Flint Michigan (1 Viewer)

[JimEverett]

When I first heard "Emergency Manager" I thought it was equivalent to hurricane prep officials or such. Maybe that's what has you confused.

Wiki (sorry) but you can confirm through links. This supports everything written by the people of Flint blogging/tweeting. (No idea what is being reported on TV.)



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_emergency_in_Michigan#Public_Act_4_of_2011

What's really sad and scary is the people of Michigan (rich poor black white urban farmers) voted to repeal this draconian concept...and boom, the state legislature enacted a stronger version which is not subject to voter action. Incredible.

The vote to switch to the regional water authority was made in March 2012. In March, 2012 the powers of the Council were restored. Judge: State violated law in appointing Flint emergency manager; Powers of mayor, city council reinstated | MLive.com
Not sure about the exact dates because I cannot find them. So maybe the COuncil had full power at the time of the vote or maybe they did not. Regardless, it seems more than mere coincidence that the Council votes and then shortly thereafter the State Treasurer approves the ordinance/request of the Council under the EM law.

But I wonder, also, why it matters. The Flint City Council voted 7-1 to switch water sources, and the mayor approved it. No doubt that the Emergency Manager and the State Treasurer had to approve it - but, as I wrote earlier - its functionally the same. Flint's elected representatives voted to switch.

More to the point that started my questioning - that was the trigger appears to have started the problem. Not, as so many seem to report, that the State wanted to save a few million dollars so they poisoned Flints residents.

 

[JimEverett]

Not surprising...

Newly Leaked Emails Indicate Michigan Republicans Didn


More poor governing in order to privatize government operations to cronies for profit?

Okay - but that email clearly indicates that the choice is between Detroit water and KWA water. The latter is the choice that the FLint City Council and mayor made and entered a contract on.
The implication here is the State should have overruled the Council's vote and cancelled the contract to remain with Detroit water.
Plus, it appears from the wording that this was a 30 year commitment to Detroit water. For all the talk against the Emergency Manager law (and for good reason) not people are saying the Emergency Manager should have overturned a vote by the Council and bound Flint to a 30 year water contract?????????

 

[JimEverett]

What people are upset with and the reason the governor is at issue is that it was ignored or covered up once the problems were noticed and reported. Now you have people poisoned and paying for useless water.

This might be true.
But what I have read so far seems to implicate the Michigan Environmental Agency and the EPA for giving out false information. They were telling Flint and the State that everything was fine as far as lead was concerned - right?

Again - there seems to be conflicting info out there - but that at least seems to be at least backed to some degree by actual source documents.

 

[MLU]

#insane

 

[Tapxe]

This might be true.
But what I have read so far seems to implicate the Michigan Environmental Agency and the EPA for giving out false information. They were telling Flint and the State that everything was fine as far as lead was concerned - right?

Again - there seems to be conflicting info out there - but that at least seems to be at least backed to some degree by actual source documents.

You may be right and Snyder falsely implicated. If that's true tho, why release emails so redacted as to be useless and withhold emails from ranges in question by this allegation?

 

[JackDiesel]

What people are upset with and the reason the governor is at issue is that it was ignored or covered up once the problems were noticed and reported. Now you have people poisoned and paying for useless water.

Shouldn't they be upset with the DEQ and EPA?

They spent months squabbling with each other instead of informing the public. They emailed the mayor who showed no sense of urgency to fix the problem. The EPA had proof as early as April, yet the public wasn't notified until November. No common sense was used.

Incompetent local government and incompetent government agencies more concerned with protocol than public safety.

 

[Saint_Ward]

What people are upset with and the reason the governor is at issue is that it was ignored or covered up once the problems were noticed and reported. Now you have people poisoned and paying for useless water.

Yes, see, I still see the switch away from Detroit water as a smart and needed one.

Whatever source they used (pipeline to Lake Huron) or using the River should be ok, so long as it can be properly treated and proper pH to mitigate lead issues from internal piping.

However, their water treatment plant wasn't able to do an adequate job, despite having millions pumped into it.

I'd stop right there, what was the issue with the plant? Was it even known or considered that the water would be too corrosive? Was there within acceptable values?

At first people just complained that the water was too hard, so they softened it, then too much chemical was in the water, then the boil notices, then later lead issues. I'm still not clear on the lead, other than piping.

I've also lately been seeing some university tests and discussion that all of our water has more heavy metals that we think.

I'm not up on the testing procedures for our various water systems to know where, how, etc water is tested.

As usual, there are technical issues/problems, human error, and then the group think issues when a bunch of people are trying to sort out a problem, especially when non-technical people are trying to make decisions on a technical problem.

I echo what a friend of mine said on this a few weeks ago. We are hearing all this chatter/anger over what the city officials did or didn't do, what the Emergency Manager did or didn't do and what the Governor did or didn't do. What were the Engineers saying? Who's running that plan? What was the approval process for the water system to be activated? Who over sees that?

 

[Saint_Ward]

Shouldn't they be upset with the DEQ and EPA?

They spent months squabbling with each other instead of informing the public. They emailed the mayor who showed no sense of urgency to fix the problem. The EPA had proof as early as April, yet the public wasn't notified until November. No common sense was used.

Incompetent local government and incompetent government agencies more concerned with protocol than public safety.

You have to read what they're saying though.

The EPA was aware that there were a lack of corrosion controls in Flint's water plan. They told DEQ to fix it. DEQ said no, they don't have to have one.

This still ignores that the City of Flint could easily make the system fully comply with both, I guess the chose to just follow the State?

Now, what can the Federal Government do on a State government issue? The head of the region was trying to get legal authority to act, because my guess is legally they couldn't (or were unsure). If they leaked information that the lack of a corrosion control plan, "might" increase the odds of getting lead contamination, what would that mean? It wasn't even known that lead WAS in the water, just that not controlling the corrosiveness of the water, MIGHT create a POTENTIAL issue.

The EPA and Federal Government as a whole, is only afforded so much control/power, unless a state of Emergency is declared.

Honestly, I feel bad for the one EPA water expert who saw the issue and alerted Michigan. I wish that guy simply could have just called up a DEQ water/environmental engineer or someone from the Flint water treatment facility and say, I think you guys need to run a few water samples to check for lead, especially from houses.

Instead, they just tried to argue policy (which is their function, so hard to fault them).

I guess the question is legally, when there is a concern about a water supply, who has the authority to act and when there is a disagreement, can the federal government over rule?

 

[Norwajun]

As usual, there are technical issues/problems, human error, and then the group think issues when a bunch of people are trying to sort out a problem, especially when non-technical people are trying to make decisions on a technical problem.

I echo what a friend of mine said on this a few weeks ago. We are hearing all this chatter/anger over what the city officials did or didn't do, what the Emergency Manager did or didn't do and what the Governor did or didn't do. What were the Engineers saying? Who's running that plan? What was the approval process for the water system to be activated? Who over sees that?

And here we have the root of the issue. I can't tell you how many times on a project there would be some wet behind the ears Project Manager straight out of a Construction technology course who would override what the Engineers, Craftsmen and Safety Professionals were telling him. And then it would all go to crap and they would start pointing the finger everywhere but at themselves. The preponderance of bureaucrats in positions of authority instead of experienced personnel creates issues like this every single day. Inexperienced or outclassed Supervisors feel they HAVE to be the final say in order to be respected and make knee-jerk reactions with no basis in available data, and then blame workers for failure to perform when it doesn't end up like they expected it to.

 

[Saint_Ward]

There is probably a fundamental issue here about State rights vs Federal when it comes to public works. It shouldn't be an issue if the State agency was interested in ensuring the health of their citizens.

I got a "call" into a friend who's a Civil Engineer and has already spoken out a bit about this. I guess she has a Cliff's Notes for Engineers on what was going on here.

When I get some feedback, I'll copy what's appropriate here.

 

[Alan]

And here we have the root of the issue. I can't tell you how many times on a project there would be some wet behind the ears Project Manager straight out of a Construction technology course who would override what the Engineers, Craftsmen and Safety Professionals were telling him. And then it would all go to crap and they would start pointing the finger everywhere but at themselves. The preponderance of bureaucrats in positions of authority instead of experienced personnel creates issues like this every single day. Inexperienced or outclassed Supervisors feel they HAVE to be the final say in order to be respected and make knee-jerk reactions with no basis in available data, and then blame workers for failure to perform when it doesn't end up like they expected it to.

