President Trump and Governor Whitmer meet again and in the queue to talk about school funding.

Here in the studio.

Senator Darrin Camilleri, chair of the K-through-12 budget.

Getting state workers back on the job.

Speaker Hall wants that.

Around the OTR table Kyle Melinn, Jordyn, Hermani and Craig Mauger sit in with us as we get the inside out.

Off the record.

Production of Off the Record is made possible in par by bellwether public relations, a full servic strategic communications agency partnering with clients through public relations, digital marketing and issue advocacy.

Learn more at bellwetherpr.com And now this edition of Off the Record with Tim Skubick.

Thank you very much.

Welcome back to Off the Record.

So the way I figure this, if the president and the governor meet one more time, he can declare her as dependent.

Is that why, if he comes to Michigan one more time, he can declare residency or pay the resident nonresident income tax one or the other?

So what did you make of that gig out at Selfridge?

Well, I think that this was a great win for the governo and had to give her some comfort after that embarrassing episode in the Oval Office.

And for Donald Trump to come and say that there going to be a new fighter mission in Macomb County.

You know, he comes back to a place where he did very wel in the last election, where they have welcomed him warml and is able to bring back goods.

So he's got to feel good about that.

I also for for the governor, he can show everybody, hey, if you want to work with me, you can get something.

This governor was willing to work with me.

And look, I'm giving her something.

I think that's I think Kyl hit the nail on the head there.

I mean, President Trump is trying to send a message to the Democratic governors of the country, You come and work with me, say positive things about me.

We can figure some things out here.

And you wonder you wonder if Governor Whitmer will continue to do this.

I mean, there are some other things that Michigan needs from the federal government.

So how long do you think it lasts?

Forever.

The to two years to.

She closes the door on the executive office.

There's no poin where there's a breaking point.

Wow.

So, okay.

But to your point, I mean, I would be surprised.

Why would you be surprised?

I think his point to his point, though, you know, when when she was last in the Oval Office and we had tha like folder photo more recently when he was at Selfridge, there was a photo of the two of them hugging, embracing, and that ended up getting a headline in the A that was like so about that hug.

Democrats were not enthused with the fact that she was so warmly embracing.

I mean, you see such a a physical divide between her for instance, and Dana Nessel, who used to be like that, a triumvirate with the two of them, and Jocelyn Benson.

Now, you know, I guess at some poin we go back to the natural state of Democrats and Republicans feuding.

No, I mean, that's that's her look at she she believe she was doing the right thing.

And if you know this governor, when she locks in, you can't get her off the radar.

Yeah, but the base of her party is not there with her.

I think in the short term, yes, this was a positive for the governor.

You can't deny it.

The base of the party wasn't going to create jobs.

It's Selfridge Air Force Base.

She acknowledged that It's I mean, she hasn't said she's thinking about running for president, but she has not ruled it out.

She says, I don't really know if she wants to seek the Democratic nomination for president.

This cannot last, correct?

It's not going to happen Mr. Mauger.

to preserve her legacy as as a great governor, she's got to have wins like this.

And this is a significant win.

I think that's what this is about.

I mean, this is about the governor's legacy.

It's about her legacy.

And, you know, if she can mayb coax the president to ease off that, his whole hesitancy on the CHIPS Act and maybe and maybe say yes to the Mundy township Chips project there, hey, that would be another significant win.

And so when we think about her in five or ten years, we can say, hey, she was willing to work across the aisle and the last two years of her governorshi and look what she accomplished.

She did quite a bit.

And maybe maybe this is a a sign that maybe folks want to see people get things done.

And and while we while it's easy to kind of collapse back into the Republicans versus Democrats and we're at loggerheads and fighting all the time, maybe that there is a political will out there to see people come together.

I mean, she's been working with Republicans for most of her term, though most of her two terms.

The early part she didn't.

You don't think so.

I mean, she finally she shut down the budget, for crying out loud, her first term.

But she and House speaker, then House Speaker Lee Chatfield, I mean, they worked on a lot of stuff during COVID.

I mean, and she was working with Mike Shirkey, the Senate leader, on some things.

There were clashes, but she has throughout her career she has worked with the Republicans in the Senate minority leader.

She was working with Randy Richardville.

Well the you just answered my question.

Okay.

Why would she change?

Is eventually this is going to become part of nationalized politics.

That's assuming if you thin she's running for president.

No.

It's also assuming that there is goin to be a pivotal election in 2026 that's going to loom over all of this.

And also, let's keep in mind, they did work together on Selfridge.

There's been some positive things happening.

But what happened like a day after that?

The Trump administration sues the state of Michigan, naming he and Dana Nessel as defendants.

I mean, there's a lot of dynamic.

So.

I mean I mean that's not took that personally is oh my goodness.

I guess I'm not going to work with him anymore.

I don't think that is I don't think it was to that point.

But I think it's a sign that there are still fundamental differences here that are going to play out.

In his delivery on the tariffs was not even a half a loaf of bread.

You know, there' only so many times or instances in my opinion, that, you know, there's going to be the ability for Trump and Whitmer or Trump and Democrats to come together on these certain things, because, again, as you point out, Michigan is doing is uniquely impacted by these tariffs.

Whitmer herself, to her credit, has also come out again and again every time that she's with Trump to try and push a little bit back on that is talking about how much these tariffs will hurt Michigan, do hurt Michigan.

So, you know, it's I don't know.

I guess that's what I'm going to be watching from here on out is what happens with that.

I think that's the pivotal moment when it starts hurting Michigan and hurting Michigan hard.

I don't know how much longer that she can still cozy up to him and expect to get reasonable wins when people's pocketbooks are hurting.

And that's all we heard about in the last election.

You know, you mentioned Dana Nessel and that's why I think Senator McMorrow, when she was on the show a few weeks ago, had the right point.

Governor Whitmer's job is a lo different than Dana Nessel job.

Dana Nessel job is to be adversarial.

She gets paid to file suit, she gets paid?

Yeah, she gets paid to push back to say you've gone too far.

That's what she's paid to do.

Whereas the governor has to bring people together, get things done.

All right.

Another story that you guys are the news we're trying to ferret out this week wa where are the state employees?

Where where did they go?

We've got a set up piece Then we'll talk.

We want to know if the state workers are working at home.

The COVID pandemic, of course, moved thousands of state employees out of their downtown Lansing offices and into their homes.

And with the House Republican speaker on a mission to find out how many are back downtown, he asked the Whitmer administratio for the building occupancy data.

Instead of the data.

He got this.

To state workers.

Where are they working?

We can't give that to you for security reasons.

It was one of the governor's department directors, Michelle Lang, who told The Detroit News, which requested the data, that it was a security risk.

Now, if you know Speaker Hall, he doesn't exactly take no for an answer, which is why he may us the legislature subpoena power to get the answers.

Meanwhile the Lansing mayor, Andy Schor, and the head of the Lansin Chamber of Commerce, Tim Damon, certainly want to see the employees back for obvious economic reasons.

And while pledging to get some answers, the speaker tells at home employees he will use the state budget process, quote, to force them to do it.

To return.

And we are going to bring the government workers back to the office.

We're just going to do it.

We're going to force them to do it in the state budget.

It should be noted, however, that the speaker cannot unilaterally do this because if he puts it in the budget, that means it would have to be approved by the Democratically controlled state Senate and then signed by the Democratic governor, which raises the possibility that maybe the speaker may not deliver on his attemp to, quote, force them to do it.

So what do you think?

I mean, I think it's baffling that the state's not being transparent about how ofte the state workers are required to be in these offices and how often they're actually showing up to be in the offices.

How do they explain the security risk of releasing the numbers of who's in building X, Y and Z.

You know it doesn't make a lot of sense.

I mean, I'll just say that I mean, this is just raw data that our newspaper is looking for.

And my colleague Beth LeBlanc, is looking for.

It's data that would enlighten this whole conversation that's now shaping the public policy debate in Lansing.

Should these workers have to come back maybe three days or five days a week to wor in-person in downtown Lansing?

So here's the overriding question.

Does the public give a hoot?

Well, they may.

If if you can show video that you've got all these building in downtown Lansing on the strip between the Capitol and the Hall of Justice that are nearly empty.

