Local Government Actions

 

city hallLocal governments are leading the transition to Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) in North America. They are doing so by reevaluating their roles in picking up after consumer goods companies, by integrating EPR into their purchasing policies, and by passing local resolutions supporting the transition to EPR. They are exploring ways to use municipal planning functions to encourage the development of private collection infrastructure for hard-to-manage products and packaging. And much more.

Resources

Local Government Roles

Purchasing Policies

EPR Resolutions

National Resolutions

umsc_logo_bw_150pxU.S. Conference of Mayors – EPR Full Resolution

Supporting EPR for Products – Final

Adopted June 14, 2010

 

National League of Cities logoNational League of Cities – EPR Resolution

Principles for Product Stewardship

Adopted Dec 4, 2010

 

National League of Counties logoNational Association of Counties – EPR Resolutions

 

Local EPR Resolutions

Qualities of a good EPR resolutionModel Local Government EPR Resolution

 

California Local EPR Resolutions

California Resolutions – Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is supported by 24,552,304 Californians. That’s 64% of the state population! 136 resolutions were passed by California local jurisdictions and organizations supporting a more sustainable and toxic free environment through product stewardship.

Massachusetts
  • 2010, February 2: City of Holyoke
  • 2010, February 22: City of Milton
  • 2010, March 1: City of Springfield
  • 2010, May: City of Salem
  • 2010, September 2: City of Northampton
  • 2010, November 1: City of Cambridge
  • 2010, December 13: Town of Hardwick
  • 2011, January 11: City of Worcester
  • 2011, February 14: Town of Carlisle
  • 2011, March 7: Town of Concord
  • 2011, April 4: Town of Amherst
  • 2011, December 19: Town of Newton
Minnesota
  • 2009, September: City of Minneapolis – Legislative Priority Agenda for 2009: EPR Framework
  • 2010, January 27: Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board – Product Stewardship Resolution (SWMCB represents six counties in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The resolution encourages member counties and all MN jurisdictions to adopt similar resolutions that urge the Minnesota Legislature to adopt a product stewardship framework approach.)
  • 2010, February 16: City of Buffalo
  • 2010, February 22: City of Roseville
  • 2010, February 23: Dakota County
  • 2010, February 23: Washington County
New Jersey
  • 2010, August 17: Clifton
New York State
  • 2009, June 10: Onondaga County (Syracuse) Resource Recovery Agency
  • 2009, August 10: Fulton County Board of Supervisors
  • 2009, September 24: Broome County
  • 2009, September 18: Washington County
  • 2009, September 15: Wayne County
  • 2010, April 6: Niagara County
  • 2010, May 4: Town of Southold
Rhode Island
  • 2009, October 30: City of Providence
  • 2010, September 9: Town of Narragansett
  • 2010, October 13: Town of Burrillville
  • 2010, December 13: Town of Jamestown
  • 2011, January 26: Town of Woonsocket
  • 2011, February 22: City of Central Falls
  • 2011, February 14: Town of Charlestown
  • 2011, May 9: Town of North Smithfield
  • 2011, June 8: Town of West Greenwich
  • 2011, June 27: City of Cranston
  • 2011, August 11: City of Pawtucket
  • 2011, September 13: City of Warwick
Texas
  • 2009, January: City of Austin – Zero Waste Plan includes language directing staff to work with TXPSC and to lobby for state producer take-back legislation
  • 2010, February 8: City of Plano
  • 2010, March 15: City of Lewisville
  • 2010, June 15: City of Denton