HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 01/12/2021 - PLASTIC POLLUTION BALLOT MEASURE - DRAFT BAG ORDINDATE:
STAFF:
January 12, 2021
Molly Saylor, Senior Sustainability Specialist
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Plastic Pollution Ballot Measure - Draft Bag Ordinance.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to request Councilmember feedback on a draft bag ordinance, banning plastic bags
and setting a fee on paper bags at large grocers to begin May 1, 2022.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Do Councilmembers have input regarding the fee per paper bag at 10 cents, 20 cents, or an amount in
between?
2. Do Councilmembers support staff’s recommendations on key policy and related program details?
• City and grocer each retain 50% of the fee.
• Fee revenue supports costs of new plastic pollution mitigation and solid waste reduction program.
• Income-qualified exemption for residents who participate in income-qualified federal, state, or county
assistance programs, including WIC and SNAP.
• Provide resources to support the program before ordinance implementation.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Reducing Plastics Pollution is an adopted Council Priority, which aligns with the community’s Road to Zero Waste
goal to produce zero waste by 2030 as well as the goal to sustain and improve the health of the Cache la Poudre
River and watershed.
Past Council Action
• Work Session
o February 11, 2020 - Staff provided plastic pollution context and learnings from peer communities. Council
provided feedback on action both on micro and macro pollution.
o October 27, 2020 - Staff provided a progress update on plastic pollution awareness work, including
impacts of COVID-19 on plastic use, policy development and community engagement, and a staff
recommendation. Councilmembers indicated interest in moving plastic bag policy to a ballot measure.
o December 8, 2020 - Staff provided Council a suite of policy options for a plastic pollution ordinance and
related ballot measure. Council provided feedback on these policy elements and other logistics.
(Attachment 1)
January 12, 2021 Page 2
• Regular Meeting
o December 15, 2020 - Councilmembers adopted a resolution directing staff to draft an ordinance for
Council to discuss at this work session.
The attached draft ordinance includes the details as specified by Council on December 15, 2020, including:
• Hybrid approach - ban plastic bags, fee on paper
• Large grocers
• Staff recommended base case (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Staff recommended base case
There are a few remaining choices for how certain policy elements will be included in the ordinance and related
considerations. These are outlined below as “Key Policy Elements” and the rest are wrapped into “Staff
recommendations on key policy details.” Further description of fee details, income-qualified relief, recommended
resourcing for 2021, and other supporting information are presented as attachments.
Key Policy Element for Council Feedback
Fee amount (Attachment 2):
• 10-cent fee on paper bags, collected at the point of sale.
• 20-cent fee on paper bags, collected at the point of sale.
• An amount between 10 and 20 cents.
• Considerations:
o The attached draft ordinance uses 20 cents as a placeholder pending Council feedback.
o There is sufficient nexus between City costs and fee revenue to support either 10 or 20 cents (or an
amount in between).
o A ten cent fee is the most common amount on bags for Colorado cities and balances financial impact to
low- and medium-income households with environmental outcomes.
o A twenty cent fee has the highest rate of behavior change to reusable bags, the best environmental
outcome.
o Fee may be shared with grocers (discussed below)
Staff Recommendations on Key Policy Details
Fee elements (Attachment 2):
• Fee structure:
o Recommendation: City and grocers each retain 50% of the fee.
o Context of recommendation:
▪ Both the City and grocers will have new costs due to the ordinance and this allows both entities to
recover those costs.
January 12, 2021 Page 3
▪ This recommendation acknowledges that data around grocer costs from other cities ranges.
Combining a required grocer fee revenue plan and a 50-50 split allows costs to be explored in
collaboration.
• Fee revenue:
o Recommendation: This ordinance creates a new plastic pollution mitigation and solid waste reduction
program to which City fee revenue would be applied, including the following costs:
▪ Costs to administer and enforce ordinance; conduct community wide engagement about the
ordinance;
▪ Provide reusable bags to low-moderate income residents and then the broader community;
▪ Existing litter pick up, stormwater, and street sweeping costs related to single-use items;
▪ Existing paper and plastic bag recycling costs at the Timberline Recycling Center;
▪ Expanded equitable engagement, outreach, and community partnerships; and
▪ Solid waste reduction and recycling efforts, including but not limited to encouraging reuse and
reduction efforts targeting single-use items.
o Context of recommendation:
▪ Recovers ongoing costs related to single-use bags and other items;
▪ Supports distributing reusable bags to community members who may not otherwise have them;
▪ Creates opportunities for community partnerships, recognizing in some cases that partners can have
a deeper impact on waste reduction and recycling goals and help the City scale more rapidly;
▪ Recognizes the interconnected nature of waste management and recycling systems and allows staff
flexibility to use fee revenue on the most strategic interventions; and
▪ Incorporates lessons learned from other cities whose costs were defined too narrowly.
Income qualified fee exemption
• Recommendation: Residents who participate in federal, state or county income-qualified assistance programs
including WIC and SNAP who provide benefit cards at the point of sale would be exempt from the paper bag
fee. (Attachment 3)
o The City would prioritize reusable bag distribution to recipients of WIC and SNAP as well as those
enrolled in other income-qualified programs, including City programs.
▪ Context of recommendation: (Attachment 3)
Funding implementation
• Recommendation: Provide resources to start implementing the program before the fee starts. (After fee is
implemented, all program costs will be funded through fee revenue.)
o Process:
1) Councilmembers can adopt a one-time funding off-cycle budget allocation via ordinance concurrent
with the single use bag ordinance in Feb 2021.
2) Staff will write a 2022 BFO offer to fund implementation that may be sourced from the general fund or
from fee revenue, pending logistics and timing.
o Staff recommends funding Scenario 2 ($87,500 in 2021). Council may also select funding Scenario 1
($70,000 in 2021).
▪ Context of recommendation: (Attachment 4)
Survey Responses to Date
Initial survey results to date (e.g. summary statistics and comments) are included. (Attachment 5) Further survey
data, comments, and demographics will be shared as a read-before memo prior to the work session to give the
community as much time as possible to provide feedback.
