MB to appeal ruling that sacked plastic-bag ban

Mar 5, 2009 Read more: Daily Breeze 30
Manhattan Beach has opted to appeal a judge's recent rejection of its ban on plastic bags. Read more
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Waste Taxes

Santa Monica, CA

#1 Mar 6, 2009
So you idiots are going to waste my TAX MONEY.
clear perspective

United States

#2 Mar 6, 2009
For facts and links to the studies about plastic bags and the environment that started it all, as well as environmental shopping strategies and a survey of plastic bag knowledge...please visit

www.thetruthaboutplasticbags.com
Wiseburn

Los Angeles, CA

#3 Mar 6, 2009
MB would be far wiser to tax plastic bags to recover the costs of their pollution, while reducing taxes elsewhere by an equivalent amount. That action would have earned Incumbent council members my vote.

Plastic bags are reusable. By banning plastic bags, the city is encouraging more dog owners to not clean up after their pets.

This appeal is another bad decision by this council.
Anon

Redondo Beach, CA

#4 Mar 6, 2009
If this requires and EIR, what environmental impact information did MB have when they went forward. I understand that one of their concerns were plastic bags ending up in the ocean. MB obviously can't solve all our environmental problems, but MB could have been more thoughtful in their approach.

First is if they ban plastic bags, what will be used in their place. Paper bags which are equally damaging to the environment. In essence MB is saying it's better to cut more trees down. Banning plastic bags is not a gain for the environment. Banning alll bags would have been a gain.

Why not ban other POS plastic containers? Particularly water bottles.

Houses contribute much of the carbon pollution. Why not higher insulation standards, smaller houses etc.

The plastic bag ban is too narrow focused and has no net environmental advantage; and gives the appearance that MB is jumping on the band wagon without having any kind of overall plan or objective. In other words what message is MB sending to the community? Is this the best a wealthy community like MB can do to help solve environmental problems?
ADBB

Los Angeles, CA

#5 Mar 6, 2009
Manhattan Beach will not ban water bottles or anything else the business community sells because any council members who voted for such a ban would be recalled. Banning items that businesses give away for free eliminates opposition.

The council continues to focus on this issue while the economy gets worse and city revenue falls.
Daniel

Los Angeles, CA

#6 Mar 6, 2009
If Portia Cohen actually believes the appeal will only cost 2,000.00, she should resign from her elected position. She must be living in an alternate universe. 2K for an appeal? Earth to Portia!

Judged:

48

38

33

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
kma

Los Angeles, CA

#7 Mar 6, 2009
$2,000 for an appeal? Even if they win they can't hide all the costs of an appeal under the existing salaries and retainers to their legal staff. And if they lose the winner can recover ALL their legal expenses - and believe me, that won't be cheap!

Judged:

13

10

3

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Daniel

Los Angeles, CA

#9 Mar 6, 2009
It's been over five hours. Has Portia resigned yet?

Judged:

17

12

8

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Confused by Council

Pasadena, CA

#10 Mar 6, 2009
Funny -- the last Mayor, during his re-election campaign that just ended this week (specifically in at least one of the candidates' forums), proudly dismissed the judge's finding as inconsequential by stating that the goal of eliminating plastic bags was successfully being met _voluntarily_, even without the ban.

Then suddenly, and apparently as a result of Wednesday's closed session discussions (as this topic was never discussed in open session), Council decides the judge's finding to be worthy of an appeal.

Then, just to assure that any remaining Council credibility is lost, our _new_ Mayor swears to the laughable claim (assuredly originating from the very same City Attorney slapped down by the judge) that the appeal 'will only cost $2000'.

So, my dear Councilmembers:

1)Did Montgomery misrepresent the facts during his campaign?
2)If not, is the ban indeed required to achieve the goal of converting from plastic bags to reusable bags?
3)Just maybe, could it be that City Attorney and Councilmember egos are the prime motivator behind the appeal?

Judged:

28

25

21

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Bob

AOL

#11 Mar 6, 2009
The Judge messed this Opinion UP Badly! If a person has any gray matter in their head they know that plastic bags take to long to be bio-degradable in dump sites. We need more judges like the one ruling in this case so the USA can go down hill faster into nothing...
Daniel

Los Angeles, CA

#13 Mar 7, 2009
It has been 21 hours. Has Portia resigned yet? And Bob, I think you left out "up" and an "o" after "to".
Stupid

El Segundo, CA

#14 Mar 7, 2009
What a bunch of feel good IDIOTS. Wasting money on pusuing something like this. oh wait ! Its not just money its TAX PAYER money !

The city "leaders" are concentrating on this when they have bigger things to worry about.

