Flint Municipal water 89

[moon161]

So, Flint has been MI lead poisoned and exposed to legionella bacteria because the water supply was switched from Detroit municipal to the Flint River. Since the polluted river is corrosive and iron rich, lead was leached from pipes and solder into the water of thousands of homes, and legionella bateria (legionaire's diseased) apparently thrived on the dissolved iron.

It was done to save money, it stayed that way because people who knew of the crisis sat on the information and obstructed inquiry.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/14/e...nation-for-months-without-telling-the-public/

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/15874

There HAS to be a (ir)responsible engineer in that chain. What are their duties, did they fail to perform? Would whistleblower action have been appropriate?

 

[SwinnyGG]

Regarding: "The City of Flint is a member of the KWA board, not just a customer, meaning they have input on things like rate adjustments. They did NOT have a seat on the DWSD (or the GLWA) board and were denied board seats when they asked for them."

A seat on the board is OK, but having the majority voting rights (+51%) is much more important and relevant. Flint is a minority on the KWA board.

What do you think will happen when Flint does not have the money to pay the water bill?

I'm aware of this. 49% of the vote is better than 0%, especially when the current situation involved Flint having the per-gallon highest water costs of any DWSD customer.

Public authorities operate with a tremendous amount of autonomy, little transparency, incur debt without voter approval, and remain largely unknown and unrecognized entities. Good luck with that.

ok.

The State of Michigan report that was prepared by an independent consultant states:

1. The KWA water will cost at least 20% more than Detroit water;
2. Requires Flint to upgrade the Flint water treatment plant at additional expense to process the KWA water;
3. Doesn't appear that the work on the Flint water treatment plant has even started;
4. Now that Mr. Glasgow will be in jail, Flint will have to find new water treatment plant operators;
5. Pay for excess water because the old Flint distribution system is leaking excessively;
6. Have no backup water supply since KWA has no standby generators (major risk);
7. Have a single source of water supply because Detroit water is gone as well as Flint River Supply is repurposed;
8. Pay for 30% of the pipeline cost while other communities on KWA board pay nothing.


The cost estimates of the TJTY report were based on two inaccurate premises:

1) They estimated that the KWA project would cost something like $100 million more than initially estimated, and that this cost would be passed on to water customers. KWA is currently, according to the information that is publicly available, nearly complete and under budget despite being a month or so behind schedule- meaning that the TJTY report overestimates pipeline construction cost by $100 million. That's a lot.

2) The report uses the DWSD's initial 48% rate cut as the base point for future water costs, and then applies the regional average cost increase to estimate future rates. The problem with that is that after the first year of the potential new lease, there were no price control measures in the contract- meaning that DWSD could charge Flint whatever they wanted, and the city would be back at square one, except without the option of finding another source. In other words, TJTY might have been 100% correct about the water rate 30 years from now, but they also may have missed the mark by 100% or 500%. There is no way to no, because Flint would have had zero control over their own costs by signing a new lease with DWSD.

What financials are you looking at? Some crystal ball?


I'm looking at the monthly financial statements published by the KWA every month since its inception, as well as the audits performed by third party firms. It's not very complicated.

OK, so the EPA is supposed to be responsible for not making the lying, misleading, inept, fraudulent MDEQ and Flint do their job. But later, the State of Michigan says the EPA has no legal authority.

"Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Director Keith Creagh, in a Friday letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, disputed whether the EPA “has the legal authority” to require a state to take the actions outlined in the order, saying the state would share those concerns by letter or in person."

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/201...

You're not understanding what I'm saying. Regardless of the EPA's legal role in directing the MDEQ or Flint water treatment staff in how to operate the plant- they had in their possession test data that indicated the drinking water in Flint was contaminated, and did nothing to make the people drinking that water aware. That's negligent, at best.

 

[bimr]

Must be something in the water in Michigan as the math is fuzzy.

"18 MGDs to 15 MGDs would change the take diameter for the piping from 66” to 54” — that’s where savings comes from," Genesee County Drain Commissioner and KWA CEO Jeff Wright told the council after breaking down the math for them. "You started at 36 MGDs in the study and that’s what had you at $12 million annually — currently what you’re paying Detroit.

