The water crisis in Flint, Mich., happened more than six years ago, but it seems like it will take a generation or more for customer confidence in the area to be restored. Flint is a case study of what happens when nonwater professionals like emergency city managers or state officials make technical decisions based on financial drivers; in Flint, leadership went even further by ignoring the pleas of concerned community members. It's here—when its voices were ignored by so many trusted institutions—that the public's trust was lost.

Communities care about their local water supply challenges, affordability issues, and potential health threats, and they trust that the water industry will address and resolve any issues before they disrupt normal services. In the water industry, it is especially hard to rebuild a community's trust if it is ever broken. But what does it take for a utility to earn back trust that is lost? If we look at other communities, we see the answer is competency, transparency, and better representation. The answer is also money, and in Flint's case, that includes a recent US$600 million settlement with the state, with most of the money being dedicated to addressing the health and education needs of children affected by lead.

While Flint's problems began in spring 2014, in a 2013 article in Journal AWWA, I wrote, “Transparency helps gain the trust of stakeholders, and public involvement and collaboration can increase the overall community benefits of addressing the costs of system stewardship.” This wasn't forward‐thinking, this was the thinking of the day—and that thinking is still true. Communities need to understand the systems that serve them and be involved in decisions that affect their health and livelihoods. But once a path is determined, they need to let the standards and norms of the water industry drive implementation, operation, and management—with the understanding that they will be heard if there are problems.

Ongoing community engagement and outreach across income and racial demographics ensures all stakeholders understand their water systems and share responsibility for their protection. AWWA understands that utilities need to instill trust in the communities they serve, and recently the association expanded its strategic plan to specifically mention strengthening public trust. Moving forward, AWWA will expand its efforts to help utilities better connect with the communities that rely on the water industry's expertise to deliver safe, reliable water.

This month's Journal AWWA features a range of topics, including examples of how utilities have responded to the challenges of PFAS, cyanotoxins, lead service lines, and more. Please consider sharing your perspectives and experiences to improve the water industry by writing me at journaleditor@awwa.org.

密歇根州弗林特的水危机发生于六年前，但似乎要花上一代甚至更长的时间，客户才能恢复对该地区的信心。弗林特（Flint）是一个案例研究，说明当非水专业人士（如紧急城市管理人员或州官员）根据财务驱动因素做出技术决策时会发生什么情况；在弗林特（Flint），领导层甚至更进一步，无视相关社区成员的呼吁。当这里的声音被众多值得信赖的机构所忽视时，公众的信任就此消失了。

社区关心当地的水供应挑战，可负担性问题以及潜在的健康威胁，他们相信水行业将在中断正常服务之前解决并解决任何问题。在自来水行业中，要打破社区的信任就尤为困难。但是，公用事业需要什么来赢得失去的信任？如果我们看看其他社区，我们会看到答案是能力，透明度和更好的代表性。答案也是金钱，就弗林特而言，其中包括最近与该州达成的6亿美元和解协议，其中大部分资金专门用于解决受铅影响的儿童的健康和教育需求。

尽管Flint的问题始于2014年春季，但我在《 AWWA杂志》 2013年的一篇文章中写道：“透明度有助于赢得利益相关者的信任，而公众的参与和协作可以提高解决系统管理成本的整体社区利益。” 这不是前瞻性的想法，而是当今的想法，而且这种想法仍然是正确的。社区需要了解为他们服务的系统，并参与影响其健康和生计的决策。但是，一旦确定了道路，他们就需要让水行业的标准和规范来推动实施，运营和管理，但前提是他们会在遇到问题时听到他们的声音。

持续的社区参与和跨收入和种族人口统计的外展活动可确保所有利益相关者了解他们的水系统，并共同承担保护自己的责任。AWWA了解公用事业需要在其服务的社区中灌输信任，最近该协会扩展了其战略计划，特别提到了加强公众信任。展望未来，AWWA将继续努力，以帮助公用事业更好地与依靠水行业专业知识来提供安全，可靠的水的社区建立联系。

本月的《 AWWA杂志》包含一系列主题，包括公用事业如何应对PFAS，氰毒素，铅服务线等挑战的示例。请考虑写信给我，电子邮件地址为journaleditor@awwa.org，以分享您的观点和经验，以改善水行业。