My name is Sandra Turner-Handy; I’m the Community Engagement Director with the Michigan Environmental Council.
Water Security in Detroit
Interviewer: Thank you for that, Sandra. We’re going to be talking a little bit about water security and insecurity today. What does water security mean for you?
Sandra: Water security, to me, means that water is equitable across all races, all income levels, all genders. Everyone has access to clean and healthy water. That’s what water security means to me.
Interviewer: In the context of Detroit, what is your broader take in terms of accessibility, security, cleanliness, and all of that stuff, you just mentioned about water security?
Sandra: In the city of Detroit, water security is- access is not equitable, water is unaffordable, the city has been allowed to attach water to properties that affect other areas of people’s lives. Low-income residents within the city have minimum access, meaning that they can’t afford the water, so they move from place to place in order to have water. Landlords have been able to put water bills on residents, which as with water being attached to the property, should not happen.
It’s just I just see great insecurity in the city of Detroit because we have not made provisions for the economy in which Detroit now exists. The fact that we have high unemployment rates, the fact that many of our residents are currently below the poverty line, no adjustments have been made to water rates so that this population can afford it.
Water Affordability in Detroit
Interviewer: I wonder if you could talk a little bit about the scope of the problem because when most people think about access and affordability in other parts of the country, for instance, they generally think it’s only a few people, or it will be a particular kind of people. There’s a lot of negative stereotypes associated with that. Could you just talk generally a little bit about the scope of the problem that you see?
Sandra: Many people think that water affordability is Detroit, and they associate it a lot with Detroit. They associate it with Detroit because of our low-income status, the fact that we have so many people unemployed in the city and living below the poverty line but believe me, there’s a lot of people in the city of Detroit living above the poverty line they still can’t afford their water. It’s not that they can’t afford the water, they can’t afford the sewage cost of the water.
The water is very cheap. If they just had to pay a water bill, residents would be fine, but the sewage costs have gone up because of the fact that our infrastructure is so old and it takes a lot more money now in order to filter the water and clean the water and all that so now residents are faced with these high sewage costs. A lot of the homes in the city of Detroit are older; we have older housing stock, so the piping may not be good in the houses. The toilet may not be running efficiently.
A lot of inefficiencies are causing our residents to have to pay these high bills. It’s not just well income residents; it’s residents across the board. Many people think it’s just Detroit. Let me go back to that, but this problem exists across the country. It is not just Detroit. Water issues are across the country and residents- many are impacted by the high cost of water or water and sewage and the idea of affordability.
A lot of residents are- I sit on a table around water equitability, I think that’s the word, equitable water, okay. It’s the nationwide tables. We have people from Concord, we have people in California, our table just goes across the scope of the United States, and we’re all talking of water affordability which was a surprise to me because I’m thinking Detroit, I’m thinking Flint, and I’m putting it in a box in the urban context. I’m thinking about these areas in Michigan, which I should not do because now, I found out that it’s across the board. Everybody is being affected.
Water—a Human Right
Interviewer: When the UN came in and declared that this was a travesty for human rights, how did that make you feel?
Sandra: I wish it would have made me feel a lot better about those decision-makers taking it to heart. We knew that we know that water is a human right. I tell people all the time, especially in the state of Michigan, “You can stand in the middle of the mitten, and you could go for hours each way except for some and hit freshwater, but we have a water issue.” That just seems so out of context for me.
Interviewer: Of all places in the United States, our Great Lakes states should not ever have a problem with water. Maybe stewardship because we have to learn how to better conserve our water and take care of it but access to water? We have all the water in the world surrounding us, so the United Nations is coming out and declaring that its travesty was a good thing, but how many decision-makers took it to heart and changed their policies or created policies that would make water accessible and affordable to all residents? Not just a specific population but all residents.
Sandra: The answer is no; it did not happen. No one changed their policies to accommodate residents. Water is in the city of Detroit. I will say this; water is a big commodity. The Detroit Water and Sewage Department is the only department in the city of Detroit that uses no general dollars. They are able to upgrade on the cost that people pay for their water. Anytime you have a department that is so self-sustaining, they have to be making money. I’m sorry, they are making money.
If they can sustain their self without general fund dollars, so if they are sustaining themselves and they’re making money, where’s the upgrades to the infrastructure? Why has the infrastructure not been upgraded where sewage costs would be cheaper? No one ever talks about that, how self-sustaining they are, that department is, but the fact that it’s not self-sustaining to the point where it could upgrade the infrastructure, then that’s a problem to me.
Infrastructure and Contamination Issues
Interviewer: In fact, right now, I’m sure you’re aware the DWSD and few others are suing the State of Michigan so that they can remove the recently instituted contamination rules and infrastructure upgrade rules. Are you aware of that?
Sandra: The lead and copper rules?
Interviewer: Yes.
