Governor Gets Anti-Litter Bottle Bill

A major anti-litter bill that would establish a refundable beer and soft-drink container recycling program and end a 20-year impasse between conservationists and the beverage industry was passed by both houses of the Legislature Thursday and sent to Gov. George Deukmejian.

On a 55-8 vote, the Assembly granted the delicately drafted measure final legislative passage Thursday night, a few hours after the Senate approved it 34 to 0.

Deukmejian has not taken a public stand on the bill, authored by Assemblyman Burt Margolin (D-Los Angeles). But Kevin Brett, a Deukmejian spokesman, said that the governor “generally is in favor of the concept.”

“This bill sends a very simple message to all Californians and that message is that we can no longer continue to support the throwaway ethic in this state,” said Assemblyman Bruce Bronzan (D-Fresno) in arguing for the legislation.

An opponent, Assemblyman Richard E. Floyd (D-Hawthorne), called the measure “outrageous” and said it amounted to a new “tax” on consumers.

Unlike traditional “bottle bill” legislation of the past that simply would have required consumers to pay a refundable 5-cent deposit on each beer or soda pop container, the bill would require beverage distributors, starting on Sept. 1, 1987, to pay a penny-per-container fee into a newly created statewide redemption fund. The fee would likely be passed on to consumers as part of the product’s price but they would get it back when they deposited the container at a recycling center.

“Now that we have a bounty, I say tomorrow you’re going to have cleaner streets,” asserted Assembly Majority Leader Mike Roos (D-Los Angeles).

Major Agreement

The long-sought compromise legislation marks the first time in two decades that environmentalists and California’s powerful beverage industry have reached agreement on the volatile recycling issue.

“This is a beginning, it’s better than we’ve ever had before,” said Sen. Becky Morgan (R-Los Altos Hills), Senate floor manager of the bill as the upper house debated the measure.

Beginning Oct. 1, 1987, consumers could exchange the beer and soft-drink containers for a 1-cent payment at neighborhood recycling centers. They would also receive payment for the scrap value of the container--currently about 1 cent for an aluminum can and about a half-cent for a glass bottle.

If the return rate for a particular type of container dropped below 65%, the redemption fee charged to distributors would increase to 2 cents in 1989. If by 1992 the minimum return rate was still unmet, the fee would climb to 3 cents per container.

The escalating fee provision is intended to encourage participation.

‘Best We Can Do’

“It will not work as well as a traditional bottle bill, which is what I support, but it is the best we can do,” Margolin told reporters.

Success of the program, Margolin said, is partly hinged on its “visibility” and on “recycling centers popping up all over the state.”

Floyd contended during the Assembly floor debate that the centers--which he called “mini-scrap yards”--would be breeding grounds in residential areas for “roaches, ants and rats.”

To encourage recycling, the bill would require the state Department of Conservation to establish by next Jan. 1 “convenience zones” statewide in which at least one recycling center would be located within a half-mile radius of every large supermarket. Currently there are about 1,000 recycling centers throughout the state. The measure would require the establishment of at least 2,000 centers statewide.

Other Requirements

The centers could be anything from parking lot drop-off programs run by charitable and service organizations to reverse vending machines or a permanent recycling station. They would be open at least 30 hours a week and would be required to accept glass, plastic and aluminum beverage containers.

Neighborhoods that would be unable to establish such centers by next July 31 would be eligible for special financial help, such as money for start-up costs, or money to slightly increase the container redemption rates paid to consumers.

If by Dec. 31, 1987, a center was still not established in such areas, a grocery store would be required to either accept containers from customers or pay a $100-a-day penalty into the redemption fund.