California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate 1 D cosponsors

SB 71 — Solid waste: disposal.

Last action — August 16 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. The act authorizes each county, city, district, or other local governmental agency to determine whether aspects of solid waste handling services are to be provided by franchise, contract, license, permit, or other authorization. This bill would require a court to award to a prevailing party reasonable attorney's fees, expert witness fees, and other costs incurred in a civil action brought to enforce a franchise, contract, license, permit, or other authorization for solid waste handling services in an amount the court deems appropriate, but would prohibit the court from awarding those fees and costs under specified circumstances. The bill would require a plaintiff, in order for a court to award to a prevailing party those costs and fees, to first notify and request approval to proceed from the relevant local agency. The bill would require the local agency to post all notices and approval requests it receives on the local agency's Internet Web site, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require a person seeking costs and fees in accordance with that provision to notify the department, and would require the department to report to the Legislature the total number and dispositions of actions filed in accordance with that provision for the previous calendar year. The bill would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2022. The act prohibits a person, other than an authorized recycling agent, from removing specified materials that have been segregated from solid waste materials and placed at a designated recycling collection location for residential curbside collection programs authorized by a city, county, or local agency for the purposes of collection and recycling or at a designated recycling collection location by any commercial or industrial entity. Existing law authorizes a court, in a civil action by a recycling agent against a person alleged to have violated these laws, to either allow treble damages or award a civil penalty, as specified, against the unauthorized person removing the recyclable material, and to allow treble damages or award a higher civil penalty, as specified, against a person for a second violation and subsequent violations. This bill would expand this civil enforcement to apply to knowing and willful participation in the unauthorized removal of the segregated recyclable material, would explicitly authorize a local governmental agency to bring an enforcement action, and would require a court to award to the prevailing party reasonable attorney's fees, expert witness fees, and costs incurred in the course of the litigation, except as specified. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. August 16 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  2. Joint Rule 62(a) suspended.

  3. August 15 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  4. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. pursuant to Joint Rule 10.5.

  5. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  6. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  7. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (July 3).

  8. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  9. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (June 25).

  10. June 18 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

  11. June 11 hearing postponed by committee.

  12. From committee: Be re-referred to Coms. on NAT. RES. and JUD. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (April 16). Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

  13. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Assembly Rule 96.

  14. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on U. & E.

  15. July 5 hearing postponed by committee.

  16. Referred to Coms. on U. & E. and H. & C.D.

  17. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  18. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 24. Noes 13. Page 1313.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  19. Published May 26 at 10 a.m.

  20. Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.

  21. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 1177.) (May 25).

  22. Set for hearing May 25.

  23. May 22 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  24. Set for hearing May 22.

  25. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  26. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 3. Page 1021.) (May 9).

  27. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on T. & H.

  28. Set for hearing May 9.

  29. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on T. & H.

  30. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on T. & H. (Ayes 8. Noes 3. Page 621.) (April 4).

  31. Set for hearing April 4.

  32. Re-referred to Coms. on E., U. & C., T. & H., and APPR.

  33. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  34. Referred to Com. on RLS.

  35. From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 9.

  36. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

environment
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 71 do?
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. The act authorizes each county, city, district, or other local governmental agency to determine whether aspects of solid waste handling services are to be provided by franchise, contract, license, permit, or other authorization. This bill would require a court to award to a prevailing party reasonable attorney's fees, expert witness fees, and other costs incurred in a civil action brought to enforce a franchise, contract, license, permit, or other authorization for solid waste handling services in an amount the court deems appropriate, but would prohibit the court from awarding those fees and costs under specified circumstances. The bill would require a plaintiff, in order for a court to award to a prevailing party those costs and fees, to first notify and request approval to proceed from the relevant local agency. The bill would require the local agency to post all notices and approval requests it receives on the local agency's Internet Web site, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require a person seeking costs and fees in accordance with that provision to notify the department, and would require the department to report to the Legislature the total number and dispositions of actions filed in accordance with that provision for the previous calendar year. The bill would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2022. The act prohibits a person, other than an authorized recycling agent, from removing specified materials that have been segregated from solid waste materials and placed at a designated recycling collection location for residential curbside collection programs authorized by a city, county, or local agency for the purposes of collection and recycling or at a designated recycling collection location by any commercial or industrial entity. Existing law authorizes a court, in a civil action by a recycling agent against a person alleged to have violated these laws, to either allow treble damages or award a civil penalty, as specified, against the unauthorized person removing the recyclable material, and to allow treble damages or award a higher civil penalty, as specified, against a person for a second violation and subsequent violations. This bill would expand this civil enforcement to apply to knowing and willful participation in the unauthorized removal of the segregated recyclable material, would explicitly authorize a local governmental agency to bring an enforcement action, and would require a court to award to the prevailing party reasonable attorney's fees, expert witness fees, and costs incurred in the course of the litigation, except as specified. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors SB 71?
SB 71 is sponsored by Wiener, Scott D. (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 71?
This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 71?
Track SB 71 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 71

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 71

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →