Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Uploaded: Tuesday, March 17, 2009, 6:55 AM

Palo Alto bans plastic bags at grocery stores
Despite threat of lawsuit, new rule to take effect Sept. 18 -- city ponders broader bans on plastic, fees on paper bags

by Gennady Sheyner
Palo Alto Weekly Staff

Posted by Marvin, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 7:56 am

Looks like the Council went ahead and voted in the plastic bag ban. Of note, as reported in today's Daily Post, a judge invalidated a similar ban in Manhattan Beach because an environmental impact report was not done.

Surprising that in Palo Alto, which requires an EIR for almost everything except crossing the street, the Council could not be bothered to get one. I guess when you are in a hurry to fatten up your resume and show off your "environmental" credentials, there is no time for EIRs.

BTW--Pat Burt says:

"We're going to hear a lot of grief initially, but once we change our habits I'm convinced it won't be the end of the world. "It's going to be an easy solution."

Yes, Pat, there is an easy solution for now--shop in Menlo PArk and Mountain View

Posted by qq, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 8:00 am

When is the ban on styrofoam coming down the pipe?

qq

Posted by SaveThePlasticBag.com, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 8:06 am

Check out www.savetheplasticbag.com

Posted by Mom, a member of the Palo Alto High School community, on Mar 17, 2009 at 8:34 am

The worst offender of plastics is WalMart. Not even an option to use paper and if you bring your own bag, they have nowhere to set it except on top of the bag rounder and checking out takes longer. Moreover, they only put a few items in each bag so they use more plastic bags than need be.

This is a midwest company though. They hardly even recycle in the midwest.

Posted by Marvin, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 9:07 am

Thinking about it, the Council should have gone further. They should have enacted a complete ban on POSSESSION of plastic bags. This will then address the issue of people (like myself) who shop in neighboring cities. Not sure what the punishment should be, but I am sure the "environmental mavens" Drekmeier and Kishimoto would have come up with something

Posted by Art Kraemer, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 10:03 am

The problem is not plastic bags themselves, but the fact that people let them loose, and they eventually end up in the waterways. So instead of banning plastic bags, why not pass an ordinance that provides for a stiff fine ($25 or more) for letting a plastic bag loose. People who see somebody let a plastic bag loose could then ask that person to retrieve the bag or threaten get a police officer. After awhile and after few well publicized fines, there will be a great reduction in the numbers of plastic bags in the waterways.

The approach worked for dog pooh. Prior to the ordinance, most dog owners didn't pick up their dog's messes. Now they do.

This approach would avoid putting the burden on the merchants and would avoid the anticipated lawsuits, by putting the burden on the people who misuse the plastic bags.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 10:41 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Grease up the tumbrels. It is time to sue to revoke the city charter - obviously we are not ready for self rule. Palo Alto needs to revert to a limited authority municipal service district. Send our Duces elsewhere to make the trains run on time. I agree on the need for an EIR, and suggest a lawsuit to demand one, and demand that it must also quantify convenience of the individual.

Posted by Eric, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 11:02 am

How much plastic is in a Prius? I bet you won't see those banned anytime soon.

Posted by Concerned Retiree, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 11:09 am

Palo Alto needs to focus more on rewards (carrots) for good pratices and less on punishment (sticks) for things like plastic bag use.

If I were thinking of opening up a new business, I certaintly wouldn't choose Palo Alto as my base. Now we have a ban on plastic bags which will soon be followed by a tax on businesses. In these economic times, we should find ways to help businesses NOT impose more hardships and costs on them.

Where are the cutbacks on the salaries and the sheer numbers of city employees??

Posted by Kate, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 11:32 am

Like many other Palo Altans, my family is suffering right now due to the bleak economic conditions. Many of our local businesses are in the same boat. Now is not the time for City Council to start implementing their green agenda. I have a real problem with our current major's focus on anything and everything green. They need to get back to basics and leave the green concerns alone for now.

Posted by Michael D., a resident of Los Altos, on Mar 17, 2009 at 11:44 am

General thoughts: 1: I definitley won't shop in Palo Alto even tho' I always carry my own bags.

2: What will Palo Altans pick up dog poop with??

