Boston-based engineering firm agrees to pay $53 million to Flint residents in water crisis lawsuit
The lawsuit against Boston-based Veolia North America was filed on behalf of 26,000 individuals who were impacted by the lead-contaminated water. Attorney General Dana Nessel says the state will dismiss its separate lawsuit against the company in exchange for the latest settlement.
"After years of drawn-out legal battles, this settlement finally closes a chapter for Flint residents," Nessel said in a statement. "While no amount of money can fully repair the damage caused to the Flint community, these funds will provide additional resources to those directly impacted, especially Flint children, by this preventable crisis."
In a statement following the settlement, Veolia North America says it "stands behind its good work in Flint."
"The only jury who had to consider the facts and hear the truth did not find any evidence to say otherwise," the company said, pointing to a trial in 2022 that ended in a mistrial.
"For the past eight years, we have been defending our work and our reputation against baseless attacks," the company went on to say. "As the facts of the 2022 trial clearly demonstrate, the Flint water crisis was caused by government officials. It is a disgrace that nearly a decade-plus since the crisis was set in motion, still no person who was actually responsible has been held accountable. This final settlement is in no way an admission of responsibility, but the best resolution to avoid decades of costly, unproductive, and time-consuming litigation, and to bring closure for all parties involved."
Flint, which was under state-appointed managers, used the Flint River for water in 2014-15, but the water wasn't treated the same as water previously supplied by a Detroit-area provider. As a result, lead leached throughout the vast pipe system.
In 2019, former Republican Gov. Rick Snyder, who was in office at the time of the crisis, faced misdemeanor charges. However, those charges were later dismissed.
The state was sued due to environmental regulators and other officials missing opportunities to fix Flint's water problems during the lead crisis. Flint returned to a regional water supplier in the fall of 2015.
Flint families sued Veolia North America and Lockwood, Andrews & Newman, known as LAN, accusing both firms of not doing enough to get the city to treat the highly corrosive water or to urge a return to a regional water supplier.
As a result, Veolia agreed to a $25 million settlement in 2024, while families reached a settlement with LAN in December 2022.
Veolia claims that it was hired as a consultant 10 months after the switch to the Flint River to conduct a one-week assessment focused on carcinogens instead of lead. The company claims it received test results from government officials showing that Flint's water complied with specific lead standards. It also claims that it made recommendations to city officials, including on corrosion control, and did not contribute to the operation of the Flint Water Treatment Plant.
"With this litigation now behind us, we at VNA will continue to fulfill our mission of providing clean water to millions of customers across the country and doing our part to tackle climate change, reduce pollution and promote conservation of our air, land, and water," the company said on Friday.
The latest settlement adds to a list of lawsuits in the water crisis. In 2021, a judge approved a $626 million settlement with residents and others impacted. About $600 million of the money was coming from the state of Michigan, which was accused of repeatedly overlooking the risks of switching the water. That settlement is the largest reported in state history.
The rest of the money was coming from the city, McLaren Regional Medical Center and Rowe Professional Services Co. Officials said more than half of the money settlement was going to children who were minors when they were first exposed to the water.
Ten years after the water crisis, the city upgraded the water facility and offered tours to residents.
"We want Flint residents to understand how far Flint's water infrastructure has come since the early days of the water crisis, as well as the work that still lays ahead," Mayor Sheldon Neeley said back in 2024.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
3 minutes ago
GOP Rep. Tim Burchett doubles down on call for release of Epstein files
Tennessee Republican Rep. Tim Burchett on Sunday again called for the release of the Department of Justice's evidence against the late accused pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, part of a growing cadre of Republicans calling for transparency in the case. Speaking with "This Week" co-anchor Martha Raddatz, Burchett said he wanted the Epstein files to be released, but cautioned against releasing material that might expose the identities of victims and others in the files who may be innocent. But Burchett pushed back against criticism leveled by President Donald Trump, who earlier this week called Republicans demanding the release of the documents 'foolish' and baselessly claimed the Epstein files were a hoax concocted by Democrats. 'Was I a little ticked off he said that stuff? Sure, I was, but I'm a big boy, Ma'am,' Burchett said. 'We're playing in the big leagues right now.' Trump has since directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to move to unseal grand jury evidence in Epstein's case, which Burchett called 'a start.' 'I don't think we're ever going to get to the bottom of … all of it, Ma'am,' Burchett said. 'You know, this town doesn't give up its secrets very easy.' Asked by Raddatz if he believed Bondi should resign, Burchett said he criticized her communication on the issue but stopped short of calling for her to step down. 'I have a saying: It's not how you start, it's how you finish. If she finishes strong on this, then I'm all for it,' Burchett said. 'I'm sure the learning curve is steep, and I think she blundered in the beginning, I really do, as most Americans do.'
