth Amendment deals with citizenship, due process, representation in Congress, public debt, and other areas. The degree of latitude here given to the AG is too broad. It should also be pointed out that appointing the Attorney General as prosecutor, judge, and jury in these cases, with no procedures for due process, likely violates the Constitution itself. Please support my amendment eliminating this language.

Senator Cherry’s statement is as follows:

I’d just like to note that over the past two days, we have dealt with various amendments that restrict funding to local units of government, removing all their money from EGLE if they adopt ordinances about gas stoves. Today, we dealt with one that defunds them if they have DEI initiatives. We defund schools if they recognize diversity, equity, and inclusion. We’re simply saying that you have to follow the Constitution. I think this is a far more serious matter than gas stoves.

Senator Albert’s ninth statement is as follows:

I appreciate the comments of the speaker before me. It’s worth noting a great differentiation of how this is being done and applied under different circumstances. There have been numerous amendments with different avenues that would establish some type of standard. That’s clear, Everybody understands it. We have standards for all sorts of things across our state and state law, and if people don’t meet that standard, then there are repercussions. That’s—we do that literally in all sorts of forms of state law. It’s actually what laws are for, is to set some type of standard. The problem here with what the Democrats are proposing is the standard is unknown. The Attorney General, through their own determination, without any type of public notification or explanation, gets to simply wave a wand and withhold people’s money. Like I said, it’s just too broad. There needs to be a standard that’s clear, that people know what the expectations are.

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, generally speaking, cover a lot of areas, so it’s like, What are you guys getting at? Is it immigration? Is it something else? What is it? If you’re trying to set some type of standard, set it. If you’re trying to make a point, make the point and put it down between the four corners of the page so everybody knows what they’re expected to do. This is just too abstract, it’s too broad, and it causes way too much uncertainty for our local units of government.

Senator Albert’s tenth statement is as follows:

This amendment is the same as the one cited before, related to revenue sharing and the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments. This one deals with eliminating the Attorney General’s proposed power to take away a community’s funds for improving public safety, such as the Community Crime Reduction Initiative. Please support my amendment.

Senator Theis’ second statement is as follows:

If the Attorney General isn’t going to do the full job that the taxpayers have hired her to do, her office can operate with less of the taxpayers’ money. My amendment would cut $1 million from the Attorney General’s funding. It’s shameful and a dereliction of duty that our Attorney General has failed to prosecute crimes perpetrated during campus protests that erupted after the October 7 terrorist attacks on Israel. Not only has our Attorney General failed to stand up firmly against the hateful antisemitism we have seen displayed on college campuses, she has also failed to stand up for the basic rule of law. One is a failure of character; the other is a failure of duty. I ask for a “yes” vote on my amendment to hold the Attorney General’s office accountable for this inaction.

Senator Hauck’s second statement is as follows:

We’ve heard a lot of different amendments today, but I assure you this is going to be the best one today. Hear me out on this one. Is our state delivering great customer service to our residents? Are we answering phones properly? Are permits being processed quickly? Do we have any specific goals to improve customer service? If you answered those three questions, “no,” then I have the right amendment for you. As legislators, I believe we should have clear answers to these questions. My amendment simply requires departments to maintain a public accessible website with key metrics to track and improve agencies’ performance. This isn’t political. It’s literally how most organizations are run. In fact, we used to do this. We used to require department scorecards. It tracked all sorts of things that would be useful for us to consider. We used to be able to see the average wait time for phone calls to LARA. We used to be able to see the processing times for the Treasury. Unfortunately, it was quietly taken out of our budget last year, and I simply suggest that we bring it back. I really hope you give this one some thought.

Senator McBroom’s statement is as follows:

I recognize that this amendment may seem completely superfluous to many of my colleagues and unnecessary, but I’ll start off by pointing out some members’ names, both past and present. There’s McMorrow, O’Brien, VanderWall, McCann, McBroom—what do all these names have in common with each other? They’re all names that are known as being bi-capital, meaning that they have two capital letters in them. This is the correct spelling of these names. There’s a significant reason, history, convention, and etiquette that goes into why they have two capital letters in them. It’s not just European names. There are many names from Asia as well that have two capital letters. Of course, we also have many names that are hyphenated, such as our former colleague, McDonald Rivet, that have two capital letters.

