1200

Nor

th T

eleg

raph

Pont

iac,

MI 4

8341

PRES

OR

TED

FIR

ST-C

LASS

MAI

LU

.S. P

OST

AGE

PAID

PER

MIT

#14

RO

YAL

OAK

, MI

So

me o

ther g

reat services you

can g

et...

On

line

No

t In L

ine

ww

w.o

ak

gov.c

om

/cle

rkro

dIntroducing O

C eD

eeds - A new

portal where land docum

ents can be recorded without leaving your hom

e

Deeds E

xpress - Now

you can bring your documents into our office and take the originals w

ith you imm

ediately

Sign up for F

ree Deed F

raud Protection and V

iew Your P

roperty Records

Order B

irth, Death and M

arriage Records • O

rder Circuit C

ourt Docum

entsA

pply for a Marriage License • S

earch Cam

paign Finance R

ecords U

se Open O

akland to search Oakland C

ounty Governm

ent Records

2012 BALLOT PROPOSAL GUIDE

Dear Voter,

The upcoming election will feature a large number of statewide ballot proposals. Voters will have the opportunity to play an important role in Michigan public policy.

The purpose of this guide is to help voters make an informed decision and understand what their vote would mean.

The information in this guide is not meant to encourage a vote for or against these proposals. The pros and cons of each proposal were prepared by non-partisan staff of the state legislature.

There are also local ballot proposals which may be on your ballot as well. Contact your local clerk or visit our website for more information. There is also a tremendous amount of information regarding this election available at oaklandvotes.com.

I hope you will find this guide useful. Please feel free to contact my office if you need any assistance.

Oakland County Clerk/Register of Deeds

www.oaklandvotes.comTrack Your Absentee Ballot-See Your Sample Ballot-Your Voting Location-New District Maps

Bill B

ulla

rd Jr

.O

akla

nd

Co

un

ty C

lerk

& R

egis

ter

of

Dee

ds

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

PROPOSAL  12-­‐1    A  REFERENDUM  ON  PUBLIC  ACT  4  OF  2011  –  THE  EMERGENCY  MANAGER  LAW        Public  Act  4  of  2011  would:  •Establish  criteria  to  assess  the  financial  condition  of  local  government  units,  including  school  districts.  •Authorize  Governor  to  appoint  an  emergency  manager  (EM)  upon  state  finding  of  a  financial  emergency,  and  allow  the  EM  to  act  in  place  of  local  government  officials.  •Require  EM  to  develop  financial  and  operating  plans,  which  may  include  modification  or  termination  of  contracts,  reorganization  of  government,  and  determination  of  expenditures,  services,  and  use  of  assets  until  the  emergency  is  resolved.  •Alternatively,  authorize  state-­‐appointed  review  team  to  enter  into  a  local  government  approved  consent  decree.      Should  this  law  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐2    A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  This  proposal  would:  •Grant  public  and  private  employees  the  constitutional  right  to  organize  and  bargain  collectively  through  labor  unions.  •Invalidate  existing  or  future  state  or  local  laws  that  limit  the  ability  to  join  unions  and  bargain  collectively,  and  to  negotiate  and  enforce  collective  bargaining  agreements,  including  employees’  financial  support  of  their  labor  unions.  Laws  may  be  enacted  to  prohibit  public  employees  from  striking.  •Override  state  laws  that  regulate  hours  and  conditions  of  employment  to  the  extent  that  those  laws  conflict  with  collective  bargaining  agreements.  •Define  “employer”  as  a  person  or  entity  employing  one  or  more  employees.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO    

PROPOSAL  12-­‐3  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  A  STANDARD  FOR  RENEWABLE  ENERGY  This  proposal  would:  •Require  electric  utilities  to  provide  at  least  25%  of  their  annual  retail  sales  of  electricity  from  renewable  energy  sources,  which  are  wind,  solar,  biomass,  and  hydropower,  by  2025.  •Limit  to  not  more  than  1%  per  year  electric  utility  rate  increases  charged  to  consumers  only  to  achieve  compliance  with  the  renewable  energy  standard.  •Allow  annual  extensions  of  the  deadline  to  meet  the  25%  standard  in  order  to  prevent  rate  increases  over  the  1%  limit.  •Require  the  legislature  to  enact  additional  laws  to  encourage  the  use  of  Michigan  made  equipment  and  employment  of  Michigan  residents.    Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO      Proposal  12-­‐3  