DWSD and others want to sue the state concerning the lead and copper rules which are in place to make sure that we do not ever have another water crisis as we had in Flint. We know that the infrastructure in the city of Detroit has not been upgraded. We know we still have tree trunks for water pipes that tell you how long it’s been, you know we still got tree trunks… and the fact that the city does not even know where these pipes are that needs to be replaced. They don’t even know where the tree trunks are, so yeah, they don’t even know where the pipes are!
Let them sue them. Let them sue them, because all it does is show them that they are not… the water department has always been seen as “The Great Water Department” because they own the commodity, we all need. We respect and revere the water department because we need the water, but DWSD needs to learn that it has to work with its customers. Okay, it has to work for its customers. I am a firm believer that the city works for me; I pay taxes. The city works for me.
So, if I pay you property taxes and I’m paying you income taxes, then, and I elect your boss, your boss works for me because – well, I didn’t elect him – but he’s elected, so he works for me. All politicians work for me, then you work for me, but how can you work for me and work against me at the same time? You’re supposed to be providing me a city service that I pay taxes for, but you’re not providing me with the quality of service that I need. You’re talking about suing the state which I pay taxes to; you’re talking about suing the state because you’re unwilling, not unable, but you’re unwilling to upgrade your infrastructure to make sure that your residence that you are serving don’t have incidents like Flint.
That’s the problem for me, that’s a waste of my city dollars too. If you’re using the state, that means I’m paying for that lawsuit. You see, Detroit is me, and that’s how I think of Detroit is me. When they do things, it fully affects me because this is my city. This is where I live; this is where I was born and raised; this is where I raised my family. The idea that you are using my money to sue the state is a problem for me. For something that they’re trying to do to make sure that my great-grandkids or their kids are not impacted by pipes. (Sigh)
Water Security Policy
Interviewer: At the risk of editorializing, I always come back to that language that’s used when we say that DWSD has to listen to its ratepayers or listen to its customers. What about listening to its communities? When you think about ratepayers and customers, we often sort of focus on an individual person’s capacity to pay or not pay, and we ignore the fact that no person lives with a vacuum, you’re always part of a broader community. Do you think the community angle has been lost in some ways when we talk about making water security policy or thinking about how we can create equitable water access?
Sandra: I actually do not think that the community aspect has been lost when we talk about equitable water. The security of water, it’s across the board right now, and I was in water, a tier water break meeting yesterday, and one of our water activists said listen, don’t make water equity about one person. It has to be across the board; that’s what equity means is that everyone is treated in the same way. I don’t think that the idea of community is lost. I think it’s lost by DSWD.
Interviewer: That’s why I’m asking.
Sandra: Okay. DSWD has lasted, they’re concerned with each individual customer, pay your bill. Even their programming, their rap program designed to assist individual customers that are unable to pay their water. It’s designed failed. There’s a program that they design to fail because if I can’t pay you $100 this month, believe me; I’m not going to be able to pay you that $100 next month and the fact that you’re putting all this on the rear Tim arrears.
Are you waiting on me to have a windfall or- it has to be affordable? If I can’t afford a $100, find me a program that’s going to allow me to be able to pay the 75 I can afford because if I pay you 75 and you want a 100, you are going to cut my water off, but I can’t afford 100. The rap program is, and if you miss a payment, and then they tag on an additional percentage, and that’s crazy. Then you have to pay it in full. If you missed so many payments, you could wind up having to pay it in full, so you’re still without water. Yes, I think that DWSD definitely does not see Detroit as a community; they see the residents in Detroit as individual residents and not as a community of Detroit.
Interviewer: When we talk about water security or insecurity, there are so many broader implications. What is the key issue that drives you, personally?
Sandra: The key issue that drives me when we talk about water insecurity is my neighbor, with children in our household, living in a household where she’s paying the landlord every month. The landlord doesn’t pay the water bill; the landlord doesn’t pay the taxes on the house; the house goes into foreclosure. They turn off our water because the landlord didn’t pay. It personally affects me because I’m filling up igloos to make sure that her kids have water for sanitary purposes. I’m filling up igloos to make sure that they have water for cooking and everything else, and this woman has children in her household. How can you turn off the water when there are children in the house knowing that after a certain period of time which I think is 72 hours if the state finds out you don’t have water, they cannot legally come and take your children because that’s neglect.
If you don’t have water, that’s neglect because water is a necessary thing. They put these families at risk and that’s why you have a lot of residents, they want to call them transient. They’re not transient; they’re trying to get better conditions, better home living conditions. Did this one then moves? No, she didn’t move. She went down; I told her go downtown, talk to the land they took over this house. Okay, let’s find away. She was able to purchase that house and now she has the water bill in her name and her water has not been shut off since.
Do you understand what I’m saying? The idea to have the residents have to go to this so much because our housing is not up-to-date and the fact that the city is not on top of these absentee landlords that are driving these conditions that each family to live there. They’re moving from place to place so that they can have water or they’re moving from place to place because the roof is caving in or a pipe busted and he didn’t come and fix it; you know what I’m saying?
