Michigan House Approves Plan to Eliminate Six-Mill Education Tax, Promising Property Tax Relief

 

LANSING, Mich. — Michigan homeowners could be one step closer to seeing a significant reduction in their property tax bills after the Michigan House approved legislation that would eliminate the state's long-standing six-mill State Education Tax.

House Bill 5873, backed by House Republicans, would repeal the statewide property tax that currently helps fund Michigan's K-12 public schools. Supporters estimate the proposal would reduce property tax bills by approximately 14%, providing financial relief to homeowners facing rising housing costs, inflation, and increasing property assessments.

Republican lawmakers say the legislation is aimed at making homeownership more affordable, particularly for seniors living on fixed incomes and young families trying to purchase their first home.

State Rep. Steve Frisbie, R-Pennfield Township, said Michigan families deserve relief as the cost of living continues to climb.

"In a time where anything that could be done to help with affordability, this is something we can do to deliver results," Frisbie said.

Relief for Homeowners

The six-mill State Education Tax has been collected since the passage of Proposal A in 1994 and applies to most property owners across Michigan. While property tax increases are limited under Michigan law, rapidly rising home values have still resulted in many homeowners paying substantially more in taxes over the past several years.

Supporters argue eliminating the tax would leave more money in the hands of Michigan families while making homeownership more affordable across the state.

For homeowners struggling with higher mortgage payments, insurance premiums, and everyday expenses, a 14% reduction in property taxes could translate into hundreds of dollars in annual savings.

Questions About School Funding

The proposal has also generated significant debate because the six-mill tax currently generates roughly $3 billion annually for Michigan's School Aid Fund.

To offset the loss, House Republicans approved a companion measure, House Bill 5880, which would replace the education funding through a combination of General Fund appropriations, state spending reductions, and a proposed 6% tax on certain luxury, non-essential, and artificial intelligence-related services.

Because the two bills are tie-barred, neither can become law unless both are approved by the Legislature and signed by the governor.

Democratic lawmakers have questioned whether the replacement funding would provide schools with the same long-term financial stability as the existing education tax.

State Rep. John Fitzgerald, D-Wyoming, voiced concerns during debate.

"Without a clear and defined backfill to this, I'm concerned that this is truly a challenge not only for the individuals paying the tax but for the entire stream from schools to workforce that will be impacted," Fitzgerald said.

Education advocates have also warned that any interruption in funding could affect teacher salaries, classroom resources, transportation, building maintenance, and student programs if replacement revenue falls short.

Republicans: Lansing Has a Spending Problem

Republicans maintain that Michigan's budget is large enough to provide tax relief without harming education.

They argue the issue is not a lack of revenue but how state government prioritizes spending. Supporters believe lawmakers should identify savings elsewhere in the budget rather than continue relying on property taxes that many homeowners say have become increasingly burdensome.

The debate reflects a broader philosophical divide in Lansing over taxation and government spending. Republicans view the proposal as a way to reduce the tax burden on working families, while Democrats argue stable and predictable school funding should remain the state's top priority.

Senate Approval Still Needed

Although House Bill 5873 has passed the Michigan House, the legislation still faces several hurdles before becoming law.

The Michigan Senate has not yet taken up the proposal, and Democrats control that chamber. If senators amend the legislation or reject portions of the package, both chambers would need to negotiate a final version before it could be sent to the governor.

Whether the proposal ultimately becomes law remains uncertain, but the legislation has already sparked one of the state's biggest policy debates of the year.

For Michigan homeowners, the measure offers the possibility of meaningful property tax relief. For educators and school districts, however, the central question remains whether lawmakers can reduce taxes while ensuring that public schools continue to receive reliable, long-term funding.

Why Did Michigan House Speaker Matt Hall Reverse Course on FOIA?

 

LANSING — For years, Matt Hall argued that Michigan's Legislature should no longer be exempt from the state's Freedom of Information Act. He voted for transparency legislation, criticized legislative leaders for failing to act, and appeared to support opening the Capitol's doors to greater public scrutiny.

Today, as Speaker of the Michigan House, Hall has taken the opposite position.

The same type of legislation he once supported is now stalled under his leadership, leaving many lawmakers, journalists and government watchdogs asking a simple question:

What changed?

The answer has never been fully explained.

A Campaign for Transparency

Michigan is one of only two states where both the governor's office and the Legislature remain exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. That means citizens cannot use FOIA to request lawmakers' emails, calendars, internal communications, or many records routinely available from state agencies.

For years, reformers have argued that exemption undermines public confidence and allows government to operate behind closed doors.

Matt Hall once appeared to agree.