PROPOSAL  12-­‐4  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  ESTABLISH  THE  MICHIGAN  QUALITY  HOME  CARE  COUNCIL  AND  PROVIDE  COLLECTIVE  BARGAINING  FOR  IN-­‐HOME  CARE  WORKERS  This  proposal  would:  •  Allow  in-­‐home  care  workers  to  bargain  collectively  with  the  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  (MQHCC).  Continue  the  current  exclusive  representative  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  until  modified  in  accordance  with  labor  laws.  •  Require  MQHCC  to  provide  training  for  in-­‐home  care  workers,  create  a  registry  of  workers  who  pass  background  checks,  and  provide  financial  services  to  patients  to  manage  the  cost  of  in-­‐home  care.  •  Preserve  patients’  rights  to  hire  in-­‐home  care  workers  who  are  not  referred  from  the  MQHCC  registry  who  are  bargaining  unit  members.  •  Authorize  the  MQHCC  to  set  minimum  compensation  standards  and  terms  and  conditions  of  employment.  Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO        

PROPOSAL  12-­‐5  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  TO  LIMIT  THE  ENACTMENT  OF  NEW  TAXES  BY  STATE  GOVERNMENT  This  proposal  would:  •Require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  the  State  House  and  the  State  Senate,  or  a  statewide  vote  of  the  people  at  a  November  election,  in  order  for  the  State  of  Michigan  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes  on  taxpayers  or  expand  the  base  of  taxation  or  increasing  the  rate  of  taxation.  •This  section  shall  in  no  way  be  construed  to  limit  or  modify  tax  limitations  otherwise  created  in  this  Constitution.          Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 PROPOSAL  12-­‐6  A  PROPOSAL  TO  AMEND  THE  STATE  CONSTITUTION  REGARDING  CONSTRUCTION  OF  INTERNATIONAL  BRIDGES  AND  TUNNELS  This  proposal  would:  •  Require  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  voters  at  a  statewide  election  and  in  each  municipality  where  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  are  to  be  located  before  the  State  of  Michigan  may  expend  state  funds  or  resources  for  acquiring  land,  designing,  soliciting  bids  for,  constructing,  financing,  or  promoting  new  international  bridges  or  tunnels.  •  Create  a  definition  of  “new  international  bridges  or  tunnels  for  motor  vehicles”  that  means,  “any  bridge  or  tunnel  which  is  not  open  to  the  public  and  serving  traffic  as  of  January  1,  2012.”        Should  this  proposal  be  approved?  YES  NO  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  A  “YES”  vote  would  uphold  PA  4.  This  law  ensures  the  state’s  ability  to  offer  early  financial  intervention  and  assistance  to  schools  and  local  governments  that  are  struggling  financially  before  they  reach  a  crisis.  •  Repealing  the  law  would  impede  the  ability  of  the  state  to  provide  important  tools  necessary  to  address  immediate  financial  crises  and  will  put  state  taxpayers  on  the  hook  for  these  locally  incurred  bad  debts.  •  Local  governments  and  schools  currently  being  helped  by  this  law  could  be  adversely  affected  by  its  repeal,  since  the  emergency  managers  could  be  forced  to  step  down  resulting  in  a  reversal  of  financial  stability.    

