Vehicle Bill.
Allows counties to provide electronic parcel records for the specifically requested tax year, if possessed, in open formats with defined fees and limits.
Allows counties to provide electronic parcel records for the specifically requested tax year, if possessed, in open formats with defined fees and limits.
Status / Timeline
- Introduced: January 23, 2025 (Senate Bill 102, Wojno, et al.).
- Action noted in provided documents: reported and passed the Senate (as passed by the Senate version dated April 23, 2025). (Bill amends Section 1 of 1895 PA 161 — MCL 48.101.)
Purpose and intent
- Update a long‑standing 1895 statute that requires county treasurers to furnish transcripts and abstracts of records on request so the law better accommodates electronic records and practical timing of tax‑year data.
- Improve public access to parcel and property tax data (including electronic datasets) for a requested tax year (rather than limiting requests to the “current” tax year) and clarify how fees are charged for such requests.
Key provisions (what the bill changes)
- Tax year requested: Requires a county treasurer to produce requested documentation for the specifically requested tax year if the treasurer possesses those records — not limited to the “current” tax year as in the post‑2022 statute.
- Electronic records — possession standard: Expands the obligation to provide certain electronic parcel records where the county treasurer “possesses” the records, not only where the treasurer “maintains, controls, or manages” them.
- Electronic file format and delivery: Requires electronic responses to be transmitted in an open‑standard, documented format with defined, delimited fields.
- Fee rules for electronic requests:
- Maximum charge is $0.30 per parcel record, capped at $2,000 per request for an electronic data file.
- A request that includes both winter and summer tax bill amounts is treated as a single request; if both amounts are available at the time of request the combined maximum charge is $2,000.
- Copies obtained under the electronic‑records provision may not be resold for commercial purposes.
- Retains existing paper/abstract fee structure (e.g., 25¢ per year for abstracts, 25¢ per 100 words for copies, minimums), except that electronic requests are not subject to those subsections.
- No obligation to produce information the treasurer does not maintain, control, manage, or possess.
Who is affected
- County treasurers: operational changes to how they respond to records requests, potential need to compile or produce electronic exports in a specified format.
- Requesters: researchers, title companies, real‑estate platforms, local governments, academics, journalists and members of the public gain clearer access to parcel/tax data for specified tax years and (in some cases) electronic datasets.
- Local governments: potential modest revenue impact where separate requests would previously have generated separate fees (the bill treats winter and summer bill amounts as a single request). The state fiscal impact is expected to be negligible; local fiscal impact is indeterminate but likely small.
Fiscal and policy notes
- Nonpartisan fiscal analyses included with the bill indicate no state fiscal impact; local revenue may change modestly depending on request patterns (e.g., combined winter/summer requests reduce fee receipts per requester).
- The change to allow provision of records the treasurer “possesses” (not only those he/she manages) is intended to reduce compliance problems where county systems or timing mean current‑year data are only available later.
Other notes
- The bill is a legislative reintroduction of prior efforts (e.g., reintroduces concepts from earlier SB 705 in 2023–24).
- Text amends MCL 48.101 (Public Act 161 of 1895).
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.