Relating to the regulation of composting in certain counties; authorizing a civil penalty.
Summary
SB 2078 creates a new restriction on where certain food waste collected under a municipal commercial food waste composting ordinance may be delivered for composting. Specifically, it prohibits depositing that food waste at a composting facility located in a county that does not have a municipality with such an ordinance, unless an exception applies. The bill defines both “commercial food waste composting ordinance” and “composting facility” for purposes of the restriction.
The bill also establishes a civil penalty of $1,000 per violation and authorizes the attorney general to sue to recover the penalty. It takes effect September 1, 2025. The measure includes exemptions for agricultural operations, for facilities in affected counties if the county commissioners court authorizes the deposit by resolution or order, and for certain preexisting facilities that were already authorized and accepting the covered food waste before January 1, 2025.
Impact
SB 2078 amends Chapter 364 of the Health and Safety Code by adding Section 364.020, creating a state-level limitation on the interstate or intrastate flow of food waste to composting facilities in certain counties. It affects municipalities with commercial food waste composting ordinances, composting operators, counties without such ordinances, and the attorney general’s enforcement authority. The bill also preserves operations for certain agricultural and grandfathered composting facilities, while allowing county commissioners courts to opt in by resolution or order.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received enough support to pass both chambers, but the vote margins show meaningful opposition, especially in the House. The Senate approved the measure by a 27-4 vote, while the House passed it 102-32 with two present not voting, and the Senate later concurred in the House amendment. Overall, the sentiment suggests broad but not unanimous support, likely reflecting a mix of environmental, local control, and industry concerns.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s restriction on accepting food waste from municipalities with commercial composting ordinances at facilities in counties without such ordinances, which may be viewed as limiting composting markets or creating logistical barriers. Supporters likely see it as a way to regulate where regulated food waste may be processed and to preserve county and local control, while opponents may object to the added civil penalty, the attorney general enforcement mechanism, and the potential burden on composting operators and waste diversion programs. The grandfather clause and county opt-in exception suggest lawmakers were trying to address concerns about existing facilities and local flexibility.