> Remember they switched to flint river to save a "whopping" $1 Million per year. It's starting to look like they were offered a deal from their previous water

> Remember they switched to flint river to save a "whopping" $1 Million per year. It's starting to look like they were offered a deal from their previous water source that would have come in under the price of switching to Flint, so the decision making process was especially weird. > Even without the lead leeching issues, everyone knows the Flint river was an industrial dumping ground for decades and was very toxic - no amount of filtering would have made it safe for constant consumption. As I understand it, the science is that it would have been fine if they hadn't failed to add an anti-corrosive agent, against normal best practice. The lead did not come from the river; the lead came from water pipes being corroded by the water.