State Recommendations

Washington stresses the benefits of aligning with other states’ negotiated language, partnering closely with local solid waste experts, and maintaining strong legislative engagement throughout complex EPR negotiations.

Maryland highlights the value of conducting a baseline needs assessment, sequencing implementation carefully, and cultivating diverse stakeholder coalitions to support a multi-year path toward EPR adoption.

Minnesota emphasizes the importance of local government coalitions, early acceptance of compromise, and thoughtful decisions on exemptions to craft an equitable, state-specific EPR program.

California offers insights from the negotiation and passage of SB 54, highlighting deliberate stakeholder selection, creative compromise across interests, and the importance of implementation planning aligned with PROs and other states.

Colorado provides recommendations grounded in years of coalition-building with local governments, NGOs, and businesses, emphasizing fully producer-funded EPR, strong municipal support, and an adaptive, data-driven approach to long-term program design.

Oregon shares insights from implementing the first U.S. EPR law to go live, emphasizing the importance of a strong, representative Oversight Council, full transparency throughout negotiation and rollout, and careful coordination with existing municipal waste contracts to ensure continuity.

Maine shares lessons from passing the nation’s first EPR for packaging law, underscoring coalition alignment, municipal outreach, and early engagement with local businesses to reduce misunderstandings and build durable support.