SR 09-27-2016 13D 13.D
September 27, 2016
Council Meeting: September 27, 2016 Santa Monica, California
1 of 1
CITY CLERK’S OFFICE - MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson -Warren, City Clerk , Records & Elections Services
Department
Date : September 27, 2016
13.D Request of Councilmember O'Day for the City Council to adopt a resolution
in favor of Proposition 67 on the November 8, 2016 ballot to protect the ban
on plastic bags.
1444 9th Street ph 310 451 1550 info@healthebay.org
Santa Monica CA 90401 fax 310 496 1902 www.healthebay.org
September 26, 2016
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main St.
Santa Monica, CA 90401
RE: Item 13D - Support for City of Santa Monica to Endorse Proposition 67
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
On behalf of Heal the Bay, a non -profit environmental organization with over 15,000 members
dedicated to making the coastal waters and watersheds of greater Los Angeles safe, healthy, and clean,
we are writing to express support for the CityAofASantaAMonicaAendorsingACalifornia’sAPropositionA67 .
PropositionA67AisAtheAreferendumAtoAprotectACalifornia’sAplasticAbagAbanAlaw:A A“Yes”AvoteAonAPropositionA
67 keeps the bag ban in place. Our organization has been engaged in the effort to reduce the amount of
plastic litter in the environment throughout California,AandAareAveryAsupportiveAofACalifornia’sAsingle -use
plastic bag law passed in 2014, which would help eliminate one of the largest sources of litter found at
our regular beach and river cleanups. We strongly urge the Co uncil to pass the proposed resolution and
endorseAPropositionA67AinAanAeffortAtoAprotectACalifornia’sApreciousAandAvaluableAwaterways:
When Governor Brown signed SB 270 into law in 2014, California became the first state in the nation to
enact a comprehensive single-use bag law. Unfortunately, out-of -state members of the plastic bag
industry spent over $3 million on a signature-gathering campaign that ended up putting the ban on hold
until November 2016, when voters have to decide upon its fate at the ballot (Proposition 67). Like the
City of Santa Monica, over 150 municipalities across California have adopted local bans on plastic bags,
and many of these measures are also designed to curb distribution of paper bags, including those passed
by Los Angeles County, the City of Los Angeles, Manhattan Beach, Santa Monica, Pasadena, and
Sacramento.
Californians use an estimated 13 billion single-use plastic bags every year.1 Despite both voluntary and
statewide efforts to implement recycling programs, the statewide recycling rate for plastic bags remains
around five percent;2 the majority of single-use plastic bags – even if reused once or twice by consumers
–end up in our landfills or as part of the litter stream, polluting our inland and coastal communities and
wasting taxpayer dollars on cleanup costs.
Plastic bags are designed to be used for minutes, but persist in the environment without biodegrading.
They are also one of the largest forms of trash found in local waterways. In fact, a characterization
study of urban litter in storm drains and the Los Angeles River estimated that plastic bag litter makes up
as much as 25% of the litter stream.3 Once plastic debris, including plastic bags, reaches aquatic
environments, it may choke and starve wildlife, distribute nonnative and potentially harmful aquatic life,
absorb toxic chemicals, and degrade to micro-plastics that may subsequently make their way into the
food web.4 A 2012 study by the Convention on Biological Diversity found that 663 marine species have
1 “TheAProblemAWithAPlasticABags”ACaliforniansA gainstAWasteAhttp.//www:cawrecycles:org/the -problem-of -plastic-bags
2 County of Los Angeles. Dept. of Public Works . Los Angeles County Plastic Bag Study: Staff Report to the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors . Aug. 2007: 2. Print.
3 County of Los Angeles. Dept. of Public Works . Los Angeles County Plastic Bag Study: Staff Report to the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors . Aug. 2007: 24. Print.
