WOOLWICH, Maine — A petition to revisit the Pay As You Throw program through a November ballot question was turned down by the Woolwich Board of Selectmen on Tuesday night.
The program, implemented on Sept. 1, requires Woolwich residents to dispose of their trash by purchasing orange bags provided by WasteZero, an organization that administers PAYT programs throughout Maine.
The petition circulated by Woolwich resident Don Adams proposes a November municipal ballot question to clarify what he believes was a questionable town meeting vote to implement the program.
Adams and several residents contested the validity of a town meeting vote that approved PAYT, as the program appeared to have been rejected by a voice vote. However, after a call for written balloting on the measure, town meeting voters subsequently approved the program, 114-105.
“I feel like any other questions like this should not be on [the] town warrant because it creates a lot of barriers,” Adams said earlier that day.
Kristin Collins, the town’s attorney, advised the board to reject Adams’ petition, saying that the document is deficient in several areas.
She said the petition lacked “necessary content,” as the document merely calls for a yes or no vote on the PAYT program. For a ballot question, she said a particular format must be followed.
This would give Adams only 10 days to collect signatures and resubmit an accurate petition, according to Maine law that states a petition should be submitted 45 days before Election Day.
Collins said a court could also consider whether the town meeting’s attendance justifies the selectmen’s rejection of a petition.
“If it’s a pretty good turnout and if it was pretty recent in time, a court is most likely going to say you are right in refusing the petition because you can’t have this uncertainty in government where something gets to be challenged again and again and you don’t know where to stand,” she said.
Collins also cited a 1991 case, Dunston v. York, as justification for the board’s authority to decline a petition.
“The contract says you can cancel within 60 days, and presumably any time, but you have discretion to determine, ‘Is it too soon?’ We just voted on this and this portion of the town voted to go forward with this and are we disrespecting them by now possibly reversing it by a different group of people,’” Collins said during Tuesday’s meeting.
Community members also expressed concern when it was revealed that the town had entered a five-year contract with WasteZero, as many were under the impression that it was only a yearlong contract.
Town Administrator Lynette Eastman and Collins confirmed that the contract was a five-year contract with one-year contract renewals following the five years.
Even with the five-year contract, solid waste committee chairman Fred Kahrl reminded residents that they can still choose to vote down PAYT next year at town meeting.
“It is a one-year contract because the town meeting can block funding next year and there is escape language in the contract, which allows us to leave the contract,” he said. “The town vote is still in control of whether we go beyond.”
Four members of the board voted against accepting the petition.