They ar they are complete ghost towns.

And the very few opportunities that I've had just personall to walk through these buildings, there is nobody in these cubicles.

There is.

And some of them don't even have personal effects.

They don't look like they've been you know, they've had a human being in them for years.

The so there was a House committee that met yesterday to talk about this very issue.

And Michelle Lang came an talked about the security risk.

They finally pushed out of her that they're afraid that somebody is going to take the data and use that as a way to say, well, we got 20 employees here, we got 300 employees here, and that they're going to use this in this like this tense time to do some damage at a building.

That's what they're concerne about.

Damage at the building?

I don't understand.

That a terrorist or somebody, they become a terror suspect, 300 people, a terrorist.

It's stunning, given the fact that our newspaper also did about 54 years recently of K-12 schools across the state.

And the schools gave us how many kids were in each class.

So, I mean, this rationale that the state's using does not make a lot of sense.

I mean, this is basic transparency.

Everyone should be able to agree.

This is information that the public should have to se what the current situation is.

So lawmakers like the one that's about to come on the program in a minute, can make a decision about what needs to happen.

It's not it's not that complex.

Yeah.

So, I mean, what the Whitmer administration is concerned about is the fact tha we have a policy now since COVID where employees are able to work from home, and you can debate whether they are as efficient more efficient or less efficient than they were.

But the fact is, is that it' harder to keep them accountable.

They're concerned some of the legislators who talked yesterday are concerne that state employees are doing second jobs while on the clock as a state employee.

And there's really no way necessarily to double check that that's not happening.

Meanwhile, you've got the th the the just the visual of empty parking lots, stat state buildings where allegedly they're supposed to be workers, but they're not.

So are we maximizing these buildings or are we just paying for the heat and the light and the utilities on places where people aren't going?

Not to mention just empty parking lots, but an empty downtown Lansing right now, vacant office buildings throughout downtown Lansing.

That's what Speaker Hall's been talking about.

I mean, it really is differen than it was even six years ago.

When you walk out in downtown Lansing at lunchtime, you just don't see the crowds that you once saw.

So and so our offices are right across the street from a parking lot.

And Craig, you remember this working at MIRS back in the day.

If it was 5:15, there was no way you were leaving our parking lot.

It was a complete gridlock.

Yeah.

Cars backed all the way up.

Nowadays, I could leave at 5:15 and I could be home in 3 minutes.

I mean, it's a completely different.

There is a taxpayer accountability question on the table here.

Okay.

We are basically on the honor system that the civil servants and you would assume that most of them are doing their job.

Okay.

Or they would be fired or whatever.

But you know, put the information on the table.

Some people would argue and it's not just reporters asking about this.

I'd want to highlight we're seeing other states take steps to try to get the employees back.

Gavin Newsom in California trying to get employees back in person, universities trying to get the employees back.

This is not just, hey, some rando reporters are asking about this.

I should just mention, though, that the state did come out with a report after the committee meeting.

So they did spend a year with a private firm to come out with a report which basically said from what I was abl to read out of it, is that, yes, you are not maximizing your building space as well as you could.

Wonder what we paid for that?

All right.

Let's take a call in our guest today.

Senator, please.

Senator, welcome back to the off the record.

Congratulations on the new baby boy.

Appreciate it.

You couldn't sleep through the night.

It's getting better.

It's getting better.

Yeah, that was a no.

All right.

Yeah.

Let's cut to the chase.

I know we're going to talk about education, but first of all, you're also on the Infrastructure Transportation Subcommittee.

Can you explain to the public why the Democrats refuse to put a financial piece to raise more money for the roads, for our consumption?

Well, first of all, you know, I think the roads impact everybody.

On my way to Lansing thi morning, tons of construction.

We see massive investments in our infrastructure.

Nobody has to tell me about roads and bridges and down river.

It's one of my top issues that I fight on and have delivered on for my constituents.

We do need a solution.

There's no doubt about it.

I do.

I look, you saw I think one of the maybe Jordyn, you may have reported on this or someone else reported on this this week.

The speaker has not accepted any of the majority leader's request to meet none.

Zero.