As a state representative and later House Republican leader, Hall supported legislation to extend FOIA to the Legislature and publicly criticized the lack of progress. At the time, Republicans frequently argued that transparency should apply equally to every branch of government.

Those statements earned praise from advocates who believed meaningful reform might finally be within reach.

Then Hall Became Speaker

Everything changed after Republicans regained control of the Michigan House and Hall became Speaker.

In early 2025, the Michigan Senate overwhelmingly approved bipartisan legislation to expand FOIA to both the Legislature and governor's office.

The bills weren't partisan.

They were sponsored by Democratic Sen. Jeremy Moss and Republican Sen. Ed McBroom.

The proposal included exemptions designed to protect constituent privacy, legislative research, attorney-client communications, and other sensitive records while still giving the public access to government documents that are currently unavailable.

Many expected the bills to receive serious consideration in the House.

Instead, Hall declared them "dead on arrival."

Later, he went even further, saying publicly:

"We're just not going to do FOIA."

The statement surprised many transparency advocates because it represented a dramatic departure from Hall's earlier support.

An Unanswered Question

The most striking aspect of Hall's reversal is not simply that he changed his position.

It's that he has never provided a detailed explanation for why.

Instead, Hall argues that FOIA is not the best tool for government accountability.

He has promoted what Republicans call the HEAT Plan—Ethics, Accountability and Transparency—which includes requiring earlier disclosure of legislative earmarks, limiting certain legislative practices, and restricting former lawmakers from immediately becoming lobbyists.

Those reforms address ethics.

They do not give citizens the legal right to obtain government records.

To critics, the distinction matters.

FOIA allows reporters and citizens to independently verify government actions instead of relying solely on information officials choose to release voluntarily.

Following the Power

Political observers often note a familiar pattern in state politics.

Lawmakers in the minority frequently support greater transparency.

Once they gain control of government, enthusiasm for open-records laws often fades.

That pattern has crossed party lines.

Democratic leaders have previously faced criticism for failing to advance FOIA reforms when they controlled the Legislature.

Now Republicans are facing many of the same questions.

Hall's critics argue the issue is no longer about party affiliation.

It is about whether those holding power are willing to subject themselves to the same public scrutiny required of nearly every other government agency in Michigan.

What Could FOIA Reveal?

Supporters of expanding FOIA say the issue extends far beyond curiosity.

Opening legislative records could allow the public to examine:

• Communications between lawmakers and lobbyists.

• Internal discussions surrounding major legislation.

• Scheduling records showing meetings with special-interest groups.

• Documents related to earmarks and budget negotiations.

• Communications involving outside organizations attempting to influence legislation.

Current law generally prevents the public from obtaining many of those records.

Transparency advocates argue that exemption shields important government decision-making from independent review.

Supporters of the exemption counter that legislators need confidential space to negotiate, debate ideas, and serve constituents without every internal discussion becoming public.

A Rare Alliance

Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the debate is who agrees.

The Michigan Press Association supports FOIA expansion.

The Mackinac Center for Public Policy supports it.

The ACLU of Michigan supports it.

Progress Michigan supports it.

These organizations disagree on nearly every major political issue.

Yet they have united behind one principle: Michigan's elected officials should not enjoy exemptions from public-records laws that apply to nearly every other public body.

The Political Cost

Hall's position has become one of the defining transparency issues of his speakership.

Supporters say he is pursuing accountability through different reforms.

Critics argue those reforms avoid the one change that would give citizens the greatest independent oversight: access to government records.

Without FOIA, the public cannot compel disclosure of many legislative records.

Instead, lawmakers largely decide for themselves what information will be released.

The Bottom Line

The central question remains unanswered.

Matt Hall once argued that legislative transparency should be expanded.

Today, he is preventing legislation that would accomplish that goal from advancing in the Michigan House.

His public explanation is that other reforms are more important.

His critics say that answer does not explain why he abandoned a position he once championed.

Until Hall offers a fuller explanation—or allows the Legislature to vote on the issue—the debate is likely to continue, leaving Michigan as one of only two states where both the governor's office and Legislature remain largely beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information Act.

This version is written in an investigative-news style, emphasizing the documented timeline and the key unanswered questions without asserting motives that haven't been established.

Wife of Former Michigan House Speaker Lee Chatfield Pleads Guilty in Corruption Case, Ex-Speaker Faces Embezzlement and Rape Accusations

LANSING — The corruption scandal surrounding former Michigan House Speaker Lee Chatfield tightened another notch Tuesday as his wife, Stephanie Chatfield, admitted guilt in a felony embezzlement case stemming from what prosecutors describe as the misuse of nonprofit funds intended for public purposes.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced that Stephanie Chatfield pleaded guilty to one count of embezzlement from a nonprofit organization involving between $200 and $1,000. Under the plea agreement, she will receive probation, and the remaining charges against her will be dismissed if she successfully completes the terms imposed by the court.

