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 Water — Water Affordability and Access to clean, affordable water. The rising cost of water is causing too many families to go without. While Detroit's water affordability program has seen great success, additional funding and statewide legislative protections are needed to support and protect everyone's access to affordable, clean water.
2. Clean Energy — Energy Burden and Utility Accountability. As utility rates continue to climb, so do shutoffs. When families can no longer protect themselves from extreme elements, devastating health and economic outcomes follow.
3. Air Pollution — Detroit is ranked 11th-worst in the country for short-term particle pollution. This pollution leads to high rates of asthma, early deaths, and many other serious health problems. Solutions: I am a co-sponsor of the "Polluter Pay" bill package, which would replace Michigan's weak laws and hold polluters responsible.
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
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 believe state ovesignt and guardrails should include these actions at a minimum:
Establish a Study Commission: Form an independent state commission to investigate and document the environmental, economic, and social impacts of data center development.
Cap Hyperscale Facilities and Strengthen Regulatory Framework: Place an evidence-based cap on the total number of hyperscale data centers permitted in Michigan, including those already approved. This can be paired with legislation that narrows the Michigan Public Service Commission’s (MPSC) discretion while increasing the enforcement powers of the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) to protect communities from harm. Finally, as the State’s top consumer advocate, the Office of the Attorney General role should be expanded to access and review unredacted documents, intervene or bring independent actions on behalf of ratepayers or have a contested hearing.
Implement Resource Monitoring and Limits: Place state-level monitoring and mandatory caps on the consumption of vital resources, especifically targeting the water and energy demands of these facilities.
Mandate Infrastructure Funding: Developing companies must fully fund the construction of all supporting infrastructure and cover ongoing costs, ensuring none of the financial burden falls on taxpayers or local utility ratepayers.
Require Renewable Energy Sources. Require the integration and expansion of renewable energy sources and the adoption of strict efficiency standards to avoid increasing reliance on non-renewable energy sources.
Strenthen Protective Provisions. Strenghten clawback and injuctive provisions in the event facilities violate their agreements.
Protect Local Autonomy: The state must not preempt local zoning, land use, permitting, or other decisions regarding data centers. State consumer protections should be a floor, not a ceiling, or a mechanism to override local decisions.
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?
I believe the most important step to address Michigan’s PFAS crisis in the next term is to pass the comprehensive PFAS legislative package that has been introduced by several House Democrats. As a proud co-sponsor of this package, my priority is enacting these critical protections into law.
This legislative package tackles contamination through several key actions:
Mandatory Notification: Requires EGLE to notify households when a potential PFAS site is being investigated within one mile of their home—a critical safety alert residents do not currently receive.
Product Bans & Corporate Accountability: Bans PFAS from cosmetics and a wide range of consumer products. It holds companies liable, allowing consumers to sue if testing proves a company continues to use these toxic chemicals.
Farmer Support: Establishes a dedicated grant program to assist Michigan farmers whose livelihoods and lands have been impacted by PFAS.
Regulation & Oversight: Regulates PFAS in biosolids and permanently codifies both the Michigan PFAS Action Response Team (MPART) to track state data and the Citizens Advisory Working Group to ensure community-led action.
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 co-sponsored the Protecting Overburdened Communities Act (see Question 1).
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?
Yes. Elected officials should play a proactive role in protecting Michigan residents from frequent, significant rate hikes.
First, legislators should keep Michigan's Clean Energy Act firmly in place. This framework requires utilities' long-range Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs) to factor climate, health, equity, and affordability directly into their decision-making. Crucially, the law equips the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) with stronger authority to review utility spending decisions. It also expands funding and resources for independent ratepayer advocacy, making it easier for consumer groups to actively participate in hearings and directly challenge utility rate hikes.
In addition to the above, more legislative action is necessary, including limiting a utility's return on investment and codifying winter shutoff protections for seniors and working families, automating and increasing consumer credits during service outages, and banning credit card surcharges on utility bills.
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 human safety, the protection of the Great Lakes, and the honoring of Tribal agreements should be prioritized above all else. I voted No on Michigan House Resolution 91, a resolution in support of President Trump and the US Army Corps of Engineers' emergency permitting for the Enbridge Line 5 Project.
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 support these measures.
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
This is essential for remediation, environmental preservation, and community health, and serves as a deterrent for bad actors. I am a co-sponsor of polluter pay legislation (see answer to question 1).