If cities like Long Beach and Calabasas have banned single use plastic bags, many South Coast environmental activists are mystified — and exasperated — they can’t persuade the Santa Barbara City Council to do the same. But after a lengthy, if nutrient rich, war of words this Tuesday, the Santa Barbara council — controlled by a more conservative majority — shied away from the more dramatic action demanded by the Community Environmental Council, Channelkeeper, and a new, more theatrical outfit of ad hoc advocates called Save the Mermaids.
Instead, the council voted for a more mild-mannered proposal that would require major supermarkets and produce dispensers to offer their customers reusable tote bags at affordable prices, post signs inside and outside their premises stating such bags are available, and training their employees in the art of encouraging customers to switch to reusable bags. For the past three years, City Hall has merely encouraged such voluntary efforts, while also spending more than $35,000 on a “Where’s Your Bag?” PR campaign designed to encourage use of tote bags.
Councilmember Dale Francisco — clear leader of the conservative majority — demonstrated yet again that he’s the most procedurally agile operator on the council. Francisco — up for reelection this fall — expressed enthusiastic support for taking the issues to city voters in the form of a ballot initiative that would impose a tax on both plastic and paper bags. While that won by a vote of 5 to 2 — with councilmembers Frank Hotchkiss and Randy Rowse opposing — Mayor Helene Schneider (who supported the plastic bag ban) all but called the action an empty gesture. By asking City Attorney Steve Wiley a series of technical and legal questions, Schneider sought to show that the soonest such a ballot measure could actually make it to city voters was 2013. To defer action to such a date, she said was “to do nothing.” Still, she concluded, “It’s better than nothing.”
In recent years, plastic bags have emerged as the new environmental battleground du jour. Symbolically, they represent everything that’s wrong with what environmentalists decry as the mindlessly destructive “use-and-toss culture” that’s killing off the planet in general and sea life in particular. Immune to the normal process of biodegradation, plastic bags don’t just persist in nature, but they — and other forms of cast-off plastic — accumulate throughout the oceans as vast pseudo land masses that horrify the moral sensibilities environmental activists. Because plastic bags are often mistaken for jellyfish, they are swallowed whole by whales, sea turtles, and some marine birds.
In certain instances, the bags can be pooped out. But in others, the bags serve to choke and clog the intestines of the animals that ingested them, resulting in starvation and death. Unlike climate change — which seems inevitable, inexorable, and impervious to individual action — plastic bags pose a problem that can actually be solved with a minimum of personal sacrifice and inconvenience. Hence its popularity as an issue. But for conservatives — like Frank Hotchkiss and Michael Self on the City Council — plastics bags are yet another pseudo problem to trumped up and exaggerated by environmental hysterics, ever in search of a regulatory cure. To the extent there actually is a problem, they insist, education, cooperation — and new technological quick fixes — are the solution, not legislation and regulation. To an unusual degree, the debate has been colorful, contentious, educational, and illuminating. But as usual, few minds have been changed along the way.
To the extent any facts are really known about plastic bags in Santa Barbara, an estimated 29 million a year are given out within city limits. Of those, about 5 percent are recycled. Most wind up in landfills. And to some indeterminate degree, others are blown hither, thither, and yon, littering creeks, beaches, and waterways. City Parks employees have reported plastic bags are not an issue. But Creeks Division workers reported that plastic bags were found at all 268 littered sites they cleaned up last year. Forty-two plastic bags were found along a quarter-mile stretch of Sycamore Creek on one day. And the Coastal Commission reported that during countywide beach cleanup efforts, 700 plastic bags have been picked up in each of the past two years by volunteer crews. Where Santa Barbara’s bags actually go once on the loose — and how many aquatic stomachs they clog — no one really knows.