January 12, 2021 Page 4
Future Steps Towards a Comprehensive Approach
Once the major impacts of COVID have subsided, an anticipated six to nine months of engagement and work with
the community would likely be required (to allow time for equitable engagement early in the process) before
bringing additional single use plastic reduction options for Council feedback. Potential next steps regarding
utensils and accessory items and expanded polystyrene items are included. (Attachment 6)
Next Steps
Staff anticipates the following next steps:
• Online engagement on OurCity (<https://ourcity.fcgov.com/plastics>) around the Council-preferred elements
of a plastic policy.
o With the timing of the April election, online engagement is live and will need to end on January 31 so
Council can consider the ordinance on First Reading on February 2 and Second Reading on February 16.
• Updates to the ordinance draft based on Council feedback during January 12 Work Session.
• Feb 2 - First Reading of the plastic pollution ordinance and 2021 funding ordinance.
• Feb 16 - Second Reading of plastic pollution ordinance, resolution to refer the ordinance to the ballot as a
referendum, and 2021 funding ordinance.
o Note: At this point, Environmental Services staff can no longer conduct any engagement on the issue.
City Clerk’s office manages the logistics of the ballot process.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Work Session Summary - December 8, 2020 (PDF)
2. Fee Summary and Background (PDF)
3. Income-Qualified Relief (PDF)
4. Single Use Bag Policy Implementation Resourcing (PDF)
5. Summary of Survey Responses (PDF)
6. Potential Paths to Further Action on Plastic Pollution (PDF)
7. Draft Ordinance (PDF)
8. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
Environmental Services
222 Laporte Ave.
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6600
fcgov.com/environmental services
MEMORANDUM
Date:December 11, 2020
To:Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers
Thru:Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Jacqueline Kozak Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director
From:Molly Saylor, Senior Specialist, Environmental Sustainability
Re:December 8, 2020 Work Session Summary: Single Use Plastics Ballot Item
Discussion
Attendees: All Councilmembers were present virtually.
Staff presented options for Council to consider as part of a potential future ballot item on single use
plastics. Key discussion points:
x There were different perspectives shared on the options presented.
x Some Councilmembers expressed preferences for
o passing an ordinance banning plastic bags and putting a fee on paper bags at large
grocers in Fort Collins (hybrid approach).
o referring the adopted ordinance to a vote at the April election.
x Some Councilmembers expressed interest in
o including expanded polystyrene take-out containers in the ordinance.
o addressing other items and concern about the timing with the pressures on small business
due to COVID-19.
o including equity considerations for low-income residents.
x Some Councilmembers shared
o an interest in addressing plastic pollution through innovation and circular economy
strategies.
o desire to see performance measures included in the plastic pollution ordinance.
o including expanded polystyrene take-out containers from franchise restaurants in the
ordinance.
Next steps:
x Dec 15 –Council consideration of a resolution to direct staff to develop an ordinance and ballot
language based on Council feedback from December 8
th.
x Dec 16 –Jan 31 –Online engagement on OurCity (https://ourcity.fcgov.com/plastics) around the
Council-preferred elements of a plastic policy.
x Jan 12 –Present ordinance and ballot language aligned to the Dec 15 resolution for Council
feedback.
x Feb 2 –First reading of the plastic pollution ordinance.
x Feb 16 –Second reading of plastic pollution ordinance and resolution to refer the ordinance to
the ballot as a referendum.
ATTACHMENT 1
Attachment II: Fee Summary and Background
Cities imposing new fees are required to demonstrate a clear nexus between program costs incurred by
the City and the subject of the fee, in this case paper bags. This nexus has been defined in different ways
across Colorado and U.S. cities with a best practice being Aspen’s hybrid bag policy (see case study
below). Staff recommends aligning to the approach Aspen has taken and that has been upheld by
Colorado courts. The following fee summary reflects this approach and outlines the types of costs
associated with the new program created by the ordinance that would be recovered and potential fee
revenue.
Staff has also included alternatives for the fee structure as additional context to the recommendation
presented in the AIS.
Proposed Waste Reduction Program established by bag ordinance:
By passing the bag ordinance, Council would create a new plastic pollution mitigation and solid waste
reduction program, to which the fee revenue can be applied. The elements of this program include:
• the administration and operation of the Waste Reduction Program and administration
activities to collect all disposable bag fees;
• activities and campaigns conducted by the City (or a contracted vendor) to provide reusable
bags to residents and visitors, educate residents, businesses and visitors about the impact of
disposable bags, trash, single-use plastics and other waste on the waterways and
environment and on the health and welfare of its residents and visitors, the importance of
reducing the number of disposable bags entering the waste stream and to raise awareness
about waste reduction and recycling;
• community clean-up events, City activities, and other community-led activities to reduce or
mitigate solid waste and litter;
• programs and infrastructure to facilitate and encourage the community to reduce waste and
recycle, including community-led efforts;
• creating, expanding, and maintaining equitable outreach and engagement strategies,
including a public website to educate residents on the progress of waste reduction efforts;
• other activities directly related to the reduction of waste from disposable bags, trash, single-
use plastics and other waste and its impact on the waterways and environment within the city
and the Cache la Poudre watershed; and
• funding or providing other support for programs and activities conducted by others in
furtherance of these purposes.
The following section outlines the program costs that would be recovered and the Figure 1 establishes
the fee revenue nexus.
ATTACHMENT 2
Fee Summary - Staff Recommendation for Fort Collins Bag Fee Revenue
This draft fee summary was conducted internally by the Sustainability Services Senior Financial Analyst
and leverages baseline assumptions about plastic pollution mitigation and solid waste reduction program
costs created by the ordinance and fee structure examples from other cities. Key takeaways from the fee
summary include:
• Direct and indirect costs related to materials management, reduction, and recycling are significant
when considering expanding efforts to be equitable, to support community-led efforts, and when
considering infrastructure or capital investments.
• Based on the assumptions made here, the nexus cost per bag ranges from approximately 10 to
20 cents per bag.
• With current assumptions, the City will be able to recover annual direct and indirect costs on an
ongoing basis and could leverage higher fee revenue in the first few years for long-term capital
investments needed to reach waste goals.
