Should homeowners pay the cleanup cost?
By E.B. FURGURSON III, Staff Writer
Third in a three-part series.
The bottom line to fixing the county's damaged shorelines and waterways is green - and it doesn't grow on trees.
With a growing backlog of $400 million in restoration work needed, county officials and environmental interests are quietly talking about charging property owners an annual fee that would average about $60 per household.
But getting that done politically in a fiscally conservative county could be as big a task as stopping the tons of polluted sediment washing every year into the Chesapeake Bay.
The county currently spends about $11.5 million a year to repair the ravages of storm water on Anne Arundel's watersheds. The proposed homeowner fee would raise an additional $20 million per year.
But the problem for those supporting the fee is finding a politician willing to carry the water.
County Executive Janet S. Owens says it's not something that will get done during her tenure and no County Council member has come forward publicly to sponsor such a bill.
As the debate goes on behind the scenes, the damage to local waterways continues.
Ten percent of Anne Arundel County's 1,239 miles of freshwater rivers and streams need immediate restoration to slow the effects of sediment pollution.
"It will take a public education campaign," said Ron Bowen, the county's director of public works. "We have to establish a process so people recognize the fairness (of such a plan)."
Mr. Bowen said there is precedent for attempting to create a specific fund to address a county-wide problem.
"Years ago our wastewater infrastructure was underfunded, but we were able to create an enterprise fund, a dedicated funding stream, to pay for it," he said of the county sewer system. "Today we have turned it around."
Ideas gel
Several years ago, Ms. Owens OK'd a plan by county officials to research similar storm-water funding mechanisms nationwide to find what works and what doesn't.
The consensus is pointing to a fee based on the amount of hardened surface on a property, like driveways and rooftops, also called impervious surfaces.
The money would be spent only on watershed restoration projects and related storm-water work like dredging projects and maintaining county-owned storm-water ponds.
The storm-water fund would charge property owners an annual fee, roughly $5 per month, based on an "impervious surface runoff unit." That would be determined by finding the amount of impervious surface for an average county home's roof and driveway. The current working figure is about 2,400 square feet.
Commercial properties would be charged at that rate for their total impervious area in multiples of 2,400. That scenario would raise some $20 million per year.
But property owners could also earn a credit, possibly up to 50 percent, for installing rain gardens, using porous pavers in lieu of asphalt drives, or using other techniques that allow rainwater to infiltrate into the soil.
But Mr. Bowen realizes whatever is done it must generate enough money to do the job.
"Is $60 a year enough?" he said. "We need to demonstrate results. The question is will we be able to demonstrate results to maintain the support of those folks who are paying into the fund."
'One Happy Meal'
"Would you be willing to pay $5 a month, per household, to see our water improved to clean the bay? That is about one Happy Meal a month." said Anne Pearson, who founded the Anne Arundel Watershed Network.
She is one of several people who have been meeting with community organizations around the county to kick off a discussion about the issues involved.
"If people think about it, we spend money on things that are a bit frivolous, not necessary. This $5 will contribute to the long-term health of the bay, and ourselves," she added.
So far they have talked to some 40 organizations and the response has been generally positive.
Even some business groups are supporting it.
"The home building industry is supportive of a storm-water utility fee for Anne Arundel County," said Susan Stroud Parker of the Home Builders Association of Maryland in a statement. "Unlike new residential communities or those about to come online, a majority of older neighborhoods in this county have little or no storm-water management. Because of the expense of retrofitting older neighborhoods, new development is always asked to mitigate runoff from adjacent communities. That cost is borne by the new home purchaser."
Several civic associations including the Weems Creek Conservancy, Generals Highway Council of Civic Associations, Annapolis Neck Peninsula Federation, Belle Grove Improvement Association have voted to support a storm-water fund.
Robert MacWilliams, a project manager for McCrone Inc., one of the area's primary engineering firms, said the fund is a good idea. He thinks new storm-water management techniques should be made mandatory.
"If your plumbing is broken, you need a plumber to fix it now," he said. "Well, our ecological plumbing is broken. We spend public money on infrastructure (roads, water systems). We need to take care of our ecological infrastructure, too."
Leaders balk
But county leaders are not ready to push for yet another fee after the so-called flush tax, a $60-per-year charge intended to pay for sewage treatment upgrades to reduce nitrogen in the bay was implemented this year.
"Faced with unfunded mandates for non-source point discharge and the daunting task of correcting the storm water management practices of the previous generations, it's important to begin looking at funding alternatives now," Ms. Owens said. "However, without all the facts on alternative funding sources, moving forward with legislation for a dedicated storm-water utility fund would be premature. This is not legislation that my administration will be able to see to fruition."
At least one councilman is not ready to take the leap either, especially going into in an election year.
"I will be very happy to discuss it," said Councilman Ed Reilly, R-Crofton. "But I need a groundswell of citizen support before I take that step."
He said adding a new fee could be difficult in a county where the conservative base won't even discuss removing the tax cap. It limits the amount of revenue the county can raise to the rate of inflation or 4.5 percent, whichever is lower.
"I don't know if it will get legs in the general population . . . Right now I see no interest on the part of the council to take such action."
The county's five riverkeepers, who advocate on behalf of the Severn, South, Rhode, West Patapsco and Patuxent rivers, brought the subject up at the July 18 County Council meeting.
South Riverkeeper Drew Koslow spoke about the presentation. "The growth and development throughout the county has had a huge impact on our streams and contributed a large part to sediment pollution. We have all contributed to the problem. The only way to get these done is to create a specific source to pay for them."
Conservationist John Flood points to another reason to act: "We owe it to the next generation. We should not rob our children of their natural heritage. And that is what we do when we do not control storm water," he said after climbing out of his skiff loaded with bay grasses for a shoreline restoration project.
"We owe our kids blue water and lush grasses like we had when we were kids."
To see what other jurisdictions have done:
ø Florida
ø Montgomery County
Published 08/01/05, Copyright © 2005 The Capital, Annapolis, Md.
Click here to contact your council members in support of a Stormwater Management Enterprise Fund
Click here to go to Part Two in the series.
Back to Watershed Restoration Fund Page