4 BarnesAD:AK:A :,AGalganiAF:,AThompsonAR:AC:,ABarlazAM:A“ ccumulationAandAfragmentationAofAplasticAdebrisAinAglobalAenvironments:”A Phil. Trans.
R. Soc. B 364 (2009): 1985 –1998. Print.
Item 13-D
09/27/16
Item 13-D
09/27/16
1444 9th Street ph 310 451 1550 info@healthebay.org
Santa Monica CA 90401 fax 310 496 1902 www.healthebay.org
been impacted by marine plastic litter through entanglement and ingestion.5 Given the scope and
nature of this problem, any lasting solution must be widespread geographically.
The cleanup of litter from single-use bags puts an additional strain on our economy. California spends
approximately $25 million annually to landfill plastic bag waste.6 A 2012 report by the U.S.
EnvironmentalAProtectionA gencyAfoundACalifornia’sAcoastalAcitiesAandAcountiesAspendAaboutA$420AmillionA
each year to combat litter and curtail marine debris.6 These cleanup costs do not reflect the energy costs
associated with producing single-use bags, or the negative socioeconomic and environmental costs
associated with single-use bag litter. Ultimately, the costs to clean up plastic bag waste are borne by
taxpayers, and during a time of tight budgets, this money could be allocated to fund vital public services.
Also, plastic bags can clog catch basin inserts and screens thereby increasing local flood risks. Littered
streetsAandAbeachesAalsoAthreatenACalifornia’s ocean economy, valued at $43 billion. An estimated
408,000 jobs mostly in the tourism and recreation sectors are tied to the ocean economy.7
Many of the single-use bag ordinances enacted by local governments have changed consumer behavior
and have resulted in an increased use of reusable bags. For example, Los Angeles County announced
that its ordinance which bans plastic carryout bags and charges for paper carryout bags, and became
fully effective in 2012, has resulted in a 94% reduction in overall single-use bag usage (both plastic and
paper).8 Furthermore, single-use bag ordinances are effective in reducing plastic pollution. Since January
2012, the City of San Jose has prohibited distribution of all single-use bags except for recycled content
pa perAbags,AwhichAconsumersAmustApurchaseAforA10Acents:ATheACity’sA2012AlitterAsurveysAindicateAthatA
plasticAbagAlitterAhasAbeenAreducedA“approximatelyA89ApercentAinAtheAstormAdrainAsystemA:A:A:AwhenA
comparedAtoA]preordinance[AdataA:A:A:”9
Supporting Cali fornia’sAbagAbanAwillAbeAaAmajorAstepAinAreducingAtheAeconomicAwasteAandAenvironmentalA
impacts that single-use bags create. Municipalities and the general public throughout the state look to
cities such as Santa Monica for leadership on this issue and recognition that the restriction of free
distribution of single-use bags is the environmentally preferable alternative for protection of our aquatic
ecosystems. We urge you to endorse Proposition 67.
Thank you for your leadership on this critical environmental issue.
Sincerely,
Dana Roeber Murray, MESM
Senior Coastal Policy Manager
5 http://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts -67 -en.pdf 6 “Shopping? Take
ReusableABags!”ACalRecycle:A23ANov:A2011:AWeb:A
<http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/publiced/holidays/ReusableBags.htm >.
6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region 9. Sept. 2012. Web. <http://www.epa.gov/region9/marine debris/pdf/WestCoastCommsCost -
MngMarineDebris.pdf >.
7 Kidlow,AJ:AetAal:A(JulyA2005):A“California’sAOceanAEconomy,”AreportAtoAtheACaliforniaAResourcesA gency,Aprepa red by the National Ocean
Economics Program.
8 “ boutAtheABag:”ALosA ngelesACounty:AWeb:A http://dpw.lacounty.gov/epd/aboutthebag/.
9 Kerrie Romanow, City of San Jose, memorandum to Transportation & Environment Com. re : Bring Your Own Bag Ordinance Implementation
Results and Actions to Reduce EPS Foam Food Ware , 20 Nov. 2012. Web.
