Tennessee's Container Deposit Legislation
|
TITLE: |
|||||
|
STATUS: |
Feb. 3, 2011: Filed as House Bill 289 in the Tennessee House of Representatives. Feb. 4, 2011: Filed as Senate Bill 337 in the Tennessee Senate. To see a detailed chronology of the bill's progress, including links to most of the earlier versions, scroll to the Timeline at the bottom of this page. |
||||
|
FISCAL NOTE: |
Anticipated fiscal note for the 2011 bill The unofficial fiscal note here is advisory only; there will not be a "real" fiscal note until the "real" bill begins committee hearings. The version here is based on earlier fiscal notes for this legislation, so it should give you a fairly accurate idea of what the 2011 fiscal note will look like. What is a fiscal note? A fiscal note (also known as a fiscal memorandum) summarizes the projected impacts, both positive and negative, that a piece of legislation can be expected to have on state and/or local revenues. Fiscal notes are prepared by economists and analysts within the Fiscal Review Committee, a a legislative services office that serves both chambers (House and Senate) of the legislature. In general, a bill with a negative fiscal note is hard to pass, but this one is positive--i.e., it generates more money than it spends. |
||||
|
SENATE SPONSORS:
|
Prime sponsor: Sen. Jim Summerville, R-25, Dickson; represents Dickson, Giles, Hickman, Humphreys, Lawrence, and Lewis counties. 11A Legislative Plaza, (615) 741-4499 Co-prime sponsors: Sen. Randy McNally, R-5 (Oak Ridge; represents Anderson, Loudon, Monroe, and part of Knox counties), 307 WMB, (615) 741-6806 Sen. Beverly Marrero, D-89 (Memphis; represents part of Shelby), 312 WMB, (615) 741-9128 Note: Clicking on a legislator's name will automatically link to his or her e-mail address. Office addresses refer to War Memorial Building (WMB) or Legislative Plaza (LP). Scroll further down the page for additional contact information. |
||||
|
HOUSE SPONSORS:
|
Prime sponsors: Rep. Mike McDonald, D-44 (Portland: represents part of Sumner County), 37 LP, (615) 741-1980 Rep. Jim Coley, R-97 (Bartlett: represents part of Shelby County), 207 WMB, (615) 741-8201 Co-prime sponsors: Rep. Karen Camper , D-87 (Memphis: represents part of Shelby County), 26 LP, (615) 741-1829 Rep. John DeBerry, D-90 (Memphis: represents part of Shelby County), 26 LP, (615) 741-2239 Rep. Sherry Jones, D-59 (Nashville: represents part of Davidson County), 26 LP, (615) 741-2035 Rep. Mike Kernell, D-93 (Memphis: represents part of Shelby County), 38 WMB, (615) 741-3726 Rep. Kelly Keisling , R-38 (Byrdstown: represents Clay, Jackson, Pickett, Scott and parts of Anderson counties), WMB 108; (615) 741-6852 Rep. Frank Nicely, R-17 (Strawberry Plains: represents parts of Knox and Jefferson counties); WMB 113; (615) 741-4419 Rep. Mary Pruitt, D-58 (Nashville: represents part of Davidson County), 25 LP, (615) 741-3853 Rep. Bob Ramsey, R-20 (Maryville: represents part of Blount County), 207 WMB, (615) 741-3560 Rep. Jeanne Richardson, D-89 (Memphis: represents part of Shelby County), 26 LP, (615) 741-2010 Rep. David Shepard, D-69 (Dickson: represents Dickson and part of Hickman counties), 34 LP, (615) 741-3513 Rep. Art Swann, R-20 (Maryville: represents part of Blount and Sevier counties), 219 WMB, (615) 741-5481 Rep. Mike Stewart, D-52 (Nashville: represents part of Davidson County), 22 LP, (615) 741-2184 Rep. Mike Turner , D-51 (Old Hickory: represents part of Davidson County), 18 LP, (615) 741-3229 |
||||
|
KEY FEATURES : |
• 5-cent deposit applies to most beverages, including soda, beer, bottled water, flavored water, energy drinks, iced teas, iced coffees and juices; and to containers made of glass, plastic, aluminum and bi-metal, regardless of size. • Stores have nothing to do with the empty containers. Unlike in some deposit programs, stores in Tennessee are not responsible for accepting, redeeming, sorting, storing, selling or otherwise dealing with empty containers (unless they wish to open their own redemption centers). Instead, consumers in Tennessee will get back their nickels at any of hundreds of independent, certified "redemption centers"across the state--many of which will be located next to stores. At most redemption centers, workers at the redemption centers will calculate the number of containers by hand-count or by weight; sort them by material and (if appropriate) by color; compact them (in most cases); and put them aside for purchase/pickup by a participating scrap processor. (Some scrap processors will also be certified as redemption centers.) Redemption centers may be owned and operated by individuals, nonprofit groups, scrap yards, manufacturers, curbside recyclers and local governments--including the county convenience centers where many Tennesseans already take their household recyclables. • The program is self-supporting. Redemption centers are private businesses, compensated by the revenues from scrap sales and an "overhead allowance" equal to a maximum of 20 percent of total refund values (or 1 cent per container), which comes out of the unclaimed deposits. In addition, redemption centers are free to accept and sell nondeposit recyclables such as milk jugs, newspaper and cardboard, all of which are in strong demand on the recycling market. • Bottlers have nothing to do with the empty containers. Unlike in some deposit programs, beverage distributors in Tennessee have no role whatever in accepting, handling, transporting, processing, marketing, reporting or otherwise dealing with the empty containers. This is done instead by processors (scrap dealers, etc.) who have been certified by the program. Processors receive an "administrative allowance" of 1/10 cent per container to cover bookkeeping costs (this also comes out of the program funds). In addition, they gain access to high volumes of clean, properly sorted scrap material--the kind that commands the highest prices from end-users. • No tax increase on beverage distributors. Beverage distributors pay no new taxes under this bill. Instead, they simply continue paying a small fee to subsidize county litter crews and litter education through the "county litter grants"—something they've been doing since 1981. At present, they are paying two separate "litter taxes," based on volume of beer sales and gross receipts of soft drink sales, that together generate about $6 million a year, or about 1/8 cent per container. Under the new legislation, these "litter taxes" will be revoked. In their place, distributors will pay a flat "container-recovery fee" of 1/8 cent on every container. The money collected will be essentially the same; it will continue to be disbursed to the counties and to Keep Tennessee Beautiful by the same agency (the Tennessee Department of Transportation); and payments to individual counties will