A lot of this is really transpiring due to the fact that our city is not on top of these absentee landlords. They’re allowing them to go to treat residents so inhumane that it’s causing people to have to consistently be surviving. People don’t need to live in a survival state, people need to be able to live and enjoy life, but we find a lot of families in survival state because they’re living in these substandard houses and the people are not paying the bills. They get a letter in the mail one day to say this house is up for full closure, how is it up for full closure and I’ve been paying my bill every month? Or they come and they shut the water off and you’re like, the water is not coming out what’s going on, and you find out the water’s been shut off or you see a big X on your grass where they came to shut off the water. Seeing what my neighbor was going through really pushed me to realize this is a problem and this is a problem beyond Flint beyond the water crisis. This is just a problem that our water department or water departments are not regulated across the state of Michigan; they can do whatever they want to do with no regulation around them except for they have to meet certain standards but as far as rates, they’re not regulated. I always think of them with all the money they make to me they are for a profit, they’re not– They are for a profit like DTE, but DTE is regulated. You got me started.
Sandra’s Advocacy Work
Interviewer: Tell me about how you got involved in advocacy work.
Sandra: Advocacy, this goes back to the early 2000s. I was a chief of staff for a state senator at the time and we received a call from a fire captain in one of the community and he said, “We called the representative for this area but he hasn’t gotten back to us, we need someone to get over here immediately so you can see what’s going on in this community.” I was the one to go, went over to this community on the east side of Detroit and it was July, it was about 90 degrees outside I stepped out my car and the air literally hit me.
It literally hit me, and my head started pounding, I got nauseated, the air was so heavy with this foul smell. Come to find out that it was a wastewater treatment plant in a low-income community, they were supposed to treat wastewater from the industry even trunk over from Canada. They were supposed to remove the heavy metals and dispose of the water, the wastewater. They were pouring the wastewater down the sewer system.
It was coming up in peoples’ homes through their basements, and this particular day it was just with the heat it had just exploded to a point where no more. That led me into environmental work, I’ve always been an advocate, but that led me into environmental work and wanting to make sure that residents don’t have to live in communities where their health is impacted.
I want to be able to live where they’re able to enjoy not only the built environment but the natural environment of their communities. I am so passionate about communities now; I’m just passionate about it. This community taught me that there are babies coming here on breathing machines; there’re seniors that can’t enjoy their own homes because of environmental issues. That got me into this environmental reign, and now that I’m in it it’s like okay shut down there, shut down there, let’s do this, let’s do this. I just want us to be able to enjoy our communities, even the community I live in, I live in a low-income community of color that is highly vacant, a lot of vacant lots. I’ve been working to redevelop the community based on youth doing the work because I want them to stay in the community, I don’t want them to leave.
The young people wrote a paragraph for me; I asked them to send a paragraph to someone that didn’t live in Detroit, describing their community or their city. When I read the paragraphs, I literally cried, I literally real tears. They were do not come to Detroit; you will be raped, robbed, nothing but drugs, shootings, don’t come to my community. These kids were so ready to just leave Detroit, you know, “When I turn 18 I’m out of here, I’m never coming back,” and I’m thinking to myself, what have we done as adults that our kids are racing to leave the city?
That kind of spurred me to say, “Okay, we have to change this perception.” I’ve been working with high school kids to really redevelop the community that I live in, to make the build environment one that they, where they want to stay and to help spur the natural environment. We planted trees to help with the missions in the community; they developed two parks in the community. They’re working on home efficiency, some of the homeless families where the kids go to the schools will have a house to live in. It’s about teaching them leadership; I’m trying to teach these young people how to be advocates for themselves, how to be advocates and leaders, and turning the city around so that it becomes a place where they’d want to stay.
Michigan Environmental Council: Mission and Goals
Interviewer: Tell us a little bit about Michigan Environmental Council and what it does.
Sandra: Michigan Environmental Council is 20 years old and it works within the capital to create environmental policy. We cover the whole state of Michigan, our job is to create a clean, safe and healthy Michigan for all residents. We have member groups that we advocate for within the capital. The only program that’s different– We have two programs that’s different from the policy aspect, although is all policy and that’s my position here in Detroit. I only work in the city of Detroit, my job is to turn Detroit’s reign, my work is grassroots and grasstops.
I work in both arenas, we have another satellite office in Traverse City and Kate’s job up there, she’s working around energy efficiency and getting cities to set energy goals, she’s really working around climate change, her thing is climate change. Where those two areas, we’re not in the capital, we’re not in Lansing in the capital and trying to drive policy there, and we’re trying to drive policy in the individual cities. In doing that I’ve worked in the food arena, I sat on the Detroit food policy council, currently, I’m the co-chair with the office of sustainability on the sustainability agenda.
