Conduit Street

MACo Legal and Policy Counsel Les Knapp addressed the Stormwater Association of Maryland (SWAM) on June 15 on Maryland’s proposed Accounting for Growth (AFG) Policy.  As previously reported on Conduit Street, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) is overseeing a stakeholders workgroup to draft an offset policy for water pollution generated by new development and growth in the state.  The offset requirements would be in addition to the nitrogen, phosphorous, and sediment reduction goals of the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load, which largely targets currently existing development and pollution sources.

As part of his presentation, Mr. Knapp discussed the goal of the AFG Policy, the projected timeline for the AFG Workgroup (draft regulations by December), the key stakeholders on the workgroup, and the primary components of the draft AFG policy.  Mr. Knapp also offered the following observations:

• The AFG Policy has the potential to have a greater impact on practitioners and stakeholders than previous land use and environmental initiatives, such as the 2012 septic system legislation or PlanMaryland.
• The AFG Workgroup has identified the overall components for an AFG Policy but much more work and consensus is needed on the details of the Policy.
• The draft Policy not only includes water pollution reduction goals but also land use goals, which can sometimes complicate or even run counter to the water pollution reduction goals.
• Having proposed regulations for an AFG Policy by December is ambitious but possible.
•  MACo has been engaged throughout the process and will remain an active participant until the AFG Policy is finalized.

For further information, please contact Les Knapp at lknapp@mdcounties.org or 410.269.0043

A wide group of stakeholders, organized by the Maryland Department of the Environment and including counties, continues to meet to work out mechanics of a forthcoming policy to create offsets for nutrient loads arising from continued development in the state.  The overall effort, labeled “Accounting for Growth,” (or AFG) is likely to yield regulations by the end of the year.

MDE’s webpage on “Accounting for Growth” includes this summary:

Maryland’s plan for addressing pollution load from new development centers on: 1) the strategic allotment of nutrient loads to large wastewater treatment plants to accommodate growth; and 2) the requirement that all other new loads must be offset by securing pollution credits. To ensure that there are sufficient credits available, the State is designing its AFG policy to induce a robust nutrient trading market in Maryland, which would, in turn, lower pollution reduction costs, especially for local government, developers, tax and rate payers, and accelerate the Bay’s restoration.

The workgroup met on Friday, May 10, to review progress made by several sub-groups in recent weeks, and to further refine its attentions across a wide range of outstanding issues. The workgroup has stated a goal to complete its own work by the end of June, and expects to hold three further meetings in the coming weeks to do so.

Among the major issues remaining are:

-how to calculate the amount of nutrients required to be offset under the AFG policy — which involves defining both the “before development” and “after development” nutrient loads, and the special cases raised by agricultural land being converted to other more intensive uses that may not generate as much nutrient runoff

-the creation and fostering of a robust trading program, where an actor proposing a new development may seek credits to offset its added nutrient load, by purchasing them from other sources — this debate involves both the calculation and geography of such a trading program, and a a desire to “retire” credits as part of these exchanges

-the responsibility for verifying and observing load-reducing efforts — including a debate over the timing of such offsets (permanent of fixed in time) and the oversight duty (state, county, or third party)

MACo and county governments have been formally represented on the workgroup by Harford County Council Member Mary Ann Lisanti, Talbot County Planner Sandy Coyman, and Shannon Moore from Frederick County’s Office of Sustainability and Environmental Resources.  Steve Stewart from the Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection and Resource Management has also been an active participant and Les Knapp from the MACo staff has been closely involved in both a policy and technical capacity.

For more information about the AfG workgroup and MACo’s involvement, contact MACo Legal and Policy Counsel Les Knapp.

An April 24 Sustainable City Network article highlights the benefits community gardens can provide in urban areas with vacant lots but also notes that planning and support is critical to ensure a garden’s success.  The article focuses on the experiences of Lawrence, Kansas, which approved 4 pilot sites for the 2012 growing season that were open to neighborhood associations, nonprofit associations, and schools.

Community gardens have the potential to beautify vacant lots, augment local food supplies and enhance the urban environment in a variety of ways. But, successful program management requires careful planning and ongoing support, according to Eileen Horn, sustainability coordinator for Douglas County and the city of Lawrence, Kan.  …

The sites include a neighborhood community garden, a youth-focused garden in a city park, a community orchard for free picking, and a market farm coordinated by college and middle school students. In exchange for receiving a free license for use of city property, each applicant created a community benefit plan for their project.

Horn presented an overview of the city’s “Common Ground” community gardens program in an April 18 webinar hosted by Sustainable City Network. A video recording of the webinar can be downloaded at sCityNetwork.com/webinars.  …

Lawrence drew inspiration from successful community garden programs in Cleveland and Boston, both of which provide city property but rely heavily on local organizations to take responsibility for operating the gardens.

Key goals established for the Common Ground program included supporting the local food economy; supporting the city’s healthy food initiatives; helping address food access issues in the city’s “food deserts;” providing for potential “agritourism;” supporting neighborhoods; and avoiding maintenance costs of existing vacant lots.

The article notes that site selection is critical and important property factors include:  (1) being vacant or under-utilized with little development potential; (2) being in a safe area near active neighborhoods; (3) access to existing water infrastructure; and (4) being free of toxins and environmental contaminants.

Horn’s advice to cities considering similar programs include:

• Target “food deserts”
• Partner with organizations with proven capacity
• Educate commissioners about the community benefit plan
• Monitor and evaluate
• Form solid partnerships with community groups

The WYPR radio show “Maryland Morning” recently focused on high profile legislation offering farmers who engage in various best practices for nutrient management and pollution controls to receive protection from future regulations or mandates. The “Agricultural Certainty” bill yielded extensive debate in Annapolis in the waning weeks of the 2013 session.

From the show’s website:

One of the main challenges is getting farmers to embrace practices that reduce runoff, such fencing off cows to keep them away from streams.

Earlier this month, the Maryland General Assembly passed an “Agricultural Certainty” bill. The idea is that if farmers do take up these best practices, their operations shouldn’t be upended down the line by new pollution laws forcing more changes on them.

Visit the website to hear the audio discussion, archived as a podcast.