California Brands Remain Skeptical of ‘Landmark, First-in-the-Country’ Textile Recycling Bill
Pioneering is tough work, proponents of California’s Responsible Textile Recovery Act (SB 707) have learned over the past year.
The “landmark, first-in-the-country textile recycling bill”—so branded by author and State Senator Josh Newman—has the potential to revolutionize the way that the Golden State manages the tsunami of garments and textile products flowing through its ports and across its borders.
More from Sourcing Journal
The law, which was pulled from consideration last July to be overhauled over the ensuing months, was reintroduced this spring with new language designed to ameliorate industry concerns and clarify a course of action.
Most pressingly, the text aimed to pinpoint who would be responsible for funding the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program and managing the creation of a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) to deal with the collection, sortation and recycling of textiles.
The bill cleared its first hurdle—the Assembly Natural Resources Committee—with a majority of “aye” votes in early July. Next, it’s headed to the Assembly Appropriations Committee before it moves to the full Assembly and on to the governor’s desk.
But while SB 707 has seen serious momentum since version 2.0 dropped, even some of California’s most environmentally conscious brands are still on the fence.
Questions about how the Sheins, Temus and Amazons of the world—which operate outside of California and serve as platforms for legions of third-party sellers—will be compelled to pay their part as “producers” are still swirling. Others wonder about the types of recycling deemed acceptable by SB 707, and whether the text in its current form leaves out some crucial avenues for furthering the future of trashed textiles.
Distilled down to its essence—an idea, an intention, a call for change—SB 707 speaks to many members of the California fashion community. It’s time to address the impossible-to-ignore issue of textile waste, the bulk of it a result of overproduction, overconsumption and the fast-fashion model that has come to dominate the sector, they say.
“Reformation still very much supports the spirit of this bill,” the Los Angeles-based women’s wear brand’s chief sustainability officer and vice president of operations, Kathleen Talbot, told Sourcing Journal.
“If anything has become clear since its introduction, it’s that this work will not happen voluntarily,” she explained. “We need regulation to put pressure on the industry and force us to collectively move faster and operationalize the changes necessary to create a viable future for fashion.”
Talbot believes government has an indispensable role to play in the advancement of sustainable industry. “However, there are still significant concerns from trade groups about the brass tacks of the bill and how it would be enforced,” she said.
Reformation is a member of American Circular Textiles (ACT), an industry advocacy group which has said the bill still falls short on several “make-or-break” elements. The bill still lacks an iron-clad mechanism to hold vendors on e-commerce marketplaces accountable for the goods they sell into California, for one.
What’s more, advanced recycling—chemical or hydrothermal processes being employed by a number of American innovators to facilitate textile-to-textile recycling—isn’t explicitly recognized as an acceptable channel in SB 707, which many see as a gaping hole in the bill.
“In its current form, advanced recycling could be banned in California, which is obviously hugely problematic,” Talbot added. “Other structural elements will need to be fleshed out in the drafting and amendment process in order to secure broader support from key industry stakeholders.”
Everlane director of sustainability Katina Boutis said the Bay Area-based lifestyle label also believes that “comprehensive legislation is an important part of the fashion industry’s move towards sustainability.”
“Without it, it is left to individual companies to decide how much time and money to invest in doing right by people and the planet,” she told Sourcing Journal. “We believe in signing onto bills when we can, so that we can provide feedback on important legislation.”
Everlane joined the California Product Stewardship Council’s (CPSC) Statewide Textile Recovery Advisory Committee (STRAC) in 2022. CPSC—a network of local governments, non-government organizations, businesses and individuals—is the main sponsor for SB 707, and has sponsored the development of other California EPR programs for programs like batteries, carpet and packaging.
According to Boutis, stringent regulations “provide support to building the necessary infrastructure and funding to support innovations in reuse and textile-to-textile recycling,” and the brand aims to do its part to help shape the sector’s future. “Everlane signed on to SB 707 because we recognize that the industry needs to do a lot more to combat textile waste and the overproduction-overconsumption cycle,” she added.
But the brand, which coined the term “radical transparency” to define its business model, believes certain provisions of the California Responsible Textile Recovery Act are still murky.
“We still see opportunities to further refine some of the language to ensure that online marketplaces are covered in the same way as other fashion businesses, and that advanced recyclers are included as innovative solutions providers to ensure textile-to-textile recycling is possible,” Boutis echoed. “While we’re excited about the spirit of this bill, it will not be as effective as it could be without all types of companies and recycling innovators being covered.”
Boutis also said the industry would benefit from support, not just sanctions. “We believe shifting some focus to incentives rather than punitive measures will lead to more positive outcomes and innovation in the fashion sector,” she added.
Aras Baskauskas, CEO and co-founder women’s apparel brand Christy Dawn, said he was relieved to see changes to the bill that clarify the duties of brands and retailers (referred to in the text as “producers”) to pay into the program.
Much to the consternation of the manufacturing community, SB 707’s 2023 text did not establish a clear hierarchy of responsibility, and was frequently (and understandably) misinterpreted as placing the onus of funding and managing the EPR and PRO on the state’s cut-and-sew shops and fabric mills.
“If the weight of this legislation sits on the shoulders of the manufacturers, and they’re the ones who are going to bear the brunt of it, that’s a real concern. But hearing that the legislation has shifted in this way, that feels good,” Baskauskas said.
Still, the chief executive of the Downtown, L.A. brand has more than a few misgivings about the bill—and the role of legislation in propelling the movement toward a greener fashion industry.
“I understand that it’s coming from a really good place. We want to change and we need to change,” he said. “Change is necessary, and it’s time, but I think it’s placing an undue burden on smaller to mid-sized brands and, at the end of the day, it’s not addressing the larger issue.”
The overarching problem is the way shoppers have been conditioned to consume, he believes. “We live in a culture where people have been taught, especially around women’s clothing, that if you wear it once, you can’t wear it again.”
“It’s a cultural issue—and fashion is absolutely an architect of culture,” he added. “But with this bill, you’re just adding barriers that… make it harder and harder to do business. The more difficult you make it to do business, the less likely you’re going to find people inspired to do really cool, radical things that can change the world.”
According to Baskauskas, “there’s a lot of hoops to jump through already” for California brands, which have always been on the leading edge of ecological innovation.
Founded in 2014, Christy Dawn got its start using deadstock fabrics for its line of dresses. The brand partnered with the Oshadi Collective several years later to establish a supply chain for regeneratively grown cotton in India, releasing its first “Farm-to-Closet” collection in 2021.
The family-owned venture established this model without a push—or a leg up—from the government, the co-founder said. And now, he feels that the state’s small- to medium-sized businesses are being punished for their good deeds.
“There are not a lot of Christy Dawn dresses ending up in landfills,” he said. “Obviously, there are brands like us, but we’re the exception to the rule. The dominant distribution of clothing is from fast fashion now.”
Fast fashion from sellers on massive marketplaces, whom he believes are likely to evade paying their fair share under the EPR. “Christy Dawn’s not going to be able to skirt [responsibility],” he said. “We’re going to be on the hook, and we’re really going to be paying more for other people’s impact.”
Compliance with SB 707, should it be signed into law, will present a financial burden for SMBs, Baskauskas said. “I believe it’s just going to make it more challenging,” he added. “We are absolutely, 1,000 percent, committed to creating change, to healing. I just don’t see how this is going to bring that; it’s just going to bring more red tape and make it harder to run your business.”
The CEO also said he was dubious about SB 707’s focus on reuse and repair as a means of diverting goods from landfills. “What is the likelihood that that the majority of people who are have bought into this concept of fast fashion want a piece repaired?” he said. “How many of those people really want to patch up the dress that they bought for $23?”
Instead, greater investments should be made in the state’s infrastructure to help sustainably-minded brands. And if penalties are to be levied, they should be against those that bring fast fashion into the world, he said.
“What if the legislation [surrounding apparel] was more geared at the quality of the clothing?” he posited.
“A better law would be: from now on, your stitches per inch can’t be less than 10. Because if H&M is doing seven stitches per inch so that their sewers can zoom through those seams, the consequence is that the seams fall apart,” he said by way of example. Quality assurances, like upping the stitch count required to sell clothing in California, would create a new standard for garment longevity, he said.
The state should also be funding the infrastructure for verticalized apparel production, he believes—a move that would up clothing quality and create more industry and jobs. “You can’t grow cotton and have it ginned, spun, woven and vegetable dyed in California today,” he added. “What if we invested some resources and really rewarded the brands that are willing to go out there and go for it?”
California has made profound moves to turn the tides of consumption before. By 2035, all new passenger cars, trucks and SUVs sold in the state will be zero-emissions vehicles, a rule approved by the California Air Resources Board in 2022. The legislation has been credited with fueling the uptick in sales of electric vehicles in California and beyond.
“It’s impacted the entire country, where other states followed through with the same kind of legislation,” Baskauskas said.
It’s a reminder that world-changing evolution can—and often does—begin in the Golden State.
“I really appreciate the sentiment of this bill, which, underneath all of it, is like, ‘Hey, we’ve got to change,’” he said. “We do need to think about the end of life of clothing. But we’ve also got to think about the whole process.”
Solve the daily Crossword
