Flint Talk

SALINE TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS FOUGHT IT WHITMER BACKED IT ANYWAY

FLINT TALK EDITORIAL

Governor Gretchen Whitmer stood beside OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and other executives to celebrate a sixteen billion dollar AI data center project in Saline Township. The problem is that many of the people who actually live there spent months trying to stop it.

Residents raised concerns about farmland, local control, water consumption, electricity demand, and the long term impact the project could have on their community. Yet despite those concerns, the project moved forward and state leaders showed up to celebrate it.

Supporters call it economic development. Many residents see it differently.

This facility is expected to consume roughly 1.4 gigawatts of electricity, an amount comparable to the power used by more than one million homes. It will also require significant infrastructure and water resources to operate. None of that comes free.

The electricity has to be generated. Transmission lines have to be expanded. Substations have to be upgraded. Water systems have to be able to support the demand. Every one of those improvements costs money, and many residents are asking the same question. Who ultimately pays?

Michigan residents are already being asked to pay more. Electric rates have increased. Peak pricing has returned during the summer months. Insurance costs remain high. Housing costs continue to rise. Fuel tax increases are being debated. For many families, there is no room left in the budget for another increase.

Communities across America are already discovering that AI data centers do not just bring servers. They bring enormous demands for electricity, water, transmission lines, substations, and other infrastructure. Residents in other states are asking whether they will end up paying part of the bill through higher utility costs and increased strain on local resources.

Michigan is not the first state to face these concerns. Lawmakers in Maine have proposed restrictions on large data centers because of worries about electricity demand, grid reliability, and the impact on ratepayers. Across the country, communities are questioning whether the benefits justify the costs.

Electricity is only part of the story. Large data centers can consume millions of gallons of water per day. Communities around the country have already raised concerns about local water supplies, infrastructure demands, and whether taxpayers will be expected to support the expansion needed to accommodate these facilities.

Government officials are once again telling people not to worry. For many Americans, that message no longer carries the weight it once did. After years of government failures, cost overruns, fraud scandals, broken promises, and rising bills, many residents no longer believe it is their responsibility to prove why they should be concerned. They believe it is the government's responsibility to prove why they should not.

The people of Saline Township attended meetings, voiced their concerns, and tried to stop the project. In the end, one of the largest AI developments in the country moved forward anyway.

For many residents, that did not look like representation. It looked like local concerns taking a back seat to the interests of billion dollar corporations and powerful investors.

Years ago, a political candidate became famous for saying, "The rent is too damn high." Today, many Michigan residents might say everything is too damn high. Rent is too high. Groceries are too high. Insurance is too high. Electricity is too high. Taxes are too high.

That is why many residents are not celebrating. They are asking a simple question:

If projects like this are so good for the public, why do ordinary people always seem to end up paying more?

Consumers Energy Raises Rates Again as Michigan’s Most Expensive Hours Return

FLINT, MI — Michigan residents are now paying more for electricity twice over. Consumers Energy’s latest rate increase took effect May 1, raising the average residential bill by about $6.46 per month, and now the company’s higher summer peak pricing has returned, charging customers about 24.5 cents per kilowatt hour between 2 p.m. and 7 p.m. on weekdays, compared to about 19.7 cents during off peak hours. The summer rates began June 1 and remain in effect through September 30.

The Michigan Public Service Commission approved a $276.6 million rate increase for Consumers Energy in March. That increase followed another approved electric rate hike of about $154 million last year, continuing a string of increases that critics say have pushed Michigan utility bills higher year after year.

Now customers are entering the hottest months of the year with the company’s summer pricing structure back in place. Under the plan, electricity costs roughly five cents more per kilowatt hour during weekday afternoons when air conditioners, fans, appliances, and household demand are at their highest.

Consumers Energy says the higher afternoon rates are meant to reduce stress on the electric grid by encouraging people to shift energy use into the morning, evening, and weekend hours. Critics argue the policy hits families exactly when many have little choice but to run air conditioning during Michigan heat waves.

Adding to the frustration, Consumers Energy announced plans for yet another electric rate case just days after receiving approval for the latest increase. State records show the company signaled its intent to seek another rate hike as soon as it became eligible under Michigan law.

For many Michigan residents, the question is becoming familiar: how many rate hikes can households absorb before electric service becomes unaffordable?

Do you think Michigan utility companies are improving service enough to justify these repeated rate increases?

Whitmer Says No To 2028 In The Morning Then Maybe By Afternoon

MACKINAC ISLAND, MI — Governor Gretchen Whitmer gave two different answers on the same day about whether she may run for president in 2028.

In the morning, Whitmer told Fox Two Detroit she would not be part of the 2028 presidential field.

“I will not be one of them in 2028. I can tell you that,” Whitmer said.

She also said she was looking forward to taking a break after her second term as Michigan governor ends and was not focused on running for the White House.

But later that afternoon, after her comments drew attention, Whitmer softened her answer.

After her keynote address at the Mackinac Policy Conference, Whitmer told reporters she had been answering what she called the “hundredth question of the morning” about 2028.

Then she shifted to a different answer.

“I never thought I would run for governor, so I guess I should know better than to say never say never,” Whitmer said.

Whitmer said she has no announcement and is not currently planning a presidential campaign, but her afternoon comments changed the message from no to maybe.

For critics, that sounds less like clarification and more like political flip flopping. In the morning, Whitmer gave a firm no. By afternoon, that no sounded more like maybe.

That matters because Whitmer is still governor of Michigan. Voters may wonder whether her focus is fully on the job she has now, or whether she is already looking toward the White House.

And for many Michiganders, there is another issue that still sticks: Whitmer promised to fix the damn roads. If she could not get that done the way people expected here in Michigan, why should voters believe she is ready to lead the entire country?

If Whitmer sounds this wishy washy about whether she wants to run for president in 2028, is this the type of leadership voters want in the White House?

Michigan House Republicans Use Fuzzy Math On Property Tax And Utility Savings

LANSING, MI — Michigan House Republicans are claiming families could save around $1,400 a year under a House plan to cut property taxes and roll back utility rates.

But the math looks much different for working class homeowners.

At Flint Talk, we are happy to see any kind of tax cut or refund from the government. If people can get some of their own tax money back, that is a good thing. But why can’t politicians be honest about what the average person is really going to save?

The plan would not eliminate all property taxes. It would remove the 6 mill State Education Tax, which is charged on a home’s taxable value, not the full market price of the house.

That matters because a home valued at $100,000 is not taxed like a $100,000 bill. In Michigan, property taxes are based on taxable value, which can be much lower because of the state equalized value and taxable value caps.

For example, if a homeowner has a taxable value of $34,000, removing the 6 mill state tax would save about $204 a year.

That is about $17 a month.

Even if someone had a taxable value of $50,000, the savings would be about $300 a year.

That is only $25 a month.

So when Michigan House Republicans throw around a big number like $1,400 a year, they are not talking about property tax savings alone. They appear to be mixing property tax cuts with claimed utility savings and other costs.

The utility savings are also smaller than the headline sounds. If the energy rollback saves customers around $1 billion statewide, that works out to roughly $137 to $238 a year for many households, depending on how the savings are divided.

That means a working class homeowner may be looking at something closer to $341 to $442 a year in combined savings, not $1,400.

Three hundred dollars is better than nothing. But if politicians are doing something good, they should not have to stretch the math to sell it.

Are Michigan House Republicans giving voters honest numbers, or using fuzzy math to make the plan sound bigger than it really is?