SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
flint
A Moral Imperative: Embracing the Precautionary Principle and the Right to Know
When there is a suspected risk of harm—and scientific certainty is not yet established—the burden of proof should not fall on the people who may be harmed by it.
Jul 19, 2025
We live in a time that celebrates innovation—but too often, it’s innovation without accountability. Pesticides are sprayed where children play. Harmful chemicals are embedded in everyday products. Communities are exposed to toxic risks without warning.
The pattern is clear: Dangerous substances are allowed into our lives before their safety is truly understood. Industry profits from speed, while public protections are stuck in delay. The default approach often favors inaction until overwhelming evidence of danger is undeniable. But by then, the damage is already done. From asbestos to lead paint to Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) “forever chemicals,” history offers a grim catalog of missed opportunities to prevent harm. Each case is a reminder that early warnings were ignored, risks were downplayed, and the public was left unprotected.
That’s why we must fully embrace the Precautionary Principle and defend the Right to Know as the foundation of public health, environmental justice, and informed consent.
At its core, the Precautionary Principle is straightforward and rooted in common sense: When there is a suspected risk of harm—and scientific certainty is not yet established—the burden of proof should not fall on the people who may be harmed by it. These aren’t bureaucratic ideals—they’re essential safeguards in a world where the cost of delay is measured in illness, inequity, and lost public trust.
It’s not radical to ask what’s in our air, water, or soil. What’s radical is expecting families to live with uncertainty, secrecy, or delayed action.
When I founded California Safe Schools, it was because of one disturbing reality: Parents had no idea when or where pesticides were being used on school campuses. There was no warning, no notice, and no choice. Children and school staff were being exposed—without their knowledge or consent.
Through years of community organizing, scientific research, and policy advocacy, we helped secure a major shift in how public schools approach pesticide use. In 1999, the Los Angeles Unified School District—the second-largest in the country—adopted a groundbreaking Integrated Pest Management Policy grounded in the Precautionary Principle and the Right to Know. It required written notification of pesticide use, prioritized least-toxic alternatives, and banned broadcast spraying.
This became a model for statewide reform. In 2000, California passed the Healthy Schools Act, ensuring that all public schools would follow similar transparency and notification requirements. And in 2005, AB 405, sponsored by California Safe Schools, made California the first state in the nation to ban the use of experimental, conditional, or phased-out pesticides on school grounds.
These victories weren’t just legislative—they were lifesaving. They proved what’s possible when grassroots voices, science, and public values come together. They also reaffirmed a fundamental truth: People have a right to know what they’re being exposed to and the right to act on that knowledge.
Still, these principles continue to face resistance. The Right to Know is sometimes viewed with hesitation—treated not as a basic public good, but as a burden or threat. Communities are routinely left in the dark about nearby industrial emissions, pesticide use near schools, or the presence of toxic substances in drinking water. In Flint, Michigan residents were told their water was safe long after it had been poisoned with lead. If we’re serious about protecting public health—especially for the most vulnerable—then transparency and prevention must be the norm, not the exception. It’s not radical to ask what’s in our air, water, or soil. What’s radical is expecting families to live with uncertainty, secrecy, or delayed action.
The Precautionary Principle and the Right to Know are practical tools that remind us that safety should never be an afterthought—and that acting early, openly, and ethically is not just the right thing to do; it’s essential.
We don’t need to wait for more evidence to take meaningful steps forward. What we need is the collective courage to revisit outdated systems, to consistently put human well-being first, and to ensure that those most vulnerable are fully protected.
The good news is that each of us can play a role in advancing this work. Real change begins with awareness—and is sustained through action. Learn what chemicals are being used in your schools, parks, and neighborhoods. Ask questions. Show up to school board meetings and local government hearings. Speak out for policies that reflect transparency, precaution, and the use of least-toxic alternatives. Organize with neighbors. Support legislation that puts health before profit. And perhaps most importantly, share what you learn—because awareness leads to advocacy, and advocacy leads to change.
Every voice counts. Every action matters. Together, we can protect the places where our families live, learn, and grow—and build a future that prioritizes health, safety, and transparency.
Keep ReadingShow Less
10-Year EPA Plan to Swap All US Lead Pipes 'Still Not Enough'
While welcoming the "long-overdue meaningful action" on drinking water safety, one campaigner argued that "much more must be done—much faster—at no cost to impacted households."
Nov 30, 2023
The Biden administration's proposal to better protect drinking water nationwide was met with sweeping applause on Thursday, but at least one consumer advocacy group stressed that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy is "still not enough."
With its proposed changes to the Lead and Copper Rule, the administration aims to replace all lead water service lines in the United States within a decade, according to the EPA. There are also provisions intended to locate legacy lead pipes, improve tap sampling, lower the lead action level, and strengthen protections to reduce exposure.
Food & Water Watch Public Water for All director Mary Grant said that "the federal government has already waited far too long to require the elimination of these toxic lead water pipes, which poisoned the water in communities across the country," from Flint, Michigan and Jackson, Mississippi to Newark, New Jersey and Washington, D.C.
"The Biden administration has proposed long-overdue meaningful action toward the goal of eliminating lead from drinking water, but to ensure that every community has safe, lead-free water, much more must be done—much faster—at no cost to impacted households," she asserted.
Grant praised "agitators who emerged from... water contamination fights" and called on Congress to "step up to provide funding to replace the entire service line at no cost to impacted households, prioritizing low-income and environmental justice communities."
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, signed by President Joe Biden two years ago, "provided a $15 billion downpayment on this overhaul, but the total cost could exceed $60 billion," she pointed out, urging Congress to pass the Water Affordability, Transparency, Equity, and Reliability (WATER) Act.
