Quote Originally Posted by Dumpling View Post
This is a bit more backstory about the dams. [[Before yesterday's flooding I knew nothing of all of this.) Understanding all of the problems, both structural and political, local residents on the lakes formed a group to buy the dams from Boyce Trusts.

[[The structural problems are on full view on global news right now. The political problems include a Michigan Tea Party approved Republican legislature that has in recent decades been not at all given to funding infrastructure and Dems, such as Gov. Whitmer, who do advocate funding for infrastructure, but there is a suspicion that this is as much for bondholders' benefit, as for the benefit of Michigan wage earners.
THEORETICALLY SPEAKING, at the start of her term in office, Governor Whitmer could have advocated to the Michigan legislature that Boyce Trusts be allocated funds to upgrade the dams. THEORETICALLY the legislature would have readily approved this request. IN REALITY there was difficulty even in obtaining funding to improve roads.)

https://www.ourmidland.com/news/arti...m-14947027.php

There was an acceptable purchase agreement and an action plan.
Action either from a Democratic governor or a Republican legislature was not at all required. The only problem was, Mother Nature didn't bother to hold off on the 4 inch spring rainfall until year 2024.

[[The flood stage volume on the Tittabawassee is about 25 Detroit WWTP's right now if the news accounts are correct.)

[[I notice the phrase "delegated authority" - that is kind of like "Great Lakes Water Authority". It does kind of imply more allegiance to bondholders rather than county executives or county workforces or ratepayers. I notice where the legislature was not arranging for ownership to stay as Boyce Trusts - compare with legislative advocacy for the Morouns and Ambassador Bridge.)
Sounds like the locals were interested in acquiring the dams and paying a special assessment tax to maintain water levels for the value of their benefit for recreation and to maintain their property value.
Did not look at the court ruling about maintaining legal water levels. Was the owner company trying to lower levels in lieu of proper maintenance of the dams?