Here's a prevew of an editorial we're working on. Let us know what you think. The best comments will appear alongside it in the print edition. 

Carbon monoxide poisoning killed three members of the Wiley family in July 2005 after the colorless, odorless gas built up to astronomical levels in their Eastern Baltimore County rental home in the Cove Village complex, apparently as a result of faulty installation of the unit's furnace or other appliances. It's not so surprising, then, that immediately after Cove Village management installed carbon monoxide detectors in all the other homes in the complex that firefighters got a string of false alarms from nervous residents.

What's harder to figure is that more than four years later, after Sawyer Realty Holdings LLC, the College Park-based company that owns the complex, spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to correct problems in the homes, the number of elevated carbon monoxide readings there -- including the most serious kind -- is higher than ever in 2009. Sun reporters Robert Little and Nick Madigan reported in Sunday's edition that county officials have found elevated CO levels 39 times so far this year, up from 20 last year. In fact, in the years since the Wileys' deaths, the number of false alarms has steadily dropped and the number excessive or potentially lethal readings has been on the rise.

According to the investigation by Little and Madigan, Sawyer officials have completed complex-wide improvements to address most, though not all, of the problems that likely contributed to the Wileys' deaths, and the company deserves credit for that. But its efforts belie its initial unwillingness to act sooner on many of the problems with the installation and venting of furnaces and hot water heaters that were found by a consultant hired by attorneys for the Wiley family as part of a lawsuit that Sawyer settled out of court in 2007. The company has acted defensively on this point, saying it won't use findings by plaintiffs in a lawsuit as a roadmap for its conduct. But if it had done so in 2005, when it was first briefed on the problems, how many hospitalizations, evacuations and calls to the fire department could have been avoided?

County officials, too, could have acted sooner, and they need to think carefully about what they did and did not detect about the problems in Cove Village. This summer, county permit officials beame fed up with the persistent problems at the complex and threatened to shut down the entire complex. A subsequent sweep of the complex by county officials and Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. technicians found 20 of this year's 39 elevated readings, begging the question of how many elevated levels were still going unreported. Sawyer has made more improvements and replaced more appliances since then, but at least two elevated readings have been made since the summer, including one last week. Permits and Development Manager Timothy Kotroco acknowledged that the county could have acted sooner if it had studied the records of carbon monoxide alarms more closely.

County Executive James T. Smith Jr. is introducing legislation at tonight's County Council meeting to require carbon monoxide detectors in every rental property in Baltimore County. Given the danger posed by buildups of the gas, it makes just as much sense as requiring fire alarms in every home, perhaps even more so given that the gas may not be apparent to residents until it's too late. But if thousands of new detectors are going to be instaled, the county needs to develop a robust system for tracking the alarms and looking for patterns. Fire officials say the number of carbon monoxide calls countywide has been on the rise in recent years, and in some cases, firefighters found potentially lethal levels of the gas. The county needs to make sure it can track patterns of carbon monoxide alerts and spot problems before they turn deadly.

Posted by Andy Green at 7:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)
Categories: Baltimore County
        

Baltimore County Councilman Vincent Gardina has always seemed to have nine lives as a politician. He's not necessarily beloved by his fellow council members (note that they drew a redistricting map that put him in the same disctrict as another incumbent, and that he's only been selected as council chairman once, back in 1996). He's survived tough challenges in his five elections. He got fired from a state job, sued and settled for $100,000. But it looks like it all may be worth it: He's set to ride off into the sunset as the first ever county councilman to receive his full salary as a pension, The Sun's Larry Carson reports today. That means that when he leaves office in December, 2010, the 54-year-old Democrat will collect $54,000 a year for the rest of his life.

Yes, that's way more generous than other public sector employees get, and wildly more generous than you're going to find in the private sector. The reaction of the other council members (most of whom are set to receive at least 80 percent of their salaries for life): A big yawn. The justification seems to be that since they didn't establish the system, they hold no responsibility for it. Indeed, Mr. Carson reports that the rule of council members getting 20 percent of their salary in pension for each term they serve (up to five) was established way back in 1956, the same time the county's charter government was formed.

But back then, councilmen earned a scant $3,000 a year. With inflation, that comes out to less than half what councilmen make now: $23,820.

Granted, there's a danger that we could be so parsimonious with elected officials' salaries and benefits that nobody would want the job. It does require quite a bit of work to do well. But the idea of full salary for life is too far in the opposite extreme. In an ideal world, financial considerations would have nothing to do with whether someone decides to run for office; officials would be compensated fairly for their time, no more, no less. But that's not what we have.

Council Chairman Joseph Bartenfelder (a likely candidate for county exectuive in 2010) said he'd like to see the council pensions changed to mirror those of state legislators, which max out at 60 percent of salary. That would be a decent start. But Mr. Bartenfelder says he doesn't think he's got the votes. Well, how about this: Mr. Gardina is leaving, so it's no skin off his nose. And at least one other councilman, Kevin Kamenetz, appears all but certain to be running for executive. That's three people with good incentive to do something now. With all their years of council experience (49 among the three of them), they ought to be able to round up one more vote.

Posted by Andy Green at 9:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (15)
Categories: Baltimore County
        

One of the more bizarre claims to emerge from the debate in Baltimore County over speed cameras is that the automated devices would raise huge sums for goverment coffers - perhaps even $170 million, a sum that would require the issuance of a ludicrous 4.25 million tickets for driving at least 12 mph above the speed limit.

Never mind that Montgomery County which has had speed cameras for years, has seen far less revenue, and there probably aren't enough cars, schools and time to rack up so many violations in Baltimore County if people tried.

But here's the real reason why it's foolish to portray the speed camera proposal as a revenue grab: because it isn't a very good one. At least that's been the county's experience with red light cameras.

Continue reading "Traffic camera revenue not exactly a gold mine" »

Posted by Peter Jensen at 2:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (6)
Categories: Baltimore County
        

Nearly two weeks ago, Baltimore County Councilman Stephen G. Samuel Moxley was involved in a four-car accident in West Baltimore and subsequently charged by police with driving under the influence.

This is the second such charge he has faced in four years. In 2005, he crashed a county-owned vehicle into a stopped car on the shoulder of the beltway. He was charged with DUI in that case, too, but was sentenced to a year of probation before judgement.

What is the councilman's explanation for his actions? So far, he has offered none. His only comment to date -- supplied before this week's council meeting -- is that he does not intend to resign.

Mr. Moxley owes county residents more than that. One DUI charge may represent a momentary lapse in judgment but two suggests a pattern.

(Photo: Baltimore County Council)

Continue reading "Mr. Moxley's DUI charge" »

Posted by Peter Jensen at 11:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (9)
Categories: Baltimore County