Reminds me of the band on the Titanic , playing as the ship sank because it was familiar and comfortable.
Stupid

El Segundo, CA

#15 Mar 7, 2009
Daniel wrote:
If Portia Cohen actually believes the appeal will only cost 2,000.00, she should resign from her elected position. She must be living in an alternate universe. 2K for an appeal? Earth to Portia!
Agreed. Even if they have the city attorney pursue the matter its taking his time from things that actually count.

Filing fees alone will be a ton of money.

and WHEN the city loses they will have to pay the opposing parties legal costs.
Daniel

Los Angeles, CA

#16 Mar 7, 2009
It has been over a day now. Portia, time to move on to some other civic project where you will not be in a position wasting money with poor decision making.

Judged:

23

18

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Jun 08

Federal Way, WA

#17 Mar 9, 2009
Bob wrote:
If a person has any gray matter in their head they know that plastic bags take to long to be bio-degradable in dump sites. We need more judges like the one ruling in this case so the USA can go down hill faster into nothing...
Bob, by "dump sites" I assume you mean landfills. Nothing degrades fast in a landfill. They are engineered to keep things from degrading. When organic matter breaks down harmful gasses, like methane, are released, and other chemicals leach into the ground. Landfills are lined and covered to keep things from breaking down. Plastic bags are inert in landfills and take up very little space. BESIDES, we shouldn't send them to landfills, we should recycle them.

And folks, think about it... the plastics industry are the ones asking for an Environmental Impact Study. If their product was so harmful, why would they want that? Truth is that bags are not the problem. Litter is the biggest problem associated with bags. Anyone with any gray matter at all would know that.
Sheesh

Long Beach, CA

#18 Mar 19, 2009
Wiseburn wrote:
MB would be far wiser to tax plastic bags to recover the costs of their pollution, while reducing taxes elsewhere by an equivalent amount. That action would have earned Incumbent council members my vote.
Plastic bags are reusable. By banning plastic bags, the city is encouraging more dog owners to not clean up after their pets.
This appeal is another bad decision by this council.
In a "be careful what you wish for" moment the chemical bag industry tweaked California's state law to prevent a tax or disposal fee or deposit on plastic bags -- and left the only option open a complete ban on them.

There are a couple of Southland Cities with bag bans in the works that meet these issues ... stay tuned!
Sheesh

Long Beach, CA

#19 Mar 19, 2009
clear perspective wrote:
For facts and links to the studies about plastic bags and the environment that started it all, as well as environmental shopping strategies and a survey of plastic bag knowledge...please visit
www.thetruthaboutplasticbags.com
What a load of Chemical Bag Industry Twaddle.

Half truths and straw-men masquerading as facts ... following this debate I have seen the Chemical Associations and Bag Makers resort to this low road often, which tells me they see they writing on the wall but are to moribund to respond to consumer demand.

Sheesh!
Sheesh

Long Beach, CA

#20 Mar 19, 2009
Ken Holmes wrote:
<quoted text>
And folks, think about it... the plastics industry are the ones asking for an Environmental Impact Study. If their product was so harmful, why would they want that? Truth is that bags are not the problem. Litter is the biggest problem associated with bags. Anyone with any gray matter at all would know that.
The Chemical Bag Industry has decided that a study would be too costly for small cities like MB to do, and cite this mythical $100,000 figure to raise taxpayer ire. An EIR is not likely to cost near that, and they are pissing off enough savvy consumers and municipalities that eventually someone is going to call their bluff and pay (less than $100K) to do the study, AND tax paper bags, so reusuables are the prefered option.

It is a strategy that depends on the cities and the citizens being too weak-willed to do the study, so the Chemical Bag Industry can win by creating a big roadblock. At least two cities I know are working on EIRs anyway; several are appealing. Plastic bags are dead.
Bagus Interruptus

Torrance, CA

#21 May 7, 2011
Portia Cohen wears green panties!

Judged:

18

16

6

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Portia Cohen

Redondo Beach, CA

#22 Aug 18, 2011
Ah, now you see. That is why I was elected; and you should not run.

Judged:

18

15

12

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Torrance Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 5 hr TOASTER 19,829
Review: Solid Solution 24-7 Inc. Thu Roy G Biv 3
News Earthquake: Was it Fracking's Fault? Thu probably 1
News Hermosa Beach needs walk of fame candidates (Jan '09) Thu Daddy Doggie 18
letter winner Apr 14 Cedric Eugene Che... 1
News Coroner: Man shot girlfriend, then self (Jul '08) Apr 14 Valerie J 7
William Shatner refused to go to Leonard Nimoy'... Apr 13 trekkedup 1

Beach Hazards Statement for Los Angeles County was issued at April 17 at 2:31PM PDT

More from around the web

Torrance People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]