Page 4 October 6, 2016 How Grocery Bags Got on the November Ballot By Rob McCarthy Grocery bags appear on the Nov. 8 ballot, which may surprise Californians who thought a plastic-bag ban was decided by lawmakers. They would be correct. The California Legislature in 2014 banned stores from using the thin-plastic carryout bags out of a concern that the plastic litters coastal waters and harms wildlife. Gov. Jerry Brown signed the bill, called SB 270. The law was to take effect on Jan. 1, 2015, except the plastic-bag industry blocked it by declaring its intent to take its case for a repeal to the California voters. The industry immediately announced a petition-gathering drive to put the plasticbag law on a referendum. The American Progressive Bag Alliance funded the signaturegathering drive that qualified Prop. 67. The alliance has spent $6.1 million to defeat the legislative plastic bag ban, according to the Secretary of State’s Office in Sacramento. It’s been widely reported that out-of-state manufacturers of store checkout bags are the major funders of Prop. 67. Though the plastics industry is bankrolling both Prop. 67 and Prop. 65, they aren’t asking for a yes on both. The alliance of plastic-bag makers urges a no vote on Prop. 67. Why a no vote on a measure they pushed themselves? It’s because the alliance is attempting to overturn an existing law, so the question before the voters is whether to keep the statewide plastic-bag ban. Yes to preserve the ban; no to reject it. It’s a little complicated. Environmental groups oppose what they see as a proliferation of plastic bags along the coast and in sensitive habitat areas. They urge a yes Prop. 67 to support the legislative action and activate the bag ban, currently on hold. Prop. 67 isn’t a choice between paper or plastic at the checkout stand. The Legislature forbid stores and select retailers from giving customers “single-use” plastic or paper carryout bags any longer. Stores can sell them for 10 cents apiece, but the bags will be paper or a higher-grade plastic that is reusable. That’s the law, as it was written. Prop. 67 isn’t a blanket ban on all plastic bags. Clear bags for separating produce items won’t be banned if the referendum is approved. Also exempt from the law are bags for meat, bread, bulk food and perishable items. Most grocery stores, convenience stores, large pharmacies and liquor stores are affected by the bag ban. The Official Voter Information Guide The Jewelry Source 337 Main St. El Segundo. 310-322-7110 www.jewelrysourceUSA.com ©2007 The lure that gets more than a nibble There are two ballot measures for Californians to decide about store plastic bags. describes the referendum as a vote on the “ban on single-use plastic bags,” without mentioning paper bags. The voter guide mailed out last week explains what a yes or no vote on Prop. 67 will do, starting on page 110. Surfrider Foundation regional manager Bill Hickman thinks the wording of Prop. 67 is clear, and he expects the vote to be close. “Surfrider is focusing on the simple message Yes on 67,” said Hickman, who manages Southern California chapters down to San Diego. “The voter guide and ballot info is clear if you read through it all. The advantages of voting YES on prop 67 shine through, if you can get through all 200+ pages of the voter guide,” he added. The Sierra Club also favors Prop. 67, saying that “a yes will say no to big out-of-state plastic manufacturers who put this measure on the ballot to try to stop enforcement of the statewide ban.” More than 100 environmental groups have joined the yes on 67 campaign. Critics of the plastic bag-ban include leaders from California’s manufacturing and technology sectors, taxpayer and senior advocates. They refer to the statewide ban as a “hidden bag tax” on consumers who will be charged $300 million per year. Critics argue for a no vote on Prop. 67, saying that the Legislature gave grocers a “sweetheart deal” by letting them keep the profits from the sale of carryout sacks. Leaders with the California Manufacturing & Technology Association, the California Taxpayer Protection Committee and the California Senior Advocates League are asking voters to reject the plastic-bag law. In a ballot argument in the Voter Information Guide, the trio characterize the original ban as anti-consumer. it helped the grocers and labor unions, and the public paid for it. “The Legislature could have dedicated the new tax revenue to protect the environment, but their goal wasn’t about protecting the environment,” they wrote in the Official Voter Information Guide. The November ballot is stuffed with propositions asking about pocketbook issues, from issuing school bonds to taxing tobacco products. Prop. 67 is placed last among the 17 ballot questions for voters to decide, and the high number generates some concern at the Surfrider Foundation. That’s because there are two ballot items dealing with grocery sacks. Prop. 65 is an initiative all about who gets the money from any sales of carryout bags should the bag-ban referendum be upheld by a majority. Either the money goes to the stores or to a state-run wildlife program, depending on the outcome of Prop. 67. If the referendum pases, stores would keep the money from the sale of 10 cent plastic bags and paper carryout sacks. If Prop. 65 and the referendum pass together, the money from the sale of grocery and shopping bags would go to state environmental programs. A defeat of Propositions 65 and 67 would end the bag ban, and no money would change hands, according to the Voter Information Guide. If you find that confusing, you’re probably not alone. Tim Allison, a political science lecturer at California State University, Channel Islands, suspects the plastics industry qualified two ballot measures about a single issue to confuse voters and divide support among environmentalists, grocers and unions for keeping the plastic-bag ban. “I think it was meant to confuse and split the coalition that would be in favor of 67,” he said, referring to the distribution of money from the sale of paper and stronger plastic bags. The more complicated a ballot issue is, the less likely it is to pass, according to Allison. Such is the case on Nov. 8 with two grocery-bag questions on the same ballot. Some supporters of the plastics ban might reject the idea of grocers adding to their profits, and cast a no vote on both ballot items, Allison thinks. The Voter Information Guide is more than 200 pages, containing so much information about candidates and statewide issues that voters might not properly understand all of the issues, Allison said. It’s out of the hands of local and state officials to simplify the November ballot, too. The law requires all statewide ballot measures be put to voters at one time in even-number years. An official with the plastics industry alliance that is behind both shopping-bag measures says polling numbers show that Californians don’t want the stores to keep the profits from the sale of 10-cent carryout bags. Lee Califf, executive director with the American Progressive Bag Alliance, says in a press release voters favor bag fees for public programs. Prop 65 “gives voters the opportunity to make sure that any state-mandated fee will go to environmental causes, which is what voters thought they were getting in the first place” when the Legislature passed the plastic-bag ban, Califf said. Environmental groups, including Surfrider, are not taking a position on Prop. 65. Surfrider wants to avoid confusing voters and would rather focus on the referendum that asks whether the Legislature got it right when it banned the plastic carryout bags from stores. Allison, the political science lecturer, expects lawsuits to be filed if 65 and 67 pass. Even if voters approve both Prop. 65 and 67, it’s unclear how, and if, they would be implemented. Sacramento lawmakers reviewed a scenario in which both measures are approved by the voters. Members of the Senate Environmental Quality and the Assembly Natural Resources committee came to a conclusion that the courts may need to decide how to combine the two, if voters approve both the referendum and the initiative about the money from the sale of bags. •
MBSun_100616_FNL
To see the actual publication please follow the link above