Yet another example of a public policy initiative that ignores real risks and will waste the public's money on something that just isn't a priority.

Road salt saves lives each and every year by using the laws of physics and chemistry to melt through a clear and serious public danger.

On the other hand, the risk of harm to the public health is minimal from exposure to road salt due to drinking water contamination or other environmental degradation.

Yet we're going to put more lives at risk.

This is akin to the states in the upper-midwest that decided to try and save money and energy (and thus the environment and public health) by installing LED light bulbs in traffic lights.

Yet when the first serious snow and ice storms hit, these lights got overwhelmed due to their inability to melt the snow and ice that stuck to them. Not only did this create a serious (and real) public health hazard, it also required these states to spend considerable monies, time, and energy on "unblocking" those lights.

Maryland needs to adopt some common sense public policy tools - comparative risk assessment is just one of them.

uggghhhh... why doesnt the legislature worry about balancing budgets and keeping our taxes from going up in an unending spiral? Geeezzz... the few days we use salt arent hurting anybody. What a joke...

Typical Teaparty mentality that flies in the face of any common sense approach.

Anyone can understand that adding 300,000 pounds of salt to the ground water and water table will percolate into streams, culverts, reservoirs and ultimately, the Bay. Why is that so hard to see?

And, oh yes, the tired old saws about "saving lives," and legislative priorities. Yawn. Snore.

Just wait until your drinking water is tainted like California or Arizona or New Mexico. Then the Teaparty "Know-Nothings" will probably complain that the State wastes too much time on someother straw man, and negelected to look at the dangerous implications of too much road salt in the environment.

There is no "winning" in the current toxic political environment. These consistent nay-sayers are like so much Kudzu that spreads over the political landscape.

But now all too typical in the new reality of faux Libertarianism and radical Repulbicanism.

Even if you drive an Audi, you evidently will not still be safe from the Green Police.

It's not just a green thing. I hope they are not overlooking that salt is many more times more than the cost of traction sand. We can green up our roads AND save some of our tax dollars. Why can't we look for more creative solutions to have our cake and eat it to? It’s like the asphalt roads that are all over. Why can’t we save money and green things up a bit with concrete roads like other states? This green thing will catch on a lot easier if we can make it an economic thing too.

Ok...I'm going to weigh in on this one. Salt has a lot more issues for us to be concerned about than just environmental. The hidden costs of road salt in regards to the premature depreciation of our infrastructure investment may be 10 times the nominal cost of that ton of salt. Those cost just keep adding up as our infrastructure falls apart due to corrosion. I have also read 3 articles that link salt to close to 3/4 of a million automobile recalls. As we continue to move more toward electrical components in our cars the problems with corrosion due to road salt will become larger. If I read the proposed bill correctly they are only calling for salt management plans to reduce the use of salt. This will be VERY good for tax payers both short term and long term because we CAN significantly reduce salt use, in budget, and maintain if not enhance public safety. Old habits die hard but change is necessary in the competitive times in which we live.

Incidentally, my son and his girlfriend were in an accident because there salt corroded brake lines burst and they rear ended a car. Salt saves lives? Yes Salt causes death? Yes The debate is not "eliminate" salt it is "use it wisely".