By admin 
There’s a lot of talk in the agriculture industry these days around Senate Bill 54 — California’s Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act.
Read more This nonprofit uses Sacramento’s Golden 1 Center suite the most. Here’s what to know
Lawsuits are flying. Letters are being sent to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration and the state Legislature. Public comments are in abundance.
A group representing small farmers and packers — growers who are mostly exempt from the law — support the policy and say it will lead to huge environmental benefits and billions of dollars in cost reductions for consumers in the long haul. These cost savings will come by reducing rising trash bills and the need for pollution remediation efforts.
“We are pleased that the law recognizes that very small family farmers don’t have a lot of opportunities to have a lot of say over what our packaging materials are,” said Jennifer Fearing, lobbyist for Community Alliance with Family Farmers and ocean groups. “We are rolling up our sleeves to figure out (the changes) because we are committed to the underlying goals of the law.”
Representatives for larger players in the agriculture industry, including the wine community, say while they are supportive of reducing waste and furthering sustainability, they oppose the law. Associations have asked the state for amendments to the policy and more time for implementation. They say the law as it is now will cost Californians billions of dollars. These cost increases will come by way of millions of dollars in fines for food producers who do not comply with the law, which will then lead to higher grocery bills for consumers.
Growers, packers and shippers will also face rising costs when switching packaging or processing infrastructure, the representatives say. Some of those changes may not even be possible, they say, without risking food safety — an issue that is top of mind for consumers as the nation faces a cyclosporiasis outbreak linked to California-based Taylor Farms.
“It has gotten out of hand,” said Gail Delihant, senior director of government affairs in California for Western Growers, a large agricultural trade association. “We are … asking that the fee structure be adjusted to accommodate for fresh produce. We have to use this packaging or else you are not going to get your fresh produce on this table to get anything to eat.”
What consumers need to know about SB 54
Gov. Gavin Newsom signed SB 54 into law in 2022, with a phased implementation. The law will overhaul California’s entire plastics and packaging use system, in the food industry and beyond.
The goal of the law is to reduce packaging waste and ensure that waste is recycled in the state. The state argues the law is necessary to meet its recycling and climate goals and will Californians over $53 billion. Representatives for larger agricultural interests say the state’s cost predictions for producers are severe underestimates.
Read more California Democrats back Ben Allen for insurance commissioner
Packaging makes up 50% of landfill waste volume, according to CalRecycle. With SB 54, the state has three plastic and packaging requirements to hit by 2032: a 25% reduction in single-use plastic, a 65% recycling rate in single-use plastic and a 100% rate of recyclable or compostable single-use packaging.
There are various exemptions to the law, including two that will allow most small producers to be excluded: if a producer earns under $1 million in gross annual sales and/or if a producer harvests and packs goods in the field.
If producers fail to comply, they will pay fees. Those fees will fund the plastics system .
The California law mimics environmental policies in other states, including Colorado and Oregon. The policies are also known as extended producer responsibility programs. California’s program is being challenged in court by both environmentalists who say the law doesn’t go far enough and states that argue the law will extend into their borders.
The Oregon government was on trial last month for its program after the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors filed suit in 2025. The wholesaler association is also suing California. The group said in a statement on its website that the Oregon trial is the first to test the constitutionality of a state extended producer responsibility law.
California growers, packers and shippers faced an Aug. 1 deadline to submit plastic packaging reduction plans to Circular Action Alliance, a national nonprofit organization tasked with managing state extended producer responsibility laws.
Circular Action Alliance submitted its plan to California on June 15 and the SB 54 Advisory Board and the public have until Aug. 14 to review the plan and submit comments.
CalRecycle must approve the plan on or before Jan. 1, 2027, and then the program begins.
Read more Idaho shooter causes multiple fatalities, is also dead, Twin Falls police say
Public comments can be submitted to Circular Action Alliance.