The below proposals will be on your Michigan ballot this November:
Proposal 1 - Conservation Funds
A PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO REQUIRE THAT MONEY HELD IN CONSERVATION AND RECREATION FUNDS CAN ONLY BE USED FOR THEIR INTENDED PURPOSES
The proposed constitutional amendment would:
• Create a Conservation and Recreation Legacy Fund within the Constitution and establish
existing conservation and recreation accounts as components of the fund.
• Use current funding sources such as state park entrance and camping fees; snowmobile, ORV
and boating registration fees; hunting and fishing license fees; taxes and other revenues to
fund accounts.
• Establish the current Game and Fish Protection Fund and the Nongame Fish and Wildlife
Fund within the Constitution.
• Provide that money held in Funds can only be used for specific purposes related to
conservation and recreation and cannot be used for any purpose other than those intended.
Should this proposal be adopted? Yes or No.
Proposal 2 - Affirmative Action
A PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO BAN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS THAT GIVE PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT TO GROUPS OR INDIVIDUALS BASED ON THEIR RACE, GENDER, COLOR, ETHNICITY OR NATIONAL ORIGIN FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION OR CONTRACTING PURPOSES
The proposed constitutional amendment would:
• Ban public institutions from using affirmative action programs that give preferential treatment to groups or individuals based on their race, gender, color, ethnicity or national origin for public employment, education or contracting purposes. Public institutions affected by the proposal include state government, local governments, public colleges and universities, community colleges and school districts.
• Prohibit public institutions from discriminating against groups or individuals due to their gender, ethnicity, race, color or national origin. (A separate provision of the state constitution already prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin.)
Should this proposal be adopted? Yes or No.
Proposal 3 - Mourning Dove Hunting
MCRGOPAC SUPPORTS A "YES" VOTE ON PROP 3
A REFERENDUM ON PUBLIC ACT 160 OF 2004 – AN ACT TO ALLOW THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A HUNTING SEASON FOR MOURNING DOVES
Public Act 160 of 2004 would:
• Authorize the Natural Resources Commission to establish a hunting season for mourning
doves.
• Require a mourning dove hunter to have a small game license and a $2.00 mourning dove
stamp.
• Stipulate that revenue from the stamp must be split evenly between the Game and Fish
Protection Fund and the Fish and Wildlife Trust Fund.
• Require the Department of Natural Resources to address responsible mourning dove hunting;
management practices for the propagation of mourning doves; and participation in mourning
dove hunting by youth, the elderly and the disabled in the Department’s annual hunting
guide.
Should this law be approved? Yes or No.
Proposal 4 - Eminent Domain
A PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROHIBIT GOVERNMENT
FROM TAKING PRIVATE PROPERTY BY EMINENT DOMAIN FOR CERTAIN
PRIVATE PURPOSES
The proposed constitutional amendment would:
• Prohibit government from taking private property for transfer to another private individual or
business for purposes of economic development or increasing tax revenue.
• Provide that if an individual’s principal residence is taken by government for public use, the
individual must be paid at least 125% of property’s fair market value.
• Require government that takes a private property to demonstrate that the taking is for a
public use; if taken to eliminate blight, require a higher standard of proof to demonstrate that
the taking of that property is for a public use.
• Preserve existing rights of property owners.
Should this proposal be adopted? Yes or No.
Proposal 5 - Educational Funding
A LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE TO ESTABLISH MANDATORY SCHOOL FUNDING
LEVELS
The proposed law would:
• Increase current funding by approximately $565 million and require State to provide annual
funding increases equal to the rate of inflation for public schools, intermediate school
districts, community colleges, and higher education (includes state universities and financial
aid/grant programs).
• Require State to fund any deficiencies from General Fund.
• Base funding for school districts with a declining enrollment on three-year student
enrollment average.
• Reduce and cap retirement fund contribution paid by public schools, community colleges and
state universities; shift remaining portion to state.
• Reduce funding gap between school districts receiving basic per-pupil foundation allowance
and those receiving maximum foundation allowance.
Should this proposed law be approved? Yes or No. |
