By Wayne E. Rivet

Staff Writer

As Steve Lisauskas of WasteZero explained how the company could provide designated trash bags and offer public education on the benefits of a Pay Per Bag program, Maureen Harpell had one important question to ask.

“How do we get people to say ‘yes?’ What is the buy in for the people,” asked Harpell, the newest member of the Bridgton Recycling Committee.

Lisauskas, who is vice president of government affairs for the Raleigh, N.C.-based company, said via Zoom that the biggest benefit is Pay Per Bag reduces what everyone pays and gives the town the ability to control costs related to waste disposal.

“The cost of a bag provides incentive to do things differently — to recycle, to compost and to donate items to charity,” he said. “If I pay more, I change my behavior.”

Local officials reached out to WasteZero to provide information regarding purchasing Bridgton specific trash bags, as well as assistance in educating the general public on the benefits of a Pay Per Bag program — which will go to public referendum this June.

According to its website, WasteZero was founded in 1991 to address “the nation’s systematic waste management crisis with the goal of increasing residential recycling participation and reducing landfill waste tonnage and cost.”

The website adds, “WasteZero is a national leader in municipal waste reduction, with over 7.1M tons of trash reduced and over $1.7B in cost savings. On average, our programs cut trash by 44% in our partner communities and have a 96% retention rate.”

WasteZero can be contracted to manufacture trash bags, ship them to local vendors and provide accounting to the town regarding bags sold and revenue collected by vendors. Lisauskas pointed out that when inventory reaches a two-month supply, WasteZero would contact the town as to its wishes regarding restocking. The town would set the cost of bags sold to Transfer Station users, as well as determine the color and thickness of bags. The town can cancel the program with WasteZero at any time.

“The cost of the bag will be higher than Glad or Hefty, since it helps pay for disposal,” Lisauskas said.

Community Development Director Linda Lacroix has heard a number of people express fear that users won’t purchase Bridgton-designated bags (one figure used in discussion was $1.25, but the select board would decide what fee to charge) due to cost and possibly resort to illegal dumping.

“Education will be very important. People need to understand the margins and incentives,” Lacroix said.

Lisauskas said that very question is raised everywhere — rural to urban areas.

“EPA studied it. The good news is illegal dumping doesn’t happen, surprisingly. The vast majority (of people) know what is right and what is wrong. They know it is wrong to dump illegally. Data shows 11% across 10,000, temporary increase in illegal dumping. Education and enforcement after implementation addressed the issue. Those 11% didn’t do the public engagement. It’s not been a factor in many communities. You should plan for it, and move quickly to prevent it from happening,” Lisauskas said.

Harpell wondered if the town might look at ways to “sweeten the pot,” in hopes to sway voters to support Pay Per Bag. How about municipal trash pick-up?

Board Chairwoman Carmen Lone quickly struck down that idea, calling it a “giant leap.” She noted that the town is served by many private haulers.

“The town is not ready to move in that direction,” Lone said. She also noted that the state is getting “serious” regarding how municipalities handle waste and the push to recycle more. “If we don’t control it ourselves, someone will come in and do it.”

Town Manager Bob Peabody speculated that at a charge of $1.25 per bag, revenue generated would cut the cost of operating the Transfer Station by a third, thus reducing the solid waste disposal cost to taxpayers.

“It’s a compelling argument,” Peabody said.

Lisauskas pointed out that some municipalities went to Pay Per Bag as a one-year pilot program, bypassing voter approval. If voters were dissatisfied with the program, they could discontinue its use after a year.

Harpell asked why Bridgton officials decided to put the question out to referendum vote, rather than implement Pay Per Bag as a pilot program?

Peabody pointed out a couple of legal questions — one, Bridgton is a town meeting town, and requires voter approval in regards to ordinances (in this case, the ordinance spells out the select board’s authority to charge a fee for bags).

“I like living in this town, therefore I’d like to present the idea to the entire town for consideration and not make that decision myself,” Selectman Bob McHatton said.

“If the townspeople vote for it, and it’s not working, they can ask for us to stop it,” Selectman Bear Zaidman added.

A public educational campaign will soon begin regarding the Pay Per Bag program

In other meeting notes:

Superintendent in the house. SAD 61 Superintendent of Schools Al Smith gave the select board an overview of the proposed $32M-plus budget.

“It’s a frugal budget, but a good budget,” Smith said. (See related story for budget details.)

Smith, however, broke the bad news to Bridgton officials, whose town will see a 3% increase in its school tax. Admittedly, Smith dislikes the “rollercoaster ride” towns seem to be on, experiencing tax reductions one year only to see the tax figure increase the next — mainly driven by valuation numbers.

Smith noted that the original budget crafted by the leadership team would have pushed Bridgton to the $1 million tax mark, but reductions made left the tax below that threshold.

One topic the select board was enlightened upon is the future of the Bridgton Memorial School property. If the district’s proposal to build a new storage facility on the high school campus grounds is approved, SAD 61 will look to turn the BMS property over to Bridgton.

Initially, Smith thought construction work could begin by early summer on the 60-by-100 foot metal building (40% of it will be heated), but it appears that timeline will be pushed back because the project will need to go before the Naples Planning Board, as well as the Maine DEP and Fire Marshal’s Office. Although the storage building will not be “sprinkled,” the Fire Marshal’s review kicks in because the structure is on school property. That review could take a “minimum of three months,” Smith said.

“It (construction) won’t be completed until the beginning of next summer,” Smith projected.