Jeff Wright was quoted as saying Flint is paying $12 million annually to Detroit for treated water.

The Flint EM bought 18 MGD of water from KWA. The cost of 18 MGD of untreated water has an operating cost of $355,300 x 18 MGD or $6,395,400 per year.
Plus the capital costs of $81,726,467 financed over 25 years at 5% or $5,556,352 per year.

That comes to $11,951,752 or about the same as purchasing treated water from Detroit.

Plus you have to add the cost of upgrading and operating the existing Flint Water Treatment Plant to treat the KWA water.

1. Using the KWA's figures, this comparison shows that the KWA water is more expensive than Detroit water.
2. Flint will now be tasked with operating their own water treatment plant assuming additional responsibilities.
3. There is no back water supply, one would assume that Flint would need extra storage at additional expense.
4. Flint only needs 9 MGD of water (99,000 people x 90 gal per capita per day), yet the EM bought 18 MGD.
5. While the KWA was often touted as a "cost-saving" solution — likely so it could appeal to Flint residents frustrated with rising water bills — the true motivations behind the project were focused on new economic opportunities for the region. A poor community like Flint is actually subsidizing economic development outside their community.
6. After 40 years Flint will own 30% of the project and can sell their share of ownership if they want. However, the 40 years is also past design life of project like this.
7. Water rates in Flint will be higher than before.

 

[thaidavid40]

I see where some here want to lay blame at the feet of the recent Republican leadership at the State level. Well, this problem was a long time a'comin, and waaaay predates the current Republicans in office. The problem started decades ago. And it was allowed to stay, and fester, by decades of local and state leadership. In truth, this is the kind of result one can expect after decades of liberal, Democrat leadership, as Flint has been thus dominated for years. Look around the country. Where is the infrastructure in the absolute worst shape? In primarily, and a majority of, communities ruled by liberal Democrats, and their often corrupt allies. The wind was sown by their policies, and now the residents reap the resulting whirlwind.

Thaidavid

 

[IRstuff]

I guess then that Republicans are magically immune to corruption. If you believe that, I've got some prime real estate for sale.

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
faq731-376 forum1529

 

[thaidavid40]

@IRstuff,
If you last statement is in response to my post, then you are reading into my statement words which I did not say. I never impugned incorruption to Republicans (indeed, I am not that naive). I only associated the Democrat corruption with the problems now extant in Flint.

Thaidavid

 

[SectionIX]

Within five minutes of the start of the democratic debate in Flint, both 'candidates' called for the removal of the Republican Governor over this matter. One can only wonder if this would have happened if a dem had been governor. Yes, most assuredly, politics has no bearing on this issue.

 

[urgross]

Check their hand sizes.

 

[IRstuff]

I think these last few posts show how sad current politics are. There seems to be no more of, "the buck stops here," and falling on one's metaphorical sword, for the good of the party. No doubt this was exacerbated by Watergate, when a loyal cohort all few on their swords to protect Nixon.

I've often posited the notion that no one ever matures beyond the age of 8, or so, where the response to a crime is, "not me," or, "he did it." I've rarely seen it go differently. Seems too often now, for people to continually deny their own culpability until the evidence is completely overwhelming, which is pretty typical of 8-yr olds.

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
faq731-376 forum1529

 

[SwinnyGG]

Must be something in the water in Michigan as the math is fuzzy.

"18 MGDs to 15 MGDs would change the take diameter for the piping from 66” to 54” — that’s where savings comes from," Genesee County Drain Commissioner and KWA CEO Jeff Wright told the council after breaking down the math for them. "You started at 36 MGDs in the study and that’s what had you at $12 million annually — currently what you’re paying Detroit.

Jeff Wright was quoted as saying Flint is paying $12 million annually to Detroit for treated water.

The Flint EM bought 18 MGD of water from KWA. The cost of 18 MGD of untreated water has an operating cost of $355,300 x 18 MGD or $6,395,400 per year.
Plus the capital costs of $81,726,467 financed over 25 years at 5% or $5,556,352 per year.

That comes to $11,951,752 or about the same as purchasing treated water from Detroit.

Plus you have to add the cost of upgrading and operating the existing Flint Water Treatment Plant to treat the KWA water.

