Bag Tax Meets Resistance Outside of Seattle

Port Townsend, Washington, wants to do something about disposable plastic bags. The question is, “But what?”

Although they acknowledge that plastic bags are not the best choice, downtown business merchants have resisted a ban proposed by the Bring Your Own Bag and Bottle (BYOB) group which would make it illegal for Port Townsend retailers to distribute them. Because of that, BYOB has reworded its petition to propose a charge to consumers asking for any kind of bag at retail stores instead of banning plastic bags altogether. Merchants are reluctant to do that as well.

An impasse! So, what to do? The members of BYOB are trying to go the petition-signing route, but such things are often hit-or-miss. In their case, they have raised over 800 signatures, but by their own admission it is not nearly enough yet to force more discussion. The group is also selling reusable bags for $5 as a fundraising tactic, and speaking to store owners privately about how far they would be willing to go for the environment.

BYOB has already discussed charging for bags with Safeway’s management. Bob Giesler, store manager, has said he is amenable to a bag fee, said [BYOB representative Ann] Katzenbach, since bags are a significant expense for the chain grocery.

All the usual arguments were brought up — a tax will insult our customers, paper bags are too expensive. (As if we were aiming for widespread paper bag use, anyway.) Interestingly enough, quite a few of the those vigilantly filibustering the bag tax/ban proposal were also representatives of alternative/eco-friendly stores and centers; even more interesting were their reasons given for their opposal:

A few merchants who could not attend the meeting still wanted their opinions heard. In an email to the Main Street Program, Nicole Beck of the Tree of Life Wellness Center wrote: “I am a strong candidate for the environment. I have a degree in environmental science and operate a local business that reuses and/or recycles anything possible and purchases products made from recycled materials whenever possible. I make responsible decisions for my own business and am irritated by the idea that someone would force me to make decisions that may not be best for me and my business.”

Another email from Ruth Marlow of The Candle Store echoed this sentiment. She rarely purchases new packing, wrapping and marketing supplies. Instead she uses what’s already out there, and a ban would only decrease her supply, forcing her to buy new products.

In her note to the Main Street Program, she wrote: “People want to be responsible for their impact on the planet. Allow people to make conscientious decisions and they may surprise you.”

They may surprise you. They may surprise you: that’s the operative word, there. It’s a nice thought, that the population at large wants a hand in having a positive impact on the environment, but the fact seems to be that those who consciously want to make an impact are doing it already. It would seem that the point of the proposal is not to preach to the eco-conscious choir, so much as it is to give everyone else a push. Major environmental change can’t happen if it’s only enacted by an elite few — everyone has to be on board. But, on the other hand, perhaps it’s cheaper to buy repurposed packing supplies? There has to be another reason for the opposition.

And so, the battle continues. At least both merchants and activists found one thing they could agree on: educate the public about the pros and cons of their decisions, and maybe eventually we’ll get somewhere.

Danke, Flickr!

Thursday, July 17th, 2008 at 9:10 am and is filed under The Daily. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.