Other accidents waiting to happen
The bridge collapse in Minnesota may have been just one of many accidents waiting to happen ("Warning from Minneapolis," editorial, Aug. 3).
The most recent report card issued by the American Society of Civil Engineers gives our overall infrastructure a D rating - bridges got a C, roads a D, transit a D+, rail systems a C- and navigable waterways a D-.
The group estimated that the total investment in infrastructure the nation needs over the next five years is $1.6 trillion.
Yet according to the federal Office of Management and Budget, the Highway Trust Fund's highway account will post a $3.8 billion deficit in fiscal 2009, a figure U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters has called "a stark reminder that we need to re-evaluate our policies for funding and operating the nation's surface transportation network."
In many states, the private sector has been entering into partnerships with local and state governments to provide funds to create revenue-producing toll roads and bridges as well as to maintain and upgrade roads and bridges.
These consortiums are often awarded long-term concession agreements, which are basically long-term leases, even as title to the toll road or bridge remains with the government agency.
Our Maryland Department of Transportation and our State Highway Administration are exploring ways to bring the private sector into infrastructure partnerships here.
I think we need to encourage state leaders to do so to ensure that what happened in Minnesota does not happen here.
Sidney M. Levy
Baltimore
The writer is a retired construction engineer who is writing a book on public-private infrastructure partnerships for the American Society of Civil Engineers.
Charter plan creates a conflict of interest
I hope Baltimore County voters will have the good sense to defeat the proposed charter change that would allow County Council members to work for Maryland state government ("Council asks voters to change job rule," Aug. 7).
The people who drafted the Baltimore County Charter were right to restrict council members from working for the state.
And the argument that this prohibition might prevent someone from running for County Council is specious.
People who don't work in the rarefied atmosphere of elected office have to make such choices among career paths all the time.
Council members make more for their part-time jobs than most full-time county employees earn, and they get a very generous pension plan as well.
They often defend their ever-expanding salaries and benefits by saying that they work many more hours a week than the few required for formal work sessions and council meetings.
But if that's the case, how would council members have the time to devote to a state job and still serve their county constituents?
This charter change would create a potential conflict of interest.
And one of the council members' bosses - either the state or their constituents - would end up getting less than a full measure of service.
Karen Stott
Baltimore
The writer is a retired Baltimore County employee.
Gardina's past taints role in amendment
The Sun's report that Baltimore County Council member Vincent J. Gardina sat silently during Monday's public criticism of the council proposal to let state employees serve as council members underscores his misconduct on this issue ("Council asks voters to change job rule," Aug. 7).
It is commonly accepted that public officials should not influence the outcomes of issues in which they have a personal financial stake - past, present or future. And Mr. Gardina has been personally enmeshed in this issue ever since he served illegally on the council when he was a state employee.
Now, he has sponsored, and cast a crucial vote for, a proposal which could let him resume state employment.
Had Mr. Gardina observed well-established ethical standards and abstained from voting on Monday, the proposal, which required five votes to pass, would have failed by one vote.
In the past, Mr. Gardina has argued that no one cares about the rule barring state employees from council membership.
The county's elected charter commission, however, cared enough in 1956 to include the provision in the thoroughly debated charter approved by the voters in that year.
Indeed five of Maryland's six urban corridor counties have included similar measures in their charters. Prince George's County is the only exception.
If the reasons for barring state employees from council membership were obscure 50 years ago, that is no longer the case today.
Driven by the Government Accounting Standards Board to begin disclosing and providing for the staggering costs of health and retirement benefits for government employees, county council members will soon be confronted with the kinds of painful benefit-paring decisions that already have beset major private employers and unions.
When that happens, participants in those debates will deserve to know whether government employment and relationships with government employee unions pose conflicts of interest for council members.
Sitting in silence won't do.
Paul G. Edwards
Towson
Creating standards for carbon offsets
In Tom Pelton's article "Pollution, without all that guilt" (Aug. 5), he seems to want to discredit a new but important next step in curbing greenhouse gas emissions - carbon offsets.
The market for emission offsets is relatively new and, like most emerging markets, is moving faster than the regulations which govern it.
However, rather than dismissing the market outright, we should be working to strengthen it by offering improved consumer protection.
