Category Archives: Freedom and Liberty

Plastic Bag Bans and California’s Drought

Economic Costs, Environmental Impacts, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances, Reusable Shopping Bags, Statewide Bag Ban, , , , , , , , , ,
California Condor on the 2005 California State...
California Condor on the 2005 California State quarter (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

On 17 January 2014, Governor Brown declared a Drought State Of Emergency for California which included a call on Californians to reduce water usage by 20%!  In signing the declaration, Governor Brown stated “We can’t make it rain, but we can be much better prepared for the terrible consequences that California’s drought now threatens, including dramatically less water for our farms and communities and increased fires in both urban and rural areas. … and I’m calling all Californians to conserve water in every way possible.” (Brown, 2014)

Felicia Marcus, chairwoman of the State Water Resources Control Board, stated “This is the most serious drought we’ve faced in modern times” and that we need to conserve the water we have for future use.  Similarly, State Department of Water Resources Director Mark Cowin stated that there simply is not enough water to meet the needs of farmers, communities, and “the conservation efforts intended to save dwindling populations of salmon and other fish throughout Northern California”. (Associated Press, 2014) Continue reading Plastic Bag Bans and California’s Drought →

Stop Statewide Plastic Bag Ban – Contact Your Legislator

Carryout Bag Fees, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances, Statewide Bag Ban, , , , , , , , ,

Sacramento_Capitol_BuildingCalifornia State Legislators are at it again.  Although past efforts to pass a plastic grocery bag ban by the state legislature have failed, it may be different this time.  AB 158 and SB 405 are going through the legislature.  We urge you to contact your state legislators in the California Senate and Assembly.  Let them know you oppose a statewide plastic bag ban.

Click on the following link: Find Your California Representative

Some Talking Points Follow:

Plastic bag litter (all sorts of plastic bags) comprise only 0.6% or roadside litter.  In comparison, fast food litter is 29.1% of roadside litter.  A plastic bag ban will at most eliminate 0.6% of roadside litter leaving the other 99.4% waiting to be picked up.  A plastic bag ban will not reduce litter and make for a cleaner city.

AB 158 and SB 405 is not equally applied to all residents.  AB 158 and SB 405 creates two different classes of shoppers, one class that is able to receive free paper bags and another class that is required to pay for paper bags.  AB 158 and SB 405 creates a new welfare benefit for WIC and SNAP participants.  The benefit is provided at the expense of shoppers who pay for paper bags or at the expense of the retailer who will pass the cost of free paper bags on to all shoppers. 

The indirect cost of plastic shopping bags for a family of four is less than $20 per year.  The cost of paper bags at 10-cents each is about $78.00 per year.  The cost of reusable bags is about $250 per year when you include both out of pocket expenses and the cost of a person’s time in handle bags including the time required to wash reusable bags.

Plastic bag bans end up with cutting down more trees for paper bags and actually increase the amount of plastic, paper, and reusable bags ending up in the landfill.  In fact, a bag ban increases the amount of material (plastic, paper, and reusable bags) headed for the landfill by as much as factor of four.

Furthermore, based on plastic bag ban results in Santa Monica and San Jose, shoppers rejected reusable bags by choosing paper bags or no bags over reusable bags by a ratio of two-to-one.  Clearly, using reusable bags is the wrong solution.

Paper Bag Fee Setting A Bad Precedent

Carryout Bag Fees, Citizens Fighting Back, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances, Paper Carryout Bags, , , , , , , , , , ,

California_State_Capitol_Building256The paper bag fee sets a dangerous and illogical precedent.  Paper bags from the paper aisle are taxed at the check stand, but paper carryout bags purchased at the check stand to hold your groceries are not taxable.  Furthermore, the fee paid for paper carryout bags subsidizes the free paper bags provided to certain low income groups, providing a powerful argument that the fee is a tax instead.  So far court rulings have stated that the paper bag fee is not a tax since the fees are retained and used by a private party.  Under current court rulings, a state or local government jurisdiction can enact a statute or ordinance which requires payment of fees to a private party and then dictate how the moneys are spent by the private party and as long as no monies are remitted to the state or local jurisdiction then the scheme completely bypasses constitutional tax limitations and constitutional protection of citizens from a continual barrage of new taxes and fees.