Presently, the Secretary of State has—which seems to be a great pattern over there—chosen some software that they claim disallows them to have bi-capitalization of last names. Our Secretary of State has chosen a software vendor to develop another program that, once again, is letting down the people of this state—people who care about having their name printed correctly. People should care to spell other people’s names correctly as a matter of good manners and etiquette, not to mention proper spelling.

My amendment says that the Secretary of State must correct this software error and start spelling people’s names correctly, or simply put them in all capital letters as was done in the past before this latest snafu of computer programming. I ask for your support of my amendment.

Senator Theis’ third statement is as follows:

In recent years, we’ve seen relentless efforts to ignore basic facts, including efforts by our own Secretary of State. In 2021, Jocelyn Benson unilaterally decided that Michigan would abandon biological reality and allow Michiganders to use “X” as the sex on their driver’s license and state identification cards. My amendment would ensure that when the state issues governmental documents, like a driver’s license, the Secretary of State’s office shall only recognize two sexes: male and female. Now, this doesn’t mean that you can’t present however you want to present; it merely recognizes biological reality in governmental documents. Our laws, opportunities, and protections are based on the fact that we recognize this. I ask for support on my amendment.

Senator Victory asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Victory’s statement is as follows:

Today, I’m going to say farewell to one of our great team members who spent this semester helping in my office—Ben Lefere. Ben has been a great team member. I’d like to thank him for all the tasks he’s done, on administrative tasks, constituent relations, researching serious issues like wetland restoration practices, and being a positive addition to the day-to-day activities in our environment. Ben has shown an exceptional ability to handle any situation he faced. I wish him the best as he moves to his next challenge in the United States Congress.

Colleagues, join me in welcoming Ben, who is in the west Gallery.

By unanimous consent the Senate proceeded to the order of

Introduction and Referral of Bills

Senator Hauck introduced

Senate Bill No. 303, entitled

A bill to amend 1978 PA 368, entitled “Public health code,” (MCL 333.1101 to 333.25211) by adding section 16189.

The bill was read a first and second time by title and referred to the Committee on Health Policy.

Senators Damoose, Bellino, Bumstead, Singh, McMorrow, Bayer and McBroom introduced

Senate Bill No. 304, entitled

A bill to amend 1899 LA 437, entitled “An act to vacate the Township of Holmes and Village of Mackinac in Mackinac County, State of Michigan, and to Incorporate the City of Mackinac Island in said Mackinac County,” by amending section 1 of chapter IX and section 1 of chapter XVI; and to provide for a referendum.

The bill was read a first and second time by title and referred to the Committee on Regulatory Affairs.

By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of

Resolutions

Senator Singh moved that the Senate proceed to consideration of the following resolution:

Senate Resolution No. 46

The motion prevailed.

Senators Victory, McCann, Cherry, McBroom, Hertel, Shink, Lauwers, Chang, Anthony, Damoose, Bellino, Huizenga, Bumstead and Daley offered the following resolution:

Senate Resolution No. 46.

A resolution to recognize May 14, 2025, as Michigan Rail Day.

Whereas, National Rail Day is celebrated in May to commemorate the completion of America’s first transcontinental railroad on May 11, 1869; and

Whereas, Michigan is fortunate to have 3,465 freight rail miles operated by 29 freight carriers and Amtrak passenger service; and

Whereas, Railroads are a safe way to move freight and are working to improve infrastructure and equipment safety, reduce human error, and protect the rail network every day; and

Whereas, Technologies like train inspection portals and cracked wheel detection have resulted in Class 1 mainline accident rate reductions of 42 percent since 2000; and

Whereas, The last decade was the safest, with the 2023 hazmat accident rate at its lowest ever; and

Whereas, The railroad industry partners with law enforcement, fire departments, 911 call centers, emergency management directors and others to promote a blue safety sign, also known as the Emergency Notification Sign (ENS), which is located at every rail crossing; and

Whereas, Railroads offer the safety tool, AskRail app, to Michigan’s fire and police leadership. The AskRail app provides first responders immediate access to accurate, timely data about what type of hazardous materials a railcar is carrying so they can make an informed decision about how to respond to a rail emergency; and

Whereas, Moving freight by rail prevents 6.97 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions, the equivalent of planting 105.6 million trees; and

Whereas, Railroads help preserve infrastructure and aid in cutting congestion; and

Whereas, Freight railroads take 4.7 million truckloads off Michigan roads annually; and

Whereas, From the auto industry and other manufacturers to mining and agriculture, Michigan’s productive freight rail network provides key connections to keep our state’s economy vibrant; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, That the members of this legislative body recognize May 14, 2025, as Michigan Rail Day; and be it further

Resolved, That we recognize and celebrate the pivotal role that a robust freight railroad and passenger system is to the residents of the Great Lakes State.

