This website is accessible to all versions of every browser. However, you are seeing this message because your browser does not support basic Web standards, and does not properly display the site's design details. Please consider upgrading to a more modern browser. (Learn More).
Posted Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Pittsboro, NC - The argument posted by Mr. Page appears to ignore the situation and the history of environmental regulation.
As stated, the model environmental laws passed under Hunt, early 1980's, were not backed by budget to effectively manage enforcement (practice.)
We now do have the Jordan Lake rules. They are not hypothetical or future (practice.)
If you can not tell the difference between a supporting comment and the looming repeal, sir, I can argue little with you about the topic.
The present economic problem provides a base from which to repeal or modify legislation. I know how long it took to draft the rules and have them approved by stakeholders. They are a fine effort with flexibility in standards, but possibly too much burden for upstream governments at this moment.
If local and state officials would get out of the way of business and industry, we would have a better employment, job and tax base "environment." Then, increased costs would not be such an issue. But, then, the left is against all of that, so we should not have jobs, industry or employment to spread the burden.
I heard the cry "Eat the Rich" in the 1960's. hould conditions get bad enough, you may have to consider it. Just one question: what is the definition of rich? According to the president and his staff, the line is $250,000/year gross income. I guess the menu will be rather broad, as lots of households have that income and deserve punishment for achieving it. Very classist and divisive for someone who promised unity.
The same attitude prevails on these types of issues. Some level of income or revenue is suspect and should be taxed, at some point more than others. This, rather allowed to prosper and contribute to the general welfare of us all. Respect for all the members of society is paramount in our republic, not just for some of them.
Further, the lake is not dying, nor the Haw River. Durham installed a state of the art wastewater plant and closed three old ones. Chapel Hill has always had a pretty good plant constantly improved. Water quality is improved from point sources. Development, on the other hand, is increasing and so is run off from non-point sources. If nutrients were a major problem, the lake would show it with major algae blooms in summer. The main measure of its health is the water uptake by Cary, Apex, Morrisville, Raleigh, Wake and Chatham County from the upper portion above US 64.
If there were bad, untreatable water quality, these water users would be suing someone or not using the water.
Send a letter to the editor.
Sign up for the Chatham Chatlist. Find out what your friends and neighbors are saying about what's going on in Chatham County.
Promote your business at chathamjournal.com