



"The people of Flint did not enjoy the equal protection of environmental or public health laws, nor did they have a meaningful voice in the decisions leading up to the Flint water crisis," it said.



Also, "had the emergency manager law focused on the financial health of the city and the welfare of its residents, and not just on cost-cutting measures, and/or had it allowed for meaningful involvement of the community when it came to the very basic needs of life, clean water and clean air, this too could have served to mitigate or even prevent the water crisis."



The commission's report is the third state government report since 2016 to identify the state emergency manager law as a significant factor in the Flint crisis. The law was earlier faulted by Snyder's Flint water task force and by a joint select committee of the legislature.



The report calls for a more regional approach to tackling issues involving Flint, and for emergency managers to have regional powers.



On the proposed Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the report said a hallmark of successful commissions has been "the inclusion of a convening panel, composed of residents who, by the nature of their role in households and small community groups, are well trusted within the community."



The report said its purpose is not to lay blame, but to prevent a recurrence, in Flint or anywhere else in the state.



At the same time, the commission, which held three public hearings in advance of writing the report, shouldered some of its own blame in the crisis.



"The Michigan Civil Rights Commission and Department of Civil Rights must do a better job of responding and listening to the constituents we represent, and of making our priorities their priorities," the report said.



And just as the report questioned the response of government agencies, it questioned the response of the news media.



As Flint residents began complaining about the taste, odor and color of their drinking water shortly after the switch to the Flint River in April 2014, "there was some media coverage," but "it was occasional and cursory," the report said.



"The limited coverage begs the same question of the media that we ask of decision makers: Would things have been covered differently if it wasn't Flint? Might the story have led the news, would stories be more extensive? Most critical, would reporters have pushed government officials to provide acceptable answers?"