Sign up today and save up to 83% on a Hartford Courant digital subscription
CT Now

Md. must enforce stormwater controls [Letter]

In a letter to the editor ("Md. leads the region in reducing stormwater runoff," Jan. 10), Maryland Department of the Environment Secretary Robert Summers took issue with concerns I expressed earlier in The Sun ("Bay advocates say state lax in monitoring county stormwater controls," Jan. 3). At issue is a program which could halt the loss of 68 miles of Maryland waterways each year and eventually restore 4,600 miles polluted by past growth.

The program was established by the 1982 Maryland Stormwater Management Act which Secretary Summers' agency oversees. Through this law, MDE was to assist counties and larger municipalities in setting up programs to ensure new development used measures to minimize flooding, runoff pollution and other stormwater impacts. The act also required that "the Department shall periodically, but at least once every 3 years, inspect and review the stormwater management programs of the counties and municipalities and their field implementation."

In his letter, Secretary Summers claims that through reports provided by local jurisdictions MDE can assess how well each is doing in using the highly-effective aquatic resource protection measures required by state law and policy. If only this were so.

Local governments are under tremendous pressure to provide many critical services — police, fire, schools, water, sewers, stormwater, etc. When five of these six services decline in quality, the public finds out within a fairly short period of time. But few notice when a cut-back in staffing results in the use of cheaper, but less effective measures or higher failure rates for existing stormwater ponds and other runoff control measures. During dry weather when most would see a stormwater-polluted stream, it looks clear and clean. But look closer and you'll see few fish. Look at bacteria test results and you'll keep your children far from these waters which probably flow within a 15-minute walk of your home.

To comply with the Act, MDE used to send their staff out to review recently approved stormwater plans to ensure highly-effective measures were used to minimize stormwater impacts. MDE staff would also inspect ponds and other measures in the field to verify that they were being kept in good working order through regular maintenance. Throughout the 1980s and much of the 1990s, MDE evaluated most local programs once every three years. But for reasons Mr. Summers did not explain, the reviews petered out in the last decade.

Secretary Summers seemed to contend that self-reporting by local governments is as effective as the independent reviews MDE is required to perform. While not a perfect analogy, one could liken this to doing away with school quizzes and tests. Instead, report cards would be based upon the teacher's impression of how well each student is learning. I suspect in a number of cases the teacher's assessment would come close to what tests would show. But without quiz and test results, there's no way to determine if the teacher's pet really deserves a better grade than the class-clown. Or if a school system opted to fudge their numbers a bit to prevent sanctions.

To bring this back to the real world, Anne Arundel County decided in 2001 to reduce their stormwater inspection staff from seven to one. A single inspector can evaluate about 800 stormwater measures in a year for maintenance needs. State law requires inspecting each measure at least once every three years. There are more than 11,000 of these measures in Anne Arundel County. By 2011, a decade after the cutback, half of the stormwater measures in the Severn River watershed were failing due to a lack of maintenance. Of course, the county still had a single inspector.

Ironically, MDE did perform a triennial review of the Anne Arundel County program in 2005. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency then conducted a review in 2008. Yet it was only recently that the county announced that it will be adding three more inspectors. So I guess this kind of supports what Secretary Summers wrote with regard to the triennial reviews being only one part of what it takes to keep local stormwater programs working well. It also takes a state agency willing to aggressively pursue correction of program deficiencies before they result in the failure of thousands of stormwater measures that could have been keeping hundreds of tons of pollution out of the Chesapeake Bay.

Richard Klein, Owings Mills

The writer is president of Community & Environmental Defense Services.

To respond to this letter, send an email to Please include your name and contact information.

Copyright © 2015, CT Now
Related Content
  • The rain tax is unfair because not all pay it

    The rain tax is unfair because not all pay it

    I'm for the stormwater management fee if it is paid by all ("End 'rain tax' ridicule rap, repeal and replace law," Feb. 28). It is ridiculous to tie it some counties and not all. In the state of current dynamics, just about all contribute to the problems, and just about all will benefit from the...

  • 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 costs...

  • 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 The...

  • Rain tax still isn't justified

    Rain tax still isn't justified

    Regarding The Sun's editorial on the stormwater management fee ("Carroll talks sense on stormwater," April 3), let's first explain Gov. Larry Hogan's position in my opinion. He proposed to get rid of the "rain tax," the legislature voted that down and proposed their own biased solution as offered...

  • 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...

  • '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).

  • 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 levels...

  • 'Rain tax' a drop in Md. tax bucket

    'Rain tax' a drop in Md. tax bucket

    I agree that the repeal of the "rain tax" is bogus ("The bogus 'rain tax' repeal," Nov. 24). But it would be interesting if The Sun put a table in the paper with the typical cost to Maryland residents of all the 40 or so new or increased taxes imposed upon us by the nanny Gov. Martin O'Malley.