be calculated using the same apportionment formula used now. • No interruption in Tennessee's existing litter program. As noted above, the bill uses the 1/8-cent "container-recovery fee" to ensure uninterrupted, undiminished funding of the "county litter grants" program, which funds litter crews from the county jails as well as litter education by the counties and Keep Tennessee Beautiful. In order to make payment during the interim year of the start-up period, as well as to cover the program's other start-up costs, the legislation requires distributors to pay an advance on the container-recovery fee. That is, the fee is 1/4 cent for the first nine months, after which it drops to .0035 cent for the next three years, until the advance has been fully recouped by the distributors. • Allows the program fund to accept outside grants and donations. The program fund is the "bank" into which all program monies (deposits, interest, etc.) are deposited and out of which all program payments are made. The 2011 version of the bill allows the fund to accept donations from public and private sources--for instance, a manufacturing trade group or the EPA. This provides a way for recycling advocates and beneficiaries of the program to support its operations and keep fund levels healthy without mandating special fees or reducing payments to redemption centers and processors. • Third-party contractor is possible. The legislation provides that the Department of Revenue is responsible for administering the program fund, while program operations, enforcement and so on are the responsibility of the Division of Solid Waste Management within the Department of Environment and Conservation. However, the bill also provides that either department may contract with an independent third-party agent to carry out its designated functions, with expenses paid out of the program fund. • The program reduces solid-waste costs while boosting overall recycling rates. In addition to increasing recycling rates for beverage containers from our current 10 percent to 80 percent or better, this bill will lead to increased recycling rates for other items such as milk jugs, mauyonnaise jars and cardboard boxes. This will not only reduce waste hauling and landfill costs; it will help local governments meet recycling mandates. The bill stipulates that material recycled via a redemption center must be credited to the county where the center is located, for purposes of calculating overall recycling rates and meeting state waste-diversion goals. • Varied redemption options. In adddition to storefront redemption centers, the bill authorizes "reverse vending machines," mobile redemption services, "drop-and-go" satellite kiosks (which funnel empties to a centralized high-speed processing site) and "microsites" (attended rolloff trailers typically located outside grocery stores or other retailers). Every redemption center must meet various criteria for things like location, hygiene, hours of operation, etc., in order to become and remain certified by the program. • Penalties for cheating and rewards for being honest. Fraud has never been a major problem with bottle bills, typically accounting for only 1 to 2 percent of the roughly 45 billion containers redeemed across the country each year. Nonetheless, the Tennessee bill takes some innovative steps to minimize fraud. For instance, the fine for knowingly trying to redeem more than 24 non-deposit containers (e.g., containers purchased in another state) is a whopping $25,000 or $100 per container (whichever is greater). And if a redemption center or processor detects the fraud, and the case is successfully prosecuted, the vigilant party is "rewarded" with half of any fines collected. • Assured coverage. In the unlikely event of an "underserved" area (as defined during the rule-making process), the bill stipulates that the program is responsible for seeing that one or more redemption centers is established in the area. Microsites--attended redemption trailers that fit into a single parking space, typically outside a host grocery store--are a good option in such situations. • Extra money for recycling and litter control. The bill stipulates that any monies in the program fund that are not required to fund the program may be used to provide grants to local governments for solid waste management, recycling, litter control and related activities. • The program privatizes a significant aspect of what is currently an inefficient and costly government program. Virtually all municipal recycling in Tennessee today is at least partially sponsored by, regulated by and/or funded by the government. This occurs at significant cost, and with lackluster results--10 percent recycling rates for most recyclables in Tennessee. Moreover, the 90 percent that is not recycled--Tennessee's garbage--is also, to a large extent, managed by, regulated by and paid for by taxpayers. Far from creating a "huge new government bureacracy," as opponents charge, the proposed legislation effectively moves a significant and extremely valuable component of the municipal waste and recycling stream out of government hands and into the private sector, where it will be recovered with far greater efficiency and at no unfunded cost to the government. |
||||
|
COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS: |
The Tennessee legislative process relies on a series of committee votes in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. A bill must be approved in a series of committees in order to make it to the "floor" of the Senate or House for a vote by the whole body; and it must be approved by a majority of both bodies, and not vetoed by the governor, in order to be signed into law. In the Senate, the 2011 Recycling Refunds Act has been assigned to the Senate Environment, Conservation and Tourism Committee. In the House of Representatives, it has been assigned to the House Conservation and Environment Committee--but first it must go before the House Government Operations Committee. Below are the members of these three committees, with their legislative address and phone numbers, and automatic links to their e-mail. Feel free to contact any member (not just your own) and voice your support for the "recycling refunds" bill: |
||||
|
Senate Environment, Conservation and Tourism Committee To call toll-free, dial (800) 449-8366, then, when prompted, dial the last five digits of the member's phone number LP = Legislative Plaza. WMB = War Memorial Building; ZIP code is 37243 Legislative Plaza is at the corner of 6th Avenue North and Union Street in Nashville, and across Charlotte Avenue from the State Capitol. Suggested parking: Public Libary lot (Church Street between 6th and 7th), or the various surface lots around the capitol complex. For more information, go to http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/ |