The question being on the adoption of the resolution,

The resolution was adopted.

Senator Santana was named co-sponsor of the resolution.

Senator Victory asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Victory’s statement is as follows:

Today, I rise in support of my resolution designating May 14 as Michigan Rail Day. From the auto industry and other manufacturers to mining and agriculture, Michigan freight rail network provides a key connection to keep our state moving with more than 3,400 freight miles operated by 29 carriers. A strong rail network is vital to Michigan’s economy. Rail is the safest way to move freight on land, and the last decade was the safest ever, with the 2023 hazmat accident rate at its lowest ever.

The rail industry partners with law enforcement, fire departments, 9-1-1 call centers, emergency management directors, and others to promote the Emergency Notification Sign, which is located at every rail crossing. I want to highlight, that’s that blue sign you see at every crossing; when there’s ever an incident, just call that number. It’s very critical, and that’s a part of the safety network.

Moving freight by rail takes 4.7 million truckloads off Michigan roads annually. I ask you to help me recognize and celebrate the pivotal role that the robust freight railroad and passenger system is to the residents of the great state of Michigan.

Senator Klinefelt offered the following resolution:

Senate Resolution No. 47.

A resolution to commemorate May 11-17, 2025, as Police Week.

Whereas, In 1962, President John F. Kennedy proclaimed May 15th as National Peace Officers Memorial Day, while the calendar week in which May 15th falls is also known as National Police Week; and

Whereas, National Police Week was established by a joint resolution of Congress in 1962, paying special recognition to those law enforcement officers who lost their lives in the line of duty or for the safety and protection of others; and

Whereas, There are more than 750,000 law enforcement officers serving in communities across the United States, including approximately 18,000 full-time uniformed police officers in Michigan; and

Whereas, In 2024, 147 law enforcement officers were killed and many more assaulted in the line of duty across the country; and

Whereas, The names of the dedicated public servants who made the ultimate sacrifice are engraved on the walls of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial in Washington, D.C.; and

Whereas, Michigan’s fallen officers will never be forgotten, nor will their service to their respective communities. By choosing to serve as law enforcement officers, these courageous individuals answered the call for service and willingly put their lives in jeopardy to protect; and

Whereas, We applaud them for choosing law enforcement as their honorable career and commend those who serve with honor and integrity; and

Whereas, We are indebted to the unwavering public service of our local and state police and are both fortunate and grateful for their contributions to our state; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, That the members of this legislative body commemorate May 11-17, 2025, as Police Week. We openly salute the law enforcement officers in our communities, in addition to those in our state and country, and honor police who sacrifice their lives for the safety and security of all.

The question being on the adoption of the resolution,

The resolution was adopted.

Senators Chang, Santana and Webber were named co-sponsors of the resolution.

Senator Klinefelt asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Klinefelt’s statement, in which Senator Huizenga concurred, is as follows:

Today, I’d like to offer a resolution to recognize May 11-17, 2025, as Police Week. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy proclaimed May 15 as National Peace Officers Memorial Day, while the calendar week on May 15 was established by a joint resolution of Congress as National Police Week—same year. They paid special recognition to those in law enforcement who lost their lives in the line of duty or for the safety and protection of others.

Michigan is home to 18,000 full-time uniformed police officers. Last year, five were killed in the line of duty. Three of those were killed by gun violence. In 2024, 147 law enforcement officers nationwide were killed, and many more were assaulted and wounded in the line of duty. We’d like to applaud those who have chosen a career in law enforcement and commend them for serving with honor and integrity, and to never forget those who have made the ultimate sacrifice.

Senators Huizenga, Theis, Lauwers, Webber, McBroom, Hauck, Victory, Hoitenga, Johnson, Runestad and Nesbitt offered the following resolution:

Senate Resolution No. 45.

A resolution to commemorate May 11-17, 2025, as Police Week.

