The Ontario government announced it’s charging an extra 25% on all electricity exports to the U.S. Monday.

The provincial government says that’ll impact 1.5 million homes spread across Michigan, Minnesota, and New York. Ontario said that could cost up to $400,000 each day the surcharge is in place, blaming tariffs from the Trump Administration for the move.

Despite Ontario naming Michigan in its announcement, state regulators expect the move could more likely be felt on a regional scale.

“While the vast majority of Michigan’s electricity is either produced by the electric utilities or purchased under long-term power contracts, the imposition of these tariffs could have some impact on prices in the regional energy markets, though the ultimate impact on Michigan customers is likely to be small,” a written statement from the Michigan Public Service Commission read.

The agency cast doubt on whether any utilities in the state actually purchase electricity from Canada to begin with.

In a written statement, DTE Energy, one of the state’s largest utility companies, said it was prepared to mitigate any pricing concerns.

“DTE continues to monitor the evolving tariff policies with Canada.We self-generate the majority of electricity required to serve our customers’ needs, with the small amount that we do purchase coming from the United States.” DTE Energy said.

The Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) said “the vast majority” of the state’s electricity is produced by the state’s utilities themselves or through long term contracts.

The MPSC is warning, however, that Michigan’s electric grid is tied to several other states and one Canadian province, Manitoba. It said Michigan’s regional operator and Ontario’s regional operator coordinate that flow of electricity.

“Any action to limit or disrupt these flows would remove a layer of protection and make all of us – Canadians and Americans alike – more vulnerable to grid-scale outages,” the MSPC statement said.

Brandon D. Morris is with the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, which operates Michigan’s electric grid.

“MISO is still reviewing Ontario’s recent decision to apply an export tax on electricity, which will be collected on the Canadian side of the border,” Morris said in a statement.

The Michigan House voted Tuesday to keep lawmakers from signing non-disclosure agreements.

The practice has come under scrutiny in recent years as some lawmakers and state officials have signed NDAs as part of talks to bring some economic development projects. That includes for a General Motors battery plant that spurred the creation of the often-criticized Strategic Outreach and Attraction Reserve (SOAR) Fund.

State Rep. Steve Carra (R-Three Rivers) co-sponsored the bipartisan bills. He said public servants shouldn’t be signing NDAs, especially for business incentives.

“They’re using tax dollars to fund these projects. And then the idea that we as legislators would be complicit in that process and signing secrecy pacts, saying we cannot disclose the conversations we’ve had is a reckless form of governance.”

The bills would apply to lawmakers and their staff acting in their official capacities.

Despite the criticism, the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, which took the lead in talks over some of the projects that have involved NDAs, defended the practice.

“It is important to note that in our experience, those seeking to make a significant investment are increasingly requiring NDAs, given the financial and proprietary information being shared. Further, no decisions are made until an investment opportunity is voted on by the bipartisan and bicameral appointees of Michigan Strategic Fund board in a public setting,” MEDC spokesperson Otie McKinley said in a written statement.

That feeling was shared by some of the lawmakers who voted against the bills.

Opponents to the bills argue NDAs are a tool that keeps Michigan competitive economically and that they stop lawmakers from insider trading when they know something is coming.

Rep. Phil Skaggs (D-East Grand Rapids) was among the lawmakers who voted against the bills.

“Non-disclosure agreements are critical for competitiveness, our ability to attract new jobs, cutting edge technology. And we should be involved in far more serious ethics issues than what I think here is largely a nothing burger,” Skaggs said.

Sponsors of the bills, including Rep. Dylan Wegela (D-Inkster) rejected the argument, however, that NDAs were necessary to bring business to Michigan.

“I think if corporations want public tax dollars, they should do their business in public. And that should be part of the discussion. Right? We’re talking about hundreds of millions of dollars going to multimillion dollar and multibillion dollar corporations,” Wegela said.

Lawmakers on both sides of the argument, however, have said they want the House to take up Senate-passed bills that would expand the Freedom of Information Act. Republican House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp) has said those bills aren’t a priority for him.

Ahead of voting in the House Tuesday, Democratic lawmakers unsuccessfully tried to tie the NDA legislation to the FOIA bills so one couldn’t become law without the other.

The NDA bills still passed with wide bipartisan support, by margins of 80-28 and 91-17.

The legislation now heads to the state Senate.

A bill to change Michigan’s minimum wage law ahead of it taking effect passed the state Legislature Wednesday. The law is scheduled to take effect Friday.

If left unchanged, the law would gradually raise the minimum wage for both tipped and non-tipped workers until both are making the same amount by 2030.

The bill would speed up raises for non-tipped workers so they get to $15 an hour by 2027 instead of just coming close in 2028 with a planned $14.97 minimum wage.

But the bill would also slow down gradual raises for people who get tips. It would cap that minimum wage for tipped workers, like bartenders and servers, at half of what everyone else makes.

Employers would still be responsible for covering the gap if tips don’t make up the difference.

Rep. Bill G. Schuette (R-Midland) said that’s a necessary compromise to protect businesses.

“It’s not perfect, but it is an action, an immediate action that’s going to help preserve our tip credit and the tip wage system. And I think that’s vital in here to the restaurant industry,” Schuette said after the House vote Wednesday.

The bill is now cleared to head to the governor to receive her signature. But, for it to go into place by Friday’s deadline, it would need the Senate to vote for it to take effect immediately. That would require a supermajority in the Democratic-controlled chamber.

Republicans and hospitality industry groups say restaurants and bars could go out of business if they become responsible for covering a server’s entire base pay. Some Democrats in both the House and Senate also voted in favor of the bill.

But other Democrats say lawmakers shouldn’t touch the petition-initiated minimum WAGE law before it takes effect Friday.

That’s especially after lawmakers, in 2018, adopted the initiative before it could go to the ballot and watered it down, in a move known as “adopt and amend.” It led to a court challenge that eventually set the Feb. 21 deadline to begin with.

One Fair Wage, the group behind the petition, sent out a press release Tuesday that argued passing the bill would be illegal under the court ruling. It included an open letter from University of Michigan law professor Samuel Bagenstos.

“The Legislature’s original adopt-and-amend constitutional violation has meant that the Wage Act and Earned Sick Leave Act have been in suspended animation for years and have still not gone into effect. For the Legislature to amend these initiatives now, before letting them take effect, would be to once again ‘sidestep the people’s reserved power,’ Bagenstos wrote, referencing another law also planned to take effect Friday.

That law guarantees all non-federal workers in Michigan the right to at least some paid time off. How much that would be depends on how many hours they work and the size of their employer.

Business groups say wording in the law would create too much new paperwork for companies and not include enough accountability to make sure people don’t skip work without any warning.

House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp) said any compromise with Democrats needs to include exceptions for small businesses and seasonal workers, limit who can sue an employer, and include more accountability.

Hall also wants it to be more clear that businesses can offer the required sick time up front and not have to worry about doing the math to see how much sick time someone earns based on hours worked.

“I think we’re laying out things that we need to protect in order to do a deal here,” Hall told reporters during a press conference Wednesday.

Like with the minimum wage bill, however, some Democrats are promising opposition, saying people should be able to stay home if they’re sick, regardless of how many coworkers they have.

When asked what he’s hoping to get out of any compromise legislation, House Minority Leader Ranjeev Puri (D-Canton) said he’s just trying to watch out for Michigan workers.

“There’s been a very false choice presented where we have to pick between business and workers. And I don’t think that that is the reality of the situation here,” Puri told reporters.

The main sick leave policy bill is currently before the state Senate, which is expected to take up a vote on the measure Thursday in what could end up being a long session day.

The House would likely still need to agree to whatever compromise changes the Senate could introduce before the sick leave bill goes to the governor as well.

Both the sick leave and minimum wage bills are tie-barred together, meaning neither can take effect unless both become law.

Inmates in Michigan’s only prison for women are suing the state Department of Corrections for alleged forced labor and gender discrimination.

The lawsuit claims the plaintiffs at the Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility were forced to work as unpaid porters, cleaning common areas like showers and hallways, despite having chronic medical conditions. It’s asking the Michigan Court of Claims to certify its class action status.

Each of the women in the complaint live in the units that house the prison’s Vocational Village Curriculum but don’t participate in it. Instead, they work other paid prison jobs like for the Michigan Braille Transcribing Fund, or as tutors.

Still, women say prison staff told them if they don’t work at least one week a month as an unpaid porter, they could potentially face discipline and risk their paid jobs and educational opportunities.

That goes against department policy, according to the complaint.

“Prisoners in Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) correctional facilities who are assigned to work and/or school shall be paid and/or receive stipends for the assignments as set forth in this policy except if in the Special Alternative Incarceration Program,” MDOC’s directive on prison work reads.

The lawsuit claims the warden at Huron Valley told the women the unpaid work requirement was department wide, though the plaintiffs argue men in a similar situation didn’t have to work for free.

According to the complaint, attempts to resolve the issue within the prison system were unsuccessful, with a friend of one plaintiff reaching out personally to Kyle Kaminski, the MDOC legislative liaison.