|||||
|
Member's name |
Notes |
Party/ district |
Hometown, and county or counties represented |
Address** |
Legislature* |
|
|
R-9 |
Riceville: Bradley, McMinn, Meigs, Polk counties |
302 WMB |
(615) 741-1946 |
|
|
|
R-4 |
Church Hill: Claiborne, Grainger, Hancock, Hawkins, Jefferson and Union counties |
10-A LP |
(615) 741-2061 |
|
|
|
R-18 |
Springfield: Robertson and part of Sumner counties |
3 LP |
(615) 741-1999 |
|
|
|
D-24 |
Dresden: 24 — Benton, Decatur, Henry, Henderson, Lake, Obion, Perry, Stewart, and Weakley counties |
309 WMB |
(615) 741-4576 |
|
|
vice-chair |
R-23 |
Franklin: Williamson and part of Davidson counties |
11 LP |
(615) 741-2495 |
|
|
Sen. Beverly MarreroSponsor |
|
D-30 |
Memphis: part of Shelby County |
312 WMB |
(615) 741-9128 |
|
chair |
R-1 |
Morristown: Cocke, Greene, Hamblen and Unicoi counties |
10 LP |
(615) 741-3851 |
|
|
|
D-14 |
Belvidere: Franklin, Bledsoe, Coffee, Grundy, Sequatchie, Van Buren and Warren counties |
310-A WMB |
(615) 741-6694 |
|
|
Sen. Jim SummervillePrime sponsor |
secretary |
D-25 |
Dickson: Dickson, Giles, Hickman, Humphreys, Lawrence and Lewis counties |
11-A LP |
(615) 741-4499 |
|
House Conservation and Environment Committee Note: Before it can be voted on by the full committee, the bill must be approved by the general subcommittee. Members of the general subcommittee are noted. To call toll-free, dial (800) 449-8366, then, when prompted, dial the last five digits of the member's phone number LP = Legislative Plaza; WMB = War Memorial Building; ZIP code is 37243 |
|||||
|
Member's name |
Exec? gen sub? |
Party/ District |
Hometown: Counties Represented |
Address** |
Legislature* |
|
|
R-64 |
Columbia: part of Maury County |
106 WMB |
(615) 741-3005 |
|
|
gen sub |
D-43 |
Sparta : White and parts of Putnam and Warren counties |
34 LP |
(615) 741-1963 |
|
|
vice-chair; secy gen sub |
R-27 |
Chattanooga: part of Hamilton County |
G-24 WMB |
(615) 741-2746 |
|
|
gen sub |
D-54 |
Nashville: part of Davidson County |
22 LP |
(615) 741-1997 |
|
|
chair of full committee; gen sub |
R-5 |
Greeneville: Unicoi and part of Greene counties |
201 WMB |
(615) 741-7482 |
|
|
|
R-76 |
Dresden: Weakley and part of Carroll counties |
205 WMB |
(615) 741-7847 |
|
|
gen sub |
D-93 |
Memphis: part of Shelby |
38 LP |
(615) 741-3726 |
|
|
vice-chair; chair gen sub |
R-99 |
Bartlett: part of Shelby |
214 WMB |
(615) 741-7084 |
|
|
gen sub |
R-62 |
Shelbyville: Bedford and parts of Lincoln and Rutherford counties |
110 WMB |
(615) 741-6824 |
|
|
Rep. Mike McDonald Prime Sponsor |
|
D-44 |
Portland: part of Sumner County |
37 LP |
(615) 741-1980 |
|
Rep. Frank Niceley Sponsor |
gen sub |
R-17 |
Strawberry Plains: part of Jefferson and Knox counties |
108 WMB |
(615) 741-4419 |
|
Rep. Art Swann Sponsor |
gen sub |
R-8 |
Maryville: part of Blount and Sevier counties |
219 WMB |
(615) 741-5481 |
|
gen sub |
D-74 |
New Johnsonville: Houston, Humphreys, Perry and parts of Hickman and Maury counties |
22 LP |
(615) 741-7098 |
|
|
House Government Operations Committee Note: This committee is not supposed to debate the mertis of a bill; it can only recommend for or against passage based on the bill's perceived impact on the structure of state government |
|||||
|
Member's name |
Exec? |
Party/ District |
Hometown: Counties Represented |
Address** |
Legislature* |
|
chair |
R-31 |
Spring City: part of Hamilton and Rhea counties |
110-A WMB |
(615) 741-1450 |
|
|
|
D-86 |
Memphis: part of Shelby |
38 LP |
(615) 741-4295 |
|
|
|
D-82 |
Ripley: Lauderdalem Crockett and part of Dyer counties |
33 LP |
(615) 741-2134 |
|
|
|
R-18 |
Knoxville: part of Knox County |
113 WMB |
(615) 741-2287 |
|
|
|
R-32 |
Lenoir City: Roane and part of Loudon counties |
114 WMB |
(615) 741-7658 |
|
|
|
D-93 |
Memphis: part of Shelby County |
38 LP |
(615) 741-3726 |
|
|
|
R-45 |
Hendersonville: part of Sumner County |
103 WMB |
(615) 741-3893 |
|
|
|
R-47 |
Tullahoma: Coffee and part of Warren counties |
15 LP |
(615) 741-7448 |
|
|
|
R-26 |
Chattanooga: part of Hamilton County |
18-A LP |
(615) 741-2548 |
|
|
vice-chair |
R-94 |
Somerville: Fayette and parts of Hardeman and Tipton counties |
117 WMB |
(615) 741-6890 |
|
|
secretary |
R-2 |
Kingsport: part of Sullivan County |
114 WMB |
(615) 741-2886 |
|
|
Rep. Mike Turner Sponsor |
|
D-51 |
Old Hickory: part of Davidson County |
17 LP |
(615) 741-3229 |
|
|
|||||
|
Timeline of Events Since 2003 103rd General Assembly (2003-2004) February 2003: State Rep. Russell Johnson (R-Loudon) files Tennessee's first container-deposit bill since 1993; it is carried in the Senate by Sen. Randy McNally (R-Oak Ridge). It's a decent bill, modeled after Hawaii's successful 2002 legislation and relying mainly on independent redemption centers; but with little outside support, it goes nowhere. April 2004: Marge Davis, a conservation writer in Mount Juliet who worked on the first Tennessee bottle bill in 1979, decides it's time to try again. She calls the Container Recycling Institute in Washington, D.C., to get some advice. To her great surprise, CRI founder and executive director Pat Franklin tells her that Tennessee already has a bill in the works. November 2004: Marge asks Scenic Tennessee to host the bottle-bill effort. Meanwhile, the lobbying group Tennessee Conservation Voters is also preparing to get behind it. After talking to Rep. Johnson and Sen. McNally, Scenic Tennessee launches the Tennessee Bottle Bill Project and prepares a public education and media campaign. 104th General Assembly (2005-2006) February 2005: Rep. Johnson and Sen. McNally reintroduce their bill. In the Senate the bill is referred to the Senate Environment, Conservation and Tourism Committee. But in the House, it is referred to the Local Government Subcommittee of the House State and Local Government Committee. This placement apparently owes to the fact that the bill will mean the end of $5 million annually in beverage taxes that fund the county litter grants as well as Keep Tennessee Beautiful. Rep. Johnson comes up with a solution: replace the $5 million in tax money with $10 million of the unclaimed deposits, and so keep the litter grants alive. Yet even with the prospect of doubled funding, opponents continue to insist that the bottle bill will mean the end of Tennessee's "comprehensive litter program." April 4, 2005: The Loudon County Commission endorses a resolution supporting Rep. Johnson's bottle bill. April 13, 2005: The bill comes before the Local Government Subcommittee of the House State and Local Government Committee. Knowing that he lacks the votes to get out of subcommittee, Rep. Johnson intends merely to give a brief presentation on the bill's merits, after which he will ask to "roll" the bill to 2006. One of Johnson's fellow