Save 75% - Only $49.99 for 1 full year! digitalPLUS subscription offer ends 12/1
NewsOpinionOp-Eds

Baltimore's stormwater fees are hard on businesses — and could have been worse

BusinessLocal GovernmentEnvironmental PoliticsBill HenryMary Pat ClarkeU.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Baltimore businesses, homeowners and nonprofits took on new financial responsibility July 1 with enactment of the city's Stormwater Remediation Fee ordinance. Much media has been generated around the unfunded mandate handed down from Annapolis to the 10 largest counties around the Chesapeake Bay. Yet, based on fiscal reality, including the cash to be collected and spent, little has been written about the disproportionate impact on Baltimore City businesses and the latest layering of fees atop already hefty property taxes.

The South Baltimore Business Alliance (SBBA), representing a coalition of Baltimore-based industrial businesses (yes, they do exist), helped craft significant improvements to the legislation from first draft through final reader. The SBBA's timely and active participation generated full-blown discussion on the fair allocation of costs, as well as dialogue on the safeguards needed to protect the integrity of the multimillion-dollar fund.

The SBBA is proud of our success in improving the legislation, including a gratifying collaboration with a myriad of interests beyond the traditional business sector to inject needed transparency into the law. Our organization's involvement in Baltimore's stormwater remediation policy was a grass-roots mandate from membership, a coalition of vital job creators in the city. The amendments and clarifications introduced by SBBA included:

•a cap on the fee equal to 20 percent of state and local real property taxes;

•a reduction of the rate paid for impervious surfaces from $18 to $15 per equivalent residential unit (a Baltimore equivalent residential unit equals 1050 square feet);

•A credit of 55 percent of the fee for property with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit to avoid "double-dipping";

•A credit of 30 percent for properties with stormwater management systems that do not use the city's stormwater infrastructure; and

•Full-disclosure requirements on the proposed budget, formulation of regulations and ongoing detailed reports.

Despite these much-needed changes, there are significant gaps in the legislation. The city's stormwater fee ordinance remains a burden for Baltimore businesses and threatens blue collar-employment. Through oversight of the ordinance's application and by continued engagement with the Baltimore City Council, both environmental and business stakeholders urge attention to the following unaddressed issues:

•deletion of the section requiring that property owners can either choose the 20 percent cap or the credits, but not both;

•further limitation of the permitted uses of the fund to ensure that the maximum amount possible goes to actual stormwater remediation, and not to pay for General Fund items or general administrative costs of the city;

•promotion of additional state legislation to remove the government property exemptions; and

•close scrutiny of budget expenditures and possible "leakage" from the fund.

Credit is due to the members of City Council who were able to grasp the big picture earlier than most. Without the leadership of Jim Kraft and his Judiciary and Legislative Committee (especially Mary Pat Clarke, Warren Branch and Bill Henry), and without the attentive ears of Rikki Spector and Council President Bernard C. "Jack" Young, the SBBA would not have made any headway. Thanks also to Council Vice President Ed Reisinger, who continues to support the growth and viability of Baltimore-based business enterprises alongside a balanced approach to environmental stewardship.

SBBA members want a clean Chesapeake Bay and are willing to pay our fair share of the cost, side by side with homeowners and nonprofit organizations. Since the rain knows not where it falls, we hope that a fresh look at the issue by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will result in Washington, D.C., Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and New York bearing a proportionate share of Chesapeake Bay restoration costs. Likewise, the inclusion of federal, state and local government property owners in the calculation of total impervious surface would more equitably share the burden.

The long-range forecast for the Baltimore City stormwater fee ordinance is a mix of clouds and sun. In the last election, city residents voted to impose the stormwater remediation fee upon themselves. With no such ballot option for business, the SBBA and other business groups will remain vigilant on issues that affect our members' ability to compete.

Jeff Fraley is president of the South Baltimore Business Alliance (www.sbbamd.org). His email is jeff@fraleycorporation.com.

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
BusinessLocal GovernmentEnvironmental PoliticsBill HenryMary Pat ClarkeU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  • 'Rain tax' not optional
    'Rain tax' not optional

    The recent sub-headline on the editorial regarding the "rain tax" was patently false ("The bogus 'rain tax' repeal," Nov. 23).

  • Rain tax exemption not worth the effort
    Rain tax exemption not worth the effort

    When we built our house in Anne Arundel County in 2002, we had to install a $10,000 wastewater management system because we were building within 1,000 feet of a body of water. We found this to be unreasonable but we had no appeal. We were certain that we qualified for an exemption now from...

  • The bogus 'rain tax' repeal
    The bogus 'rain tax' repeal

    Despite facing a bigger-than-expected budget shortfall, and although he promised a policy blackout until he takes office, Governor-elect Larry Hogan last week publicly reiterated his support for repealing Maryland's "rain tax" while meeting with fellow Republican governors in Florida. He told...

  • On 'rain tax,' Hogan has the right idea
    On 'rain tax,' Hogan has the right idea

    The Sun really doesn't get it! Larry Hogan is "repealing" the "rain tax" because it is emblematic of the over-taxing of our state's residents ("The bogus 'rain tax' repeal," Nov. 24). You can engage in all the legalistic finger-wagging you care to, but the people of this state are not impressed...

  • In rush to cut taxes and fees, lawmakers are sacrificing long-term environmental sustainability
    In rush to cut taxes and fees, lawmakers are sacrificing long-term environmental sustainability

    I was disheartened to read that both Republican and Democratic legislators are already making plans to repeal the stormwater management fees designed to pay for projects that mitigate the only source of Chesapeake Bay pollution that is still on the rise ("After Hogan victory, local...

  • Right as 'rain tax'
    Right as 'rain tax'

    I am not a fan of Gov. Martin O'Malley, but he was right for initiating his so-called "rain tax" ("'Rain tax' sobriquet is misleading," Nov. 19). In a Midwestern state, homeowners are subject to heavy fines if they allow runoff rain water to enter the streets. They must redirect it to their own...

  • 'Rain tax' sobriquet is misleading
    'Rain tax' sobriquet is misleading

    I find the continued use of the term "rain tax" to be misleading at best ("After Hogan victory, local governments look to cut taxes and fees," Nov. 15).

  • Churches should not have to pay stormwater fees [Letter]
    Churches should not have to pay stormwater fees [Letter]

    In response to your paper's recent article about churches paying stormwater fees, I would point out that churches provide heavily discounted space for community groups and that many house affordable kindergarten and nursery school programs and provide food and shelter for at-risk populations...

Comments
Loading