A Yale University philosophy professor posed a question on World Water Day last week that demands attention: 

“Why does the state with access to the world’s greatest supply of fresh water, why is that state, the state of Michigan, continually in crises about water?” 

The query by Jason Stanley was raised during a panel discussion focused on the fight for water affordability. It is a fight taking place on the ground and in the courts, and at every level of government, from city councils and mayors’ offices to Congress and the Oval Office.  

At its heart, it is a fight about the value of human life and the well-being of our communities. Looming as a backdrop over the discussion was the fact that a statewide moratorium on water shutoffs could end Wednesday.  

The impact of shutoffs was front and center at Monday’s panel discussion, which featured a host of experts who collectively stitched together a devastating picture of a crisis that continues to worsen. 

“I think of one resident on the east side,” said Cecily McClellan, co-founder of the activist group We the People of Detroit, which co-hosted Monday’s event with the Damon J. Keith Center for Civil Rights at the Wayne State University Law School.  

“This individual was bed-ridden. She had respiratory problems. She was diabetic. ... She had a water bill of $1,600. She was unable to pay that bill.” 

Consequently, the woman went without water for a year. It was only turned back on because of an order to restore service due to COVID-19 crisis.  

“What we are witnessing is the removal of a core public good from democracy,” Mr. Stanley said. 

“To my mind, the national and international news media have missed an extraordinary story of world historical purpose,” he said. 

Professor Stanley, an expert on fascism and propaganda, has also paid close attention to Michigan’s disastrous emergency manager law, which allows elected public officials to be replaced by state-appointed bureaucrats who possess vast, unilateral authority. Their job is to ensure that debts faced by the cities and school districts they control get paid, no matter what.  

That law, which primarily impacted majority-Black communities and remains on the books unchanged, played a crucial role in creating the Flint water crisis: It was an emergency manager who made the disastrous decision to begin using the highly corrosive Flint River as the city’s water source, causing lead to leach from old pipes and poison a community with nearly 100,000 residents.  

Peter Hammer, director of the Keith Center and a member of the ACLU of Michigan Board, presented a devastating PowerPoint showing the overlap between wealth and race in southeast Michigan. He showed a clear picture of urban islands, largely Black and poor, surrounded by a sea of suburban wealth. The terrible irony is those areas of wealth exist because the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department constructed the massive system of pipes and pumps needed to bring them clean safe water and take away their sewage to be treated. Without that, those suburbs could not have been built. 

Now, as the result of the Detroit’s bankruptcy (which the city was taken into by a  state-appointed emergency manager), control of that water system was wrested from the city and handed over to the newly created Great Lakes Water Authority for 40 years. 

That same sort of focus on the financial bottom line fueled the water shutoffs that were taking place across Michigan until the COVID-19 pandemic forced Governor Gretchen Whitmer to impose a moratorium intended to keep water flowing during the current crisis. Although Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan has promised to keep a moratorium in place for another two years, others across the state could see shutoffs resuming as early as this week if an extension of the moratorium isn’t granted by the state.  

Water and Health 

With the Michigan Legislature on its spring break, the prospect is high that a moratorium on shutoffs initiated last year could screech to a halt on March 31 – at a time when the number of COVID-19 cases has been rising for the past five weeks. Allowing the moratorium to end now would be terribly dangerous.  

The moratorium was put in place because good hygiene is a critical component in the desperate fight to control the spread of COVID-19.  And the pandemic is far from over. 

In fact, shutting off water is a health threat whether there is a pandemic or not. Basic common sense dictates that if people are unable to wash their hands, bathe, clean their clothes or wash their dishes, illness is going to spread. That fundamental scientific fact has been understood since at least the 1800s. 

But it was left to Detroit activists and their allies to dig into the data to demonstrate the health consequences shutoffs in Detroit were having pre-pandemic. 