I sit on the Detroit environmental agenda; I sit on D4, which is doing development differently in Detroit, which looks at making sure that as we develop these communities that residents in the communities have a say in it and that gentrification does not happen within these communities. I do transportation; I do water issues. Really working hard on water affordability in the city of Detroit. I do lead issues; I work on lead. I am a community leader I lead the ninth precinct community relations council. I also lead the Dimpy neighborhood lions which is a group that was started by my young people in 2014 and I’ve been leading that ever since. I sit on quite a few groups. I even sit on Detroit Horsepower. I’m trying to get horses in the city of Detroit so that my kids can see something different. My kids don’t know anything by law so we’re going to– we have the okay and we’re going to ahead and build a horse Equestrian on the website of Detroit for the kids.
Well for everybody, so though there are a lot of the things that I do and I do them under the scope of the Michigan Environmental Council because they all either lead to a better natural environment or a better-built environment.
Interviewer: How does water security enter into the scope of what the MEC does? Can you talk us through how the MEC got interested in issues related to water security and access? Maybe how that work that the MEC has been doing for a while has perhaps changed or evolved over time to address these issues that we just talked about.
Sandra: MEC has always been involved in water issues. We’ve always been involved in the great lake’s issues. We have always set on a commission around DWSD, but the Flint water crisis moved us into residential water security issues. Our former boss Chris Cold was actually tasked by then-Governor Snyder to be a co-chair on the Flint Water Taskforce. He actually with my insistence because I am a big environmental justice advocate, that’s my thing.
Constantly putting that in is here look at it from the environmental justice perspective. You have to look at it from the environmental justice perspective. They were able to come out with a set of recommendations around the water crisis. A set of recommendations that would benefit everybody in the state of Michigan.
One of the recommendations was for E.J I’m suppose meantwhere if you have issues, you are able to call someone because there is no reason that anyone that gets brown water out of their taps should not be able to get a response from the State of Michigan, about what’s going on with my water and that didn’t happen. That resulted in a lot of health impacts on residents.
That’s just an E.J issue but it’s an E.J issue that can happen anywhere in the State of Michigan. Flint just happened to be where it happened there. My boss was tasked with being on this environmental justice task force and of course, you know they did the who’s at fault, but they also did 65 recommendations. Our current governor Whitmer is looking at those and she is really developing different offices in her administration that will cover these environmental justice issues.
Her first directive out the gate in January was around the E.J issue and a climate change office because of the fact that she was getting rid of the rules and regulations committee or something is what hangs it up.
Interviewer: Oversights.
Sandra: Yes, the oversight committee which was fully industrial. It was manned by industry, that hanged it up, but I did as someone is really looking at creating a space where residents can literally touch their State government around issues that are impacting their daily life. I love the idea that MEC was able to be a part of that. I like the idea that Governor Snyder created an environmental justice work that my boss was also a part of, he co-chaired.
That was able to bring industry, environmentalists and environmental justice advocates together to create an environmental justice director for the State of Michigan. So, I love that idea. We did that back in 2010 under Governor Granholm, but when Snyder came into office, it got thrown on the shelf and nobody– it had been watered down but it was still some good points in that, but it got thrown on the shelf. One of the greatest things that MEC was able to do and it came out of the original director, that Granholm signed, was to create an intra-agency working group. So, anything major happening, you have to take it before this intra-agency working group. That way, had someone from MDEQ when they made the decision to allow them to switch off to the Flint River, would have had to go before the department of Health… They would have had to go before Health and Human Services. They would have had to go before all these departments, and somebody somewhere would have said, “Okay, how will this impact the health of those residents?” That way you got a different view, a different perspective to look at a project or look at a decision that one of the agencies is making, so that was a great thing.
Then Mott, as you know, The Mott Foundation is based in Flint, they said, “Okay, we can’t have this happening here. This has happened right under our nose where our home is.” They had tasked a lot of different groups across the State of Michigan with working on water issues. So, MEC has developed a water tool kit. On our website, we have this water tool kit and what it does is, it looks at well water as well as tap water. It looks at water across the State of Michigan, because not everyone goes in to the kitchen to get the water, you know, we still got people who live on wells. It looks at the quality of water, affordability of water, where your water comes from. The toolkit is so expensive; it even tells people how to read their water bill because most people don’t read their water bill.
They get a water bill, they pay it. They look at the cost but they’re not looking over here to see what the cost is really for. It teaches people how to read their water bill, so this tool kit is needed because water before was never an issue for people, so they weren’t concerned with it until Flint. So, now across the State of Michigan, we have groups that are providing people with enough information to educate them so that when they take that bill and go to the water company, they know exactly what they’re talking about.
They may not be able to get into the details but they have enough education to know what they’re talking about and they can walk in there and speak on their own behalf, because our water company here in the city of Detroit has even gotten at where you can’t take an advocate in with you. Advocates are not allowed to go into the customer service area with you when you’re talking about your water bill.
So you have to be educated on what you need to say, and this toolkit helps residents to get that information. That’s important, so MEC we’re now going out and we’re taking that water toolkit and having different groups vet it out and make sure we got everything we need. So that’s our entry into water right now. There is the tiered water rate, we sit on that table trying to come up with how we come up with an affordability plan across the state of Michigan, not just Detroit. People always say Detroit is different, and Detroit is different, but how do we come up with a tiered water plan because it has to be an adjustable, city by city or county by county. We’re working to see how we can come up with a tiered water rate because everyone deserves water, but everyone deserves water based on how much they can afford to pay. I should not be able to get water because I can pay $100 and you can’t get it because can only pay $25; that’s crazy to me. My 100 should be able to balance out your 25. If we have people paying their full water bills and we know they’re making money, so there’s some extra money there that you can help balance out what someone else’s paying. That’s our entry into water.
Water Plan
Interviewer: What progress do you think you’re making on those discussions about the tiered water plan? The reason I ask is especially because that seems to be the centerpiece of a lot of the community organizing and activism movement happening within the city. To what extent do you see those ongoing negotiations unfold?
Sandra: Well, we’re really at the beginning, we just had a study commissioned by Roger Colton. We talked about that yesterday and we’re still kind of like okay, “If we’re going to do this what we do is trying to decide will we do it regionally, try to implement this regionally or would it be city by city.” We’re still at that point.
Interviewer: Was this a new plan or this is the old 2005 plan?
Sandra: No. This is a new plan. If I send you a copy don’t shop it around, but you could take a look at it because it may have some– You may be able to educate me because you know I’m not technical.
Interviewer: Sure. I will edit this part.
Sandra: I’ll send you a copy of it so you could take a look at it. You might be able to educate me on it because I’m not a technical person, I’m a community activist. I am a community advocate, so don’t ask me anything technical but I can tell you how it impacts the people in the city of Detroit and that’s what I do.
Interviewer: Who are some of your major partners, because you work with both grassroots and grasstops. Who are your partners in both grassroots sides and the grass top side?
Sandra: Monica Patrick Lewis. I just hold her up. She is my woman warrior on water. I’m sorry because her and Sylvia, I can’t think of Sylvia’s last name.
Interviewer: Orduno?
Sandra: Yes. They sit on the tiered water group with me. These women have been out there, lugging water to people. Setting up water stations, making sure that people’s kids aren’t taken, going to the water company with people, they (DWSD) stopped letting people come in because they were going with them to talk about these water bills. These women have been so at it on the ground, and I’m normally on the ground but I have not been on the ground with water the way they have. So, what I tell them is whatever I can do to support you, I’m there. I’m part of creating the water toolkit, but I’m not on the ground doing that. These are the grassroots people that I think are amazing.
Some of the organizations, and we all belong to different groups, like we all belong to the National Equity Water Table around affordability, but we work with Freshwater Future. We work with Healing Our Waters. We work with– It’s hard thinking about these groups, the Erb Foundation, they are a big person with groundwater along with Mott, which is one of the greatest things you’ve ever seen is two foundations that are sitting at the same table working together on this issue, as partners with grassroots and with organizations, so that’s a great table, that tiered water rate table.
Nationally the group we sit on, we sit on Policy Link, which is all about equitable water. It’s probably about 20 different organizations out there that Mott has probably funded to do water and they bring them all to the table, they’re all at the table in this water tiered rate because affordability is so important.
Interviewer: Where do you see the movement to address water security, affordability. Where do you see it headed?
Sandra:
I see the movement to address water affordability, I see us headed in the right direction and I think with the backing of major foundations, I think especially across the state of Michigan, especially Detroit and Flint, that water affordability policy will probably shift in those areas because people would be surprised at how many foundational dollars are helping to run cities. A lot of city projects do not come up under the general fund dollars or those departmental dollars; those dollars are coming from foundations. I think that they are beginning to listen to foundations because they are willing to invest money into cities.
They want cities to be successful. So a lot of decision-makers are beginning to listen to a lot of these foundations, and I think that having the foundations supporting this issue will probably move it a lot quicker than our grassroots efforts, but because they support the grassroots efforts, I think that’s why the city is going to start listening to people like Monica and Sylvia on this issue.
Structural Problem—Racism
Interviewer: What about some of the other structural problems that still remain, structural racism, for instance, regional tensions between Detroit and the suburbs for instance? Also, when we were talking earlier about how there seems to have been this historical breakdown in terms of what different parts of the city government, whether it’s DWSD or whether it’s keeping landlords accountable. Those are really complex issues that not a lot of people readily associate with water. You think the contamination of land, but you have all of these other institutional issues. I’m curious as just how you see what can be done or how we can address all of these broader issues as well that are also still very much there.
Sandra: I begin this by saying that I love my city. I love my city; I love my city, I love my city. However, structural racism, institutionalized racism all of it is so very prominent in the city of Detroit. For me to truly answer that question, people won’t like what I have to say. I’m just saying that the only reason this city is moving forward is not for those of us that chose to stay here because people have this idea that everyone in the city of Detroit is poor. Everybody that had money they moved the way, that’s not true.