1. Using the KWA's figures, this comparison shows that the KWA water is more expensive than Detroit water.
2. Flint will now be tasked with operating their own water treatment plant assuming additional responsibilities.
3. There is no back water supply, one would assume that Flint would need extra storage at additional expense.
4. Flint only needs 9 MGD of water (99,000 people x 90 gal per capita per day), yet the EM bought 18 MGD.
5. While the KWA was often touted as a "cost-saving" solution — likely so it could appeal to Flint residents frustrated with rising water bills — the true motivations behind the project were focused on new economic opportunities for the region. A poor community like Flint is actually subsidizing economic development outside their community.
6. After 40 years Flint will own 30% of the project and can sell their share of ownership if they want. However, the 40 years is also past design life of project like this.
7. Water rates in Flint will be higher than before.

Once again, ALL of the price projections in the TJTY report are based on the assumption that the first-year lease rate would be maintained as the base, and that the rate increases going forward would be at or near the regional average.

Nothing in the history of the Flint-DWSD relationship indicates this was likely. Flint has paid higher-than-market rates and paid higher-than-market increases. The TJTY report is unrealistic. It's not a valid bases for a cost argument.

Secondly, The goal of the KWA is to reduce cost long term. even the flawed numbers you're using indicate that once the bonds are paid, the water rates fall pretty drastically. So, why would this be seen as a negative?

And finally...

Economic development is VITAL for the recovery of the area. Flint is what it is today because of the exodus of light industry. So, once again, why is an attempt to bring jobs to the area a bad thing?

 

[cranky108]

Sadly I agree with some of the political truffle, but I would like to not go there. And I believe it would be better if we don't get into the weeds of political pin pushing.

I can't help to think that people in both major parties tend to hide and push problems into the next parties administration as a point of something for the news to find.

Honestly, both major parties have an agenda item for blaming problems on each other rather than working for the public.

But so far I have only heard three people being held on charges of hiding evedance. Really that's all they could find?

 

[IRstuff]

That may be two more than the Great Recession, which was WAY bigger ;-)

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
faq731-376 forum1529

 

[bimr]

jgKRI (Mechanical)

You seem to ignore reality.

It is a standard political procedure to compare your favored alternative to an unaffordable alternative. Politicians frequently increase the price of the unfavored alternative to whatever they want since it will not be built.

Economic development is fine, but do you really want the government to be picking the winners and losers. And how are the Flint suburbs planning to compete with the likes of South Carolina and Alabama. South Carolina has given the bulk of their States funds for infrastructure to economic development. Alabama gave something like $400 million to Mercedes to built an automobile factory.

How are the Flint suburbs planning to compete against States?

One thing that I noticed about all of the factory jobs moving south. The companies are not paying the same wages. What good is it to work in a factory in Alabama and only make $20 per hour.

Don't think it is rational to compute higher cost increases to one authority (Great Lakes Water Authority) and the other authority (KWA).

"Secondly, The goal of the KWA is to reduce cost long term. even the flawed numbers you're using indicate that once the bonds are paid, the water rates fall pretty drastically. So, why would this be seen as a negative?"

When was the last time that you heard an authority going out of business when the bonds were paid off? They always come up with another project to continue the business. You live in IL. The tollway bonds were paid off years ago.

 

[SwinnyGG]

Dude.. you're grasping at straws.

You seem to ignore reality.

It is a standard political procedure to compare your favored alternative to an unaffordable alternative. Politicians frequently increase the price of the unfavored alternative to whatever they want since it will not be built.

Uh... The TJTY report you keep referencing was commissioned by the State, not by DWSD or KWA. I can't see any obvious reason why TJTY would sway their analysis one way or the other.

Once that report is evaluated based on actual reality, it makes it pretty clear that the KWA is approximately cost-neutral until the bonds are paid, and cost negative afterward, with the added benefit of local control.


Economic development is fine, but do you really want the government to be picking the winners and losers. And how are the Flint suburbs planning to compete with the likes of South Carolina and Alabama. South Carolina has given the bulk of their States funds for infrastructure to economic development. Alabama gave something like $400 million to Mercedes to built an automobile factory.

How is the government picking winners and losers? The government isn't involved. KWA is a corporation, which found a customer, and will attempt to find others.