When done right, carbon offsets can be a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist way to begin to address the greenhouse gas issue.
For the last 10 years my group, the Center for Resource Solutions, has certified green power products that help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Now, the organization is developing, and will soon launch, a similar consumer protection program specifically designed to certify the efficacy of the carbon offsets sold to consumers.
This new program will offer a Good Housekeeping-type seal of approval for offsets that meet a strict set of standards.
These requirements were designed to prove, among other things, that the offsets are real, verifiable and of high-quality.
Mr. Pelton's article slammed a fledgling industry that will soon get the standards and oversight it needs to grow past its current problems and become a viable tool in the fight against climate change.
Evan Johnson
San Francisco, Calif.
The writer is a visiting fellow at the Center for Resource Solutions.
Balancing ethics with our palates
In a follow-up to Dr. Patrice Green's column "Save the planet with a vegetarian diet" (Opinion
Commentary, July 19), Dr. Richard Schwartz's letter "Animal farms create considerable carbon" (July 28) further highlighted the threat of climate change and animal agriculture's considerable contribution to it.
We would like to thank The Sun for drawing attention to this under-recognized climate change risk factor.
How under-recognized is it? Our Lexis-Nexis search found that only six major U.S. newspapers published anything at all about the November 2006 report from the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization on the impact of animal farming on global warming or on its findings.
So we in Baltimore are in the vanguard; we know about the problem. Now what?
Framing the issue as a conflict between vegetarianism and the "choice" to eat meat, as food industry representative David Martosko did in his letter "Vegetarianism isn't cure-all for warming" (July 28) can make those who don't want to go "cold turkey" on meat feel powerless.
But given the magnitude of the problems at hand, we need realistic solutions that can be widely adopted.
And everyone can reduce his or her meat consumption - by eating fewer meat-based meals or by bulking-up meat-based meals with other ingredients.
We can also buy more sustainably produced meats. And we can follow U.S. Department of Agriculture's dietary guidelines, which call for about a 37 percent reduction in the average American's meat intake.
No one challenges Mr. Martosko's choice to eat a chicken sandwich.
But the challenge to all of us is to find ways to balance our ethics, health and palates.
Roni Neff Dr. Robert S. Lawrence Baltimore
The writers are, respectively, the research director and the director of the Johns Hopkins University's Center for a Livable Future.
Mandate clean-up of poisoned courses
Kudos to Howard County Executive Ken Ulman and Health Officer Peter L. Beilenson for taking action on arsenic and lead contamination at the Turf Valley Golf Course, a property slated for redevelopment for homes, commercial uses and a possible elementary school ("Arsenic found high in Turf Valley," Aug. 3).
We especially welcome Mr. Ulman's promise to introduce legislation requiring the comprehensive testing and remediation of all county golf courses undergoing redevelopment.
For years, Turf Valley's developer stonewalled all attempts by residents and environmental groups to obtain comprehensive test results for the property.
But last week, the developer's lawyers divulged the existence of a different set of damning test results to county officials.
Those tests revealed arsenic contamination levels 60 times the norm (at 300 parts per million in a part of Maryland where 4.9 million ppm is considered normal) and lead levels of 640 ppm, which sharply exceeds the safe level of 400 ppm.
Some of the credit for the release of this information should surely go to The Sun for its investigation of Allied Signal/Honeywell's callous suppression of its record of arsenic contamination at Swann Park ("Arsenic forces closing of park," April 20).
This reporting put developers, corporate executives and public officials on notice that they will be held accountable for suppressing information on toxic contamination on public and private lands and for its impact on human health and the environment.
The General Assembly must take the next step and enact legislation in its next session which will require comprehensive testing of all golf courses prior to redevelopment and mandate the remediation of contaminated properties.
Lee Walker Oxenham
Ellicott City
The writer is chairperson of the conservation committee for the Howard County Group of the Sierra Club.
Parks can anchor the city's renewal
I read with great interest The Sun's article about the improvements to Rash Field ("Inner Harbor to get new 'green anchor'," July 28).
This project will add a new green element to the Inner Harbor which will help continue to make Baltimore an exciting destination and attract even more residents and visitors.
This park will also serve as a critical link between the Federal Hill community and the Inner Harbor, providing residents improved access to recreation opportunities and giving neighbors a place to come together.
The renovation of Rash Field is an example of how well-planned green spaces can serve as connectors linking citizens and tourists to cultural, educational and entertainment amenities.
Parks and green spaces are among Baltimore's greatest assets and are critical to sustaining a healthy ecosystem and thriving communities.
Well-maintained, lively parks can also be key components of good economic development and neighborhood revitalization strategies for Baltimore.
Congratulations to the Parking Authority, the Baltimore Development Corp. and the Department of Recreation and Parks for their vision for incorporating green space in their plans for Baltimore's revitalization.
Jacqueline M. Carrera
Baltimore
The writer is president of the Parks & People Foundation.
Industry is working to boost recycling
As a Maryland resident and a member of the nonalcoholic beverage industry, I completely agree with the writer of the column "Let's bag those criticisms of plastic" (Aug. 3) that we need improved access to recycling receptacles for consumers.
This is a solution which will help improve recycling rates for all containers, not just bottled water.
Drinking fluids is essential, and bottled water is just one of many choices provided by the beverage industry to meet our hydration needs.
But it is important for readers to know that our industry does care about what happens to its containers.
Beverage containers are among the most recycled consumer product packaging in the nation and are accepted in virtually all curbside and drop-off programs.
Furthermore, bottled water containers are 100 percent recyclable and account for less than one-third of 1 percent of the nation's municipal waste.
The beverage industry is committed to improving access to recycling at home and on the go, which is why its members are founding members, along with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, of the new National Recycling Partnership, which is dedicated to revitalizing recycling in America.
Ellen Valentino
Annapolis
The writer is executive vice president of the Maryland Beverage Association.
Defender of slavery merits no memorial
I take exception to the letter that defended pro-slavery Chief Justice Roger B. Taney and the monuments erected in his honor ("Moving monuments distorts our heritage," letters, Aug. 3).
I understand that, as the letter-writer is a descendant of Mr. Taney, this defense is a matter of family honor. But as a member of the African-American people who, according to Mr. Taney, "have no rights which a white man is bound to respect," I have an even weightier claim to honor and human dignity.
The letter-writer claims that if earlier generations of Americans honored Mr. Taney with monuments, we have no right to withdraw that honor for the sake of "political correctness."
But earlier Americans were divided over slavery and hardly unanimous in admiring Mr. Taney. His pro-slavery ruling left many people appalled at his defense of the barbarism of servitude.
Why cannot we, who today struggle to overcome the anti-democratic legacy of slavery and racial caste, re-evaluate a judge who aided in the continuance of that legacy?
The writer's substantive defense of Mr. Taney's infamous pro-slavery ruling in the Dred Scott decision is that it was "in accordance" with the Constitution and backed by a majority of other justices.
He also commends Mr. Taney for a judicial ruling purportedly upholding the rule of law "against the tyranny of the Lincoln government."
But Mr. Lincoln's mild, temporary constraints on some liberties were reasonable under civil war conditions in which slave-holding seditionists sought to subvert the republic.
Such measures were hardly tyrannical. Indeed the greatest tyranny was slavery.
And although slavery was once allowed by the Constitution, we should remember that the aim of law is justice.
It is not a matter of erasing Mr. Taney from our history.
But in re-evaluating its history, a country dedicated to the idea that "all men are created equal" cannot honorably esteem someone who upheld human bondage.
Robert Birt
Baltimore
Gallery gives boost to city's arts district
My business partner and I are baffled by reporter Glenn McNatt's omission of our gallery's success from his article on the Station North Arts and Entertainment District ("Art makes a start," Aug. 6).
Mr. McNatt made three visits to our business, querying us about what was happening in the neighborhood, yet made only passing mention of our Station North Arts Gallery.
Our gallery didn't even get a dot on the district map which accompanied the article.
Being the Station North area arts ambassadors we are, we gave Mr. McNatt a Station North district map and some sources he should contact.
When we read his story we couldn't believe our efforts or sentiments got so little attention.
When we opened the Station North Arts Gallery, it sparked a second renaissance in the 1800 block of North Charles Street.
For years no one would come near this block because it was nearly 80 percent vacant, continually strewn with trash and overrun with huge rats.
We moved in, cleaned up, fixed up and set up shop utilizing absolutely no federal, state or city funding assistance and prevailed in realizing our dream of owning a business.
And we encouraged others to follow suit.
Couldn't Mr. McNatt have thrown us a little bone?
Kevin Brown
William Maughlin Baltimore
Viewing beating in terms of race
I would like to commend The Sun and reporter Gus Sentementes for a very moving article on the attack on a young Canton man, Zachary Sowers ("Violence hits too close to home," Aug. 4).
I am sure I was not the only reader who was on the verge of tears as I read about how this young couple was coping with this tragic and senseless act.
I would, however, like to pre-emptively address the inevitable accusations (I've lived in this town my whole life, so trust me they are inevitable) that somehow the victim's race contributes to the community's reaction and outpouring of support.
As a resident of Canton, my participation in the Neighbors' Night Out fund-raiser for Zachary Sowers is driven exclusively by the fact that he lives in my neighborhood.
Had he been African-American, Latino or of any other racial or ethnic background, my outrage over his beating and, I suspect, that of my community, would have been exactly the same.
Each and every member of the community has an opportunity to support one another and is obligated to do so if the city is to continue the urban renaissance so eloquently described in this article.
D. Kenneth Mangum
Baltimore
What precisely was it about the vicious, life-threatening attack on Zachary Sowers in Canton in June that makes The Sun feel it hits "too close to home"?
When Jordan Brown, an extraordinary 21-year-old man was killed last week right in his West Baltimore neighborhood, three blocks from my home (and several blocks from the home of the mayor), why was this senseless murder not regarded as so "close to home"?
In neighborhoods all over Baltimore violence of the kind visited on Mr. Sowers and Mr. Brown has become a daily reality.
However, Mr. Sowers is a young, white, urban professional. And perhaps The Sun's editors imagine that its readership can connect more closely with his story.
But the principal victims of violence in Baltimore are young, African-American men.
The toll of grief and loss for their families and communities is like a weight draining the very spirit out of Baltimore.
The murder of Mr. Brown, an amazing former high school athlete, well-known and admired by his peers, is a crushing loss for this city, which can ill-afford to lose the contributions and leadership of responsible, positive young black men.
But often The Sun and other local media outlets treat the murders of young black men in Baltimore -- as The Sun did in the case of Mr. Brown -- as worthy of just a few lines describing the circumstances of the attack, without giving readers any sense of how his family, church and community struggle to cope ("Shooting victim is city's 186th homicide of '07," Aug. 2).
Perhaps if The Sun provided the kind of attention it devoted to the Sowers' story to the murder of every young, black man in the city, public awareness of the urgency of the need to stem this violence would result in a broad-based demand for the kind of concrete changes to our education, social service and criminal justice systems needed to turn around the lives of the young, violent perpetrators of these crimes.
Sherrilyn Ifill
Baltimore
The writer is a professor at the University of Maryland School of Law and a member of the board of the Open Society Institute -- Baltimore.
While I appreciate The Sun's continued coverage of the horrifying beating of Zachary Sowers, I think there was a subtly troubling tone to the article "Violence hits close to home."
The article repeatedly makes the point that the beating took place "merely" for a watch and $10.
And that's certainly true.
But the implication of that point seems to be that if the beating had taken place for, say, a car and $10,000, then it would somehow be more explicable and palatable.
In other words, it implies that we can understand and even accept violence when the monetary stakes are higher.
This is a dangerous mindset and an old one that assumes crime and violence are rooted simply in poverty.
While poverty certainly continues to fuel violence in our city, I'm afraid that we are failing to understand that the trends of the last year are especially frightening because they suggest that, more than ever, violence is raging for the sake of violence alone.
I daresay that those four youths charged with this crime may have been more interested in power than in money.
And I think the rage of powerlessness felt by urban youth is what is causing the ridiculous, soulless, remorseless violence in Baltimore and throughout urban America.
And why shouldn't it?
Look at the gentrification that has taken place in Baltimore, and ask yourself who's been invited to participate in the spoils of that wealth.
Then ask the harder question: Now that we've created an alienated, violent, remorseless and brutal urban youth culture, what are we going to do to change it?
Rich Espey
Towson
The writers are co-owners of the Station North Arts Gallery.