"In a moment when many of us feel overwhelmed by bad news, the EPA's lead rule provides a ray of hope."
While additional steps are clearly needed, impacted communities and other campaigners still welcomed the progress on Thursday.
"Communities like ours... have grappled with the repercussions of lead contamination for too long," said Deborah Brown, a steering committee member of Newburgh Clean Water Project in New York. "The proposed improvements, especially the replacement of all lead service lines, signify a significant stride to safe and clean drinking water for our families and future generations. It's a step in the right direction."
Earthjustice attorney Suzanne Novak—whose legal group has represented the Newburgh Clean Water Project—said that "the EPA's proposed improvements to the Lead and Copper Rule are a much-needed response to a dire public health crisis that's been ongoing for more than a century."
"The administration's proposal takes important steps towards fulfilling the Safe Drinking Water Act's purpose of protecting human health to the extent feasible," Novak continued. "EPA has recognized that quick removal of all lead service lines is imperative, and that swift action is needed when a community has persistent high levels of lead in its water."
"Because the public health burden of lead exposure falls disproportionately on environmental justice communities," she emphasized, "we need to make sure that the final rule is equitable in how it achieves reduction of lead in drinking water across the country."
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) noted "apparent weaknesses" of the proposal, including that "water systems are not required to pay for the lead service line replacement," utilities could get extensions beyond the 10-year deadline, and the action level reduction from 15 parts per billion to 10 ppb "is less strict than the 5 ppb standards recommended by health experts and the governments in Canada and Europe."
Still, Erik Olson, senior strategic director for health at NRDC, said that "in a moment when many of us feel overwhelmed by bad news, the EPA's lead rule provides a ray of hope that we are approaching the day when every family can trust that the water from their kitchen tap is safe, regardless of how much money they have or their ZIP code."
Environmental Working Group senior vice president for government affairs Scott Faber also praised the progress, saying that "once again, President Biden's EPA is putting our families first and honoring his commitments to the American people."
The campaigner also highlighted the need to better protect communities whose drinking water is contaminated with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), chemicals used in various products that persist in the environment and human body and are connected to health problems including cancers.
Biden's EPA proposed the first-ever national drinking water standard for PFAS in March. Faber said Thursday that "we're confident he will also make good on his commitment to finalize a drinking water standard for the toxic 'forever chemicals.'"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Flint Residents Demand Federal Action After Michigan Court Upholds Permit for Asphalt Plant
"This case shows how the state permitting process fails to protect communities, and that's why federal action is needed," said one attorney working with local activists.
Jun 22, 2023
Environmental justice advocates in Flint, Michigan called for federal action after a circuit court on Tuesday upheld a state permit allowing for a toxic asphalt plant to be built and operated on the outskirts of the beleaguered city despite sustained opposition from residents.
The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) gave Ajax Materials Corporation permission to construct a new hot-mix asphalt manufacturing facility in Genesee Township—less than 1,600 feet from public housing in a low-income, predominantly Black neighborhood of Flint—in November 2021, just days after a federal judge approved a $626 million settlement for thousands of lead poisoning victims in the city.
Multiple lawsuits were filed challenging the permit. Ajax claimed that EGLE's requirements were too restrictive while the city of Flint argued that regulators' decision-making reflected a failure to adhere to legal requirements associated with environmental justice. In addition, five community groups—St. Francis Prayer Center, Flint Rising, Environmental Transformation Movement of Flint, Michigan United, and CAUTION—accused EGLE of using incomplete emissions data to evaluate the proposed asphalt plant's health consequences in violation of the federal Clean Air Act and Michigan's air quality rules.
As Earthjustice explained in a Wednesday statement, "The court ultimately sided with EGLE, which argued that the issued permit—amended only after public outcry forced the agency to extend its deadline for public comments three times—was sufficient."
In response, Mona Munroe-Younis, executive director of the Environmental Transformation Movement of Flint, said: "We are heartbroken by the court's decision not to protect a wonderful and vulnerable community from yet more air contaminants. But it's a relief that the plant will be forced to operate under stricter pollution controls than what Ajax sought and what EGLE would have permitted, had residents not pushed back."
St. Francis Prayer Center director Debra Hawley echoed Munroe-Younis.
"Community members had to drag EGLE kicking and screaming to issue a stricter permit for this toxic asphalt plant," said Hawley. "I'm proud that we succeeded in securing better monitoring and enforcement of this plant's emissions. This case shows just how crucial it is for the public to have a voice in environmental permitting, especially given the history of environmental racism in Michigan."
Flint, where the poverty rate exceeds 35%, has been hit particularly hard by environmental injustices that are inseparable from deregulation and austerity. Nearly a decade ago, a contaminated water crisis began when an unelected "emergency manager" appointed by then-Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) made the cost-cutting decision to switch the city's tap water source from Detroit's municipal supply to the Flint River, whose highly corrosive water caused aging pipes to leak lead into thousands of homes.
"The fact that EGLE has acknowledged environmental justice concerns with this asphalt plant and decided to go ahead and permit it anyway reflects a much larger problem."
Now, with a stamp of approval from Michigan's regulators and 7th Judicial Circuit Court, Ajax is on the verge of bringing another highly polluting facility to a community that is already overwhelmed by particulate matter stemming from the Genesee Power Station, Universal Coating Inc., Ace-Saginaw Paving Company, Buckeye Terminals, Superior Metals, RJ Industrial Recycling, and other nearby entities.
This concentration of industrial activity has left inhabitants with high rates of cancer, asthma, and other respiratory illnesses, prompting them to demand an assessment of the cumulative impacts of the projected emissions from the proposed asphalt plant along with the pollution emanating from other toxic facilities in the area.
