Since the Senate’s version of the legislation was unanimously rejected by the Democratic-controlled House, it will enter a conference committee to resolve the differences between the two.

Revenue sharing is a redistribution of money from the state government to local units. The funds often are used to pay for services such as fire department and law enforcement.

The House’s rejection was not a surprise, said Kelly Bartlett, a legislative aide for State Sen. Bill Hardiman, R-Kentwood, because it is a typical practice when one of the two legislative bodies amends budget legislation by the other. Hardiman voted in favor of the Senate’s version of the bill.

“I think it was pretty much expected that the House would reject it,” Bartlett said. “It’s quite normal that the one house would reject the budget … by the other.”

The decrease recommended by the Senate was designed to help the state cope with the current economic climate and contained cuts that could not be helped, said Matt Marsden, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester.

“Nobody likes cuts, but at the same time, the citizens who are living inside those communities don’t have the resources they used to have and are opposed to paying higher taxes to fund those services,” Marsden said.

The Senate’s changes to the legislation met opposition from mostly Democratic senators due to the decreased amount of money communities would receive.

“That money belongs back in local community,” said State Sen. John Gleason, D-Flushing, who opposed the Senate version of the bill. “They’re the first line of defense (and) they’re the first responders. … We’re no longer just cutting money – we cut police and fireman now.”

If the 4 percent cut were approved, East Lansing would receive about $100,000 less than the $6.1 million it received for the 2009-10 fiscal year, said Ted Staton, the East Lansing city manager.

However, Staton said the city budgeted for a more than 4 percent decrease for the 2010-11 budget passed Tuesday, which predicted East Lansing would receive slightly less than $5 million from the state next year.

The actual appropriation ultimately could increase or decrease as the House and Senate reconcile their bills.

In the House, both Republicans and Democrats opposed the Senate’s provisions about decreasing revenue sharing.

“(The Senators) are cutting one of my priorities – I believe education, public safety and roads are a priority,” said State Rep. Rick Jones, R-Grand Ledge, prior to the House vote.

“I would find other things in the budget to cut.”

Before the House rejected the Senate bill Wednesday afternoon, State Rep. Mark Meadows, D-East Lansing, said he was concerned about the impact revenue sharing cuts would have on local communities such as East Lansing.

“I think it would be a devastating cut to local governments,” he said.

Staff writer Pat Evans contributed to this report.