Yep. I have seen it far too often in the tech world alone. Another "I have a piece of paper so listen to me" type comes into the picture in a position of management with zero practical experience. Next thing you know the well oiled process that was humming along starts encountering issues. Then there needs to be an entire overhaul in order to fit his "vision" and it goes down hill from there.

The paper waving student fails to realize that plenty of folks were doing this in a practical sense well before there was even a class created and that his knowledge is due in most part to the people actually doing the work. Don't even get me started on folks with little to no background in I.T. calling the shots.

In the old days if an issue was encountered I would grab a dba, or developer, or network engineer, etc. and handle the issue immediately. That no longer happens in today's environment.

Example: An agent goes down on a remote server and now production cycles fail. Firewall team had closed bidirectional on the port needed for said agent to communicate with the database. It takes 2 days to fix because of red tape and sort who owns what and who will do what. This happens quite frequently. You think they would learn.....

P.S. It was a simple fix that takes roughly 5-10 minutes to apply and reboot. Yet another example of microcosm reflecting the macrocosm. I now call it job security.

 

[Deacon Blues]

And here we have the root of the issue. I can't tell you how many times on a project there would be some wet behind the ears Project Manager straight out of a Construction technology course who would override what the Engineers, Craftsmen and Safety Professionals were telling him. And then it would all go to crap and they would start pointing the finger everywhere but at themselves. The preponderance of bureaucrats in positions of authority instead of experienced personnel creates issues like this every single day. Inexperienced or outclassed Supervisors feel they HAVE to be the final say in order to be respected and make knee-jerk reactions with no basis in available data, and then blame workers for failure to perform when it doesn't end up like they expected it to.

I have seen this many times. And when it all goes to ****, they never seem to get fired. Or even demoted.

 

[SharonT]

Frack!

This is from a 2014 interview with a Flint lawyer. Lots more speculation here:

Could the Flint water crisis have its origins in a desire to open up new areas of Michigan to fracking?

I wonder if the work slowdown/issues on the new water line that was to support both Flint and the possible fracking coincides with the price drop in oil?

It was because that new line wasn't ready, that the Flint River was even considered.

 

[SharonT]

And from Detroit - MotorCityMuckraker.com/2016/01/23/gov-snyder-lied-flint-water-switch-was-not-about-money-records-show/

Must admit - great name for an independent investigative news site.

A high-ranking DWSD official told us today that Detroit offered a 50% reduction over what Flint had been paying Detroit. In fact, documents show that DWSD made at least six proposals to Flint, saying “the KWA pipeline can only be attributed to a ‘political’ objective that has nothing to do with the delivery – or the price – of water.”

The offer by DWSD raises serious questions about whether Gov. Rick Snyder was lying when he insisted the water switch was motivated by saving money for Flint, which was under the control of a state emergency manager.


“When compared over the 30 year horizon the DWSD proposal saves $800 million dollars or said differently – saves 20% over the KWA proposal,” then-DWSD Director Sue McCormick said in the e-mail dated April 15, 2013.


The e-mail was first obtained by the Bill Johnson Group, a Detroit-based media consulting firm, and confirmed today by DWSD.



“If Snyder had accept this deal, the catastrophe would have been avoided,” Bill Johnson said.

I got these links off of Mercedes Schneider's blog. She also has a copy of Snyder's emails, if you feel so inclined.

 

[Saint_Ward]

And from Detroit - MotorCityMuckraker.com/2016/01/23/gov-snyder-lied-flint-water-switch-was-not-about-money-records-show/

Must admit - great name for an independent investigative news site.



I got these links off of Mercedes Schneider's blog. She also has a copy of Snyder's emails, if you feel so inclined.

I saw that.. the cliff's notes version of the proposal from the Detroit Water Board rep... the question is, was their e-mail summary legit or was it hiding some majors costs?

But also, why were they suddenly willing to play so nice after charging so much before?