<http://www3.sanjoseca.gov/clerk/CommitteeAgenda/TE/20121203/TE20121203_d5.pdf>.
Item 13-D
09/27/16
Item 13-D
09/27/16
1444 9th Street ph 310 451 1550 info@healthebay.org
Santa Monica CA 90401 fax 310 496 1902 www.healthebay.org
September 26, 2016
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main St.
Santa Monica, CA 90401
RE: Item 13D - Support for City of Santa Monica to Endorse Proposition 67
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
On behalf of Heal the Bay, a non -profit environmental organization with over 15,000 members
dedicated to making the coastal waters and watersheds of greater Los Angeles safe, healthy, and clean,
we are writing to express support for the CityAofASantaAMonicaAendorsingACalifornia’sAPropositionA67 .
PropositionA67AisAtheAreferendumAtoAprotectACalifornia’sAplasticAbagAbanAlaw:A A“Yes”AvoteAonAPropositionA
67 keeps the bag ban in place. Our organization has been engaged in the effort to reduce the amount of
plastic litter in the environment throughout California,AandAareAveryAsupportiveAofACalifornia’sAsingle -use
plastic bag law passed in 2014, which would help eliminate one of the largest sources of litter found at
our regular beach and river cleanups. We strongly urge the Co uncil to pass the proposed resolution and
endorseAPropositionA67AinAanAeffortAtoAprotectACalifornia’sApreciousAandAvaluableAwaterways:
When Governor Brown signed SB 270 into law in 2014, California became the first state in the nation to
enact a comprehensive single-use bag law. Unfortunately, out-of -state members of the plastic bag
industry spent over $3 million on a signature-gathering campaign that ended up putting the ban on hold
until November 2016, when voters have to decide upon its fate at the ballot (Proposition 67). Like the
City of Santa Monica, over 150 municipalities across California have adopted local bans on plastic bags,
and many of these measures are also designed to curb distribution of paper bags, including those passed
by Los Angeles County, the City of Los Angeles, Manhattan Beach, Santa Monica, Pasadena, and
Sacramento.
Californians use an estimated 13 billion single-use plastic bags every year.1 Despite both voluntary and
statewide efforts to implement recycling programs, the statewide recycling rate for plastic bags remains
around five percent;2 the majority of single-use plastic bags – even if reused once or twice by consumers
– end up in our landfills or as part of the litter stream, polluting our inland and coastal communities and
wasting taxpayer dollars on cleanup costs.
Plastic bags are designed to be used for minutes, but persist in the environment without biodegrading.
They are also one of the largest forms of trash found in local waterways. In fact, a characterization
study of urban litter in storm drains and the Los Angeles River estimated that plastic bag litter makes up
as much as 25% of the litter stream.3 Once plastic debris, including plastic bags, reaches aquatic
environments, it may choke and starve wildlife, distribute nonnative and potentially harmful aquatic life,
absorb toxic chemicals, and degrade to micro-plastics that may subsequently make their way into the
food web.4 A 2012 study by the Convention on Biological Diversity found that 663 marine species have
1 “TheAProblemAWithAPlasticABags”ACaliforniansA gainstAWasteAhttp.//www:cawrecycles:org/the -problem-of -plastic-bags
2 County of Los Angeles. Dept. of Public Works . Los Angeles County Plastic Bag Study: Staff Report to the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors . Aug. 2007: 2. Print.
3 County of Los Angeles. Dept. of Public Works . Los Angeles County Plastic Bag Study: Staff Report to the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors . Aug. 2007: 24. Print.
4 BarnesAD:AK:A :,AGalganiAF:,AThompsonAR:AC:,ABarlazAM:A“ ccumulationAandAfragmentationAofAplasticAdebrisAinAglobalAenvironments:”A Phil. Trans.
