January 27, 2009
Bottle bill expansion may have chance this year
HARTFORD -- The debate to expand the deposit bottle bill is an annual ritual at the Capitol.
Supporters at a news conference Monday joked that the legislature could vote this year to place nickel deposits on bottles of water and other noncarbonated beverages -- only because members are sick and tired of dealing with the issue.
But the state's budget crisis also is likely to have lawmakers taking the bill more seriously than ever.
"The stars are lined up just right to do this this year," said state Sen. Edward Meyer, D-Guilford.
Meyer was joined by state Rep. Richard Roy, D-Milford, Meyer's environmental committee co-chairman; state Senate President Pro Tempore Donald Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn; and state Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield.
The group argued that expanding the 1978 bottle bill -- which only applies to soda, beer and sparkling water -- to water, teas and juices would improve recycling and combat litter.
"The evidence to date is nothing gets to the recycling rate like the bottle bill," said McKinney, ranking Republican on the Environmental Committee.
But there is a new financial benefit as well: an estimated $12 million that Connecticut, which is facing billions of dollars in deficits, could recoup annually from unclaimed deposits.
For years, beverage distributors have been allowed to keep millions of dollars in unclaimed deposits on beer and soda. But Democrats and Republicans this month used an existing abandoned property law to seize that money to reduce the deficit.
Betty McLaughlin, executive director of the Container Recycling Institute, said if the bottle bill is expanded and the same consumers do not return their noncarbonated bottles, it could add $12 million to the state's pot of unclaimed deposits.
"In this budget deficit year, every dollar obviously counts," Williams said.
The General Assembly also might gain more money by boosting deposits from 5 to 10 cents, although legislators were split on that issue
Monday.
"We might do this incrementally and do it next year," Meyer said.
Lawmakers hoped some of the unclaimed deposit revenue also could be used to win over grocery stores that have traditionally joined with beverage companies in fighting a bottle bill expansion.
The state pays stores a handling fee for managing bottle and can returns. But the amounts -- 1.5 cents per beer bottle and 2 cents per soda container -- have not been increased since 1986.
"When you talk about increasing a handling fee, you see that opposition fracture," McKinney said.
Lawmakers said they hope the increased handling fees would also encourage the opening of private recycling centers to take the burden off grocery stores.
"There are fewer and fewer (private bottle redemption centers). The handling fee wasn't increased, and their costs kept going up," McLaughlin said. "There's about 16 left in the whole state."
But Stan Sorkin, president of the Connecticut Food Association, said the trade group will continue to oppose an expanded bottle bill, arguing that higher handling costs will not fully compensate what stores lose on investing in more recycling machines and expansions to their recycling rooms.
In previous years, supermarkets such as Stop & Shop warned customers through in-store ads that if the bill is passed, it could increase the costs of groceries.
"We feel it's the wrong time and place to increase the cost of food and beverages to the consumers," Sorkin said.
There also is a question of whether the state's move to take the bottle deposits might result in distributors increasing prices.
McLaughlin said a price hike is not out of the question.
"What is not discussed is people in survey after survey are willing to pay a little more for something if the environment is going to be protected," McLaughlin said, adding the beverages being targeted are luxuries.
"This is an extra. It's not a necessity of life," she said. "And in a lot of cases, it's convenience. People are on the go and want the convenience" of a bottled beverage.
Brian Flaherty, spokesman for Greenwich-based Nestle Waters North America, said an expanded bottle bill would prove "very costly to us," adding that consumers are willing to only pay so much.
"When the price starts to go up, there's a limit to what the market bears," he said. "It puts us at a competitive disadvantage."
But Flaherty acknowledged Nestle is learning to do business in states with broader bottle bills, like Oregon, which on Jan. 1 began placing nickel deposits just on bottled water.
Flaherty said Nestle hopes to offer some better recycling models to Connecticut lawmakers this legislative session. He said the state's decision this month to go after the unclaimed deposits made the industry stand up and take notice.
"That is the clearest possible message I've seen of the state (telling) the beverage and retail industries, 'You've got very little time to come up with a better idea,' " Flaherty said.
http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/norwalkadvocate/news/ci_11562969
