In so many things written, spoken and published about the Chesapeake Bay cleanup efforts, much of those efforts were directed toward reaching certain goals by the year 2010.

Three months into that supposedly magical year, the bay still faces most of the same problems at the same levels that cleanup advocates sought to rectify by this year.

Recently, the states within the Chesapeake’s watershed, most notably Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania, resolved to implement two-year goals rather than the decade-long ones they have previously set forth.

Hwever, not everyone seems convinced the two-year goals will be any more attainable than the decade-long goals.

Tthe Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Bay Daily blog recently noted that Maryland has not spent much of the money in the Chesapeake Bay Trust Fund raised through a law the General Assembly enacted in 2007. The blog reported that Maryland Governor O’Malley proposed to spend more of the money this year and added:

So let’s at least give Governor O’Malley for moving in the right direction.  But now the Maryland General Assembly is talking about cutting O’Malley $20 million in half, to $10 million (or even less), for the upcoming fiscal year.

The cuts would mean lots more pollution flowing into the Bay. And they are also very likely to mean that Maryland will miss one of its first “milestones.”

The blog said the new two-year goals will, if nothing else, lead to more accountability among politicians in the bay states. If voters aren’t satisfied with what their elected officials are doing to help the bay cleanup, the officials could find themselves out of a job more quickly.

However, it will be up to those same voters to pay closer attention to the goals and how states are progressing toward meeting them. If they don’t, citizens and advocates within the watershed will just find themselves frustrated about the lack of progress every two years rather than every 10.