Shaw's Beats Barrington to Bag Ban
A Shaw's representative announces that the Barrington store will phase out the use of plastic grocery bags over 90-120 days at a special Town Council meeting Wednesday night to further debate a proposal to ban all plastic bags.
Photos
Shaw’s Supermarket plans to ban plastic grocery bags at its Barrington store no matter how the Town Council votes on an ordinance that would eliminate the bags at all retailers in town.
The announcement of the ban came at the special public meeting of the Town Council on Wednesday evening, Aug. 22, to further debate the proposal from the Conservation Commission.
Steve Sylven, external communications manager for Supervalue, which owns Shaw’s, said the Barrington store would phase in the ban “over the next 90 to 120 days.”
“We’ll do it as a trial,” Sylven said, to determine if the ban would put the supermarket at a competitive disadvantage with stores that still offer plastic bags for groceries.
The Shaw’s ban brought widespread applause from supporters of the Barrington proposal, including representatives of several environmental groups. It seems to add significant support for the town-wide ban because Shaw’s is the largest user of the plastic bags by far in Barrington.
“Why wouldn’t the Town Council do it now?” said Cynthia Fuller, chairwoman of the Conservation Commission, after the meeting.
Joseph Roberts, the Conservation Commission member who proposed the ban last spring before making a formal presentation to the Town Council for a ban a few weeks ago, opened the meeting with a brief synopsis of his proposal.
“It’s time to move ahead,” Roberts said, “and others will follow.”
He also said the ban can be done by large establishments like a Shaws Supermarket, which announced that it plans to give it a try.
Several speakers urged the councilors to consider some type of enhanced recycling effort instead of a ban as a better alternative. It’s an effort that seems to have the support of Councilor Jeff Brenner, who suggested the possibility of placing recyclable barrels at schools and other public places all over town.
Councilor Bill DeWitt also favors other alternatives because he is concerned about the impact of a plastic ban bag on Barrington. He suggested that shoppers in Barrington “might vote with their feet” and travel to stores in nearby Seekonk where they will still have a choice of paper or plastic bags.
Councilor Kate Weymouth said that for DeWitt to suggest "people will flee Barrington and battle traffic" on Route 6 just to use plastic bags makes no sense.
David Asselin, a representative of the Progressive Bag Alliance in Washington, D.C., which represents plastic bag manufacturers, said Barrington should consider a recycling initiative because the bags “are no way toxic” and “100 percent recyclable.” They can be made into decking, mulch and other products.
“And when given a choice,” said Asselin, who traveled from Washington, D.C. to Barrington for the meeting, “people will use plastic.”
Addressing a concern about the bags filling up landfills, Asselin said: “The best way to keep bags out of the waste stream is to recycle them.” And the best way to recycle the bags is with “in-store recycling,” he said.
Jeff Weiser, a town official in Westport, Conn., which is the only New England town to ban plastic bags, also traveled to Barrington Wednesday evening. He said there does not appear to have been a negative impact on businesses, which have been among the biggest supporters of the ban before and after its passage.
Vickie Olsen, the owner of Miz Fibz Deli & Café on Kent Street, said the plastic bag ban doesn’t go far enough.
“The real enemy is not this bag,” she said, wielding a grocery bag, “the real enemy is all plastic.”
She pulled a large sheet of plastic wrap from a paper bag to make her point.
George Tamer of Center ACE Hardware, said: “I already support the ban. But give us time to use up what we have.”
He said a 90-day phase-out period should be sufficient.
Margaret Kane of Barrington, a candidate for Town Council, asked if the councilors had an idea of the size of this problem. She said she picked up 1,000 beer cans in one month and 3 plastic bags. That seems to be a larger menace to the environment.
“An economic impact is needed,” Kane said. “And there is a lot more to look at” than just grocery bags."
Jonathan Fain of Barrington, who works for a plastic-making company, said the Town Council should be looking at a "ban of paper bags, not plastic bags." He said recycled plastic can be used for other products to produce far less of an impact on the environment.
“The chemical composition of plastic does not change, only its form,” Fain said.
Town Council President June Speakman said the next step in this process is the introduction of the ordinance to ban plastic grocery bags. That will come at the Sept. 10 meeting.
A public hearing on the ordinance will then be held at the Oct. 1 Town Council meeting. A decision on the ban is expected to be made at that meeting, she said.
Lorraine F
5:10 am on Thursday, August 23, 2012
OK, I get it: Bags, bad!
But people who don't run a business don't have to deal with the concept of marginal profits.
A 10% loss in foot traffic can translate to a 30% drop in profits. The mortgage, utilities, taxes, inventory, payroll, remain as fixed costs. Mr. DeWitt is correct to question this matter.
Maybe the town council could reward Shaw's loss in business by lowering their property tax bill.
I hear residents are already covering the property tax bill for affordable housing. Why not extend this concept to an entire socially engineered property tax system.
Residents will love that (I think).
Bags are a problem, no argument there. But so are a lot of policies that collectively have a much greater carbon impact than bags do.
Let's face it, bags are easy to work with and make us feel like we're accomplishing something in this sometimes insane world.
John Baron
1:45 pm on Friday, August 24, 2012
Agree, at last a voice of reason.
James
8:01 am on Thursday, August 23, 2012
Before shopping at a store I first research to see what type of carrying items they provide for the goods I purchased. If I learn that they only provide paper bags, I pass - regardless of how much I needed/wanted the items I would purchase from the store. What am I, a caveman?
Use a paper bag? I would rather starve.
nan
10:36 am on Thursday, August 23, 2012
1. Aren't paper bags considerably more expensive for a store to use? Isn't that an issue for the stores? For the consumers?
2. If a ban were in place, would you seriously want to be penalizing stores that break this law?
3. Paper bags just don't carry groceries as well. And I can't reuse them for household garbage, etc. Sometimes you just need plastic.
4. Wouldn't an incentive program be more effective in changing consumer habits than a law? Some stores charge 5c if you ask for a plastic bag. Shoppers come to expect this and either bring their own bags or pay the small, occasional fee. Other stores give you a 5c credit for every bag of your own you use at the checkout (Whole Foods). CVS even has a Bag Tag program that rewards customers with a $1 coupon for every 4 visits you use your own bags. Why create a law when you don't have to?
5. It's worth noting that Shaws and other stores place the bag recycling bins at the entrance. Next time just grab a few bags as you enter to shop. And reusable shopping bags have become available everywhere. Just remember to use them.
While legislative action that may prevent pollution is admirable, there are other, better solutions to this problem. Let the town spend their efforts on something else.
Gary Morse
11:32 am on Thursday, August 23, 2012
Government meddling is what drives RI to the bottom of the barrel in just about any fiscal measure.
Our majority town council appears to be morphing away from representative government into a new role as "life coach".
There are better ways to reduce our carbon footprint.
Ignorance is not bliss
1:31 pm on Thursday, August 23, 2012
Better ways to reduce our carbon footprint such as not destroying open space by building dense affordable housing.
Michael S. Dellefratte
1:22 pm on Thursday, August 23, 2012
Now that they solved the plastic bag problem. How about all the disposible diapers, dog waste in plastic bags that fill the land fills. Go back to cloth diapers and wash your own and let your dog go in your own yard dig a hole and bury it. The land fill is just another cesspool.
Manifold Witness
4:49 pm on Thursday, August 23, 2012
Gotta shop out-of-town to get lightweight plastic bags to use for trash.
To avoid using more of the big, thick plastic trash bags.
(What do those who want to ban some plastics use for their trash?
The question is unanswered still.
Do they put it loose in the plastic barrel?
Do they use plastic at all?
Do they hand it to the trash picker upper?
Do they use big, thick, Hefty-indestructible-plastic?
Are they hypocrites?
We need to know.)
The Town Council has apparently decided it is a done deal.
Is introducing the vehicle that will make
June & Kate & Jeff world famous!
And sweep them into higher offices.
On the wave of their anti-certain-plastics stance
and their largess in leisure-izing all for “free”-
on the Barrington taxpayers’ dime of course.
Jean C. MacCorison
5:32 pm on Thursday, August 23, 2012
Kudos to Shaws for experimenting with a ban on plastic bags. That should reduce the availability of plastic bags in town considerably. Some other merchants do not use plastic, others could be encouraged to follow suit. These actions plus a town-wide promotional effort should satisfy those who think a town ordinance is needed and at the same time prevent government intrusion into our lives over a shopping ban issue! Jean Mac
Lorraine F
6:19 pm on Thursday, August 23, 2012
Jean,
I too am glad Shaw's stepped up to do a volunteer trial period.
I suspect the first time it is raining, and people aren't able to grab 4 plastic handled bags in one hand (something even a small girl like me can do), they will realize at once why those little handles on the plastic bags are so helpful.
I keep a jug in the closet full of these plastic helpers for things like corn husks, watermelon remains, used cat litter, etc etc. I think everybody does, even the conservationists.
The replenishing cycle for everybody's used plastic bag supply will be a trip out of town to shop across town lines. People will soon realize one shopping trip a month is not enough to cover the need.
The council is hoping an ordinance can be written before any of us discover that we are green only up to a certain point.
John Baron
1:47 pm on Friday, August 24, 2012
Shaws probably questions their move to Barrington every single day...
