A second go-around at a fund to pay for $1.3billion in stream restoration projects in Anne Arundel won?t happen until the new year, officials said.
County Executive John R. Leopold has said he would bring forward a new version of the Stormwater Management and Restoration of Tributaries Fund by Monday after an altered version of the bill died before the County Council.
“We?re having constructive conversations with the County Council and will hopefully move forward the first week of January,” said Leopold, who would not disclose the discussions.
The added time may be needed.
While Leopold and the council agree the county?s waterways are polluted, few have aligned for a common funding source.
Leopold?s bill was initially an added fee on permits to discourage the addition of impervious surfaces, such as parking lots and rooftops.
But the bill died because a tax on current impervious surface was tacked on, and the majority of the council is fiscally conservative.
Council Chairwoman Cathy Vitale, R-District 5, said Friday she wants a stormwater impact fee on new development and supports current property owners being able to “opt-out” of the fee.
The optional provision was offered during last week?s meeting, but Vitale voted against it, saying she didn?t have time to review the amendment submitted last minute.
Meanwhile, environmentalists and activists are pushing for a fund. Of the 70 people who testified before the council last week, a majority favored the tax as a way to raise funds.
Some residents described how small wounds led to debilitating skin infections after swimming in Anne Arundel?s bacteria-laden waters.
A cut on Bernard Voitch?s leg was exposed as he swam in Plum Creek in 2005. He then spent five months nursing his leg after a flesh-eating bacteria nearly led doctors to “choose between my leg and my life.”
“We need to find the right solution,” said Bob Whitcomb, who also suffered a skin infection because of bacteria in the water. “But they have to find a way in the next few weeks or the opportunity may pass them by.”
The tax would have generated an estimated $11 million annually, while Leopold?s bill would have raked in $5 million. The fee would have charged homeowners $30 a year, and commercial and industry property owners at most $25,000 a year.