3: It's sad to think Palo Alto is so willing to cost its tax payers and store owners with more expense!

Posted by Neal, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 12:27 pm

Can anyone tell me where I can buy my own supply of these banned bags?

Posted by Agree With Kate, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 12:32 pm

I absolutely agree with Kate that there are many, many far more important issues for the City Council to deal with than its fee;-good green agenda. Get back to basics, please!

Posted by YSK, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 12:34 pm

You can purchase excellent bags cheaply at Costco Neal.

Posted by wondering, a resident of Menlo Park, on Mar 17, 2009 at 12:35 pm

I greatly appreciate every one of these comments.

Regarding bags for animal waste, I have tried to use landfill-safe bags. I had a hard time getting them off their roll. Then I had a hard time separating the two sides of the bag. These bags also cost, at that time, 39 cents each. As people have said, these are very tough times economically, and expensive bags don't help.

I am wondering why we had to have this change imposed on us when we were doing quite well at mending our ways (if you want to look at it like that, and I'm not sure I do). Surely it alienates us to have a nannying City Council in Palo Alto, and it's not helpful, I don't think, for green-ness in general, to have people not understanding what a turnoff this ban is.

Posted by YouShouldKnow, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 12:40 pm

A fee on paper bags? Seriously? Why? Paper bags are recyclable! Who are these busy body little Tin Gods interfering in our lives daily but NEVER in a positive way? Why don't you stick a tree in Council chambers so y'all can hug it every day and leave the rest of us the hell alone. Times are tough enough with more petty interferences in our lives. This City Council is driving business away from Palo Alto instead of attracting it. They should be working on how to attract more business to create jobs, not over regulate, tax and burden.

Said it before, will say it again: RECALL THE CITY COUNCIL!

Posted by Clay Lane, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 12:45 pm

Wet newspapers are for the birds, and while the news article does not specify what restrictions the Council has placed on protective plastic bags, there should be none. Plastic bags used on newspapers are by no means waterproof. One is good in the rain for only a few minutes. Double wrapping helps, and should not be restricted.

w

Posted by YouShouldKnow, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 12:46 pm

And P.S. Wouldn't a lawsuit be lovely? More money thrown away. Money from the City coffers padded by our astronomical utility bills. Guess we'd all better start stocking up on KY, this is really starting to hurt!

Posted by TwoSides, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 1:09 pm

Ironic that the City is going forward with this ban while people are canceling their Palo Alto Green because of the aforementioned astronomical utility bills.

This City Council literally can't see the Trees for the Forest.

They base everything on an ideal, but don't understand that individually, we are suffering. They are only adding to our misery. Way to go City Council. You show us what your priorities are more and more. You shouldn't have time right now to be worrying about bags, especially in such a recycle conscious community such as our own. You should be worried about bringing in JOBS! BUSINESS.

Z Gallerie is gone. Anyone else notice? One of the more interesting stores on the main drag, not another rug store or coffee shop. We start losing our boutiques, Downtown Palo Alto will become GhostTown Palo Alto.

Posted by Kate, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 1:19 pm

To You Should Know.

A total recall is expensive, but I wish we could. But there is a council election in November, and let's hope we can get rid of Drekmeier. There are others not running that should go too. Heaven help us if Kishimoto gets into the Legislature. That bunch has enough problems now. This council is the worst we've had in years.

Posted by Big Al, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 1:39 pm

I think total recall was a movie....starring the governator...

at any rate....why get so irate....or so filled with hate....

when follks are simply trying to rearrange the chairs on the titanic....

get with the times, or get out of the way.....dylan suggested....

for the times they are a changing....

Posted by Agree with Kate, a resident of another community, on Mar 17, 2009 at 1:47 pm

I agree with Kate of Crescent Park......this is NOT the time to ban plastic bags. Palo Alto is so very misguided.

Posted by Sharon, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 2:02 pm

It seems that the majority of the comments come from people who are not aware that Plastic Bags are Toxic for the Environment. They blow around causing a litter problem, they don't break down all the way, they fill landfills and blow out of there too into creeks, rivers, lakes, they break up just enough to pollute the water, gather up other toxins and end up in the ocean where they fill up the bellies of birds, whales and other sea animals. Are people really too cheap to buy their own trash bags? They have great biodegradable bags for sale now, check it out. Web Link They are reasonable and won't pollute. Shop in your own town don't give your tax dollars away-don't be so spiteful, just get with the times, it's a small planet!

Posted by wondering, a resident of Menlo Park, on Mar 17, 2009 at 2:14 pm

Alas, a not nice comment.

We DO know about these bags and the environment. At least one person, myself, knows about the green bags you urge us to buy--no thanks.

Posted by TwoSides, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 2:21 pm

We are aware what is toxic. We are not idiots. We are not misguided. We are actually a community that, on the recycling awareness scale, sits very close to the top of awareness and in recycling. The plastic bag problem should simply NOT be a priority right now. And sorry lady, I don't HAVE 39 cents to buy designer bags to clean up dog poop. Guess I'll just leave the poop, THAT is biodegradable.

It simply isn't the time to start charging for MORE things. Explain the fee on paper bags, whydontcha? TOTALLY recyclable. Why charge? In fact, Safeway should thicken theirs, they are as thin as tissue paper, and add handles. More people would choose them as the option over plastic if they did that.

As to Dylan, hear what's blowin' in HIS Malibu wind lately? Pretty much the same malodorous stench coming from Council Chambers. Dude can afford guards, but not to put in bathrooms to accommodate them . Or perhaps it's not a priority. Pretty much the same situation in Palo Alto. We are not all wealthy here. We can not all afford to pander to the lofty notions of the City Council. And no, we all don't want to move either. There should be diversity in Palo Alto, in other demographics other than race.

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 2:26 pm

People like Sharon who tell us that the green thing to do is ... and we should get used to it are the problem. I nearly always take my own bags. I recently had messy meat which leaked in the cart and needed a plastic bag at the checkout. Paper would not have done the job and my cloth bags would have just leaked the mess into my car.

We are not stupid, we are just making intelligent choices. The majority of us are not dumping our bags in the creeks but reusing them or recycling them when we get them. Taking away the ability to do sensible things is going to cost us in the long run.

Banning something always makes the commodity more desirable.

And when we do get plastic bags now, I suppose they will do away with the recycling bags containers at the grocery stores so we will end up having to trash the plastic bags we do get.

Posted by TwoSides, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 2:31 pm

The lofty idealism of the environazi's are making us more recalcitrant, not compliant. Most people respond well to being educated on a subject. Being ordered to do something is really treating people like we are recalcitrant children. Insulting.

Posted by Resident, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 2:47 pm

You can buy dog poop pick-up bags that are biodegradable. Yes, they are expensive but they are made of the kind of plastic that disintegrates over time.

Posted by Green Palo Alto, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 2:55 pm

You dissenters should get with the program. This is Palo Alto, not some godforsaken place like Texas: we do EVERYTHING the greenest way possible. Plastic bags are a cancer on the earth. We SHOULD ban 'em. Our wise mayor's plan to ELIMINATE carbon based energy consumption in Palo Alto also is a natural for our environmentally proper community. It's a no-brainer. Just do it.

We all will need to make sacrifices for the environment and the common good. Quit complaining and pitch in. Get rid of your car. Stop heating your house to over 65 degrees. Recycle your food scraps to compost. Buy used clothes and save on the waste of precious earth resources necessary to produce new ones. Shower once a week.

As Al Gore has pointed out, we have only a few years to act. Everyone will be forced to take these simple steps eventually. Why not start doing them voluntarily now to get a head start? We're Palo Alto! Why not the best?!

Posted by Ken Holmes, a resident of another community, on Mar 17, 2009 at 3:45 pm

Here's the thing, plastic isn't made at refineries, fuel is. The waste product left over from that refining goes into plastics - ALL plastics (maybe 3% of the total). Plastic bags are a fraction of that, and most in the US come from natural gas.

Here's the thing... this whole debate about what to do about the "plastic bag problem" is misguided. There just isn't really that much of a problem. Compared to other things in our lives, those grocery bags have such a tiny impact that it's laughable to even think about. How it became such a huge issue is beyond me.

