Maybe it Would Just Be Easier to List What They Don't Want to Tax

From the hometown paper, the LA Times, Sacramento wants to tax soda, tires, guns, water, pain pills, lawyers, car batteries... Women hurt worst. 

It’s a perfect storm for millions of Californians because of the federal tax overhaul enacted in 2017 by the Republican Congress and President Trump. For the first time, deductions for state and local taxes on federal returns are limited to $10,000. That’s much less than Californians have been deducting in this high-tax state.

Making the bite even sharper for salaried employees who receive a W-2, non-reimbursed job expenses are no longer deductible on federal returns. That hits teachers particularly hard because they often buy their own classroom supplies and have been deducting the costs.

So guess who's getting the blame?

So blame that tax shaft on Trump and Republicans.

But in California under Democrats, it’s tax, tax, tax — a drip and a drop, nickel and a dime — all the time. That’s not a political statement. It’s a fact.

Not all taxes are evil. Some are justified. But many are unwarranted. And others are eye-rollers.

One of the more controversial and annoying taxes currently being proposed is a state levy on sugary soft drinks. More on that later.

Here’s an eye-roller: A bill that would authorize San Francisco to turn its crooked Lombard Street — a tourist attraction after so many movie appearances — into a toll road, maybe even requiring reservations. Think they have a traffic jam now on weekends? Wait until cars are lined up behind a tollgate.

There are a whole bunch of taxing ideas in the Capitol: on new tires, firearms, water, prescription painkillers, lawyers, car batteries, corporations based on their CEO pay, estates worth more than $3.5 million, oil and gas extraction. The list goes on.

 Taxing lawyers seems like a good idea to me.

The oil and gas extraction tax is long overdue. We’re the only major oil-producing state without one. It would raise an estimated $1.5 billion a year.

The California Tax Foundation has counted more than $6.2 billion worth of tax increase proposals pending in the Legislature. It expects the figure to grow substantially as bills are amended with details.

Polls show that California voters already think they’re overtaxed. No surprise there.

I'd make a crack about my home state, California, but my adopted state, Maryland is almost as bad. Heck, we even tried to tax the rain.

The Wombat has Rule 5 Sunday: Aisha Tyler awaiting your digital pleasure. Pirate's Cove links with the weekly "Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup" and links.

Hogan: No Regrets for Killing Rain Tax

Counties' plans to cut water pollution prove 'rain tax' was unnecessary, Hogan says

State environmental officials signed off Tuesday on a list of projects aimed at reducing the amount of pollution that rain washes into the Chesapeake Bay.

But advocates for the environment said the efforts proposed by the state's 10 largest jurisdictions are inadequate to the job of restoring the estuary.

Gov. Larry Hogan called the plans from Baltimore and the nine largest counties "innovative," and said they prove that the stormwater fee derided as the "rain tax" was unnecessary.

Hogan signed a law last year that gave jurisdictions the option not to collect it.

"Today's news further illustrates what many Marylanders and local officials have already known for years: the state does not need to impose yet another burdensome tax on homeowners and job creators in order to successfully manage stormwater runoff," Hogan said in a statement.

A coalition of environmental groups, including the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Maryland League of Conservation Voters and the Sierra Club, had urged the state to reject the plans.

The envirolobby desperately wanted a land use tax that they could  expand later to more jurisdictions (the "Rain Tax" only covered 5 heavily urban counties) and more things that offend them. They are still free to lobby that counties collect the tax of their own volition.

Baltimore County Prepares to Dump "Rain Tax"

Baltimore County Council seeks to eliminate 'rain tax'

The stormwater remediation fee, known to many critics as the "rain tax," could soon be eliminated in Baltimore County.

The County Council on Monday introduced legislation that would phase out the fee over the next two years. According to the bill, the fee would be reduced in next summer's property tax bill before being eliminated the year after that.

The bill has unanimous support among the seven-member County Council, making it veto-proof against a possible rejection by County Executive Kevin Kamenetz.

"The council and I share the desire to lower fees but without compromising environmental protection. I intend to meet with the council to discuss next steps," Kamenetz said in a statement.
. . .
Baltimore County first established the fees in 2013. The General Assembly passed legislation the previous year that required the 10 largest jurisdictions in the state to collect the fees, which must be spent on projects designed to reduce runoff and control pollution in the area.

The mandate for the fees was lifted this year when the state legislature changed the law, ensuring that jurisdictions needed to show only that they were funding such projects and didn't need to create a new dedicated fee to pay for them. The shift was a top priority of Gov. Larry Hogan.

The "Rain Tax" was a brainchild of former Baltimore (City) Mayor, and then former Governor O'Malley, who is currently running for the democratic nomination. The "rain tax" was widely hated in the state, and is generally regarded as the reason Gov. Larry Hogan (R) beat O'Malley's hand picked would be successor, Lt. Gov. Anthony (Tony) Brown, which may have cast a shadow on O'Malley's presidential aspirations as well.

Hogan sponsored and signed legislation to repeal the mandate, allowing the jurisdictions affected to choose their own method of funding storm water control. Baltimore County is the first such jurisdiction to dump the "rain tax."

Just as information, Baltimore County is separate from Baltimore City, so this does not affect the city, yet.

Local Boy Lags at Home

Twice burned, forever shy? O’Malley gets 4 percent support from home state

Martin O’Malley, who is hoping to jumpstart his presidential campaign with a strong debate performance here Tuesday, continues to get little love from his home state of Maryland.

The former governor is backed by just 4 percent of voters who are Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents in a potential presidential primary matchup in the state, a new Washington Post-University of Maryland poll finds.

O’Malley lags far behind former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton, who gets the support of 43 percent, followed by Vice President Biden -- who is mulling a run -- with 26 percent and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) with 20 percent.

Former Virginia senator Jim Webb is the choice of 1 percent, while former Rhode Island senator and governor Lincoln Chafee attracts less than 1 percent.

I'm a little surprised he isn't more popular in Maryland; the state is generally further left than Cuba. I can see how lack of name recognition in other states could be an initial hindrance for him. But in Maryland, he's well known as an aggressive tax and spend democrat; he even contrived to tax the rain (since repealed, in part). Maybe the appetite for new taxes among democrats knows some bounds after all.

Rain Tax Fails A Court Challenge

I had pretty much given up hope for more news out the rain tax after Gov. Hogan was elected mostly on the promise to repeal it, a promise that he and the Democratic legislature of the state, to my surprise, actually carried out. It was, however, still acceptable for counties to keep the rain tax as their chose method to raise money for storm water abatement, and several, including Montgomery chose to.  This may be in jeopardy, as a judge has ruled the "Rain Tax" unfair:

Montgomery lawsuit raises questions about Baltimore area stormwater fees

The so-called rain tax is being debated again — this time in court.

A Montgomery County circuit judge has declared the county's stormwater management fee invalid, saying it violates a state law passed this year to reform the controversial environmental charge. Though the ruling only applies in Montgomery for now, it's creating ripples of anxiety in Baltimore area communities that still levy such fees to pay for reducing the polluted runoff fouling local streams and the Chesapeake Bay.

"My concern is that we may be in a similar situation," said Vincent J. Gardina, director of environmental protection and sustainability in Baltimore County.
. . .
Hit with an $11,000 stormwater fee, the owner of a 34-acre commercial development in Gaithersburg sued Montgomery County, contending he shouldn't have to pay anything because he had put in ponds that collect all the runoff from his property as well as from neighboring tracts. Judge Nelson W. Rupp Jr. agreed last week, saying the fee should be limited to what it costs the county to treat runoff from the owner's property.

In any case, the judge added, the landowner ought to get a pass if he's taking care of the runoff from his property.

It was always my contention that in the relatively urban areas in which it was imposed, the tax was deliberately designed to unfairly target the suburban and even rural residents with larger areas of impermeable surfaces, but even larger surfaces of natural land, such that less stormwater was created. I feel vindicated that a judge agrees with me on that, but I'm not convinced that the ruling will stand further review.

Rain Tax Repeal

Gov. Hogan repeals rain tax

The rain tax in Maryland is officially repealed.

The repeal eliminates the requirement for local jurisdictions to increase taxes for a storm water remediation fee.

But state law still requires them to come up with the money for projects like restoring streams and planting trees to safeguard and improve the health of the Chesapeake Bay.

Well, that's that then, isn't it? Rain Tax repeal? Not really

You'll be hearing a lot of news reports that the repeal of Maryland's much-hated rain tax takes effect. Not really.

The law, enacted in 2012, required 9 counties and the City of Baltimore (because of its size) to pay for EPA mandated water cleanup - by taxing property owners for stormwater runoff.
. . .
Others instituted perhaps the most derided fee calculation - one based on the amount of "impervious surface area". We're talking about driveways, roofs, concrete stoops, patios, even swimming pools - and for commercial property owners and HOA's - alleys, parking lots and sidewalks... all added up to tabulate each tax bill.

Montgomery County, Prince George's County and Howard County do it this way, and plan to continue despite the "repeal". That's because the law only removed the REQUIREMENT that counties charge the tax. It didn't say they couldn't.

Montgomery County collected more than $24 million dollars in rain tax last year. That's a lot to give up.

