The poll from Annapolis-based OpinionWorks asked 801 registered voters if they'd support increasing the Bay Restoration Fund fee - its officially name - to upgrade sewage plants and reduce stormwater runoff.
Twenty-six percent offered strong support and 38 percent said they somewhat support an increase, for a total support of 64 percent.
Another 27 percent either somewhat or strongly oppose and increase, while 9 percent were not...
| This story has expired! You can purchase the full text in our news archives. |
If you encounter other problems, please email nlundskow@capitalgazette.com and include your name, username, and any errors or messages that are displayed. The more information you can provide, the better able we will be to assist you.
In order to post or vote on a comment, you must be signed in with a hometownannapolis account.
Take a look at a summary of Commenting Guidelines.
Report Abuse or Vote In order to allow the user community the ability to collectively rank the value of comments posted on the Capital Gazette websites we have implemented a thumbs-up/down system. All logged-in users may participate by voting up/down each comment. If others vote on your comment, your individual score will go up/down depending on the votes. Initially, everyone starts with a score of zero, and must earn credits to have significant voting weight. Individuals with higher scores will have more voting weight. 0
1
Works...if - 2012-01-19 22:42:11
If the additional fee is consumption based, no worries. If it actually goes to improving treatment plants, no worries.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?
harry trampolini - severna park, MD - Karma: Excellent
Report Abuse or Vote In order to allow the user community the ability to collectively rank the value of comments posted on the Capital Gazette websites we have implemented a thumbs-up/down system. All logged-in users may participate by voting up/down each comment. If others vote on your comment, your individual score will go up/down depending on the votes. Initially, everyone starts with a score of zero, and must earn credits to have significant voting weight. Individuals with higher scores will have more voting weight. 0
3
Flush Fee - 2012-01-19 20:14:47
Why not put a head tax on animals raised in consolidated animal feeding operations (CAFOS) that generate a large percentage of our water pollution. This will not harm the small family farmer. There are roughly 12 million chickens placed in these CAFOS each week on the Delmarva Pennisula.
A 5 or 10 cent head tax would generate significant funds to support the cleanup of the bay and place the burgen on the polluter that is now taxed at a lower rate than the residents.
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?
Jim Remines - Gambrills, MD - Karma: Neutral
Report Abuse or Vote In order to allow the user community the ability to collectively rank the value of comments posted on the Capital Gazette websites we have implemented a thumbs-up/down system. All logged-in users may participate by voting up/down each comment. If others vote on your comment, your individual score will go up/down depending on the votes. Initially, everyone starts with a score of zero, and must earn credits to have significant voting weight. Individuals with higher scores will have more voting weight. 4
0
Septic Tank Treatments - 2012-01-19 19:43:14
Use All-Natural Advanced Formula Septic-Helper 2000. It has the 8 natural bacteria and enzymes that liquefy the waste in the tank AND out in the drain field. For less than $4 per month.
Check the septic and water rules in your State and County. In 2011 the EPA TMDL Mandates that States clean up their water supplies. A failed inspection would include a slow drain in your leach field, low bacteria levels or elevated Nitrate levels could require replacement of your entire system for $10,000 to $80,000 or connect to the city sewer system.
800+ Septic, Well & Water News Stories: Twitter MillerPlanteInc Search the News by State: Facebook Miller.Plante
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?
Chris Edwards - Maitland, FL - Karma: Bad
Report Abuse or Vote In order to allow the user community the ability to collectively rank the value of comments posted on the Capital Gazette websites we have implemented a thumbs-up/down system. All logged-in users may participate by voting up/down each comment. If others vote on your comment, your individual score will go up/down depending on the votes. Initially, everyone starts with a score of zero, and must earn credits to have significant voting weight. Individuals with higher scores will have more voting weight. 1
2
Statistical Validity? - 2012-01-19 19:08:41
A sample of only 801 respondents sounds pitifully small from which to extrapolate a 'nearly 2/3 approval' conclusion. The validity of such a small sample size is further called into question by the margin of error -- 3.4% is pretty large, especially for such a small sample. I'd also be curious about the demographics of the respondents -- age, income, political affiliation, income, etc. And, I wonder, how were the poll questions framed?
unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking. Why is this comment hidden?
Tina Chite - Churchton, MD - Karma: Good
If you encounter other problems, please email nlundskow@capitalgazette.com and include your name, username, and any errors or messages that are displayed. The more information you can provide, the better able we will be to assist you.