Re: [greenyes] Grocery bag fee in SF

["Mike Morin" <mikemorin@no.address>]

> Con: Amounts to a regressive tax that would be a heavier burden on lower- 
> income consumers with little control over spending of the money >generated.

That's ridiculous. For a very small price, people can purchase reusable 
canvas and/or hemp bags. At 17 cents per bag, the purchase will pay for 
itself in a very short time. I think the surcharge is a great idea.

I use reusable bags for all my shopping. Though I don't shop much (voluntary 
simplicity), I feel good about not using paper or plastic bags and they do 
not accumulate in my apartment or in my apartment's recycling and/or trash 
bins.

When I used to live by the Safeway, they took 3 cents off for using a 
reusable bag. When I lived in Texas and Arkansas many (about 20) years ago, 
they paid 5 cents a bag. It's strange, but the local  small "organic" store 
that I live near and shop at, does not give a rebate for using reusable bags 
(nor do they charge for the paper and plastic). I have spoken to them about 
it, but they just shrugged it off. So let virtue be its own reward! I have 
noticed that although the store has a reputation of being "alternative", 
almost nobuddy but me brings their own bags to shop there.

Paper and plastic bags are not free. The cost of the baggage is imbedded in 
the price that I pay at the register.

Great to hear about the surcharge. I hope it takes effect and spreads to the 
place(s) where I shop.


Mike Morin


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Heidi Feldman" <hfeldman@no.address>
To: <GreenYes@no.address>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 1:36 PM
Subject: [greenyes] Grocery bag fee in SF


Interesting story about a "revolutionary" program in San Francisco...which 
has been standard practice in Europe for many years! If there's anyone in 
the region, they need support tomorrow for a hearing. Or you can write a 
support letter to emily.rogers@no.address For more info, contact 
emily.Utter@no.address

Heidi Feldman
Public Education Coordinator
Monterey Regional Waste Management District
Tel.: 831/384-5313     FAX: 831/384-3567

Paper or plastic? Pay up
S.F. grocers might be charged 17¢ per sack -- and pass on the cost
- Suzanne Herel, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, November 20, 2004
.
In San Francisco, the free grocery bag soon might go the way of the 
full-service gas station.
City officials are considering charging grocery stores 17 cents apiece for 
the bags, 90 percent of which are plastic -- and are blamed by 
environmentalists for everything from clogging recycling machines to killing 
marine life and suffocating infants.
Although the environmentalists are not as concerned about the effect of 
recyclable paper bags on the environment, the proposal would include them, 
too, with the idea of reducing waste in general.
In turn, the fee would be passed on to the consumer. Proponents of the 
surcharge hope this will persuade shoppers to give up the convenience of the 
disposable sack.
"Yes, it's going to be a pain the ass, but that's part of the point," said 
Mark Murray, executive director of Californians Against Waste. "One thing 
we've learned is that sending a financial signal to the marketplace tends to 
modify behavior much better than voluntary approaches."
Trade groups representing grocers and the plastics industry predictably 
aren't crazy about the idea.
"We think essentially it's an unnecessary and misguided approach," said Tim 
Shestek, spokesman for the American Plastics Council. "This tax is going to 
hurt those who can least afford it."
The proposal, set to be considered by the Commission on the Environment on 
Tuesday, imitates efforts around the world to stem the use of plastic 
bags -- known in China as "white pollution." Ireland, South Africa, 
Bangladesh, Australia, Shanghai and Taiwan are just a few of the places 
where the government either bans plastic bags outright or charges a fee to 
use them.
Trade groups contend that the results of those efforts are mixed. In 
Ireland, for example, there is anecdotal evidence of increased shoplifting 
as people bring in their own bags and higher sales of boxes of plastic bags, 
which consumers use for everything from pet waste to trash cans.
Murray said the local effort is the first in California after an Assembly 
bill to levy a statewide 2-cents charge on nonrecyclable disposable bags 
failed last year.
"We've attempted to pursue this at a state level, but the lobbyists for the 
retail industry are too strong," he said.
After being considered by the commission, the proposal would move to the 
mayor's office or the Board of Supervisors in search of legislative 
sponsors. A spokesman for Mayor Gavin Newsom said the mayor is reviewing it. 
Meanwhile, the proposal has at least one potential champion on the Board of 
Supervisors, the newly elected Ross Mirkarimi, who helped found the city's 
Department of the Environment, which is overseen by the Commission on the 
Environment.
"We all have a responsibility to promote a healthy and sustainable 
environment, and by doing that, it means we need to help change people's 
patterns, and that even means their shopping patterns," said Mirkarimi, who 
will take office in January. "This is a sensible user fee."
The proposal, which takes the form of a resolution urging the mayor and 
board to take action, also suggests expanding the surcharge in the future 
beyond grocers to include drug stores, dry cleaners, newspapers and other 
retailers.
According to the Department of the Environment, consumers lug home about 50 
million bags from San Francisco grocery stores each year. Of those, 90 
percent are nonrecyclable plastic.
A report prepared in support of the proposal by Robert Haley, recycling 
program manager for the environment department, says plastic bags gum up 
recycling and composting machines at Norcal -- San Francisco's waste 
management provider -- resulting in $1 million in extra costs and lost 
revenue from the sale of recyclable materials.
The bags account for 2 percent of the city's total "waste stream," and 
picking up and disposing littered bags cost an additional $7.4 million 
annually, according to the report.
It notes that an estimated 12 million barrels of oil go into the production 
of plastic bags, while 14 million trees are felled to make their paper 
counterparts.
Paul Smith, vice president of the California Grocers Association, said the 
proposal is strongly opposed by the industry group.
"We're not sure where it came from or ... where the 17 cents is going to go. 
There's not really a lot of accountability," Smith said.
According to the proposal, grocers would be able to keep half of the fee and 
would be expected to spend it on city-approved programs, such as discounted 
reusable shopping bags.
Shestek, the American Plastics Council spokesman, said some of the costs 
attributed to plastic bags could be recouped by sending plastic bag waste to 
companies that can use it as a raw material, such as decking and composite 
lumber producers.
Heidi Melander, president of the Northern California Recycling Association, 
a supporter of the proposal, said the fee was a tangible way the public can 
participate in helping reduce waste.
"We've been trained to want bags," she said. "It's gotten out of hand --  
everywhere you go, they force them on you, and they think you're weird if 
you don't take a bag. We might not have control over the blister packaging 
around the electronic equipment we buy. But we have control over taking that 
bag."

Grocery bag surcharge debate
Pro: Would lead to reduced usage, resulting in saving millions of dollars in 
litter control and waste management costs that proponents of the levy 
attribute mostly to plastic bags.
Con: Amounts to a regressive tax that would be a heavier burden on lower- 
income consumers with little control over spending of the money generated.
E-mail Suzanne Herel at sherel@no.address
Page A - 1
URL: 
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/11/20/MNGG49UVF71.DTL

©2004 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback | FAQ


Heidi Feldman
Public Education Coordinator
Monterey Regional Waste Management District
Tel.: 831/384-5313     FAX: 831/384-3567