Most complaints are about litter or oil consumption. But littering isn't caused by the litter, it's caused by people who litter. Plastic bags are also 100% recyclable, and require far less energy to recycle than paper bags. Plastic bags also take up far less room in landfills than paper - and yes, LOTS of paper bags end up in the landfill. NOTHING degrades in landfills... that's by design to keep harmful toxins from leaching into the water table. Most of those harmful toxins would be coming from things other than plastic, let alone plastic bags (which don't emit harmful toxins). As far as oil use goes, plastic bags account for a small fraction of 1 percent of what is used for fuel. Most people would save more oil by not driving one day out of the year, than by avoiding plastic bags.

Next time you are filling your non-recyclable polypropylene reusable bag that was made in China (where there is little in the way industrial or environmental standards) and shipped halfway across the globe to get to you, look at what you are putting inside it. Produce in plastic produce bags, cereal in a plastic bag in a box, cookies in a plastic bag, bread in a plastic bag, meat wrapped in plastic, crackers and chips in plastic, batteries in plastic, shampoo in a plastic bottle, etc.... And you are really worried about the impact of the bag you take things home in? REALLY?

Plastic (and especially the lowly plastic bag) isn't the evil force it's made out to be. It protects food from spoiling, it keeps your milk jug from breaking when dropped, it reduces shipping costs due to it's light weight, and if you look around the room you are in right now, it is filled with plastic products. Plastic has improved our lives.

The environmental solutions for dealing with our waste and pollution don't lie in banning one little thing that has a tiny impact. Solutions come from legislation promoting renewable energy sources, upgraded recycling and waste management programs, and doing things to actually reduce our carbon footprints. Banning or taxing bags will have no positive impact, and may even make things worse.

Posted by Greg C, a resident of the Ventura neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 4:48 pm

All this means to me is that I am now going to have to purchase plastic bags to put baby diapers in. And don't get me started on cloth and other options. We've tried them all, and a normal diaper going into a plastic bag is the best all around option. And our source for the bags was shopping trips. Alas.

Posted by resident, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 5:30 pm

Good point Ken Holmes. The jury is still out in my house. I'm having a baby in a few months, so we'll see if the ban affects us. We still shop more in Mountain View than in Palo Alto, so it may not affect us at all. Palo Alto mostly has expensive boutique shops which I hardly visit.

Posted by Casey, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 9:33 pm

I found these documents to be quite interesting:

City Manager Memo:

Web Link

CEQA Document:

Web Link

The entire premise of the ordinance is wrong. First, the City Council demonstrates its bias by calling the plastic bags handed out at the check-out counter "Single-Use Plastic Checkout Bags." If people disposed of these plastic bags immediately upon returning home, that description may be accurate. However, that is not the case in my household, and I would guess in many other Palo Alto households as well. We re-use these plastic bags as lunch bags, to line trash cans, and to bag various sundry items around the house. I think the city needs to study where the residents of Palo Alto really use these check-out bags as single-use bags before clamping down . In some cases, there are no viable alternatives to plastic bag use. If you have dogs, purchasing plastic bags to dispose of animal waste gives new meaning to single-use plastic bag. Instead of reusing an old checkout bag, dog owners now need to purchase single-use doggie doo bags. For people with babies, plastic bags are vital for disposing of diapers, storing soiled clothes while away from home, etc. Unless Palo Alto is going to ban people from buying plastic bags, any environmental benefits of this ban is purely illusory. The bags will be used anyways.

I guess the big loophole in all this is the ban only applies to plastic bags available at checkout stands; i.e., if the supermarket makes the plastic bags available in aisle 6, we're all cool. If that's the case, then I'm cool with the new ordinance. We'll just learn to pick up our checkout bags before we reach the checkstand.

Posted by YSK, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 17, 2009 at 11:15 pm

Green in Palo Alto pisses me off. Get with the program? I am not a bot. Ken Holmes and Casey made a lot more sense. They addressed the issue with a comprehension that we are individuals with choice, creativity and the wisdom to make a good decision on our own.

Posted by Nora Charles, a resident of Stanford, on Mar 18, 2009 at 1:22 am
Nora Charles is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

I agree that the use of plastic bags should be reduced, but this is hardly the time to ban them! It hurts the stores and those of us who re-use them for for other purposes. For my family (and that includes the four-legged variety) they are never "single use" bags! Please Palo Alto, there are so many other pressing issues to attend to...