Whereas, In 1962, President John F. Kennedy proclaimed May 15th as National Peace Officers Memorial Day, while the calendar week in which May 15th falls is also known as National Police Week; and

Whereas, National Police Week was established by a joint resolution of Congress in 1962, paying special recognition to those law enforcement officers who lost their lives in the line of duty or for the safety and protection of others; and

Whereas, There are more than 700,000 law enforcement officers serving in communities across the United States, including the approximately 17,000 full-time uniformed police officers in Michigan; and

Whereas, Members of law enforcement deserve the appreciation and respect of our citizens for the merit, dignity, bravery, and reliability they exhibit each and every day. We must also honor the sacrifices made by families of police officers, as each day they must face constant concern as their loved ones work to protect us; and

Whereas, In 2024, 145 law enforcement officers were killed and many more assaulted in the line of duty across the country. This includes five Michiganders: Motor Carrier Officer Daniel Kerstetter from the Michigan State Police, Corporal Mohamed Said from the Melvindale Police Department, Deputy William Butler, Jr. from the Hillsdale County Sheriff’s Office, Deputy Bradley Reckling from the Oakland County Sheriff’s Office, and Trooper Joel Popp from the Michigan State Police; and

Whereas, The names of the dedicated public servants who made the ultimate sacrifice are engraved on the walls of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial in Washington, D.C.; and

Whereas, Michigan’s fallen officers will never be forgotten, nor will their service to their respective communities. By choosing to serve as law enforcement officers, these courageous individuals answered the call for service and willingly put their lives in jeopardy to protect; and

Whereas, We applaud them for recognizing service as their honorable career, securing the public safety, and commend those who serve without incident to date; and

Whereas, Michigan citizens have turned to members of law enforcement for assistance and support in times of distress, whether they are coping with a personal crisis, bearing the strains of a pandemic, or struggling through civil disorder or a natural disaster; and

Whereas, Our communities rely on these courageous individuals when it is difficult to stand on our own. We are indebted to the unwavering public service of our local and state police and are both fortunate and grateful for the contributions of law enforcement officers to the people of Michigan; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, That the members of this legislative body commemorate May 11-17, 2025, as Police Week. We openly salute the law enforcement officers in our communities, in addition to those in our state and country, and honor police who sacrifice their lives for the safety and security of all.

The question being on the adoption of the resolution,

Senator Singh moved that further consideration of the resolution be postponed for today.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Santana was named co-sponsor of the resolution.

By unanimous consent the Senate proceeded to the order of

Statements

Senator Polehanki stated that had she been present earlier today when the vote was taken on the passage of the following bill, she would have voted “yea”:

Senate Bill No. 172

Senators Bellino and Anthony asked and were granted unanimous consent to make statements and moved that the statements be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Bellino’s statement is as follows:

Madam President, the Michigan Court of Claims’ ill-advised ruling is an immediate threat to the health and safety of women across our state. The overturn of informed consent for women considering an abortion flies in the face of both common-sense medical practice and the democratic process. Abortion is the only medical procedure of its kind in which the patient is now expected to go in blind. There is no question that women are at greater risk when they enter an abortion clinic than they were before.

As a result of this dangerous ruling and disregard for patients’ rights, women in Michigan are no longer guaranteed access to important facts related to abortion. The informed consent and 24-hour waiting period law had been in effect for more than 30 years, providing women seeking an abortion with medically accurate information, including common risks associated with the procedure. The timing of this decision can not be more concerning, Madam President, as the state faces an unprecedented spike in serious complications from abortion, up 38 percent in one year according to the latest MDHHS abortion report.

Unable to gain the votes you needed to overturn the 24-hour waiting period and informed consent in the State Legislature, activist abortion providers appealed to the ideologically driven courts to strip these long-standing, bipartisan protections. Unsurprisingly, an overwhelming majority of voters—66 percent—support a 24-hour waiting period on the informed consent law.

Senator Anthony’s statement is as follows:

I’ve said it before and I will say it again, budgets are moral documents. If you want to understand what someone truly values, you can’t just listen to what they say; you have to follow the money, and you have to see where that money goes. As a state, when we invest our resources—wherever we put them—this says everything about who we are and what we stand for. That’s why I am proud of the budgets that we’ve passed out of this chamber.