Yep, it was all about the money. It's part of Maryland tradition. Needs come and go, but taxes are forever. Linked as "post of the day" at Pirate's Cove "If All You See. . ."

Yes America, Martin O'Malley Really Did Tax the Rain

Sorry Media Matters, But O’Malley Did Tax the Rain

Media Matters took issue with my article The Democrats Have the Worst Presidential Candidates in America where I wrote that, “Unfortunately the only other thing that O’Malley is famous for is taxing the rain as governor.”

And that’s true.

Martin O’Malley doesn’t even need a theme song. There are multiple songs about him taxing the rain like No Taxation With Precipitation and Who Would Tax The Rain.

Media Matters responded by quoting a variety of defenses that don’t actually address the issue, but instead drag out assorted environmental arguments.

House Bill 987 did indeed tax the rain. If you want to be technical about it, it taxed any impervious surfaces on which rain falls. Defenders prefer to call it a ‘stormwater fee’, but that’s another way of saying rain tax.

The left obviously hated the term “Rain Tax” because it makes them look bad. But they don’t argue the issue on the facts, instead they whine about it. Media Matters quotes Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s claim that it’s false.

Q: What about the assertion that these fees are a tax on rain (or a “rain tax”)?

A: That moniker is catchy but blatantly false. It is designed to mislead and confuse. The truth is that we are talking about a fee to reduce pollution from water that washes off hard surfaces and empties into local waterways.

It’s ‘blatantly false’ because it’s not a rain tax, it’s a fee on water that falls from the sky.

Can’t be any clearer than that. Right?

It's pretty clear that the "Rain Tax" was indeed the straw that broke the camel's back in Maryland, and caused the state to go for the Republican Hogan over Democrat Brown in the last gubernatorial contest. Maryland is a very blue state, and that was too much for it.

Being in one of the rural jurisdictions in Maryland not affected by the "Rain Tax" (yet), I had no direct interest in the tax. However, I saw how it was being implemented in the ones that got it, and in general, they went out of their way to stick it to rural interests like farms far in excess of their actual contributions to storm water  and protect the liberal churches and NGOs in the cities.

If that's what you want, vote for O'Malley.

Stormwater Taxes Coming to Calvert

Even though the now partially repealed "Rain Tax" never applied to Calvert County, it doesn't mean we're off the hook: Calvert commissioners face tough call on whether to implement new stormwater fee - Option presented to collect $25 per property owner to help meet WIP goals

Shortly after the Calvert County Board of County Commissioners was briefed on the fiscal climate for the upcoming year, which requires difficult decisions regarding furloughs, layoffs and tax increases, the board is faced again with a difficult financial decision on how to proceed with the Watershed Implementation Plan.

The WIP is a mandated program to reduce nutrient loads in the Chesapeake Bay, and initially was estimated to cost Calvert County more than $1 billion. After more analysis, the cost estimate was lowered and the deadline for thresholds is looming.

A billion here, a billion there, and eventually you're talking about real money. I assume that's out to 2025, the usual timeline for

“We’re taking incremental steps to meet our target loads,” said Terry Shannon, county administrator.

Danielle Conrow, project engineer in the county Department of Public Works, presented to the commissioners April 14 the idea to implement a $25-per-year property owner fee that would begin to fund the county’s stormwater management plan.

Is that per property or per owner? It makes a big difference. We own 4 lots, and a slip. Is that a $25 fee or a $125 fee? In some areas of our community, the original lots are the old Cracker-Jack type lots, that takes 5 to make room for a house. How is this fair? $25 for a property regardless of size?

“It’s our responsibility to make sure this program is in place,” said Rai Sharma, director of the Department of Public Works.

Why? Obama ignores lots of laws that are on the books, especially immigration.

Currently, the responsibilities involved in the program would be on current staff, but requiring this would affect customer service in the department, Sharma said. There needs to be a designated person who is totally dedicated to drafting the plans and implementing the program.

The $25 fee would fund the position, which would allow the employee to apply for grant funding to implement the stormwater management master plan, which has yet to be drafted.

I assume that most of the stormwater management upgrade needs for Calvert County will occur in our limited cities, Solomons, Prince Frederick, North Beach and Chesapeake Beach. A tax like this on property will, of course, collect it predominantly outside those areas, thus, as usual, making the rural poor pay for the urban elites messes.

The 'Rain Tax' Dance Continues in Baltimore

"Rain Tax" Debate Not Going Away In Baltimore County

The General Assembly’s repeal of the storm water remediation fee requirement has rekindled the debate over the so-called “rain tax” in Baltimore County. Republicans on the County Council are vowing to push to repeal the county’s fee.