"EGLE has the power to go much further to protect communities of color who are disproportionately impacted by dirty air and water, and they consistently choose not to," said Nayyirah Shariff, director of Flint Rising. "That pattern smacks of racism, and it needs to change."
In addition to challenging the permit in court, the community groups have filed separate Title VI civil rights complaints with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, requesting an investigation into EGLE's alleged racism in this permitting process and a comprehensive review of the agency's compliance with civil rights laws more broadly. The groups are represented by Earthjustice, Great Lakes Environmental Law Center, and the National Housing Law Project.
"By filing these civil rights complaints, we hope to secure stronger protections for communities of color surrounding the Ajax plant, and throughout Michigan," said Nick Leonard, executive director of the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center.
As Earthjustice associate attorney John Petoskey put it: "The fact that EGLE has acknowledged environmental justice concerns with this asphalt plant and decided to go ahead and permit it anyway reflects a much larger problem. This case shows how the state permitting process fails to protect communities, and that's why federal action is needed.”
In Tuesday's decision, Judge David Newblatt pointed to the need for site-specific analyses in future permitting. This means that regulators would be expected to consider the multiple ways in which communities are already exposed to harmful pollutants—and the cumulative effects of those exposures—when issuing permits for new facilities.
In response, Rev. Monica Villarreal, an environmental justice organizer at Michigan United, said that "polluting industries should be on notice: Your choice to locate that new facility in an environmental justice community will mean a much higher barrier to get a permit, and those of us who live nearby will not stop fighting for our right to live and breathe clean air."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Indignation as Michigan Judge Drops Flint Water Charges Against GOP Ex-Gov Snyder
"The people of Flint deserve justice--and it's unacceptable that the people responsible for Flint's water crisis aren't being held accountable," said Food & Water Watch in response to the development.
Dec 09, 2022
Environmental justice advocates on Friday condemned a move by a district judge in Michigan to drop two misdemeanor charges against former Republican Gov. Rick Snyder in connection with the 2014 Flint water crisis that killed dozens of residents of the predominantly Black city and poisoned thousands more.
The Detroit Free Press reports Genesee County Judge F. Kay Behm signed an order remanding willful neglect of duty charges against Snyder, who served two terms as Michigan's governor from 2011 to 2019.
According to the paper:
Behm cited a Michigan Supreme Court ruling from June which stated government prosecutors erred in 2021 when they had a circuit judge serve as a "one-man grand jury" to indict Snyder and the other officials. She also noted circuit court rulings to dismiss charges against other former state officials which cited the Supreme Court ruling.
"The people of Flint deserve justice--and it's unacceptable that the people responsible for Flint's water crisis aren't being held accountable," the advocacy group Food & Water Watch tweeted in response to the dropped charges.
Tom Ivacko, director of the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan's Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy, said on Twitter that "the Flint water crisis was an abject failure of governance at all levels, and the ultimate price was paid by the residents of Flint."
"While the legal ramifications continue to play out, residents need to claim their role in holding the government accountable," Ivacko continued. "Policymakers need to redouble their efforts to increase government transparency and improve the workings of government."
Journalist Jordan Chariton noted on Twitter, "Nearly 9 years into #FlintWaterCrisis, not one government official in prison."
As the Associated Press reports:
Flint's water became tainted with lead after city managers appointed by Snyder began using the Flint River in 2014 to save money while a new pipeline to Lake Huron was built. The water wasn't treated to reduce its corrosive qualities, causing lead to break off from old pipes and contaminate the system for more than a year.
The Michigan Civil Rights Commission said it was the result of systemic racism, doubting that the water switch and the brush-off of complaints in the majority-Black city would have occurred in a white, prosperous community.
Flint residents complained about the water's smell, taste and appearance, raising health concerns and reporting rashes, hair loss and other problems. Snyder didn't acknowledge that lead was a problem until 17 months after the water switch, in fall 2015, when he pledged to take action.
In addition to lead poisoning, a 2014-15 outbreak of Legionnaires disease caused by the water emergency officially killed 12 people, although an investigation found that the actual death toll may have been up to 10 times higher.
Last year, a federal judge approved a $626 million settlement for Flint victims.
Friday's dismissal comes two months after Genesee County Circuit Judge Elizabeth Kelly dropped felony charges against seven former officials in connection with the Flint water crisis. Earlier this year, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat, dropped racketeering charges against officials connected to the catastrophe, drawing accusations of corruption.
Responding to Friday's development, the Flint Water Prosecution Team said in a statement that "this decision is not surprising, and the prosecution will appeal."
"We anticipated that this ruling would be similar to other outcomes that only considered process," the prosecutors continued. "Our team has been preparing for this and looks forward to addressing these issues in court. As we have reiterated time and again, rulings up to this point have been on process alone--not on the merits of the case."
"We are confident that the evidence clearly supports the criminal charges against Rick Snyder," the team added, "and we will not stop until we have exhausted all possible legal options to secure justice for the people of Flint."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Flint Residents Return to Court After City Misses Deadline to Replace Lead Pipes
"Flint residents are fighters and we intend to stop at nothing short of securing safe water for our entire community," said resident Melissa Mays.
Nov 02, 2022
Flint, Michigan residents and advocacy groups said Wednesday that they are returning to court for the fifth time in nearly six years to ensure the city removes the lead pipes which contributed to the community's devastating water crisis that began in 2014.
The city failed to meet a court-ordered deadline of September 30 for excavating and replacing all the lead service lines, which officials had agreed to do under a 2017 legal settlement. The city has been granted several extensions to complete the work.
"The people of Flint won't tolerate any more broken promises from the city, which is under a federal court order to get the lead pipes out of the ground and somehow still can't get the job done."
