Paper or Plastic? Sonoma County Carry-out Bag Ordinance Report

The Sonoma County Waste Management Agency hosted nine carryout bag forums in March to solicit feedback from residents and busnesses.  All meetings were open to the public.  Articles about the forums were published in the Press Democrat, the Sonoma County Gazette, the Petaluma Patch, the Healdsburg  Patch, the Rohnert Park Patch, the Sonoma West Times, and the Rohnert Park Community Voice, and staff was interviewed on the KSRO morning news program on March 8, 2012. Comments received at those meetings were overwhelmingly positive.

In addition to the comments received at the outreach meetings, staff also received written and phone comments from approximately 50 people.  Those comments also heavily favored an ordinance reducing carryout bag waste.

PLEASE E-MAIL ANY FURTHER COMMENTS TO Patrick Carter <Patrick.Carter@sonoma-county.org>

Though staff sent press releases to 17 Chamber of Commerce in Sonoma County as well as the Sonoma County Alliance, the turnout for businesses was low.  However, staff received comments  for individuals representing  Oliver's Markets, G and G Markets, and Safeway, all indicating their support for a consistent, countywide bag reduction ordinance.  The California Grocers Association has indicated continued support for a regional plastic carryout bag ban and paper carryout bag fee in Sonoma County.

The comments received were numerous, despite the rather low turnout, and those comments have been summarized  and attached to this packet.   Briefly, these comments in favor of an ordinance generally agree with the San Jose carryout bag ordinance approach (banning plastic carryout bags, fee of at least $0.10 for paper carryout bags, affecting all retailers but excluding  restaurants, though some felt that reusable bags should be provided to the needy instead of free paper bags).  A summary of comments is included in this packet and copies of all comments, as well as recordings of the meetings,  are on file with the clerk.

Given the community response at these meetings and through written comments, staff recommends drafting an ordinance similar to that of San Jose's carryout bag waste reduction ordinance, should the direction to proceed with ordinance drafting be given.  However, Agency staff has been in contact with Rohnert  Park staff and is providing the city with additional details they have requested.  At this time, staff recommends waiting for a response from the City of Rohnert Park before making a decision to proceed.

Comments AGAINST an ordinance: Plastic Bags:

• Plastic bags were encouraged to replace paper bags to save the trees.

• Plastic bags are reused as trash liners and to clean up pet waste. Customers will have to buy bags to accomplish these tasks now.

• Plastic bags have other uses than transporting groceries,including transporting secondary items, containing wet and muddy items.

• There is no documented need for banning plastic bags.

• Plastic wrap and other plastic bags not included in the ordinance have similar properties and ability to be litter  as plastic carryout bags but are not included,so this will not solve the plastic issue.

• Customers will need to buy plastic trash liners where they previously reused plastic carryout bags.

• Plastic bags are not a significant portion of materiallandfilled.

• Plastic bags in Sonoma County are an insignificant portion of bags distributed  worldwide.

• Animal deaths attributed to plastic bags are insignificant (2.2% of total animal deaths attributed to trash). The focus should be on other, more impactful items, if animal deaths is an issue.

• Plastic bags clogging recycling equipment is the disposal company's issue, not this agency's.

• Making in-store bags unavailable will limit the ability of customers who carry purchases home on foot more difficult.

Paper Bags:

• Paper carryout bags are singled out, yet other paper products do not have a similar minimum price charge.

Reusable Bags:

• The inexpensive plastic reusable bags do not hold up well and can tear and melt.

• What is the environmental impact of the reusable plastic bags?

• This issue has a narrow focus. Environmental impacts should be examined 20 years into the future.

• Is the reuse of reusable bags (including manufacturing and washing) better for the environment than plastic bags?

• What is the risk to clerks with unwashed reusable bags?

• Who is responsible if a soiled reusable bag is used and leads to illness or death of an individual?

• What does the Sonoma County public health community think of a bag ban?