R. Soc. B 364 (2009): 1985 –1998. Print.
Item 13-D
09/27/16
Item 13-D
09/27/16
1444 9th Street ph 310 451 1550 info@healthebay.org
Santa Monica CA 90401 fax 310 496 1902 www.healthebay.org
been impacted by marine plastic litter through entanglement and ingestion.5 Given the scope and
nature of this problem, any lasting solution must be widespread geographically.
The cleanup of litter from single-use bags puts an additional strain on our economy. California spends
approximately $25 million annually to landfill plastic bag waste.6 A 2012 report by the U.S.
EnvironmentalAProtectionA gencyAfoundACalifornia’sAcoastalAcitiesAandAcountiesAspendAaboutA$420AmillionA
each year to combat litter and curtail marine debris.6 These cleanup costs do not reflect the energy costs
associated with producing single-use bags, or the negative socioeconomic and environmental costs
associated with single-use bag litter. Ultimately, the costs to clean up plastic bag waste are borne by
taxpayers, and during a time of tight budgets, this money could be allocated to fund vital public services.
Also, plastic bags can clog catch basin inserts and screens thereby increasing local flood risks. Littered
streetsAandAbeachesAalsoAthreatenACalifornia’s ocean economy, valued at $43 billion. An estimated
408,000 jobs mostly in the tourism and recreation sectors are tied to the ocean economy.7
Many of the single-use bag ordinances enacted by local governments have changed consumer behavior
and have resulted in an increased use of reusable bags. For example, Los Angeles County announced
that its ordinance which bans plastic carryout bags and charges for paper carryout bags, and became
fully effective in 2012, has resulted in a 94% reduction in overall single-use bag usage (both plastic and
paper).8 Furthermore, single-use bag ordinances are effective in reducing plastic pollution. Since January
2012, the City of San Jose has prohibited distribution of all single-use bags except for recycled content
pa perAbags,AwhichAconsumersAmustApurchaseAforA10Acents:ATheACity’sA2012AlitterAsurveysAindicateAthatA
plasticAbagAlitterAhasAbeenAreducedA“approximatelyA89ApercentAinAtheAstormAdrainAsystemA:A:A:AwhenA
comparedAtoA]preordinance[AdataA:A:A:”9
Supporting Cali fornia’sAbagAbanAwillAbeAaAmajorAstepAinAreducingAtheAeconomicAwasteAandAenvironmentalA
impacts that single-use bags create. Municipalities and the general public throughout the state look to
cities such as Santa Monica for leadership on this issue and recognition that the restriction of free
distribution of single-use bags is the environmentally preferable alternative for protection of our aquatic
ecosystems. We urge you to endorse Proposition 67.
Thank you for your leadership on this critical environmental issue.
Sincerely,
Dana Roeber Murray, MESM
Senior Coastal Policy Manager
5 http://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts -67 -en.pdf 6 “Shopping? Take
ReusableABags!”ACalRecycle:A23ANov:A2011:AWeb:A
<http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/publiced/holidays/ReusableBags.htm >.
6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region 9. Sept. 2012. Web. <http://www.epa.gov/region9/marine debris/pdf/WestCoastCommsCost -
MngMarineDebris.pdf >.
7 Kidlow,AJ:AetAal:A(JulyA2005):A“California’sAOceanAEconomy,”AreportAtoAtheACaliforniaAResourcesA gency,Aprepa red by the National Ocean
Economics Program.
8 “ boutAtheABag:”ALosA ngelesACounty:AWeb:A http://dpw.lacounty.gov/epd/aboutthebag/.
9 Kerrie Romanow, City of San Jose, memorandum to Transportation & Environment Com. re : Bring Your Own Bag Ordinance Implementation
Results and Actions to Reduce EPS Foam Food Ware , 20 Nov. 2012. Web.
<http://www3.sanjoseca.gov/clerk/CommitteeAgenda/TE/20121203/TE20121203_d5.pdf>.
Item 13-D
09/27/16
Item 13-D
09/27/16