Nadia Gaber, who has a PhD in medical anthropology, has been part of We the People’s Community Research Collective, which has been working to uncover the connections between racism, water and health. During the panel discussion, Ms. Gaber pointed out that, starting in 2015, the Collective partnered with Henry Ford Health Systems to see if they could gauge the health effects of water shutoffs in Detroit. 

What they found was that people living in neighborhoods where high numbers of shutoffs occurred were 1.5 times more likely to contract an illness related to a lack of good sanitation. 

While it is incredibly disheartening that such a study had to be initiated by community activists, the work being done by people on the ground in Detroit is serving as a model for others to follow as they push to keep water flowing into the homes of poor people. They aren’t sitting around waiting for officials to act. They are taking matters into their own hands, doing the research and collecting the data needed to open eyes and change policies.  

A Better Way Forward 

More than 317,000 households serving an estimated 800,000 Michiganders throughout the state are known to be behind on their water bills, according to data compiled late last year by the Natural Resources Defense Council in in collaboration with the People’s Water Board Coalition. 

But it is also true that the problem is particularly acute in cities like Detroit and Flint – places that have seen their populations decimated by decades of white flight.  

Detroit is the starkest example. At its peak in the 1950s, nearly 2 million people called the city home. The number now is closer to 670,000. The problem is that, even though the population has shrunk by nearly two-thirds, aging water and sewer lines running through the entire city need to be maintained, regardless of how many homes have disappeared. In a city where nearly 40 percent of the population lives below the poverty line, and residents are besieged by water bills that continue to climb, affordability is truly a crisis, and has been for years. 

That is why, since 2005, activists have been pressing the city to adopt a pay structure based on a percentage of income. Doing so would help keep water affordable for the city’s poorest residents.  

Those opposed to such a plan cynically argue that reducing water rates for low-income customers passes the cost on to other users. That may be true, but it is also misleading because it obscures the fact that other users also must pick up the tab for those who default on their bills and have their water shut off.  

Pointing to the work of utilities expert Roger Colton, who helped develop an income-based affordability plan that was passed by City Council in 2006 but never implemented, activists have long contended that it makes much more fiscal sense to keep water affordable for poor residents because doing so actually increases collection rates. If a bill is within reach, people will tend to pay it. Robert Ballenger, a lawyer with Community Legal Services, which serves low-income Philadelphians and helped draft water-affordability legislation that passed in 2015, said that is proving to be true there. 

“What we are seeing is that people who are provided affordable bills do pay them,” Mr. Ballenger said. “Low-income customers who get affordable bills under our water affordability program are twice as likely to pay them in full as low-income customers who aren’t participating in that program. So, we know this is the kind of thing that meaningfully contributes to the individual customer’s ability to interact with the utility, to make the payments and meet the demands placed on them.” 

To force the city of Detroit to permanently halt shutoffs and implement an income-based rate structure, the ACLU of Michigan, along with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF) and others, filed a federal class action lawsuit against the city and state last year. 

Turning to the Courts and Congress 

Coty Montag, a lawyer with LDF, explained that both the Detroit lawsuit, as well as a similar lawsuit LDF filed against Cleveland in 2019, are based in part on the fact that Black people are disproportionately affected by shutoffs. 

If successful, those lawsuits will establish a legal foundation for making water affordable to poor people and would be a crucial victory.  

But that’s just one prong in the attack.  

The fact is that water systems around the country are forced to raise rates beyond the reach of many of their customers because the federal government has slashed assistance to states and communities.  

“Exclusive analysis of 12 diverse cities shows the combined price of water and sewage increased by an average of 80 percent between 2010 and 2018, with more than two-fifths of residents in some cities living in neighborhoods with unaffordable bills,” the Guardian newspaper, in conjunction with Consumer Reports, reported last year. “Meanwhile, federal aid to public water utilities, which serve around 87 percent of people, has plummeted while maintenance, environmental and health threats, climate shocks, and other expenditures have skyrocketed.” 

The federal government’s abandonment of its responsibilities cannot be understated. 

“Federal funding for water systems has fallen by 77 percent in real terms since its peak in 1977 —leaving local utilities to raise the money that is needed to upgrade infrastructure, comply with standards for toxic contaminants like PFAS, lead, and algae blooms, and to adapt to extreme weather conditions like drought and floods linked to global heating,” according to the Guardian. 

To begin addressing that shortfall, 77 Members of Congress and 540 groups last month reportedly joined forces to endorse the Water Affordability, Transparency, Equity and Reliability (WATER) Act of 2021. 

The act would create a trust fund that, according to the group Common Ground, “would dedicate $35 billion each year to grant programs and to the Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs. These programs include a specific focus on providing support for rural and small municipalities, Indigenous communities, and low-income Black and Brown communities who face disproportionate water issues.” 

Monica Lewis-Patrick, president and CEO of We the People of Detroit, summed up the current situation at the conclusion of Monday’s two-hour long program with these six words: 

“We cannot allow this to stand.” 

For many in America, the automobile represents freedom, fun, and adventure, the chance to travel wherever, whenever. Having a car provides autonomy and access to jobs, opportunity, and the open road —For some, cars are a source of pride, prosperity or envy. For others, a chance to be carefree, blaring the radio with the windows down, while driving nowhere in particular.  

This has never been the case for me.  

Growing up as a Mexican immigrant in Arizona, just getting in the car was a source of great uncertainty and angst for me and my family. I vividly remember being about 10 years old when we purchased our first car — a used, light-blue Buick. I was so proud. We were on our way. The world was opening up to me, my parents, and two siblings.

But that feeling of excitement quickly evaporated in less than two weeks when we were pulled over, allegedly for a broken taillight. As my father’s hands started to tremble, I knew something was wrong. 

Read the full article on the Detroit Free Pres here.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 25, 2021 

CONTACT: Ann Mullen, (313) 400-8562 amullen@aclumich.org  

DETROIT, Mich. – Today, the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan (ACLU) and researcher Dr. Geoffrey Alan Boyce released a new report exposing how Border Patrol, an agency within U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), uses racial profiling to target immigrants from Latin America and other people of color throughout Michigan. The report also reveals how Border Patrol colludes with state and local police agencies to target, arrest, and deport immigrants, many of whom are longtime Michigan residents.  

The report, The Border’s Long Shadow: How Border Patrol Uses Racial Profiling and Local and State Police to Target and Instill Fear in Michigan’s Immigrant Communities, is the first-ever investigation of Border Patrol’s Michigan operations. It is based on thousands of CBP documents, spanning nine years, including records of over 13,000 stops detailing which police agency initiated the stop, the location of the stop, as well as the national origin and skin tone of the person apprehended.  

“No one should have to live in fear of being targeted by law enforcement agencies because of the color of their skin or the language they speak, but, as the report reveals, that is exactly what’s happening in Michigan because of Border Patrol’s rampant use of racial profiling,” said Monica Andrade, ACLU of Michigan attorney and one of the report’s co-authors. “The same agency accused of horrible abuses, cruelty and discrimination at the Southern border is running nearly unchecked in our communities with the help of our local police. It is time for our congressional, state and local leaders to get serious about reining in Border Patrol.” 

Border Patrol has long claimed broad authority to operate far from the border and across the entire state of Michigan based on CBP’s expansive interpretation of its jurisdiction, which it defines as anywhere within 100 miles of an international waterway, commonly referred to as the “100-mile zone.” CBP wrongly considers Lake Michigan, which does not share a shoreline with Canada, as an international waterway, allowing CBP to claim that it can conduct warrantless searches anywhere in the state. 

In May 2015, the ACLU, the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, and Dr. Boyce filed a Freedom of Information Act request with CBP to learn about Border Patrol’s operations in the Detroit Sector, which includes all of Michigan, as well as northeast Ohio. When CBP refused to provide the records, the group sued in federal court. Attorneys from the ACLU and Dykema Gossett litigated the case for five years. The lawsuit resulted in CBP finally releasing the records, which were subjected to extensive analysis and compiled into this report.  
 
