Whitmer: State workers must report health threats, and bosses must listen

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and  Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist II address reporters on Jan. 2 2019 before she signed her first official executive directive. (Bridge photo by Jim Malewitz)

Related: Gov. Whitmer seeks speedy public record response, but not yet for her office
Related: Whitmer administration changing tone around Michigan marijuana regulation

LANSING — Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer on Wednesday used her first full day in office to mandate that state employees speak up when they discover urgent threats to public health and safety — an effort she hopes will bolster their morale and prevent a repeat of scandals such as the Flint water crisis.

In another nod to environmental protection, the new governor also announced her first steps toward disrupting her predecessor’s recent approval of an oil pipeline tunnel below the Straits of Mackinac.

Related: Michigan Gov. Whitmer sets ‘equal pay’ rules to boost women in state hiring
Related: Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder signs Line 5 tunnel bill; appoints authority members

Fresh off her inauguration a day earlier, Whitmer, a Democrat, signed an executive directive requiring state employees to immediately report to their department director or agency chief any “imminent threat to the public health, safety or welfare.”

The directive also requires agency higher-ups to swiftly assess — and take action — on credible reports while communicating with the governor’s chief compliance officer, creating a pipeline for the information to reach Whitmer.

“We’re here today to make sure that our state employees — our dedicated public servants — are empowered to do their job for the people of Michigan,” Whitmer told reporters Wednesday, calling the directive a “failsafe” for employees who feel they are not being heard.

The directive applies to all state agencies, but the Department of Environmental Quality loomed particularly large in the announcement.

Liesl Eichler Clark, the new DEQ director, and several other agency employees flanked Whitmer as she signed the directive.

The agency is still trying to rebuild public trust after its series of errors helped trigger the Flint water crisis in 2014, which led to charges against 15 state and local officials. The DEQ is among several agencies, Whitmer said, where employees are facing “serious morale problems.”

“The people of Michigan deserve peace of mind that their government is working to protect them,” Clark said in a statement. “I am committed to having an open-door policy, listening actively, empowering employees to speak up, and reassuring them that they have protections under the law if they believe there are threats to public health and safety.”

Robert Delaney, a DEQ Superfund specialist, was among those standing behind Whitmer on Wednesday. He’s the staffer who grew frustrated with his superiors’ years of inaction on contamination from hazardous and indestructible PFAS chemicals — now increasingly found in Michigan’s waters — after he authored a 2012 report on the threat.

Related: Michigan waited years to heed warnings on PFAS dangers, expert says
Environmentalists outraged Michigan warning about PFAS went unheeded

“I was so disturbed from the start that — everything that happened, I was just trying to get someone to listen,” Delaney testified in November at a PFAS-related summit organized by U.S. Sen. Gary Peters.

Whitmer’s directive states that “action to prevent threats to public health, safety and welfare should take precedence over any ill-advised attempt to protect the reputation of a department or agency.”

The directive requires agency leaders to communicate with Whitmer’s chief compliance officer — Corina Pena Andorfer — following employees’ reports of concerns regardless of whether they agree a public health or safety threat exists.

It is not clear what would happen to state employees who know of a threat but do not report it. Asked about that Wednesday, Whitmer referred the question to Andorfer, who said her office is still working on policy to respond to such scenarios.

Line 5 action

The directive wasn’t Whitmer’s only significant move in her first hours on the job. She also asked new Attorney General Dana Nessel, a fellow Democrat, to weigh in on the legality of recent legislation — and dealmaking by her predecessor — concerning the fate of Line 5.

During his final weeks in office, Gov. Rick Snyder signed Public Act 359 into law, creating a new Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority to oversee construction and operation of a $350 million to $500 million tunnel that would encase Enbridge Energy’s controversial oil pipeline beneath the Straits of Mackinac.

Snyder’s plan, pushed through the Republican-controlled Legislature during a fast-moving lame duck session, would swap out the aging twin pipelines running along the bottom of the Straits for a new pipe that would be protected in a bedrock tunnel 100 feet below the lake bottom.

Snyder and his supporters have called a tunnel the best way to protect the Straits while keeping energy flowing to the Upper Peninsula.

On the campaign trail, both Whitmer and Nessel criticized the tunnel plan and vowed to shut down the pipeline, siding with environmentalists who fear a leak and have instead pushed to shut down the pipeline.

“Resolving any legal uncertainty regarding PA 359, the Mackinac Straits Corridor Authority and action taken by the authority is necessary to assure that we can take all action necessary to protect the Great Lakes, protect our drinking water and protect Michigan jobs,” Whitmer said in a statement. “I pledged to take action on the Line 5 pipeline on day one as governor, and I am holding true to that campaign promise.”

Nessel said Wednesday she was eager to weigh in on the matter.

“There are serious and significant concerns regarding PA 359, which the previous governor and legislature initiated and passed without the care and caution one would expect for an issue that will have a monumental impact on our state,” Nessel said in a statement. “Governor Whitmer has rightly – and immediately – raised important questions about the legality and statutory underpinnings of this Act and my office is prepared to tackle her request for an opinion immediately.”

Some experts say disrupting Snyder’s deal in court could prove difficult for a variety of reasons — including language in the state’s recent agreement with Enbridge aimed at thwarting certain legal arguments critics have raised, such as that Enbridge has violated its lease of state bottomlands.

But in her request dated Jan. 1, Whitmer asked Nessel to evaluate six legal questions unrelated to Enbridge’s lease with the state.

Among the questions Whitmer wants Nessel to consider: whether the act was properly titled, whether the act too dramatically departed from the bill originally filed, and whether it violated state law by giving members six year terms rather than four.

Responding to the development late Wednesday, Ryan Duffy, an Enbridge spokesman, said the company “looks forward” to working with Whitmer and Nessel.

“Enbridge also believes that the time is right to build for the future. This tunnel project would make a safe pipeline even safer and reflects Enbridge’s steadfast commitment to protecting the Great Lakes while safely meeting Michigan’s energy needs,” Duffy said

House Speaker Lee Chatfield, R-Levering, appeared to respond to Whitmer’s opinion request Wednesday afternoon in a tweet.

“I support building bridges AND tunnels, especially when it comes to transporting energy resources so hard-working Michigan families can heat their homes. Let’s keep our Peninsulas connected and uphold our constitutional legislation,” he wrote.

Chatfield did not immediately return a voicemail on Wednesday. 

Attorney General opinions are not binding on the courts, but can be binding on state agencies and officers.

Facts matter. Trust matters. Journalism matters.

If you learned something from the story you're reading please consider supporting our work. Your donation allows us to keep our Michigan-focused reporting and analysis free and accessible to all. All donations are voluntary, but for as little as $1 you can become a member of Bridge Club and support freedom of the press in Michigan during a crucial election year.

Pay with VISA Pay with MasterCard Pay with American Express Donate now

Comment Form

Add new comment

Dear Reader: We value your thoughts and criticism on the articles, but insist on civility. Criticizing comments or ideas is welcome, but Bridge won’t tolerate comments that are false or defamatory or that demean, personally attack, spread hate or harmful stereotypes. Violating these standards could result in a ban.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.


Wed, 01/02/2019 - 5:14pm

Basically, ordering people to do what they were supposed to be doing and trying to find a way to shutdown the pipeline, which Granholm couldn't do,and stop the replacement of it.

Wed, 01/02/2019 - 6:53pm

The first volley of coming four years worth of empty meaningless junctures and jargon. But what else should we expect?. Where do you start with “imminent threat to the public health, safety or welfare.”? Imminent? Threat? Public health? And who's opinion do we take? This is as wide or narrow as anyone wants to make it. But she cares and today that's all that matters.

Kevin Grand
Wed, 01/02/2019 - 7:12pm

"It is not clear what would happen to state employees who know of a threat but do not report it. Asked about that Wednesday, Whitmer referred the question to Andorfer, who said her office is still working on policy to respond to such scenarios. "

For a candidate who claims to be big on building things, it would certainly help to have all the pieces in place before you even think about beginning.

Fri, 01/04/2019 - 8:16pm

Do you ever not complain? If she had the policy ready to go yesterday, you'd complain that she was rushing

Fri, 01/04/2019 - 6:23am

Build a questionable oil tunnel, then transfer operational authority and liability to the State of Michigan and taxpayers.? Not a good idea!