Republicans, Knoxville Rep. Harry Brooks, moves to discuss the bill. However, in a rather awkward moment of averted eyes and lowered heads, none of his fellow legislators seconds the motion. Subcommittee chair Edith Langster declares the bill "fail[ed] for lack of support." Members who were present and eligible to second were Ulysses Jones, Randy Rinks, Park Strader, Harry Tindell, Ben West and Eddie Yokley. Rep. Curry Todd had excused himself from the room shortly before the vote. As chair, Rep. Langster can neither make nor second motions. April 20, 2005: The bottle bill now goes before the Senate Environment, Conservation and Tourism Committee. Like Rep. Russell before him, sponsor Sen. Randy McNally intends merely to give a presentation on the bill's merits, after which he intends to ask that it be referred for study without an up-or-down vote. Instead, committee chairman David Fowler asks Sen. McNally if he intends to withdraw the bill, given that it had already been rejected in the House. Sen. McNally replies that he does not wish to withdraw the bill but does wish to have it referred for study. There appears to be some confusion as to which type of study is being requested (whether a comptroller's independent study or a multi-member task force). Chairman Fowler suggests that he and Sen. McNally clear the matter up later, and the brief hearing is over. By late spring, it has become clear to both sponsors that the wisest route is to withdraw the bill altogether and file a new, significantly improved version for 2006. Scenic Tennessee continues to promote the bill to citizen groups, county commissions, the media and so on. Meanwhile, lobbyists for Tennessee Conservation Voters and the Sierra Club decide that container-deposit legislation will be one of their lobbying priorities in 2006. They, Scenic Tennessee and other supporters begin meeting periodically. October 2005: Rep. Johnson offers to use his campaign funds to take fellow legislators to Maine to learn about that state's successful bottle bill. There are few takers, and the idea is abandoned. However, Rep. Johnson and Marge Davis decide to make the trip themselves around Christmas. November 2005: Scenic Tennessee hosts a reception for winners of "Message In The Bottles," a photo contest focusing on beverage-container litter. Winning images are used widely in the campaign and displayed at Legislative Plaza. Also in November, Marge organizes "X Marks the Spot," a statewide, separated litter survey designed to refute the opposition argument that beverage containers make up a small portion of litter. The survey results prove what supporters have observed and that other states' surveys have found: that bottles and cans make up about half of roadside litter volume in Tennessee. December 2005: Rep. Johnson, his legal aide John Sanchez and Marge Davis spend four days in Maine meeting with and videotaping assorted stakeholders, including grocers and small market owners, redemption-center owners, recyclers, government officials, nonpofit groups and even a beer bottler. (He likes the bottle bill!) Using information gained in these meetings, Johnson and McNally revise their bill. Meanwhile, Marge Davis turns the videotaped footage into a 25-minute DVD that she shares with legislators and others. February 2006: Rep. Johnson and Sen. McNally introduce their substantially improved 2006 bottle bill. There are two versions, but in the end they decide to go with the version that exempts all retailers from having to take back empty containers. The task of redemption is explicitly given to voluntary "redemption centers." Redemption centers may be operated by individuals, county and local governments, organizations and retailers. The bill also explicitly gives $10 million of the unclaimed deposits to the litter-grants program. Nonetheless, certain Keep Tennessee Beautiful affiliates continue working actively to undermine the bill. March 29, 2006: HB 3350 makes a quick stop in front of the House Government Operations Committee. This committee is supposed to evaluate only the government-structure implications of a bill, and these are minimal in this case. Nonetheless, there is one dissenting vote, that of Rep. Barbara Cooper of Memphis. April 17, 2006: The Hickman County Commission votes 14 to 4, with 3 abstentions, to endorse a resolution in support of the bottle bill. April 19, 2006: Following presentations by Rep. Johnson and two convenience-store executives, the House Local Government Subcommittee votes 8 to 1 against the bill. Rep. Ben West casts the single vote in favor of the bill. The Senate version dies in consequence, and the 104th General Assembly ends without a bottle bill. Over the coming months, Sierra Club lobbyist Mike Murphy works out a new provision designed to appeal to farmers. He proposes to amend the 1976 Agricultural, Forest and Open Space Land Act (dubbed the Greenbelt Law) to increase from 1,500 to 2,000 acres the amount of undeveloped land on which a landowner can qualify for a reduced tax rate. In order to compensate local governments for any resulting losses in tax revenue, he proposes to alllot $5 million of the unclaimed deposits. Meanwhile, following a powwow of supporters in July, the Tennessee Bottle Bill Project changes its name to the more upbeat Pride of Place (POP), emphasizing the social, community and economic benefits of the bill as well as its environmental ones. In November, Rep. Russell Johnson wins election as district attorney for the Ninth Judicial District with a landslide 74 percent of the vote. Supporters are grieved to see him go but grateful for his leadership and courage. 105th General Assembly (2007-2008): February 8, 2007: The better-than-ever 2007 bottle bill is filed in the Senate as SB 1408 with Sen. Tommy Kilby as prime sponsor and Randy McNally as cosponsor. With Republicans now in control of the Senate, Sen. McNally has been made chair of the Finance, Ways and Means Committee and feels he should not be the lead on the bill. Sen. Kilby soon withdraws as sponsor in deference to a supporter who owns a chain of convenience markets; he later says he will never support the bill as long as it is opposed by the retailers. Sen. Doug Jackson (D-Dickson) agrees to sponsor the bill. February 15, 2007: HB 1829 is filed in the House by Rep. Mike Turner (D-Old Hickory). Though the bill has lost the leadership of Russell Johnson, it has gained numerous cosponsors. Supporters launch "POP Means Business," lining up business endorsements as well as potential redemption-center owners. Throughout March and April, supporters drum up grassroots support, meet with legislators and enlist new sponsors. May 2007: With 14 sponsors now signed on and the bill gaining ground (but not yet ready to be put to a vote), supporters and sponsors agree to