Environmental Protection Agency spending reduction could impact the science and administrative committees for the Chesapeake Bay Program. In our weekly series with the Bay Journal Delmarva Public Media's Don Rush talks with reporter Jeremy Cox about the effect of the EPA cuts.
RUSH: The integrity of the Chesapeake Bay program could be in danger. This is Don Rush. The Environmental Protection Agency announced it will be providing $2.4 million over five years for administrative support and advisory committees on an annual basis. That is a one third reduction from the total in 2025. In a weekly series of Bay Journal, we talked with reporter Jeremy Cox about the potential impact.
COX: The Chesapeake Bay program is the multi-state and federal partnership that has been overseeing the cleanup of the Chesapeake Bay for 40 years now. And it's guided by these committees giving advice and really doing the legwork to help be that bridge between the science, the policy makers, the residents, to get that information where it needs to go, so that the right projects go into the ground. The right policies are enacted. So what's happened here is that the Environmental Protection Agency has severely cut the budgets that sustain these four prime groups... 50% when you go back a couple of years ago. So now they're going to have a little bit over $200,000 to cover everything from travel to conferences, day-to-day staff work, that sort of thing.
RUSH: How does this impact the independence of these committees?
COX: So the Trump administration came out with kind like a request for proposals. It's not called that...it's called a "NOFO" (Notice of Opportunity). There's some different language than what's been in there in the past related to how these groups will come up with their agendas, how they will set their priorities. It gives EPA officials sort of a front row seat at that. Whereas in the past, the partnership has really been more egalitarian than that kind of collectively, holistically come up with these sorts of priorities. And so that's generated concern that the federal government side is trying to execute like a power grab of sorts.
RUSH: How do they do this in terms of the rules and what they're looking at? Or is it just a matter of what they accept and not accept?
COX: This Notice of Opportunity says, okay, [here's] how these committees are going to run... who's going to keep track of what they do...a third party is going to do that legwork, but who's going to oversee them in house? So when you say, who sets these rules? Well, EPA does in this form, and in the past it's been more collaborative. So in this case, a lot of the fellow signatories on that Bay agreement were caught off guard by this, whereas in the past they've been part of the process [where they could say] "okay, this is how we'd like this to run." There's definitely entities and folks who feel they've been rubbed the wrong way here.
RUSH: Now, in terms of the Chesapeake Bay program, obviously there's been mixed results. What are we to make of their track record, and do we have any sense about whether or not this will have any impact on shifting that at all?
COX: The Trump administration says that the savings from this, they're going to take and reinvest back into what they call more "on the ground" type projects, more tangible projects. So the people who are opposed to these cuts are saying, no one can argue that investing in on the ground tangible projects is the wrong way to go. But certainly if you're cutting back on these committees, these advisors, then you don't have that brain trust that you had before. Right? You're acting a little bit more blindly. You don't have the expertise. You're not hearing from the public as much, or perhaps as many different voices as you did before. So you're not acting with the same intention than you otherwise would have.
RUSH: Bay Journal reporter, Jeremy Cox and the proposed reduction of spending for scientific and administrative committees to help with the cleanup of the Chesapeake Bay. This is Don Rush for Delmarva Public Media.
