Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Composting And Organics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee Advances SB 279 to Expand On‑Site and Community Composting; Commercial Composter Groups Urge Changes
Summary
SB 279 would let growers compost large, episodic orchard or vineyard removal material on‑site, expand volumes for community composters, and allow limited food scraps into small/medium operations to catalyze composting; the committee advanced the bill after contested testimony.
Sen. Jim McNerney introduced SB 279 to increase on‑farm composting flexibility, expand permitted volumes for community composters, and allow small and medium composters to accept limited food scraps.
Proponents — including Californians Against Waste, the Western Tree Nut Association, the Almond Alliance, Wine Institute, California Farm Bureau and numerous local organizations and compost groups — said the measure responds to the January 1 ban on most open agricultural burning and a shortage of commercial composting capacity. Erica Parker (Californians Against Waste) said small and community composters are volunteer and donation‑supported operations that lack revenue models, and that on‑site composting for orchard removals (which can occur roughly every 20–30 years for a given site) is a practical way to manage large woody biomass. Roger Isom (Western Tree Nut Association) said contractor costs for chipping and removal have risen “from a few hundred dollars per acre to almost $2,000 per acre,” and that growers need options to remain in business.
Commercial composters and waste‑industry witnesses testified in opposition or “oppose unless amended.” Neil Edgar (California Compost Coalition) said the bill would create unregulated or underregulated operators participating in commercial markets, and he quantified a concern: at the upper exclusion tiers cited in testimony 12,500 cubic yards equals about 5,000 tons, and if 10% of that volume were food waste that would equal roughly 500 tons (about 1,000,000 pounds) at a single site — a material scale he said small operators are not equipped to process safely. Other industry witnesses said permitting equity, public‑health risks from food contamination, and stranded investments at permitted facilities were unresolved.
After debate, the committee moved SB 279 as amended to Appropriations with the clerk recording the committee vote in the hearing record.