“We’ll go back as a council and see if we can go to work on eliminating this fee from, especially from our business community,” said Todd Crandell, one of three Republicans on the council. But County Executive Kevin Kamenetz says talk of repeal is a “phony issue,” because the county would still have to meet its federally mandated obligation to pay for projects to reduce storm water runoff that pollutes the Chesapeake Bay.
. . .
Last month, at Kamenetz’s request, the council rolled back the fee by about a third. But a few weeks later, the executive announced water and sewer rates would be going up to pay for upgrades to an aging system plagued with water main breaks and sewage overflows. Councilman Crandell questioned the timing of those two announcements. “I think it’s a bit disingenuous to offer a one third cut in a rain tax and then a month later hike water and sewage fees by 15 percent,” he said. Council Chairwoman Cathy Bevins, a Democrat, says that while the Council will reconsider the storm water remediation fee, the projects that fee is paying for are making a difference.

I'm agnostic on whether or not Baltimore should be using a 'rain tax' (tax on impervious surfaces) to fund its stormwater fixes. That's a job for Baltimore voters and politicians to determine. But at least, with the state mandate for the 'rain tax' repealed, they have the choice from where to take the money. Will they choose a minimally invasive, fair way? Stay tuned.

"Rain Tax" Repealed, Sort Of

Still a ‘rain tax’ by any other name?

. . . one closely watched issue involved Maryland’s stormwater law — SB 863. Initially presented as the fulfillment of a campaign promise by Hogan to repeal the state’s so-called “rain tax,” in the end this legislation was supported by the Clean Water, Healthy Families coalition, which includes the following environmental groups: Maryland League of Conservation Voters, Blue Water Baltimore, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and Sierra Club’s Maryland chapter.

These groups lent their support to what amounted to a revision of the rain tax that strengthens the state’s pollution-fighting position by focusing on reducing runoff and giving affected local jurisdictions . . . greater flexibility in how to fund the initiatives needed to reach goals.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation tweeted this: “We were holding our breath. The stormwater bill is now a remarkable #ChesBay victory. What a turnaround.”

Meanwhile, the governor said this: “We did not get everything we wanted and the legislature did not get everything it wanted, but Marylanders will benefit from the passage of the repeal of the rain tax.”

How did we manage to make everyone so happy and still repeal the "rain tax?"

SB 863 was originally filed as a repeal of the rain tax, and it does eliminate the mandate for jurisdictions to collect a specific fee under certain conditions by changing the word “will” to “may.” But elsewhere, it changes the word “may” to “will” to require each jurisdiction to establish a fund to pay for efforts to reach the goal, and it changes reporting requirements to increase accountability. It also imposes stiff fines for failing to meet funding requirements.

Technically, the rain tax was indeed repealed, yet its replacement should get us to roughly the same place. Is it really possible we have emerged with a stronger law that allows both opponents and supporters of the original rain tax to claim victory?

You mean, local politicians actually deciding what to tax and how much? An idea so novel it just might work. Even in Maryland.

Maryland Senate Votes to Rein In 'Rain Tax'

Maryland Senate unanimously approves easing ‘rain tax’ terms

The Maryland Senate voted unanimously Friday to no longer require that the state’s largest jurisdictions charge a storm water remediation fee, which Republicans dubbed the “rain tax” on the campaign trail last year.

The legislation now moves to the House of Delegates, where there has been stronger opposition to changing the fee because Democratic leaders say they do not want to do anything that could impede the reduction of pollution reaching the Chesapeake Bay.

One of the loudest critics of the fee has been Gov. Larry Hogan (R), whose vow to kill it became his campaign rallying cry. Hogan introduced his own legislation to repeal the mandate that the state’s nine most-populous counties and Baltimore City charge a fee — while acknowledging that he did not have the power to actually eliminate this jurisdiction-level tax. But the governor’s bill died in both chambers.

Just like Hogan’s bill, the version introduced by Maryland Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) version gets rid of the requirement that major jurisdictions charge a fee to at least partially fund anti-pollution efforts that are mandated by the federal government. But Miller’s measure requires these counties to document how much their anti-pollution programs will cost and where they will find that money.

For counties that decide to continue charging this fee — as many plan to do — Miller’s bill would exempt some veterans organizations from having to pay. A similar exemption already exists for volunteer fire departments.

The 'Rain Tax', technically speaking a tax on impervious surfaces was imposed under the O'Malley administration at the behest of EPA, has been uniformly unpopular except in environmental circles, even in the areas not (yet) affected, for the entirely forgivable feeling that it will likely expand. The money raised from the tax was to be designated towards stormwater remediation. However, Maryland has a long tradition of raising taxes for special purposes, and then diverting the money back into the general pool when times get tight.

But once it was time for a final vote Friday morning, Sen. Bryan W. Simonaire (R-Anne Arundel) rose on the floor to support the legislation — and then complain that the original 2012 law was passed too hastily, that it is unfair that some counties charge a fee while others do not and that the administration of former governor Martin O’Malley (D) used environmental funds to plug holes in the general budget.

Now to the House of Delegates.

House Speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Anne Arundel) said his chamber is “certainly going to take a close look at it.”

And after the Senate adjourned, Miller had a more optimistic take on his bill’s chances in the House. “The bill is obviously supported by the governor very vigorously,” Miller said. “I would hope the House could deal with it appropriately.”

I'm agnostic on the 'Rain Tax' since it does not (yet) apply in Calvert County. But I would expect it to in time. And where it's been applied, the tax only counts impervious surfaces, and does not account for the offsetting pervious surfaces common in rural areas, who face high taxes on long driveways, and parking areas for agricultural equipment.

Democrats Vote to Retain "Rain Tax"

House panel kills Hogan's stormwater fee repeal

A House committee voted along party lines Friday to kill Gov. Larry Hogan's bill to repeal the so-called "rain tax.''

Baltimore, MD--Jan. 6, 2013--Kathy Hoverman, left, and Azzam Ahmad walk in Leakin Park along an area in which storm drains are being restored. The storm drain restoration is funded by the city's storm water fee.

Dealing a blow to one of the Republican governor's top legislative priorities, the Democratic majority of the House Environmental Matters and Transportation Committee refused to roll back the controversial 2012 law that requires Baltimore City and the state's nine largest counties to levy stormwater remediation fees on property owners. The vote was 14-7.

Republican members argued that voters had spoken in electing Hogan, who campaigned on a pledge to end the fee mandate. St. Mary's County Del. Anthony O'Donnell said repeal "simply is a promise made and a promise kept."

As a conservative in one of Maryland's more rural counties which is not (yet) affected by the "Rain Tax" (a tax on impervious surfaces), I'm conflicted about the rain tax. It applies to the more urban, democratic regions which are more important source of stormwater, the reason for the levy. Sure, let them pay. Their representative enacted it.

However, in the areas it was imposed, it hit rural land owners in excess of their contributions to stormwater, and excused churches with lame "educational programs" and sermons (violating, in my opinion, the wall between church and state, since they are now excusing churches if they preach the state's environmental mantra).  And I fear that it won't be long before it is extended to the remainder of Maryland's areas, as the Democratic majority in the cities realizes they're paying more, and decide to stick to the more Republican voters in the rural counties. We already pay the "flush tax" on our water consumption, primarily to rebuild their sewers, a tax that Martin O'Malley, wanna president, doubled during his tenure.

Rain Tax Rumble

Rain Tax Hearing Gets Stormy In Annapolis

Political reporter Pat Warren was at a hearing that got a little stormy.

The Senate committee that moved the rain tax forward in 2012 is now being asked to take it back. “Peoples’ rain tax was higher than their property tax,” said Sen. James Brochin.

Nancy Correlli tells WJZ about the day she opened her first rain tax bill.

“The first time I opened the bill was outrage. I was shocked that we were hit with a $4,700 tax bill over and above our normal $16,000 tax bill,” she said.

The rain tax is a storm water management fee that was imposed on residents and businesses in certain counties, mandated by the state in order to comply with EPA regulations about rain washing pollutants into the sewers and out into the Chesapeake Bay.

The Senate is hearing three bills all aimed at repealing the rain tax–one of them proposed by Governor Hogan.

“It’s nearly universally despised by an overwhelming super-majority of taxpayers throughout the entire state,” the governor said.

Environmentalists testified against the repeal.

“Every summer I listen to storm water warnings from our health department saying don’t swim for 48 hours after it rains,” said Allison Prost, Chesapeake Bay Foundation. “And until I stop getting those messages, I’m going to keep advocating for this work.”

And that will never happen because most of the fecal coliforms that cause such closures from wildlife.  

Hogan Proposes Rain Tax Repeal

He campaigned against it, and now he's actually floating a proposal to get rid of it. Shocking!

The Republican governor's legislation would take away the state requirement that 10 jurisdictions impose a fee to pay for programs that curb storm water pollution.

Hogan's bill to repeal the rain tax, which has 61 co-sponsors, is now in the hands of the General Assembly.

"Forcing counties to raise taxes against their will was a mistake and needs to be corrected," Hogan said.