roll the bill to 2008. This means the 2007 bill will remain in the pipeline, unchanged and ready for action when the legislature reconvenes in January 2008. Summer/fall 2007: Supporters meet with key legislators and support groups; Marge Davis rides her bicycle 855 miles across Tennessee to raise visibility and awareness and generate press coverage. (Click on Bicycle Tour for details.) January 22, 2008: Thanks to Glen Hasse, Maury County commissioner, and the testimony of a half-dozen citizens from a farmer to a member of the NAACP to a biologist, the Maury County Commission votes 15 to 5, with 1 abstention, to endorse the bill. (Click here to read the story.) Earlier, an unofficial online poll in the Columbia Daily Herald had logged nearly 80 percent support for the bill. February-March 2008: The bill encounters a number of delays. Marge Davis' father (who has always cheered on her bottle-bill efforts) has cancer; she returns to Maine in mid-February and doesn't return until after his funeral. Meanwhile, members of the Tennessee Solid Waste Directors Association, which has not yet taken a position on the bill, have been waiting to hear a presentation by Marge during their annual meeting. The day they are to meet is the same day Marge flies to Maine, and they discuss the bill without her. Concerns are raised about who controls the leftover monies, and without someone knowledgeable to reply to these concerns, they decline to endorse the bill. Around the same time, the Legislative Committee of the Tennessee Sheriffs' Association does agree to endorse the bill. April 6, 2008: Marge gets an e-mail from Karen Soro, a real estate broker and resident of Harbor Town, a high-end residential development on Mud Island in Memphis. Recent heavy rains and high waters have turned their front yards into a raft of debris, half of it beverage containers. The Harbor Town Neighborhood Association sends photographs and a video to legislators, when Karen learns of the bottle bill, she and her neighbors get involved. April 8, 2008: Following several discussions, recommended changes in the bill, and a presentation to the entire body, the general membership of the Tennessee Association of County Mayors, meeting in Nashville during their annual "county government" day, votes without dissent to endorse the bottle bill. April 9, 2008: The bill, now with 16 sponsors, finally starts working its way through the legislative gamut, beginning with a tough hearing before the Senate Government Operations Committee. Marge Davis testifies for the bill; an anti-bottle bill consultant, Kevin Dietly, testifies against it. Dietly, a principal at Northbrige Environmental in Westford, Mass., has been providing anti-bottle-bill research and testimony--most of it either misleading, selective or outdated--for the beverage and grocery industries for more than 15 years. Senators Dewayne Bunch, Jack Johnson and Bo Watson are prepared to vote against recommendation, while Senators Thelma Harper and Beverly Marrero are prepared to vote for it. Sen. Mike Williams, who faces a tough reelection race, will vote aye only if there is a majority. Senators Rusty Crowe, Ophelia Ford and Paul Stanley are not present. Because of some hard-to-follow procedural rules, the vote is recorded as "recommended for passage." (Two senators voted yes--Harper and Marrero; 0 voted no and 4 voted pass-no-vote (Bunch, Johnson, Watson, Williams). Score one for our side! April 22, 2008: The bill now goes before the the House Government Operations Committee. After much squabbling (some members want to debate the content of the bill, though this is explicitly not the job of the committee), the bill is deferred to Wednesday, April 30. April 23, 2008: The bill is due to be be heard by the Senate Environment, Conservation and Tourism Committee. However, two days before the hearing, legendary state comptroller William R. Snodgrass dies, and the Legislature takes a recess to attend his funeral. The bottle bill is deferred to Tuesday, April 29. April 29, 2008: The bill finally has its day before the Senate Environment, Conservation and Tourism Committee. Kevin Dietley is again testifying for the opposition, along with three convenience-store owners. Testifying for the bottle bill--in addition to our good-natured and incredibly savvy chief sponsor Sen. Doug Jackson--are 11 private citizens representing 11 diverse constituences: 1. Benefits to counties: Mayor Jai Templeton, McNairy County 2. Benefits to small entrepreneurs: Robert Lahm, Ph.D., assistant professor of entrepreneurship, Jones College of Business, Middle Tennessee State University 3. Benefits to recycling/manufacturing industries: Steve Russell, area manager, Strategic Materials, Inc. 4. Benefits to energy: John Noel, Nashville; president, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy; member, Governor’s Task Force on Energy Policy 5. Benefits to existing curbside/solid waste programs: Linda Kaplan, Germantown Environmental Commission 6. Benefits to local businesses: Karen Soro, Sowell and Co. Realtors, Memphis 7. Benefits to social services: Clifton Harris, coordinator, Metro Nashville Homelessness Commission 8. Benefits to tourism: Bob Keast, owner, Birdsong Resort & Marina, Camden 9. Benefits to sustainable industries: Mark Schwartz, architect, MFS3 Designs and greenMARK Collaborative, Pegram 10. Benefits to farmers: Frank McGinley, Hardin County Farm Bureau, Savannah 11. Benefits to litter: Gary Barrigar, Overmountain Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Elizabethton (Jeremy Doochin of Vanderbilt was unable to be there, but he would have spoken on the benefits to schools.) Though all adhere to a 2-minute limit, there are many questions, especially from Sen. Roy Herron, and the testimony goes on for more than an hour. (To give him credit, Sen. Kilby allows every one to speak without interruption.) When it's time to vote, Sen. Herron begins by saying that our folks have given some of the best testimony he's ever heard, and it's clear that for the first time, he has really listened to our arguments--especially regarding the need for more recycling options. He acknowledges that he has promised a constituent to vote against the bill (presumably he is referring to former governor and beer distributor Ned Ray McWherter) and says that he now feels he was too quick in doing so. However, he must keep his promise. Therefore, he urges Sen. Jackson to defer the vote until all committee members are present (Sen. Raymond Finney is missing). Herron then proceeds to chide the opposition's lobbyists--there are six or eight of them at the back of the room--for being obstructive without offering an alternative, especially to the recycling dilemma. The lobbyists all promise to come up with their own solution by next year. Even staunch opponents Sen. Steve Southerland and Sen. Dewayne Bunch seem to finally "get" that the status quo is not acceptable. We leave the hearing feeling almost victorious. April 30, 2008: The bill is recommended for passage by the House Government Operations Committee, and is referred to the State and Local Government Committee. However, that committee has already closed for the year, and there is zero chance that it will reopen on our account. All around, committees are closing. It's clear that the bottle bill is running out of time. It's also clear that the biggest sticking point for most legislators is not the concept of a container deposit--many of them have said they are okay with that--but rather the 3-cent handling fee charged to the distributors. After talking with various experts, other states, some recyclers and even the beer and grocery lobbyists, we've come up with a way to reduce the handling fee to just one cent, while still giving the redemption centers 3 cents (more or less)--the difference being made up out of the unclaimed deposits and the scrap value. It's a huge improvement--but the sponsors decide it is too late to bring it up this year. Wait till 2009. May 6, 2008: The final meeting of the Senate Environment Committee. Though we know passage this session is impossible, spirits are high: Sen. Raymond Finney had decided to vote with the two sponsors, Sen. Jackson and Sen. Steve Roller. That's three of the five votes we need. We're hoping Sen. Williams and Sen. Bill Ketron will vote with us--Ketron has been lobbied hard by the citizens of Maury and Rutherford counties--and some people think Sen. Herron will make his apologies to his constituent and vote with us as well. But it doesn't happen. Sen. Herron intends to remain loyal to his word, and Sen. Ketron and Sen. Williams both intend to be cautious. This is an election year, after all, and it's hard to stick your neck out for a bill that's doomed in the House even if it makes it out of the Senate. So Sen. Jackson decides to let the bill die. However, before he leaves the podium, he gives a gracious, upbeat and eloquent closing statement. (See it at www.legislature.state.tn.us--click on Senate, then video streaming.) Holding up a green plastic soda bottle, he says that Tennessee can no longer afford a status quo that tolerates the annual, mindless wasting/littering of 4 billion such containers. Summer 2008: In July, POP coordinator Marge Davis is elected to the board of the national Container Recycling Institute, a respected information clearinghouse. And in August, Governor Bredesen appoints her to the Keep Tennessee Beautiful Advisory Council. Meanwhile, the bill is undergoing an extensive overhaul. TDEC's Solid Waste Management folks look at the legislation line by line and suggest several smart improvements. Advisors from across the country, especially in California, help us spot weaknesses and correct them. With the primaries scheduled for August, Marge sends a letter to all state legislative candidates, apprising them of the improvements to the bill. When the primaries are over, we have lost one of our Senate sponsors--Sen. Steve Roller of McMinnville--and Sen. Ray Finney has also been defeated. However, most of our allies will be back in January. Fall 2008: The November elections are interesting, to say the least. For the first time since the 1860s, Republicans are now the majority party in both houses, the GOp having won a 50-49 majority in the House. (The Senate has gained members as well.) While this is not necessarily bad for our side--our bill has friends and foes in both parties--it is widely assumed that the new Speaker of the House will be Rep. Jason Mumpower of Bristol, and he is unapologetically opposed to a bottle bill. On the other hand, so is the current speaker, west Tennessee Democrat Jimmy Naifeh. Meanwhile, two other events bode very well indeed. On November 18, the Aluminum Association issues a press release acknowledging, among other things, that it now supports container deposits as part of a multi-tiered approach to achieving new recycling goals (75 percent by 2015). Within a month, another trade group, the Glass Packaging Institute, does likewise; its goal is 50 percent recycled content in all glass containers by 2013. This brings to three the number of major industry associations that have reversed their former opposition to bottle bills. (The Association of Postconsumer Plastic Recyclers started the trend in May 2006, when it voted to support the expansion of existing bottle bills and oppose any efforts to repeal them.) All three industries are now willing to help--cautiously--pass the Tennessee bill. 106th General Assembly (2009-2010) January 13, 2009: In a stunning political maneuver, all 49 House Democrats vote to elect east Tennessee Republican Kent Williams to be speaker, denying the seat to Rep. Jason Mumpower. Williams is promptly kicked out of the GOP, meaning that the House is now evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats--49 to 49--with one Independent. Speaker Williams promises to appoint both parties evenly in committees, which he does. However, most committees now have lots of new members, meaning that bottle-bill advocates must get busy educating these newcomers. February 12, 2009: The extensively revised Tennessee bottle bill is filed in the Senate by Sen. Doug Jackson (SB 1404) and in the House by Rep. Mike Turner (HB 1167). (Note: Rep. Turner, who is swamped with administration bills, will later hand the bill off to Rep. Mike McDonald, another fine environmental ally.) Meanwhile, several representatives of processing industries begin helping us lobby the bill. It quickly becomes clear that the proposed 1-cent distributors' fee is still too high, especially in a much tougher economy. Sponsors and advocates begin crunching numbers and preparing an amendment to lower the fee and restructure the funding. February 18, 2009: The bill is referred, as expected, to the Senate Environment, Conservation and Tourism Committee. Fortunately, our prime sponsor, Sen. Jackson, is still on this committee. February 19, 2009: The bill is referred in the House to the State Government Subcommittee of the State and Local Government Committee. This is new. In the past, it always went to the Local Government Subcommittee. March 9, 2009: The sponsors file an amendment that reduces the container-recovery fee to one-eighth of a cent per container and reduces the payment to redemption centers to 1 cent. March 23, 2009: The bill is "put on notice"(scheduled to be heard) on Tuesday, April 7, 2009, in the Senate Environment, Conservation and Tourism Committee, which will meet at 11:00 a.m. in hearing room 12 of Legislative Plaza. April 7, 2009: The agenda is so lengthy in the Senate Environment Committee hearing that by the time the bottle bill is up, they've just about run out of time. Fortunately, the committee agrees to address the bill as far as it can in 15 minutes, and to put it at the top of its agenda the following week (April 14). First, the committee adopts the amendment (see above). It then hears from four speakers who cannot return the following week: 1. Benefits to manufacturers: Peter Walters, vice president for purchasing and distribution, and Darrell Wineman, director of purchasing, Saint-Gobain Containers, Muncie, Indiana. Saint-Gobain (formerly the Ball glass jar people!) is the second-largest glass-container maker in the country and part of the largest glass company in the world. 