How are the Flint suburbs planning to compete against States?

How are they planning to compete? Oh, I don't know, by building infrastructure that would allow those industries to return, maybe? That's great for SC and AL- but you can't attract new industries to Sanilac County, MI unless there is infrastructure there to support said industry. Currently, that infrastructure does not exist. What would you have them do? Watch other areas prosper and not take any steps to even attempt to make the area attractive for businesses? Other than just disagreeing with everything I say because you think I'm stupid or whatever, is there something cohesive that you're actually trying to say? What you're saying makes zero sense.

Don't think it is rational to compute higher cost increases to one authority (Great Lakes Water Authority) and the other authority (KWA).

The history of the DWSD/GLWA-Flint relationship indicates that it is unlikely that re-signing with GLWA would be a long-term cost effective option. There's nothing in the past that would suggest that GLWA was likely to just charge Flint market rates and increases- it had literally never happened over their 50 year history.

"Secondly, The goal of the KWA is to reduce cost long term. even the flawed numbers you're using indicate that once the bonds are paid, the water rates fall pretty drastically. So, why would this be seen as a negative?"

When was the last time that you heard an authority going out of business when the bonds were paid off? They always come up with another project to continue the business. You live in IL. The tollway bonds were paid off years ago.

I live in Michigan. So I know very little about tollway bonds. Once again, what're you trying to say? You think Jeff Wright is going to embezzle $100 million from the KWA so that 50 years from now when upgrades are needed the coffers will be empty? The KWA isn't making money off of the bonds- they're making money by selling a lot of water at a competitive rate, and assuming no one breaks the law, that money will get re-invested into the system when the time comes.

 

[cranky108]

Still trying to point the finger of blame, either at something or away from something.

Facts: Was the plant designed right?
Did a person operate it correctly?
Did a super government agency become involved?
Was it really an engineering mistake?

 

[bimr]

I am referencing common sense, not a TJTY report. You seem to be lost in the phoney numbers and don't understand the big picture. There is no way that one can build a new asset (approximately $300M) and compete economically against a paid off asset. The Detroit infrastructure is paid off. For Detroit, selling water was like printing money, a golden goose business opportunity.

The KWA is an authority, not a private company. An authority is a quasi-governmental agency.

Only one aspect of economic development is water supply. There is no way that selling only water will provide economic development. And very few businesses these days use large volumes of water.

There is no way that an authority such as the KWA has the financial clout (major authorities such as the port authority of NY/NJ do have the resources) to compete with a larger player such as a State in economic development. The resources given away by an authority are not free either. Free water given to company X has to be paid for by someone else.

It is scandalous to charge the poor community of Flint a higher cost water and turn around and give away water to make economic development in other areas of the county.

Given the opportunity, a monopoly (like the KWA) will also charge whatever the market will bear. That is why public service commissions were created years ago; a mechanism to set the rates charged by monopolies. To rein in the cost that monopoly's will try to charge.

Regarding jobs in Michigan, that ship has already sailed. The jobs are not coming back. Most people fail to realize that when businesses are relocated, the relocated business are generally automated with new equipment. When business are relocated, fewer jobs are created at the new locations.

If you want to see a job creator, go down to your local school. Jobs are created through the education of the public, not with some two bit economic development scam. Mr. Wright comes to town, just like in the music man, a big scam.

 

[SwinnyGG]

Still trying to point the finger of blame, either at something or away from something.

I know what you're getting at. Based on what we know right now, it seems to me that this WAS an engineering mistake.

Facts: Was the plant designed right?

No, in the sense that there was no additional corrosion control system(s) added before the changeover. This is the result of Mike Prysby, engineer from the MDEQ (who I believe is a PE, but not 100% sure on that) recommending that no additional corrosion control was necessary, because he (willfully or otherwise) misinterpreted the law requiring corrosion control.

Did a person operate it correctly?

This is a gray area... To me it seems that Glasgow was put in a very difficult situation. He was apparently under great pressure to make the Flint plant ready to pump water, but was not given the resources required to do so, both in staff and equipment. The chain of emails seems to make it clear that Glasgow was aware the plant was not ready, and the decision to switch to the Flint plant full time as early as they did was one that he disagreed with. It's not clear to me if he could have refused to turn the valve and forced everyone to listen to him. If he did actually have that power, than he succumbed to political pressure in allowing the plant to operate full time, and bears more responsibility than I'm giving him here.

