Woolwich First Selectman Crispin Connery said increases approved in a town meeting May 12 and 13 would, barring other factors, raise property taxes by $145 on a $100,000 house.

But Connery cautioned the numbers will probably change. By how much, he said he wouldn't hazard a guess.

The state hasn't told the town how much it will receive for aid to education, which according to School Committee Chairman Laurie Bisson could be around $53,000. In addition, Connery said there might be ``a couple million dollars in new construction,'' which could buffer the property tax. Connery said he won't have final assessment figures until just before tax bills come out in September. In addition, the amount of revenue sharing is as yet unknown.

Residents approved a school budget calling for about $215,000 more in taxes this year than last and a municipal budget up by $42,000. With 73 people attending the first town meeting session 110 the second, voters passed a $3.2 million school budget, then a $922,000 municipal budget. The third component is Sagadahoc County taxes, which this year are about $194,000, up $4,000, according to Connery.

The largest increase in the school budget was for contracted salaries. The school also received $30,000 for architectural services to enlarge and renovate the school and another $9,000 for safety improvements.

The municipal budget included about $14,000 more for trash collection this year. According to selectmen, the increase would have been higher if the town had not switched from using the Wiscasset Transfer Station to T & R Associates of Bath.

Last year Woolwich paid Wiscasset about $112,000. The contract with T & R for roadside pick-up is $126,000. Wiscasset notified Woolwich that its new contract price would be $192,000 but Connery said by the time it was adjusted at the end of the year, the way it always is, the Wiscasset price could have been $200,000.

A small percentage of Woolwich residents decided at a special town meeting March 18 to switch to T & R, but dissatisfaction remained, as evidenced by discussion at the May 13 gathering.

Phillip Baker began the objections after moderator John Chapman read the article to raise the money for T & R.

``Why just one company?'' Baker asked. ``Why not have others put in bids? There are a lot of people who don't like taking their garbage to the end of their road... Bags break, animals get into them, and we have to take care of things like refrigerators on our own. I have talked to a lot of people who don't like it. They would rather pay the bucks to go to Wiscasset.''

Connery responded that the town is not required to bid out that service and in any case there was not enough time. ``A lot of people in Woolwich are on fixed incomes,'' Connery said. ``For us to spend $200,000 to go to Wiscasset and push the mill rate to 15 or 16 is unfair. For those who say they have a long driveway, I've got a long driveway. The driveway is just as long as when I used to drive to Wiscasset.''

Asked later if the town would consider putting the trash contract out to bid next year, Connery said, ``We can try to figure out a methodology to put it out to bid.'' He said that is something the newly appointed solid waste committee could consider.

Several people said residents who can't afford to pay T & R to haul items not accepted in the regular trash - items like mattresses, large appliances, and tires - would dump them in the woods.

Bill Flood of the Middle Road said he has seen mattresses dumped under the power lines and bags thrown along the side of the road. ``If someone throws trash on my property, now I have to get rid of that,'' he said.

When a resident asked if Woolwich could have a transfer station similar to one in Georgetown, Connery said the cost of running a transfer station is high. ``Maybe we could have something small, but we would have to look at the operating expense,'' the selectman said.

Connery said he realizes that the switch to T & R is ``not totally palatable to all folks, and we are willing to look at alternatives.

``All of this is sinking in. This is a fluid, not a static situation,'' he said. He said the solid waste committee will be looking at various alternatives.

Another topic that came up, this time introduced by Joan Jordan, was the comprehensive plan. Jordan made a motion to delete $2,500 in the budget for updating the 1991 plan. The comprehensive plan forms the foundation for regulations about how land will be used in town.

Jordan said she tabulated the results of questions one through six on the comprehensive plan questionnaire that went out to residents a few weeks ago. The results, she said, indicate that residents do not want to pay tax dollars for an update. She said written comments on the survey also indicate confusion about the plan's function.

On question one asking residents whether the town should spend $15,000 on the plan, Jordan said 139 people said ``yes,'' 183 said ``no,'' and 26 had no opinion. To question two asking if the money should be spent on other things, 187 answered in the affirmative, 129 in the negative, and 31 had no opinion, she said. Responding to the question about whether the plan could be done within town committees, 213 people said ``yes,'' 101, ``no,'' and 30 expressed no opinion, according to Jordan.

Connery said, ``Maybe the town doesn't have the political will'' to deal now with growth issues.

``The first three questions are misleading,'' Connery said. He said the money the town has been using to update the plan came from the state for that expressed purpose only.

``We are going to have to address this issue and we will need dollars to do it,'' he said.

Connery said the economic climate has changed in the town since the comprehensive plan was updated about 10 years ago. When the plan was last worked on, there was a recession and there was doubt about the future of Bath Iron Works and the Brunswick Naval Air Station. Now the area is booming. ``This is one of the fastest growing areas in Maine. We need money available in the (comprehensive planning) account because we will need it and then it will be a crisis,'' Connery said.

Sue Whittaker said, ``Last night we spent $3.2 million on the school budget. If we don't deal with growth, we will soon have a $5 million school budget. This $2,500 is pennies compared to what is needed to work on the comprehensive plan.''

Kitty Wheeler commented that inadequately planned growth could be ``crippling''for the town.

Jordan said she understands the need to plan, but maintained that it could be done in town committee. ``When we bring in outside planners, we are not doing this ourselves. COG (Council of Governments in Portland, the agency Woolwich asked to help with the process) wanted to change Woolwich thinking on the comprehensive planning committee. We're Woolwich. We're not Portland or Boston,'' Jordan said.

Selectman David King responded that the Portland planning agency left Woolwich ``because there was a certain element on the committee that wanted to address the takings law. COG didn't want to champion a cause that is a dead issue. The Supreme Court has refused to hear it.'' The takings issue is the question of whether land owners should be compensated if a governmental entity places restrictions on the way they can use their land. Residents voted unanimously by voice vote to keep the $2,500 in the comprehensive planning account.