The estimates shown in Figure 1 below represent staff’s recommendation to cover a broad range of
direct and indirect costs related to solid waste reduction and recycling, similar to Aspen’s fee (see case
study below).
Figure 1. Costs to the City for the new plastic pollution mitigation and solid waste reduction program:
Cost description Annual cost range (low) (high)
a. Cover the costs to administer, enforce and conduct
community wide engagement about the ordinance $260,000 $300,000
b. Provide reusable bags to both residents and visitors,
especially to low-moderate income residents and other
historically underrepresented groups $10,000 $30,000
c. Cover a portion of the costs of existing litter pick up,
stormwater, wastewater and street sweeping costs related to
single-use items $100,000 $150,000
d. Cover a portion of the costs of existing paper and plastic
film recycling costs at the Timberline Recycling Center $50,000 $100,000
e. Expanded equitable engagement, outreach, and
community partnership, including neighborhood and
community project funding as program and funding capacity
allow $175,000 $300,000
f. Solid waste reduction, recycling, plastic pollution
mitigation efforts, and infrastructure, including but not limited
to encouraging systems approaches to reuse and reduction
efforts targeting single-use items $200,000 $500,000
Total Cost $795,000 $1,380,000
Cost per Bag (50% retained by City; 75% reduction in
bags) $0.12 $0.21
Key assumptions and considerations:
• Above figures reflect estimations based on current cost structures that were provided as ranges
by the relevant finance analyst for each item. They do not reflect assumptions for how the costs
may alter over time.
• The low end of the range for each line item represents the more conservative estimate and the
high end represents more expanded programming.
• Details by cost
o (a.) Administration cost would cover staffing for 1.0 added classified FTE that would be
responsible for administering the ordinance, including outreach to and engagement with
residents and businesses as the ordinance is rolled out and for enforcement support, 1.0
added FTE for the first two years to support ordinance roll out, and the costs of marketing
and outreach campaign materials.
o (b.) Bags are assumed to cost approximately one dollar per bag. Based on staff
estimates and experiences distributing other items, it is reasonable to distribute three
bags per household to 3,000 households per year.
o (c.) Litter clean-up and other operational costs related to single-use plastic items and
paper bag litter were estimated by finance support for each service area. This is
presented as a wider range due to the challenge of estimating the exact percentage
represented by these items versus overall litter.
o (d.) Assumes a portion of the costs to collect and transfer plastic film, paper, and
cardboard for recycling at the Timberline Recycling Center.
o (e.) Assumes reimagined community engagement strategies such as: paid community
partner and ambassador programs to engage on the City’s behalf, reaching parts of the
community the City struggles to access; language justice and focus groups to ensure
culturally relevant campaigns; and neighborhood-scale community-led projects to
address barriers to waste reduction, reuse and recycling and encourage behavior
change.
o (f.) Investments in programs and infrastructure to protect waterways and natural areas,
reduce waste, encourage reuse, and enable local circular economy progress.
Infrastructure investments may include but are not limited to recycling center equipment
and compost facility development.
Figure 2. Revenue projections from the bag fee, assuming staff’s recommendation to retain 50% of the
fee.
Estimated Annual Revenue
Fee per paper bag $ 0.10 $ 0.20
Estimated Current Number of Paper and Plastic
Bags 52,500,000
Estimated Reduction in Bag Usage* 75% 75%
Fee Retained by City 50%
City Revenue $ 656,250 $ 1,312,500
* Based on results documented in Palo Alto
Key assumptions and considerations:
• Approximately 340 bags are used per person per year, resulting in an estimated 52,500,000 bags
per year0F1.
• Palo Alto saw their hybrid approach ultimately settle at a 75% reduction of paper bags (with no
plastic bags). The Fort Collins fee summary uses this data point to estimate long-term fee
revenue after the initial transition1F2.
• Some costs to the City are expected to taper as single-use bag use (and related fees) taper.
• Ten-cent and twenty-cent options are shown but other cities have used other amounts ranging
from five-cents up to twenty-five-cents.
• Staff recommends revisiting the level of fee to ensure it is set appropriately every 3-5 years
similar to other City fees
• Figures presented represent the base case analysis; staff also calculated scenarios with High,
Medium, and Low assumptions for existing bag usage (250-340 bags) and reduction in single-use
bags (50-90%) and found that in most scenarios, a fee between $0.10-0.20 would support the
minimum program costs.
Alternative approaches to fee structure
• Four cents retained by grocers, based on Boulder’s estimate that this is the actual cost to grocers
for providing the bag and administering the fee program.
o Considerations:
Data points used for Boulder’s estimate is based on costs from other cities and
sources ranging from approximately $0.01 to $0.10 with the average being $0.04.
It is unclear what the true costs to grocers in Fort Collins are and where they
would fall on this spectrum.
Allowing grocers to retain higher amounts of fee revenue may create an incentive
for them to sell paper bags rather than transition customers to reusable bags.
Increases the fee revenue to the City somewhat (10-cents scenario) or
significantly (20-cents scenario).
• All of the fee could be retained by grocers with 50% required to be used for providing customers
with reusable bags. This was the model used in the 2014 ordinance.
o Considerations:
May result in a surplus of reusable bags in the community creating waste and
causing bags to be discarded before the end of their useful lives.
Does not allow City to recover any direct or indirect costs of the ordinance
(enforcement, outreach, etc.)
1 From Brendle, 2012 and Wagner, T, 2017
2 Palo Alto https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/48074
Colorado and peer cities with hybrid policies in place:
• Aspen, CO***
• Avon, CO**
• Carbondale, CO***
• Steamboat Springs, CO***
• Telluride, CO**
• Vail, CO**
• Eugene, OR*
• Palo Alto, CA**
• Santa Barbara, CA**
• Tacoma, WA*
• Seattle, WA*
• San Francisco, CA****
Legend: * cities charging between 5 cents per paper bag; ** 10 cents, *** 20 cents, **** 25 cents
Case studies:
Aspen
• Key takeaways:
o Allows Aspen to recover costs for reducing waste and recycling, inclusive but not limited
to bag reduction costs
o Litigation of the Aspen fee upheld the program and related costs defined in ordinance
• Bag policy: Hybrid approach, banning plastic bags, fee on paper bags
• Fee amount: 20-cents per paper bag
• Ordinance language:
(f) The Waste Reduction Fee shall be administered by the City of Aspen Environmental
Health Department.