Posted by Nora Charles, a resident of Stanford, on Mar 18, 2009 at 1:24 am
Nora Charles is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

P.S. Great post, Ken Holmes!

Posted by Kate, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 9:25 am

Mayor Drekmeier complains that the San Francisquito Creek is clogged with plastic bags. I don't doubt it. In dry weather, the Creek is the abode of many homeless who set up camp primarily under the bridge on El Camino. There are homeless encampments up and down 101, along train tracks, our by the Bay. The bags that 'decorate';the bushes along Highway 101 are coming from uncovered trash trucks. Same thing on 85 and 280. I've seen then and reported license numbers. This is another touchy-feely issue that is good for photo ops and running for higher office and getting trips to conferences someplace else that take plane trips to attend. This council is 'out of control'. Yes, I hope the city gets sued and then maybe once and for all the council and city government will get down to serious business.

Posted by Interesting, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 10:55 am

I have not found who on the Council voted each way, please post it.

Posted by YSK, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 11:58 am

Burt speaks about us as if we are recalcitrant children with a new bedtime. This is only one example of how the City Council considers themselves so far above us:

Councilman Pat Burt said he expects an initial burst of anger from some community members, but predicted a smooth transition to reusable bags."We're going to hear a lot of grief initially, but once we change our habits I'm convinced it won't be the end of the world," Burt said. "It's going to be an easy solution."

Posted by YSK, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 12:31 pm

Also a problem is that the City Council pays little or no heed to the commentary of what they consider the few dissenters. Perhaps they don't realize that the posts on this site helped ignite the backlash against the Utilities!

Posted by Marvin, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 12:38 pm

I think some council members said that they pay no attention to the posts on this forum because they do not "like the tone".

To me that translates that they do not like the fact that they are criticized, their actions questioned and criticized and their fiscal irresponsibility brought out in public.

As YSK pointed out, the council appears to consider us to be ignorant little children that need their guidance. Their actions are never to be questioned, especially by the unwashed masses

Posted by Bella, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 1:26 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Interested, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 1:41 pm

Marvin, YSK - who, if any, of the Council voted against this law?

Posted by Marvin, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 1:54 pm

Only John Barton voted against it and Larry Klein was absent

Posted by Geogre, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 3:42 pm

Welcome to our little nanny state Palo Alto. We live in a land ruled by eco-idiots. Excuse me as I vomit in my last few remaining plastic bags from the Whole Foods.

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 4:05 pm

I do not approve of this ban, but I do use reusable grocery bags and refuse bags when I do not need them, but I still have a stack of plastic bags which I periodically recycle. These plastic bags come from produce, bread (often in cellophane as well as plastic bags), 6 packs of socks or underwear, and from the occasional purchase made by a family member, dry cleaning or returning something I have previously lent, etc.

For those who need to put diapers or dog poop in plastic, bread and produce bags are ideal and the bread bags in particular are clean enough to carry in your pocket or in your car for trash bags. They are also good for wet waste in your garbage. I do buy the right sized bags for my trash bags, but they are used multiple times before I decide that they must be thrown out because I put wet and messy waste in bread bags first.

I do not approve the ban because banning anything will make the commodity more desirable. We don't need bans; we do need common sense. If anyone is responsible (which I doubt) for dumping bags in creeks, they will still dump bags in creeks even with a ban. They will just be different types of bags or containers.

Can we also ban beer in cans which are also dumped as litter by those so inclined and cause just as many problems in our parks and elsewhere?

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 4:12 pm

Can we ban our City Council from making any more philisophical or idealogical decisions until they make a few common sense ones? Like making it easier to do business in Palo Alto instead of being a giant road block, fixing our infrastructure, lowering our utility rates, welcoming Stanford and their assests, realizing that Palo Alto is only a destination for those who live and work here, not tourists...

Posted by TwoSides, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 4:29 pm

Can we just ban the City Council? I don't like being treated like a child either. If they want to treat me as a child, tell me what I can and cannot do; then I shall act like a child and do my grocery shopping in a nearby City and bring ALL my groceries home in plastic bags....do the childish contrarian thing. I don't want to let my City council down, after all.

