INTERACTIVE: Highland Park residents say GLWA is charging them too much — here's what's at stake

The city is demanding $1.5 million back from the Great Lakes Water Authority. Now it's headed to arbitration.

Residents of Highland Park — one of Michigan's smallest cities — marched outside Great Lakes Water Authority headquarters this week insisting that a decades-old sewer cost formula is draining their community dry.

Mayor Glenda McDonald says GLWA charges Highland Park four times what comparable small cities pay for combined sewer overflow costs, despite data showing Highland Park contributes far less than what the bill suggests. The city wants $1.5 million cut from those charges. GLWA says the formula stands. Here's how to unpack what that means for residents — and for the region.

• $1.5M — Reduction Highland Park Demands
• 4x — What GLWA Charges HP vs. Comparable Cities
• 1999 — Year the Cost Formula Was Set

How Much Do You Know About Highland Park's Water Fight?

Four questions drawn from the reporting — some answers may surprise you.

How much does Highland Park say it is being overcharged on its combined sewer overflow bills compared to similarly-sized cities?

• Twice as much — The gap is actually steeper than that. Mayor Glenda McDonald says GLWA charges Highland Park four times what it charges other small cities with comparable populations.
• Four times as much — Correct. Mayor McDonald stated directly: 'They're charging us four times the amount that they charge other small cities like this with the amount of people that we have.'
• About 50 percent more — The city's complaint is much larger than a 50 percent premium. The mayor puts the disparity at four times the rate charged to comparable small cities.
• Ten times as much — Not quite — but the city's claim is still dramatic. According to Mayor McDonald, the multiplier is four times what other small cities pay.

The cost-allocation methodology Highland Park is challenging was originally established through a rate settlement agreement in which year?

• 1985 — Earlier than the actual date. The methodology dates to a 1999 rate settlement agreement, and GLWA says it remains in effect through subsequent federal orders.
• 2008 — 2008 was during the financial crisis, but not the origin of this formula. GLWA's statement traces the cost allocation methodology to a 1999 rate settlement agreement.
• 1999 — Correct. GLWA's own statement confirms the methodology was originally established through a 1999 rate settlement agreement and remains in effect through subsequent federal orders.
• 2024 — 2024 is when the parties entered into new agreements — including Highland Park's wastewater disposal services contract — but the underlying CSO cost formula goes back to 1999.

How have Highland Park and GLWA agreed to resolve their ongoing billing dispute?

• A state legislative review — The dispute is not headed to Lansing. GLWA's statement says the parties have agreed to resolve their outstanding disputes through arbitration.
• Arbitration — Correct. GLWA stated it 'looks forward to a timely and final resolution through that process' of arbitration — meaning a neutral third party will rule on the billing dispute.
• A federal court ruling — While federal orders are referenced in GLWA's statement regarding the 1999 agreement, the current dispute resolution path is arbitration, not a new federal court case.
• A renegotiated rate by the GLWA board — The GLWA board meeting was where residents protested Wednesday, but the formal resolution mechanism is arbitration — not a board vote on the rate.

What specific type of sewer cost is at the center of Highland Park's billing dispute with GLWA?

• Drinking water treatment surcharges — The protest is about sewer costs, not drinking water treatment. The city's dispute centers on combined sewer overflow (CSO) charges — triggered when heavy rainfall overwhelms the system.
• Combined sewer overflow charges — Correct. Combined sewer overflows happen when heavy rainfall overwhelms the sewer system. Highland Park argues the formula for splitting those costs across member cities is unfair to them.
• Infrastructure repair assessments — The dispute is not about repair assessments. It is specifically about how GLWA divides the cost of combined sewer overflows among its member communities.
• Monthly flat-rate service fees — The city's objection is to the variable cost formula for combined sewer overflow events — not a flat monthly fee. The formula, set in 1999, is what Highland Park says needs to change.

Wednesday's protest outside GLWA headquarters was not just about one city's bill. It was about who bears the cost when Metro Detroit's aging combined sewer system gets overwhelmed by heavy rain — and whether the formula that decides that split is still fair after more than two decades.

Highland Park Water Advocates organizer Charlene Turner Johnson put it plainly: 'We're the smallest user in the system, and we're paying more than the other users, which are all larger cities.' The city's position is that its actual contribution to combined sewer overflow events is far smaller than what the 1999 formula assigns it — and that the data to prove it already exists.