"The people of Flint won't tolerate any more broken promises from the city, which is under a federal court order to get the lead pipes out of the ground and somehow still can't get the job done," said Melissa Mays, operations manager for the grassroots group Flint Rising, in a statement. "The city's mismanagement is adding insult to the injury we've endured for years. Flint residents are fighters and we intend to stop at nothing short of securing safe water for our entire community."
Mays was one of the plaintiffs in the federal drinking water case that arose from the lead crisis in the city, where the majority of residents are Black and about 40% live in poverty.
To save money, city officials decided in 2013 to temporarily pump drinking water from the Flint River, failing to treat the water. Nearly 9,000 children were supplied lead-contaminated water for 18 months and the crisis spurred residents including Mays to action as the community called on the Environmental Protection Agency to take immediate emergency action. After the EPA failed to take action, the residents sued the city and state officials, resulting in the 2017 settlement.
By the end of 2021, lead pipes going to roughly 400 Flint homes still needed to be excavated and officials still needed to complete outreach to 1,400 households.
According to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Lakeshore Global Corporation, which was awarded a $17.8 million contract to remove the lead pipes, did not resume the work until September, weeks before the latest deadline.
Democratic Flint Mayor Sheldon Neeley said as the latest deadline passed that 95% of service line excavations had been completed, but advocates said Wednesday that they have lost patience with the city.
On October 28, the city announced that the EPA had granted a $100 million funding extension for one year to complete the replacement of lead pipes. The city's contracts now stipulate that the work must be finished by the end of 2023.
"The city of Flint did not manage to replace even a single lead pipe this year until September and is unable to tell us which homes and how many still need lawns, driveways, and sidewalks restored from the excavation work," said Pastor Allen C. Overton of Concerned Pastors for Social Action. "This is unacceptable. Residents have no option but to ask the federal court to hold the city accountable and push this work over the finish line."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Absolutely Shameful': Michigan Judge Drops Flint Water Crisis Charges Against 7 Officials
"This means there are currently no criminal charges over 8 years later," lamented one journalist.
Oct 05, 2022
A Michigan judge on Tuesday dropped felony criminal charges against seven former officials in connection to the 2014 Flint water crisis that poisoned thousands of people and killed dozens.
Genesee County Circuit Judge Elizabeth Kelly's decision stems from a Michigan Supreme Court ruling in June that deemed state prosecutors' use of a one-man grand jury to issue indictments legally improper, throwing into doubt efforts to hold ex-officials accountable for a water disaster that has had lasting impacts on Flint residents.
"The threat of lead contamination is not over, as we've seen from recent monitoring showing rising lead levels in the city's drinking water."
"Because the one-person grand jury does not have the power to issue indictments, the indictments issued in the felony Flint water cases were void ab initio," Kelly wrote. "Therefore, anything arising out of the invalid indictments [is] irreconcilably tainted from inception."
In the eight years since the start of the crisis, which was sparked by a cost-cutting decision to switch the city's water supply to the Flint River without adequate testing and treatment, a number of Michigan officials--including the state's former Republican governor--have been charged with crimes, but none of the charges have held.
Among the officials who had charges dropped Tuesday were former Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) Director Nick Lyon and former MDHHS medical executive Eden Wells, both of whom faced nine counts of involuntary manslaughter.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat, has been accused of botching efforts to punish officials responsible for the mass lead poisoning and Legionnaires' epidemic in Flint. Charlie LeDuff, a columnist for The Detroit News, explained last month that "instead of holding preliminary examinations, Nessel's office used a one-man grand jury to charge former Gov. Rick Snyder with willful neglect--a misdemeanor--as well as recharging several others with a new round of indictments of manslaughter and misconduct."
"Nessel's team argues that while the Supreme Court ruled a one-man grand jury may not issue indictments, his findings can still be used to seek a warrant," LeDuff continued. "Despite assurances from Nessel's office claiming things are moving forward, people in the legal world know time is running out... Evidence has grown cold and memories have grown dark. The statute of limitations is creeping up, depending on the person and the charges. So it's worth saying again. It's doubtful anyone goes to prison."
In a statement responding to Kelly's decision, Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy, Michigan Solicitor General Fadwa Hammoud, and the Flint Water Prosecution Team vowed to "review" the ruling and "continue its pursuit of justice for Flint."
"Though it may be of little comfort," the officials said, "the people of Flint have always had on their side a dedicated team of lawyers and advocates committed to justice and with the sincere belief that what happened to the people of Flint is a crime."
The latest indication that justice for Flint residents won't be forthcoming any time soon was met with outrage. Nina Turner, a former Ohio state senator, called the decision to drop charges against the seven ex-officials "unjust" and "absolutely shameful."
Journalist Jordan Chariton, who has covered the Flint case closely, also expressed dismay on social media:
As prosecutors fail to punish officials involved in the 2014 crisis and the high-level attempts to cover it up, Flint is struggling to replace its remaining lead pipes.
"The city of Flint has conducted lead service line replacement work at only about a dozen homes in 2022. It is an unacceptable performance by our elected officials," Melissa Mays, operations manager of the advocacy coalition Flint Rising, said in a statement late last month.
"The threat of lead contamination is not over, as we've seen from recent monitoring showing rising lead levels in the city's drinking water," Mays added. "As the state of Michigan approaches the milestone of removing all of [Benton Harbor's] lead pipes, a move supported by advocates and concerned citizens in Flint, we ask: Why not Flint?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Flint Residents 'Disgusted' After Court Throws Out Indictments of Top Officials
"It has become increasingly clear that the judicial system is not a viable option for a poor majority Black community facing injustice," said Flint Rising.
Jun 29, 2022
Flint residents expressed disappointment and disgust after the Michigan Supreme Court on Tuesday determined former state officials were not indicted properly--yet again delaying accountability for the city's water crisis.
