10 Years After Crisis, Flint Is Still Fighting for Clean Water

Today marks the 10-year anniversary of the day when the City of Flint switched its water source to the Flint River, sparking a lead-in-water crisis that would poison residents for years to come.

In 2014, Flint, Michigan was governed by a State-imposed emergency manager, effectively suspending local democracy, including over the water system. State-imposed officials claimed the switch to the Flint River would save the City money. Instead, it cost many residents their health and even their lives. Ten years later, Flint still doesn’t have water justice.

What happened in Flint embodies many facets of our water problems nationwide. The United Nations has long recognized a human right to water, but the U.S. has failed to deliver. For many families across the country, water is dangerously contaminated, inaccessible, and unaffordable. Moreover, this failure is disparately harming majority-Black, Brown, and low-income communities.

Many residents lack local control over their water system because of private ownership or state takeovers, as happened in Flint. There, the takeover stripped away decision-making power from local Black elected officials and effectively disenfranchised Black voters in Michigan.

At the time, Food & Water Watch was working on water affordability issues in the state. When we heard about the crisis in Flint, we jumped into action, supporting the local groups demanding clean water and fighting government pushback.

Now, thanks to grassroots groups’ unrelenting activism, Flint has seen some changes. But residents are still fighting for accountability from companies and government officials, and for clean, affordable water. Many still don’t drink from their taps.

“They Didn’t Treat the Water to Prevent It From Eating Our Pipes and Our Bodies.”

Interview with Melissa Mays

How did the water problems in Flint start, and how did you get involved in organizing to get answers?

In 2014, the State Emergency manager switched our water to the Flint River to put us on more privatized pipelines. He tried to say, “Well, Flint’s broke, and Detroit’s upping the rates and making it unaffordable,” which Food & Water Watch had actually found out was false. [Editor’s note: Our 2015 rate survey even found that Flint had the highest water prices among the 500 largest systems nationwide]. This was largely due to the Emergency Manager hiking rates to extract water revenues for other purposes.]

He decided to cut us off from Detroit and then put us on the Flint River. Even though the whole county shares a water system, Flint was the only one that had its water switched. The other communities, mostly white and more affluent, were not switched.

In May of 2014, we failed our first safe drinking water test for disinfection byproducts that cause cancer. People were almost immediately having discolored water. It was so harsh, it was more corrosive and caustic, and they didn’t put any treatments. They didn’t treat the water to prevent it from eating our pipes and our bodies.

My family didn’t have discolored water, and we didn’t know at the time that lead and several other contaminants don’t have a taste, color, or odor. We just felt lucky that we didn’t have brown water. Little did I know, as I was handing my kids the clear water, I was poisoning them.

In January of 2015, we received a letter in the mail saying, “By the way, for the previous nine months, your water has been contaminated with a cancer-causing disinfection byproduct. You might want to check with your doctor before consuming the water.”

So in January, I went to my first protest, and I’d never been to a protest before. I had never been an activist. I managed bands and put on shows; I was in PR and marketing.

But I realized there that even though we were different ages, races, and genders and lived in different parts of town, most people were having rashes, hair loss, breathing problems. We had people with cancer, people with miscarriages, pets that had died. So I started collecting information then.

In January 2015, I was connected with [water quality expert] Bob Bowcock. I took him through our water treatment plant, and he started realizing that there wasn’t the proper equipment for corrosion control. He said, “Look, orange and brown water means iron corrosion, which isn’t super dangerous, except for the fact that it feeds bacteria.”

We had found out that there were major E. coli breakouts in 2014 and 2015. What we didn’t know until later was that there was an ongoing Legionnaires’ outbreak, and Legionella, the bacteria that causes Legionnaires’, feeds off of iron corrosion.

Then Bob suggested that we start testing for

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

Explanation:

The article discusses the ongoing water crisis in Flint, Michigan, which is directly related to the issue of clean water and sanitation (SDG 6). It highlights the lack of access to clean and affordable water for the residents of Flint, particularly impacting marginalized communities. This connects to the goal of reducing inequalities (SDG 10) as the water crisis disproportionately affects majority-Black, Brown, and low-income communities.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all
• Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status

Explanation:

The article emphasizes the need for universal access to safe and affordable drinking water (Target 6.1) in Flint and across the country. It also highlights the importance of promoting social and economic inclusion (Target 10.2) to address the inequalities faced by marginalized communities affected by the water crisis.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator 6.1.1: Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services

Explanation:

The article implies the need to measure the proportion of the population in Flint and other affected areas that have access to safely managed drinking water services. This indicator (6.1.1) can be used to assess progress towards achieving universal access to safe and affordable drinking water (Target 6.1).

4. Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: foodandwaterwatch.org

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.