CBS News
4 minutes ago
- CBS News
CBS News poll finds support for Trump's deportation program falls; Americans call for more focus on prices
After six months that included a string of achievements on President Trump's legislative goals, views of his second term are increasingly defined by the difference between his political base, which likes what it sees, and the rest of the country, which has growing doubt. On the economic front, it comes from continued calls to focus more on prices, rather than tariffs, which most Americans oppose. And now, there's the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which at least initially, most believe will help the wealthy. On matters of deportation, differences hinge on who, and how many, Americans see as being targeted, as well as the use of detention facilities. Here again, the Republican and MAGA political base remain overwhelmingly approving of it all, but the rest of the American public has become less so. (On another matter, by comparison, most say the case of Jeffrey Epstein is not very important in their evaluations of the president, and in particular, the president's MAGA base remains overwhelmingly approving of his job performance, especially on immigration.) Most now say the administration is not prioritizing dangerous criminals for deportation and also is deporting more people than they thought it would. The program had majority support earlier in the term, but today it does not, moving along with that perception of who is being deported. Meanwhile, most disapprove of the way the administration is using detention facilities. Approval of the deportation program has slipped over these months to become slightly net-negative now, with support becoming more exclusively drawn from Republicans and MAGA identifiers. Hispanic Americans, along with Americans overall, say Hispanic people are being targeted more than others for searches, and those who think so say that's unfair. As a result, Hispanic approval of the deportation program and of Mr. Trump more generally is lower today than it was earlier in the term. (For broader context, too, during the 2024 election, Mr. Trump made gains with Hispanic voters and started his term with approval from half of Hispanics. Today he has one-third.) This, despite widespread public views that Mr. Trump's policies have reduced border crossings. That suggests that Mr. Trump's declining marks on immigration generally are more connected to his deportation program than activity at the border, these days. And on balance, it's an example of how a policy pendulum can swing in American politics: in the first year of Joe Biden's presidency, most Americans said he and Democrats were not being tough enough on immigration. Today, most Americans say Mr. Trump and the Republicans are being too tough. Half the country (again, largely outside that political base) now says the president is focusing too much on deportation. What do people want Mr. Trump to focus on? That part isn't news: it's still prices, as it's been throughout the term. Seven in 10 say the administration isn't doing enough to try to lower them. Inflation and prices are important to most in how they evaluate Mr. Trump overall. Nearly two-thirds now disapprove of how Mr. Trump is handling inflation, the highest disapproval for him on that yet. And for the first time, a plurality says the administration is focusing too much on cutting spending. More broadly, and after having campaigned heavily on immigration and inflation, most Americans still say Mr. Trump is doing what he promised in the campaign. However, fewer say that now than did near the beginning of his term, with the difference being in part, fewer independents and fewer Democrats thinking so. Republicans largely say it's consistent. On the debate, such as it is, around interest rates, Americans are split in their general desire for the economy — whether the bigger priority should be to keep interest rates where they are to control inflation, or lower them to make borrowing money easier. Amid the discussion surrounding Mr. Trump and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, a large majority say the Fed should act independently from the president. But there's a caveat to all this, as many admit they don't know a lot about what the Fed does. Powell gets mixed confidence, with Democrats expressing more confidence in him than Republicans, perhaps another example of how partisanship may stand in for more technical economic viewpoints. Six in 10 disapprove of the One Big Beautiful Bill legislation. Views of it today are similar to what they were before the bill was passed: Most think it will hurt poor people and help the wealthy. Fewer believe it will help the middle or working class. With so many Americans saying they don't know a lot of the bill's specifics, the initial response to it appears very partisan, opening up what may be a months-long fight to define and sell it. And so Mr. Trump's overall approval also continues to slide as it has consistently, if incrementally, since the start of his term. It's now closer to where it spent a lot of time in his first term, in the low 40s, with similar structure underneath of negative sentiment beyond that strong approval from the base. For all the week's punditry, the matter over the Epstein files isn't affecting Mr. Trump's overall approval among his MAGA base. For one thing, Republicans and MAGA like his handling of immigration, especially, and say they gauge him on that more. The Epstein case doesn't compare on importance. Few Republicans, including MAGA, say issues surrounding the Epstein case matter "a lot" to how they evaluate Mr. Trump's presidency. That said, there is some relative dissatisfaction within the GOP, including in the MAGA base, with how the administration is handling it. Americans do want the files released — that includes Democrats, Republicans, MAGA in particular, across a wide range of groups. Americans overwhelmingly suspect that the files contain damaging information about powerful and wealthy people. This CBS News/YouGov survey was conducted with a nationally representative sample of 2,343 U.S. adults interviewed between July 16-18, 2025. The sample was weighted to be representative of adults nationwide according to gender, age, race, and education, based on the U.S. Census American Community Survey and Current Population Survey, as well as 2024 presidential vote. The margin of error is ±2.5 points.
