A potential game-changer for Iowa 'bottle bill’

It’s become an annual thing: the debate on Iowa’s beverage container deposit law, colloquially known as the “bottle bill,” with new bills introduced during the legislative session to “modernize” it. In recent years, including this one, those proposals have included doubling the five-cent deposit to 10 and expanding the requirements to include everything from water to tea to juice.

I’m usually against the proposed changes. Like many Iowans, I already recycle my water and Powerade bottles via weekly waste collection, which I pay for. To be charged even more upfront and have more to lug to the redemption center just to get that money back displeases me — and my mobility-impaired upper extremities.

But expanding the bottle bill and updating it are two separate things, and the consensus is largely that updates are long overdue. With House Study Bill 709, which survived last week’s legislative “funnel” deadline, this could be the year it happens.

Until I researched it several years ago, I, perhaps like most others, thought that the state of Iowa handled the finances of the bottle bill. It doesn’t — the money begins and ends with beverage distributors. Distributors charge five cents per container when they sell beverages to a retailer. The retailer passes that five-cent charge to the consumer when they buy.

When the consumer returns the empty container for the five-cent refund, the retailer or redemption center then returns the empty container to the distributor, collecting their own five-cent refund, plus one cent as compensation. Importantly, if a container is never redeemed, the distributor does not have to surrender the five cents paid upfront and instead keeps that money.

Redemption centers assert that the penny per container compensation is no longer adequate to cover their operating costs. This is where an important change outlined in the bill comes into play: it would double the handling fee paid by the distributor to the retailer or redemption center from one to two cents per container.

Another change outlined in HSB 709 is a retailer’s option to refuse any empty beverage container without prior approval from the state as long as the retailer’s place of business is within 15 miles of a redemption center. While seemingly burdensome to many rural consumers, the bill also removes the requirement for state approval to establish a redemption center, potentially paving the way for more of them to open, especially if handling fees are doubled.

This series of tweaks could be a game-changer for Iowa’s 43-year-old container redemption law. Is it the right kind of change? I’m not sure. The bill would also require retailers to pay an extra half-cent upfront to distributors who already pocket the unclaimed deposits, which is possibly why grocers have signaled opposition.

No legislator or lobbyist is popping the cork on their deposit-eligible Champagne bottle just yet. This bill that could prompt major changes might first have to undergo major amendments if lawmakers hope to bring all of the stakeholders on board and gather enough support to pass it. If they do come up with a compromise after years of coming up short, perhaps the most impressive change to the whole process will be the fact that they finally make one.

Althea Cole is a Gazette editorial fellow. Comments: althea.cole@thegazette.com

Opinion content represents the viewpoint of the author or The Gazette editorial board. You can join the conversation by submitting a letter to the editor or guest column or by suggesting a topic for an editorial to editorial@thegazette.com