Y

ou could go swimming 
right now, but you 
didn’t necessarily plan 
on it. You knew it was going 
to rain, but did you expect 
giant puddles to swallow the 
sidewalk, the road or your 
shoes for that matter? In this 
beautifully constructed city 
that we call home, the last 
thing that we think about is its 
imperfection. Ann Arbor, new 
and old, consists of aesthetic, 
impressive architecture and 
infrastructure that not only 
meets the logistical demands 
of the city, but also perfectly 
complements the abundant 
natural 
scenery 
that 
surrounds it. Nevertheless, 
what if I told you that’s not 
good enough?
When vast puddles form 
after one mild rain in areas 
around 
campus 
that 
are 
frequently occupied by foot 
traffic, 
one 
consequence, 
among many, of an ineffective 
stormwater system becomes 
completely 
obvious. 
The 
design 
of 
our 
current 
stormwater 
and 
sewer 
systems 
pertain 
to 
past 
observations of precipitation 
and land use which have 
evidently shifted over time 
with changing climate and 
urbanization. Thus, what we 
can truly recognize is that 
the city of Ann Arbor has 
always considered molding 
public infrastructure in a 
way that best suits the needs 
of the times. Now, it’s time 
that it continues taking steps 
toward executing plans to 
renovate 
infrastructure 
in a way that supports the 
University 
of 
Michigan’s 
goals 
for 
sustainability 
while 
maintaining 
strong 
output 
in 
all 
important 
economic 
sectors. 
Perhaps 
more 
importatly, 
strong 
infrastructure 
and 
the 
removal of excess stormwater 
has 
exponential 
effects 
for 
our 
environment, 
particularly when it comes to 
preventing erosion and water 
contamination. 
In 
order 
to 
do 
this 
effectively, the city has to 
have a particular mentality 
already 
reflected 
in 
those 
who 
specialize 
in 
environmental 
and 
urban 
sustainability. 
Branko 
Kerkez, assistant professor 
of Civil and Environmental 
Engineering, is the leader 
of a national research team 
organized under the National 
Science Foundation’s Smart 
& Connected Communities 
program. 
This 
team 
is 
composed of researchers from 
various 
other 
institutions 
who are investigating the use 
of smart stormwater systems 
in 
reducing 
flooding 
and 
improving water quality. In 

essence, Kerkez is looking to 
improve the functionality of 
current stormwater systems 
by implementing sensors and 
other autonomous technology 
to enhance system capacity 
during large storm events. 
However, 
rather 
than 
completely 
replace 
old 
infrastructure, 
Kerkez 
emphasizes the benefits and 
practicality of implementing 
green 
infrastructure 
into 
existing 
infrastructure: 
“Instead of saying new and 
expensive construction is our 
only option, can we use what 
we have in a better way?”
The 
sensors 
being 
developed by the research 
team 
are 
multifaceted 
to 
account 
for 
all 
aspects 
of 
water 
passing 
through 
a 
stormwater 
system. 
In 
essence, they will run on 
real-time 
control 
systems 
that 
allow 
a 
stormwater 
system 
to 
enable 
flood 
control 
with 
a 
detention 
basin as well as to enable 
water quality control with 
a retention basin based on 
the precipitation conditions 

present. The research team 
expresses 
confidence 
that 
the hybridization of these 
stormwater 
system 
sites 
will benefit the quality of 
the water and the health 
of the overall surrounding 
ecosystem, 
claiming 
that 
temporarily 
converting 
a 
detention basin to a retention 
basin and vice versa can 
increase 
the 
removal 
efficiency of total suspended 
solids 
by 
60 
percent. 
In 
addition, sensors will control 
the function of above-ground 
and underground valves for 
the system to most effectively 
regulate groundwater flow 
and measure moisture and 
water quality at any given 
time. As a result, retrofitting 
existing stormwater systems 
with 
cost-effective 
smart 
technology 
will 
give 
the 
overall 
stormwater 
system 
an 
adaptive 
capability 
to 
constantly redesign itself in 
response to changing weather 