(g) Funds deposited in the Waste Reduction and Recycling Account shall be used for the
following projects, in the following order of priorities:
(1) Campaigns conducted by the City of Aspen and begun within three hundred sixty-five (365) days
of the effective date of this act, to:
Provide reusable carryout bags to residents and visitors;
And
Educate residents, businesses, and visitors about the impact of trash on the City's environmental health,
the importance of reducing the number of disposable carryout bags entering the waste stream, and the
impact of disposable carryout bags on the waterways and the environment.
(2) Ongoing campaigns conducted by the City of Aspen to:
a. Provide reusable bags to both residents and visitors; and
b. Create public educational campaigns to raise awareness about waste reduction and recycling;
c. Funding programs and infrastructure that allows the Aspen community to reduce waste and
recycle.
d. Purchasing and installing equipment designed to minimize trash pollution, including, recycling
containers, and waste receptacles;
e. Funding community cleanup events and other activities that reduce trash;
f. Maintaining a public website that educates residents on the progress of waste reduction efforts;
and
g. Paying for the administration of this program.
(h) The Fees shall not be used to supplant funds appropriated as part of an approved annual budget.
(i) No Waste Reduction Fee shall revert to the General Fund at the end of the fiscal year, or at any other
time, but shall be continually available for the uses and purposes set forth in Subsection (g) of this
Section without regard to fiscal year limitation.
Boulder
• Key takeaways:
o Outlines costs for recovery that are closely tied to bags.
o Staff has heard that Boulder has struggled to match the fee revenue to the narrowly
defined costs they identified for recovery.
• Bag policy: Fee on plastic and paper bags
• Fee amount: 10-cents per bag
• Ordinance language:
(g) Funds from the disposable bag fee shall be used only for the expenditures that are intended to
mitigate the effects of disposable bags, including, without limitation, the following:
(1) Administrative costs associated with developing and implementing the disposable bag fee.
(2) Activities of the City to:
(A) Provide reusable carryout bags to residents and visitors;
(B) Educate residents, businesses and visitors about the impact of disposable bags on
the City's environmental health, the importance of reducing the number of single-use
carryout bags entering the waste stream and the expenses associated with mitigating the
affects of single-use bags on the City's drainage system, transportation system, wildlife
and environment;
(C) Fund programs and infrastructure that allow the Boulder community to reduce waste
associated with disposable bags;
(D) Purchase and install equipment designed to minimize bag pollution, including
recycling containers and waste receptacles associated with disposable bags;
(E) Fund community cleanup events and other activities that reduce trash associated with
disposable bags;
(F) Mitigate the effects of disposable bags on the City's drainage system, transportation
system, wildlife and environment;
(G) Maintain a public website that educates residents on the progress of waste reduction
efforts associated with disposable bags; and
(H) Fund the administration of the disposable bag fee program.
(h) No disposable bag fees collected in accordance with this chapter shall be used only for general
government purposes.
(i) Disposable bag fees collected in accordance with this chapter shall be continually available for the
uses and purposes set forth in subsection (g) of this section without regard to fiscal year limitation. No
disposable bag fee funds shall be used for any purpose not authorized in this chapter.
1
Attachment III: Income-Qualified Relief
Recommendation
The proposed bag ordinance includes a ban on plastic bags and a point-of-sale fee on paper
bags which impacts Fort Collins’ residents. Staff recommendations include accommodations for
our lowest earners and a two-pronged approach: 1) a cost exemption of the paper bag fee at
the point-of-sale to participants who provide a benefit card reflecting participation in Federal,
State, or County income -qualified aid programs to address the needs of low-income residents,
and 2) distribution of reusable bags for low- to moderate-income earners.
Context of Recommendations
Fee Exemption at Point of Sale to Participants in Federal, State, or County income-
qualified aid programs
The proposed ordinance states “A large grocer may provide a disposable paper bag to a
customer at no charge if the customer provides, at the time of purchase, a benefit card reflecting
participation in federal, state, or county income-qualified aid program including but not limited to
benefits delivered via Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) such as Supplemental Nutrition
Assistant Program (SNAP) or Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children
(WIC).”
The primary food assistance programs are described below.
SNAP- Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
• The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a food assistance program in
Colorado, formerly known as Food Stamps. SNAP provides food assistance benefits as part
of a federal nutrition program to help low-income households purchase food. U.S. citizens
and some non-citizens are eligible for SNAP benefits. Even if so me members of the
household are not eligible, household members who are eligible may still be able to get
SNAP benefits.
• Proof of enrollment: CO Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) card
• For a family of 4, SNAP covers households below 36% Fort Collins/Loveland Family Median
Income
WIC -The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children
• The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)
provides Federal grants to States for supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition
education for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum
women, and to infants and children up to age five who are found to be at nutri tional risk. To
be eligible for this benefit program, you must be a resident of Colorado and one of the
following: Pregnant, or Breastfeeding, or Postpartum, or A child 5 years old or younger.
Individuals on Medicaid, TANF, SNAP or FDPIR are automatically income eligible.
• Proof of enrollment: CO Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) card
• For a family of 4 in Fort Collins, WIC covers households below 52% of Fort Collins/Loveland
Family Median Income
SNAP/WIC Eligibility Guidelines in Fort Collins
Each state sets eligibility guidelines. The graphic below shows the eligibility requirements in
Colorado.
ATTACHMENT 3
2
Reusable Bag Distribution for Low to Moderate Income Residents
A portion of the revenue collected from the bag fee will be used by the City to purchase
reusable bags that will be distributed to low to moderate-income residents. The City will apply
an equity lens and partner with the community to create an equitable plan for distributing bags
to low-income households. This is likely to include working with non-profits and government
agencies such as the Food Bank, Homeward Alliance, Larimer County Workforce Center, etc.
to distribute bags. Reusable bags will also be distributed through affordable housing properties
and at public events hosted by the City and community nonprofits. Participants in all City
income-qualified programs will receive notification about reu sable bag distribution events. If
additional funding is made available in advance of receiving bag fee revenue, the City will
distribute reusable bags earlier.