When City Hall gave birth to the “Where’s Your Bag?” campaign, 12 major produce outlets signed up. Of those, only three have shown sustained interest. Of those, Tri-County Produce has been the real star. Owner John Dixon gives customers who use reusable bags paper tickets worth five cents each which they can “donate” to one of numerous charities. To date, Dixon has redeemed $5,000 worth of these tickets, the equivalent, he said, to 100,000 reusable bag trips. Likewise, Lazy Acres has gotten high marks for its efforts. And Trader Joe’s employees — trained to engage customers in conversation — always make a point to thank shoppers who bring their own bags. Of the big chains, Albertsons has clearly shown the most initiative. This spring, its Carpinteria store stopped offering paper or plastic bags to its shoppers altogether and experienced no loss of business or customer loyalty as a result. And most recently, Gold Coast Recycling — which handles the recyclable market for the South Coast — has just agreed to take plastic bags. For the first time, South Coast residents can now put plastic bags in their blue curbside recycle bins.
But for Kathi King of the Community Environmental Council (CEC), Kyra Redmond of Channelkeeper, and Eric Cardenas of LoaTree, these successes are far too little and far too late. Increased recycling, argued King, is hardly the solution. It means shipping the bags to China, where they are typically incinerated in worksites notable for poor working conditions. Voluntary efforts, added Redmond, have been a bust. And given that Santa Barbara gave birth to the environmental movement, insisted Cardenas, the City Council should provide leadership by passing a ban. Upstaging everyone was Emma Cohen of Save the Mermaids, who accurately anticipated that Councilmember Frank Hotchkiss would argue that plastic bags pose no health threat to sea life — as he had the last time the matter came before the council. Cohen and her fellow mermaids brought a serving tray stacked with plastic sandwiches, which she offered with sweet sarcasm to councilmembers who thought plastic bags could be easily digested. She warned them the food might be a little “chewey,” and as an hors d’oeuvre, she offered a few bags. If 25 percent of the countries on the planet banned plastic bags, she argued, so could Santa Barbara.
Not this week. Playing the role of skeptical contrarian to the hilt, Hotchkiss expressed confidence that plastic bags posed only an inconvenience for sea creatures that ingested them, not a deadly peril. The bags could be pooped out, he argued; life would go on. “I don’t think this is a scourge on the planet,” he declared. “I don’t think we will save it by banning plastic bags.” He took exception to Kathi King’s statement that plastic bags constitute a failure of consumer culture. “I think it’s a symptom of our consumer culture that is working,” he added. “We all use them for their convenience.” To the extent plastic bags do pose a problem, he said, it’s an issue best solved by new microbes “for which plastic is turkey and steak.” As for reusable tote bags, Hotchkiss expressed concerns about how sanitary they are. At one point, he suggested inserting language into the proposed new ordinance instructing people on the need to wash reusable bags.
Hotchkiss and Councilmember Michael Self quibbled, fussed, and minimized the numbers provided by City Hall’s solid waste planners. Self said she’d been recycling long before it became fashionable because it was the right thing to do, not because of what she called environmental guilt-tripping. She took exception to the use of the political term “progressive,” adding, “I have an alternative word I’d like to insert — dictatorial.” Self added, “We are being more enlightened not because of government dictates and mandates but because we’re better educated.” Self then objected, “I don’t want government telling me what kind of light bulb I can have.” She suggested environmentalists might soon be clamoring for restrictions on chip bags or the plastic film used to cover meat, as well. “It’s a slippery slope,” she warned.
Councilmember Randy Rowse expressed a conviction that plastics in the ocean posed a real problem, citing his personal experience as a boater and surfer. But he expressed doubt that passing an ordinance was the best way to solve it. He called new ordinances “the graveyard of good intentions,” arguing they gave people the false impression that a problem has been addressed. Instead, he expressed hope that councilmembers could meet with executives from the major supermarkets and ask them get more involved in the solution. To motivate them, he said, City Hall needs the viable threat of a more “draconian” regulation.
Councilmember Francisco argued against passing a ban, predicting it would not survive legal challenge. He, too, favored an extension of the voluntary program. But he said the issue was sufficiently important that the council should put it to city voters. But rather than put a proposed ban to city voters, he argued City Hall should ask if they wanted to impose a new tax on themselves for both paper and plastic bags.