So if we're not even having a conversation about anything else, you can't just assume that we can get to a solution that's going to get through both chambers and the governor is going to sign.

With all due respect, the question on the table here, I'm just asking you, what do you guys want to do to raise revenue?

You don't have to talk to the speaker.

Talk to me.

I'll speak for myself.

I think I think one of the things that I'm very interested in is the corporate income tax.

I think it's far too low.

The governor proposed it.

Let's have a conversation about what that should look like.

There are various loopholes that we have not examined.

And in the tax code that I think we can pull back and raise revenue on.

We have solutions here that do not impact everyday people.

Let's talk about that.

I think that's a solution that I'm ready to have a conversation on.

The governor has said that sh wants a roads deal potentially.

That is like some new revenue, some cuts.

How do you see that?

And also, along those same lines, Speaker Hall responded to you in his press conference this week saying, Hey, roads in education, we can do both of these things.

He said that you were essentially saying it's one or the other.

And he said, hey, we can do both of these.

Illuminate us.

Can you do both of these things?

You can do both things If you raise the revenue required to fix the roads in a sustainable manner.

So you're saying new revenue?

Has to be as a part of the discussion.

Yes.

There's no way that we can fix this for the long term unless we address that problem, because if you're going to pull money from the school aid fund which is what he is proposing, you have to backfill it.

That means backfilling it from the general fund so you're not pulling additional revenue out of the general fund to put it back into schools, which I would want to do.

Right.

We can we cannot put ourselves in the position to take out money from our kids.

So the houses road plan doesn't add up.

It doesn't add up.

We don't see the details.

We don't see a specific plan of how they're going to come up with $3 billion.

They have one component where they're shifting money from the school aid fund.

They don't tell us how they're going to backfill it.

Let's have the discussion.

Right.

I think the speaker should accept the invitation from majority leader.

And let's start talking.

How much of this is being complicated by the fact that Hall and Brinks have a very, very tumultuous, publicly tumultuous relationship?

I mean, the rancor and the you know, the the insults, I think that doesn't really help anybody.

I think it's a problem.

We see it on a weekly basis from the speaker's press conferences.

We're ready to solve problems that Michiganders face.

Roads, education, public safety, whatever that topic may be.

But we have to be able to sit down at a table and talk about those issues.

That hasn't happened, and I hope that it does.

We still have a long way until the budget is done.

We still a long way to finish out in this term.

I want to suss a little bit more information out of you on your idea about roads here and education.

So if everyone agrees that, hey, the sales tax, the everyone pays on gasoline should go to the roads in one way or another.

Are you looking for some type of protected source of new revenue to backfill that to schools?

Because I'm guessing you don't want lawmakers every yea having to sit there and allocate general fund money to the schools?

That concerns me.

I mean, yes, have a debate every single year on how much more money we're going to move fro one pot to another is a problem.

We already face a systemic deficit when it come to funding our public schools.

We're proposing an additional billion dollars annually, $2 billion in total investments in the budget that I released this year, this week.

Excuse me, but that's something that comes out of the school aid fund that continues to grow over time because it sells back sales tax based.

We need to talk about longe term investments in our schools and they have to be sustainable.

I don't want to debate people back and forth every year on how much we're going to backfill.

That's just not productive.

Senator as you're taking a look at how the House Republicans have treated this budget process, they haven't had any subcommittee means they haven't kicked out any budgets yet.

We saw the speaker say talk about shut down and this kind of thing.

What do you see?

Just kind of a long term how this budget season is going to go.

I mean, the good thing that I hear from my Republican counterpart in the House is that he seems to like my budget.

So we have some common ground here, K through 12 budget.

That's right.

We have some common ground here that I think we can work wit and hopefully get to a solution.

So it should not be, in my opinion, on schools, at least the heaviest of lifts if he's already in support of many of the ideas that I've offered.

Let's sit down and let's hammer it out by July 1st.

But are you concerned that we are going to reach a September 30 deadline and we're all going to go, oh, my gosh?

I mean, they don't have reason to do that.

There really isn't.

We've don bipartisan budgets in the past.

I've voted for Republica budgets when I was in the House.

There's no reason why we can't get to an agreement.

The governor has proven her ability to wor with Republicans in this manner.

