Support School Toxics Bill by January 27

Supporting Letter From MOFGA
Sample Letter to the Governor

Dear Alliance Friends,

We just learned that the Governor will a decision on whether to support the DEP proposal for school toxics bill before Friday. It is extremely important that we get e-mails/letters/calls into him from supporters.

Of course, a primary issue is whether the Governor will support a fee of $.30 per container of consumer pesticides. As discussed at last week's meeting, we support a cleanout of toxic, flammable and explosive hazards from school and agree that the fee on pesticides is the best funding option.

Please send an e-mail to Governor Baldacci at: governor@maine.gov (and copy Dick Davies on the email at: richard.davies@maine.gov), urging him to support An Act to Protect Children from Toxic Chemicals in Schools with funding from a pesticide fee. (Address, fax and phone number provided below for those who want to send formal letters or make calls.)

Talking Points

• Schools across Maine contain dangerous chemicals that are obsolete, unlabelled, toxic, reactive, and even explosive. These chemicals put students, teachers, staff and the environment at risk.
• The DEP’s pilot program to clean out toxic chemicals in schools has been cut short due to lack of funding with only 18% of Maine schools cleaned out so far.
• The State of Maine should prevent harm to children, school workers and the environment by funding a program to rid schools of unwanted toxic chemicals.

• It is better as a matter of policy to collect fees from the use of products that become environmental liabilities as opposed to turning to all taxpayers to fund cleanup and disposal costs.
• Experience in Maine has shown that there's a direct nexus between pesticides and the cleanup and disposal costs arising both in the schools and Maine households. According to DEP, pesticides are a consistent problem appearing in school and household hazardous waste collections.
• Managing the paperwork for a pesticide fee would be simple, relative to other products. Pesticide distributors must already report their annual sales in Maine to the BPC. The fee would be charged at that wholesale level, reducing the bookkeeping to companies simply having to write a check.

If you would like to send a formal letter:

Governor Baldacci
Office of the Governor
#1 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0001

To call the governor: 207-287-3531; 207-287-6548 (TTY)
To fax a letter: 207-287-1034

Please call if you have any questions.

Thanks everyone,

Matt Prindiville
Outreach Coordinator
Natural Resources Council of Maine
3 Wade Street, Augusta ME 04330
207-622-3101, ext 244

Supporting Letter from MOFGA:

Dear Governor Baldacci:

I am writing, both individually, and on behalf of the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association, to urge your support for An Act to Protect Children from Toxic Chemicals in Schools with funding from a pesticide fee. I teach environmental law to undergraduates at the University of Maine, and have chaired the MOFGA Public Policy Committee for over ten years.

During this period, the goal of reducing Maine children’s exposure to pesticides has been a priority for MOFGA. MOFGA supported the Department of Agriculture’s 2000 survey on pesticide use in Maine schools ("What’s Bugging Our Schools?") – which revealed that more than 70 percent of Maine schools used pesticides with some regularity, and most of those were violating the law by having maintenance or custodial staff purchase and apply pesticides, instead of licensed and trained commercial applicators. This survey lead to the Board of Pesticides Control’s adoption, in 2002, of new rules requiring the implementation of integrated pest management in schools, mandating choosing less toxic alternatives, and providing for staff and parental notification. These rules, consistent with standards applied in many other states, will go a long way toward reducing children’s future exposure to pesticides. But they do nothing about the problem of the storage and proper disposal of those pesticides that were purchased by the custodial staff and are sitting in closets and cabinets.

I’m sure you have reviewed the article and editorial in the Portland Press Herald from October 18 and 19, which detail the disturbing results of the DEP’s pilot clean up of 18 percent of Maine schools. As the editorial noted, "The search for weapons of mass destruction turned up empty in Iraq. It shouldn’t be successful in our schools."

The proposed legislation is tailored to impose a fee on pesticides sold at retail stores, primarily to homeowners, and would not impose additional financial burdens on farmers. The problem of homeowner use and overuse of pesticides has long been a prime concern of Maine’s Board of Pesticides Control. The Board’s admirable efforts at homeowner education have not appeared to have had a significant dent in homeowners' love affair with pesticides – homeowner and in particular home lawn and horticultural use of pesticides is one of the fastest growing sectors of pesticide use. It’s clearly better policy to collect fees from the use of products that become environmental liabilities as opposed to turning to all taxpayers to fund cleanup and disposal costs. Increased costs may well ultimately impact a decision to buy a toxic chemical as opposed to the preferred alternative of consulting our excellent Cooperative Extension about less toxic alternatives.