Councilmembers Bendy White and Grant House strongly favored an outright ban on plastic bags and the imposition of a fee on paper bags. But both clearly understood they didn’t have the votes. Mayor Helene Schneider took exception the anti-regulation arguments advanced by the council’s conservative majority. Sometimes, she argued, government has to step in and pass clear rules and regulations, as with the Clean Water Act. The voluntary approach, she said, does not work when dealing with known health risks like asbestos. Speaking in mock outrage, Schneider said, “We’re forcing builders not to put asbestos in buildings anymore. Oh my god!” She was equally dismissive of Rowse’s suggestion that City Hall could now enlist supermarket executives into a meaningful effort to promote reusable bags. She predicted the exchange would go along the lines of, ”I know we asked you already, but we really mean it this time.”
When it came to Francisco’s ballot suggestion, Schneider was more oblique, but no less skeptical. A ballot measure, she said, would be meaningful only if it occurred this year. Given the legal and environmental scrutiny that any ballot measure must receive, there’s no way the measure could qualify for this November’s city elections. After that, the next regularly scheduled city election takes place 2013. “To say 2013 is to not do anything,” she lamented. And she suggested Francisco favored asking voters to tax themselves — as opposed to imposing a ban — because tax increases tend to be harder to pass. Councilmember Rowse, who had argued that supermarket executives needed a viable threat to bring them to the bargaining table, wound up voting against Francisco’s measure without giving any explanation. Schneider, for all her misgivings, went along with it and the expansion of the “Where’s Your Bag?” program, explaining, “It’s better than nothing.”
Related Links
- Council Duo Suffocates Plastic Bag Ban [ April 20, 2011 ]



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace







Previous Month



Comments
Had enough of these Tea Party Tea BAGGERS?
Vote accordingly for the November election.
And we all look forward to some Mermaids challenging and beating Hotchkiss in 2013.
And it is so, so obvious why Francisco does not want this on the ballot in 2011 when he himself is trying to get reelected.
Let's all give Francisco plenty of time to practice his cello.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
July 13, 2011 at 3:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Leave it to Santa Barabara to want to institute such an idiotic ban. Don't they have other things to worry about, like banning gangs from the city? What a bunch of tools!
waz (anonymous profile)
July 13, 2011 at 3:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"For the past three years, City Hall has merely encouraged such voluntary efforts, while also spending more than $35,000 on a “Where’s Your Bag?” PR campaign designed to encourage use of tote bags."
Really!!!
waz (anonymous profile)
July 13, 2011 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Save the Mermaids!
http://savethemermaids.net/
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
July 13, 2011 at 5:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, Randy, addressing a problem is certainly a way to fool people into thinking the problem is being addressed. Sound logic.
And please, people, stop trying to confuse microbe-brained Hotchkiss with facts.
And if our local tea-parrot Self decides to hook up her sewage outlet directly to the ocean, don't you dictators even try to take away her god-given right to do so.
pk (anonymous profile)
July 13, 2011 at 9:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If Hotchkiss were present when cotton underwear was invented to replace fig leaves, he'd be advocating a label warning of bacterial growth, LOL!!!
That just goes to show you how ideologically-driven and insecure Hotchkiss and Self are. If they perceive they're being "talked down to", they will resist any change, even if it benefits their everyone. Poor little babies.
BTW, I've got friends down in Calabasas where they just banned plastic bags. They think its a great idea and will help keep the world a good place to live for their kids and grand kids.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
July 13, 2011 at 10:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Viva, plastic bags! It's none of the city's business. Work on real problems, not feel good B.S.
waz (anonymous profile)
July 14, 2011 at 8:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So if these "conservatives" really wanted a 'market solution' they'd promote a requirement to charge for the damn bag >>> The "bag" is a product and there should be a charge for it. If I bring reusable bags to the market/store then the people that require single use disposable 'paper or plastic' 'for free' are really being subsidized by my reusable bag use. So where is my choice? I pay or 'subsidize' for your bags through my purchase.
But this is feigned phobia about microbes in reusable bags; just evidence that this is one of those divisive conservative-republican-tea party wedge-issues, endlessly debated for political advantage at election time.
So here's the right-wing campaign slogan; 'Be afraid of CFLs, Smart Meters, Re-Usable Bags, Bulb-Outs, 60' Buildings, Wind Turbines, Solar Panels, Two-Lane Roads and Marrying Homosexuals. Vote for Me!'
