3 ms·

They had the money specifically because they decided not to renew their contract with Detroit water to save money. If they couldn't afford to treat their water,

They had the money specifically because they decided not to renew their contract with Detroit water to save money. If they couldn't afford to treat their water, they shouldn't have ever tried switching water sources from Detroit. Not to mention they had even more money to fund the Huron pipeline project to get off Detroit water which would also need to be treated. The people who switched water sources was not the Flint local government, it was the state appointed manager, which was against local and state wide voter's wishes. WNot sure what you are talking about with 'stealing water', it makes no sense, it is government owned infrastructure, not private enterprise. They had a literal pipeline already working and connected to the Detroit water supply and had it for decades and they decided to turn it off for cheaper Flint water. The costs of treating flint water was 100% known beforehand. They knowingly falsified water test results specifically to not pay for water treatment, what are the costs of killing people, destroying an entire city's worth of water infrastructure, and paying off people to falsify water tests? The water would have been fine if it was treated, it would have been fine if they kept buying Detroit water for another 2-3 years like they had been for decades. If water test results weren't falsified every sanitation engineer in the country would be calling them up telling them the billions of dollars worth of damage they were doing to their pipes. Okay so you don't want them to drink the water, fine. How does that prevent the acidic water from destroying 50 years worth of water infrastructure in a single year? How does bad tasting water prevent billions of dollars in damages? The EM did a horrible job, they killed people, first via legionnaires disease, then via lead poisoning, not to mention the decades of population with reduces IQ and increased violence, crime, and incarceration costs. Then they cost them Literally billions of dollars destroying the entire pipeline system. The biggest damage to Flint wasn't the poisoning of the people, which is bad enough, but the destruction of billions of dollars of government property. It is like burning piles of $100 bills so you don't have to pay for your gas to be turned on. If you think the EM did a good job (and the water crisis is only the tip of the iceberg) then I don't think you have been paying attention at all.

tropo 7y ago
What I mean by stealing: If they continued to use the nice Detroit water, but they didn't pay Detroit for that water, it would be stealing. Detroit would shut off the water. If they then reopened the valves or broke into the pumping stations to continue getting Detroit water, that would be even worse. The savings produced by switching to the bad water shouldn't be viewed in isolation. The rest of the city budget matters too. If they are not in the black, then bills can't be paid. That includes important things like water treatment chemicals. Basically, bad stuff happens when you are out of money. Budget problems started long before the emergency managers took control. If somehow the city was in the black, then I'll agree that the emergency managers screwed up. I don't however think that they should be held to a standard of perfection, so "screwed up" doesn't mean anything criminal or even seriously malicious or inappropriate. Mistakes happen. If the city was still in the red, as I'm led to believe, then disaster of some type was unavoidable. It's just a matter of choosing the disaster. They could have laid off the entire fire department for example, which would likely mean that fires spread from building to building. They could have shut down much of the school system, eliminating school lunches and school buses. Tough choices had to be made.

tropo 7y ago

What I mean by stealing: If they continued to use the nice Detroit water, but they didn't pay Detroit for that water, it would be stealing. Detroit would shut off the water. If they then reopened the valves or broke into the pumping stations to continue getting Detroit water, that would be even worse. The savings produced by switching to the bad water shouldn't be viewed in isolation. The rest of the city budget matters too. If they are not in the black, then bills can't be paid. That includes important things like water treatment chemicals. Basically, bad stuff happens when you are out of money. Budget problems started long before the emergency managers took control. If somehow the city was in the black, then I'll agree that the emergency managers screwed up. I don't however think that they should be held to a standard of perfection, so "screwed up" doesn't mean anything criminal or even seriously malicious or inappropriate. Mistakes happen. If the city was still in the red, as I'm led to believe, then disaster of some type was unavoidable. It's just a matter of choosing the disaster. They could have laid off the entire fire department for example, which would likely mean that fires spread from building to building. They could have shut down much of the school system, eliminating school lunches and school buses. Tough choices had to be made.