Give nips fund some time

There has been a lot of back and forth in the media this year regarding the sale of nips in Connecticut, including a recent news article in which it was reported that towns such as Cromwell love the new nips fund, which has allowed them to go far beyond just cleaning up nips and is helping fund larger cleanup projects around the town.

Cutting through the noise of this back and forth and the sometimes silly debate is the simple truth that since being launched, this innovative program has been an undeniable success for Connecticut — sending more than $11 million to municipalities across our state and creating a new source of revenue for towns and cities.

For the municipalities that are using the additional resources for their intended use — which is to clean up litter — this has meant the ability to hire a new town employee focused on environment and energy such as Bridgeport, buy a new mechanical street sweeper like East Haven, or to promote days of action for litter pick up like South Windsor. And it doesn’t stop there; Stonington recently bought new garbage and recycling cans, Warren hired a part-time employee to focus on pick-ups near storm drains, Watertown focused on pick-ups in parks, and so on.

When the wine and spirit suppliers, wholesalers, and retailers proposed this program in 2021, it was in direct response to the Legislature looking for a solution to the litter problem nips were contributing to. And we do not deny that they play a role in our state’s litter problem. But to lay the full litter problem at the feet of nip sales is misleading.

For those unfamiliar with the program, it is simple: in 2021, the legislature passed a “nickel-per-nip” surcharge on all sales that would be collected and then redistributed to the towns where they were sold, providing a new revenue stream that could be used to help mitigate litter and help invest in more sustainable and long-term solutions to problems surrounding litter clean-up in our state. Funds are distributed every April and October, when the municipalities receive five cents for each nip sold within its borders during the preceding six months.

Since launching, detractors of the program and the liquor industry have largely not waited to see if this program can actually work, continuing to call for new changes to policy, such as allowing individual towns to vote on whether they can ban the sale of nips. But just like we have seen already in the early stages of cannabis sales, if a town bans the sale of it, people will simply go to the towns that allow it and buy it there. It won’t drive down sales; instead, such a move simply redistributes where the litter ends up.

What we believe is special about this program is that it provides money directly to municipalities at regular intervals, allowing them to take action in their towns and at their discretion and that there are no hidden handling fees. Furthermore, the direct allocation of the funds means the money isn’t tied up in the state budget and suddenly being allocated to deal with problems unrelated to recycling, environmental concerns, or keeping towns clean.

While we are sure the debate over nips will continue, we urge people to keep the debate at the state level. The idea of a handful of towns determining what size alcohol containers businesses can sell will only further complicate things for small business owners, consumers, and become a political football to be debated election after election. As for the “nickel-for-nip” program itself, we urge people to travel the state and speak with municipal leaders about their experiences because we have seen that when handled correctly, the good far outweighs the negative of local nip sales.

In the Land of Steady Habits, we do not often devise an innovative program like this that can become a nationwide model. We simply ask that you give it time to see how successful it can be.