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.