Posted by TwoSides, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 4:31 pm

Seriously? The main job of the City Council right now should be striving not to lose more businesses and to attract new business. That would bring in good revenue for the City and keep people shopping in, employed in and supporting our City. Win, win, win.

Posted by George, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 4:36 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by neighbor, a resident of another community, on Mar 18, 2009 at 4:55 pm

I thought Palo Alto was pro-environment --- oh yes, only on issues that don't involve them. I forgot.

QUESTION: Is it really a terrible burden to keep cloth bags in your car and take them into stores with you? Re-usable shopping bags are now sold in various sizes in stores everywhere...been to Trader Joe's lately?)

ANOTHER QUESTION: Does the PA ordinance just require that people pay a little fee for plastic bags if they want them, or if they forgot their shopping bag? In European stores they charge a few cents for plastic bags --- you'd be surprised how fast the plastic bag habit fades once they cost even just a few pennies.

Posted by Kate, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 5:45 pm

Re: the 'bag vote'. Klein was conveniently 'out of town". Barton, usually on the eco-bandwagon, voted against because he feared the city could be sued - like Manhattan Beach (which lost the suit and $$$$). The rest I don't remember all of them - Burt yes. He said in effect, being sued-be damned. Full speed ahead. Kishimoto was all for it. Klein said he did not read these posts because of the negativity. Yet the council has a goal of 'civic engagement' and are now paying $6K a month for something called "Peak Democracy". Rarely more than 25 people sign in on opinions afterd registering and getting a password and on-and-on ad nauseum. The council could feel the pulse of the city and escalating civic blood pressure by reading the Weekly Town Square. Klein ran on a platform of fiscal overhaul and prudence. Politicians do that - anything to get elected. He has a short memory. Off with their heads.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

If the city council is incapable of dealing with plastic bags perhaps they need to get out of the way of those who can.

Notice they don't pick up on any conservation features that affect them, like the replacement of junketeering with teleconferencing, or surrendering their reserved parking spaces.

Posted by Manhattan Beach Hope, a resident of another community, on Mar 18, 2009 at 7:01 pm

Please don't blame me personally for the approach taken by Manhattan Beach, but I do live there.

Yes, a judge ruled that an EIR is required before the Manhattan Beach ban can take effect. But to correct Kate's above post, the judge did not rule against the ban, nor has it cost Manhattan Beach "$$$$".

The Manhattan Beach City Council has stated a desire to appeal the finding; meanwhile, voluntary compliance by a number of local merchants and reusable bag giveaways are greatly increasing awareness.

But yes, I would suggest that there is now much local sentiment that our Council's efforts are better focused on the financial and budgetary challenges of both our City and, tangentially but under much greater fiscal pressure, our Manhattan Beach Unified School District.

Posted by Mike Alexander, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 18, 2009 at 7:55 pm

We got along just fine without plastic grocery bags until they were implemented, when, in the late 60's? For most things, they ARE single use, after which they're full of little holes and tears, not water-tight, not smell-proof, etc. I find many more second-uses for paper grocery bags than for the plastic ones. And the plastic produce bags (which are not banned) are great for air-tight storage, picking up poop, etc.

In fairness to Council, I think they speak well on this issue for most Palo Altans. The bags are a blight. Good riddance. Get used to it ... the times they are a-changin'.

Posted by George, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 19, 2009 at 7:28 am

Mike,

I have the CHOICE of paper or plastic. Why don't you let people vote with their ability to choose which one they want. We reuse the plastic bags all the time. Don't be a nanny.

-George

Posted by YouShouldKnow, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 19, 2009 at 10:30 am

I'm still waiting for Councilman Burt to come by to administer my ten o'clock bottle and diaper change. I'm totally helpless without him. Thank God he's out there making my decisions for my own good.

His patronizing attitude is off putting. I believe I can be concerned for the environment all by my bewwy self without Big Daddy Burt setting himself up as my social conscience.

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 19, 2009 at 11:58 am

I hope the City Council now reads the real news in Palo Alto.

We are worried about a gang related shooting near three schools at the time when kids are coming home from school or playing in a park. This shooter is still out there.

We are worried about High Speed Rail and what it will do to Palo Alto.

