Winston Churchill once said, “In times of great uncertainty, look for great opportunities.”

The Maryland state government has been and is operating in times of great uncertainty.

That is especially true when the general assembly and governor have a constitutional mandate to approve a balanced annual state budget and a new administration in Washington.

One great opportunity is the focus of a recent thought-provoking and impossible-to-ignore article in the Baltimore Sun.

The article headline was: “Maryland officials don’t know how much the state spends on nonprofits.”

The opening paragraph of the article says it all. “As Maryland funnels taxpayer dollars to nonprofits each year, neither state budget officials nor individual agencies can say exactly how much money is flowing, raising concerns about transparency and accountability.”

These concerns were affirmed by the chief of staff at the Maryland Department of Budget and Management when he told a Sun reporter, “Many nonprofits receive funds directly from agency grant programs, and we don’t track that centrally.”

Based on that reply, the Sun asked individual Maryland departments and agencies to provide details on the state money they send to nonprofits. The replies were varied and disturbing.

Some departments and agencies responded with specific dollar amounts, some responded that they needed time to determine the amounts and some large state departments responded that they could not provide the information. Those include the Departments of Health, Department of Labor, Department of Human Services and Department of Juvenile Services.

In January of this year, the governor’s director of communications told a Sun reporter that the state money allotted to nonprofits is “a miniscule amount of the budget every year.”

Is it really a minuscule amount?

David Brinkley was director of the Maryland Department of Budget and Management for eight years. Before that while serving in the state Senate, Brinkley was a member of the Senate Finance Committee and the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee.

Brinkley suggested to a Sun reporter that he wouldn’t be surprised if around $1 or $2 billion of the state’s annual budget goes directly to nonprofits.

That begs the question — Is there a way for the state government to be more transparent and accountable with greater details on the matter of providing state funds to nonprofits?

The answer is yes.

In fact, it is already being done at the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy.

That office has a system in place to identify the nonprofit recipients and the amounts of state funding they receive from that office.

The system was launched by Dorothy Lennig, the office’s executive director, who previously served at the House of Ruth, a nonprofit organization that provides domestic violence programs.

About her experience at the House of Ruth, Lennig told a Sun reporter said, “There was always interest in the nonprofit community about who else was getting money. And so, I thought, you know, this is the public’s money, and it should not be a secret where the money goes.”

Indeed. The public has a right to know that information, and the government has an obligation to share it.

Earlier this year, a majority in the general assembly and Governor Moore agreed on new taxes, tax increases, fee increases, budget cuts, and rainy-day fund drawdowns to address a projected state budget deficit.

How many of these changes could have been mitigated or revised with a thorough evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of nonprofits that receive state funds?

Going forward, I am NOT suggesting cuts in state funds sent to nonprofits.

After serving as a nonprofit President and CEO in four state,s including Maryland, I fully understand and greatly appreciate their role and value in our society.

I do suggest there are ways to help ensure state funding for nonprofits is done in such a way that results in a maximum return on investment from that state funding.

To accomplish this, we need a commitment from the governor and every member of the General Assembly to take timely action on implementing the following policies and procedures.

• Use the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy’s transparency and openness program as a model for every state department and agency that provides state funds (and perhaps passes through federal funds) to Maryland nonprofits.
• Regular evaluations of all nonprofits receiving state funds to affirm that their staff and volunteer leadership embrace and follow Peter F. Drucker’s observation: “Not-for-profit organizations need management even more than business. Good intentions are no substitute for organization and leadership, for accountability, performance, and results.”

We need these policies and procedures well before debates, deliberations, and decisions on a new state budget in the 2026 general assembly session.

David Reel is a public affairs consultant, public relations consultant, and a not-for-profit organizational governance, leadership and management consultant who lives in Easton.

The Chesapeake Bay has a long history of challenges to its health and sustainability.

Its ability to not only survive, but also to thrive are threatened by: 

• Regular discharges of untreated wastewater from malfunctioning wastewater treatment plants in Baltimore.
• Runoff from farms, streets, parking lots, and development.
• Sediment discharges from Susquehanna River overflows at the Conowingo Dam. 
• Constantly fluctuating levels of native species.

If history is any indication, the prospects of meaningful action on any of these challenges is not promising. 

There is one constant on all of these challenges. 

When all is said and done about them, a lot has been said, but almost nothing has been done. 

Another serious challenge that has not received widespread attention has been the steadily increasing numbers of blue catfish in the Bay.

Blue catfish are not a new challenge. 

They first appeared in the Bay over fifty years ago after they were originally introduced into rivers on Virginia’s Western Shore. 

All expectations were they would remain in those rivers since conventional thinking was blue catfish prefer a freshwater environment. 

Defying expectations, blue catfish adapted to higher salinity levels more than anticipated. As a result, they successfully migrated into the Bay where their numbers continue to expand.

They were then and continue to be classified as an invasive species. Their numbers are not only increasing in the Bay, but they are also in every major river in Maryland.

Worse yet, they have no natural predators and are voracious predators of other native species such as blue crabs, clams, mussels, oysters, striped bass (rockfish), menhaden, American eel, and other economically and ecologically important species. 

Their appetites are so voracious they have been known to devour small blue catfish. 

Scientists who follow the Bay ecosystem have concluded that completely eradicating blue catfish in the Bay is not realistic. 

Instead, the goal is reducing their numbers in the Bay to a point where native species can at least coexist with them and not become extinct.

Efforts to reduce the blue catfish numbers have had relatively limited success at best.

Ongoing marketing efforts by Maryland’s Department of Agriculture to promote eating blue catfish to chefs, consumers, restaurants, grocery stores, and distributors have not made a dramatic difference in demand.