"No more excuses. No more delays."
"This leaves no one criminally responsible for poisoning 100,000 people in one of the largest public health disasters in this nation's history," Flint Rising said in a statement Wednesday, adding that the group is "disgusted" by the 6-0 decision.
"It has been 2,986 days since the start of the Flint water crisis. Throughout the years, we've sent buses of Flint residents to our state and nation's capital, shared our stories, marched in the streets, and fought for reparations for our community," the group continued.
Their advocacy last year led to "making lead service line replacement a reality for communities across the country through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act," Flint Rising noted, "yet no one has been held accountable."
"It has become increasingly clear that the judicial system is not a viable option for a poor majority Black community facing injustice," the organization said. "For us, justice means all of the infrastructure (public and private) replaced with Flint hands, lifelong healthcare and educational support services, and those responsible brought to justice. No more excuses. No more delays. We will see you in the streets."
The high court found that prosecutors appointed by Democratic Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel should not have relied on Genesee County Circuit Judge David Newblatt acting as a one-man grand jury to charge nine people including Rick Synder, the former GOP governor.
Three of the indicted individuals--Richard Baird, Nicholas Lyon, and Nancy Peeler--challenged the process by which they were charged, leading to the state court's decision Tuesday.
"MCL 767.3 and MCL 767.4 authorize a judge to investigate, subpoena witnesses, and issue arrest warrants. But they do not authorize the judge to issue indictments," states the Michigan Supreme Court opinion. "And if a criminal process begins with a one-man grand jury, the accused is entitled to a preliminary examination before being brought to trial."
"Accordingly, we reverse the Genesee Circuit Court's orders denying Peeler's and Baird's motions to remand for a preliminary examination and denying Lyon's motion to dismiss," the document continued. "We remand to the Genesee Circuit Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."
As the Detroit Free Press reported Tuesday:
Due to the significance of the case, Justice Richard Bernstein wrote in a separate but concurring opinion, prosecutors should have taken every necessary step to avoid any public scrutiny over the legal procedures.
"Put simply, the prosecution's power to charge individuals and haul them into court is constrained by certain preconditions," Bernstein wrote. "We recognize today that, under these circumstances, one of those preconditions is required by statute--a preliminary examination.
"The prosecution cannot simply cut corners in order to prosecute defendants more efficiently. To allow otherwise would be repugnant to the foundational principles of our judicial system."
Attorneys for Snyder now "say they will move immediately to dismiss all Flint water criminal charges pending against him and eight others charged with similar crimes likely won't be far behind," according to MLive.
Meanwhile, Michigan Solicitor General Fadwa Hammoud said in a statement Tuesday that "the citizens of Flint should know that these cases are not over. Public commentary to the contrary is presumptive and rash."
After briefly explaining prosecutors' reasoning for using the process they did, she noted that Bernstein also wrote: "If the allegations can be proved, it is impossible to fully state the magnitude of the damage state actors have caused to an innocent group of people--a group of people that they were entrusted to serve. The Flint water crisis stands as one of this country's greatest betrayals of citizens by their government."
"Do you know it's been eight long years--eight? Eight long years that we've been dealing with this atrocity."
Hammoud vowed that "we are prepared and determined to prove the allegations against the defendants in court and are committed to seeing this process through to its conclusion."
Despite that promise, the people of Flint--where residents were impacted by high lead levels and Legionnaires' disease after the water supply was switched to the Flint River in 2014 in an effort to save money--remain frustrated.
"The court system should be ashamed that they let it drag on this long," Claudia Perkins-Milton, a lifelong Flint resident and an activist on water issues, told The New York Times Tuesday.
"People here are so upset," she added. "Do you know it's been eight long years--eight? Eight long years that we've been dealing with this atrocity."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Unconscionable': Despite Outcry Over Lead Poisoning, New Asphalt Plant Approved in Flint, Michigan
"Our community, our families, our children, cannot and should not take more chemical pollution."
Nov 15, 2021
Less than a week after a federal judge approved a $626 million settlement for thousands of lead poisoning victims in Flint, Michigan, state officials on Monday rubber-stamped an air permit for a new asphalt plant in the city despite strong opposition from residents and advocates, who denounced the decision as another manifestation of environmental injustice.
"The plant will be an additional source of air pollution in a community of color that already has one of the highest rates of asthma hospitalizations in the state."
According to Earthjustice, "The Ajax asphalt plant will be located in Genesee Township, less than 1,600 feet from public housing in a low-income Black neighborhood in Flint that is already overwhelmed by high levels of air toxics, particulate matter from the concentration of industrial activity. Nearby facilities include Genesee Power Station, Universal Coating, Inc., Ace-Saginaw Paving Company, Buckeye Terminals, Superior Metals, RJ Industrial Recycling, and many others."
"A coalition of many Flint-based groups have been fighting the issuance of this permit" by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE), Earthjustice said in a statement. "In response to the comments of this coalition and other advocates, EGLE changed the draft permit."
Mona Munroe-Younis, executive director of the Environmental Transformation Movement of Flint, told MLive on Monday that "I haven't seen the permit yet and am interested to know if EGLE made any changes based on the public outcry against the permit."
"I'm frustrated and disappointed that EGLE would issue the permit before having all the information they need to do so, namely the cumulative impact analysis," Munroe-Younis added. "The state of Michigan should know that their civil rights obligations require them to consider the health impacts on already environmentally burdened, predominantly Black communities. We'll have more to say once we see the permit."
MLive reported that EGLE "said the green light for the project comes with 'a host of site-specific conditions and restrictions [that] provide safeguards to ensure compliance with the law and to better protect the community.'"
Opponents of the asphalt plant, however, remain unconvinced.