This should not be any different.

Should there be more money from EV owners given to the state?

EV owners are actually already pay more on the registration fees.

So that's something that does already exist.

That's a no.

I'm not saying no.

I think every every, you know, idea is worthy of discussion.

One thing I want to bring to the table is a reevaluation o PA 51 coming from metro Detroit.

That is something that we have see the challenges with over time.

Senator, do you know how many years they've been trying to change Act 51.

Many.

Before your kid was even a glimmer.

in your eye.

Before I was around.

I get it.

But the point is that is actuall one of the systemic challenges.

We can't just send money.

You don't have the votes in the House to change it, sir.

Everything's in negotiation.

And so if he has certain ideas of what he wants to get done, we have ours, too.

What are you willing to give him to get that in return?

We can talk about some of those potential paring back of revenue ideas that he's brought in to the table.

I think that's something that we're happy to engage in, depending on what it is.

But we have to have a systemic change in how that funding goes back to our communities.

And is it possible to change public Act 51 if you jettison in a whole bunch of new revenue?

I mean, is that the opportunity to change this?

Look there are a ton of Republicans who represent heavily populated areas of the state.

Their roads are just as bad as mine.

And so they should care about this just as much as I do.

Just for the public, Act 51 is the formula for how the road dollars are distributed, and Republican legislators hav slanted that the Democrats say to their outstate Michigan roads.

That's a fair analysis on your part.

Yes, effectively.

And you guys, we have the bad roads.

You're getting squat.

And we are.

I mean, you've bee to the airport in my district.

Every road on the way to the airport is terrible.

If you come to my area and downriver, the Grosse Ile Bridge, which is ove 100 years old, is falling apart.

Wayne County currently has it shut down because of money that I invested in one in the budget to help fix it.

But it's not even close.

Are you going to see the school meal program?

Yes.

The feds notwithstanding.

I mean, we've got to see if the feds will keep their end of the bargain if they do.

Obviously, there is no issue here in Michigan to be able to do that.

If they don't, we're gonna have to have some tough conversations where you're going to steal money from the school rainy day fund to pay for it.

I don't know about stealing it.

That's why we set it aside.

We set aside a savings account We set aside a savings account in order to us it in times of financial duress.

That would be on that I would be more than happy to spend money on.

Senator I want to ask you this question.

You're a former teacher.

You've been working on education policy for a long time here.

Can you explain to the viewers what has happened in Michigan school that we ranked 44th nationally in fourth grade reading scores right now?

How have so many other states passed us?

Why are we different than our neighboring states, States in the south?

What's going on?

You know, I don't think that we've spent enough.

The last two years, we spent significantly more dollars back into the classroom in ways that we think will actually fix some of these challenges.

We started to invest in our teacher pipeline again, which is really important.

And we've seen an upswing in more educators entering the profession.

Again, one of my passion projects.

So, yes, education is a long and winding road to fix our solutions for our kids.

I think in 12 year increments, not two year increments.

And so the investments I'm spending this year will see a return on investment.

We're not going to see tomorrow.

I mean, that' just the reality of education.

So I hope that we can see those results.

To Craig's point, though, the governor's education budget did contain a component that was supposed to basically be some kind of check.

It was for it for help, for, you know, literacy tutors and things like that that was not included in the revised budget and said that money going to at risk students instead.

I know that was brought u during the subcommittee process, but I was wondering if you could explain a little bit more.

You know, if we do rank so low, why take that accountability, measure the potential accountability measure out of the budget?

So we put in some different money towards literacy.

I invested almost $75 million in literacy efforts that we started last year.

So, again, continuing programs that we want to see the fruits of our labor on.

So that's one piece.

But one thing that we know is very clear, students who are in schools that have high concentrations of poverty have the greatest challenges, and the best way to fix it is to spend more money on those school districts that need it the most.

And that's what we've done during my leadership over the last two years of this budget.

We've invested historic revenue in our opportunity index, and that is where I think we should continue the priorities.

The argument out of Republicans has been that we keep throwing money at it and the problem does not seem to be getting any better.

So I guess ho how exactly does that compute?

You know, that is their favorite talking point.

You can't just throw good money after bad.