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's fans keep calling him "daddy." But there's a limit to this parenting metaphor.
America has long had daddy issues with the presidency, but now they're threatening to undermine democracy. It started with George Washington: 'the father of our country,' as we're all taught, though he had no children of his own. In recent years, it's included Bill Clinton, whose biological father died before he was born and who fought with his stepfather; George W. Bush, one of two presidents whose fathers were also presidents; and Barack Obama, who wrote a whole book about a father he barely knew. For his part, Donald Trump took over his father Fred's real estate business and adopted Fred Trump's strict 'winners and losers' mentality. He's a father of five kids by three mothers. And he's convinced his supporters that he's something of a surrogate father to them — and to the country — in a troubling use of rhetoric. At first, the framing was just about Trump returning to the White House, which was unsettling but made a bit of sense. At a pre-inauguration event, musician Kid Rock added the words 'daddy's home' to the song he was performing. Around the same time, die-hard MAGA Republican Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida said on a Fox News panel 'Daddy's back,' Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado tweeted 'Daddy's home,' and conservative influencer Charlie Kirk posted, 'Dad is home.' Things heated up in June. When discussing Trump's expletive-laden comment on Israel and Iran, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte used a metaphor: 'Daddy has to sometimes use strong language.' Trump ate it up with a spoon, imitating it for the cameras later. 'He did it very affectionately, 'Daddy, you're my daddy,'' he said. The White House then posted video of Trump set to Usher's song 'Hey Daddy (Daddy's Home),' while the campaign sold red T-shirts with the word 'DADDY' beneath his mug shot. But for some of Trump's fans, there's a darker undercurrent to the rhetoric. After the California wildfires burned down his home in Malibu, conservative actor Mel Gibson described Trump visiting the state as 'like Daddy's arrived, and he's taking his belt off.' At a 2024 campaign rally, conservative commentator Tucker Carlson compared the U.S. to a defiant 15-year-old girl whose angry father has come home go give her a 'vigorous spanking' for being a 'bad little girl.' That lines up neatly with an argument cognitive linguist George Lakoff made in his 1996 book 'Moral Politics' that American politics is built around an overwrought parenting metaphor, with conservatives serving as the 'strict father' and liberals as the 'nurturant parent.' This frame explains a lot about Trump's political agenda. Just as the strict father defends the family against outside threats, Trump pledges to protect the country from immigrants that he casts as violent criminals. His cuts to everything from foreign aid to the Federal Emergency Management Agency to Medicaid are framed as 'tough love' that will teach self-reliance. And, of course, strict fathers expect total obedience from their children — which has unsettling implications for the future of American democracy. There are several ways to respond. For people seeking favors from Trump, it makes sense to play it up. Rutte, who is surely hoping to keep the United States from leaving or otherwise disregarding NATO, earned a lot of goodwill from the president with that one remark. The downside is that this only encourages Trump to see himself this way and it validates his self-image among his supporters. Critics also use the language to mock Trump, as when a Democratic state lawmaker in Texas criticized his colleagues for considering a proposal pushed by the president as doing 'whatever Daddy Donald Trump asks of them.' This works as a way of criticizing other politicians by making them seem weak by comparison and highlights the weirdness of the whole 'daddy' thing to the president's critics. But it doesn't do much to undermine his support. Another tactic would be to argue that the frame is wrong, like literally every person who has tapped out 'Trump is NOT my daddy' on social media after someone called him that. But like most of what's posted on social media, this doesn't do much to persuade anyone and only ends up giving the metaphor more exposure. Instead of refuting a metaphor this way, Lakoff recommends instead 'shifting the frame' to a new one, but this particular one is so ingrained in American politics that may not be so easy. Another possibility would be to go after the metaphor directly. You could argue that Trump is not like a beneficent father, but more like a dad who doesn't live up to his obligations to keep the family safe, manage its finances and provide basic support. You can tell his supporters that it's not their fault that he let them down and affirm their disappointment. And you can point the way toward an alternative model of presidents who keeps up their end of the bargain. In the real world, strict parenting works in the short term, as children learn to be compliant, like the von Trapps responding to a whistle. But in the long run it usually fails, as they come to resent their parents for stifling them. We may find a similar thing happens in politics. Trump is demanding obedience now, and all too often getting it. But there will likely be a cost to that down the road, for both Trump and the country. This article was originally published on
