California “single-use” bag ban opponents gather enough signatures to qualify a “bag ban ban” for 2016 ballot

2 Jan

Here’s the latest on the effort to overturn the statewide bag ban:

Here’s an interesting website with more information:

Here’s my prediction – wait til they find out, people don’t re-use the new bags, they accumulate them, forget to take them to the store again, and then when the space under  their kitchen sink is full to overflowing they will dump them in their garbage cans – they aren’t recyclable! 

This bag ban is a bigger scam  than The Interview!

14 Responses to “California “single-use” bag ban opponents gather enough signatures to qualify a “bag ban ban” for 2016 ballot”

  1. Michael Jones January 2, 2015 at 8:54 am #

    I’m extremely annoyed at the bag ban. I have no place to store them. So I have to move to a larger apartment to accommodate the reusable bags, plus launder them and send the waste down the sewer into the Sacramento River. The environmental footprint appears to be larger with the reusable bags. I’m an environmentalist, so being forced to do something that hurts Mother Earth is extremely coercive.

    • Juanita Sumner January 2, 2015 at 1:17 pm #

      Jim makes an excellent point in the previous conversation – “The Chico Bag Ban has shown folks why they need to pay attention to local politics.” Maybe there will be a silver lining on this turd – maybe more people will start paying attention, getting educated to these issues, before it gets to this point.

      we can dream!

  2. bob January 2, 2015 at 8:44 pm #

    Check out the article in the ER today. Some old guy from Oroville went ballistic at Winco because of this. Said he’d never shop in Chico again. Not a surprise. I read that cities adjacent to cities with bag bans saw a 3.2% increase in retail sales which just about matched the decrease in the cities with bag bans.

    Anyhoo, I went into Winco today and was disappointed to find out you no longer get 5 cents a bag if you bring your own bags but I figured that would also go with the bag ban.

    If plastic bags are so bad why must our rulers make the grocers charge us 10 cents plus tax for a paper bag? Obviously they want to discourage the use of paper bags. Why? Are they bad, too? If so why don’t the libtard progressives just outlaw them? (BTW, the paper bags are biodegradable, recyclable and re-useable.) And if they are bad why do poor people get them for free at the store? Why are we subsidizing bad behaviour by poor people?

    I used the plastic bags to line garbage cans and for taking out other kinds of trash and for other things. Now I will just have to buy plastic bags for that. And those bags are unnecessarily thicker so they use more plastic and therefore energy. How is that making the environment better? It is just making the environment worse and adding to my costs.

    I wish one of the libtards like Ann Schwab who forced this down our throats could answer these questions. (Or one of the “conservative” city council members who refuses to overturn this law.)

    Speaking of Schwabbie, when I was in Winco one guy was apoplectic because he had to pay 10 cents for a paper bag. He made a rude remark to the cashier and there was an uncomfortable period of silence.

    I jumped right in and said, “You know this is Ann Schwabs fault, don’t you?” He said, “Well to hell with Ann Schwab then!” I said, “It’s Andy Holcombe’s fault, too.” He said, “To hell with Andy Holcombe, too.” I said, “That’s the spirit!”

    • Juanita Sumner January 3, 2015 at 8:14 am #

      Thanks Bob. We have to complain, no matter the looks we get, no matter how many lemmings tell us, “let it go!” Go tell it on the mountain – this is being perpetrated by the cities, the unions, and the plastic manufacturers, not the will of the people.

      Here’s something we haven’t talked about – I’ve been seeing people leaving with plastic bags they paid for that are 100 times worse for the environment than the old bags – when will we see piles of these new, tougher bags, sitting on top of people’s garbage cans (newsflash – they aren’t RECYCLABLE!)?!? People don’t re-use their bags now, what makes the talking heads think they will re-use the new bags? These bags will sit in the landfill 1000 years beyond the old bags.

      Yes, I will be using my stash of Safeway bags all over town. I just got a ginchee Sears bag yesterday, and Walmart was giving out these huge, really nice plastic bags right up until the first. I saved, and I will re-use, and I will squeal like a pig about this. I will also tell everybody I can get ahold of, there’s a referendum to overturn the ban. I think more people are angry about this, and about to get angry, than there are supporters of this ban.

      And I don’t think the supporters really know what they’re supporting.

      • bob January 3, 2015 at 5:17 pm #

        So Jack Lee says the conservatives can’t overturn the bag ban ordinance. (You can read about this conversation at the Postscript blog under the New Laws post.) He says they need 5 votes to do that. Something about the Rules of Procedure which I don’t find on the City’s Web site.

        Apparently they can’t just pass a new law with their majority stating that retailers can offer their customers a plastic and/or paper bag for free but must overturn the old law.

        Do you know anything about this? Are you familiar with the Rules of Procedure? Is it true that they can pass a new law with their majority but it takes 5 votes to undo an old law? That doesn’t seem to make sense.

        I figured if anyone would know about what is required to get rid of a bad law or pass a new law it would be you, Juanita.

        In my opinion it would seem they should be able to overturn the old law and if not just write a new law which supersedes the old law but apparently that is not true. What are your thoughts on this?

      • Juanita Sumner January 3, 2015 at 8:01 pm #

        I think that sounds weird too.

        Here’s some pertinent excerpts from the city charter:

        Section 609. Ordinances and resolutions generally.
        Legislative action shall be taken by the council only by means of an ordinance or
        resolution. Unless otherwise specified in this Charter ordinances and resolutions shall be
        adopted upon receiving the affirmative votes of a majority of a quorum of the council
        present at any regular meeting.

        Section 613. Same – Amendment.
        No ordinance shall be revised, reenacted or amended by reference to its title only;
        but the ordinance may be revised or reenacted, or the section, sections, or subsections
        thereof to be amended, or the new section, sections, or subsections to be added thereto
        shall be set forth at length as to the particular section, sections, or subsection to be so
        revised, reenacted or adopted and adopted in the method provided in Section 611 of this

        Charter. No ordinance or section or subsection thereof shall be repealed except by an
        ordinance adopted in the manner provided in this Charter, provided that an ordinance,
        section or subsection thereof may be repealed by reference to the number of the
        ordinance, section or subsection and to the title of the ordinance or section.
        (Assembly Concurrent Res. No. 163, 1969, Ratified 4-8-69)

        It sounds as though they just have to get a simple majority – 4 – to pass an ordinance repealing the bag ban. Is that what you’re reading?

      • bob January 3, 2015 at 9:50 pm #

        Yes, it sounds like they currently have the votes.

      • Juanita Sumner January 4, 2015 at 6:18 am #

        Like Harvey Two-Face, we’re of two minds today. One mind says, “give them the benefit of the doubt, maybe they’re waiting for the referendum to turn over the state ban”.

        the other mind says, “no, Jack is full of shit, they’re all full of shit!”

        I think they should go ahead and turn it over, but I’ll assume it would take a huge outpouring from the public, writing letters directly to council. It would probably take some of their big donors – I’m afraid the CPOA couldn’t give a shit about this ban.

        I’m pinning my hopes on the state ban, and if that passes, maybe we can get up a mob to make them overturn the citywide ban.

        the problem in our town, Bob, is not the elected, it’s the electors!

      • bob January 4, 2015 at 9:16 am #

        I think you’re right.

        It makes no sense to me that they can’t change this.

        My guess is that they don’t want to touch this with a ten foot pole because it just is not politically correct to oppose this bag ban. So if it is not something that will directly benefit the special interests that support them they will do nothing.

      • Juanita Sumner January 5, 2015 at 6:30 am #

        I agree – Sorensen is a lot like Gruendl – they both posture against stuff they really want, knowing many of their own supporters don’t like it, but also knowing it’s going to pass anyway. And now Sorensen’s got a chance to overturn it, and he’s just not going to.

        Sorensen is a RINO – he’s really more of a “progressive” than a “conservative.” For example, Sorensen has told me he likes traffic circles – he once told me he wants to replace the stoplights at Vallombrosa and Mangrove, for example, with traffic circles.

        He’s embarrassed of our town. He thinks traffic circles and bag bans make us look modern and forward thinking. He doesn’t see past the end of his own nose.

        Hey, you know what though – people are mad about this ban, they been hitting this blog like crazy, searching, “bag ban,” “Chico bag ban,” “single use bag ban”, etc. I hope the giant is awakening on this one.

    • Anthony van Leeuwen January 23, 2015 at 2:20 pm #

      And those bags that the poor people get for free, are paid by those who pay 10-cents for a paper bag.

      Check out my website:

      You will find lots of articles about issues regarding bags- that it is not only a scam but the litter problem with plastic bags is so small it is not worth a ban. For example, in San Jose they did two litter surveys of city streets, creeks, and storm drains. They found a total of 2913 plastic grocery bags. The city estimates that 511 plastic bags are used by every man woman and child in the city. So the 2913 plastic bags found represents the annual consumption of plastic bags by just 6 people in San Jose, a city of more than 1 million people. Then if you compare the 2913 plastic bags the more than 500 million used in the city every years, you get a very small percentage.

      See my article titled: “San Jose’s Bag Ban Useless in Solving Litter Problems –Should Be Rescinded” for more information showing that the bag ban was not only not justified based upon the small problem but did not solve the litter problems faced by the city.

      • Juanita Sumner January 23, 2015 at 2:50 pm #

        Thanks so much for coming over, very interesting website, I think people here will be interested in your adventures.

        When I have done my own litter surveys – along busy highways and around shopping centers, even around our landfill – I’ve found the “single use” bag to be less than one percent.

  3. bob January 5, 2015 at 8:02 am #

    Just curious how you know what people are searching for? Do you mean they search for those terms and the results they get are from your blog? How do you find out what they searched for and where they are searching?

    • Juanita Sumner January 5, 2015 at 5:09 pm #

      Yes, I get a list of search terms that have led people to my blog. Some of them are far-fetched – based on one or two words – but most are by topic.

      By far the most searched topic on my blog is how to get rid of junk mail, specifically, Market Value Place. Lately the plastic bag ban has been hot, with people using search phrases like, “it’s okay to wipe my butt with tree pulp but you ban my plastic bags?” and so on. It’s pretty interesting.

Leave a Reply to bob Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: