Planet Detroit Candidate Survey
What are the three most pressing environmental issues facing the communities you seek to serve? Please rank them in order of priority and briefly explain why you chose each.
1. Clean Drinking Water — Aging Water Infrastructure and Lead Service Line Replacement
Safe, clean drinking water should never be a luxury. One of the most pressing issues facing our communities is the replacement of aging water infrastructure and lead service lines. While municipalities are committed to protecting public health, the cost of these improvements is often placed on local governments and, ultimately, taxpayers.
2. Clean Energy — Energy Affordability and Reliability
The rising cost of energy is placing a significant burden on families, seniors, and small businesses throughout District 18. Residents are paying more while often experiencing outages and reliability concerns. Access to affordable, reliable energy is both an environmental and economic issue.
3. Air Quality — Protecting and Expanding Green Space
Green space is vital to the health and well-being of our communities, yet it continues to be depleted as development expands. Parks, trees, and natural areas improve air quality, reduce flooding, lower temperatures in urban areas, and provide residents with opportunities for recreation and connection to nature.
Michigan law requires utilities to reach 100% clean energy by 2040. If elected, would you support maintaining this law, or would you support revising or repealing it? Please explain your position.
Maintain the current law and timeline
The 2040 timeline provides utilities with a reasonable and achievable transition period to modernize infrastructure, train workers on new technologies, and coordinate a successful rollout for residents and businesses.
More than two dozen Michigan communities are considering or have approved large-scale data center developments. These facilities can consume as much electricity as a small city and place significant demands on local water and energy infrastructure. What role should state government play in overseeing data center development, and what guardrails should the state legislature enact to protect communities where data centers are proposed?
I would support the current legislation that would place a one-year moratorium on new data center approvals in Michigan, specifically House Bills 5594, 5595, and 5596. The proposed pause would give lawmakers, regulators, and local communities time to better understand the impacts that large-scale data centers have on energy demand, water usage, local infrastructure, and utility rates before additional projects move forward.
First, any data center receiving state or local approval should be required to demonstrate meaningful local hiring, including a commitment that a significant portion of its workforce comes from the surrounding community. Residents should share directly in the economic benefits these projects promise.
Second, strong community benefit agreements should be required. These agreements should include investments in local infrastructure, workforce development, environmental protections, public amenities, and other priorities identified by the community through a transparent public process.
Finally, and most importantly, residents should not bear the cost of data center development through higher utility or water bills. Data centers consume enormous amounts of electricity and water, and any costs associated with serving these facilities should be borne by the companies that profit from them—not by families, seniors, and small businesses already struggling with rising utility costs. I would support legislation ensuring that residential ratepayers see no increase in their utility or water bills as a result of data center development.
PFAS contamination has been detected in drinking water, groundwater, and surface water across Michigan. Cleanup efforts are underway, but many affected communities are still waiting for action. What is the single most important step the officeholder in this position should take on PFAS in the next term?
The single most important step is holding polluters accountable for the cost of PFAS cleanup. Communities and taxpayers should not be left paying to address contamination they did not create. The state should aggressively pursue responsible parties, dedicate resources to cleanup efforts, and ensure that every resident has access to clean, safe drinking water.
Michigan residents in some communities face disproportionate exposure to air pollution, contaminated water, and industrial waste. Do you support requiring Michigan regulators to assess cumulative environmental and health impacts on overburdened communities before approving new permits for polluting facilities?
Yes
Utility rate cases directly affect what Michigan residents pay for electricity and gas. DTE and Consumers Energy have requested frequent significant rate increases in recent years. Should elected officials play a greater role in holding utility companies accountable for rate hikes and rising energy costs?
While the Michigan Public Service Commission plays an important regulatory role, legislators have a responsibility to provide oversight, ensure transparency, and protect the public interest. Utility companies should be required to clearly demonstrate why rate increases are necessary, how the funds will improve reliability and infrastructure, and what measures are being taken to control costs.
Enbridge's Line 5 pipeline runs through the Straits of Mackinac and carries crude oil and natural gas liquids between Wisconsin and Ontario. A proposed tunnel beneath the lakebed to house a replacement pipeline has faced legal and regulatory challenges for years. What is your position on the future of Line 5?
I believe protecting the Great Lakes must be our top priority, while also recognizing the role Line 5 currently plays in Michigan's and the region's energy supply. I do not support simply shutting down Line 5 without a viable alternative in place, as doing so could have significant impacts on energy reliability and affordability.
At the same time, the current situation is not acceptable as a long-term solution. The risk of a spill in the Straits of Mackinac is too great given the importance of the Great Lakes to our economy, environment, and drinking water supply. I support moving forward with enhanced protections, including the proposed tunnel project or other proven engineering solutions that would significantly reduce the risk of damage from anchors, vessel strikes, or other threats that could lead to a release.
Any solution must be subject to rigorous environmental review, strong safety standards, ongoing monitoring, and accountability measures. Michigan should not have to choose between environmental protection and energy reliability. We must pursue a path that safeguards the Great Lakes while ensuring a stable energy supply for residents and businesses.
Drinking water is becoming increasingly unaffordable for Michiganders in both rural and urban areas, leading to water shutoffs. Would you support legislation that caps water bills for low-income Michiganders and adds shutoff protections?
Yes, I would support legislation that caps water bills for low-income Michiganders and provides stronger protections against water shutoffs.
In my own community, we do not shut off water service when residents are unable to pay. Instead, unpaid balances are added to the property tax bill. This approach ensures that residents continue to have access to water while providing a mechanism for the municipality to recover costs over time.
I believe Michigan should explore policies that make water more affordable for low-income households, including income-based assistance programs, reasonable caps on water costs, and stronger protections against shutoffs. At the same time, we must ensure that municipalities receive the resources they need to maintain and improve critical water infrastructure.
Michigan is home to more than 18,000 contaminated sites. Do you support or oppose legislation to hold polluters accountable for cleaning up these sites?
Support
To reduce man-made pollution, we must ensure that those responsible for contamination are responsible for the cleanup. This should include meaningful penalties, enforcement measures, and requirements that polluters restore affected land and water resources. When companies know there are real financial consequences for environmental damage, they are more likely to invest in prevention and responsible practices.