|
|
|
Uploaded: Friday, March 2, 2012, 2:09 PM
Updated: Tuesday, March 6, 2012, 6:56 AM
Lawsuit filed challenging San Francisco's plastic bag ban could affect similar laws here
City councils in Dublin, Pleasanton, at Alameda County's urging, vote to impose bag bans starting next year
|
|
by Jeb Bing
Pleasanton Weekly Staff
San Francisco's ban on plastic bags, similar to ones adopted by Plesanton and Dublin last month, is being challenged in court on the grounds that the city needed to examine the environmental impacts of imposing such a ban.
An organization called "Save The Plastic Bag Coalition filed the lawsuit last Wednesday with the argument that San Francisco must follow the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act before instituting the ban.
But according to Plasticbaglaws.org, which bills itself as a resource for legislative bodies considering laws limiting the use of plastic bags, completing environmental impact reports can take years and is often costly for many smaller municipalities.
"What these suits accomplish is to delay the enactment or implementation of bans, in addition to intimidation," said the online organization reported.
The EIR on plastic bags conducted by the Silicon Valley city of Sunnyvale, as an examples, ended up costing $48,000, which Sunnyvale program manager reported was significantly lower than expected.
San Francisco supervisors voted last month to expand a law passed by the board in 2007 banning supermarkets and chain store pharmacies from providing single-use, non-compostable plastic bags.
The changes to the ordinance were made after several delayed votes because of concerns over inadequate outreach to local businesses. Supervisors also extended its impact to all retail establishments starting this October and restaurants in 2013.
On Feb. 21, city councils in Dublin and Pleasanton also approved a ban on all retailers on those cities from providing plastic bags free of charge. The ban goes into effect Jan. 1, 2013. The new law will apply to all grocery stores, pharmacies and other retailers, although restaurants, fast food outlets and charitable organizations will be exempt.
The original San Francisco ordinance aimed to reduce the number of plastic bags used in the city annually, which was estimated to be 180 million bags in 2007. That estimate jumped to 350 million bags as of 2011.
The San Francisco ordinance includes a 10-cent fee for each paper bag used that would be kept by individual businesses to be used as they see fit.
The goal was to lower the cost of compost-friendly plastic bags by increasing demand and to encourage consumers to bring their own reusable shopping bags.
However, the Save The Plastic Bag Coalition, which was formed in 2008 and claims that the anti-plastic bag campaign is "largely based on myths misinformation and exaggerations," filed the lawsuit with the argument that the city must follow the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act before instituting the ban.
The group sites a report that found that plastic bags used less energy, fossil fuels and fresh water compared to their paper or compostable counterparts.
"Paper and compostable bags are significantly worse for the environment than plastic bags," the lawsuit states.
San Francisco is not the first local government sued by the coalition. In a similar suit the group filed against the city of Manhattan Beach, the state Supreme Court ruled in July 2011 that an environmental impact report must be prepared in connection with a proposed plastic bag ban in cities and counties larger than that Southern California municipality.
According to the lawsuit, before that ruling was issued, Los Angeles County completed an environmental impact report (EIR) in advance of its banning plastic and compostable bags in 2011.
That countywide ban took effect last year after the EIR found that charging a nominal fee for issuing paper bags would likely fail to offset environment impacts associated with their increased use.
The coalition argues the EIR is necessary because of what it claims are negative environmental impacts and because it says the city was not exempt from the CEQA requirements.
"Very few people will carry a reusable bag to Macy's or other department stores to save a dime," the lawsuit read. "Very few people will carry a large reusable bag to purchase ... a snack from Union Square or Chinatown."
Even President Obama is guilty of such an offense. On his most recent visit to San Francisco, Obama made a surprise stop in Chinatown, where he was photographed toting a large order of dim sum in the ubiquitous plastic carryout bags.Bay City News contributed to this report. Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by Charlie Brown, a resident of the Pleasanton Valley neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 8:44 am So we ban plastic bags to save "Mother Earth", I can hardly wait until someone brings a lawsuit against a grocery store because a meat package leaked fluids on the customer's reusable grocery bag (that they never wash) and the customer later becomes seriously ill due to some malady caused by the contaminated grocery bag.
There is someone lurking in the woods to sue, there always is!
|
|
Posted by Scott Walsh, a resident of the Pleasanton Valley neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 8:54 am Government stay out of my consumer business and fix the roads, deal with the drug problem and represent the city. You have enough to do without having another lawsuit thrown in your faces.
|
|
Posted by Dave Walden, a resident of another community, on Mar 5, 2012 at 8:56 am
Dave Walden is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com Nothing in your article refers to the stated purpose of the group:
"We are the only organization that is questioning and challenging the misinformation, myths, exaggeration, and hype spread by anti-plastic bag activists. We believe that environmental policy should be based on facts."
I don't know the truth of the matter but certainly every effort should be to research before enacting an ordinance that will affect every shopper today.
|
|
Posted by What a joke!, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 9:25 am I am all for helping the environment, but Charlie Brown, I am with you! I have heard stories about people bringing in the most disgusting bags. I end up throwing away a few plastic bags each time because something leaked in them, but for the most part they get re-used as lunch bags, packing material for boxes, etc. Instead of banning the bags and creating some sort of super-virus, why not promote other uses of bags?? Have recycling programs?? It's so ridiculous. It's not like the streets of Pleasanton are littered with plastic bags.
|
|
Posted by Liberal Hypocrisy , a member of the Pleasanton Middle School community, on Mar 5, 2012 at 10:21 am ...but it's for THE CHILDREN! If we don't act now (or in the next 500ish years) what will become of the world we are leaving for them?
I simply will not buy any of the doom & gloom predictions that the various panic prone hand wringers have thrown at us over the years. From the population explosion, (fake/debunked) the world-wide food shortages/famine crowd(failed, never happened)to their latest scam GLOBAL WARMING or simply the biggest lie EVER perpetuated on the human race.
We simply do not buy your story any more Mr. & Mrs. Crunchy Munchy. Your attempts to "One World" our economy and to marginalize our industrial, manufacturing and consumer spending base to bring us more in line with that of a 3rd world country, has failed. The UN does not rule our world, we the people of the United States do.
|
|
Posted by AnnaS, a member of the Foothill High School community, on Mar 5, 2012 at 10:39 am There are two ways of protecting environment: first is to protect it FOR people, the second - is to protect it FROM people. Education and encouraging of a safe reusing and a correctly done recycling helps to protect the environment for people without reducing their quality of life. Banning and restricting helps mostly to protect interests of bureaucrats and to increase taxes. Even if these measures protect an environment little bit, they protect it from people.
By the way, did environmentalists ever consider to take into account the environmental impact of human's diarrhea caused by contaminated food?
I'm glad that there are still somebody in America who survived politically-correct education without permanent brian damage and who still has some sense of reality.
|
|
Posted by information, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 11:00 am Only 2 percent of plastic bags in California are recycled -- and the best way to do that is to take them back to a store that collects them (like Safeway). They will take plastic bags from any source, in bins placed near the front doors of the store that are just for plastic bags.
It is also important to know that plastic bags should not be placed in the blue recycling bins collected weekly by city garbage trucks. They jam up the machines used to sort recycling into different types.
Link to the list of things that can go in the blue bins:
Web Link
|
|
Posted by Zert, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 12:57 pm When are people in this state going to start standing up to the liberal knuckleheads and left wing-nuts that are one-by-one chipping away at our freedoms? Isn't it about time to take a stand against these idiots and regain control of our own lives?
I sincerely hope this lawsuit is successful - especially since it is directed at San Francisco, the bastion of loonism.
|
|
Posted by AnnaS, a member of the Foothill High School community, on Mar 5, 2012 at 1:32 pm You are right Zert, this insanity must stop. It's very possible that after plastic bags they will ban diapers: not a big deal for San Francisco, but could be a problem in
Pleasanton. Unless, of course, they will ban children...
|
|
Posted by Mrs. Slippers, a resident of the Ruby Hill neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 1:43 pm Announcement:
"Liberal Hypocrisy" (aka YAT) wins the March 2012 Mr. Slippers Award.
Thanks for the laugh!
|
|
Posted by Mike, a resident of the Highland Oaks neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 3:02 pm Consumers in Germany and Japan have been using their own "einkaufstute" "eco-bags" for groceries for years. Department stores and boutiques are a different story, mainly because bags are a very cost-effective advertising tool.
Mike
|
|
Posted by Don, a member of the Fairlands Elementary School community, on Mar 5, 2012 at 3:05 pm I agree plastic bags should eventually be banned. But not until there is a non-toxic, water-soluble replacement. What does one do with rubbish that smells and needs to go to the dump or recycle compost? I make all my grocery bags double use.
A gelatin or vegetable alternative needs to be developed and available first.
|
|
Posted by The Green Thing, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 3:24 pm For Mayor Hosterman and the rest of the Pleasanton City Councilmembers who are probably still patting themselves on their collective self-righteous back for their self-aggrandizing, supposedly "green" environmental effort to ban plastic bags (i.e., tell us what to do/how to live our lives), I offer you this parable (if you're not too arrogant to read it):
The woman apologized for not understanding the plastic bag ban and explained, "We didn't have this "green thing" back in my earlier days."
The Mayor and City Council responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save the environment for future generations."
They are right -- our generation didn't have the green thing in our day. Back then, we returned our milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store.
The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so the same bottles could be used over and over again. So they really were recycled.
But we didn't have the green thing back in our day.
We walked up stairs, because we didn't have an escalator in every store and office building.
We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks.
But she was right.
We didn't have the green thing in our day.
Back then, we washed the baby's diapers because we didn't have the throw-away kind.
We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts -- wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days.
Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters or friends, not always brand-new clothing. But that young lady is right. We didn't have the green thing back in our day.
Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a sheet of paper, not a screen the size of the state of Montana. In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us. When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap.
Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power.
Kids got a gift for Christmas and on their birthday--and they took care of their things--the house was not overrun with toys.
We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club and run on treadmills that operate on electricity. But they're right.
We didn't have the green thing back then.
We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water.
We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.
But we didn't have the green thing back then.
Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus, and kids rode their bikes to neighborhood schools, or walked--not turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service.
And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint.
But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we are, just because we didn't have the green thing back then?
Please feel free to forward this on to another self-righteous "green" politician in California (or elsewhere) who needs a lesson in conservation, from the Green Generation of ordinary, average, humble people who aren't hypocrites.
Remember this...WE THE PEOPLE are all living the lives we want to live, and in the United States of America, no one should have their government telling WE THE PEOPLE how to live!
|
|
Posted by Dan, a resident of the Bridle Creek neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 4:33 pm I wonder if anyone has ever done a study of the ratio between foods that use plastic packaging and plastic grocery bag usage?
Went to the store yesterday and I'll tell you that there was probably a 4-1 ratio of plastic packaging to grocery bags.
So do we stop using plastics in food packaging?
Gah! How dumb.
Dan
|
|
Posted by Mrs. Slippers (Just call me Doreen), a resident of the Ruby Hill neighborhood, on Mar 5, 2012 at 5:03 pm I'm part of that older generation, and I have to tell you that me and other oldsters around me continue to push hand lawn mowers across our lawns in Ruby Hill; we hang our clothes out on the clothesline; we take our milk bottles back to the factory; and we still hand-wash our own diapers as well as those of our grandchildren.
|
|
Posted by Bear Droppings, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Mar 6, 2012 at 8:44 am How about we ban socialist and environmental nut jobs? Think of all the benefits that would provide to our wallets, our government, our freedoms, and our overall quality of life.
|
|
Posted by mom, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Mar 6, 2012 at 12:46 pm The link to this story reflects the ban on plastic bags. Didn't Pleasanton ban ANY bag (plastic or paper)? And you have to pay for an alternative ...with the stores keeping the profits (I don't beleive that those bags cost 10 cents each. I heard they were 3 - 5 cents.)
I'm Ok with a ban on plastic at grocery and convenience stores. But I don't agree with the ban on all bags at all retail establishments.
|
|
Posted by AnnaS, a member of the Foothill High School community, on Mar 7, 2012 at 8:33 am If we'are talking about Pleasanton, I don't think that stores will make a big profit from this. But, I would not surprise that this law will become the "straw that broke the camel's back" and will bring to the end the retail business in Pleasanton.
|
|
Posted by Shawn, a member of the Foothill High School community, on Mar 7, 2012 at 8:51 am Somehwere high above in a prviate jet spewing a long carbon trail and paid for by his elaborate carbon credit scam, "the environmentalist", Al Gore is reading these comments on the internet that he invented and is very disappointed.....
It is encouraging to see that most people are tired of the govvernment getting involved with this crap.
|
|
Posted by Marianne, a member of the Foothill High School community, on Mar 7, 2012 at 9:41 am Haters gonna hate
so many misguided right wingnuts, can't see the forest for the trees
|
|
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Mar 7, 2012 at 7:28 pm Marianne, while you out in the forest looking at the trees for your nuts, note that paper bags made out of those trees are now outlawed unless we agree to get gouged paying for them. Must be nice to be wealthy and so arrogant as to know what's best for all of us.
|
|
Posted by Tango , a resident of the Vineyard Avenue neighborhood, on Mar 9, 2012 at 5:18 pm So how come we didn't get to vote on this, when it impacts everyone in the city???? I am tired of the government being my mother and father. I would like to make my own rules sometimes. I think I can , because I think I am a well educated person.
|
|
Posted by Bags, a resident of the Pleasanton Valley neighborhood, on Mar 10, 2012 at 6:38 pm Could we also ban those stupid stickers that are stuck on every single item of produce? Bad for environment. Bad for my compost pile. Pain in the neck besides.
|
|
|
| |
|
Send this story
Print this story