Did a super government agency become involved?

Does the MDEQ count? If so, than yes. The MDEQ was involved every step of the way, from the planning stages on.

Was it really an engineering mistake?

Yes. Prysby is an engineer, and his decision to recommend that additional corrosion control was not necessary seems to me to be the root-cause of root-causes so to speak.


I am referencing common sense, not a TJTY report. You seem to be lost in the phoney numbers and don't understand the big picture. There is no way that one can build a new asset (approximately $300M) and compete economically against a paid off asset. The Detroit infrastructure is paid off. For Detroit, selling water was like printing money, a golden goose business opportunity.

I'd agree completely that a financed asset is always going to cost more than a wholly owned asset- when the wholly owned asset is trading its commodity at the market rate

That simply was not happening. You yourself brought up, earlier in the thread, that Flint's water rate was well above the level it should have been relative to MHI. DWSD was gouging the residents of Flint. That right there is the primary flaw in your logic- if DWSD was charging Flint a fair market rate, the entire plan for the KWA completely falls apart. That simply was not happening. Period. There's no arguing it. Flint was using 10% of the DWSD supply and paying 20% of the revenue.

Only one aspect of economic development is water supply. There is no way that selling only water will provide economic development. And very few businesses these days use large volumes of water.

That's a gross generalization that is most certainly not true. Power generation, agriculture, manufacturing, and numerous other industries need water in large quantities. I work in the manufacturing sector, this is an issue I know intimately. If anything, industrial water usage per product dollar is on the rise. The drive to reduce the use of aromatic compounds in industry, for example the change from solvent-borne to water-borne paints in automotive and other coatings applications, makes water availability and quality more important than it used to be. I am typing this post while I'm sitting at a job site monitoring the install of a brand-new paint shop (in Michigan, relocated from Washington state) that will use water-borne paint. A big chunk of the $150 million budget of this project is the installation of a shiny new water treatment plant on site, owned and operated by the plant. You can't tell me that water in high quantities isn't important to bringing industries back here.

There is no way that an authority such as the KWA has the financial clout (major authorities such as the port authority of NY/NJ do have the resources) to compete with a larger player such as a State in economic development. The resources given away by an authority are not free either. Free water given to company X has to be paid for by someone else.

I would agree. But the existence of the KWA allows government agencies that DO have sway in economic development to pitch the area. It's not the only selling point for bringing businesses to the area, but it is a selling point nonetheless.

It is scandalous to charge the poor community of Flint a higher cost water and turn around and give away water to make economic development in other areas of the county.

So it's scandalous for the KWA to charge Flint an above-market rate (which they're not as far as I can tell) but it's ok for the DWSD to charge them an above market rate? Uhh.... ok.

Given the opportunity, a monopoly (like the KWA) will also charge whatever the market will bear. That is why public service commissions were created years ago; a mechanism to set the rates charged by monopolies. To rein in the cost that monopoly's will try to charge.

The existence of the KWA breaks a monopoly- previously held by the DWSD/GLWA. There is nothing stopping Flint from changing back to the GLWA as a water source in the future, if the new competition from the KWA forces the GLWA to actually sell at the market rate.

Regarding jobs in Michigan, that ship has already sailed. The jobs are not coming back. Most people fail to realize that when businesses are relocated, the relocated business are generally automated with new equipment. When business are relocated, fewer jobs are created at the new locations.

'Fraid not. Is Michigan going to be 'the' hub of automotive manufacturing that it once was? Doubtful. But the state is slowly recovering. You don't live or work here, stick to talking about what you know about.

If you want to see a job creator, go down to your local school. Jobs are created through the education of the public, not with some two bit economic development scam. Mr. Wright comes to town, just like in the music man, a big scam.

You can't fund an education system with money you don't have. How do you pump money into a community? You create jobs.

No doubt that Flint (and most of the rest of southeast Michigan) is in a rough spot economically. Your opinion seems to be that the response from the residents and government of this area to this economic situation should be "Oh, the jobs are gone, guess we should just give up". Does the KWA guarantee that 10 years from now eastern Michigan will be a towering powerhouse of industry? Of course not. But to sit and watch your community die, while doing nothing, is not an option.

