LIHU‘E — The latest incarnation of a proposal under discussion at the state Legislature would enact a five-cent fee for all single-use checkout bags — both paper and plastic — statewide in an attempt to discourage their use and promote
LIHU‘E — The latest incarnation of a proposal under discussion at the state Legislature would enact a five-cent fee for all single-use checkout bags — both paper and plastic — statewide in an attempt to discourage their use and promote reusable bags and environmental stewardship.
Not all environmentalists are happy with recent changes to the bill, which turned it from the outright ban on single-use bags that had been passed by the state Senate earlier this month into a fee structure in the state House of Representatives.
Zero Waste Kaua‘i Chairman John Harder said Friday said the “gutted” version that replaced the ban with a 15-cent fee and then reduced that to a 5-cent fee is insufficient to change behavior, saying, “We don’t think a nickel is enough.”
“The people are going to react to the five-cent fee are probably the people who don’t throw their bags out the car window anyway,” he said. “Fewer bags may end up in the landfill, but it’s not going to make a significant impact on our highway litter or our marine litter, and those are the big issues with plastic bags.”
However, other environmental groups like Surfrider and Sierra Club have expressed support for the measure.
In a recent update and “action alert,” Surfrider’s Hawaiian Islands Field Coordinator Stuart Coleman wrote that Senate Bill 2559 “is a good bill and would make Hawai‘i the first state in the country to impose a fee on plastic and paper bags … (and) will greatly reduce the proliferation of single-use plastic and paper bags across the Hawaiian Islands.”
The Sierra Club’s Hawai‘i Chapter Web Site contains a “Capitol Watch” that supports a fee program “to support struggling businesses and to help alleviate our budget problems … in order to create a link between the actual cost of each plastic bag and to discourage use.”
Harder said the bill really is a “hollow statement,” adding that the “fee” is really a “tax” because the funds it generates are funneled to the state’s general fund to try to balance the budget rather than to programs like county recycling, litter pickup or coastal clean-up. Of the five cents, three would go to the state and two would go to the retailer under the current proposal.
“I might get behind it if it had a fee adequate to provide incentives for some change and to address the problems that were having with bags,” Harder said. “If they can’t implement a ban or put in place a fee that will cause some significant changes, they should just let the bill die and try again next year.”
The most recent changes were made by the House Committees on Energy and Environmental Protection and Economic Revitalization, Business and Military Affairs. Energy and Environmental Protection Committee Chair Hermina Morita (D-14, Hanalei to Waipouli), crafted the changes with Economic Revitalization, Business and Military Affairs Chair Angus McKelvey before the joint committee passed the measure out on March 16, but said it was a matter of political reality.
“We could have taken up the Senate bill and put it to a vote, but I can tell you it would have failed. There was not votes to pass out an outright ban, and the discussion would have ended,” Morita said. Asked how she would craft the bill if it were entirely up to her, Morita said she believes that “a fee set at the right amount will probably change behavior more than an outright ban.”
“At this point, I’m not sure a five-cent fee is enough of an incentive to make a difference,” she said. “For me, looking at solid waste issues, one of the things we really don’t think of is the cost to dispose of that single-use plastic bag, and how to accurately calculate that cost into the way we do business.”
Preemption
The language added by the two House committees last week would not only replace a statewide ban with a statewide fee, but would also add a clause that would “preempt the powers of any county to regulate the use of disposable checkout bags,” wiping out county-wide bans on plastic checkout bags in Kaua‘i and Maui that are slated to take effect in January 2011.
“There are a lot of retail establishments that have stores throughout the state and wanted consistent policy throughout the state. … They didn’t want to be affected in one county differently than another” Morita said, again pointing the political realities of dealing with some conservative, business-friendly representatives.
“Had it not had the preemption language, again, the bill would have died,” she said. “If it came down to a vote for me, I think I’d rather have the counties take the lead on this, because they’re the ones that have to deal with the solid waste issues.”
For that reason, the preemption clause stuck in the craw of Harder, erstwhile supporter Surfrider, and Kaua‘i County Councilman Tim Bynum, who along with Councilmembers Dickie Chang, Jay Furfaro and Lani Kawahara, led a charge that culminated in a 4-2 vote to approve a county-wide ban on single-use plastic checkout bags last fall.
“Charging a fee would be a good idea and could be consistent with the Kaua‘i bill that specifically allows for and encourages a fee for disposable bags, but it shouldn’t preempt the county,” Bynum said Wednesday.
Surfrider’s action alert, which otherwise supported the amended bill, encouraged members to contact their representatives to ask that the preemption clause, which would become Section 342H-E of the Hawai‘i Revised Statutes, be “dropped.”
Harder said he felt for Bynum, who “put his neck out there” to support Kaua‘i’s ban, adding that the preemption clause “negates a whole lot of hard work on our part and our County Council’s part” and that “the state should really not come in and preempt the wishes of the citizens of Kaua‘i County and Maui County.”
Morita said preemption clauses are not uncommon, as the federal government’s Environmental Protection Agency routinely overrules more strict legislation in progressive states like California, but said the counties still have an opportunity to weigh in and the bill is far from a “done deal” as negotiations are ongoing.
The bill was passed on second reading on March 18 and referred to the House Committee on Finance, which counts Kaua‘i Reps. James Tokioka (D-15, Lihu‘e and Koloa) and Roland Sagum (D-16, Waimea and Ni‘ihau) among its 17 members.
The bill, if taken up and passed by Chair Marcus Oshiro’s committee and then passed by the full House, would face a conference with the Senate version. It could take effect on July 1, 2010.
“Both chambers have very different positions. One is an outright ban and one is a fee structure to change behavior. We’re looking at two very different philosophies,” Morita said. “Until this bill moves out of the conference committee and up for a final vote, everything is still up in the air.”
On the Net:
www.capitol.hawaii.gov
www.sierraclub.org
www.surfrider.org
zerowastekauai.org
• Michael Levine, assistant news editor, can be reached at 245-3681 (ext. 252) or mlevine@kauaipubco.com.