It’s not just about numbers on a spreadsheet. It’s a blueprint for we serve the people of Michigan, because let’s face it, in a time of confusion, chaos, and unpredictability at the federal level, Michigan taxpayers deserve leaders who are willing to put aside petty differences and partisan politics. They deserve leaders who are willing to work together for the betterment of our state. It’s what we’ve done successfully in the past, and it’s what I know we can do this year. This chamber will serve as an example of what’s possible when elected leaders come together, respect each others ideas, and do what’s best for the people of Michigan.

The budget that we have passed today makes a few things clear: that we’re investing in our people, communities, and the future of our state. We’re putting more money directly into our neighborhoods; into the classrooms where our kids learn; into local governments that provide essential services and protect our families; into workforce programs that ensure that our people have the skills they need for the future they want; and into the health care that our most vulnerable citizens expect and deserve. It gives tariff relief, debt elimination, emergency response efforts, and targeted community support for people who need it most—like our seniors, our students, our small businesses, and our farmers. This budget doesn’t just respond to our challenges, it meets them head on.

I want to make something absolutely clear: we got the budget done here in the Senate on time, because we understand the seriousness of time in this moment. Passing a budget on time is not just about checking a box, it’s a responsibility we owe to every school district, every municipality, and every community that counts on us for stability and clarity—and it’s also the law. Timely budgets mean that city councils can pass local budgets, teachers and administrators can plan, caregivers can budget for the road ahead, and families can breathe a little easier. It’s not just about politics; it’s our job.

Our budget puts Michigan’s families first, plain and simple. It reflects what we’ve heard from residents across the state. They want good schools, safe communities, access to healthcare, and real opportunities to build a life here in Michigan. So yes, follow the money, and when you do, you will see that this Senate and the budget that we’ve just passed put Michigan residents first. It’s a budget that listens, that invests, and that delivers for people.

Announcements of Printing and Enrollment

The Secretary announced that the following House bills were received in the Senate and filed on Tuesday, May 13:

House Bill Nos. 4076 4103 4104 4118 4276 4309

The Secretary announced that the following bills were printed and filed on Tuesday, May 13, and are available on the Michigan Legislature website:

Senate Bill Nos. 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302

House Bill Nos. 4489 4490 4491 4492

Committee Reports

The Committee on Labor reported

Senate Bill No. 6, entitled

A bill to amend 1978 PA 390, entitled “An act to regulate the time and manner of payment of wages and fringe benefits to employees; to prescribe rights and responsibilities of employers and employees, and the powers and duties of the department of labor; to require keeping of records; to provide for settlement of disputes regarding wages and fringe benefits; to prohibit certain practices by employers; to prescribe penalties and remedies; and to repeal certain acts and parts of acts,” by amending sections 1, 7, 11, 13, 13a, 14, 15, 18, and 19 (MCL 408.471, 408.477, 408.481, 408.483, 408.483a, 408.484, 408.485, 408.488, and 408.489), section 1 as amended by 2016 PA 18, section 7 as amended by 2023 PA 243, and section 13a as added by 1982 PA 524, and by adding sections 13c and 13d.

With the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.

John Cherry

Chairperson

To Report Out:

Yeas: Senators Cherry, Camilleri and Cavanagh

Nays: Senator Albert

The bill and the substitute recommended by the committee were referred to the Committee of the Whole.

The Committee on Labor reported

Senate Bill No. 7, entitled

A bill to amend 1927 PA 175, entitled “The code of criminal procedure,” by amending section 14b (MCL 777.14b), as added by 2002 PA 29.

With the recommendation that the bill pass.

John Cherry

Chairperson

To Report Out:

Yeas: Senators Cherry, Camilleri and Cavanagh

Nays: Senator Albert

The bill was referred to the Committee of the Whole.

COMMITTEE ATTENDANCE REPORT

The Committee on Labor submitted the following:

Meeting held on Tuesday, May 13, 2025, at 9:45 a.m., Room 403, 4th Floor, Capitol Building

Present: Senators Cherry (C), Camilleri, Cavanagh and Albert

Scheduled Meetings

Regulatory Affairs – Thursday, May 15, 9:00 a.m., Room 403, 4th Floor, Capitol Building (517) 373-1721

Senator Singh moved that the Senate adjourn.

The motion prevailed, the time being 2:28 p.m.

The Assistant President pro tempore, Senator Geiss, declared the Senate adjourned until Thursday, May 15, 2025, at 10:00 a.m.

DANIEL OBERLIN

Secretary of the Senate