In the moment
6:59 am on Friday, August 24, 2012
WIsh there was a "like" option for previous comments. Town Council moving much too quickly on this - some businesses in town can't afford to alienate even one customer. How 'bout trying some grass roots education first to get consumers to bring own bags (or design fun new Barrington cloth bag, which might even act as advertising for town merchants>>>), and then move to draconian ordinance if absolutely all else fails? As George at Ace Hardware (a very generous community supporter, by the way) says, give them a chance to figure something else out. Props to Shaws for trying to get ahead of curve here - but will love to see the solution for packages of chicken that have a strong tendency to leak, immediately rendering any paper or cloth bag useless for another purpose. Going to go after the produce folks for all those plastic packages that protect their goods? Projo too? They deliver my paper in plas bag. CVS and Rite Aid yet to weigh in ..... good luck with those 800# gorillas.
Pam
7:53 am on Friday, August 24, 2012
I recycle many of my plastic bags, but I have to agree with Lorraine. I also save some to use for the purposes she describes. I guess I will now have to hoard the precious few I will get in the future. I think education on recycling and the use of cloth bags would have been a better way to go. And I agree with Donut, that the Town Council moved way to quickly on this. That seems to be their modus operandi of late. Keep this in mind during the upcoming elections. At least two of the councilors are up for reelection.
Jean C. MacCorison
12:27 pm on Friday, August 24, 2012
Oops! I made a typographical error in the comment I made yesterday. The last line should read that an ordinance rejection would prevent government intrusion into our lives over a plastic BAG issue.
John Baron
1:41 pm on Friday, August 24, 2012
Kate Weymouth should go home and check on her own family who could use some guidance. Get out of town politics. As far as the plastic bag ban and her opinion that it doesn't make sense when Mr. Dewitt comments that customers may go to nearby Seekonk or Bristol to do their grocery shopping, SHE makes no sense. Of course customers will do this if they prefer the plastic for handling purposes. A more accessible recycling plan and allowing PEOPLE to choose is what living in a free country is all about. Furthermore, the stats prove that the paper bags and canvas bags need to be reused, the canvas 151 times to make it a plus to plastic use. Perhaps tree huggers need to get the facts before they go all glory bound looking to reduce when in fact they are creating more of an environmental problem.
John Baron
1:42 pm on Friday, August 24, 2012
For God sake people of Barrington vote OUT Speakman and Weymouth and recycle.
John Baron
1:43 pm on Friday, August 24, 2012
Not sure when Jeff is up but seriously, toss him as well.
Diana
2:16 pm on Friday, August 24, 2012
I can't believe how many of you spew against town officials on a daily basis but how many of you have actually run for office or helped the town by serving on a committie or coached a team or helped. Its very easy to comment on a blog, its a whole different to actually put your mouths into action. Run for office, do something constructive other than spew hatred.
Lorraine F
3:01 pm on Friday, August 24, 2012
Diana,
Advocacy is not spewing hatred.
We advocate against a government that finds itself trying to dictate their standards rather than implement good public policy.
When is the concept of checks and balances a bad thing? One entire segment of our governmental checks and balances (the judicial branch) endorse the concept of adversarial positions.
This is not to say lawyers spew hatred as you suggest.
Manifold Witness
4:09 pm on Friday, August 24, 2012
Folks who disagree with the government aren't “spewing hatred”.
As a taxpayer (or maybe even just as a human being), some feel they have a right to express an opinion.
There are a few tired, old concepts that someone drags out every time folks disagree with a plan the politicians pontificate: label it “spewing hatred”, challenge the writer to volunteer, & folks aren't entitled to an opinion unless they volunteer/run for office.
The Town council appoints people to committees & boards & assigns Town Council “liaisons” to the boards and committees. Not for nothing.
The boards and committees may not be as independent as one might assume &
if the Council is not well-pleased, an appointee might not get reappointed.
It would be great if every politician/government official was motivated by largess & desire to do what is best for their constituents/taxpayers. Sadly, that's not always the case.
Probably the most difficult position of all is the one of the volunteer who DOES serve out of a true desire to contribute & do the right thing for all.
We appreciate all comments from the keyboard critics who call it like they see it. Many times it is THEY who provide the data that is NOT forthcoming from the government officials.
Especially appreciated are the comments that provide documentation for their facts and conclusions. That takes a lot of volunteer time from those who do it, and we feel fortunate that so many who post here do it so well.
Gary Morse
7:05 am on Saturday, August 25, 2012
When the Barrington revaluation lawsuit was heard by Judge Lanphear, the argument put forth by the town was that lawsuits are not a proper way to deal with such matters.
As described to the judge, the proper way was that residents take the option at election time to "throw the bums out".
Yes, that was the colorful wording used by the town.
I think the town attorney was only trying to drive home a point to Judge Lanphear.
The town lost on that day in court, but the wisdom of their argument remains.