California Mattress Recycling Bill, SB 254, Moves Forward On A Bi-Partisan Vote

 

CALIFORNIA USED MATTRESS RECYCLING

LEGISLATION APPROVED BY CALIFORNIA STATE SENATE

SB 254 (Hancock/Correa) Now Moves To The Assembly

Sacramento, CA -- On Wednesday, May 29, 2013, California’s State Senate SB 254 (Hancock/Correa) was approved on the Senate Floor vote by a 32-5 bipartisan vote. 

SB 254 creates a used mattress recycling program that will have a dedicated funding mechanism, reduce the impact of illegally dumped mattresses, harness existing infrastructure for transporting used mattresses to recyclers, create jobs, and minimize costs to both government and consumers.

International Sleep Products Association President, Ryan Trainer commented, “We are very pleased Members of the California State Senate recognized the importance and value of SB 254.  Since its inception, all stakeholders have been diligently working to craft sound used mattress recycling policy that will benefit consumers, retailers, manufacturers, and the environment.”

The result provides Californians with a comprehensive mattress recycling solution that is consumer friendly and efficient.  The SB 254 model is now very similar to existing successful recycling systems in California for paint and used carpet. 

SB 254 enjoys a broad range of support from industry, retailers, cities and counties, local elected officials, and waste management organizations.  It creates a non-profit mattress recycling organization whose duty would be to plan, implement and administer a state system to collect discarded used mattresses, dismantle them and recycle their materials for use in new products. The program will be sustained by collecting a nominal fee at retail on the sale of new mattresses and box-springs.  The fee collected does not go into government coffers; rather, it is remitted directly to the NGO responsible for sustaining the mattress-recycling program. 

Shelly Sullivan representing Californians for Mattress Recycling stated, “SB 254 (Hancock/Correa) simply puts a price on used mattresses akin to California’s bottle and can recycling program.  It’s good common sense that ensures Californians can continue their overall enthusiasm in improving their recycling practices.”

 SB 254 (Hancock-Correa) now moves to the Assembly for Committee hearings and a floor vote.

 

 Contact: Shelly Sullivan

  (916) 858-8686

oOo

GOOD NEWS / BAD NEWS: Google will manufacture its newest phone the "Moto X" in the USA but California loses 2,000 high paying manufacturing jobs to Texas. California 's high tax, high regulatory burden and high cost of housing simply made it impossible for Google to seriously consider siting those coveted jobs here in the Golden state.         


May 30, 2013
Walter Russell Mead's Blog

Google’s New Phone: Made in the USA

Motorola Mobility, the phonemaker Google purchased last year, announced yesterday that it will manufacture its newest phone, the Moto X, in the United States (just outside of Fort Worth, Texas). Motorola Mobility CEO Dennis Woodside teased the new smartphone at the D11 conference, but the made-in-America buzz trumped the latest and greatest features it’s purported to have. The NYT reports:

Dennis Woodside, the head of Motorola, said…that the Texas location would allow Motorola to “iterate and innovate much faster.”
Mr. Woodside acknowledged that while the Moto X will be built in the United States, not all of its parts would necessarily come from American manufacturers.
“The components will come all over the world,” he said. Display parts will be built in South Korea, for example, and processors will be made in Taiwan, he said.

Woodside estimated that the Texas plant would employ roughly 2,000 Americans. That’s nothing to shake a stick at, but nor is it as exciting as some are making it out to be. The phone’s parts will still be made outside of the US; the Fort Worth plant will just be putting these parts together. And a few thousand jobs here and there are hardly a sign that the Fordist era of American manufacturing is making a comeback.
So why is Google making such a big deal about this? First, because the made-in-America tag is great PR, and tech companies like Google and Amazon are increasingly seeing the value in aligning themselves with the preferences and causes of the American political class.
A couple of years ago, when President Obama asked Steve Jobs whether Apple could make its products in the US rather than China, he famously replied that “those jobs aren’t coming back.” Today’s tech giants seem much less cavalier about delivering such dour news to Washington. Issues of intellectual property rights and instances of state-backed hacking of American companies have become big problems for Silicon Valley. Tech CEOs have re-discovered the benefits of cozying up to Uncle Sam for warmth in a cold, harsh world.
We’re happy that Texas will pick up a couple of thousand jobs courtesy of Google, but this doesn’t mean mass manufacturing employment is coming back.

