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. Air Quality — And Industrial Pollution This is the most urgent issue because many residents live near heavy industrial facilities, major transportation corridors, and other pollution sources. Poor air quality contributes to asthma, respiratory illness, and other health disparities that disproportionately affect children, seniors, and low-income communities. Every resident deserves clean air regardless of their ZIP code.
2. Environmental Justice — And Equitable Enforcement Too often, communities in District 11 have carried a disproportionate share of the environmental burden while receiving fewer benefits from economic development. I believe state agencies must ensure stronger oversight, transparency, and community input when making decisions about industrial permitting, pollution control, and environmental enforcement.
3. Lead Pipes — Climate Resilience and Infrastructure Aging infrastructure leaves many neighborhoods vulnerable to flooding, extreme heat, and severe weather events. Investments in stormwater management, green infrastructure, lead pipe replacement, and energy-efficient housing can improve public health, lower costs for residents, and make our communities more resilient.
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
I support maintaining Michigan’s 100% clean energy by 2040 law because it will help improve air quality, protect public health, and create economic opportunities. For communities in House District 11 that already experience disproportionate environmental burdens, it is important that the transition remains equitable, affordable, and beneficial to residents and workers.
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?
State government should play an active role in ensuring data center development is transparent, sustainable, and beneficial to local communities. While data centers can create economic opportunities, they should not strain local water supplies, increase energy costs for residents, or undermine Michigan’s clean energy goals.
I support requiring thorough environmental and infrastructure impact assessments, meaningful community input, and clear reporting on energy and water use before projects move forward. The state should also ensure that data centers contribute to local economic development, invest in clean energy, and do not place disproportionate burdens on communities that already face environmental challenges. For districts like House District 11, protecting public health, environmental quality, and infrastructure capacity must be a priority alongside economic growth.
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 most important step we can take on PFAS is to accelerate cleanup and remediation in affected communities while ensuring residents have access to transparent information and safe drinking water.
My perspective is informed by my studies at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, where I focused on Urban Planning with an emphasis on Environmental Science and Community Development. Through that work, I learned that environmental hazards like PFAS disproportionately impact communities that often have the fewest resources to respond. Effective solutions require not only strong environmental standards, but also community engagement, public transparency, and sustained investment in remediation.
As a legislator, I would prioritize securing resources for PFAS cleanup, strengthening monitoring and public reporting, and ensuring that affected communities are not left waiting years for action. Public health must come first, and Michigan should continue leading the way in addressing PFAS contamination.
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
I support requiring Michigan regulators to assess cumulative environmental and health impacts before approving new permits in overburdened communities, because residents should not be asked to bear an unfair share of pollution and environmental risk. Environmental justice is a major part of my campaign, and I believe every community deserves clean air, safe water, and a meaningful voice in decisions that affect their health and quality of life.
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?
Elected officials should play a greater role in holding utility companies accountable by ensuring rate increases are transparent, justified, and in the public interest. As Michiganders continue to face rising costs, we need stronger oversight to protect consumers, improve reliability, and ensure that utility investments deliver real benefits without placing an unfair burden on working families.
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 the top priority when considering the future of Line 5. Given the potential environmental and economic consequences of a spill in the Straits of Mackinac, I support a cautious, science-based approach that prioritizes rigorous environmental review, public transparency, and strong accountability measures.
As someone who studied environmental science and community development, I understand that decisions like this require balancing energy needs with long-term environmental protection. Michigan’s water resources are invaluable, and any future plan for Line 5 must demonstrate that it can protect the Great Lakes, public health, and future generations.
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?
I support legislation that helps ensure access to safe, affordable drinking water and protects vulnerable residents from losing this essential service. Water is a basic human need, and no family should have to choose between paying their water bill and meeting other necessities.
I would support income-based affordability programs, reasonable caps for low-income households, and stronger shutoff protections while also ensuring utilities have the resources needed to maintain critical infrastructure. For communities in House District 11, where affordability challenges and environmental justice concerns often intersect, access to clean and affordable water is a public health priority.
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
I support legislation that holds polluters accountable for cleaning up contaminated sites. Communities in House District 11 have lived with the consequences of industrial pollution for generations, and taxpayers should not be responsible for cleaning up contamination they did not create.
The recent "Dirty Dirt" scandal in Detroit is a clear example of why stronger accountability and enforcement are needed. Residents deserve confidence that environmental laws are being followed and that those who violate them are held responsible. With Detroit containing more than 1,700 known or suspected contaminated sites and brownfields, we must prioritize remediation, transparency, and environmental justice. Polluters should pay for the harm they cause, and cleanup efforts should be focused on protecting public health and restoring trust in communities that have been disproportionately impacted by environmental hazards.