"It is unconscionable that EGLE allowed another source of pollution, including lead and other air toxics, in our community," Deborah Hawley, director of the St. Francis Prayer Center, said in a statement. "Our community, our families, our children, cannot and should not take more chemical pollution."
Flint has been hit especially hard by environmental injustices that are inseparable from deregulation and austerity. Seven years ago, a contaminated water crisis began when an "unelected emergency manager" appointed by then-Gov. Rick Snyder (R) made the cost-cutting decision to switch the city's tap water source from Detroit's municipal supply to the Flint River, whose highly corrosive water caused aging pipes to leak lead into thousands of homes.
"We demand Ajax and EGLE... pause the construction and operation of this asphalt plant," Hawley added, "until more can be learned about its impacts."
Nayyirah Shariff, director of Flint Rising, said that "this permitting decision perpetuates a legacy of environmental racism in Flint and in Michigan." Shariff rebuked Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's administration for "not following through on its commitment to environmental justice."
While EGLE says that Ajax met the minimum standards necessary to obtain an air permit, agency director Liesl Clark sent a letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Monday "seeking guidance and support in providing tools and strategies to improve public health in at-risk communities," MLive reported.
The licensing process, Clark wrote in her letter to the EPA, "highlights the limitations of federal and state environmental regulations in addressing the concerns raised by Flint residents."
As MLive noted:
The state said it received more than 340 comments from residents, environmental advocates, and government agencies during an extended 83-day comment period, overwhelmingly opposed to the facility but said most objections were outside the scope of EGLE's authority to consider.
"It is vital that air permitting rules ensure consistent, clear rules so that they are not subject to arbitrary decisions," Clark said in her letter to EPA, which she invited to conduct an additional review of the Ajax permit. "But it is abundantly clear in this situation, and many others across the nation, that the tools we are given to protect particularly distressed communities should be strengthened."
Earthjustice managing attorney Debbie Chizewer said that EGLE's decision "came even after our clients, EPA, and HUD all submitted comments raising serious civil rights concerns about the disparate impact that would result to a low-income, predominantly Black community."
"EGLE should... put a stop to the environmental injustice that continues to oppress this community."
Neighborhood residents have called for, and the EPA has recommended, a study of the cumulative impacts of the projected emissions from the proposed asphalt plant as well as the pollution emanating from other industrial facilities in the area.
On behalf of coalition members Flint Rising, Environmental Transformation Movement of Flint, and the St. Francis Prayer Center, Earthjustice and the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center have submitted a Title VI civil rights complaint to the EPA's Office of Civil Rights, requesting an investigation of EGLE's actions in this permitting process and a comprehensive review of the state environmental agency's compliance with civil rights laws more broadly.
"The draft air permit, or permit to install, for this hot mix asphalt plant was gravely deficient under the Clean Air Act and under civil rights laws," said Nick Leonard, executive director of the Great Lakes Environmental Center. "The plant will be an additional source of air pollution in a community of color that already has one of the highest rates of asthma hospitalizations in the state."
"This asphalt plant," he added, "should not have been permitted and should not be constructed or operated until the cumulative risks or impacts of adding [pollution to] this burdened Flint community are properly considered."
Munroe-Younis, meanwhile, stressed that her group and others in the community "will keep building power and fighting for access to clean air and a healthy environment."
Monday marks the beginning of a 90-day period in which anyone may appeal EGLE's decision in Genesee Circuit Court. According to MLive, Flint city council members have "approved a resolution authorizing city officials to do all things necessary to object to the air permit."
The American Federation of Government Employees Local 704, a union representing nearly 1,000 EPA employees in six states across the Midwest, including Michigan, emphasized that "the release of toxic contaminants in disadvantaged communities already overburdened by pollution is no longer acceptable."
"EGLE should protect the families in Flint and Genesee Township from any further toxic releases into their community," Local 704 said in a statement, "and put a stop to the environmental injustice that continues to oppress this community."
Keep ReadingShow Less
American's Very Big (Water) Drinking Problem
With state and local governments under increasing financial pressure, the funding shortfall for modernizing the water infrastructure could reach a staggering $434 billion by 2029.
Nov 12, 2021
Think of it this way: what we don't know will hurt us. And water--yes, water--is an example of just that. Even at a time of such angry political disputes, you might imagine that, in a wealthy country like the United States, it would still be possible to agree that clean water should be not just a right, but a given. Well, welcome to America 2021.
When it comes to basic water supplies, that's hardly an outlandish thought. After all, back in 2015, our government, along with other members of the United Nations, embraced the U.N.'s Sustainable Development Goals, the sixth of which is universal access to safe drinking water. Despite modest progress globally--71% of the world's population lacked that simple necessity then, "only" 61% today--nearly 900 million people still don't have it. Of course, the overwhelming majority of them live in the poorest countries on this planet.
The United States, however, has the world's largest economy, the fifth-highest per-capita income, and is a technological powerhouse. How, then, could the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) have given our water infrastructure (pipes, pumping stations, reservoirs, and purification and recycling facilities) a shocking C- grade in their 2021 "report card"? How to explain why Yale University's Environmental Performance Index ranked the U.S. only 26th globally when it comes to the quality of its drinking water and sanitation?
Worse yet, two million Americans still have no running water and indoor plumbing. Native Americans are 19 times more likely to lack this rudimentary amenity than Whites; Latinos and African Americans, twice as likely. On average, Americans use 82 gallons of water daily; Navajos, seven--or the equivalent of about five flushes of a toilet. Moreover, many Native Americans must drive miles to fetch fresh water, making regular handwashing, a basic precaution during the Covid-19 pandemic, just one more hardship.