I can live anywhere I want to live. I love my city. I choose to stay here and work to bring my city back to some glory. I think that a lot of the movement that has been made in the city of Detroit is not made for me. It’s not geared towards me. It was made to entice a new population to come into the city of Detroit that does not look like me, that does not think like me. I tend to ride the tide because I could snatch a little here and there for my community to make my community better. I take real offense that downtown Detroit is now Gilbertville, and that’s what residents call it. We call it Gilbertville, it is not downtown Detroit. I take offense that residents no longer just go downtown because they don’t feel like it was not built for them. I take offense that 90% of the jobs are geared towards people outside the city of Detroit. I take offense that Detroiters, when looking for jobs, have to go outside of the city for those jobs.
So, structural racism? Alive and kicking in the city of Detroit. I’ve worked hard to get regional… to get a light rail down Woodward. As I’m educating the residents, and we had the funding to do the light rail from downtown to 8 Mile, and as I’m educating the residents, I’m steady saying: “community benefits agreement.” They had 12 stops, and I held a meeting at each one of those stops and I’m saying to residents, “Community benefits agreement.” If they put a stop in your community, you make sure that you have an agreement on the table beforehand, that you 1) will not be pushed out of your homes. You will not be taxed out of your home. 2) People in your community receive jobs. 3) That people are not going to be crossing… parking a car across my driveway so they can go catch the transit. [laughs] I mean little things, but big things. I just see Detroiters, being those that stayed and maintained, really being pushed out and not so much being pushed out of the city, just pushed out! That’s how I want to say, “just pushed out.” Pushed out of the decision making. Pushed out of anything related to how their city is going to operate.
The city has never been one for engagement. We have this Office of Sustainability and Joel and I have– Joel used to be grassroots just like me. We started a lot of these groups together and I think that is probably the best engagement that I have seen as far as reaching out to everyday people.
When these big decisions are made in the city, they’re not incorporating residents. We build up downtown and leave the communities and neighborhoods to rot. If people come across 8 Mile and they don’t take the freeway, they have to come through my community to come downtown. You understand what I’m saying? So why wouldn’t you build up the community?
I’ve seen them give away land to developers, parcels, and residents can’t buy the land next door to them because that’s part of the bundle that they gave away… because they want to, they’d rather give away bundles of land than piecemeal it here and there. That’s kind of understandable, but residents that have stayed should always have first choice. I’ve seen the city have a whole “Last day to buy land in your community,” which is on the west side, but the meeting was held on the east side. Okay? How many residents can get to the meetings?
I’ve seen so much that has been done against the residents that have stayed in the city that structural racism- and I’m going to say this, it may not be a black and white issue. I think it’s a Detroit resident issue. We got white residents to stay just like the black ones stayed. And they are experiencing the same thing, the very same thing. It’s about “[being] against Detroiters.” The mayor says there’s no “two Detroits.” There are two Detroits, those that you’re doing for and those that you are not doing for. That’s my two Detroits. That’s my take on structural racism; it is about Detroiters, those that stayed; they have no say in this city whatsoever.
Interviewer: How can we address some of these problems regarding water, for instance? I mean, we are talking having legislation or grassroots action on water affordability, the TRA problem but as we have seen that some of these broader issues are still persisting. What can we do or how can we hold people accountable to address all these situations?
Are you seeing examples where people are sort of trying to address these issues and hold some of these organizations accountable?
Sandra: No, it’s not. OK, how we address these issues, and do I see how we hold these people accountable? I said earlier that elected officials work for me. I’m their boss, and if I don’t vote for them, they don’t get in office. OK, that’s my thought. So, we have to really start in the election process holding elected officials accountable, but once they get in office, if they don’t live up to what they say they’re going to do, we have to make sure they don’t get back in the office. They can make a whole lot of promises ahead of time but once they get in and we see they’re not doing, they’re not upholding their campaign promises, then we have to make sure they don’t get back here and it’s about education.
There is nobody — Did I say that in English correctly? –There is no one currently addressing the water issue, as our elected official in the city of Detroit either in the legislative body or the executive body. There’s no one. Gary Brown has been given a green light to do whatever he wants to do where water is concerned. I mean, the way they even treat residents when they come with water concerns is an issue. It has been… and that’s back to that Detroiter racism, they can talk to us any kind of way they want to talk to us. I literally got into it one of the Council people last week on an issue. They’re demolishing a house, and as part of the environmental world, we worked to help draft the demolition process, which includes you must put a door hanger on a door within 400 feet of a house that you’re demolishing because of the lead issues and other issues, because you may have children around and you may have older people around.
The night after the Mayor gives his State of the City address, and he talks about this very process of putting door hangers-on, they demolish a house two doors down from me, no door hangers. So, I go out and I say, you know you didn’t notify anyone that you were going to tear this house down. You have a baby that lives right next door to the house, you’re tearing down and you have a three-year-old that lives directly across the street. Both of these kids can be impacted by this demolition. “I don’t have to do that.” “Hold on; you’re in my community, yes, you do have to follow the process.”