The plea represents the third conviction secured in a broad corruption investigation that has engulfed the former Republican House Speaker and members of his inner circle.

Allegations of a Political Piggy Bank

According to investigators, Lee and Stephanie Chatfield allegedly treated the Peninsula Fund, a nonprofit 501(c)(4) organization, as a personal expense account rather than an organization created to promote public causes.

Authorities allege the couple diverted money from political accounts to fund vacations, dining, clothing purchases and other personal expenditures while Lee Chatfield wielded enormous political influence as Speaker of the Michigan House during 2019 and 2020.

A forensic accountant testified during earlier proceedings that approximately $152,000 in personal credit card debt was paid through nonprofit accounts.

Among the expenses prosecutors identified were:

• Tickets to Universal Studios in Florida.

• A $1,353 dinner at Ocean Prime in Naples, Florida.

• Nearly $1,000 in dry cleaning charges.

• More than $650 in purchases from Vineyard Vines.

• Numerous travel-related expenses and other personal charges.

Attorney General Dana Nessel condemned the conduct, saying nonprofit organizations are designed to serve the public—not enrich politicians.

"Nonprofits and 501(c)(4) organizations are meant to support the public welfare and wellbeing; they're not a personal slush fund for the politically connected," Nessel said.

She added that Michigan relies on honest bookkeeping and truthful reporting to maintain trust in organizations enjoying special tax treatment and limited disclosure requirements.

From Ten-Year Exposure to Probation

When charges were first filed in April 2024, Stephanie Chatfield faced felony counts that carried potential penalties of up to ten years in prison.

Instead, her plea agreement dramatically reduced the stakes. She will avoid incarceration and is scheduled for sentencing on July 20.

Because the Peninsula Fund no longer exists, prosecutors said restitution is unlikely to be ordered, meaning donors who contributed money to the organization are unlikely to see repayment.

Former Aides Already Cooperating

The investigation has already produced guilty pleas from two former Chatfield associates, Rob and Anné Minard, who once managed much of the former speaker's fundraising and political operations.

Both received probation after agreeing to cooperate and testify against their former boss.

They were also ordered to pay approximately $37,000 in taxes and penalties. Should they violate probation, they face prison exposure of up to 15 years.

Their testimony could become crucial when Lee Chatfield goes on trial later this year.

Lee Chatfield Still Faces 13 Felony Counts

Unlike his wife, Lee Chatfield has not accepted a plea agreement.

The former House Speaker continues to maintain his innocence and faces 13 felony charges, including conducting a criminal enterprise, which carries a potential sentence of up to 20 years in prison.

His attorney, Mary Chartier, has repeatedly characterized the prosecution as politically motivated and has argued that the amount of allegedly improper spending was substantially lower than prosecutors contend.

Chartier said Stephanie Chatfield's plea "has no impact" on her husband's defense and that preparations for trial continue.

His trial is currently scheduled for September.

Investigation Began With Separate Abuse Allegations

The corruption probe originated after Lee Chatfield's sister-in-law, Rebekah Chatfield, publicly accused him of sexually abusing and manipulating her for years beginning when she was a teenage student at the Christian school where he taught.

Attorney General Nessel previously stated investigators could not establish sufficient evidence to pursue criminal sexual assault charges. Lee Chatfield has denied wrongdoing and described the relationship as consensual.

Although no sexual assault charges resulted, investigators uncovered financial records that opened the door to what became one of the largest political corruption investigations involving a Michigan legislative leader in recent memory.

Renewed Scrutiny on Michigan's "Dark Money" System

The case has also drawn attention to Michigan's loosely regulated network of nonprofit political organizations, often called "dark money" groups, which can raise and spend large amounts with relatively little public transparency.

Critics say the Chatfield case illustrates how such organizations can be exploited without stronger disclosure laws and tighter oversight.

Attorney General Nessel has repeatedly called for reforms to bring greater transparency and accountability to political fundraising.

A Fall From Power

Once considered one of the most powerful Republicans in Michigan, Lee Chatfield rose rapidly through the Legislature and amassed a formidable fundraising network.

Now, three individuals connected to his political operation have admitted guilt, and the former Speaker himself faces a September trial that could determine whether prosecutors can prove allegations that political influence and nonprofit dollars were used to finance a lifestyle far removed from the charitable and public purposes donors believed they were supporting.

For prosecutors, the guilty plea by Stephanie Chatfield marks another conviction in a case they argue is about preserving public trust and ensuring that political insiders are held accountable when charitable organizations become vehicles for personal gain.

---