Apparently, many consumers view blue catfish as foul-tasting muddy water bottom feeders. 

In reality, many who have eaten blue catfish, me included, have found them to be not only edible, but also nutritious, healthy, and delicious.

Even with greater human consumption of blue catfish, more action is needed. 

One way to do that is to significantly increase the overall market for them.

That is the goal of legislation that was introduced in Congress earlier this month, the Mitigation Action and Watermen Support Act, or MAWS Act.

If approved by Congress and by President Trump, the MAWS Act is intended to increase blue catfish harvests for use as dog and cat food.

 

Achieving that goal could lead to greater harvesting of another invasive fish species in the Bay.

Snakehead fish are comparable to blue catfish in terms of being nutritious, healthy, and delicious, despite their unappetizing name and appearance.

Going forward there are encouraging developments on The MAWS Act.

It currently has bipartisan sponsorship with two Republican House members from Virginia — Rob Wittman and Jen Kiggans and two Democratic House members from Maryland — Sarah Elfreth and Steny Hoyer. 

Wittman, Kiggans, and Elfreth are also members of the Sub Committee on Water, Wildlife, and Fisheries of the House Natural Resources Committee. 

The MAWS Act also has support from The Pet Food Institute of America, whose members make the vast majority of dog and cat food purchased by an estimated 65.1 million households in America who have dogs as pets and an estimated 46.5 million households in America who have cats as pets. 

Their president and CEO recently said, “Pet Food Institute is proud to endorse the MAWS Act, … enabling pet food makers to use Chesapeake Bay blue catfish as a high-quality ingredient in complete and balanced cat and dog food,”

Hopefully, timely enactment and implementation of the MAWS Act will not only help the bay with two invasive species but also serve as a catalyst for less talk and more action from elected and appointed national, state, and local officials to address all the Chesapeake Bay Blues. 

David Reel is a public affairs and public relations consultant who lives in Easton.

The recent flash flood tragedy in central Texas resulted in seeing the best and the worst of American society.

The best has been an outpouring of sympathy, caring, and support for the flood victims, their families, and the survivors. There have been countless reports of selfless rescue and recovery efforts by first responders and volunteers, some from well beyond the immediate flooded area.

The worst has been numerous messages on social media and other media platforms, e.g., a newspaper editorial cartoon that were vile, hateful, and some of which were vulgar.

Many of them chose to blame Trump supporters or policy decisions of the Trump administration for this tragedy.

Far too many did not include expressions of sadness or sympathy for the deaths of innocent children and adults, or compassion for the lifelong impact on all the flooding survivors.

The level of vitriol in these messages is so offensive, I will not repeat any of them in this column.

The only thing they have in common is they are devoid of any sense of decency and civility.

Somewhat surprising has been dismay and even outrage expressed from unexpected sources over these vile messages.

Nina Turner is a former national co-chair for the Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign.

She recently said, “It takes a serious lack of humanity to see children to be in a politicized discussion and respond something like lines of “that’s what they [voters in Texas] voted for.”

Turner’s closing one word comment says it all — “Shameful.”

John Favreau and Tommy Vietor are co – hosts on the left of center, Pod Save America.

Both worked for Barack Obama prior to and during his presidential administration.

Both have condemned social media posts that blame local Texans and the Trump administration for all who died as a result of the recent floods.

Favreau has said, “I think the really gross stuff was, I saw some people be, like, ‘Well, Texas, you voted for Trump, and this is what you get. ‘”

Favreau has also challenged suggestions that staffing levels at the National Weather Service (NWS) in Texas had anything to do with the tragedy. Favreau has said, “It seems like the National Weather Service, like I said, did send out a timely warning, it just didn’t get to people. And that’s, you know, not the Trump administration saying that independent meteorologists and experts have all said this.”

Vietor has said that while questions about the effect of NWS cuts could be “an important question going forward, I could have done without the, like, instant, you know, leap to blame name-your-political-opponent for this tragedy on Twitter.”

The “blame your political opponent” campaign on this tragedy is already well underway.

Shortly after news broke on the flooding, Senator Chuck Schumer demanded the Commerce Department’s Inspector General investigate vacancies at National Weather Service offices and whether the purported vacancies resulted in a higher death toll in in Texas.

Schumer has suggested that proposed but yet-to-be-implemented Trump budget cuts resulted in unfilled NWS positions in Texas were to blame. Senator Chris Dodd has said likewise.

Schumer has proclaimed, “The American people deserve answers.”

Yes, we do, but not from you two or anyone who has wants to advance a political agenda from this tragedy.

We deserve answers only if the following investigative guidelines are agreed to, in advance of, and are strictly adhered to during every phase of any investigation.

At a minimum, the investigation must not focus on assigning blame for what happened or did not happen with regard to timely and effective flash flood alerts.

The laser like focus must be on what can be done going forward to help ensure it never happens again.

Differing opinions must be welcome and considered provided they follow the timeless observation of former U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who once said, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.”

We also need to accept that we never have and never will live in a risk-free world.

We can only anticipate risks and take prudent steps to try to avoid them or deal with them if and when necessary. Accidents can never be totally avoided despite planning and best intentions.

Going forward, we desperately need a renewed universal commitment that when tragedies do strike, to make sure social media posts and other public reactions reflect common decency and respect for each and every person impacted in any way by that tragedy.

This is especially vital in dealing with those who hold different political party affiliations or different views on a wide range of public policy issues.

We must do so if we have any hope of reversing the steadily declining levels of decency and civility in our society.

David Reel is a public affairs and public relations consultant who live in Easton.