• $1.5M — CSO Cost Reduction Demanded — Highland Park's core ask
• 4x — Billing Multiplier vs. Comparable Cities — Per Mayor McDonald
• 1999 — Year the Formula Was Locked In — Rate settlement agreement
• 2024 — Year New Agreements Were Signed — Including wastewater disposal contract

Highland Park vs. GLWA: Two Sides of the Dispute

Mayor McDonald connected the water bill fight directly to a broader squeeze on Highland Park households. 'You already have high food, high DTE, high gas and now we're adding high water rates,' she said at the protest. 'These people can't survive it. They just can't.' Michigan's unemployment rate currently sits at 5.0 percent — above the national rate of 4.2 percent — leaving many households with limited room to absorb rising utility costs.

GLWA, for its part, says it respects residents' right to protest and remains committed to working collaboratively with all member communities. But the authority made clear Wednesday that it will not adjust charges outside of the arbitration process the two sides have already agreed to. The outcome of that arbitration will determine whether the 1999 formula — designed for a different era — will finally be updated.

Claims vs. the Record

Highland Park is charged four times what other small cities pay for combined sewer overflow costs.

Verdict: unverified

This is Mayor Glenda McDonald's direct claim, stated at the protest. GLWA has not publicly disputed the multiplier figure, but argues the charges are correct under the 1999 agreement and subsequent federal orders. The arbitration process will evaluate the underlying data.

The cost-allocation formula has been in place since 1999.

Verdict: true

GLWA's own statement confirms the methodology was originally established through a 1999 rate settlement agreement and remains in effect through subsequent federal orders. Both sides agree on the formula's age — they disagree on whether it should still apply.

GLWA refuses to look at Highland Park's usage data.

Verdict: mixed

Mayor McDonald stated 'the data is showing that we're not using what they're charging, but they refuse to lower the rates.' GLWA does not dispute that data exists, but maintains the current agreements — not usage data alone — govern how charges are set. The arbitration is designed to settle exactly this question.

How the Dispute Developed

• 1999 — Rate settlement agreement established
• 2024 — Parties enter new agreements, including Highland Park wastewater disposal services contract
• Oct. 2026 — Highland Park residents and Mayor Glenda McDonald protest outside GLWA headquarters during Board of Directors meeting
• Oct. 2026 — GLWA issues statement: no rate adjustment; dispute to be resolved through arbitration

What Are Combined Sewer Overflows — and Why Do They Cost So Much?

Combined sewer overflows (CSOs) occur when heavy rainfall sends more water into the sewer system than it can handle. When that happens, a mix of stormwater and wastewater can overflow before it reaches the treatment plant. Cleaning up and managing those overflows is expensive — and in a regional system like GLWA's, someone has to pay the bill.

The core of Highland Park's complaint is about how that bill gets divided. The 1999 rate settlement agreement established a formula for allocating CSO costs across GLWA's member communities. Highland Park argues that formula assigns it a share far larger than what its actual usage data would justify — and that the only fair fix is to recalculate based on real numbers, not a formula set more than 25 years ago.

What Happens Next for Highland Park Residents

1. Arbitration begins — Both Highland Park and GLWA have agreed to resolve the billing dispute through arbitration — a formal process where a neutral third party reviews both sides' arguments and data before issuing a binding ruling.
2. Usage data is examined — Highland Park's core argument is that actual CSO contribution data contradicts the 1999 formula. Arbitration will give both sides the chance to present that data formally.
3. A ruling is issued — GLWA said it looks forward to a 'timely and final resolution.' The arbitration ruling will determine whether the $1.5 million reduction is warranted — or whether the current formula stands.
4. Residents continue to organize — Highland Park Water Advocates and Mayor McDonald have signaled they will keep pressure on GLWA regardless of the arbitration timeline. Charlene Turner Johnson urged GLWA to 'at least listen to us and hear our complaint.'

Stay Informed on the Arbitration

• Watch the Full Report: WXYZ's Ruta Ulcinaite reported live from the protest outside GLWA headquarters. Watch her full report for additional context and on-the-ground footage.
• Highland Park Water Advocates: The community organizer group, led in part by Charlene Turner Johnson, is continuing to push for rate reform and community accountability at GLWA.
• GLWA Board of Directors: GLWA's Board of Directors holds regular public meetings. Wednesday's protest coincided with one of those meetings. Watch WXYZ for coverage of the arbitration outcome as it develops.

For Highland Park, this fight is about more than a single line item on a water bill. It is about whether a small, economically pressed city can force a regional authority to update a formula that has not been meaningfully revisited since before many of its residents graduated high school. Mayor McDonald's message to GLWA Wednesday was direct: 'Listen to us. Listen to our hardships. Listen to what's going on with us and honor what you agreed to.'

The arbitration process will ultimately decide whether the 1999 formula holds or whether a quarter-century of changed conditions — and changed data — is enough to rewrite it. Highland Park residents say they cannot afford to wait much longer for the answer.

Sources & References

• Primary source: WXYZ Detroit — Ruta Ulcinaite
• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics — Michigan unemployment rate, September 2026