Fund the need they named.
The Troy School District says special education is the problem, then proposes to spend the money on a grab bag of everything else. Using Michigan's own data, here is what the campaign leaves out.
Oakland already leads. This widens the gap.
The campaign's headline is that "44% of Michigan students" already receive enhancement funding, implying Oakland is behind. The State of Michigan's own financial data (2024-25) show the opposite. In local funding, Oakland out-raises Macomb, a neighbor that already levies its own enhancement, by 27% per pupil.
| Local funding per pupil, 2024-25 | Oakland today | Oakland if it passes | Macomb* |
|---|---|---|---|
| Member districts' own local revenue | $7,402 | $7,402 | $5,273 |
| County ISD's own levies (incl. any enhancement) | $1,781 | $2,562 | $1,973 |
| Total local, per pupil | $9,184 | $9,965 | $7,247 |
| Total local, per county resident | $1,145 | $1,243 | $887 |
*Macomb already levies a 1.82-mill enhancement (since 2020), and Oakland, with no enhancement at all, still raises 27% more per pupil in local funding. Because Oakland's property is worth far more per pupil, its lower 1.5-mill rate is estimated to raise more per student (about $781, the proposal's figure) than Macomb's higher 1.82-mill rate does.
The bigger picture
Oakland is already a net contributor to Michigan's schools
Under Proposal A, the 6-mill State Education Tax and state sales and income taxes are pooled statewide and returned per pupil, so property-rich areas pay in more than they draw back. This does not mean Oakland's own schools are underfunded; it means Oakland already pays more than its share statewide and funds its own schools richly, which is why the "we're behind" framing does not hold. (Oakland tax base about $77B of $481B statewide; enrollment 162,000 of 1.38 million. Sources: Michigan Senate Fiscal Agency, 2024; MDE, 2024-25.)
The problem they name vs. the plan they offer
On June 30, 2026, the Troy School District emailed residents in support of the millage. Read closely, it makes the case against itself.
"Special education funding is underfunded by approximately 40%. This means that districts must use dollars from their general fund to support students with special needs to close this gap in funding."
Six broad budget categories, offered as "unrestricted" funds, with no target or reporting attached:
- Staff Retention & Raises
- Enhance Student Wellness Supports
- Stabilize the General Fund Budget
- Enhance & Maintain Safety Measures
- Maintain Staff to Student Ratios
- Maintain & Strengthen District Programming
The email also advertises that the funds are "unrestricted," and that districts could use them to "increase pay for their teachers," "buy school buses," "hire a school resource officer," and so on: "a variety of uses to support their budgetary goals." That is not a plan. It is a grab bag.
Read the full text of the District's June 30 newsletter (recipient information removed) so you can check every quote in context. The county-wide campaign's materials are at oaklandenhancementmillage.com.
Special education is a concrete, countable need
The District is right that the gap is real. When Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), it promised to cover 40% of the extra cost of educating students with disabilities. It has never funded even half of that. The remainder falls on local general funds, the same dollars that pay for regular classroom teachers, textbooks, and buses.
A grab bag, with nothing committed
Having named the problem, the email commits not a single dollar to solving it. Some of these categories a district genuinely could measure, a fund balance or a staffing ratio, which is exactly why it should set targets and report them. It has not: there is no target, no baseline, and no reporting attached to any of the six, and because the District calls the money "unrestricted," nothing binds it to them. For a six-year tax on your home, "local flexibility" is being used to mean "trust us."
Fund what they named. Prove it.
This is not an argument that schools cannot use money. It is an argument for spending it where the District itself says the need is, with results voters can verify.
Dedicate 100% to special education
Because the funds are legally unrestricted, each district's board should adopt a public policy committing every dollar to closing its special-education shortfall: the general-fund money it is currently forced to divert.
Publish measurable targets
State the dollars redirected to special education this year, the general-fund dollars thereby freed for classrooms, and service commitments, then report actuals every year through 2031.
Tie the ask to the need
If special education is the reason to tax homes for six years, say so on the record and spend it there, not on an unrestricted "variety of uses."
A blank check, dressed up as a deficit
To its credit, the District does disclose the cost. This is not about hiding the price. It is about the promise. A district that names special education as the problem, then asks for six years of unrestricted dollars it will not commit to that problem, while implying you are behind when you are ahead, is not leveling with voters.
| What 1.5 mills costs a homeowner | Taxable value | Per year | Over 6 years |
|---|---|---|---|
| Home worth $200,000 | $100,000 | $150 | $900 |
| Home worth $400,000 | $200,000 | $300 | $1,800 |
| Troy 2025 median sale (about $450,000) | $225,000 | $338 | $2,025 |
| Home worth $600,000 | $300,000 | $450 | $2,700 |
The $200,000, $400,000, and $600,000 rows are the District's own examples; the Troy row uses Troy's 2025 median sale price of about $450,000 (Redfin, Zillow, RealtyTrac). Taxable value is roughly half of market value, so a rule of thumb is about $75 per year for every $100,000 of a home's value. Homes held a long time under Michigan's assessment cap pay less. An enhancement millage applies to your primary residence, unlike the 18-mill operating tax, which does not.
Sources & method
Data, definitions, and sources
- District communication: Troy School District, "Oakland County Enhancement Millage Proposal," email newsletter, June 30, 2026. All quotations and the six spending tiles are from that email; the full text is reproduced here (recipient information removed). County-wide campaign materials: oaklandenhancementmillage.com.
- Local revenue & membership: Michigan Department of Education Bulletin 1014 and 1011 (2024-25) and the state Financial Information Database (Revenue Data, 2024-25). Oakland member-district local revenue totals reconcile exactly to the MDE Bulletin 1011 export. Macomb ISD enhancement (1.8198 mills, about $55M+ per year, 2020-2029) per Macomb Intermediate School District. Population from the U.S. Census, 2024.
- Special-education funding: IDEA's 40% commitment vs. actual federal funding (never above about 15%) and Michigan's roughly 28.6% reimbursement, per the Michigan Education Association ("Facts v. Fallacy: School Funding"), Michigan House Fiscal Agency testimony, the Michigan League for Public Policy, and the Autism Alliance of Michigan. Statewide shortfall estimated at $350M to $750M per year.
- Proposal terms: 1.5 mills for six years (2026-2031), about $781 per pupil per year, collected beginning December 2026, distributed to all public districts and eligible academies on a per-pupil basis; the ISD keeps none. Sources: oaklandenhancementmillage.com, Oakland County Times and Detroit News (March 25, 2026).
- "Local funding" vs. "spending": "local funding" is each entity's own local sources (property tax plus other local), governmental funds, excluding state and federal aid and excluding ISD-to-district pass-through, to avoid double counting. It is not total spending: total per-pupil operating funding, adding state and federal aid, is about $17,100 in Oakland and about $16,100 in Macomb (MDE Financial Information Database, 2024-25). Per-pupil figures use fall membership; the enhancement is shown at the campaign's own $781 per pupil figure. Troy home values from Redfin, Zillow, and RealtyTrac (2025-26).