Attachment IV: Single Use Bag Policy Implementation Resourcing
Recommendation
To fund program implementation from June 2021 until bag fee revenue begins, staff
recommends an interim allocation. Staff recommends funding Scenario 2 ($87,500 in 2021),
and Councilmembers may also prefer funding Scenario 1 ($70,000 in 2021). If preferred by
Councilmembers, staff will:
• Develop off-cycle funding ordinance language to be considered simultaneous to the first
and second reading of the bag ordinance to fund implementation elements from Jun –
Dec 2021.
• Develop a BFO offer for the 2022 budget cycle for one-time funding for the
implementation elements from Jan – July 2022 (projected start date for bag fee revenue
to fund the program).0F
1
Context for Recommendation
To successfully roll out the single use bag policy in May 2022, work will begin in June 2021.
This attachment describes anticipated costs, which align with the assumptions made in the fee
summary attachment.
Funding could be provided via up to three different sources as shown in Figure 1.
Fig 1: Potential Funding Sources for Single Use Bags Policy Implementation
Date June 2021-Dec 2021 Jan 2022 – July 2022 June 2022 and
beyond
Proposed
funding
source
One-time off-cycle budget
allocation authorized by
ordinance in Feb 2021
BFO offer to be
developed for 2022 one-
time funding
Bag fee revenue
allocated through
BFO process
The communications and engagement campaign funding and number of bags purchased are
scalable. The following chart shows two potential scenarios.
1 It is possible that resource needs for 2022 could be covered by bag fee revenue, depending on timing and other
logistics. Staff is working to clarify but if fee revenue is not available, one-time funding from the general fund
would be necessary.
ATTACHMENT 4
Fig 2: Summary of Resource Scenarios for Single Use Bags Policy Implementation
Program element Scenario 1 Scenario 2
Reusable bags for low- and
medium-income households
$5,000 *
(3 bags each for 1,500
households)
$10,000 *
(3 bags each for 3,000
households)
Communications and
engagement campaigns
$30,000 *
moderate campaign
$60,000 *
substantial campaign
1.0 FTE to manage program $105,000 $105,000
Total costs in 2021 off-cycle $70,000 $87,500
Total costs in 2022 BFO
offer $70,000 $87,500
Total costs prior to fee
revenue funding availability $140,000 $175,000
* scalable based on Council direction
Element details
Staff
1.0 FTE classified staff member to
• roll out the program with community and grocers
• conduct equitable communications and engagement campaigns
• coordinate distributing free reusable bags to low- and medium-income households.
• continue to develop a comprehensive approach to addressing single use plastics.
Reusable bags
The City may want to purchase reusable bags for distribution to low and medium-income
households. Additional reusable bags are anticipated to be purchased using fee revenue once
the fee is in place.
Communications and engagement campaigns
This would fund initial campaigns until fee revenue begins, at which time it would be funded via
the fee revenue.
Attachment V: Summary of Survey Responses – “Share Your Thoughts on
Plastics Policy”
Overview:
• Available at: https://ourcity.fcgov.com/plastics
• 378 Responses
• Included responses from Dec. 17 – Dec. 29.
Statistics:
222 62 12 82LEVEL OF SUPPORT
Plastic Bag Ban and Paper Bag Fee at Large
Grocers in Fort Collins, Beginning in May
2022
Strongly Support Somewhat Support Somewhat Do Not Support Do Not Support
263 38 12 63LEVEL OF SUPPORT
A Ban on Plastic Bags
Strongly Support Somewhat Support Somewhat Do Not Support Do Not Support
ATTACHMENT 5
131
189
144
155
108
77
112
69
28
20
27
52
108
85
91
94
A FEE ON PAPER BAGS
PORTION OF PAPER BAG FEE BEING RETAINED
BY THE CITY
PORTION OF PAPER BAG FEE BEING RETAINED
BY GROCERS
AN EXEMPTION TO THE PAPER BAG FEE FOR
LOW-INCOME CUSTOMERS
Paper Bags: How Strongly Do You Support
the Following?
Strongly Support Somewhat Support Somewhat Do Not Support Do Not Support
226
173
200
242
206
54
78
72
60
68
11
29
21
14
21
85
94
80
58
78
IMPLMENTING POLICY IN MAY 2022
CIVIL PENALTIES FOR THOSE WHO DON'T
COMPLY
AUDIT IMPACTED BUSINESSES
ANNUAL REPORTING ON PERFORMANCE
MEASURES
ANNUAL REPORTING ON DISPROPORTIONATE
IMPACTS
Support For Other Policy Elements
Strongly Support Somewhat Support Somewhat Do Not Support Do Not Support
Open Ended Question: What other thoughts do you have on the proposed
policy?
I think plastic bags should be banned everywhere and not just the large stores. If there is a need for reusable
bags for low-income people, stores and businesses can donate some bags. For example, the Market Days
program for seniors has sturdy reusable bags provided every shopping week with various logos on them.
How does this proposed policy affect the disabled community? Carrying groceries in paper bags is much
more difficult and will also require many more trips from the car to the home as an example.
Why is this currently a City priority in the midst of a pandemic, especially considering reusable bags are
currently not allowed to be used and grocery stores.
What problem is the City truly trying to solve, or is this just an effort to keep up with the likes of Boulder and
California?
What does gender, sexual orientation, education, race, income and other questions have to do with a policy
discussion about the what type of bags should be allowed at grocery and other retail stores?
City leadership should thoroughly vet the potential unintentional consequences that will result from a ban on
plastic grocery bags and be conscious of the "tone-deaf" message this type of ordinance sends during
COVID and ask themselves what problem are we trying to solve?
Since it is only large grocery stores affected, I think they should be able to implement it more quickly than
May of 2022.