In purported correspondence included in the complaint, Kaminski said the village model at the prison is supposed to have a different feel from the rest of the prison, leading to the need for more internal porters.

“At both male villages, having some responsibility for the unit is perceived as part of being in the Village community, but it seemed like the approach at WHV could have focused on that more,” the email reads.

The women, who are representing themselves in the lawsuit, are seeking damages from MDOC and an end to the unpaid labor policy. They’re also asking for court appointed attorneys.

MDOC did not respond to a request for comment by deadline.

Many Michigan workers would make at least $15 an hour within the next two years under a plan passed Thursday in the state Senate.

Under the bill, the minimum wage for tipped workers would eventually rise to half of what others are making. Tips are supposed to make up the difference.

That’s still different, however, than a court-restored minimum wage law set to take effect next Friday.

That law would incrementally grow the state’s minimum wage for both tipped and non-tipped workers so both camps are making the same amount by Feb. 21, 2030.

Service industry groups had long decried that. They argued being forced to cover a tipped worker’s full wage without any accounting for tips could put them out of business.

Restaurants worry paying workers more out of pocket would lead to higher menu costs and lower tips.

During a committee hearing Wednesday, the Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity shared a presentation that found tipping habits across the country were within the 15-20% range, regardless of how much a worker made.

Still, State Sen. Kevin Hertel (D-St. Clair Shores) sponsored the bill to change that policy before it takes effect.

“I’ve heard loud and clear from people across my district, whether they are small business owners, whether they are waitresses, waiters, bartenders, that this was going to impact them in a negative way, and they wanted something to change here,” Hertel told reporters. “That’s why we worked so hard to get Senate Bill 8 passed.”

Hertel’s bill only passed the Senate because most Republicans in the Democratically-controlled chamber voted for it. Most Democrats did not.

“I think this shows that in a divided legislature, we’re going to have to agree to disagree sometimes, but move important issues forward. This is a good start to a divided legislature. This is a really important policy, I think. But we did it in a bipartisan way,” Hertel said.

Groups opposed to the bill argued lawmakers should let the minimum wage law take effect as is to see how things go before making any changes to it. They say tipped workers should be making more in base pay anyway.

Despite the bipartisan vote, Republicans in the Senate largely said they were reluctantly supporting the measure just to keep things moving forward.

Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt (R-Porter Twp) said he’d rather keep the minimum wage for tipped workers at 38% of the base rate of the regular minimum wage, as it currently is.

“Our full-service restaurant model that has been built up over the last several decades is built on this. And so, it’s one of those things where, do you live to fight another day? And, today we’re saying, ‘Small business owners, Senate Republicans are going to have your back,’” Nesbitt told reporters after Senate session Thursday.

Democrats in the Senate had originally proposed capping the minimum pay for tipped workers at 60% before compromising at 50% in what Hertel described as a “framework” for a deal with the House. The bill will still need to make it past that chamber to become law.

Earlier in the day, House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp) called on Democrats to meet him in the middle with that 50% number.

“This is a good first step for Michigan’s tipped workers and their small businesses all across our state. If it gets done, this agreement would keep thousands of people on the job, help them make more money to support their families, and keep many of our beloved local businesses open for generations to come,” Hall said in a press release following the Senate vote.

While the Senate passed a minimum wage proposal Thursday, it held off on possible changes to the state’s sick leave law, which is also supposed to take effect next Friday.

Wording in the Senate minimum wage bill stops it from taking effect unless lawmakers also pass a House sick leave proposal too.

That House bill has been before the Senate for weeks. But negotiations on what a final version will look like are still ongoing.

Michigan inched a step closer to applying its open records laws to the governor and the Legislature Wednesday. That’s after the Michigan Senate passed bills to expand the state’s Freedom of Information Act.

Michigan is one of few states that don’t allow FOIA requests for the governor or lawmakers, despite years of trying to change that.

Sen. Jeremy Moss (D-Southfield) has been working on the bipartisan legislation for years. He said corruption scandals among lawmakers show the need for stronger FOIA laws.

“I don’t know what more we could say to make the case for this, because the bad behavior and the darkness over this Capitol building makes the case better than we can,” Moss told reporters after Senate session Wednesday.

Critics of the bills say they allow too many exceptions for things like policy recommendations, records held by the governor for fewer than 30 days, or communications with constituents.

State Sen. Jim Runestad (R-White Lake) said the bills are more “bark than bite.”

“Michigan ranks among the worst states in government transparency, and taxpayers deserve to have real measures that will push open wide the door on government secrecy, not merely cracks in the blinds,” Runestad said ahead of the Senate vote.