The consequences of raising costs of homeowner use of pesticides, reducing the incentive to purchase and use them AND using the fee to cleanup obsolete, unlabelled, toxic, reactive, and even explosive chemicals in our schools cannot be underestimated.

Just last year, the Ontario College of Family Physicians released the most comprehensive study ever done in Canada on the chronic effects of pesticide exposure at home, in the garden and at work. The link between common household pesticides and fetal defects, neurological damage and the most deadly cancers was found to be strong enough that family doctors in Ontario are urging citizens to avoid these chemicals in any form.

After review of over 12,000 published medical papers, "The review found consistent evidence of the health risks to patients with exposure to pesticides." The study named brain cancer, prostate cancer, kidney cancer, pancreatic cancer and leukemia among many other acute illnesses linked to pesticide exposure. As well, the College found consistent links between parents' exposure to certain agricultural pesticides at their jobs and effects on a growing fetus ranging from damage to death. The risks, they concluded, can come even from residue on food, ant spray and the tick collar on the family cat. "Given the wide range of commonly used home and garden products associated with health effects, the College's overall message to patients is to avoid exposure to all pesticides whenever and wherever possible." (News Release). The researchers also found that children are far more vulnerable to the effects of pesticides than adults because their bodies are growing, they have a greater skin surface in proportion to their size than adults, they ingest more food for their size than adults and they often have less-developed systems to excrete chemicals. A copy of the News Release regarding this report is appended; the full report can be found at http://www.ocfp.on.ca/English/OCFP/Communications/CurrentIssues/Pesticides/

In the United States, it has also been well recognized since a 1993 report by the National Academy of Sciences, and underscored in the October, 2000 Report of the School Integrated Pest Management Survey of the Maine Department of Agriculture, that "children are more vulnerable to pesticide exposure than adults." In December, 2000, the Environmental Protection Agency released "America's Children and the Environment: A First View of Available Measures." (www.epa.gov/children/indicators/download.htm). The report notes that cancer is one of the two diseases identified as priorities by the Interagency Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety to Children, organized by the EPA and DHHS. Cancer is the leading cause of death by disease of children under the age of 15. Cancer incidence for children under 20 has increased from 128 cases per million children in 1975 to 154 cases per million in 1995, a 20% increase. Certain specific forms of cancer have risen dramatically. 1998 National Cancer Institute data show that the percentage of cancer increased in children 0-4 years old between 1973 and 1995:

• 53% rise in brain and other nervous system cancers
• 37% rise in soft tissue cancer
• 32% rise in kidney and renal pelvis cancers
• 18% rise in acute lymphoid leukemia

During the same period, incidence of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma for teenagers aged 15-19 rose by 128%.

While we in Maine often take pride in the relative healthfulness of our environment Maine cancer statistics for children, who are the least likely to have "lifestyle" causes for their disease, do not bear out that perception. While the Maine Cancer Registry does not yet have a trend analysis for children's cancer rates in Maine, the epidemiologist for the registry has reported that the 1995 and 96 data indicate an annual childhood cancer incidence rate for the age group of 0-14 years of 436 cases per million, consistent with the national average of 432 cases per million.

Twelve of the 26 most widely used pesticides in the U.S. have been classified as possible or probable carcinogens by the EPA based on studies of laboratory animals, with an annual use that totals 380 million pounds:

• atrazine (C=possible)
• metolachlor (C)
• metarn sodium (B2=probable)
• dichloropropene (B2)
• cyanazine (C)
• pendimethalin (C)
• trifluralin (C)
• acetochlor (B2)
• chlorothalonil (likely)
• mancozeb (B2)
• fluometuron (C)
• parathion (C)

Maine organic farmers do all they can to reduce their families’ and their customers’ exposure to pesticides. They can only hope that, with your help, their children’s schools will no longer be storage places of "weapons of mass destruction."

Very truly yours,

Sharon S. Tisher
Chair, MOFGA Public Policy Committee

Sample Letter:

Governor John E. Baldacci
Office of the Governor
1 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0001

Dear Governor Baldacci:

I would like to add my voice to those who urge your support of a program to clean out toxic, explosive and flammable hazards in schools. It is apparent that this issue does not get adequately addressed without state leadership. The costs are low when compared to the consequences from accidents and long-term exposure to students and faculty at Maine schools. I also believe that the best funding mechanism would be a fee on household and small lot pesticides. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.