Published: Wednesday, March 17, 2010
GUEST COMMENTARY / HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE TAX
A win-win: Clean water, good jobs
Right now the Legislature is considering a proposal that would help Snohomish County address two pressing problems: toxic stormwater runoff and our slumped economy.
The proposal, the Clean Water Act of 2010 (HB 3181/SB 6851), would increase, by less than 1 percentage point, the existing hazardous substance tax to pay for clean water infrastructure projects required by law.
These projects, which range from retrofitted urban streets to new storm drains to stormwater ponds, are labor intensive and will put people to work. They’ll also directly address the biggest water pollution problem in our state.
Each time it rains, toxic pollutants from our roads and lawns wash directly into our rivers, lakes and Puget Sound, slowly poisoning our waterways. The best analogy I’ve heard to convey the scope of the problem is that it’s the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez spill in slow motion each year.
Local governments are responsible for stemming this flow, but they simply don’t have the funds to deal with the problems on the scale needed. Right now, the bulk of clean-up funding comes from property taxes and utilities fees. The Clean Water Act would ask companies responsible for producing the worst of the pollutants to shoulder their share of clean-up costs. It’s a straight-forward notion — “polluter pays” — one that we’ve used successfully in our state for over 20 years.
What the bill would do is increase the hazardous substance tax, also known as the “poisons tax.” It was created by voter initiative in 1988 to clean up toxic sites around the state and the rate has never been increased to meet the skyrocketing costs of pollution cleanup.
This common-sense solution is running into roadblocks, however. The oil industry opposes the legislation, and is throwing its weight around in Olympia. They’d prefer it if taxpayers cleaned up their mess, leaving them to make record profits as the rest of the economy suffers.
The oil companies have claimed that any cost increases they incur will endanger jobs in refineries and, at the same time, costs for consumers will increase. Yet neither of these claims makes sense coming from an industry that has been making record profits.
Make no mistake, passing the Clean Water Act of 2010 is one of the most important things we can do for clean water, jobs and our local economy. Stormwater cleanup is really about improving our county’s infrastructure, which means good-paying construction jobs at a time when we need to put Snohomish County back to work.
The Clean Water Act of 2010 is a win-win for our working families and clean water. Together we can build a legacy of clean water and family-wage jobs in Snohomish County that we’ll be proud of for generations.
Cody Arledge is the legislative director for Sheet Metal Workers Local 66.
The proposal, the Clean Water Act of 2010 (HB 3181/SB 6851), would increase, by less than 1 percentage point, the existing hazardous substance tax to pay for clean water infrastructure projects required by law.
These projects, which range from retrofitted urban streets to new storm drains to stormwater ponds, are labor intensive and will put people to work. They’ll also directly address the biggest water pollution problem in our state.
Each time it rains, toxic pollutants from our roads and lawns wash directly into our rivers, lakes and Puget Sound, slowly poisoning our waterways. The best analogy I’ve heard to convey the scope of the problem is that it’s the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez spill in slow motion each year.
Local governments are responsible for stemming this flow, but they simply don’t have the funds to deal with the problems on the scale needed. Right now, the bulk of clean-up funding comes from property taxes and utilities fees. The Clean Water Act would ask companies responsible for producing the worst of the pollutants to shoulder their share of clean-up costs. It’s a straight-forward notion — “polluter pays” — one that we’ve used successfully in our state for over 20 years.
What the bill would do is increase the hazardous substance tax, also known as the “poisons tax.” It was created by voter initiative in 1988 to clean up toxic sites around the state and the rate has never been increased to meet the skyrocketing costs of pollution cleanup.
This common-sense solution is running into roadblocks, however. The oil industry opposes the legislation, and is throwing its weight around in Olympia. They’d prefer it if taxpayers cleaned up their mess, leaving them to make record profits as the rest of the economy suffers.
The oil companies have claimed that any cost increases they incur will endanger jobs in refineries and, at the same time, costs for consumers will increase. Yet neither of these claims makes sense coming from an industry that has been making record profits.
Make no mistake, passing the Clean Water Act of 2010 is one of the most important things we can do for clean water, jobs and our local economy. Stormwater cleanup is really about improving our county’s infrastructure, which means good-paying construction jobs at a time when we need to put Snohomish County back to work.
The Clean Water Act of 2010 is a win-win for our working families and clean water. Together we can build a legacy of clean water and family-wage jobs in Snohomish County that we’ll be proud of for generations.
Cody Arledge is the legislative director for Sheet Metal Workers Local 66.
Comments
(