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  A  “NO”  vote  would  repeal  PA  4.  This  law  would  give  too  much  power  and  oversight  to  the  unelected  emergency  managers  and  would  undercut  the  authority  of  local  elected  officials.  •  The  law  could  impose  substantial  costs  and  expenses  on  affected  local  municipalities  and  school  districts  to  get  out  of  financial  distress  without  providing  new  revenues.  •  The  law  would  give  the  emergency  manager  wide  discretion  to  invalidate  contracts  and  impede  existing  collective  bargaining  agreements.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •The  amendment  will  require  electricity  providers  to  make  major  investments  in  Michigan,  which  will  benefit  the  economy  and  create  green  jobs  to  promote  clean  energy.  •  The  proposal  protects  consumers  in  the  short  term  by  capping  rate  increases  caused  by  renewable  energy  regulations  at  1%  per  year.  •  Using  clean,  renewable  energy  will  help  reduce  pollution  and  protect  Michigan’s  air,  water,  and  land  and  help  make  Michigan  more  energy  independent.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Michigan  consumers  already  pay  the  highest  electricity  rates  in  the  Midwest  and,  despite  the  1%  annual  cap  on  rate  increases,  consumers  will  experience  long-­‐term  rate  inflation  until  the  renewable  energy  investments  are  paid  off.  •  Michigan’s  current  energy  mandate  of  10%  of  electricity  to  be  derived  from  renewable  energy  sources  by  2015  still  has  not  been  achieved.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions  and  technology.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  The  proposal  would  provide  in-­‐home  care  workers  a  constitutional  right  to  collective  bargaining.  •  The  Michigan  Quality  Home  Care  Council  would  provide  training,  background  checks  and  a  registry  of  in-­‐home  care  workers  which  elderly  and  disabled  persons  may  choose  to  hire  for  daily  living  assistance.  •  Would  protect  the  authority,  duties  and  obligations  of  the  current  Michigan  Quality  Community  Care  Council  to  provide  access  to  well-­‐trained  in-­‐home  care  workers.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  These  services  are  already  available  and  could  force  terms  of  employment,  such  as  joining  a  union  and  paying  union  dues,  on  in-­‐home  care  workers,  including  relatives  of  the  patient.  •  While  all  in-­‐home  care  workers  are  directly  employed  by  the  elderly  and  disabled  persons  in  need  of  services,  they  would  be  treated  as  public  employees  for  the  sole  purpose  of  unionization.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  This  proposal  would  require  a  2/3  majority  vote  of  both  the  House  and  Senate  or  statewide  vote  of  the  people  to  enact  tax  increases.  •  The  higher  threshold  for  raising  taxes  would  make  it  harder  to  impose  new  or  additional  taxes,  expand  the  tax  base,  or  increase  tax  rates.  •  The  two  most  recent  tax  increases  in  Michigan  were  passed  with  support  from  only  a  slim  majority  of  the  Legislature.  Had  this  proposal  been  in  place,  it  is  likely  that  neither  of  these  increases  could  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  proposal  would  limit  the  Legislature’s  ability  to  balance  the  state  budget;  and  could  result  in  funding  cuts  to  education,  public  safety,  or  infrastructure  projects.  •  This  proposal  would  have  no  impact  on  current  tax  rates  and  could  impede  future  tax  reform  for  individuals  and  job  providers.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  to  update  its  provision  to  address  changing  conditions.  

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Citizens  should  have  the  right  to  decide  if  the  State  should  undertake  major  international  bridges  or  tunnel  projects  for  motor  vehicles  due  to  the  possibility  of  ongoing  taxpayer-­‐funded  expenses.  •  It  is  unclear  if  there  is  sufficient  traffic  to  support  the  building  of  a  second  international  bridge  in  Southeast  Michigan  and  the  State  should  not  be  in  competition  with  a  private  entity.  •  This  proposal  may  put  the  current  Michigan-­‐Canadian  bridge  project  before  the  Michigan  voters  for  their  approval  or  rejection.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  Given  the  traffic  volume  in  Southeast  Michigan,  a  second  international  bridge  is  critical  for  economic  development  and  job  creation  in  our  state  and  will  be  paid  for  by  Canadian  funds  and  not  state  tax  dollars.  •  The  international  bridge  project  agreement  between  Michigan  and  Canada  may  be  exempt  from  the  restrictions  of  this  proposal.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.  

 

People  Voting  YES  say:  •  Protection  of  collective  bargaining  should  be  a  constitutional  right  for  workers  to  assist  employees  in  negotiating  a  fair  contract  and  to  protect  their  rights.  •  Collective  bargaining  should  not  just  be  a  right  provided  to  certain  employees  but  should  be  extended  to  all  employees  regardless  of  their  employer.  •  This  proposal  would  protect  public  and  private  employee’s  jobs,  wages,  and  benefits  by  making  collective  bargaining  a  constitutional  right.  

People  Voting  NO  say:  •  This  amendment  would  limit  or  eliminate  the  state’s  ability  to  regulate  labor  activities  for  both  public  and  private  employees.  •  This  proposal  would  repeal  an  unidentified  number  of  existing  laws  affecting  both  employees  and  job  providers  and  would  have  an  unknown  impact  on  this  vital  relationship.  •  It  is  unwise  to  lock  this  proposal  in  the  Michigan  Constitution  as  it  will  make  it  difficult  in  the  future  for  

elected  leaders  to  adapt  to  changing  conditions.