A comment in the editorial of July 20 praised Nestle and deplored efforts to regulate or tax them. After listing all the good that Nestle’s Poland Spring Bottling Co. does, it asked, “Do we really want to chase the company off with regulatory whips and chains and shrug off that revenue?”

That seems an extreme assessment of what I believe is a sensible expectation — that a wealthy and powerful, multi-national corporation should pay something for Maine’s water, and that they should be regulated, just as all takers of natural resources should be regulated.

In a story July 16, Kim Jeffery, president and CEO of Nestle Waters North America, spoke about the purchase of Poland Spring: “It was hard for me to imagine when we bought this (that) I would be standing here today leading a $4 billion company with 7,500 employees.”

Then he complained about how hard it is to do business in Maine with attempts from “legislators to tax us or limit our development as a company.”

The story also quoted Rep. Jon Hinck, who pointed out that the proposed tax of one cent per gallon would have helped protect the water and would neither have harmed Nestle nor driven it out of the state.

Many people believe Nestle should pay something for the use of state resources. Just as Texas does not give its oil away, neither should Maine give its water away. And without careful regulation, Nestle could conceivably pump the aquifers dry and then leave.

Joyce White, Stoneham

Editor’s note: The editorial of July 19 did not argue no regulation or taxes, but against over-regulation and burdensome taxes that inhibit business growth for all Maine companies. Nestle’s bottling operation is already taxed by the state of  Maine and regulated to ensure aquifers are sustained.