City of Flint Water

[JenniSam]

For anyone who is interested, the Senate Committee Hearing about the Flint Water issue started at 9am Est. You can watch it on C-SPAN live and online from the beginning. A lot of information is being presented but not a lot of answers are being provided in return. The key players declined to attend (Emergency Manager, Darnell Earley, Gov Rick Synder, the EPA's regional administrator, Susan Hedman) but it doesn't sound like the committee has accepted that and will be pushing for their presence at a later date. I hope they keep that focus.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

It would be practical for larger entities to install their own processing units, if they wished to stay instead of accept a buyout to move. The city could vacate specific roads and sell them to those entities for access.

 

[justalayman]

It would be practical for larger entities to install their own processing units, if they wished to stay instead of accept a buyout to move. The city could vacate specific roads and sell them to those entities for access.

Processing units?

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Processing units?

To remove lead and recycle water for use. Fresh water can be introduced into a closed system by tanker.

 

[quincy]

As far fetched as it may sound, the idea of shutting down the city or bulldozing half of it has been mentioned even before this water issue ... I predict that the revitalization of downtown flint will spread throughout the city (slowly). It will not happen overnight but I don't see the city looking like it does now 5-6 years from now.

I agree that Flint could experience a revitalization, much as Detroit has - and perhaps it will make a quicker turnaround than Detroit because of the poisoned-water mess and the national attention being paid to it.

The reality is that people who reside in cities that experience disasters (man-made or natural) cannot just be shipped out to live in other locations.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

When you are dealing with cities that have lost half their citizens and businesses, have infrastructure mostly beyond its useful life and which are surrounded closely by similar cities in like situations. Throwing good money at one bad situation is usually cheaper than trying to rehab several cities in the same condition.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Large cities in the north are starting to adapt a demolish vacant homes, then undedicate street approach to avoid providing rehab money in wasted spaces.

 

[quincy]

Large cities in the north are starting to adapt a demolish vacant homes, then undedicate street approach to avoid providing rehab money in wasted spaces.

I work in a large city in the north (Detroit) and I have never heard of such a thing. Demolishing abandoned and deteriorated homes, yes.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

I work in a large city in the north (Detroit) and I have never heard of such a thing. Demolishing abandoned and deteriorated homes, yes.

Yes, just as streets are dedicated when built, council voting to abandon/undedicate them, allows the city to block them off and no longer provide services such as plowing, paving etc...

 

[quincy]

Yes, just as streets are dedicated when built, council voting to abandon/undedicate them, allows the city to block them off and no longer provide services such as plowing, paving etc...

What cities in the north are you talking about exactly?

If there are residents on a street paying for city services, the city is obligated to service those residents.

 

[justalayman]

To remove lead and recycle water for use. Fresh water can be introduced into a closed system by tanker.

The lead is coming from the branch lines from the mains to the homes. They are individual feeds so a common treatment system would do no good

 

[quincy]

It is important to note that Flint did not have a water problem when the residents were serviced by the Detroit Water and Sewer Department. It was when the decision was made to switch to the Flint River system that lead was introduced into the homes. The decision to switch to the Flint river system was strictly a money-based decision.

 

[justalayman]

It is important to note that Flint did not have a water problem when the residents were serviced by the Detroit Water and Sewer Department. It was when the decision was made to switch to the Flint River system that lead was introduced into the homes. The decision to switch to the Flint river system was strictly a money-based decision.

They had the provisions in place to have the same problem before the swap. The same lead pipes were leading to the same houses.

The problem wasn't actually the change of water itself either. It was that the ph of the water drawn from the river was not treated which cause the pipes in the system to corrode.

The scariest part to me is that if it had not affected the iron pipes in the system changing the water to be brown from a high iron level, the lead issue may not have been discovered for a long time.

I don't have a problem with the swap from Detroit water to drawing from the river to save money. That's just common sense. The problem is that for whatever reason they did not treat the water property which resulted in the pipes leaching iron and lead into the water. That is where being cheap cost them.

 

[quincy]

Trying to shave water costs has definitely cost the State (and all Michiganders) and will for a long time.

Governor Snyder has asked the legislature to approve $30 million for credit to be applied to the water bills of Flint residents, from April 2014 and into the future. At least JeniSam may be able to receive a refund that she can pass on to her tenants.

The problem with the leaching lead could have been avoided (or at least delayed) if Flint had waited until the Flint river system was in condition to service the residents. At the time of discussions on switching from the Detroit Water to the Flint River, it was expected the Flint system could be safely operated no sooner than 2016.

At any rate, it is a mess and one not likely to be resolved by closing down roads and transplanting the 90,000+ residents to a different city.

 

[justalayman]

The leaching of the lead would not have happened at all if the water was treated properly. The fact it didn't happen until they changed the system proves that.


I have heard a time frame of 2 years and anywhere from $60MM (surely way low) to $1.5B.

I have an idea to cut that time down a lot as well as cutting the cost;

Pseudo-slave labor. Prisoners on work release, welfare recipients, probationers community service, and any others that fit the bill. For $1MM you can get 100,000 shovels. That's a lot of digging. Should have it done in no time.


And if they get on the ball they can still meet that: can safely operate the water system by 2016, at least by the end of it.