In the past fiscal year, more than $100 million has been collected in storm water fees. The money is supposed to fund measures to reduce storm water runoff pollution. Storm water is untreated and separate from municipal sewage systems. The Environmental Protection Agency requires local jurisdictions with separate systems to establish a watershed and restoration program.

"We don't need a mandate from Annapolis to do what is right. We are already doing it, and for many years," said Delegate Haven Shoemaker, R-Carroll County.

The governor's legislation gives jurisdictions the option of continuing to collect the fee or not. Harford County has already repealed its fee.

The "rain tax" has been unpopular since it's conception, but "big enviro" thought it was a great idea to get the more urban counties to pay for storm water systems.  The idea of getting the urban areas was noble, but in practice, they tried hard to shift as much of the as possible the bill onto rural areas which were not the source of the problem. A farm with a large paved area surrounded by a much larger unpaved area with no runoff problem would face the same bill as a business which was all impermeable surface, all of which had to run into storm sewers. Churches would get exemptions based on hokey out reach programs, and I expect other non-profits to lobby and win similar exemptions.

Why not just set the standards that need to be achieved, and let the counties determine how to raise the money, and how to spend it?

What? Allow local government to decide! What's the fun in that?

Hogan Proposes Massive Tax Cut

And by massive I mean about 0.1%

Hogan proposes tax relief in four areas

Gov. Larry Hogan used his first State of the State address to follow through on a campaign promise, vowing Wednesday to push for tax relief for small businesses, motorists and some retirees, and to seek repeal of a controversial stormwater fee.

"The people of Maryland simply cannot afford for us to continue on the same path of more spending, more borrowing, more taxes and politics as usual," Hogan told the General Assembly.

He did not recommend an across-the-board tax break that would affect most Marylanders, instead suggesting cuts in four areas that would have relatively minimal impact on state revenue in the short term. The proposals are likely to face stiff questions from Democrats, who control the legislature.

Needless to say, democrats were flabbergasted at thought of short changing their goals of increasing taxes, and recoiled in fear:

Democratic aides estimated that Hogan's proposed tax breaks would cost up to $30 million a year, based on previous legislative analyses of similar proposals. Hogan's staff pegged the cost at $27 million. Maryland's budget is roughly $39 billion.

Yep, roughly 0.1% in round numbers. The sky is falling!

Oh, and the four areas:

•Repeal law requiring stormwater fee that critics call the "rain tax."
•Stop taxing pension income of veterans, police, firefighters.
•For small businesses, exempt $10,000 in personal property from local taxes.
•Repeal law requiring Maryland's gas tax to rise with inflation.

While I agree with the notion of getting the urbanized counties to pay for their own stormwater management with the "rain tax", I think its implementation unfairly hits the more suburban and rural areas of their population. But since it doesn't affect us, we;ll, you get what you vote for.

Otherwise, these don't strike me as big changes, but then, it is only 0.1% of the budget.

Churches Kneel Before 'Rain Tax'

Prince George’s churches embrace alternatives to stormwater fee

. . .A 2012 law required Maryland’s nine largest counties and the city of Baltimore to establish a stormwater fee to pay for the improvements. Churches with large parking lots, despite their status as nonprofits which typically exempts them from certain taxes, would be responsible for dealing with or paying for their stormwater runoff as well.

“I felt like it was a tax that was being assessed to churches,” said the Rev. Diane Johnson, of Jerusalem AME Church in Clinton, of her first reaction to the fee. “I know that we’re all going to have to do our part if we’re going to overcome the damages being caused by poor stewardship of the resources of this Earth. The question is how to do it.”
. . .
Instead of simply assessing a fee for the amount of impervious surface a church owns (its parking lot and roof, for example), nonprofits in the county can now enroll in an Alternative Compliance Program that allows them to reduce their fee in exchange for reducing their footprint.
. . .
Through the program, churches can take several steps to reduce their annual stormwater fees from $372 per impervious acre to almost nothing, although everyone still will pay a $20 administrative fee.

The nonprofits receive a 50 percent reduction if they donate the use of a portion of their property to the county to install a rain garden or other filtration device. The county provides what is typically additional landscaping, and the church is then responsible for maintaining it.

Churches also can create educational programs or green ministries that encourage the congregation, and especially youth, to build rain barrels or learn about their impact on the environment. These programs result in an additional 25 percent off the fee.

Preaching the environmental gospel for the state is only good for 25% reduction?

The remainder of the impact fee can be waived if the church practices “green housekeeping” by reducing fertilizer use and keeping parking lots free of trash that might wash into waterways.

It's too bad that private, non-clerical property owners cannot get their taxes waived for the same acts. Nagging your neighbors and building a rain garden should be sufficient.

Except that the point of the 'rain tax' was to raise money for storm water management. By accepting non-monetary substitutes for the taxes, the counties are undermining the purpose of the program. Unless the point of the program is simply to exert state supremacy over the citizens and churches both.

'Rain Tax' Building Baltimore Sewers

'Rain Tax' Dollars at Work: Baltimore's mandatory stormwater-management improvement plan is out for public review

The City of Baltimore will soon start using almost $80 million in revenues from its stormwater-management fees on property owners—what detractors call the “rain tax”—on 95 projects around the city between now and 2019. The projects are detailed in an 81-page “Watershed Implementation Plan” (WIP) released by the city’s Department of Public Works (DPW) on Dec. 19, and public comments about the plan are being accepted until Jan. 30, according to DPW spokesman Jeffrey Raymond.

The WIP is required under the city’s stormwater permit, which allows discharges from the city’s “municipal separate storm sewer system,” better known as MS4, into streams and the Baltimore harbor. It seeks to reduce stormwater contamination—Baltimore’s main cause of water pollution—by reducing the city’s “total maximum daily loads” (TMDLs) of pollution and trash entering the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The WIP’s stated goal is to meet the MS4 permit’s requirement that the city restore “an equivalent” of 4,041 acres of hard surfaces in the city that don’t absorb the rain, impervious areas where “stormwater runoff is not currently managed.”

“I think it’s important for people to understand that this is what their stormwater utility fee is being used for,” says Alice Volpitta, the water-quality manager for the clean-water advocacy group Blue Water Baltimore, which closely monitors the MS4 process. “Both supporters of the fee and those who would call it a ‘rain tax’ deserve to know how their money will be spent, and that’s exactly what document aims to clarify,” she continues, adding that “DPW is also looking to hire an additional 53 to 75 people for the implementation and maintenance of these programs and projects.”

This is a good use for the "rain tax." I've knocked the rain tax in the past, particularly because of the way it has been applied in some of the more rural of the jurisdictions it's been mandated, where it is often targeted at rural land unimportant to the storm water problem the tax is nominally designed to raise money to fix. This doesn't apply as much to Baltimore, which is essentially all urban, and which has a severe storm water overflow problem, and lots of pollution which runs into the Bay as a result.

Now if only they could apply the tax to government agencies which own impermeable surfaces too.

Will Maryland Repeal the 'Rain Tax'?

Md. Gov.-Elect Hogan Confident 'Rain Tax' Will Be Scrapped

Hogan, a Republican, was responding to comments Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller made to reporters on Tuesday. Miller, a Democrat, noted the possibility of passing legislation so that 10 local jurisdictions could pay for storm-water management needs out of their budgets, rather than charging residents a specific fee to fight Chesapeake Bay pollution carried by rain runoff.

Hogan said changing the 2012 law won't eliminate the need to pay for storm-water management. But he says Maryland can comply with federal requirements to fight pollution without imposing an added fee.

The 'Rain Tax' for those unfamiliar with it, is not actually a tax on rain, rather it is tax on the impervious surfaces on property in the 10 regions of MD affected. It was designed to satisfy an EPA mandate to raise money for storm-water management. It is an extremely unpopular tax in Maryland, and it may well have contributed to the anti-tax Hogan being elected governor in MD in the last election.

While I'm not in one of the affected jurisdictions, there are some aspects of the tax I find very objectionable, particularly how severely affects the more rural properties of the areas. I think the urban jurisdictions with big storm water problems need to find more equitable ways of paying for its management.

Maryland: Follow Any Religion You Want, As Long As It's 'Green'

Back when the "Rain Tax", the tax on impervious surfaces in 10 of Maryland most urban jurisdicitons was being proposed, church leaders noted that churches could be rather hard hit by the tax, seeing as how most churches consist of a building with an impervious roof surrounded by parking lot.  Rather than explicitly exempt churches, the way governmental offices are exempted (would they be so happy to see it if it came out of their agency budgets). Similarly, non-profits are also subject to the rain tax:

To combat this, the O'Malley administration has allowed counties to cobble together a program for churches:

Churches receive stormwater fee discounts by starting ‘green’ ministries, sermons

After months of negotiation with county environmental director Adam Ortiz, the pastors emerged with a rebate deal that will significantly cut the fees if churches adopt programs and equipment that will curb runoff, lessen pollution and help bolster the environment.

So far, about 30 churches have applied. Forestville Redeemer was the first. They are planning to install rain barrels, build rain gardens, plant trees and, perhaps, replace their blacktop with permeable pavement. The government will cover most of the cost. In return, a fee that was estimated at $744 a year will be reduced to “virtually nothing,” Ortiz said.

