Coalition of 30 Groups Calls for $953 Million Funding For Safe Drinking Water – Urban Milwaukee

Coalition of Groups Call for Nearly $1B Investment for Safe Drinking Water

A coalition of more than 30 conservation, environmental, and citizens groups in Wisconsin is urging lawmakers to invest $953 million in water infrastructure under the next two-year state budget. The request comes as the nation celebrates the 50th anniversary of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. The groups emphasize the importance of ensuring access to safe drinking water for all residents.

Challenges Affecting Safe Drinking Water

The letter highlights several challenges that need to be addressed to protect safe drinking water in Wisconsin:

1. Roughly 150,000 lead service lines owned by utilities need to be replaced.
2. Over 42,000 private wells exceed the health standard for nitrates.
3. Approximately 90 water systems have high levels of PFAS contamination.

These sources of contamination have been linked to serious health issues, including blue-baby syndrome, thyroid cancer, and developmental delays in children.

Importance of State Funding

Without state funding, local governments will struggle to upgrade their water infrastructure or may need to significantly raise water rates to fund necessary projects. The coalition argues that access to safe drinking water should not be a zero-sum competition, especially when the state has a $4 billion surplus. They believe that the available resources should be used to ensure that everyone can turn on the tap and have confidence in the safety of their drinking water.

Policy Changes and Preventive Action

In addition to funding, the groups are calling for policy changes and preventive measures to protect drinking water:

• Removal of the 2017 REINS Act, which hinders agencies from implementing regulations related to groundwater standards without legislative approval.
• Support for local rental inspection programs to ensure lead-free apartments.
• Funding for farmers implementing practices to reduce nitrate contamination from manure runoff.
• Phasing out the use of PFAS in nonessential consumer products.

The groups believe that these measures, along with adequate funding, will help safeguard drinking water and prevent harmful contaminants from entering the environment.

While the request for funding and policy changes is unlikely to gain traction in the Republican-controlled state Legislature, both parties will be competing for control of state government in the next election. The coalition remains hopeful that safe drinking water will become a bipartisan issue in the next legislative session.

Sources:

• Coalition of groups call for nearly $1B investment for safe drinking water

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Related to the Article

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

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
• SDG 13: Climate Action

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

• SDG 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.
• SDG 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping, and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials.
• SDG 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe, and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums.
• SDG 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water, and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
• SDG 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.

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

While the article does not explicitly mention specific indicators, the following indicators can be inferred based on the issues discussed:

• Percentage of population with access to safe and affordable drinking water
• Number of lead service lines replaced
• Number of private wells meeting health standards for nitrates
• Number of water systems with high PFAS levels
• Amount of funding allocated for water infrastructure
• Reduction in health care costs related to lead, nitrate, and PFAS contamination
• Number of policy changes implemented to prevent contaminants in drinking water

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: urbanmilwaukee.com