 

[bimr]

Facts: Was the plant designed right?

No, in the sense that there was no additional corrosion control system(s) added before the changeover. This is the result of Mike Prysby, engineer from the MDEQ (who I believe is a PE, but not 100% sure on that) recommending that no additional corrosion control was necessary, because he (willfully or otherwise) misinterpreted the law requiring corrosion control.

Hard to say if it was designed correctly. No plans have been published. However, it is known that the water treatment plant was built over 50 years ago which would make it questionable that it was designed correctly. There has been some modifications to the water treatment plant recently. The same water treatment plant is also supposed to treat water from the KWA project which would require a different treatment scheme.

Did a person operate it correctly?

This is a gray area... To me it seems that Glasgow was put in a very difficult situation. He was apparently under great pressure to make the Flint plant ready to pump water, but was not given the resources required to do so, both in staff and equipment. The chain of emails seems to make it clear that Glasgow was aware the plant was not ready, and the decision to switch to the Flint plant full time as early as they did was one that he disagreed with. It's not clear to me if he could have refused to turn the valve and forced everyone to listen to him. If he did actually have that power, than he succumbed to political pressure in allowing the plant to operate full time, and bears more responsibility than I'm giving him here.

The person with the water treatment operator license (Mr. Glasgow) had little experience operating such a facility. He did not operate the plant correctly as shown by the water operating reports. He has been criminally charged with willful neglect of duty for allegedly filing false reports to the State about water quality.


Did a super government agency become involved?

Does the MDEQ count? If so, than yes. The MDEQ was involved every step of the way, from the planning stages on.

The City of Flint was required to obtain permits to operate from the MDEQ and submit operating reports to the MDEQ. One employee of MDEQ was charged with misconduct for his alleged authorizing of the operating permit for the Flint water treatment plant. However, the MDEQ Director is the person whose name is on the permits.

If anything, industrial water usage per product dollar is on the rise.

Water conservation is the rage at the present time, not water usage.

The existence of the KWA breaks a monopoly- previously held by the DWSD/GLWA.

Flint is just switching monopolies, not getting out from one.

Regarding jobs in Michigan, that ship has already sailed. The jobs are not coming back. Most people fail to realize that when businesses are relocated, the relocated business are generally automated with new equipment. When business are relocated, fewer jobs are created at the new locations.

'Fraid not. Is Michigan going to be 'the' hub of automotive manufacturing that it once was? Doubtful. But the state is slowly recovering. You don't live or work here, stick to talking about what you know about.

You sound like you have never traveled outside of Michigan. The loss of factory jobs has affected the entire US, not just Flint. There are not enough factory jobs in the entire United States. Don't you recall Ross Perot's giant sucking sound regarding the potential loss of jobs as a result of trade agreements? Automation also significantly reduced the number of jobs. Flint is competing against some other areas of the country who are able and willing to provide more amenities for businesses (better educated workforce, relocation benefits, tax cuts, etc.) for a smaller number of jobs. To expect jobs to return to the Flint area when there is such a competition for the available jobs is wishful thinking. And don't forget that the employers now want to pay less than they did in the past.

 

[SwinnyGG]

Water conservation is the rage at the present time, not water usage.

You're right. Manufacturers care much more about responsible water usage than they used to, and that's a good thing. The primary difference at automotive plants in particular is the processing and re-use of water. paint shops especially used to capture millions and millions of washdown water alone every year, and pay third parties to process and reclaim that water. Now they do it themselves on-site, and put that water back into a closed loop system.

In other words, they still use a LOT of water. Acting like adding a cost-effective source of raw water to an area that already has a reasonably large industrial work force in place, cheap real estate, and friendly political attitudes toward industry doesn't improve the outlook is a pretty ridiculous stance to take.

Flint is just switching monopolies, not getting out from one.

KWA and GLWA are now direct competitors in supplying water to Flint. That's not a monopoly. The pipeline between DWSD and Imlay City does not cease to exist once the KWA starts pumping, and it will still be in service indefinitely.. When the Flint-KWA contract is up, I would bet the farm that DWSD will be trying to get that business back.

