The port must use Site 104 until other dump sites are ready
The Belt's Corp., one of Baltimore's oldest family companies, is dependent upon a healthy shipping channel. This channel is threatened by the dispute over dumping dredge at Site 104.
The Sun's editorial "Dredging up the truth on proposed dumping" (Aug. 4) got to the heart of the matter: Open water disposal is a safe dredge disposal option that will do nothing more than move clean bottom material that is already in the Chesapeake Bay from one location to another.
Open water disposal was included in the dredging plan because it is cost effective, can be done more quickly than building another Hart Miller Island and is an environmentally safe option that has been used for years without harming other areas of the the bay.
As The Sun's editorial noted, every environmental resource agency that is now raising questions about Site 104 supported open water disposal in the port's plan.
Open water disposal is meant to meet the port's dredging needs while other disposal sites are built. It took 14 years to get Hart Miller Island approved. It has taken seven years to get Poplar Island under construction.
Dredging needs to be done every year and these two sites are not big enough to take care of the port's needs.
Recycling is years away from being a practical alternative and Aberdeen Proving Ground is a totally impractical storage site because of its contamination.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should take the next several months to check its facts and write a report that will clear up the questions, misinformation and distortions being thrown about by opponents of Site 104.
The port is too important to this state as a generator of jobs, business revenues and taxes to let it die because we cannot dredge our channels.
S. A. "Skip" Brown III, Baltimore
The writer is president and chief executive officer of the Belt's Corp., a local warehousing and real estate company.
State's real estate data could protect homebuyers
The Sun's articles on the practice of real estate "flipping" described home buyers paying far above market value for their houses ("Housing prices soar, sometimes in a day," Aug. 1; "Fraud fight in housing stepped up," Aug. 3).
Using public records may help prospective homebuyers avoid such fraudulent real estate transactions.
The Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation is the state's largest provider of real estate data.
We estimate the market value of each property every three years and record all real estate sales.
The public can view our data through the Internet at www.data.state.md.us or by visiting our local assessment offices. From these sources, a buyer can review our estimates of market value and research recent property sales in any neighborhood.
Properties typically sell at prices close to our estimates. If a house is priced far in excess of our values, a prospective buyer should find out why.
Ronald W. Wineholt, Baltimore
The writer is director of the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation.
Sen. McCain was right to avoid Iowa vote bazaar
I think the most sensible of all the Republican contenders for president is Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who did not attend the Iowa straw vote ("Counting straws in America's farm belt," Aug. 18).
Mr. McCain displayed beautiful American common sense by not participating in a circus where a Republican billionaire and a Republican millionaire competed to buy an election.
Robert S. Knatz Jr., Reisterstown
'Zero tolerance' policy wouldn't help Baltimore
In The Sun's article "Candidates plot strategy for drug battle" (Aug. 15), we are told that mayoral candidates City Council President Lawrence A. Bell III and Councilman Martin O'Malley, "both favor zero tolerance, a strategy based on aggressive policing that has reduced violent crime in cities such as New York and Cleveland."
As a supporter of mayoral candidate A. Robert Kaufman, I believe "zero tolerance" would not be good for Maryland. Crime began to decrease in New York City during the administration that preceded Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's implementation of "zero tolerance."
"Zero tolerance" is also responsible for New York's rise in police brutality, which doesn't seem like a good pill for Baltimore to have to swallow.
Scott Loughrey, Baltimore
Ministers for Stokes, accountants for Bell?
The Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance, which is presumably devoted to truth, has endorsed a liar, Carl Stokes, for mayor ("Ministerial Alliance gives Stokes boost with endorsement," Aug. 13).
Perhaps a group of accountants will now endorse City Council President Lawrence A. Bell III.
Paul Slepian, Baltimore
Mayoral debate will shed light on issues, not tactics
All of us at WBAL-TV appreciate The Sun's recognition of our efforts to bring the issues of Baltimore's mayoral race to the community we serve ("Notes and Comments," Aug. 15).
Channel 11's Aug. 30 debate is getting bigger and better. Our sister station, WBAL-AM, will simulcast the televised portion from 8-9 p.m. and continue the dialogue on radio from 9-10 p.m.
This will give this debate the widest exposure possible. The stakes for Baltimore (and the entire region) are very high.
The debate's focus will be on the issues. We hope this will help shed more light on the candidate's positions -- and less on campaign tactics.
Bill Fine, Baltimore
Use rain barrels to conserve water
Rain barrels.
The way to save precious plantings and still honor the governor's ban on outdoor water use restrictions is to save what falls from the sky. Put a big plastic trash can or cleaning bucket under the rain spout.
The downpour a few days ago filled my 5-gallon plastic bucket out back and a plastic waste basket out front -- to full and overflowing.
The water is a little yellow from the roofing material, but the impatiens and petunias love it.
This water shortage is a really serious matter. We need to drain as little as possible from our reservoirs until there is an extended deluge.
Amber Eustus, Baltimore
Nuclear power is too expensive, dangerous
The Sun's article about Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant and nuclear power contained what seemed to be a couple of contrasting conclusions ("Calvert Cliffs genre on precipice," Aug 8).
It suggested that nuclear plants have advantages over fossil-fuel burning plants because, "they generate kilowatt hours of power cheaply and lots of it."
However, a few lines later the article says, "but they require enormous operating and maintenance budgets to pay for fuel, specialized safety equipment and labor. The capital investment to develop a nuclear plant is a multiple of a fossil plant."
All of these expenses must be included in the total cost of producing electricity.
No power plant is 100 percent fire-proof, explosion-proof or mishap-proof. But the advantage of non-nuclear plants is that whatever problems they have will be confined to their own area.
An explosion in a nuclear plant can affect the territory for many miles in all directions for an indefinite length of time.
This would seem to be a good reason to phase out such plants.
William H. Kelz, Baltimore
To our readers
The Sun welcomes letters from readers. They should be no longer than 200 words and should include the name and address of the writer, along with day and evening telephone numbers.
Send letters to Letters to the Editor, The Sun, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore 21278-0001. Our fax number for letters is 410-332-6977. The e-mail address is letters@baltsun.com.
All letters are subject to editing.
Pub Date: 8/23/99