Bill would change bottle deposits

Leave well enough alone, say bottlers and grocers who bristle at the idea of expanding the law to cover other beverages.

Make a good thing even better, say backers who want to increase the deposit and include water bottles and fruit-juice containers among the returnables.

No news is good news, say a lot of defenders who are wary about changing the law, which everybody agrees has cleaned up Michigan roadsides.

Add to those feelings a Republican administration and Legislature which many environmentalists feel are cool to expanding the law, and there's a recipe for the status quo.

But a Boston consulting firm is studying the issue and expected to release a report in January. They won't discuss their work, but they are expected to evaluate the size of the deposit, whether to include other containers and whether to call for centralized recycling centers as opposed to having retailers handle the returnables.

"The hopes (of expanding the law) are pretty slim," said David Dempsey of the Michigan Environmental Council, which supports including other beverages under the deposit requirement.

"We're not in a climate where environmental laws have an easy time getting through the Legislature," he said. "Every time you ask people if it makes sense to cover soft drinks and not bottled water, they say no. But there is no clamor."

Michigan voters adopted the bottle bill, following a petition drive led by the Michigan United Conservation Clubs, in 1976. It requires a dime deposit on beer and soft drink containers - and any carbonated beverage - and a nickel if the container is refillable. It was later expanded to cover wine coolers.

Michigan is one of 10 states with a bottle deposit law.

With environmentalists making little headway in beefing up the law, the only action now is a new $44,811 study Michigan has funded with the Tellus Institute of Boston to review the bottle bill.

"Michigan's bottle bill is 23 years old and it's a good time to look at it," said Mark Coscarelli, an environmental specialist in the state Office of the Great Lakes, which awarded the contract. "I'd guess this would inform the debate."

Both sides have hopes for the study - environmentalists would like to cover bottled water, fruit juices and other containers and maybe raise the deposit, while grocers generally support community recycling centers to get the job off their backs.

There's a lot of special interest opposition to expanding the law, said Pat Franklin, executive director of the Container Recycling Institute of Arlington, Va. But she said their is a trend toward more deposits.

"What has happened in recent years is a tremendous growth in non-carbonated beverages," she said. "If the deposit was extended, you'd have 15-20 percent more containers covered by the law."

Peter Pasterz, manager of recycling and waste management at Michigan State University, said the bottle bill's weak spot may be its dime deposit.

"As a lifelong resident of the state and remembering what it was like, it's been very effective in reducing pop and beer containers," he said. "But at what point does that dime become like a penny? For some people, a dime isn't as big a deal as it once was."

Inflation has taken a big bite out of the 10-cent deposit since 1976. Today's dime buys what 3.4 cents did 23 years ago. Put another way, 29 cents today buys what 10 cents did when voters passed the deposit law.

But Linda Gobler, president of the Michigan Grocers Association, said retailers can't accept any expansion of the law. She said it would only worsen space, staffing and health problems caused by the additional containers.

"We do not want to see the law expanded unless we get the containers out of the grocery store," she said. "It's costly. It's labor intensive. It's a mess.

"Just the thought of it has sent the retail community into a panic."

The dispute has left lawmakers who back expanding the law pessimistic.

"To tell you the truth, we put it on the back burner," said Sen. Arthur Miller (D-Warren). "I just think the big retailers ... have put on a big push to block any further regulation. They don't want to touch them."

One thing that just about everybody agrees on is that Michigan residents like their bottle bill.

"It's worked well," said Anne Woiwode, program director for the Michigan Sierra Club. "It actually has the effect on litter that was intended in the first place. This is one issue that is popular in Michigan. People are proud of it."

Even defenders of business recognize its popularity, and dismiss occasional talk of repealing

"The current law has a fair amount of popular support," said Rich Studley, vice president of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce. "Over the years they've grown used to the law ... Consumers have gotten used to recycling bottles and cans."

"The repeal of the bottle bill will never get out of my committee," said Sen. Ken Sikkema (R-Grandville) chairperson of the Senate Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee.

"The bottle bill has worked and we should not retreat from all the progress we have made."

09-20-99