This article originally appeared in The Detroit News May 12, 2026.

Driving around Saginaw in 2023, I noticed large yellow “Vote No” signs, urging the community to reject a massive school bond. These signs stood out. While high-quality “Yes” signs are common for local tax hike campaigns, this was the first time I had seen an organized and professional opposition.

In May 2023, voters in Saginaw Township rejected the $243 million school bond by a crushing vote of 77% to 23%.

Two years later the school district tried again, scaling back its request to $169 million. Voters said no again, 62% to 38%.

This year, Saginaw Township Community Schools put a tax increase on the ballot a third time, asking for $94.2 million. On May 5, voters said no a third time — 58% to 42%. Back-to-back-to-back defeats are rare in local tax votes.

The local debate about the latest bond measure was lively. The big yellow signs were updated to say, “Vote No … Again!” Community pages on social media lit up. Accusations of misleading information flew back and forth. The school superintendent published an open letter to the community calling for civility.

Critics objected to holding the votes in low-turnout elections. The district also chose the more costly route of scheduling special elections in 2023 and 2025, when the school bond was the only question on the ballot. Another complaint this year was simply, “Didn’t they hear us the first two times?”

The Saginaw Township Community Schools ran a full-court press for the 2026 proposal with social media posts, podcasts and informational town halls. A local reporter wrote that district officials waged an “aggressive campaign.” Those officials, who have the advantage of educating the public while on the district payroll, faced a handful of self-described citizen activists who knocked on doors and paid for signs out of their own pockets.

“We as a small team of township residents have fought this three times,” Nicole Lee told me in an email. Her group fought for “the 80-year-olds living on Social Security, seniors who have paid off their homes but risk losing them, renters who are struggling to stay afloat amidst rising rents and widows whose cash flow after a spouse’s death is limited.”

District Superintendent Jamie Kraatz said in a statement the outcome was “not what we had hoped for.” The district, she added, would “take time to listen, reflect, and better understand the concerns and perspectives of our community.”

That conversation is necessary and will require candor.

Student enrollment in the district fell 8% over the past decade. District staffing increased nearly 20% over the same period.

Student performance is also down. My colleague Molly Macek found that in English Language Arts, students performed worse in every tested grade (grades third through seventh) compared to 2014-15. In math, students in grades third through sixth also performed worse. Only seventh-grade math improved.

Meanwhile, school revenue soared. The district’s per-pupil revenue increased from $10,695 in 2014-15 to $17,095 in 2024-25. That’s a 60% increase.

What happened in Saginaw is happening elsewhere. Taxpayers aren’t opposed to good schools, but they are asking tough questions of professional educators. Why are we paying more to educate fewer students and getting worse results? Why not consider funding options that don’t saddle a community with long-term debt? Why are districts running stealth tax increases in low-turnout elections?

“Ours is supposed to be a government that derives its power from the consent of the governed,” Nicole Lee told me.

“We, the residents, are tapped out.”

Permission to reprint this blog post in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author (or authors) and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy are properly cited.