Given the overwhelming evidence that Michigan Governor Rick Snyder knew that Flint’s water was contaminated and twiddled his thumbs, it was only a matter of time before he would have to answer for his actions under oath. Well, that day came a lot sooner than anyone expected. On Wednesday, Snyder and several others were slapped with a civil racketeering lawsuit alleging that they conspired to balance Flint’s budget on the backs of the financially troubled city’s residents–and residents’ right to safe drinking water be hanged.
MLive obtained a copy of the complaint, which was filed on behalf of 15 Flint residents. Read it here. It was filed under the provisions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. While RICO is best known for crippling organized crime, this lawsuit was filed under RICO’s civil component, which allows individuals to recover damages if they have been wronged by a criminal enterprise. In this case, the plaintiffs contend that Snyder, the state environmental quality and health departments, several state and municipal officials, and various engineering corporations conspired to balance Flint’s budget at all costs.
The plaintiffs argued that rather than have Flint solve its “run of the mill” financial problems through “time-tested, well-honed” bankruptcy proceedings, Snyder instead appointed an emergency manager with a mandate to balance the budget. John Clark, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, told The Guardian that Snyder and his cohorts thought that having Flint declare bankruptcy would have been a “cop-out.” However, balancing the budget would send the message that “the government’s gaining ground, functioning properly.”
At the start of fiscal 2013, Flint had a $12.9 million deficit. By the summer of 2015, it had a $3.3 million surplus. However, the plaintiffs argue, the price was high. As we know by now, Flint stopped buying water from Detroit as a cost-cutting measure. It then temporarily switched to the Flint River before a planned permanent move to buying water from Lake Huron.
The lawsuit contends that for two years, Snyder and others told the people of Flint that the Flint River was safe when they were well aware that it wasn’t. They further contend that Flint only balanced its budget by charging residents some of the highest rates in the nation for water that Snyder and others knew was unusable. Under the terms of a state loan that allowed Flint to regain control of its finances, residents are still locked into these rates even though the water is too polluted for filters to work.
As the plaintiffs see it, Snyder and his cohorts committed mail fraud by continuing to send water bills, and committed wire fraud by allowing residents to pay them online or with plastic. In order to prove a pattern of racketeering activity has taken place, you have to prove that at least two racketeering acts occurred within 10 years of each other. In this case, the plaintiffs need to only prove that two instances of mail fraud and wire fraud–any two of them–occurred in order to prove a pattern of racketeering activity. If they can do so, they can get triple damages. More importantly, those responsible for this tragedy will have to give a full account for what happened–under oath. That means that a lot of careers could end on the witness stand–including Snyder’s.
We’ve already found a number of smoking guns that prove state officials knew this water was dangerous and did nothing. For instance, we know that Snyder knew or should have known about the seriousness of the crisis as early as the fall of 2014–well before he publicly claimed to have known. Indeed, it looks like the matter was on his agenda in February 2015–nine months before he says he knew how serious it was. We also know that Flint-based state workers had access to filtered water for 10 months by the time Snyder admitted the Flint River was toxic.
Well, this lawsuit reveals dozens more. Perhaps the most damning is in the form of an email from Flint water quality chief Michael Glasgow. He contended that Flint’s water treatment plant was not ready to handle Flint River water. However, then-emergency manager Darnell Earley refused to bend from an “aggressive deadline” to make the switch.
If switching water sources despite a warning in capital letters from your water quality chief that his plant can’t treat it isn’t criminal, I don’t know what is. That email alone would be enough to prove this was a criminal act. Combined with everything else? The only question here ought to be the amount of damages.