Mattress Recycling Bill (Hancock-Correa) SB 254 Q&A

Mattress Recycling Bill – SB 254 (Hancock-Correa)

Mattress Recycling Done Right

Californians for Mattress Recycling (C4MR) supports legislation to establish a mattress recycling system in California. The primary goals of this plan are to:

 

Ø  Create an economically practical system for recycling used mattresses;

Ø  Reduce the impact of illegally dumped mattresses;

Ø  Harness existing infrastructure for getting used mattresses to recyclers;

Ø  Minimize cost to governments and consumers.

If enacted, this would be the first law of its kind in the country and would provide a model for other states to follow. The proposed law would accomplish the following:

·         Create a non-profit mattress recycling organization made up of retailers and manufacturers whose duty would be to plan, implement and administer a state system to collect discarded used mattresses, dismantle them and recycle their materials for use in new products. 

·         The organization would fund the system by collecting a nominal fee at retail on the sale of new mattresses and box-springs.  The fee collected does NOT go into government coffers; rather, it is remitted directly to the NGO responsible for the mattress recycling program.  Many states follow a similar approach for other consumer products, including tires, batteries, motor oil, electronic devices, paint and carpet.

·         The organization will create a financial incentive to encourage parties (reimburse retailers that pick up used mattresses from consumers, municipal transfer stations, and groups that pick up illegally dumped mattresses) to send used mattresses to mattress recyclers. 

·         The organization would essentially eliminate the problem of illegal mattress dumping through the establishment of the financial incentive.

·         The system would  take advantage of the fact that most retailers already pick up used mattresses as part of their service to their customers.

·         The organization would develop reimbursement criteria for retailers to recover their administrative costs associated with program participation.

·         The organization will increase recycling rates, improve consumer awareness of, and participation in the system, and conduct research to improve recycling efficiency and demand for recycled materials.

·         The organization’s activities will be transparent and open to public input and subject to annual performance and financial audits that would be published on its website.

·         The state’s oversight authority would confirm whether the organization has met its statutory obligations.

 

Californians for Mattress Recycling is an ad hoc group representing stakeholders united in their support for efficient and practical mattress recycling.  For more information contact Shelly Sullivan at (916) 858-8686 or go to: http://www.ca4mattressrecycling.org

Automated Enforcement Saves Lives - AB 666 (Red Light Camera Reform)

Red Light Camera Reform – AB 666

Why it’s essential for safer streets

 

California law is clear and the data indisputable: red means stop and red light cameras save lives.  A 2011 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found red light cameras led to:

 

·         62% reduction in fatal red light running crashes in San Diego

·         53% reduction in fatal red light running crashes in Sacramento

·         44% reduction in fatal red light running crashes in Santa Ana

·         34% reduction in fatal red light running crashes in Long Beach

 

Last year, the General Assembly took the first steps toward reforming the red light camera program. Now, we need take these efforts further to ensure we have a program that builds on this success and ensures those who break the law and run red lights are held accountable.

 

Legislation introduced in 2013 keeps the state’s traffic safety camera programs focused on safety, establishes a reasonable fine structure and reduces the burden on the state’s court system to ensure scofflaws do not get away with breaking the law and those who wish to contest a red light ticket can easily do so. The result will be the preservation of a critical life-saving law enforcement tool and safer roads for all California road users.

 

Problem

Excessive fines have made California’s red light camera penalty the highest in the country. The fine for running a red light in California is $140. But too many additional fees have been added over the years which have very little to do with the administration of a traffic ticket, which has left motorists with inflated fines close to $500.

 

Proposed Solution – AB 666

To lower fees and restore confidence in the red light camera program’s public safety goals, citations should be administered at the municipal level to reduce court-related fees, decreasing out-of-pocket fines to 50% to 60% of the current amount, while ensuring a substantial fee is in place to deter dangerous red light running.

Problem

Overburdened courts California processes all moving violations as criminal violations. This means all citations must be processed by the courts. 