"Safe" Water
Washington and Philadelphia are just two of the many American cities whose water-distribution systems, some of them wooden, contain pipes that predate the Civil War. Naturally, time has taken its toll. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports that water mains, especially such old ones, rupture 240,000 times annually, while "trillions of gallons" of potable water worth $2.6 billion seep from leaky pipes, and "billions of gallons of raw sewage" pollute the surface water that provides 61% of our supply. Fixing busted pipes, which break at the rate of one every two minutes nationally, has cost nearly $70 billion since 2000.
The U.S. has 2.2 million miles of waterpipes, which are, on average, 45 years old. The EPA's 2015 estimate for overhauling such an aging system of piping was $473 billion, or $23.7 billion annually over 20 years--in other words, anything but chump change. Still, compared to the way Congress allots money to the U.S. military for its endless losing wars and eternal build-ups of weaponry, it couldn't be more modest. After all, the Pentagon's latest budget request was for $715 billion, to which the House Armed Services Committee added $25.5 billion, unsolicited, as did its Senate counterpart. Self-styled congressional budget hawks never complain about our military spending, even though it exceeds that of the next 11 countries combined. So, $23.7 billion annually to renovate an antediluvian water system? That shouldn't be a problem, right?
It turns out, though, that it is. The federal government's share of total investment in updating water infrastructure plunged from nearly-two-thirds in 1977 to less than a tenth of that by 2019. With state and local governments under increasing financial pressure, the funding shortfall for modernizing the water infrastructure could reach a staggering $434 billion by 2029.
Considering where the American water system already falls utterly short, a contrarian could counter that it's not a big deal for a mere two million people in a country of 333 million not to have water directly piped into their homes. But in the wealthiest country on earth? Really? And a lack of easy access to water is hardly the only problem. A substantial number of Americans are drinking (and cooking with) contaminated supplies of it. A 2017 investigation found that 63 million of them had done so at least once during the previous 10 years, or nearly a fifth of the population.
This finding wasn't an outlier. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) discovered that, "in 2015 alone, there were more than 80,000 reported violations of the Safe Water Drinking Act by community water systems" that served nearly 77 million people. And of the total number of violations, 12,000, traced to water providers serving 27 million people, were health-related (rather than monitoring and reporting infractions). There's more. A study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences concluded that 21 million consumers received water that didn't meet federal standards; and Time reported that 30 million did in 2019.
The Flint Saga and Beyond
Occasionally, stories about unsafe drinking water do make the headlines, as happened with Flint, Michigan. Once a prosperous city, Flint was slammed by a post-1970s wave of de-industrialization in the Midwest and now has a poverty rate of nearly 39% (and 54% of its population is Black). By 2013, facing its massive budget deficit, a commission appointed by the governor devised a cost-saving measure. The city's water supply would be switched to the Flint River, pending construction of new supply lines from Lake Huron. That river, however, had long been contaminated by waste from factories, paper mills, and meatpacking plants along its shore, as well as untreated sewage.
Residents began complaining that their water smelled and tasted bad, but were regularly reassured that it was safe. Testing, however, revealed lead levels that far exceeded the EPA-stipulated maximum because the water hadn't been treated with anti-corrosion additives to counter contamination. (There is, in fact, no "safe" level for lead, a toxic metal, but the EPA requires remedial action if 10% of water samples show concentrations exceeding 15 ppb, or parts per billion.) Flint's water also contained trihalomethane, a carcinogen, as well as dangerous E. coli and legionella bacteria. A scandal ensued.
Flint, as it turned out, wasn't alone. The NRDC reported this year that "dozens of cities have been found to have dangerous levels of elevated lead" in their water. Another of its studies concluded that the drinking water of 186 million people (56% of Americans) had more than one part per billion of lead, the maximum recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics, and that 61 million Americans used bottled water from sources that exceeded the Food and Drug Administration's five ppb maximum, while lead levels in the water of seven million others exceeded the 15-ppb EPA threshold for mandatory corrective measures.
In 1986, Congress banned the future use of pipes that weren't "lead free," but didn't require the replacement of existing ones. Even today, as many as 12 million lead pipes still serve households in this country and scientists generally regard the EPA's lead limit as far too lax and its testing requirements and reporting standards as too permissive. Perhaps you won't be surprised to learn that local governments and utility companies have regularly opposed tougher regulations for lead-pipe replacement.
Eliminating lead water pipes entirely in this country would cost up to $50 billion. Though that's a lot of money, it's hardly unaffordable. In fact, the American Jobs Plan proposed $45 billion for that task, though the separate bipartisan infrastructure bill cut it to $15 billion--again illustrating that penny pinching applies to threats to Americans' day-to-day well-being, but not to our militarized conception of national security.
Other Contaminants
Lead isn't the sole contaminant in our drinking water.
- In farming communities in California's Central Valley and in the San Joaquin Valley, increasing amounts of uranium--associated with kidney damage and a greater risk of cancer--have turned up in the local drinking water, including private wells, which aren't regulated by the EPA, but are used by migrant workers. A 2015 Associated Press investigation found that a quarter of San Joaquin Valley households were then using drinking water from private wells containing "dangerous amounts of uranium." Moreover, one in 10 of the Valley's community water systems contained uranium levels that exceeded federal and state limits--and there's no reason to believe that has changed in the last six years.
- The rise in fertilizer use--fivefold since the 1950s--to boost crop yields and its runoff has increased the nitrate levels in drinking water. High levels of nitrates, which have been linked to various forms of cancer, birth defects, and thyroid disease, have been found in 4,000 public water systems in 10 states supplying 45 million people, especially in the West and Midwest. In more than half of these places, the contamination seems only to be increasing. The EPA's maximum concentration level for nitrates is 10 milligrams per liter, but studies reveal that the risk of birth defects and cancer increase even when people consume water containing half that amount.
