Become a digitalPLUS subscriber. 99¢ for 4 weeks.
News Opinion Readers Respond

To save the bay, it must be 'all of the above'

In response to the op-ed written by Dee Hodges ("Focusing on the wrong threat to the bay," July 4), I must disagree. She recently attended a forum where I spoke in detail about Chesapeake Bay pollution. I made it very clear that the sources of pollution to the bay are varied and that all must be addressed or the bay cleanup will fail.

Pollution of the bay comes from many sources and is caused by many pollutants. Air pollution contributes 30 percent of nitrogen; sewage treatment plants must be made more efficient, thus the Bay Restoration Fee (flush tax); farms must include best management practices; stormwater must be controlled and cleaned, thus the stormwater remediation fee; and it would be very helpful if sediment behind the Conowingo Dam were dredged.

However, Ms. Hodges would postpone all other actions until only the last one is accomplished. The science and engineering support the multi-pronged strategy with no single approach as the solution.

Vincent Gardina, Towson

The writer is director of the Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection and Sustainability.

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • '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...

  • Faulty 'rain tax' math
    Faulty 'rain tax' math

    The facts in your recent editorial about the so-called "rain tax" are very selective ("The bogus 'rain tax' repeal," Nov. 21).

  • Sun ignores real cost of 'rain tax'
    Sun ignores real cost of 'rain tax'

    As usual, The Sun gets it wrong on the real cost to homeowners of the "rain tax" ("The bogus 'rain tax' repeal," Nov. 24). According to the Sun's editorial board, the tax only costs about $39 a year for the typical Baltimore County homeowner. No big deal, right? Well, how about the residual...

  • 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...

  • Time to flush the 'rain tax'
    Time to flush the 'rain tax'

    The Baltimore Sun editorial ("Bogus rain tax repeal," Nov. 24) neglects to mention that in passing the House Bill 987 Stormwater Management-Watershed and Restoration Program, the "rain tax" in response to the 2010 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency mandate aimed at reducing the pollution...

Comments
Loading