I in turn call City Hall, call the neighborhood office and I tell them what has happened. I tell a Councilperson. They told me, “You’re not supposed to talk to a contractor.” I told them, “What do you mean? He is in my community. He’s impacting the health of my residents and my community and you tell me I can’t say anything to him. I’m sorry. That’s my community. I am of the Community Association. I can speak to him and he was doing something wrong.” “Well, you shouldn’t have said anything to him.” “Why not?”
He’s demolishing a house and we’ve got babies on the block within 400 feet. Why shouldn’t I be out there trying to stop him from doing something that may impact their health? For a councilperson to say that to me told me right then and there, they’re not sitting at that table for my benefit. So, it’s about educating around who we elect and holding them accountable, and when they don’t do what they say they’re going to do, you don’t vote for them again. You make sure you get out there if they’re running again and say, “No, you did not live up to your campaign promises last time. We’re not re-electing you.” I am a firm believer you work for me when you are elected, and if you don’t do your job, I don’t care any job you have and you do not do your job, your boss will fire you. I’m their boss. I’m firing them. You got me started!
Detroit Water Stories Interview with Sandra Turner-Handy Part 3
Interviewer: As someone who’s engaging so many different people over the grassroots and the grasstops, do you get callers in lots of different ways and critiques from people just saying, “Well, you should be fighting harder for us over here.” Or on the other hand, “You’re an activist, we shouldn’t listen to you.” How do you engage with those sometimes-conflicting ways?
Sandra: I’m always on the side of the people. I’ve learned when to put on my suit and tie and I learned when to pick up my picket sign. I am a true activist at heart and I truly believe that if I’m not at the table, I’m on the menu, so I have to be at those tables. I have to be with grasstops to know what’s going on in those agreements and how they are going to impact me, because that’s the only way I can do a counteract. I don’t want to be standing outside with my picket sign and they’re in there deciding to give my whole community away.
I want to be at that table so I can say, “Hold on. No, wait a minute. I’m in objection of this.” I will tell you; it is many times I’m at a table, and I’m the only person of color, and I don’t hesitate to speak up. I’ve been criticized by some of my grassroots cohorts because I’m at those tables. I tell them, “I need to know. I am one of those people. I’m curious as heck. I want to know what you’re doing in there and how it’s going to impact me.”
I’d worked on some projects that people would, you know, grassroots wouldn’t work on, but I worked on them because I want to make sure that when you’re putting money into the community, or you are making decisions that will affect the community, my voice is heard. I am a firm believer in making sure that any of the tables I sit at, they know I’m there and they know why I’m there. I’m there from the community and they’re looking at environmental aspects that may impact the community.
I am there, you know, I don’t care… I don’t per se feel like my voice is the voice of the people, but I’m an impacted resident in the city of Detroit. So, my voice may be someone else’s voice. I’m at those tables, I’m at those tables and sometimes I probably need to take the picket sign in the board room with me, because when I’m in there I’m speaking from an activist point of view, so I’m never conflicted to do things that I don’t think will benefit the residents in the city of Detroit.
Interviewer: There seems to be a lot of momentum right now and at the state level. As far as legislation for water affordability and contamination, PFOS, the water bills being pushed forward, what is your take on really how you see this evolve? Because those have been used in the past too and they haven’t made it through, is this any different? Dare we hope?
Sandra: No, it’s not. All the different legislative bills and all of this being proposed right now is not any different from any of the bills. Listen, we have a new crop of legislators in there and everybody’s writing bills because they want their name to be heard. They want to be able to say, I tried, you know, it’s not going anywhere. I think the real policy is when it comes top down. The one thing that Michigan has done is that they have elected a governor that knows about these issues, a governor that’s always been a true environmentalist. She knows about water issues and what she doesn’t know she’s going to learn.
She’s put a really good crop of people around her that can inform her of issues, and I think most of the policy is going to come top-down. The only problem — well, the water issue, maybe not water affordability, but water conservation and water quality, those issues are going to be nonpartisan issues. They’re going to be across the board. I think those kinds of issues will pay us. Now when we started talking affordability, we’re talking dollars. Okay, so that may be a different story, that may become a partisan issue, because Bloomfield may not want to go for an issue that’s going to impact Detroit, but the thing is, what most of them don’t understand is, I bet you every legislator up there has somebody in their community that is facing water insecurity, and they don’t understand that. They think it’s only the urban areas. I think if someone was to write a bill, they need to make sure that across the aisle, this impacts your residence as well.
Interviewer: I still remember last year when there was a water main break up nearby the newspapers were like, “Oh my God, we’ve never experienced anything like this before. This is like Detroit.” Then everyone was like, “Yes.”
Sandra: Do you remember the big one, where was it? Saint Claire? They’ve never been through that kind of issue before, you know, “it happens only in Detroit!”. It impacts people across the board, and a lot of legislators do not understand that they actually have people with debt, with no water in their communities.
Fair Price of Water
Interviewer: So, a sticking point with tiered rate systems, affordability issues is dollars like you said, and even among a lot of sympathizers, there’s often a, well, how much is too much, or how much is fair. What do you see in terms of this broader discussion in terms of what is the fair price of water?
Sandra: I can’t answer that because I have no idea. I have no idea. My thing is that I think that amount can be developed. I think if we look at- as I said, especially with DWSD, they’re making money off of the water. When we look at that, I know that I pay my water bill in full every month, so they get their money, but I also know how to conserve water. I’m also educated about not wasting water and different things like that, although I do water my lawn. (chuckles)
I know that I pay my bills in full every month. You’re making money off that money that I just paid. How about you take a couple of those dollars and put it on that person’s water bill that couldn’t afford to pay their whole bill this month. If that’s done across the board, I’m quite sure they can come up with a percentage of pennies on every water bill or pennies on a dollar that can go into a fund and help balance out those that can’t pay their water bill.
I’m not talking about no payment assistance program; I’m talking about a true tier water rate structure. If your household brings in this amount of money, then you have this percentage of your water bill that will be covered. It has to be based on income and I hate doing anything on income because then it provides some inequitable measures when you start looking at income, but if that’s the way to make sure that water bills are being paid, then I have to step back and say okay then make sure– then do it that way.
I don’t like dividing people up by income, that’s not considered equitable to me. And, I don’t believe in, “you pay so much money and you get so much water.” Who’s to say that I need all the water I get, but you only need– you need more than what you’re getting, you’re able to pay for? So that’s not equitable, paying by usage, you know what I’m saying?
I’ve heard people say everybody is entitled to water, yes. Then the caveat to that is that, so how about we have so much water for so much money and they can pay this monthly and they’ll get this certain amount of water. What happens if they need more water? Do you cut off their water for that month because they went over the water that they purchased? You can’t do that, that’s not equitable to me. Because if I’m a household with one, and this is a household with one, we’re probably using the same amount of water, because if you’ve educated both of us about water storage, shipping and conservation, then we’re probably using the same amount of water. But I make $20,000 $30,000 more than this person, but who’s to say I need more water than that person, that I’m entitled to more water than that person because I can afford to pay for it. And that person has to live within this bottle of water that you’re giving them for the month…
That’s not equitable to me, and these are some of the stories that I hear of what people think the answer to the problem is. The answer to the problem is you take all of the money that you’re getting in and you balance it across the board. You balance it across the board so that everyone has water, and everyone has enough water to last them throughout every month. That it meets their needs, their household needs. I know that sounds crazy. If I have to put an extra dollar in the pot every month, if I have to put an extra dollar in the pot, I’m good with that to set up this fund. I’m good with that, and you would be surprised at how many people that would be willing to put an extra dollar in the pot, but nobody is looking at that.
There’s not a “Light Heat” program for water. You know how people donate to THAW and all that? Build a water program and let people donate to it, but do not use that money to pay off water bills, use that money to pay off water bills in the system as it’s happening and not waiting on someone’s water bill to get ready to be shut off and then you use the money. Let’s use that fund of money across the board for people that can’t afford to pay their water, not wait until they’re getting shut off, then they can come and get some money. That’s usually eaten up so fast because you wait until it gets to the point of no return and then you’ve got to pay a deposit. That’s crazy, if I can’t pay the water bill, I can’t pay a deposit. I can’t give you $400 for you to hold on to for how long, you know, because I couldn’t pay my water bill, I need that $400 to pay bills. (Sighs) You’re getting me started again.
Interviewer: Is there a person’s story or experience that moves you? This could be something that you have witnessed or something that you have experienced as well, or maybe a role model for you?
Well, I told you the story that moved me, the fact of having to fill up igloos and buckets of water and lug them across the street to my neighbor’s house that should have never been in that situation. That moved me, that really moved me that… There are so many people like her throughout the city, but the fact that I’ve seen Monica lugging water, with no question, you need it, we’re going to get it to you, that is so inspirational, when you don’t have conditions on the work you do. You do it because it’s the right thing, that is so inspirational, that you don’t judge people. People judge people, their water get cut off, Well, “Why didn’t they pay their water bill?” No, come on. To see people like Monica that see water shutoffs as a crime is so inspirational. She has moved me to do so much in this water issue, and I’ve really looked at it from a different point of view but that one time I did look at it, okay, they didn’t pay their water bill and people would say, “They didn’t pay their bill so their water should be cut off.” No, nobody should ever be without water. I’m sorry, that’s just unacceptable to me.
I don’t care what you have to do; people need to have water. If they can’t afford it let’s find a way they can afford it. Let’s figure it out some kind of way. Having no conditions around this issue that people without water is just wrong. It’s just unacceptable to me at this point.
Interviewer: Well, thank you so much for your time. Are there any last words or parting comments or something that we haven’t touched about so far that you’d like to leave us with?
Sandra: No. I mean, I’m just fired up now because– I’m going just to say it again. Go to the center of Michigan, go four hours each way, east, west, north; you can’t miss some water. We should not have that crisis when it comes to water. It’s just unacceptable.
Interviewer: Well, thank you.
Detroit Water Stories 