To read the entire article click on the link: Paper Bag Fee Setting A Bad Precedent

 

Huntington Beach – Bag Ban Repeal Effort Begins

Carryout Bag Fees, Citizens Fighting Back, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances, Uncategorized, , , , , , , ,

Huntington Beach CA USAA real estate agent, Frank LoGrasso, a 28-year resident of Huntington Beach, is spearheading the attempt to overturn the city’s ban on plastic bags and fee on paper bags.  LoGrasso is a proponent of the free market and views the local ordinance as an unwanted intrusion by the local government particularly when the ordinance dictates how a business is to treat their customers.  Lo Grasso has no problem with stores charging a fee for paper bags, but he believes that the ordinance fixes the price and takes competition out of it.  (Carpio, 2013)

To overturn the local ordinance, Lo Grasso and supporters will have to collect signatures from 10% of the registered voters in Huntington Beach for a total of 10,940 valid signatures.  To ensure that enough signatures qualify an attempt will be made to collect 15,000 signatures. (Carpio, 2013) Continue reading Huntington Beach – Bag Ban Repeal Effort Begins →

How To Fight Back Against Bag Bans

Citizens Fighting Back, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances

 

English: First page of Constitution of the Uni...
English: First page of Constitution of the United States Česky: První strana originálu Ústavy Spojených států amerických Español: La página primera de la Constitución de los Estados Unidos de América (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A number of readers have recently asked the question, “what can we do to fight back against bag bans?”  In response, we developed a paper titled “How To Fight Back Against Bag Bans” that list steps that most citizens can take.  It is important to recognize that proponents of bag bans including politicians, are under a very powerful and emotional spell of political correctness where being seen as “green” is more important than facts or the truth.  Which means, that no matter what you say, they will ignore it.  The only thing that these politicians understand is a lawsuit, a recall election, or a citizen’s initiative to overturn the bag ban.

So what can you do to fight back?  First, you got to involve yourself in the battle.  Are you willing to spend personal time?  If so, click on the following link: How To Fight Back Against Bag Bans.

Enhanced by Zemanta

San Jose Bag Ban Doesn’t Make a Dent in Litter

Bag Ban Myths and Misinformation, Economic Costs, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, , ,

Despite a bag ban for two years in the City of San Jose, litter is still a prevalent problem.  While it is true, fewer retail store plastic carryout bags are observed, litter and unregulated plastic bags is still a very visible problem.  On the website: http://js-politicsandburacracy.blogspot.com/2013/12/san-jose-bag-ban-almost-two-years-later.html one San Jose resident posted photos of litter in San Jose.  This is worthwhile seeing if you think that a plastic carryout bag ban will reduce litter in your area.

Here are two videos of litter in San Jose.  The first is from Tully Road East to Coyote Creek and the second is from Coyote Creek Trailhead Tully Road to Stonegate.

In neighboring Campbell, in which the bag ban will not go into effect until 27 January 2014, there is virtually no plastic bag litter and very little litter.  Photos are shown in the following article: http://js-politicsandburacracy.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2014-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2015-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=1

This video is taken in Campbell, CA.  Campbell Park and Los Gatos Creek Trail Southbound to San Thomas Expressway.  The entire route is virtually trash free.

This video is taken in Santa Clara, from Scott Blvd southbound to El Camino Real eastbound to Lafayette Street.  This video is proof that Santa Clara despite allowing plastic carryout bags and polystyrene food ware to be used without restriction hardly has any litter and it is nearly impossible to find a improperly disposed of Styrofoam food container let alone a grocery or shopping bag.  In fact not a single plastic shopping  bag was seen floating around in “city” controlled areas.

In contrast, San Jose, despite a two year ban on plastic carryout bags, its streets are just as littered as before the bag ban if not more so.

The fact is that imposing a bag ban to eliminate less than 0.6% of litter is a waste of money and effort, not only the costs incurred by the city but also the millions of dollars that residents must spend to comply with the bag ban.

Bag Bans: Defrauding the Public of Reasonable Alternative Solutions

Bag Ban Myths and Misinformation, Carryout Bag Fees, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances, Paper Carryout Bags, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Plastic Carryout Bag Disposal, Plastic Carryout Bags, Reusable Shopping Bags, , , , , ,

Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) document the environmental impact of a specific project including alternatives.  In the case of EIRs supporting Single-Use Carryout Bag Ordinances a specific solution to a plastic bag litter problem is proposed that requires a ban on plastic carryout bags and imposes a fee on paper bags in order to encourage (i.e. coerce) shoppers into using reusable bags.  The environmental analysis to support this proposed solution is never provided.  For example, if plastic carryout bags are bad and should be eliminated, then an analysis should be provided to show that using paper bags instead of plastic bags results in an environmental impact that requires mitigation by reducing the use of paper bags and using an alternative product.  That analysis is never performed or provided.  In fact, the objectives of the EIR specifically prevent that analysis and alternative from ever being analyzed.  If brought up during the public comment period, the response is that it does not meet the objectives.  In other words the objectives are cleverly used to defraud the public of an important analysis and a legitimate alternative solution.  Instead of impartially evaluating alternative solutions, someone else’s pre-conceived solution is shoved down your throat by misguided public officials.

To read more of this controversial article click on the following link: Bag Bans Defrauding The Public Of Reasonable Alternative Solutions.

California Landfills Impacted By Bag Bans

Carryout Bag Fees, Freedom and Liberty, LandFill Impacts, Paper Carryout Bags, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Plastic Carryout Bag Disposal, Plastic Carryout Bags, Recycling Impacts, Reusable Shopping Bags, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

English: Toyon landfill inside Griffith Park, ...
English: Toyon landfill inside Griffith Park, Los Angeles, California, before the May 2007 fire. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Single-Use Carryout Bag Ordinance has a detrimental impact on landfills that has not been clearly identified.  While the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identifies that plastic carryout bags currently end up in the landfill, unbeknownst to proponents of the ordinance is that the amount of material deposited in the landfill after the ban has been implemented is far greater than before the ban.  Landfill impacts for both the State of California and for Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties are presented in Tables 1 and 2 respectively.  While landfills can absorb the additional material with no problem, an unintended consequence of the single-use carryout bag ordinance, it is California’s Zero Waste Goal that suffers a setback that will have to be made up through other waste reductions!

To read more click on the following link: California Landfills Impacted By Bag Bans.  This article is an update of the article previously released and titled “Fact Sheet – Landfill Impacts” originally released 16 April 2013.  The new article includes the California statewide impacts in addition to the impacts to Santa Barbara and Ventura County landfills.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Ventura City Council Votes To Proceed With Plastic Bag Ban

Bag Ban Myths and Misinformation, Freedom and Liberty, Local Ordinances, Paper Carryout Bags, Plastic Bag Litter, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, Plastic Carryout Bags, Recycling Impacts, Reusable Shopping Bags, , , , , , ,
Ventura City Hall
Ventura City Hall (Photo credit: InSapphoWeTrust)

On 16 December 2013, the Ventura City Council voted 6 to 1 to go ahead and prepare a Single-Use Carryout Bag Ordinance and BEACON EIR addendum for consideration in six months by the City Council.   The council also voted to support the efforts of State Senator Padilla to pass a bill to institute a statewide single-use carryout bag law rather than a local ordinance.

Currently there are two bills going through the California State Legislature concerning plastic carryout bags.  SB-405 is authored by State Senator Padilla and AB-158 by Assembly member Levine.  Both bills appear to have started out with the same text which is being marked up as the bills goes through the different committees in their respective houses.

The full article can be read by clicking the following link: Ventura City Council Votes To Proceed With Plastic Bag Ban Preparation.

Related articles

Issaquah Ballot Title Successfully Challenged

Carryout Bag Fees, Citizens Fighting Back, Freedom and Liberty, Plastic Carryout Bag Ban, , , , , , ,
City Hall, Issaquah, Washington.
City Hall, Issaquah, Washington. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In a petition filed on November 15, Mr. Craig Keller of Save Our Choice, challenged the ballot title that the City Council approved on October 21 for the newly qualified citizen’s initiative to “REPEAL of Plastic Bag Ban and Forced Bag Charge”.  The citizen’s initiative is on the February 11, 2014 ballot.  Save Our Choice objected to certain wording in the ballot title and description because they were ambiguous or were words of advocacy that could generate voter prejudice during balloting on the citizen’s initiative ordinance. Continue reading Issaquah Ballot Title Successfully Challenged →