Thomas and other pastors also have agreed to start “green” ministries to maintain the improvements at their churches, and to preach environmentally focused sermons to educate their congregations.

“What God made was good,” Thomas said Sunday, quoting from the first passage in Genesis. “But it’s us that made it bad.”

A pretty good deal, avoid $744 dollars in taxes, and the only real cost to the church is to  preach the green doctrine. Why shouldn't individual homeowner and NGOs be qualified for similar subsidies? I mean, other than the fact that it would utterly defeat the purpose of the tax,  to satisfy the EPA demands to raise money for stormwater management.

Brown Loss in Maryland Voxsplained - It Was the Rain Tax

How did Democrats lose Maryland? Meet the rain tax.

Among other stunning Election Day defeats was the unexpected loss of Maryland Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown in his bid to become the state's governor. Instead, businessman Larry Hogan won a race that virtually nobody was expecting to be competitive.

Elections are always multi-faceted affairs, but one critical cause of Brown's downfall was arguably the unpopularity of a measure known to its opponents as a "rain tax":

The GOP victory was so unexpected that the media didn't even conduct Maryland exit polls, so it's not really possible to supplement these anecdotes with hard facts. But the rain tax is interesting! So let's go with it and understand what this policy is and why it matters.

Both longtime readers of this blog will be familiar with the "Rain Tax", so I'll skip the detailed exposition of this unique tax that Maryland imposed on 10 of more urbanized counties in the state.

4) How does the tax work, exactly?

Under House Bill 987, the ten largest and most urbanized jurisdictions in Maryland need to impose impervious surface fees. The law does not specify the level of the fee, only that the counties in question must set a fee to raise enough revenue to finance cleanup projects needed to meet targets set out in the Chesapeake Clean Water Blueprint.

Consequently, the fee structure varies quite a bit from place to place. This variability has arguably contributed to the tax's unpopularity. Marylanders discover that not only are they paying an unwelcome fee, but that the amount of money they need to pay may be quite different from what a coworker or friend in another county is paying. This is just a result of administrative decentralization, but it comes across as arbitrary, unfair, or confusing to some.

I would also note that withing the counties affected by the rain tax (and mine is not), it was pretty common to choose a fee structure that discriminated against the ruralish landowners who tended not to favor the democratic administration that imposed it, and whose impervious surfaces were not the problem. Cities, the big source of stormwater runoff, should pay; not their peasant farmer class.

6) This sounds great, why are people mad?

Well, sure, it sounds great to you. You are a discerning reader of explanatory journalism, and you understand that Pigouvian taxes to correct environmental externalities are part of any savvy modern policymaker's toolkit. But to the man on the street, it's a big ol' tax on his driveway. Even worse, its opponents came up with the idea of calling it a "rain tax." Who would tax the rain? Everyone knows rainwater runoff is totally harmless, unless you care about something silly like wildlife or drinking water.

Suck up to your readers much, Matt?

7) Can we draw any broad, sweeping conclusions from this?

Sure! The rain tax controversy is a little narrow and weird, but it speaks to a big reality in American politics. People really do not like paying taxes. They like having money, and they do not have a lot of confidence that the government will spend their money wisely. This isn't just true of voters in Oklahoma and Nebraska, it's true of voters in Maryland too. It's true that taxing the rich — i.e., having other people pay more taxes — is pretty popular. But people don't want to pay more taxes themselves.

This is a problem for liberals. . .

It's not like Maryland is an under taxed state. And now onto the one thing that Matt really likes about this affair:

Soon to be MD ex-Governor Martin O'Malley

8) What does it mean for Hillary Clinton?

It's good news! Realistically, Maryland governor Martin O'Malley was not a serious threat to Clinton regardless of the 2014 outcome. But the humiliating defeat for his chosen successor in a blue state makes him look quite bad. The damage is especially painful because Brown was very closely associated with the O'Malley administration and the campaign against Brown consisted overwhelmingly of attacks on O'Malley policies. Things like the rain tax or the gasoline tax hike that O'Malley also pushed through.

There might be some truth in all this; the rain tax was widely hated throughout the state, especially in the democratic controlled urban areas and their close in suburbs. Those of us farther out didn't like it much just on principles, even though we didn't even pay it, but we tend not to vote the machine anyway. They can't lose our vote; they never had it.

Previous articles on the "Rain Tax"

Do the Rain Tax Boogie
Rain Tax Alternative Stalled
Rain Tax Compromise Reached
Should the Feds Pay the Rain Tax?
Enviros Resent Rain Tax Ruckus
Counties Resistant to 'Rain Tax'
Harford County Cuts 'Rain Tax"
Generic Chesapeake Bay Post