Some of the key findings include:  

• Border Patrol uses racial profiling: While people of Latin American origin make up 16.8% of Michigan’s foreign-born population, the report shows that nearly 84% of all noncitizens apprehended by Border Patrol were originally from Latin America. More than 96% of those arrested are recorded by Border Patrol of being “Black,” “Dark Brown,” “Dark,” “Light Brown,” “Medium Brown,” “Medium,” or “Yellow.”  
• Speaking Spanish or another foreign language is a basis for Border Patrol stops: In 19% of stops, the basis for suspecting a person to be in the U.S. unlawfully was that the person spoke Spanish or another foreign language. 
• One-third of those stopped are U.S. citizens: The Border Patrol’s daily apprehension logs show that more than 33% of individuals stopped are U.S. citizens. An additional 12.88% of all noncitizens apprehended were found to have some kind of lawful status in the U.S.  
• Border Patrol is not focused on the border: Although Border Patrol’s mandated mission is to police the border, only 1.3% of cases for its Michigan operations involved people attempting to enter the U.S. without authorization from Canada.   
• Families are being ripped apart: The records make clear that at least 33% of people identified as deportable have minor children who are U.S. citizens. The actual proportion is very likely higher, given that in 12% of cases, Border Patrol failed to note whether an arrested individual is a parent.  
• State and local police call Border Patrol to traffic stops: Nearly half (48.6%) of Border Patrol apprehensions began with a state or local law enforcement department initiating a traffic stop. MSP is, by far, responsible for more people being detained and turned over to Border Patrol than any other police agency—making up nearly 37% of all incidents. The ACLU and other advocates have been working with MSP to review and implement changes to its policies. The Macomb County Sheriff’s Office has the second highest number of contacts with Border Patrol, and is responsible for 11.4% of arrests, followed by the Detroit Police Department, making up 7%. 
• Border Patrol in Michigan experienced massive growth in the past two decades: The number of Border Patrol agents assigned to the Detroit Sector, which includes all of Michigan, has ballooned from 35 agents in 2000 to 404 agents in 2019—a 1,054% increase, which is by far the fastest rate of growth of any Border Patrol Sector in the country. 

“We fought for and compiled these records to determine just how Border Patrol operates in Michigan,” said Dr. Boyce, co-author of the report and Border Studies Instructor at Earlham College. “Despite what we had been hearing about Border Patrol abuses for years, we were shocked and dismayed by the devastating picture the data revealed. It shows beyond dispute the rampant racial profiling of people of color, especially people of Latin American descent. Now, we must use this knowledge to put an end to it.”  

“Immigration enforcement in Southwest Detroit is at an unprecedented level, with sweeps that result in dozens being detained, and families separated, including parents arrested while dropping their children off at school,” said Cindy Gamboa, community organizing and advocacy director at the Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation. “Border Patrol is constantly in our neighborhood and we are in constant fear. ‘Driving while Brown,’ speaking Spanish or simply appearing Latino makes us a target, and long-standing community members, including U.S. citizens, have experienced this unfair treatment repeatedly.” 

To put an end to Border Patrol’s abusive tactics in Michigan, the ACLU is calling on lawmakers to not only restrict Border Patrol enforcement to the immediate border, but to put an end to state and local collaboration with federal immigration officials; end discriminatory policies at a local, state and federal level, including the racial profiling of immigrants; establish comprehensive public data collection processes to ensure transparency and accountability; significantly cut the number of  Border Patrol agents in the Detroit sector; and restore access to driver’s licenses for non-citizens in Michigan.  

Read the report and FAQ here.

See video of MSP and Border Patrol stopping and questioning 30-year lawful permanent resident Mr. Arnulfo Gomez here. 

See video statement of Mr. Gomez here.  

###