You sound like you have never traveled outside of Michigan. The loss of factory jobs has affected the entire US, not just Flint. There are not enough factory jobs in the entire United States. Don't you recall Ross Perot's giant sucking sound regarding the potential loss of jobs as a result of trade agreements? Automation also significantly reduced the number of jobs. Flint is competing against some other areas of the country who are able and willing to provide more amenities for businesses (better educated workforce, relocation benefits, tax cuts, etc.) for a smaller number of jobs. To expect jobs to return to the Flint area when there is such a competition for the available jobs is wishful thinking. And don't forget that the employers now want to pay less than they did in the past.

Your patronizing tone is getting old.

I've lived and worked all over this country. But we're not talking about me, and we're not talking about this entire country. We're talking about southeast Michigan. Your economic plan of action for the area seems to be that they should just roll over and die. The residents and politicians of Genesee, Sanilac, and Lapeer counties can't do a whole heck of a lot about the economic state of the whole country- but what they have to do is attempt to make the area attractive to new business. That's what they're doing.

 

[bimr]

KWA and GLWA are now direct competitors in supplying water to Flint. That's not a monopoly. The pipeline between DWSD and Imlay City does not cease to exist once the KWA starts pumping, and it will still be in service indefinitely. When the Flint-KWA contract is up, I would bet the farm that DWSD will be trying to get that business back.

If KWA and GLWA were competitors, it would have made sense to purchase half the water from each. It seems that Flint's EM purchased 60% more water than needed from KWA in a take it or pay contract. So Flint will be not be buying water from anybody else. And Flint will be paying for water that they can not use. The 2013 water reliability study estimated water usage at 11 million gallons per day, yet the EM purchased 18 million gallons per day.

Flint has a 30-year Contract with KWA, so it probably would not be a good idea to bet your farm. The 72-Inch GLWA pipeline will be mothballed. What happens when an asset sits idle? It will be decrepit by the the time the Contract is over.

http://www.metrotimes.com/Blogs/arc...n-flint-needed-on-water-from-the-kwa-pipeline

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/snyder/Rowe_2013_Reliablity_Study_compressed_515343_7.pdf

Acting like adding a cost-effective source of raw water to an area that already has a reasonably large industrial work force in place, cheap real estate, and friendly political attitudes toward industry doesn't improve the outlook is a pretty ridiculous stance to take.

If you did a little research, you will find data on economic development such as:

"Our biggest takeaway: there is virtually no association between economic development incentives and any measure of economic performance. We found no statistically significant association between economic development incentives per capita and average wages or incomes; none between incentives and college grads or knowledge workers; and none between incentives and the state unemployment rate. The scatter-graph above illustrates the lack of any relationship between incentives per capita and wages."

http://www.citylab.com/work/2012/12/uselessness-economic-development-incentives/4081/

Your patronizing tone is getting old.

I've lived and worked all over this country. But we're not talking about me, and we're not talking about this entire country. We're talking about southeast Michigan. Your economic plan of action for the area seems to be that they should just roll over and die. The residents and politicians of Genesee, Sanilac, and Lapeer counties can't do a whole heck of a lot about the economic state of the whole country- but what they have to do is attempt to make the area attractive to new business. That's what they're doing.

Wake up and smell the coffee. The next state over, Indiana, has similar problems. The point that was made was that SE Michigan is not unique in the economic problems that face.

http://www.incap.org/iiwf/2015-Status/2015-Status-IIWF-high-res.pdf

This report indicates that the policies promoted by Governor Snyder and his clones throughout the United States are not working.

 

[cranky108]

"This report indicates that the policies promoted by Governor Snyder and his clones throughout the United States are not working."

This seems a little over the top. The term 'throughout' tends to imply it is a federal policy issue, and not a state policy issue.
I'm trying here to not be too political.

The truth is, where high tech is associated the economy is good, but still there is a large population of homeless in the same places. The fact that the homeless are there say they don't have the skill set for the present economy.
So if you look at the homeless in your location, and try to determine what type of jobs they can do. What would you hire these people to do at $15 an hour?

The good news is there is a job opening for a water supervisor, and regulatory manager, and both of these pay very well.
There is also a shortage of engineers.