conditions.
With this newly designed 
system 
providing 
clear 
benefits for water quality 
and several advantages to the 
functionality of stormwater 
systems, 
it’s 
natural 
to 
agree with the efforts of 
Kerkez 
and 
the 
research 
team in implementing sensor 
technology to enhance this 
aspect of the city; However, 
this doesn’t necessarily mean 
that it’s easy for all of us to 
agree with efforts like these. 
While we as a generation 
have come across countless 
opportunities to improve the 
quality of our surrounding 
environment, we have always 
felt some reluctance toward 
seizing them because they 
often involve a change in 
lifestyle or an advancement 
that feels like it could be too 
advanced for what we’re used 
to. In other words, while it 
is natural to pursue in life 
what is morally correct, it is 
perhaps even more natural 
to remain stagnant and live 
life how we’ve always done 
it. 
I 
believe 
this 
closed-
mindedness 
is 
what 
is 
undermining our local and 
global environment as we 
speak.
Thankfully, the governing 
bodies of the University have 
recognized the importance of 
adjusting our infrastructure 
to suit the environmental 
demands of the times — teams 
from Facilities & Operations 
are currently in the process 
of installing a stormwater 
infiltration system on Central 
Campus 
near 
the 
Diag, 
where the massive ponds of 
water collect during rains. 
However, many institutions 
and industrial corporations 
everywhere 
have 
failed 
to 
take 
similar 
strides 
toward 
managing 
their 
infrastructure effectively in 
relation to the environment. 
Showing 
that 
we 
care 
about creating a healthier 
environment in accordance 
with 
a 
more 
efficient 
infrastructural design is only 
half of the journey, and, for 
most, it’s the only half that 
we have control over. So we 
can leave it to Kerkez and the 
professionals to execute these 
ideals that are progressing 
toward 
sustainability, 
but it’s important that we 
instill these ideals into our 
professionals and authorities 
with an urgency that makes 
them prevalent and necessary 
to be addressed so that we 
as a society can progress our 
environmental and economic 
sectors equally.

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A— Thursday, October 25, 2018

Emma Chang
Ben Charlson
Joel Danilewitz
Samantha Goldstein
Emily Huhman

Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
Lucas Maiman
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland

Anu Roy-Chaudhury
Alex Satola
Ali Safawi
Ashley Zhang
Sam Weinberger

DAYTON HARE
Managing Editor

420 Maynard St. 
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

ALEXA ST. JOHN
Editor in Chief
 ANU ROY-CHAUDHURY AND 
ASHLEY ZHANG
Editorial Page Editors

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board. 
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

ALEX KUBIE | COLUMN

When Trump makes landfall
I 

remember 
the 
tweets. 
The (almost too fitting) 
image 
of 
former 
Presidential 
candidate 
Donald 
Trump 
holding up the 
rainbow 
flag 
in front of his 
thousands 
of 
supporters, 
as 
if that colored 
piece 
of 
cloth 
even knew the 
truth 
of 
what 
lay ahead. I even 
remember 
the 
assurances 
of friends and loved ones to 
not worry; Jared and Ivanka 
were sure to serve as a buffer 
between the most powerful 
man in the world and the 
already-fragile 
rights 
that 
had 
just 
delicately 
been 
established.
Yet, 
just 
like 
many 
preceding 
presidential 
administrations, 
a 
people 
to fear — to unite against 
through deep-seated bonds of 
animus — was needed.
While Muslims, those of 
Mexican descent and even 
victims 
of 
sexual 
assault 
were cast aside, a group 
that lawmakers and elected 
officials have exploited for 
the past century as a means to 
elicit political gain once again 
returned to the forefront of 
our chief of state’s vitriol: the 
LGBT community.
Now, 
this 
past 
week, 
reports of a memo by the 
Trump 
Administration 
“to 
establish a legal definition 
of sex under Title IX, the 
federal civil rights law that 
bans gender discrimination 
in 
education 
programs 
that 
receive 
government 
financial 
assistance” 
has 
surfaced. 
This 
narrow 
definition “defining gender 
as a biological, immutable 
condition 
determined 
by 
genitalia at birth,” would 
“eradicate federal recognition 
of the estimated 1.4 million 
Americans who have opted 
to recognize themselves — 
surgically or otherwise — as 
a gender other than the one 
they were born into.”
While this may not come 
as 
a 
surprise 
for 
many, 

the 
administration 
has 
previously moved to limit 
the 
rights 
of 
transgender 
individuals, the memo 
serves as the boldest 
course of action yet to 
strip the transgender 
community — people 
who are our neighbors, 
who pay taxes, who 
serve this country — 
from their respective 
rights 
and 
dignity. 
It further targets an 
already 
vulnerable 
class of citizens that 
faces both legal and societal 
discrimination.
A 
transgender 
student 
on campus, who wished to 
remain anonymous out of fear 
for his identity, spoke about 
the news of the proposed 
memo with grave concern.

“I was hopeful that the 
coming election would bring 
some change for transgender 
people 
in 
the 
state 
(of 
Michigan), and now to know 
the federal government is 
trying to completely — and 
legally — erase us is just so 
terrible.” 
While 
the 
upcoming 
midterm 
elections 
may 
not 
put 
Trump 
and 
his 
administration 
directly 
on 
the ballot, it can serve as a 
first step in electing leaders 
who will fight for the rights 
of all people at both the local 
and national level. Following 
the 
2015 
Supreme 
Court 
decision that legalized same-
sex marriage, the sense of 
urgency among gay people 
— and within the national 

dialogue as a whole — has 
seemed to dissipate. If this 
week has not made it apparent 
enough, the fight for total 
equality in the eyes of the law 
is far from settled.
We are now faced with 
emerging fateful challenges. 
The 
architect 
of 
the 
enshrinement of LGBT rights 
has departed the Supreme 
Court. 
The 
United 
States 
Secretary 
of 
Education 
refuses to act on pertinent 
issues such as transgender 
bathroom 
access. 
The 
supposed-leader of the free 
world, when prompted with 
the issue of gay rights, jokes 
about his own Vice President 
“want(ing) to hang them all!” 
There is now much left to 
wonder where the issue of gay 
rights proceeds from here.
While 
much 
progress 
has been realized in the 
recent past, we cannot grow 
complacent in our current 
state of existence. Nor shall 
we become fearful at the sight 
of such hatred’s re-elevation 
to 
our 
nation’s 
highest 
positions. 
What 
reverberates 
in 
my mind in the face of such 
growing antagonism are the 
words of former President 
Barack 
Obama 
upon 
the 
2015 ruling of Obergefell v. 
Hodges in which same-sex 
marriage was granted across 
the nation: “Progress on this 
journey often comes in small 
increments. Sometimes two 
steps forward, one step back, 
propelled by the persistent 
effort of dedicated citizens. 
And then sometimes there are 
days like this, when that slow, 
steady 
effort 
is 
rewarded 
with justice that arrives like 
a thunderbolt.”
Though 
our 
brooding 
storm may be marked with 
ominous 
precipitation 
and 
despair, through persistence 
and 
unwavering 
solidarity 
with the LGBT community, 
out 
of 
this 
same 
storm 
can 
come 
that 
unbending 
thunderbolt of justice once 
again. 

Ann Arbor is preparing for the storm, are you?

KIANNA MARQUEZ | COLUMN

Alex Kubie can be reached at 

akubie@umich.edu.

Kianna Marquez can be reached at 

kmarquez@umich.edu.

KAYLA CHINITZ | OP-ED

An overshadowed opinion on Israel
W

hen people think 
about 
religious 
diversity 
on 
campus, they may not always 
consider the diversity that 
exists 
within 
religious 
minorities. Since I arrived 
at Michigan, there has been 
one dominant political voice 
coming 
from 
the 
Jewish 
community: a voice which 
does not speak for me.
As a Jewish student who is 
religiously engaged and loves 
celebrating my cultural roots, 
I feel distressed by the toxic 
environment surrounding the 
debate over Israel. Though a 
diversity of opinions exists 
within 
the 
U-M 
Jewish 
community, I’m saddened by 
the fact that many of these 
viewpoints are overshadowed 
by 
a 
vocal, 
conservative-
leaning perspective. And I 
am not alone. The polarized 
political 
dichotomy 
on 
campus excludes the many 
progressive Jews who want 
Israel to exist as a Jewish 
homeland, but are appalled 
by the indifference to the 
suffering 
of 
Palestinian 
civilians in Gaza and the 
West Bank.
I believe calling out the 
current Israeli government for 
its humanitarian violations 
is a political statement, not 
hate speech against Jews. I 

also believe criticizing the 
government and its policies 
should not be generalized to 
imply anti-Semitism, unless 
these criticisms specifically 
negatively target Judaism or 
Jews in general.
We should be quick to 
condemn anti-Semitism, as 

with all forms of religious 
discrimination, but we should 
not 
misconstrue 
political 
sentiments as anti-Semitism. 
Anti-Semitism is real and it 
exists on this campus, but 
when people equate political 
statements to a blind hatred 
toward Jews, they obstruct 
the possibility for nuanced 
conversation 
and 
joint 

productive action.
I don’t want the Jewish 
state to disappear, but I 
am also not offended by 
criticism of Israel; in fact, I 
welcome it. I’m not going to 
blindly support the Israeli 
government while it carries 
out 
severe 
human 
rights 
violations, and I’m not going 
to 
support 
Israel’s 
prime 
minister 
while 
he 
denies 
these acts.
Though 
politically 

conservative 
voices 

supporting Israel’s current 
policies are more prominent 
on campus, they should not 
be viewed as more legitimate 
than 
underrepresented 
voices. The Jewish student 
body does not speak with one 
unified voice – and that’s ok.
As a Jew who is hurt deeply 
by 
anti-Semitism, 
a 
rigid 
definition of anti-Semitism 
that broadly equates criticism 
of Israel with hatred toward 
Jews does not represent me. 
As I find myself caught in 
escalating campus tensions 
concerning Israeli politics, 
I feel a responsibility to 
critique Israel’s policies not 
in spite of my identity as a 
Jewish student, but because 
of it.

Kayla Chinitz is an LSA sophomore.

HANNAH MYERS | CONTACT HANNAH AT HSMYERS@UMICH.EDU

ALEX 
KUBIE

CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONVERSATION

Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and op-eds. 
Letters should be fewer than 300 words while op-eds should be 550 
to 850 words. Send the writer’s full name and University affiliation to 
tothedaily@michigandaily.com.

If this week 
has not made it 
apparent enough, 
the fight for total 
equality in the 
eyes of the law is 
far from settled.

I don’t want the 
Jewish state 
to disappear, 
but I am also 
not offended 
by criticism of 
Israel; in fact, I 
welcome it.

I believe 
this closed-
mindedness 
is what is 
undermining our 
local and global 
environment.

