The City Council tonight will take up a resolution that supports shifting the burden of dealing with hard-to-recycle trash from municipalities (and taxpayers) and to the manufacturers that make the products and packaging in the first place.
The resolution calls for the city to throw its support behind Enhanced Producer Responsibility, or EPR, legislation. EPR, part of a larger movement to reduce the amount of trash heading to landfills, is defined in the resolution as “an environmental policy approach in which producers accept responsibility for the end-of-life management of their products. .. [W]hen producers are responsible for ensuring their products are reused or recycled, there is an incentive to design products that are more durable, easier to repair, recycle, and are less toxic.”
Limited EPR laws already exists in numerous states. Bottle bills such as Massachusetts’—which require beverage companies to provide collection sites for empty bottles and to recycle them—is the most obvious example. Massachusetts also has a similar program for products that contain mercury, such as thermostats and thermometers. A bill pending at the Statehouse would mandate that manufacturers take responsibility for discarded electronics— also known as “e-waste”—such as televisions and computers.
Supporters of the EPR approach say it relieves overstrained municipalities of the responsibility for handling hard-to-recycle, and often hazardous, materials, instead forcing manufacturers to take on the burden—and, it’s hoped, inspiring them to be more thoughtful about the manufacturing and packaging decisions they make in the future.
The Springfield resolution was filed by Ward 3 Councilor Melvin Edwards and is cosponsored by John Lysak (Ward 8), Clodo Concepcion (Ward 5), at-large Councilor Jimmy Ferrera and Council President Jose Tosado.
As a resolution, it creates no new city policies or ordinances. Rather, if passed, it will send a very public message that city leaders support the EPR approach. According to its wording, “The Springfield City Council serves notice to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and to the manufacturers and distributors of products and packaging sold in our jurisdiction, that it supports the transfer of responsibility for the costs of managing products at end-of-life to producers (brand owners and first importers), under oversight of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.” It also calls for City Hall to “include preferential producer take-back language in purchasing contracts where feasible.”
In addition, the resolution urges the state Legislature to pass “framework” EPR legislation that would authorize state officials to add new product categories to the program, rather than wait for the Legislature to pass individual laws addressing individual products, and to pass the “e-waste” bill that’s currently before the House Committee on Rules.
Last month, the Holyoke City Council passed a similar resolution, making it the first municipality in the state to do so. “I thought the issue was tremendously appropriate for Holyoke,” City Councilor Rebecca Lisi, who sponsored that resolution, told the Advocate. While dissenters contend the resolution could create an anti-business vibe in a city in need of jobs and private investment, Lisi maintains it’s a great opportunity for Holyoke to position itself as a leader in the “green economy,” and to save taxpayers money.
