State rep. clarifies role in fluoride legislation talks

I am obliged to respond to a letter to the editor in today’s Portsmouth Herald. The letter was regarding House Bill 312, relative to notices added to water bills in order to advise parents of some children less than 12 months of age of the risks of dental fluorosis. The author of the letter stated, “State Rep. Rich DiPentima, D-Portsmouth, a member of the subcommittee, who has written multiple letters to the editor supporting water fluoridation, is said to have been instrumental in the committee’s decision to recommend the bill be killed.” Said by whom?

The facts are that the author of the letter never attended either of the two subcommittee meetings.  The fact is that during the first subcommittee meeting, I volunteered to draft an amendment to improve the bill and make it acceptable to all parties.

At the second subcommittee meeting, I had in hand an amendment (2011-0248h) that would have done two things.  It would have changed the word “warning” to “statement” and it changed the wording of the statement to be consistent with that of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Dental Association.  I was fully prepared to offer this amendment and, if adopted, move an ought to pass motion on the bill.  However, during this second meeting, a number of additional potential problems with the bill were presented.  The most concerning was that the bill would present possible constitutional issues by placing an unfunded mandate on local communities.  The bill also would have only provided a notice to parents who use water from fluoridated communities and would not inform parents living in communities served by small water utilities or those with private wells with high levels of naturally occurring fluoride.  The members of the subcommittee, as such, decided that this bill was inexpedient to legislate and that the issue is best addressed by physicians and dentists discussing the matter with parents directly.

These are the facts of this matter presented by one who was actually at the meeting, not based on an unnamed secondhand source. Other members of the subcommittee will corroborate my statements if anyone wishes independent confirmation.

Rep. Rich DiPentima
Rockingham District 16
Portsmouth

HB 901

Status as of February 16, 2011: Bill is in the House – First Reading Health and Government Operations

Departments of Health and Mental Hygiene and the Environment – Fluoride Levels in Drinking Water – Study

House: Health and Government Operations (Hearing: March 1, 2011, 1:00 p.m.)

http://mlis.state.md.us/mgaweb/subjfly.aspx?healthmhd$

HOUSE BILL 901

Bill is in the House – First Reading Health and Government Operations

File Code: Public Health

Sponsored By:

Delegate Kipke

Entitled:

Departments of Health and Mental Hygiene and the Environment – Fluoride Levels in Drinking Water – Study

Synopsis:

Requiring the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and the Department of the Environment jointly to conduct a study, in consultation with specified county boards of health, regarding fluoridation levels in public drinking water in the State and to report their findings and analysis to the General Assembly on or before September 30, 2012.

History by Legislative and Calendar Date

Legislative date is used to record history occurring in the Chambers otherwise Calendar date is used.
Any actions occurring today are available in the proceedings and hearing schedule

House Action

2/11

First Reading Health and Government Operations

2/16

Hearing 3/1 at 1:00 p.m.

Senate Action

No Action

Bill indexed under the following Subjects:

Environment, Department of

Environmental Matters -see also- Conserv; Nat Resrce; Pollut

Hazardous and Toxic Substances -see also- Asbestos; Radiatn.

Health -see also- Mental Health

Health and Mental Hygiene, Department of

Reports

Water

By COBY LaRUE
Staff

Independence, Va.

The Virginia/Carolina Water Authority Board learned last Thursday that the Town of Independence will not be seeking to fluoridate its water supply at this time.

The authority was informed by representatives of the Town of Independence near the end of its regularly scheduled meeting last week.

With that move, a proposal to build a secondary structure in which to feed fluoride into the water supply, at an estimated cost of $40,000, will not be needed. In addition, the Authority agreed to return fluoridation equipment that was purchased via a grant from the Virginia Department of Health.

Cost was cited at an earlier meeting as possibly being prohibitive to the move, which was made necessary after Alleghany County and the Town of Sparta both voted against buying fluoridated water. That vote by the N.C. municipalities required the separation of the fluoridation equipment from the main water treatment plant, which is located just over the state line in Virginia at the end of Moxley Ridge Road.

Independence Town Council met last Tuesday night, Feb. 8,