2. Benefits to processors: Steve Russell, area manager, Strategic Materials, Inc., St. Louis, Missouri. SMI, the largest glass processor in North America, has a plant in Ashland City. Its operations include NexCycle, which operates redemption centers and services in California and New England. 3. Benefits to counties: Jai Templeton, Selmer, mayor of McNairy County. Their testimony is fantastic. Mr. Walters says basically, "We used to oppose bottle bills. Now we love them." April 14, 2009: The hearing resumes in the Senate Environment Committee. Although some of last week's scheduled speakers cannot be present today, their written testimony is entered into the record. These incude Tim Soro, a Memphis realtor, Kiyala Hatcher, a Joelton 11-year-old and Linda Kaplan, member of the environmental commission in Germantown, as well as a plastics processor in Georgia. Today's speakers include: 1. Benefits to manufacturers: Garney Scott, Jr., Waverly: founder and CEO, Scepter, Inc. 2. Benefits to tourism: Fred Cole, Jacksboro: owner and operator, Indian River Marina, Norris Lake, and founding member, Campbell County Tourism Council 3. Benefits to farmers: Kathy Gunn, Springfield: co-owner, Green Hill Farm and Gourmet Pasture Beef 4. Benefits to nonprofits and kids: Sizwe Herring, Nashville: founder and executive director, EarthMatters and the Carver Food Park Once again, the testimony is terrific--polite, objective, professional and compelling. It is followed by remarks from Tony Barham, owner of eight convenience stores in west Tennessee. As in past years, convenience centers predict higher costs, lower sales and the fear that they will be forced to become redemption centers. Marge Davis, coordinator of the Pride of Place effort, is asked to respond to these concerns. This is followed by discussion and questions from the senators. Sen. Jack Johnson of Franklin (Williamson County and part of Davidson) considers the 5-cent deposit a tax and nothing but a tax, and fears that it will harm existing recycling centers. Sen. Mike Faulk of Church Hill (Hawkins and five other counties) asks, with a smile, if the roads will be so clean that prisoners will have to be put to work running redemption centers. (Marge says that's a great idea! And yes, the bill allows it.) Sen. Ken Yager of Harriman (Roane and five other counties) is worried that the bill discriminates against beverage distributors, and that even if it removes half of the litter, it still leaves the other half and so does nothing to help tourism. Senator Burks of Monterey (Putnam and five other counties) says that what she really hates is Styrofoam cups. It looks like nobody was listening when the manufacturers testified to the importance of this bill to their bottom lines. Sen. Johnson proposes an amendment that would delete everything in the bill and instead create a "summer study committee" on "comprehensite litter contol." Bill supporters groan aloud; this was precisely how opponents killed a bottle bill 30 years ago. Sen. Doug Jackson, the bill's sponsor, observes wryly that his bill is starting to resemble a freighter off the coast of Somalia (i.e., being taken over by pirates). He makes a great speech (you can see the entire hearing at http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/; click on video, go to Senate Environment Committee, and then click on the archives for April 14.) He talks earnestly about the good sense of this bill. He said it's a deposit, not a tax, but even if it is a tax, he said, it's a tax that 80 percent of the citizens want, according to the UT poll. "How often do we ever have bills with that kind of support?" he asked his colleagues. He listed all the benefits to energy, to landfills, to counties, to schools, etc. Finally, he said something lke, "We can't do much that's new for the state in this economy. But this is something we can do." In the end, he asked that the committee not rush into the study committee idea, and asks to roll the bill for a week. Sen. Johnson agrees to withdraw his proposal, and the committee adjourns. It will conclude these discussions on Tuesday, April 21, at 11 am. April 21, 2009: After considering the various options, including the likely weakening of the bill should it be allowed to go into a summer study committee, Senator Doug Jackson asks that the Senate Environment Committee roll the bill to next year, and there is no objection. Technically speaking, the bill has been "assigned to General Sub"--the General Subcommittee. This is perfectly normal; many bills go to general sub. Think of it as the belly of a plane where skydivers line up and await the right moment to jump. We now have another eight months to prepare for a successful "jump." With hearings concluded in the Senate, the bill is withdrawn in the House. Supporters shake hands all around, smile, and begin preparing for 2010. January 28, 2010: The bill is reintroduced as SB3469/HB3429. It is an update of the 2009 bill. However, the update inadvertently neglected to update all of the year-dates (e.g., to change 2009 to 2010), so the bill needs to be amended in committee. A few other minor changes include: increasing the maximum container size to one gallon; and allowing TDEC's Division of Solid Waste Management to designate a third-party agent to manage the program (the Department of Revenue already has this authority). Another development is that numerous private-sector supporters of the bill have come together as "Businesses for a Tennessee Container Deposit" and have hired a lobbyist, Mike Alder of Knoxville. Mike is a business-minded Republican (he has an MBA from the University of Tenneessee), and these credientials help gain two new GOP sponsors for the bill. The bill also has the support of the House Speaker, Kent Williams. (Williams represents Carter County, whose commissioners voted 23 to 0 to endorse a resolution in support of the bill.) February 8, 2010: The Grainger County Commission votes 13-1, with one commissioner absent, to endorse the bottle bill. So far, the bill is 14 for 14 among county commissions! The trend is clear. Are legislators listening? February 23, 