April 29, 2009
Watered down bottle bill moves to Ore. House
RYAN KOST
(AP) — SALEM, Ore. - Just two years ago, Oregon lawmakers approved a change to the state's bottle bill system-the first in its history-by including water bottles. Early this session, lawmakers said they were set to make more changes; they wanted to increase the deposit from a nickel to a dime and fold in all sorts of new beverage bottles.
But the bill that moved out of the House environment committee this week was considerably weaker than the bold proposal supporters first made.
Now, nobody is completely satisfied, not the advocates who worry about the considerable concessions that Democrats made to industry, and not the opponents, who say it's too early to pass any sort of expansion.
"There's a debate within all sectors regarding ... how much have you overcompromised and come up with a measure of little import?" said Jerry Powell, the publisher and editor of Resource Recycling, a national magazine. "It's got warts and extensions and all sort of funny parts to it."
Powell has been an advocate of the bottle bill since it was first thought up back in the 70s. He also sat on the task force that recommended the most recent changes. The legislation, as it was introduced, tracked closely to what that group had recommended.
Under the original bill, distributors would have had to accept liquor and wine bottles along with sports drinks, coffee, juice, tea and other beverages of the sort by 2013. The bill would have also increased the deposit consumers pay-and can redeem-to a dime from the current nickel.
But the committee scrapped some of that. Wine and liquor bottles got cut, and the deposit won't jump to 10 cents until 2016. Even then, the increase would only go into effect if the recycling rate dropped below 80 percent in 2015.
"If they compromise much more it is a very, very weak bill," Powell said late last week. That was before the committee added yet another amendment, this one removing the requirement that grocers accept at least 24 containers per person per day.
The governor's office, which introduced the bill, says it still represents some solid change.
"It's not as aggressive a bill as the governor introduced," said Rem Nivens, a spokesman for the governor. "But we still feel like this is a positive step forward."
And yet, even this step is too much for the grocers and other opponents.
Back in 2007 grocers committed $200 million to building redemption centers for the bottles. Joe Gilliam, a lobbyist for the Northwest Grocery Association, says the state ought to wait and see just how effective those redemption centers are before flooding them with new products.
"I don't know what the rush is here," he said. "Adding the volume that is in the bill would just crush the stores."
Rep. Ben Cannon, a Portland Democrat, figures that maybe the fact nobody is happy means the bill is OK.
Cannon sat on the task force that ginned up the latest reforms, and chaired the committee that tacked on the various amendments. While he's not a fan of all of the changes, he says they're not all that bad.
The decision not to include liquor: "The fact is those make up such a small percentage of the container waste stream that we're not giving up a lot by not including them."
The decision to tie the nickle-to-dime increase to the recycling rate: "I actually feel pretty good about tying he increase to the redemption rate the dime deposit is just a tool to make sure the bottle bill works and that people have an incentive."
As for the most recent compromising, no longer requiring grocers to take a certain number of containers, he doesn't like it, but he's willing to give industry a chance to prove redemption centers work, he said.
"If we successfully expand the bottle bill that will be only the second time in 34 years that has happened," Cannon said. "And that's a big deal."
___
The measure is House Bill 2184
http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/national-10/124105269984840.xml&storylist=orlocal