We are worried about our school textbooks and whether young kids will have to cross an expressway to get to school, or if parents will have to drive them to the other side of town to find a school with space.

We are worried about many things. The council appears to be worried about plastic bags which the County is already doing something about.

Please find out the real issues in Palo Alto and do something about them. Please let us decide whether we want to use plastic bags, paper bags or reusable bags. We are educated enough to make decisions about these things, but we are unable to do anything about the bigger issues. That is the City's job and we can't do much about that, they can and should.

Posted by Larry Breed, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Mar 19, 2009 at 1:37 pm

I oppose the City Council position.

We use paper, plastic, and fabric bags in our house. We re-use the paper and plastic bags in many ways. Right next to the paper towel roll in the kitchen is a box of reusable plastic bags, ready to go to work lining wastebaskets or holding paint brushes, diapers, dog poop, or ant-attracting food scraps. When they're no longer reusable they go into a bigger plastic bag that we eventually take to a recycling center. What's hard about this?

Paper and fabric will not substitute for all the purposes that plastic serves. I feel good making multiple uses of the bags. I will feel wasteful doing without them.

Posted by George, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 19, 2009 at 1:46 pm

Resident,

Here's the problem. The council is the first stepping stone in politics for these self serving public servants. Let's toss them out of office. We just need some normal people in there spending our money focusing on safety, quality infrastructure that we need, and education. That's the way to get the attention of future town council members.

-George

Posted by Sharon, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 19, 2009 at 2:22 pm

Here is the latest proposal Web Link

"Global Warming Alarmists Propose Limiting Population ... to the Point of Extinction---

the authors purposely fail to mention that their proposal puts humanity on a fast-tack extinction curve, as reproduction rates fall below population replacement rates. Surely, as statisticians they know this well. Within a few generations, there wouldn’t be any one around to measure, least wise care, about carbon emissions.

We would all be dead."

Posted by YSK, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Mar 20, 2009 at 9:55 am

BREAKING NEWS: California's jobless rate climbed to 10.5 percent in February, the second month of double-digit unemployment.

JOBS! Attract new business. Stop chasing away existing business.

Posted by marianne, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 20, 2009 at 10:04 am

From the comment above: "Looks like the Council went ahead and voted in the plastic bag ban. Of note, as reported in today's Daily Post, a judge invalidated a similar ban in Manhattan Beach because an environmental impact report was not done.

Surprising that in Palo Alto, which requires an EIR for almost everything except crossing the street, the Council could not be bothered to get one. I guess when you are in a hurry to fatten up your resume and show off your "environmental" credentials, there is no time for EIRs."

I agree whole heartedly! Drekmeier has never been about more than his own resume, his own lust of power. An environmental impact report!?! Why bother?? If it sounds good, that's enough. Someone more genuinely concerned with the environment would have insisted on a report... so much is counter-intuitive when it comes to science/ environmental well-being, but then, how would Drekmeier know?

Posted by Nonette Hanko, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 22, 2009 at 10:03 am

Could Palo Alto On Line publish the ordinance pertaining to the ban on plastic bags approved by the council. It would be nice to know what the council voted for.

Nonette

Posted by Me Too, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Mar 22, 2009 at 10:16 am

If most Palo Altans agreed with the ban, of course there would be no need for one - they would simply not choose plastic bags and this would be a non-issue. The vocal minority, including those on the council, thinks it is widely supported because, well, all THEIR friends support it. Reminds me of PAUSD instituting "ski week" vacation - all MY friends going skiing, doesn't everyone??

The lack of awareness and focus of the council is really amazing. Wake up guys. If we went to geographic districts to gain better representation, much of this silliness would be a thing of the past. What are the chances of that happening?

Posted by AnnasMom, a resident of the Southgate neighborhood, on Mar 23, 2009 at 9:34 am

I was in favor of the plastic bag ban, but after looking into it more (and coming up with some of the same details and reasoning as Ken Holmes) I am no longer sure it's the right thing.