I wonder if phobics will ever be able to use a handbag, wallet, doorknob or steering wheel after these tea-party types get through with them.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
July 14, 2011 at 1:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This just in ...
Plastic bag bans upheld by California Supreme Court:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-...
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
July 15, 2011 at 2:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Don't they have other things to worry about, like banning gangs from the city?"
--waz
That you apparently can't walk and chew gum at the same time does not imply the same condition for others.
SezMe (anonymous profile)
July 15, 2011 at 3:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
These idiots can't walk and chew gum at the same time. Haven't you learned that by now? I'll bet you were one of the idiots that thought that stupid blue line was a good idea. It's not a matter of doing two things at once, It's a matter of doing the things that are worthwhile, and refraining from doing the "feel good" bs that these morons tend to wrap themselves up in. I see plenty of people with reusable bags in supermarkets that have plastic bags available. Do you know why? Because they made a choice to do that. Others, like myself, choose to use the plastic bags. What ever happened to all that pro-choice you lefties are always wrapping youselves in? Or, does that only apply to killing babies?
waz (anonymous profile)
July 15, 2011 at 8:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree with waz. I think local grocers already offer incentives to people to reuse bags and I like the option of plastic bags. They are easy to recycle. That they are not better recycled is not good but that is the free market system. I would think alot of products could be made with them. Bench seats. What about plastic garbage bags people use. Do you want to ban those too? When your do gooder volunteers go out to clean up roadsides and beaches what you puttin' the trash in eh? I reuse my grocery bag for trash bag regularly. If bag gets lose from dump maybe operate the dump better. You think everybody will stop putting trash in plastic bags? Get real.
rabbitrun (anonymous profile)
July 15, 2011 at 9:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We need to eliminate plastic bags for safety reasons. Too many SB right-wingers have nearly suffocated to death when attempting to use them.
EatTheRich (anonymous profile)
July 15, 2011 at 12:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think recycling isn't such a bad idea, as long as we don't keep recycling our politicians.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 15, 2011 at 10:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"waz" did not mention Hitler, but the "killing babies" quip is a close second of irrelevant frustration.
You would be more persuasive trying to argue that sea turtles really do digest plastic bags as Frank Hotchkiss said.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
July 16, 2011 at 5:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ireland, Italy, and China have all banned plastic bags. Is it too much to ask our City Council members to do the right thing just because it is the right thing?
sallyt (anonymous profile)
July 17, 2011 at 4:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
In defense of poser Hollywood Hotchkiss and his reported theories of plastics' poopability; I did once, on Stearns Wharf, see a Great Dane poop out a load, in a plastic bag. I think it was one of those large food storage "baggies" but regardless the owners' son received a backhand for allowing the Dane to eat out of the kitchen trash. They all, human and canine continued on with their stroll while the plastic encase poop lay on the Wharf.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
July 18, 2011 at 6:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
John_Adams: What? Hitler? I'm talking about having a choice. You know, one of the many huge banners you lefties love to wave in everyone's faces, but only mean in a very narrow context. Sorry you couldn't figure that out. It must be odd, sitting around feeling good about yourself, trying to get a majority of people to do the stupid things that only a minority of people want to do. With each worthless little victory, comes a little more arrogance. An arrogance that needs to be fed with yet another goofy "green" project or feel good social program, of which you can tell us all how important it is, and how if we don't grasp its great import, we are so very ignorant. But, we're not to worry, since you know better than we, you will surely be there to protect us all from ourselves.
waz (anonymous profile)
July 18, 2011 at 8:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's...
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 21, 2011 at 7:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Since John_Adams was the first to mention Hitler, it is he that broke Godwin's Law.
By the way, if turtles can swallow plastic bags, can a plastic bag swallow a turtle?
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 21, 2011 at 7:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
With regard to DonMcDermotts last post: I think it's remarkable that the Great Dane you mentioned is so considerate that he/she had a pre-packaged bowel movement neatly wrapped up in a plastic bag so that all the owners had to do was pick up the bag and dispose of it in a proper receptacle.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 21, 2011 at 7:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)