- Arsenic, a known carcinogen, is another hazard. A 2020 Columbia University study found that, though the average concentration of arsenic in the water supply, nationwide, fell by 10% between 2006 and 2011, concentrations exceeding the EPA's maximum of 0.01 milligrams per liter were far more likely in smaller communities that use groundwater and are disproportionately Hispanic. A U.S. Geological Survey report, which focused on wells providing drinking water, noted that there were "dangerously high levels of arsenic, potentially exposing 2.1 million people" to health risks in more than half of all states.
- Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are used in numerous products, including non-stick cookware, pizza boxes, firefighting foam, and waterproof apparel. However, they remain unregulated by the EPA despite being associated with a range of health risks. Worse yet, these "forever chemicals" take thousands of years to break down. Scientists estimate that the tap water of 200 million Americans contains PFAS concentrations that put them at risk.
The Bad News for 2021
Since the early nineteenth century, enormous progress has been made toward providing Americans with abundant, clean water. And water-borne diseases like cholera, which still kills close to 100,000 people worldwide every year, and typhoid, which claims as many as 161,000, have essentially been eliminated in this country (though there are still 16 million annual cases of acute gastroenteritis traceable to contaminated water). So, yes, water in the U.S. is generally fit to drink, but given this country's economic and technological resources, it's scandalous that the problems that remain haven't at least been substantially mitigated.
To understand such a failure, just consider our politics, which, in the wake of recent elections, only seem to be growing worse by the day.
Since the 1980s, the public sphere has been dominated by a narrative that portrays just about anything the government does, other than profligate spending on the U.S. military, as financially reckless, intrusive, and counterproductive. Instead of creating a compelling message to persuade Americans that many valued public benefits, ranging from land grant colleges, the Internet, Social Security, and Medicare to the national highway system and medical research breakthroughs, owe much to government policies, too many Democrats continue to run scared, fearful of being labeled "big-government-tax-and-spend liberals."
Add to this the outsized political influence that big money exercises through copious campaign contributions--all but limitless thanks to recent Supreme Court decisions--and pricey lobbyists. (Yes, unions and public interest groups lobby, too, but for each dollar they spend, corporations spend $34.)
Companies that, for instance, produce perchlorate, a chemical found in U.S. water supplies that's used in rocket fuel and munitions and is harmful to iodine-deficient pregnant women and fetuses, have paid lobbyists to fight stricter regulations for years. Not coincidentally, the EPA, which has been monitoring perchlorate since 2001, has yet to set mandatory limits on it for drinking water, though it continues to consider a "roadmap" for doing so. Similarly, the seven largest producers of PFAS spent $61 million in 2019 and 2020 on campaign contributions and lobbying efforts. In 2018, there were only two firms lobbying against tougher PFAS regulations; a year later that number had increased to 14.
The EPA sets maximum drinking water levels for 90 substances, but hasn't (except in a few instances where Congress mandated that it do so) added more since 1996 even though its "Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List" now contains nearly 100 additional substances. This shouldn't be a surprise. Companies that oppose tougher regulations have political access and clout. Political appointees to important EPA posts often hail from those very industries or the lobbying groups they bankroll. Scientists paid by industries have weighed in, lending an aura of legitimacy to special-interest pleading.
Water policy is rife with scientific complexity, but the legislation and regulations that shape it are hashed out in the political arena. There, the deck is increasingly stacked--and not in favor of the average consumer. If the Republicans take back Congress in 2022 and the presidency in 2024, my small suggestion: have a nice cool glass of ice water and relax. What could possibly go wrong?
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Historic and Momentous Day' as Judge OKs $626 Million Flint Water Crisis Settlement
"Though we can never undo what has occurred, this settlement makes clear that those who egregiously violate the law and harm their communities will be held accountable."
Nov 10, 2021
While stressing that no amount of money could fully compensate for the irreparably damaged health of thousands of Flint, Michigan residents who suffered lead poisoning due to cost-cutting measures by an unelected city manager, advocates hailed a federal judge's final approval on Wednesday of a $626 million settlement as a crucial step toward "justice served."
"None of this would have been possible without the tireless advocacy from residents, who never gave up the fight."
MLive reports U.S. District Judge Judith Levy filed an approval order for the settlement, under which Flint residents who were six years old or younger during the lead contamination crisis in the largely impoverished, predominantly Black city of 81,000 will be the biggest beneficiaries of the historic agreement.
"For those who have endured the damage done by the Flint water crisis, I know this day brings only partial relief to what remains unimaginable hardship, but I hope this important settlement can be acknowledged as a positive step in the healing process," Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat, said in a statement following Levy's approval. "The people of Flint deserve accountability and to be compensated for any injuries they suffered."
Ted Leopold, a partner at the law firm of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll and co-lead class counsel in the case, said that "this is a historic and momentous day for the residents of Flint, who will finally begin to see justice served."
During the tenure of then-Gov. Rick Snyder--a Republican--an unelected emergency manager he appointed to govern the city made the cost-cutting decision in 2014 to switch its tap water source from Detroit's municipal supply to the Flint River, whose waters were highly corrosive and whose aging pipes leaked lead into thousands of homes.
In addition to lead poisoning, a 2014-15 outbreak of Legionaires' disease caused by the water crisis officially killed 12 people, although an investigation found that the actual death toll may have been up to 10 times higher.
In January 2021, Snyder and eight other former state officials were criminally charged for their alleged roles in the crisis.
Speaking about the settlement and the people of Flint, Leopold said that "none of this would have been possible without the tireless advocacy from residents, who never gave up the fight."
"Though we can never undo what has occurred," the attorney added, "this settlement makes clear that those who egregiously violate the law and harm their communities will be held accountable."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy