The Trump administration is making changes in security procedures at the nation’s airports. Officials say new technology now allows travelers to pass through checkpoints without having to remove their shoes. And soon, they vow, passengers may be able to bring full bottles of liquid onboard aircraft.

But the new scanners needed to screen travelers are large and expensive. Some experts say the federal government must move cautiously.

University of Michigan Associate Professor Javed Ali was a senior analyst for U.S. Homeland Security in the years following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. He says there were good reasons for checking shoes and liquid containers at airports.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Javed Ali: First there was the 9/11 operation, which was so big and broad and so sophisticated, getting trained pilots to commandeer airplanes and fly them into buildings. But that gap was closed pretty quickly. Then just a couple months later, by December 2001, we saw al-Qaida pivot to a completely different type of tactic using a single operative, Richard Reid, taking a flight bound for Miami from Paris with bombs in his shoes. That’s what led to the rule of having your shoes X-rayed up until very recently.

By 2006, al-Qaida continued to innovate and adapt and think about new ways to attack aviation, even though Osama bin Laden was on the run, in hiding, and the group was under serious pressure. Most of its senior command structure had been killed or captured, but they were still focued on attacking aviation bound for the United States. That’s what led to what was called in 2006 the “liquid bomb plot” against transatlantic planes leaving from Britain.

I was at Homeland Security from 2003–2007 and sort of lived through some of these moments. It was pretty significant and the threat was just off the charts in terms of al-Qaida’s relentless focus on attacking aviation. These international terrorist groups are very adaptive and they’re always looking for opportunities to try to plan or plot the next major attack against the U.S. homeland, even if they’re under significant pressure or their organization has been degraded. That certainly has been the lesson since 9/11. So there’s likely still some type of threat out there against global aviation.

But hopefully with these new measures that either are in place or will potentially be put in place for different types of threats, it will continue to keep the flying public safe. I’m making the assumption that there wasn’t a political dimension to these new measures. It was not just because we are in 2025 and people are tired of having to take their shoes off if they’re not in TSA PreCheck or some other trusted traveler program. But I can’t say that for certain. That’s just an assumption I’m making.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: How would you say the government should balance ease of traveling with ensuring that you’re secure while traveling?

JA: Maybe we’re at a moment where we can pull back on the screening of the shoes because there is a technological solution to that. It’ll be interesting to see if the liquid restriction rule also goes by the wayside. That was al-Qaida’s last major effort to attack the homeland, at least at the scale of the 9/11 attack. They tried to do that afterwards, but nothing at the scale of that August 2006 plot. And that was a close call. And with the al-Qaida folks who were involved in that, in Pakistan and in Britain, that was as serious as it could get.

Luckily, the worst case didn’t happen. But that’s why that rule is still in place for 20 years. The threat of terrorists trying to bring some kind of liquid explosives onto planes, even in small amounts, may still be high, even if the rule gets rescinded or adjusted moving forward.

QK:  You’ve discussed terrorist groups. But there’s always concerns over the “lone wolf” operatives or domestic terrorism. Any concerns about lessening current security procedures in regards to the possibility of homegrown terrorism?

JA: That’s a great question. In the post-9/11 era we have not seen what you and I would consider homegrown extremists or pure “lone wolves” or offenders try to conduct attacks against the aviation system here in the United States. It doesn’t mean that people haven’t thought about it, there may have been people who had the idea. But interestingly, in the post-9/11 era, the threat to U.S. aviation up until now has always been directed from groups overseas, first al-Qaida and then ISIS.

QK: As we are talking right now, you have just finished traveling by air and going in airports yourself. What do you think of the process? Was it a drawback for you to go through certain things and wait? Or were you willing and happy to go through that procedure in order to ensure there was as much security as possible?

JA: You might be asking the wrong person this question, because I was a former U.S. government counter-terrorism official. So I knew exactly why these rules and processes are in place, to keep the country safe. And that includes myself, when I was traveling on airplanes in my government years. And now that I’ve been out of government, I travel very routinely as well, including today when I left Detroit Metro Airport and landed here in Washington, D.C.  I never see this as an inconvenience, just part of the process we all have to live by. And, again, there are real threats out there that would like nothing more than for all of these rules to go away or create this perception that there are vulnerabilities that could be exploited. I also am in some of the trusted traveler programs too. So that is another thing that any person can apply for. If you’re able to get into those programs it expedites the process at the airports as well.

Detroit is just a few weeks away from a pivotal primary election that will decide the two final contenders to become the city’s next mayor.

WDET is listening to the voice of Detroit voters as part of our Citizen Vox Project.

George Goff is one of those voters. He lives in Detroit’s Jefferson – Chalmers community.

Goff says he’s following the mayoral race, but he’s still waiting to hear candidates address his concerns.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

George Goff: I am still disappointed they’re not talking about public policy. There’s a lot of environmental issues in Detroit and no one wants to address that.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: When you say environmental issues, especially if you’re on Jefferson and Chalmers, is it in terms of trying to prevent flooding, in terms of possible contamination in the waterways, all of the above?

GG: All of the above. We thought it was DTE Energy that had the problem. But it was another company, and you can smell [what’s left from the flooding] all the way up to Mack Ave. That’s a problem. You have the canals, they’re flooding constantly. And my home was flooded five times. FEMA is not doing anything. The city hasn’t done anything. And that’s a problem.

QK: Obviously whoever becomes mayor, you’d want them to address that kind of issue. I would think. What other issues, if any, do you see as important to the city that should be worked on?

GG: The other thing is that people are losing their homes now. It’s a new pandemic. Seniors are not able to keep their homes because insurance companies say they’re not going to be covered when things go astray. That’s a major problem in the city of Detroit right now.

QK: What would you suggest that whoever would be the next mayor do to try to help with that?

GG: They need to have policies in place for that, for the future. I know the city is working on a new pipeline waterway system. But they have to do more than that. They’re tearing up the streets on Jefferson Ave. and by the park and there is still sewage backing up.

QK: This will be the first time in a dozen years that Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan is not running for reelection. What have you thought of the job he’s done? And what do you think a future mayor should do? Should they build on some of what he’s done or go in a different direction?

“The social middle class of the city of Detroit is suffering. We need to make sure we’re able to live in Detroit with all these high inflation rates.”

– George Goff, Detroit voter

GG: I think Mike Duggan has done a great job for the city. I want to see the next mayor do some of the things that Duggan had put in place. But I need them to go beyond, especially for the middle class. The social middle class of the city of Detroit is suffering. We need to make sure we’re able to live in Detroit with all these high inflation rates.

They had a problem with the county deeds, they are having problems with taxes, they’re having problems with the upkeep of housing, and we’re losing a lot. Detroit could be a first-class city and it’s not anymore. So the next mayor has to get on the ground and start making way for the future of the city of Detroit. If we don’t, we will go back into bankruptcy.

QK: You think it’s that dire of a situation that bankruptcy could be a possibility?

GG: I think it’s very possible. Because they’re skirting around the real issues. People have gone to city council and shared their voice and it’s like, OK, we’ll look into that. But no one is looking into it. The flooding, people losing their homes, the taxes, common things they’re not doing. Look at the city transportation. And then crime now. There’s no activities for youth. They need to open-up recreation centers on the weekends, have midnight basketball or something. We need something for our youth. The parks are great but we need better policing of the parks.

Most candidates vying to become Detroit’s next mayor agree the city’s high property tax rates remain a barrier to home ownership and attracting more residents. 

Subscribe to the Detroit Evening Report on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, NPR.org or wherever you get your podcasts.

They say Detroit needs to find new revenue streams, especially now that the city has allocated all of its pandemic relief funding. 

On WDET’s The Metro, Detroit mayoral candidate and City Council President Mary Sheffield said Detroit must increase partnerships with the private sector. 

“I do not believe that we can tax our way out of anything. That’s one tool to have in the tool box. But overall we want to continue to increase our population, we want to continue to provide good-paying jobs because when that happens we get revenue back to Detroit through property tax and income tax,” she said. 

Sheffield and rival candidate Saunteel Jenkins say the city should explore creating a local sales tax. 

Other contenders — like council member Fred Durhal III — say Detroit should target new investment from green energy and tech firms. 

But mayoral candidate Solomon Kinloch argues the city cannot grow its way to prosperity without help from state lawmakers.

– Reporting by Quinn Klinefelter, WDET.

Other headlines for Thursday, July 17, 2025:

• Dearborn City Council voted Tuesday to restrict Airbnb and other short term rental units to the downtown area. The decision was in response to some residents who have complained about parties and parking in their neighborhoods.  The zoning amendments will take effect on Jan. 1. 
• Local prisoners will be receiving a new opportunity from Wayne State University. The university’s Prison Education Program allows inmates to receive a bachelor’s in sociology with a minor in entrepreneurship and innovation, starting fall 2025. Staff say the major was chosen because of its broad reach and the transferrable skills that come from a strong background in liberal arts.
• Wayne State University is launching a women’s varsity soccer team beginning the 2026-27 academic year. It’s the first new varsity sport brought to the university in more than a decade. The new team will play in NCAA Division II as part of the Great Lakes Intercollegiate Athletic Conference, with home matches on the lit turf stadium next to Tom Adams Field. The search for a head coach will begin this summer.  

Do you have a community story we should tell? Let us know in an email at detroiteveningreport@wdet.org.

Only about one out of every five people in the city of Detroit voted during the last mayoral election.

Now a similar small percentage of the electorate will likely determine who leads the city for the next four years, as long-time Mayor Mike Duggan makes a bid to become governor.

WDET is talking with voters about the candidates and issues that matter to them as part of our Citizen Vox Project.

That includes 60-year-old downtown resident Monica Davie.

She says the city faces a crucial crossroads.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Monica Davie: (Interview edited for clarity.) The conscience of Detroit is at stake. I think we need someone who has experience in both private and public sectors. I think our candidates are well-intended and that they love the city. Any one of them would be very good. But we need great.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: Do you have a particular candidate in mind yet?

MD: I am supporting Saunteel Jenkins. She started her early career in public service. Think she has persevered over some personal and professional challenges. Her service on the Detroit City Council was very, very good. I think she had an opportunity to showcase her talents and has done a great job with THAW (The Heat and Warmth Fund, a nonprofit assistance agency.) I think that she has protected and supported at-risk and underserved populations in the city. I think we need that kind of leadership.

QK: You already mentioned some issues. But what others in the city would you like to see whoever becomes the next mayor address?

MD: I’d like to see as much attention and money spent in the neighborhoods as is in downtown. What happens when folks are visiting a community and the lights go out? Is it still welcoming to the individuals? We have got this tag phrase of the “old Detroit” and the “new Detroit.” There’s no such thing. It’s just one Detroit. And there’s a group of individuals that held Detroit down, as we say, when the lights were out, so I’d like to see them respected.

I don’t know how we have a big, beautiful metropolis and still have individuals traversing through that are homeless and we’re not building big, beautiful shelters for them and giving them a leg-up. They don’t need a hand-out, they want a hand-up. And we have the mechanisms and the resources to do it right here in the city of Detroit. So, I would like to see an individual be really focused on sharing the wealth, spreading the wealth, making sure the individuals in the city of Detroit, no matter who they are, get some of these skilled trades jobs training. That whole component is important. Even though our political landscape is threatening adult education and skilled trades, I would like to see us focus on it in the city of Detroit. I don’t want to see us moving our low-income and at-risk individuals out to the suburbs, our homeless out to the suburbs. I’d like to see them integrated and supported in the city while we continue to build.

QK: This will be the first time in about 12 years that Mike Duggan is not running for mayor. What have you thought of the job that he’s done? And do you see things he’s done that you think the next mayor should either build upon or perhaps go beyond?

MD: I’ll be honest, I was not originally a supporter of Duggan. But I think he has a brilliant mind and I think that he’s galvanized and exposed some real challenges that we have in the city. I think that he’s tried to take a swing at them, like some of the blight and tearing-down some of the vacant homes and some of the urban farms and some of the subsidies that he’s offered. I think he’s done a good job. I’m appreciative of his leadership overall. I would like to see the next mayor follow that blueprint, look at his historical footprint, sort of put their own spin on it and bring us some new and innovative things with that base still in place. Not someone that he’s just endorsing, but someone that can think like him and call upon him for support when they need him.

Detroit faces a turning point this year. Long-time Mayor Mike Duggan is leaving the office to make an independent bid for governor.

What do Detroiters want to see from the city’s next mayor?

WDET is examining that question by launching the Citizen Vox Project. These are one-on-one conversations with Detroit residents about the issues that matter to them.

WDET’s Quinn Klinefelter spoke with 69-year-old Midtown Detroiter Andrew Crawford. He says he’s not sure yet which mayoral candidate he’ll vote for. But Crawford says he does have a question for whoever takes the top job in Detroit’s city government.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Andrew Crawford: We strive so hard to be a big city. But how can you be a big city when your transportation is very poor? You got two rail systems and none of them really go anywhere. The QLINE just runs up and down from West Grand Boulevard to downtown. Then you got the People Mover. All it does is go in a circle. So, it’s money wasted.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: What about the bus systems?

AC: I don’t understand why the suburban SMART and Detroit Department of Transportation lines can’t be merged. Why would you have two systems? It’s still wasted money. I ride them all the time, both bus systems. And I’m telling you, people are moving back to Detroit, the city is growing, and once you get the public transportation system going better, the population is gonna explode. People can move around and depend on it. There used to be a lot of rail systems here at one time, before people started buying so many cars.

QK: What other issues stick out to you?

AC: Definitely crime. I wish the community would get more involved in helping police that. I’m hoping to see more of that. I’m hoping whoever becomes mayor invests in the whole city. Downtown, it’s going to take care of itself. It’s already on its way. Now it’s time to reach further than the boulevard.

QK: What would you want to see past the boulevard? What do you want to see out in the neighborhoods?

AC: I would like to see more houses, more businesses, communities coming together. Like that food co-op past Euclid on Woodward Ave. It’s a Black-owned food co-op. I’d like to see more of that. And also see the city commit to helping more people that have homes to maintain those homes.

QK: This will be the first time in a dozen years that Mike Duggan will not be mayor of Detroit. What have you thought of the job he’s done so far?

AC: I think he did a great job. I think he’d make a good governor.

QK: Would you like to see whoever becomes the next mayor just continue with the same kind of stuff Duggan’s done? Or, other than transit or crime, is there another area you’d want to see them try to improve on or go beyond what’s being done already?

AC: Take where he left off and make it go even further. Like the north end, I see businesses and restaurants popping up all over there. But I would like to even see them go deeper into the east side and Gratiot Ave. This is where public transportation comes in, because if you got those kinds of systems running throughout the city, it’s going to bring people to those communities.

I don’t care what you do to the city or how much you improve, if your public transportation system is not together, it’s going to fall apart. And the people need to come out and vote, especially in the Black community, even in these local elections. Because if we don’t, what’s going on now is going to continue. You got to show that you care. And that you care about voting. If you don’t care, this is what happens, the turmoil we in now.

A judge is set to decide whether low-level radioactive material left over from the creation of the first atomic bomb can find its forever home in a metro Detroit landfill.

The state of New York wants to send about 6,000 cubic yards of tainted soil and 4,000 gallons of contaminated groundwater to a waste disposal site near Belleville, Michigan.

It’s one of a handful in the country licensed to dispose of such waste.

Communities near the site, including Canton Township, filed a lawsuit to stop shipments of the toxic material from New York.

Canton Township Supervisor Anne Marie Graham-Hudak says the suit kept those remnants of the Manhattan Project out of Michigan so far. But not other contaminated material.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Anne Marie Graham-Hudak: At this time, we still have this kind of waste coming into Michigan, whether it be into the injection well in Romulus or into the Wayne disposal site. But we’re hoping this lawsuit helps us launch some precedents to stop that.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: But the specific one from New York has not come yet?

AMH: No. And it was supposed to start coming basically in January. So we’re glad that we were able to stop it. We met with the judge, the hearing was in May and the judge is scheduled to make a ruling on July 2. We hope that happens. We’ve been working also with Michigan state Sen. Darrin Camilleri (D-Trenton) and state Rep. Reggie Miller (D-Van Buren Twp). They have two bills that are going to increase tipping fees, amongst many other things.

“The EPA were saying that this was safe. Our question was, ‘If this is so safe, why is it being moved? Why don’t you just mitigate it in place?’ And that’s still what we’re questioning.”

– Anne Marie Graham-Hudak, Canton Township supervisor

Our tipping fees are one of the lowest in the nation. We’re at roughly 36 cents a ton, so we’re basically inviting people to come dump into Michigan. In other states you’re looking at $13 a ton — that just exacerbates what we already have. And at some point our landfills will be full and we will be looking for other places. The Canton landfill maybe has five years left. The EPA were saying that this was safe. Our question was, “If this is so safe, why is it being moved? Why don’t you just mitigate it in place?” And that’s still what we’re questioning. Radioactive waste in the body is absorbed and it’s additive, so if you live near where they’re dumping it, that’s a problem.

Also, Michigan has 21% of the world’s fresh water, and we’re putting this in a dense area. They’ve got schools nearby. The groundwater takes it out to the Rouge River, which takes it to the Detroit River, which takes it out to the Great Lakes. So why are we even thinking of putting it there? Also, they’re going to store the waste in what they call “burritos.” They wrap the waste in these plastic burritos and then come here and bury it and put a cap on it. But they could not even guarantee that the plastic they’re going to wrap it in will match the half-life of some of this radioactive dirt. I’m a retired engineer. One of the things that I worked on before I left Ford Motor Company was electromagnetic radiation — that was actually one of my favorite classes in college. And they can’t guarantee how this waste will stay encompassed in this plastic. There’s no test on this plastic that had been done to see that. I think their guidelines are way too narrow. But they’re going to keep dumping it, which makes it additive, and it doesn’t go away. It’s a constant radiation.

QK: So you don’t trust what the agencies or the company are saying about this?

AMH: Correct. I do not trust it. I think some of the guidelines that have been made in Michigan, especially, are leaning more towards favoring companies. We’re an automotive area and we know that we’ve got PFAS. We know that, in the early days, automotive companies would dump (material.) There’s brownfields here for a reason, because companies dumped. And I really believe that some of our land is contaminated. I think our guidelines in Michigan are way too low. They protect companies more than they do our residents. This is a public health issue, it really is.

QK: So what remedy would you seek at this point?

AMH: That we stop this. State Sen. Darrin Camilleri’s bill actually states that we just stop everything from coming in. We do more studies and more testing. We do not allow any more radioactive waste to come into Michigan. We do not allow any more new sites to be established. I know a lot of the businesses are concerned about this, but if you look at it, even hospitals generate radioactive waste. They do X-rays, MRI’s, things like that. So how do we mitigate in place what we have instead of transporting it? I don’t think we should be transporting it. Quit thinking about kicking things down the road and saying, “Oh, hey, we’re just gonna keep doing this. We’re gonna keep making nuclear reactors and we’ll just keep burying it, not really thinking about what’s going to happen in the future.” I think that we’ve done that for too long and too haphazardly. Our limits need to be looked at. I think that they’re more pro-business than they are pro-public health. That is my biggest concern.

QK: So that’s what you would hope to have happen. You’ve been dealing with this issue for a while now. What do you think is within the realms of reality?

AMH: I think if we want it to be more in the business of reality it can be. Look at the concerns raised by the agencies, the mayors and supervisors and the townspeople. That’s why we have this injunction, that’s why we’re trying to push this legislation through. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce needs to take a look at things a little bit more. Let’s just talk about changing tipping fees. They’re saying they don’t agree with that. But we’re just a dumping state based on 36 cents a ton.

QK: If the disposal company comes back and says, “We’re licensed to do this. As you say, hospitals and other places keep making this kind of material. This site is allowed to take it and we’ve got to put it somewhere. So why not here?” How would you answer them back?

AMH: My answer is that we need to study this even more. I can understand that we have to decide what to do with Michigan’s waste, where this is happening. But taking outside waste, it just gives us less space to figure out what to do with our own. And it also is in a densely populated area. There is an interstate commerce clause that does not allow us to stop. There would have to be a constitutional change on the federal level also, because this is considered trading commerce and money.

QK: Have you ever had much reaction back from the federal government on this entire topic, no matter which administration was running it at the time?

AMH: Not really. They keep pointing to the interstate commerce clause. People always say it’s hard to change a constitution and it will never happen. But the U.S. Supreme Court just changed some things that were in the Constitution for 50 years. So I think it’s a possibility. I think the need is there. The want has to make it happen.

More stories from The Metro

The prosecutor who won convictions in the Oxford High School shooting trials wants to extend that work to all of Michigan. 

Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald announced this week that she’s launching a bid to become Michigan’s next attorney general. Other candidates who have entered the race include Democrats Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit and former federal prosecutor Mark Totten, as well as Republican attorney Kevin Kijewski. 

It’s an open race for the seat, as the state government’s current top lawyer — Attorney General Dana Nessel — is term-limited. 

McDonald, a Democrat, told WDET the issues facing Michigan and the nation are drawing her to serve at the state level. 

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Karen McDonald, Oakland County prosecutor: I think the answer to that is the same answer I’d give when I started my first job as an adult — as a public school teacher — really wanting to be in a place where I had the most impact and the most opportunity to do good where it was needed most. I went on to law school, was a lawyer in private practice, became a judge in the family court and then ran for prosecutor in 2020. And I think right now, given the threats that we’re facing in the state, the attorney general is more important than ever. 

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: What kind of threats are there that you think you would have to face or take on if, in fact, you were elected attorney general? 

KM: We’re facing threats to our rule of law, to the general well-being and safety of the people in the state of Michigan. The U.S. Constitution and the rights that it gives us are being dismantled, and I think the attorney general is the one that stands up for the people of this state. I also think that the role of the attorney general as the “People’s Lawyer” is something that I’ve been doing for over a decade working to serve my community, my county. Oakland County is the second largest county in the state. And that’s what I get up every day and I do. 

QK: Obviously your prosecution of the Oxford High School shooter and securing the convictions of his parents on involuntary manslaughter charges put a spotlight on your work. Are there lessons that you see from those cases that would inform you if, in fact, you were elected attorney general? 

KM: My hope is that it put a spotlight on gun violence and how critical it is that we address it like a public health crisis. It’s the number one cause of death for children in this country. Prosecuting a few individuals, or anyone for that matter, is not going to fix that. We have to treat it like a public health crisis. 

QK: Staying with the Oxford shooting, the defense attorney for the shooter’s mother, Jennifer Crumbley, has brought up issues about a proffer agreement that was made with some of the Oxford employees to testify. The judge in the trial indicated that she had some concerns about the deal. Do you have any concerns that now your opponents in this attorney general race could somehow try to use that to tarnish your efforts in the Crumbley case?  

KM: It doesn’t surprise me. The lawyer you’re speaking of has been sanctioned and fined by that same judge. And the motion for a new trial was denied. I’m focused on the victims in that case and holding the people accountable that are responsible for those kids who were killed and injured on that day (in 2021) and the hundreds of others that were traumatized. I think the focus now has to be on the victims, the families and this community. That is why I’ve dedicated so much of my time as the prosecutor, and will continue that as the attorney general, to address gun violence. Not just from the moment somebody picks up a gun, but way up-stream — what we can and should be doing to educate the public about how we can prevent that from happening. 

QK: Current Attorney General Dana Nessel has done some of that in certain aspects. But she’s also filed or joined many lawsuits that challenge the Trump administration, from threats to withholding federal funding for emergency services and limiting birthright citizenship to firing federal workers or adding restrictions on voting. Are there areas you see that as attorney general, you believe you should either continue or would institute challenges to the Trump administration? 

KM: I think that’s the responsibility and duty of the attorney general. The stakes could not be higher. We’re talking about a complete disregard for the rule of law. I’m a lawyer, I’m a former judge, I’m the prosecutor. The Constitution is our guide. Due process is afforded for all of us. We can’t just ignore that when we want to. With regard to funding, these are critical issues. The new bill that’s being proposed in Congress would make it that 700,000 people in Michigan lose access to Medicaid. We’ve had the administration take away funds for substance abuse and mental health issues at the precise time where our kids, in particular, needed it the most. This just doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t make us safer. And I think the attorney general’s job is to look out for the people of the state of Michigan. So when appropriate, absolutely those lawsuits should be vigorously litigated, because that is the attorney general’s job. But it’s also the attorney general’s job to make sure that we are focusing on things that have the most impact. I’ve always been dedicated to public service and where I could do the most good. And that is protecting the rule of all law, protecting public safety and advocating for vulnerable people. 

QK: It’s a little bit unfair at this point, because only a few candidates have declared their run for attorney general yet. But what would you tell a voter that you think sets you apart from the others that possibly could try to run for the office or that are now? 

KM: While I’ve spent most of my adult life in southeast Michigan and Oakland County, I grew up in the middle of the state in a really small town that was a farming community. My dad was a construction worker and neither of my parents went to college. They were able to work hard and provide a nice life for us, not a fancy one, but a good one. And I am only here because I had the advantage of student loans. Over half of the assistant prosecutors in my office rely on the loan repayment programs because they’ve dedicated a significant period of their life to public service. These aren’t things that should be taken away. These are things that we should be saying, “This works.” We need to fight to make sure that we don’t lose it.

I’m also a mom. And I, like all the other parents, want to make sure that my kids have a safe, thriving state to live in. Look, it’s 2025, we should not have parents worried that their kids might be the victims of gun violence when they drop them off at school. I am going to fight no matter where I am to make sure that we do everything we possibly can to eliminate and prevent gun violence.  

Metro Detroit’s efforts to create a rapid mass transit system on par with other major regions has often gone off the rails. 

WDET explores some of that history in the latest episode of CuriosiD.

But one small slice of the transit puzzle is in place — the QLINE streetcars running along Detroit’s Woodard Avenue.

Former Washington, D.C.-based attorney Jared Fleisher was there at the advent of the QLINE. He’s now the vice president of government affairs for Rock, billionaire Dan Gilbert’s family of companies. 

In the interview below, Fleisher told WDET the QLINE is a marker for what Detroit could do with transit and how the region could roll into the future. 

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Jared Fleisher: What we did with the QLINE had never been done before. Most major public infrastructure projects are led by public agencies like a transportation agency. Take yourself back to 2009, and in this case it was a ragtag nonprofit group saying, “Detroit is really struggling, economically and from a transit perspective. We want to do something to create a spark. And we, this ragtag nonprofit, wants to tear up Woodward Avenue and put in a streetcar — tear up the main avenue in a major American city.” As you can imagine, the U.S. Department of Transportation had never encountered this circumstance before. Washington had watched metro Detroit, going back to the Carter administration, never really be able to get its act together around transit. And therefore they did not take us very seriously or send money our way. They said, “You don’t even have a regional transit authority (RTA) in Metro Detroit. If you want us to approve the QLINE, which you’re saying is going to be the spark for a regional system, let’s actually create a RTA that could administer it.” 

So in 2012, before the QLINE broke ground, we worked together with the governor — and the Feds were big champions of this — to create the RTA. There were literally dozens and dozens of failed attempts over decades to create a regional authority, because of divisions between the different jurisdictions. Fast forward to 2016, and the backers of the QLINE led an effort, with community input, to develop a regional transit plan that would finally fund a regional system. It would have had rapid transit to Pontiac, rapid transit on Michigan Avenue out to Detroit Metro Airport. With support from the Kresge Foundation, Roger Penske, Dan Gilbert and others, it went on the ballot in 2016 and it lost by half-a-percent. And here we are, nine years later, and we still have not solved the issue of regional rapid transit. 

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: What is the reason these ballot proposals failed? Why has there been opposition to it? 

JF: I’ll be very candid with you. One of the realities of our region is that it’s diverse. The closer you are to the urban core, the more supportive of transit you are. But as you get into more rural areas, north Oakland County, north Macomb County, northwest Wayne County, they’re less oriented to transit. When Donald Trump won the election in 2016, he won by turning out a lot of the voters in those communities. And on the Democratic side, Hillary underperformed in the more urbanized areas. So the God’s honest true story about what happened in 2016 is that it was less about transit specifically and more about how the top of the ticket influenced everything on the ballot, including the transit referendum. And when there were attempts to go through the legislature to get it on the ballot in a different form, a narrower, more Coalition of the Willing kind of thing, the legislative majority at that time didn’t want to stick their necks out.

QK: You mentioned the diversity of the region. I’ve heard people bring up racism as an issue in transit. Do you think racism plays any part in all of this?  

JF: I don’t think that is the fundamental issue. For example, all of Macomb County votes for SMART, the suburban bus system. And that runs lines in and out of Detroit through Macomb. One of the biggest recent wins for transit, in 2022, was when Oakland County got rid of this “Swiss cheese” thing they had forever, where some communities were part of SMART and others said no to transit. Oakland County voted overwhelmingly for the whole county to be part of SMART. So I don’t think, if you’re trying to look at it analytically, they would say, “We don’t want those people coming here,” as what’s going on. I think the issue with regional transit is whether certain rural voters feel it’s worth it. Do I support investing my tax dollars in this? By the way, for the record, a lot of specialized transit has been developed over the last eight years to meet the needs of rural communities in a more tailored way. 

QK: So here we are now, in 2025. What’s your view of where regional transit is in the metro Detroit area? And where do you see the likelihood of it going in the future? 

JF: Recently, Wayne County Executive Warren Evans said he was going to try to end the Swiss cheese there, where certain communities opted-out and busses aren’t allowed to travel. They don’t participate in funding the Wayne County part of the network. Warren Evans has said they’re going to go to the ballot, in hopes that Wayne County voters pass it just like Oakland County voters did. So that’s progress. But what it’s not is the kind of modern rapid transit you see in your dynamic cities, your big cities, your great cities.

So, what’s the next step? Should we work together to really focus on one major rapid transit investment? For example, doing rapid transit up Woodward all the way to Pontiac, where Oakland County is investing so much into a new county campus and there’s other investment happening. Should we do one thing that is really, really significant? That comes full circle, right back to the QLINE. It’s successful, exceeding expectations as it carries one million or more people a year. It did its part. And now the question is, if resources become available, do we try to do a newer version of this movie, where we make a significant regional investment with the strategy that we can then use that to try to catalyze something even broader.