But the reality is with schools, there is never enough money that can fix the problem right away.

We've got to see long term systemic changes.

If I can have 4 billion more dollars today, I can tell you in five years we would se dramatically different outcomes.

But just to counter that for a second, I mean, there are other states, like on class sizes.

Your budget says let's make more money available to take on class sizes.

A majority of other states are requiring some level of class sizes.

That's a difference from accountability and providing the money as to what you've been talking about.

Reading a third grade, reading retention, that' something that the legislature backed off of.

Mississippi has seen success in their schools from retaining kids who can't read by third grade.

Is there some you know, do you do you recognize any positive idea to the argument of that Michigan does need more accountability in elementary schools and middle schools?

I mean, sure.

That's somethin that I've been happy to look at.

Education reform is not a partizan question.

It's about what actually works.

Punitive measures will not make teachers want to be teachers.

So as long as those accountability metrics have them in mind are not something that drive them away from the classroom.

That's a conversation I'm more than happy to have.

Senator, who's your candidate for the U.S. Senate?

Don't have one just yet.

We got a lot of great options on the table.

I think that no matter what, we're favoring ourselves in a good environment in 2026.

Shouldn't you be endorsing one of your colleagues of the Senate who's running?

Well I'm great friends with Mallory and great friends with Abdul.

We've got a lot of folks in the race who I have personal relationships with, and so I don't want to stick my neck out there just yet.

We've got to see how it all shakes out.

What do you think of the crowded primary on the U.S. Senate side?

That hasn't you guys haven't had a crowded primary like this in a while.

Are you concerned that this is going to divide up Democrats?

I think it's a good thing.

I think our party deserves some competition to really show out different ideas and see what works.

We are in a brand new era in American politics.

So I think the more people in the conversation, the better off we are.

And who is your candidate for governor?

Again, I've got great friend and our candidates for governor.

At some point you're going to have to decide Senator.

That's why we have the secre ballot when it comes to I mean, this is off the record.

This is nothing.

Why can't you just venture in there?

I'm not ready to venture into any of these primaries.

None of them have impressed you yet.

I mean, we've had conversations, of course, that everybody's asking for support the minut that they announce a campaign.

But right now, I'm focused on getting a education budget done on time, getting a general budget done on time, and ensuring that my colleagues in the Michigan Senate can return with the Democratic majority.

Do you think about being a leadership candidate for the nex go around for Senate Democrats?

You want to be the next leader for the Senate Dems.

You know, it's very earl to have that conversation again focused on getting a budget done, focus on returning our Democratic majority and strengthening and growing it.

But I mean, look, there's no other way around it.

I've been in this town now for ten years.

I've won competitive elections and every single one of my elections I know how to win tough fights on the campaign trail.

I know how to lead.

It's, of course, something I'm going to be looking at.

Your caucus has talked a lot about democracy, protecting the vote, making sure people can vote.

You're sitting here right now.

Should the governor call a special election soon to fill the vacancy to make sure the people in Midland and Saginaw have a representative in your chamber?

So there are no already scheduled elections in in those communities just yet.

And so I thin there might be one on Tuesday, but we're already way past that deadline for any type of special election to be called.

I think it's certainly somethin that may happen at some point.

The governor, he has been the governor has the ability to call She has the ability to call it.

Does that unsettle you?

I mean, there are 270,000 people that don't have someone representing them in your chamber, like your constituents do.

You're able to fight for, You mentioned a bridge project.

You're able to fight for that.

These people don't have someone to do that in the Senate.

Senate majority Leader has offered and does have constituent service staff in that district office to answer any concerns from those members.

There are you know, Detroit House members running for city council right now.

We have another round where a potential special election could be called.

You know, there's a lot of moving parts here.

Senator, good to see you.

Good to see you.

Thanks for showing up.

Thank you.

All right We'll see you next week, folks.

For more off the record right here.

Production of Off th Record is made possible in part by bellwether public relations, a full servic strategic communications agency partnering with clients through public relations, digital marketing and issue advocacy.

Learn more at bellwetherpr.com For more off the record, visit our WKAR.org.

Michigan Public television stations have contributed to the production costs of off the record.