 

Proposed Solution – AB 666 

To operate an efficient, effective red light camera program that deters dangerous driving and improves road safety, many states impose an administrative penalty - not a criminal violation. Through this process, appeals are processed administratively, freeing the court for other obligations

Problem

Drivers often evade citation. California law only allows identified drivers to be cited. Because of this, many car owners and drivers have found ways to make identification difficult or impossible and avoid citation.

  

 Proposed Solution – AB 666

To ensure scofflaws are held responsible for dangerous driving, the vehicle owner must take responsibility for the citation and pay the civil fine, but no points would be imposed against the vehicle owner if he or she is not the driver. Points will only be imposed on the vehicle owner when he or she is identified by the camera as the driver. Californians can be assured red light cameras are acting as an effective public safety tool.

 

Traffic Safety Coalition

www.TrafficSafetyCoalition.com || info@trafficsafetycoalition.com

Cal-Green Building Code Saves Energy, Water and Landfill Space; Savings Drop Right To The Bottom Line For Most Businesses

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxVJOSBFoQ0


While California has set the bar high for green construction practices, Gov. Jerry Brown has the opportunity to lead and encourage the state and local jurisdictions to do more. Gov. Brown can bring those parties to the table to improve upon the CALGREENprovisions by challenging local governments, builders, and industry leaders to establish resource conserving buildings and neighborhoods. He can also encourage his administration to continue to retrofit existing state buildings to become more energy efficient while building new state facilities that surpass current CALGREEN requirements. This will further California’s leadership in green building practices.

California’s leadership in green technology matters is increasingly being challenged in places like New York City. New York recently passed a package of legislation known as the Greener, Greater Buildings Plan aimed at improving the energy efficiency of the city's commercial buildings. Some analysts say it is the most comprehensive legislation of its type in the nation. California must continue to invest or cede leadership in this area of technology development.

CALGREEN and the Green Building Initiative are important achievements that demonstrate California’s leadership in resource conservation and set an example of how to build the future on a greener foundation.

Tom Sheehy is the former Acting Secretary

of the State and Consumer Services Agency
and Chaired the Building Standards
Commission in 2010 when it adopted CALGREEN.
He currently has a government affairs practice
with Greenberg Traurig in Sacramento.

We need An Economic Growth Agenda

By Thomas L. Sheehy

Our friends on the left are into redistribution not growth. The last Democrat we had in the White House who understood the need for GROWTH was President Bill Clinton. President Clinton passed NAFTA, cut capital gains rates and supported domestic energy exploration and development (oil, gas and renewables). He was a true pro-growth President. If the focus in California was on GROWTH and not redistribution, we would all be much better off I am thoroughly convinced.

The economic pie needs to be expanded and not  simply cut into thinner slices. The private sector specializes in creating wealth and the government simply moves it around. Government also creates the regulations that can help make markets function properly, but when over reached, can destroy profitable ventures and kill high paying jobs. We need to support an environment where entrepreneurs are willing to take reasonable risks without the government breathing down their back or telling them they are bad because they are not paying their "fair share" of taxes.

With a successful growth agenda and growing economy, tax revenues will flood the national treasury, bring down the deficit and provide necessary resources for our public infrastructure, social safety net and national defense needs. All this can be done by EXPANDING the pie, not just reshuffling rates and burdens.

Where is Bill Clinton when you REALLY need him?

ISPA Supports Industry- Driven, Cost-Effective Mattress Recycling solutions (SB 245).

California ISPA-supported mattress recycling legislation has been introduced in California. Senate Bill 245 would create an industry-managed mattress recycling program that would be funded by a small fee collected from consumers at retail. ISPA is working with state Sen. Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana) on the bill, which is an industry-friendly alternative to legislation introduced by state Sen. Loni Hancock (D-Oakland). Hancock’s bill would require mattress manufacturers to set up and fully fund a system to collect and recycle used and illegally dumped mattresses. ISPA defeated similar legislation in California last year. ISPA believes the system proposed by Hancock would be costly and inefficient and would ignore the current infrastructure that exists for collecting used mattresses when new products are delivered to consumers. The state estimates that Hancock’s bill could cost the industry more than $100 million a year.

To support its efforts to enact Correa’s SB 245, ISPA has created a coalition called Californians 4 Mattress Recycling and asks that everyone in the industry who manufactures, operates, sells or has customers in California to join the group at www.ca4mattressrecycling.org.