2010: The bill is "recommended for passage" by the House Government Operations Committee. This committee cannot "kill" a bill; it is supposed to consider only a bill's impact on the structure of state government, and can only give it a recommendation (positive, negative or neutral). Nonetheless, there is some partisan back-and-forth before the bill gets a thumbs-up vote along party lines (the 7 Democrats vote "positive" while the 6 Republicans vote "neutral"). The bill is now forwarded to the House State Government Subcommittee of the House State and Local Government Committee. It needs four votes to move to the full committee, but getting those four votes will be tough, as opponents have intensified their campaign of half-truths, distortions and outright lies. March 9, 2010: Having been rolled for a week, HB3429 is on the State Government Subcommittee agenda for 2:30 p.m. Supporters know they still lack the needed votes, but sponsor Mike McDonald has been given permission to present testimony without calling for a vote. At 9:15 a.m., supporters hold a press conference to explain the bill's benefits and address some of the more pernicious myths, such as the claim that bottle bills are "in trouble" in California, Michigan, Iowa and Hawaii. All four states have issued statements decrying these claims as utterly bogus. Among the speakers at the press conference is Susan Collins, executive director of the Container Recycling Institute in California. That afternoon, the committee hearing room is full. The bottle-bill presentation takes about 20 minutes, beginning with 7 minutes of a 10-minute DVD of videotaped testimony recorded by Marge Davis. It includes the following witnesses: • John Burnes, president, Marglen Industries, Rome, Ga. The first part of this segment follows John as he walks through his factory, explaining the steps in a process whereby PET plastic bottles are shredded, melted, and extruded either into fiber for carpet or into tiny pellets to make new PET bottles and other food containers. In the second part of the segment, he stands in front of dozens of huge bales of PET bottles and explains that he ships them in from as far away as Canada and South Americ, becasuse recycling rates in the Southeast are far too low to supply his current needs, let alone allow the plant to expand. • Robert Bishop, manager, Trailblazer Supermarket, Jonesborough, Tenn. Robert stands outside the market explaining that Trailblazer, a large convenience store/deli/gas station, would like to add a redemption center to its operations not just as a way to expand its business but as a way to be a leader in local waste reduction. • Stephen Worley, farmer, Hampshire (Maury County). Standing in front of a pen of cattle and next to a field of winter wheat, Stephen explains that container litter in general, and glass bottles in particular, are not just a "nuisance and an eyesore," but potentially a hazard to health, animals and equipment. A rear tractor tire, he notes, cans cost anywhere from $500 to $2,000. • Diana Fedinec, director of public relations, and Donna Palmer, director of Employment Concepts, SRVS (Shelby Rehabilitation and Vocational Services), Memphis. These two women introduce us to some of the 140 workers--adults with developmental challenges--who come daily to the SOS program at SRVS, the largest facility of its kind in the region. SRVS already operates a paper- and cardboard-recycling program and hopes to go even more green--and proviude more employment and life-skills training, by adding a redemption center. Following the video, Susan Collins speaks. She talks not only about what container deposits are--jobs creators, litter reducers and environmental boosters--but what they are not: They are neither a tax on consumers nor a burden on existing businesses. One of her most inspired points is that we pay a deposit on a keg of beer, and we don't consider that a tax. A deposit on a can of beer is simply a scaled-down version of the same thing--an incentive to return it so it can be used again. March 23, 2010: HB3429 is back on the agenda in the House State Government Subcommittee. However, despite valiant efforts by supporters, Rep. McDonald knows he does not have the necessary votes, so he withdraws the bill. First, however, he makes an eloquent parting statement, in which he reiterates the benefits of the bill and reads a letter from an Iowa legislator, praising the Tennessee bill and saying that Iowa may use it as a model in revamping its own bottle bill. Withdrawing the bill in the House means the bill is dead in the Senate as well. So ends the 2009-2010 run--and supporters begin planning for 2011. Summer/Fall 2010: Endorsements continue to come in: The Tennessee Chapter of Trout Unlimited, representing all local groups in the state, unanimously endorsed the bill on May 14. In addition, several additional county commissions vote to endorse. The list of counties to date are: Bedford (16 to 0) Campbell (14 to 0) Carter (23 to 0) Claiborne (21 to 0) Crockett (22 to 0) Dickson (12 to 0) Gibson (23-0?) Grainger (13 to 1) Hardeman (16 to 0) Hickman (14 to 4) Humphreys (13 to 0) Loudon (10 to 0) Maury (15 to 5) Moore (10 to 5) Morgan (16 to 0) Shelby (10 to 1) November 2010: The midterm elections follow national trends as Tennessee's Republicans build huge majorities in the House and Senate and also take the governor's seat. Among the defeated Democrats are long-time Senate sponsor of the bottle bill, Sen. Doug Jackson (D-Dickson) and Rep. Stratton Bone (D-Lebanon), and one of the bill's first GOP sponsors, Rep. Eric Swafford (R-Pikeville), also goes down. Between these three unexpected losses and the retirement of Rep. Ben West (D-Hermitage), the bill's 18 sponsors are reduced to 14. December 2010: Anderson County becomes the 17th county to endorse (by a vote of 10 to 5) a resolution in support of the deposit legislation. Unfortunately, the growing list of endorsements has caused opponents to step up their local opposition efforts, and the say after the Anderson County vote, Greene County becomes the first commission in the state to vote against an endorsement, by a rather appalling 15 to 5. 107th General Assembly (2011-2012) February 3, 2011: Rep. Mike McDonald (to be joined shortly by Rep. Jim Coley as co-prime sponsor) files House Bill 289, the "Tennessee Beverage Container Recycling Refunds Act" in the House. Last year's sponsors are all expected to sign on again. February 4, 2011: Sen. Jim Summerville of Dickson, the Tea Party-backed Republican who pulled the major upset of the elections by winning Sen. Doug Jackson's seat, agrees to carry the bottle bill in the Senate. When the bill is filed, as Senate Bill 337, Sen. Randy McNally and Sen. Beverly Marrero have already signed on as co-prime sponsors.
End of Timeline |
|||||