However, I disagree that plastic in the waterways is not a problem. It's a serious problem. Water is an increasingly precious and limited resource, and the waterways support all kinds of aquatic life that is part of a food chain that ultimately supports us. So I'm inclined now to address the problem the ban is intended to address -- littering with plastic bags. I think littering should be fined much more heavily than $25. In Santa Cruz, there is a ban on dogs on a state park beach. The park rangers have mobile computing technology that allows them to access a database that shows past infractions. The first violation does not incur a fine, but you have to give your name. A second infraction costs $80 and I think it goes up after that.

The question is: How could we fund greater enforcement? As many have pointed out, we are short on police enforcement against crime.

The other thing is: I am confused about the anger over biodegradable plastic bags. I believe that Whole Foods has increasingly switched to providing them in the produce section and before that offered them at checkout. They seem to work well... Moving to recycled plastic throughout the stores (not just groceries and not just at checkout) makes more sense to me. There are corn based plastics that biodegrade. At least when used as outdoor utensils they are very sturdy and workable.

Reuse of all shopping bags really does seem like the best answer to reducing waste. A charge on both paper and plastic would support the transition. I've had the same reusable bags for years now; they don't wear out. If you decide to transition, cloth shopping bags aren't the only answer. Whole foods offers very sturdy, paper-bag-shaped, recycled-plastic bags that are for reuse (they are not really pricey, but enough so that you wouldn't throw them away). Spills can be easily wiped up. Put your meats or other potentially leaky things at the bottom of your bag, or together in a single shopping bag so that you don't need to worry about meat juice on cardboard cereal boxes and the like.

I don't agree that most people are making the transition on their own, at least not very quickly. That's why I would support a charge (to offset environmental costs) for single-use paper and plastic bags at checkout (and elsewhere in the supply chain). It's kind of like making other pollutants cost what they really cost in environmental and health terms.

Posted by V., a resident of Mountain View, on Mar 23, 2009 at 8:20 pm

Just another design to separate you from your money. From the posts here doesn't seem that the community supports this and yet it's passed.

More pressure on elected "leaders" is needed here. If the economy continues to head south, people might actually start getting angry enough to stop this type of excessive, ridiculous taxation.

Posted by not a Palo Altan, a resident of Portola Valley, on Mar 23, 2009 at 10:22 pm

Thank goodness I'm no longer in Palo alto. The self-righteousness of the council is sickening.

If I don't use the multi-use grocery bags for the mulitude of purposes I currently do, then I'll I'll be using some other plastic bags to line my trash can, carry my lunch, pick up the dog poop, etc.

As for those supposedly green shopping bags "Made in China" by near slave labor, does the council know just how toxic those bags are? I don't even like to smell their chemical odor, far less put my food in them. We worry about toxic lunch bags for school kids, yet we ignore the threat of those imported bags.

One more reason not to shop in Palo Alto.

Posted by wondering, a resident of Menlo Park, on Mar 24, 2009 at 7:46 am

I guess we will be BUYING Glad or Ziplock trash bags now. The difference is what? Because they are BOUGHT they are less likely to be acquired by the homeless and therefore less likely to end up in the creek? But they are also plastic bags that hurt the environment, so what difference was the Council thinking of? The one I mention?

Posted by Dominique, a resident of another community, on Mar 26, 2009 at 8:43 am

This IS the right time to ban plastic bags. Despite what you anti-reuable bag people say, the environment is deteriorating every second. While our generation might not see the damage done, the next will. We have to act NOW, not wait until it's too late.

Try going to www.poksak.com

Posted by keeley, a resident of the Green Acres neighborhood, on Apr 13, 2009 at 11:34 am

i do not like plastic bags at all.

Posted by earthmom, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on May 6, 2009 at 10:01 pm

I'm for many green solutions but this bag thing is DUMB! Think this through - instead of taking home plastic bags to use as trash can liners, now people will BUY plastic bags in the store to carry home in their fabric bags.... costing US more, not saving a thing for the environment, but here's the REAL REASON for the ban - it saves the store a couple of cents per person! It's insane.

Next what? Turn off all of the lights in the grocery store and tell the customers to bring flashlights! That would save so much energy! Think of it! Next rent out the parking lot to cattle ranchers, and make the customers WALK to your store! Think of the savings! WOW!

It's so stupid. All of the packaging inside of those stores .... not giving bags does one thing - it causes customers to BUY LESS, you stupid stores!!!