U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christine Todd Whitman visited Macomb County in late September. Not on her anticipated agenda was explaining to a group of fourth graders from Lobbestael Elementary School why the water at the beach they visited was so polluted that kids couldn't touch it, let alone test its quality.

"It's hard to teach kids what happens when sewage and industrial waste go down the drain," said James Clift, Policy Director at MEC. "It's even harder to explain why we allow up to 50 billion gallons of inadequately-treated waste to flow into our lakes and streams each year."

Overflows of sewage and industrial waste from old, deteriorating facilities and sewer pipelines are the primary culprits in beach closings across the state. Proposal 2 would authorize the state to issue bonds and borrow up to $1 billion over the next ten years to improve this aging infrastructure and keep the contamination out of our waterways.

However, when the idea was first proposed, it was not clear whether or not environmental groups would support the initiative. Critical to MEC's support was the addition of protections to ensure the proposal was not going to encourage more urban sprawl.

Environmental groups fought to make sure the bond money would be used only for capital improvement projects that directly improve water quality. Bonding is only appropriate when future generations share in the benefits. Unfortunately, Michigan taxpayers have recently felt the sting of seeing bond funds used to replace existing dollars. Therefore, the Clean Water Bond proposal specifically prohibits any reduction in the state's current commitment to provide sewer infrastructure improvements.

Second, the proposal needed to target failing systems that are having the greatest impact on our state's water resources. Under the proposal, the state would rate every request for funding and give top priority to projects that do the most to improve water quality. This "fix it first" approach is the common-sense idea that state investment in infrastructure-be it roads, bridges or sewers-should come with an obligation to maintain our existing infrastructure before expanding it.

Lastly, the proposal encourages communities to explore more natural solutions, like protecting and using open spaces and wetlands to collect and filter storm runoff instead of sending everything to the wastewater treatment plant. "Municipalities across the country are discovering the benefits of working with nature, harnessing its ability to capture and retain runoff to reduce the size, and thus the cost, of sewer improvement projects," said Cyndi Roper, Michigan Director of Clean Water Action.

Proposal 2 is a long-term, wise investment. Spending under the program is spread out over at least ten years, and repayments stretched out over as many as 30 years, minimizing any possible short-term fiscal impact. Each year, the Governor and the Legislature will decide how much, if any, of the authorized bonds are issued, protecting the state's investment capacity over the long term. Investments in water infrastructure will pay off many times over for Michigan residents. Businesses will locate here because it's easier to attract and retain skilled employees if they can enjoy Michigan's beauty and recreational opportunities.

We all want to tell our children we are working on the problem of beach closings as hard as we can, and things will be better next summer. But that will only be true if we work to pass Proposal 2 in November.

Work to help pass Proposal 2
Literature and lawn signs are available to anyone willing to work on the passage of Proposal 2. Contact James Clift at (517) 487-9539 for more information.