The bill package sponsors defend the carve-outs as reasonable for the policymaking process to play out.

Runestad also raised concerns about the FOIA coordinators in the House and Senate being appointed solely by each chamber’s leader, saying that led to the possibility of making the position political. He said he reluctantly voted in favor of the bills.

The package ultimately passed the Senate with only two votes against it.

In the House, where similar legislation died last session, Republican House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp.) told reporters earlier this month to not expect “fast action” on the bills.

Still, Sen. Ed McBroom (R-Vulcan), another package co-sponsor, said he’s undeterred. Even if House votes don’t come quickly.

“I believe the support for the issue has never been greater because people have made promises and commitments on the campaign trail that they support this, but they need to learn how it is. And there’s a lot of nuance,” McBroom said.

McBroom mentioned he has since had conversations with Hall, who has voted for similar bills in the past, where Hall assured his support.

Hall’s office did not respond to a request for clarification by Wednesday afternoon.

At the time of his comments, Hall said he’s more focused on other issues like creating more transparency in the budget process. To that end, the House unanimously approved a resolution Wednesday to require lawmakers to publicly name which special projects they’re sponsoring in the budget ahead of voting on such items.

That raises the possibility of both chambers potentially making a deal to take up one another’s open government priorities.

Michigan’s top elections official is facing a campaign finance complaint from the state Republican Party.

Republicans argue Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson should be fined for taking questions from reporters about her gubernatorial campaign in a state office building when she first filed to run.

Tyler Henningsen, political director of the Michigan Republican Party, said the complaint merits action.

“We call on the Bureau of Elections to take this complaint seriously and to hold Jocelyn Benson accountable for her flagrant abuses of the public’s trust. We also request that the Bureau of Elections enjoin Secretary Benson and her campaign from future violations and fine them the maximum amount permitted by law,” Henningsen said in a press release. “The integrity of our public office holders must be maintained, and the misuse of taxpayer-funded resources for personal political gain will not be tolerated.”

Michigan election law bans the use of public resources, including state offices, for political causes.

“A public body or a person acting for a public body shall not use or authorize the use of funds, personnel, office space, computer hardware or software, property, stationery, postage, vehicles, equipment, supplies, or other public resources to make a contribution or expenditure or provide volunteer personal services that are excluded from the definition of contribution,” the statute reads.

But the law does make an exception for public facilities, “if any candidate or committee has an equal opportunity to use the public facility.”

When asked earlier this month about why she was speaking inside the Richard H. Austin Building when other candidates typically address reporters outside when filing their paperwork, Benson noted the single digit weather.

Benson said it’s never come to her attention if other candidates have been unable to do the same, replying, “Of course,” when asked if others would have the same opportunity.

On Monday, after the MIGOP complaint had been filed, Benson’s campaign defended the location of her address.

Alyssa Bradley is a campaign spokesperson.

“The lobby space used is a public space where First Amendment activity can occur as long as it doesn’t interfere with the operation of the building,” Bradley said in a written statement.

 A spokesperson with the Michigan Department of State confirmed Monday that the Bureau of Elections had received a complaint from Henningsen and noted that, since the complaint deals with Secretary Benson, who heads that department, it will automatically go to the Michigan Department of Attorney General for consideration, as required by law.

Bills to address racial disparities in maternal health care are making a comeback in the Michigan Legislature.

The Senate bills would increase data reporting, include pregnant people in protections outlined in state civil rights law, and expand Medicaid coverage for pregnancy-related care.

Similar bills were reintroduced last legislative session. Those bills passed the Michigan Senate but got caught up in other politics during the last weeks of the year.

Sen. Sarah Anthony (D-Lansing) said she and other package sponsors are hitting the ground running this time.

“An early start provides us an opportunity to not only continuing to collect stories from people across the state who would benefit from these bills, but it also gives us an opportunity to have really strategic conversations with both sides of the aisle,” Anthony said Friday.

State health department numbers show Black women die from pregnancy-related causes more than twice as often as white women.

The first time around, some of the bills in the package received at least a few Republican votes in the Senate.

Unlike then, Republicans now control the Michigan House. That means the package would need bipartisan buy-in to come to a vote, let alone pass the Legislature, should the bills make it out of the Senate.

Anthony said she’s feeling undeterred, saying people expect lawmakers to work on their behalf.

“Part of that is for us to sit down and find common ground on things that are not partisan and quite honestly are not wedge issues, and making sure that women have the resources they need as they are planning their family is something that I think we can find some common ground on,” Anthony said.