• Clerks overload reusable bags.

• If reusable bags have store advertising, they should be free. Purchased bags should be advertising-free.

General Comments:

• Government should not interfere.

Comments in FAVOR of an ordinance: Plastic Bags:

• All plastic bags should be banned (including produce  bags).

• The risk to wildlife and human  health  is too great for plastic bags not to be banned.

• Plastic bag litter creates an eyesore.

• Government should model behavior by banning all plastic bags.

• Plastic is commonly mistaken by wildlife as food.

• The plastic bag impacts to wildlife in the ocean are less visible but are significant (animals mistaking plastic bags for food, ingesting photodegraded plastic, large polluted areas like the Pacific Gyre).

• Biodegradable plastic bags should be used in place of traditional plastic produce  bags.

• Plastic bags are not freely distributed in Hawaii.

• Plastic remnants accumulate in our bodies,so they should be reduced.

• All businesses should be included in the plastic bag ban.

Paper Bags  - Minimum Price Charge:

• The cost of paper bags is between $0.10 and $0.25.

• Paper bags should be at least 40% post consumer recycled content (some urged for up to 100% PC recycled content).

• Several European countries charge for bags and that has changed customer behavior  toward reusable bags.

• Decreased bag purchases could affect  the per unit prices for bags,so the ordinance should be mindful of the economies of scale to stores.

• The bag fee should not be less than $0.10 (many felt more than $0.10 would be necessary to make folks go back to their cars to get their  reusable bags).

Enforcement:

• There are enough interested community members that would  allow self-enforcement if there was a complaint line (or enforcement could be government-run initially and self-enforced after a few years).

• Self enforcement is not sufficient, as the potential for harming  the environment is too great.

• There is a growing consensus that  carryout  bags are harmful, so this should be acted upon.  Just ensure as many people know about it as possible.

• Several small grocery stores support that bag ban/fee but want consistency in the cities and a level playing field on the issue.

• Costco should be highlighted for their  use of boxes (which otherwise they would have to recycle) and sale of reusable bags.

• This is a worldwide issue as debris from other  countries washes up on our shores.

• The San Jose bag ordinance  is a good start.

• If passed, the education effort should include organizations with cleanup experience  {e.g. Russian River Watershed Association, Wildlife Rescue,Transition  Cotati, clubs at SSU and SRJC)

BACKGROUND

The SCWMA Board of Directors requested  staff to provide carryout bag legislation updates at each SCWMA meeting subsequent to the March 2008 meeting.  Since that meeting staff has researched developments within California and out-of-state  legislation regarding paper and plastic carryout bags. 

At the May 18, 2011 SCWMA meeting, the Board directed staff to present the three options for addressing  carryout bags developed by staff to the Board of Supervisors and nine councils so those decision-making bodies could give direction to their respective SCWMA representative regarding action on one of those options.

Staff has presented the materials approved by the Board to all jurisdictions,  though staff has not been invited to present information to the full Rohnert Park City Council  Staff would characterize  the direction from the Councils and County Board as generally supportive of exploring a countywide ordinance  created and adopted by the Agency.

At the February 18, 2012 SCWMA meeting, the Board directed staff to begin outreach meetings throughout  the county to receive feedback on the carryout bag waste reduction effort and using the San Jose carryout bag ordinance  parameters as the starting point for the discussion.

RECOMMENDED ACTION I ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends waiting for consensus of Agency members before proceeding to ordinance drafting.   If there is no consensus, staff recommends proceeding with a model ordinance.

FUNDING  IMPACT

Staff had previously estimated a range of $135,440 to $193,240 in contractor costs for CEQA analysis, legal costs for drafting an ordinance and CEQA review, and a significant  amount of staff time managing the project.  However, as many other cities and counties have completed CEQA documents  since that estimate from August 2011, staff estimates the CEQA costs will decrease significantly, bringing total project costs down to a range of $80,000 to $150,000.