If this ballot measure passes and prior to implementation, a baseline of existing sales should be established
and then annual reporting should include whether there is an increase/decrease in sales across the city by
grocery stores, department stores like Target and Walmart, etc. of small waste can liners (3 to 4 gallon size)
to supplant the needs of consumers that still require plastic bags for purposes that cannot be satisfied by
reusable shopping bags. Such uses include cat litter box clean-out, residential kitchen and bathroom wet
trash disposal, dog waste, etc.
National Public Radio ran a story on this very issue and their report identified research indicating that more
plastic is consumed in communities that ban plastic bags and that the carbon footprint and impact to the
environment caused in the production of reusable shopping bags is greater than when communities don't
force bans on plastic shopping bags. Don't take my word for it, listen to the story yourselves....
https://www.npr.org/2019/05/08/721542495/the-problem-with-banning-plastic-bags
If the City truly was data driven and a leader in this realm, it would not be plodding down the path to ban
plastic bags without first exploring this higher possible consumption of plastics and using such data in its
decision making. This feels much like a need to "check a box" so that the city can say it is in a special club
alongside the communities that have already done it...like keeping up with the Jones', rather than actually
making a data-driven decision about its climate future. Perception seems to be a higher priority than reality.
If someone cannot afford reusable bags, to take to the store, maybe a business in town or one of the Clubs,
like Rotary, might take this on as a project.
It takes some change in habits, but it is really quite easy to bring your own bags and stop using plastic.
Education is key.
If you ban plastic bags,You CAN NOT charge for paper bags. Government OVER REACH!!!!!
I think the time spent on determining impacts to low-income households could be better spent on programs
that have a positive impact on these groups. I would start with 1 type of plastic bag (standard grocery) and
then expand in the future.
You are going after the grocers for plastic bags and mentioned restaurants with plastic utensils and straws.
But I don't see mention of banning restaurant items or charging extra. If you go after the restaurants, you
should also include Styrofoam food/drink containers. Cardboard is much more environmentally friendly.
A ban is the only solution. The problem starts at the cash register. But maybe support for free reusable
bags for low income customers is wiser than an exemption on plastics. Don't brand those bags as clearly
"poor people bags." Build a subsidized campaign in which merchants can brand their new reusable bags at
a lower cost. Get guys like me to buy them in packs of 5. Reward the eagerly cooperating merchants for
reducing their plastic bag use with a financial incentive. Make it positive for them.
each/every grocery store needs to do their parts ASAP. 90+ % of Whole food shoppers bring their own bags,
Sprout 85%, KingSoopers 70%, Safeway 60% and worst is Walmart 0%.
While I strongly oppose the use of single-use plastic shopping bags, bringing this proposition forward in the
middle of a pandemic when stores will not allow the use of reusable bags is extremely poor timing. Also, it is
folly to propose banning single-use plastic bags and propose a fee for paper bags at the same time.
Due to the pandemic, there has been a significant increase in customers using grocery store curbside
pickups and only plastic bags are used by most grocers. The City should consider if the ban will change the
type of bags grocery stores will continue to use for curbside pickup and how that will add to the cost of the
customer's bill. Grocers will need to train their employees to consolidate groceries in fewer bags as they
have a habit of putting 1-2 items in a bag.
I realize that right now the market for recycled products is not there, making it hard to encourage recycling.
And the rules for what can and cannot be recycled makes it difficult for citizens to follow those rules. Plastics
manufacturers have increased the reusable/recyclable potential for their products. I would encourage an
educational approach: how can we creatively reuse plastics? I am strongly opposed to yet another
government intervention that I am sure is believed to be for our own good. Our taxes continue to go up, the
cost of goods sold increases. Do we really want to add one more fine to our lives? Will this actually make
Fort Collins the city of choice to live in?
This is absolutely ridiculous social engineering. It is not aligned with values of a free society.
Free choice and market will eliminate plastics IF it benefits us, not a small group imposing their socialistic
values on the rest of us. We don't want dictates from bureaucrats, nor misery like in California. Stop the
nonsense.
I've lived in places with a plastic bag ban. You get used to it. It's probably a good policy in the long run.
However, Fort Collins is a nice place to live because people aren't as "strident" and "condemning". People
here are "nice" liberals, not mean ones (as they tend to be in Oregon, where I lived for a while.) It's always a
good idea to be kind and gentle about ideas like this, and not self-righteous and condemning.
Please implement this ban. It it well past the time when this should have been done.
I love this idea, and I think it should be expanded past plastic bags and grocers. It should also be extended
to restaurants and places that regularly provide consumers with single use plastics without giving them
another option. I would love to see plastic utensils and to go containers disappear, as those are just as
harmful it the environment.
I fully support banning plastic bags. Paper bags, however, are less harmful to the environment. If a fee for
paper bags is enacted, I would like to see low-cost ways for households to obtain reusable bags. Perhaps
the city can even give grocers/other retail a subsidy to provide reusable bags at the beginning of the
program to its customers.
In other countries, I have lived in, the business also provides plastic bags but customers have to pay for
them. I would also suggest the business provide reusable bags for sale. People will complain at first but will
get used to the change rather quickly.
I think the most important component of any new policy is education particularly trying to get shoppers to
rethink how any product is transported from a store to their home in a matter of a short time- you do not need
so many plastic bags to do this. We need a cultural shift so it becomes automatic like putting on seat belts
that we always use reusable bags. It's not that hard, but we need to make this happen. Thanks for
presenting this most important issue.
This is my second survey. I changed my mind because I don't think targeting grocers is fair or fosters
competition. What about the big box stores who are also selling groceries? It appears that they are already
taking business from the major grocers. This just helps them and reduces our options as consumers. Also,
a big concern is if stores just use multi-use plastic (thicker bags) to get around the ordinance. Then that add
more plastic pollution. I strongly support good legislation to reduce plastic. It needs to be smart and fair.
An overall ban should not be enacted.
Rather education and education so that the consumer is drawn to reusable bags.
I currently will try to use reusable bags but sometimes forget to grab them. I do not want to be penalized for
the occasional slip up.
Implement incentives to encourage people to use reusable bags, instead of forcing penalties on people.
If the store keeps part of the fee they should be required to give one free reuseable bag for every 50 dollars
to 100 dollars of an order. Why stop at single use bags? What about plastic cups, straws, and single use
self-serve and hot food containers?
I'm strongly in favor of this ordinance. Aside from the effect this may have on other local municipalities that
may consider a similar policy, it will have a direct impact on local trash collection be extending the life of our
landfill.
The only reason that I don't support implementing a plastic bag ban in May 2022 is that that date is too far
away. I'm already astonished that we're only having this conversation in Fort Collins now, in 2020. (Every
other place in which I've lived in the past few years has already made this move.) I think that this policy
needs to be implemented the day before as soon as possible.
I am strongly against all of the above options. We live in a free society, if someone doesn't want bags then
they are free not to use them and charging for them doesn't reduce their use its just another tax disguised as
something else. Thank you
Reusable bags spread germs. Banning one-time use bags when, thanks to COVID, we aren't even allowed
to use our own bags seems very short-sighted.
Bad time with COVID-19, equity impacts ignored, small thinking (it really ignores the single bag usage), “me
too” is not leading, would favor circular economic approach
During this time of unprecedented pandemic and the impact it has had in businesses and citizens this has to
be a very poor decision by 5 of the city council members.
In fact, they are so out of touch with the real world it is extremely disappointing. Also , have they even
considered citizens bringing in their own bags that might be contaminated with potential COVID exposure.
Also, how would that work with citizens picking up groceries that are delivered to their car.
This is the wrong time to even consider this and citizens have told them before that this fee was not wanted
or needed.
Government has already done everything to hurt business and people. Just another blow to individuals. If
you don’t believe in plastic. Don’t use it!!
I have reusable bags. Several. I don't use them due to convenience. I am also cheap, so if I had to pay to
use a paper bag, my reusable bags would become far more convenient and my behavior would change. I
doubt I am alone in this thinking. But why wait until 2022?
Many of us recycle or reuse plastic bags for summer food markets, pet waste, and various other
projects....you need to research this more.
I will shop outside Fort Collins if this occurs.
Thank you for doing this.
I feel we need to advocate at the State level to change the ‘ban on bans’ of single use plastics as well.
I don’t think municipalities can enact bans on plastics at the moment. I believe the only thing possible is to
enact such a large tax (with provisions for low income to get reusable bags) that no one will want to pay it
and will find more sustainable ways to transport their items.
A really large fee like 1.00-2.00. The point is not to collect the fee but to stop the use of disposable bags.
Also needed at the State level-ban on use of polystyrene take out containers. reps singer and Hooton have
expressed interest.
utilize the fees to offer reusable bags free of charge to low-income households
I think this is a great step in the right direction towards reducing the use of single-use plastics in our
community. The reduction of single-use plastics is a great way to reduce our community's environmental
footprint. Plastic bag bans or fees have been introduced elsewhere (including other Colorado communities,
Breckenridge for example) with success, so I do believe its as good a time as any to start taking active
measures to reduce our community's environmental impact.
Thank you for proposing the ban on plastic bags, and a few on paper bags. People will adapt quickly to
bringing their own bags; many do this already. Eliminating plastic bags has already been done in many
countries, and several cities in the USA. If not for industry lobbyists, this would have been done years ago.
Just do it. Along with Styrofoam. Painful at fiest and quickly forgotten .
The policy as proposed will cause a direct increase in purchase of additional plastic bags for a variety of
purposes currently addressed by re-purposing both plastic and paper bags. Plastic bags not re-purposed are
often re-cycled through the city required sites at grocery stores. Additional education could increase this
dramatically.
Lumping fines for paper bag into a Plastics Policy makes zero sense as they represent none of the problems
dictated in the above policy. Any reference to paper bags should be removed.
I support implementing this sooner than May 2022. I also support expanding beyond 'large grocers' to
include most, if not all, businesses.
How about just educating consumers instead of treating them like children.
Plastic doesn't pollute, people do. Stop it with these stupid policies.
People and businesses are already struggling and you want to throw this policy at then as well.
Stop with these policies that don't have a real positive impact.
I love the idea of a plastic bag ban but am uncertain about also imposing a fee on paper bags. I think
including this will make more members not want to vote for this and we need to think of the greater good, as
well as affordability and accessibility. How would you even go about low income folks being exempt? Seems
unnecessary to add that fee.
People want to see plastic bags go. I do, and know many others who do too. I think the best solution is to
mandate grocers to stop using them, and just use paper bags instead. Many grocers already offer discounts
when you bring your own bags - that would be something I'd love to see the city cover through tax revenues,
rather than charging fines and paper bag fees. Cover discount incentives for those who bring their own bags.
Positive reinforcement :)
This policy seems excellent to me. I strongly support a plastic bag ban!
This is great that the city is trying to take action as the convenience does not out weigh the cost of non
reusable bags. I also am glad that the city is trying to take into account low income member in our
community who need to be taken into account so they are not disenfranchised by this ban.
There will be painful transition period but once individuals are properly trained to bring their own bags we will
all be the better for it. Plastic, “disposable” bags are just lazy and irresponsible.
Do not charge a fee for paper bags. They are recyclable. Just ban the plastic. I would vote no if you charge
a fee for paper. Why should paper users have to pay for plastic violators? That's ridiculous. The grocers do
not need paper bag fee. KS switched to plastic only in NOCO. There was no single, no info provided.
Grocers have been selling and giving away reusable bags for years now. Why would you pay them to do
what they already do??
Do you not have better things that you could be spending your time on? We have been here before with the
plastic bag issue!!!! ENOUGH ALREADY!!! Stop wasting our money on this. We like our plastic bags and
plastic straws!!! Someone there has a plastic umm...well, issue!!!
If the city is concerned about single use plastics, the right move is not to ban them, but to provide an
alternative to stores and shoppers free of charge. This idea, from start to finish is awful.
Please double these comments, as my husband and I discussed the survey and agree. He add that there is
a floating heap of plastic in the ocean the size of the state of Texas. We can't continue our present practices,
and yes, change is painful, but it is necessary.
How about just educating rather than dictating.
This question was already answered when voters repealed the previous bag tax. Please stop. Next time we
will be recalling council members who do not respect the will of the people as well.
I have been very concerned about this issue for a long time. The sooner this can be put into effect the better.
I am low income and I have my own bags which I use the majority of the time. I do forget sometimes, though.
I am all for including any and all single use plastics! I can't state my support strongly enough!
Wish to thank the City Council for its progressive stand on this and other issues while continuing to evaluate
how their actions impact low income people.
This is just another nanny law, expanding government. This is going in the wrong direction.
I feel that this is a long overdue policy. I continue to be surprised how many people leave a grocery store
with plastic bags, when it is so easy to use a reusable bag, which we have been doing for 30 years.
I believe low-income customers should be given reusable bags. It is their responsibility to bring those said
bags when going shopping. If they do not, then they should be fined as everyone else. It is not that difficult to
bring and use reusable bags. Personal responsibility for the environment is everyone's job. It is truly
unfortunate that we need an ordinance to make people accountable for protecting the environment.
This idea has already been voted down by the people. Are we to assume you know what's better for the
people than the people themselves?
I agree that I would not want a policy like this to affect low-income people, but reusable bags are so
inexpensive that it seems to me, rather than exempting them from the bag fee, a better option would be to
give each family on public assistance a certain number of reusable bags. That way, they would be able to be
in compliance with the policy, and there would not have to be a special exemption for them. In a way, I think
giving them a certain number of reusable bags would allow them to feel less singled out, and more a part of
the community of caring people who are trying to reduce single use items of every kind (plastic bags AND
paper bags.)
I commend city council for taking concrete steps towards environment protection!
Plastic bags should have been banned a long time ago.. they breakdown and get into our soil, air and
water..and many of those particles make it to our oceans as well all the way from Colorado. I hope it’s on
the ballot and it passes.
If we open our restaurants there will be less use of single use plastics because of less take out orders. Often
grocery store clerks do not optimize the use of each bag, maybe start with educating clerks to use less bags
and be more efficient. Instead of banning bags and charging us if we forget to bring our own bags why don't
we focus on positive enforcement? So if you bring your own bag you get a bag discount? People react better
to positive enforcement instead of negative.
Aren't the cost of the bags already included in each grocery store purchase? Adding an additional charge on
the consumer for using a bag does not solve the problem. Why not focus efforts into solving the problem
instead of punishing the consumer? Fort Collins should look into alternative bag materials. One could argue
canvas bags use more resources to produce; energy, water, harmful dyes, emissions to ship the heavier
product... Be different than Boulder and California. Let's find a better solution instead of taking the easy
route.
Really dumb idea. People do not need to be told what bags they can and cannot use. Reusable bags not
sanitary
I do not support the ban or fees. In many communities the number of purchased single use bags goes up
after a ban or limit. We should work to further recycle the bags if we are trying to keep them out of the
landfill. I will not support any regulation of them.
How about a ban on selling anything that is in those clamshell plastic boxes that aren't recycleable.
ban the plastics, they are the problem. I disagree with a fee on paper. Just encourage people to use their
own bags. Monitoring and reviewing and penalizing retailers is going to cause division, resentment, and cost
a lot of taxpayer money. Work towards voluntary cooperation without unnecessary spending.
Please do this. Offer discounted packable light weight reusable bags from recycled plastics
It is imperative that a community as fine as FC and Larimer Co adopt and adhere to stringent environmental
restoration and protection policies.
It's time for FC to embrace this proposal
Just do it! Climate change is decimating our air, land & water.
Banning single-use plastics is a WONDERFUL idea! Anyone can bring a bag with them, rich or poor. It's just
a matter of getting used to it. I've been doing it for many years, and it's no problem at all!
I'd also like to see those wasteful and polluting single-use water bottles, plastic clamshells (the kind salads
come in), plastic take-out containers, etc. banned. I'm old enough to remember when takeout came in paper
containers. Let it be so again!
Thank you for pressing this important issue!
I believe that banning plastic and paper bags in grocery stores is essential! It Should be done before 2022!!
stop the use of plastic and paper bags now! The climate requires it!
I dislike trash like everyone, but I also try to look at things from a practical perspective. Foremost, the single
use plastic bag is dying a natural death in the first place. Many stores, prominently King Soopers, our local
Kroger affiliate has already announced it is phasing out these bags. Others will follow. Other studies have
shown paper bags are arguably nearly equally harmful overall to the environment. From the Coloradoan
article: "The city isn't considering the bag fee as a revenue-driver. Money from bag fees is typically used to
cover administrative costs of the program, including compliance monitoring and providing people with
reusable bags." While I am sure a few reusable bags are given out from programs like this, I am quite
certain it is an infinitesimally small number or percent of bags used overall. This falls in line with the concept
that government officials have never met a spending program they did not like. Creating a program to create
a fee or tax to cover the cost of the program for a problem that is vanishing already makes no sense. The
Most annoying of the reasoning for the program is math itself. Also from the article, plastic trash is 10% of
trash overall Within that, 17% of the plastic trash is single use bags. So overall, these bags makeup 1.7%
of the trash. The numbers as presented, I am skeptical of, but for this discussion I will use. By 2022 when
this may come into effect, the single use bags will be nearly extinct, so even less by then. I am sure there
are other pollution problems that can be addressed at much lower cost for much more impact and much less
divisive after everything we have all gone through for the last year. I hate trash like everyone else. But I also
hate wasting money. There are good and even great government programs. This would not be one of them.
My only support responses were to be considered if this oppressive ban takes place. This plastic and paper
waste makes up a ridiculously small portion of our waste stream and contributes such a tiny amount to GHG.
No thanks
That this is just another way for the city council to look like they care when this is just a money grab.
Finally! Start here and do more, like all retail.
This has been needed for a long time. I am hopeful that the City of Fort Collins can finally get this approved
and push forward where other progressive cities have been for years if not decades. Moving away from
plastic bags is an inconvenience, but it is not hard. Collectively we can do this and do our part to reduce the
great plastic invasion of our cities, neighborhoods, and even our bodies. Thanks to our city council for
leading the charge for our community with this important work.
We are somewhat in support of doing something to limit or reduce the proliferation of disposable plastic
bags, but do not support the reusable cloth bags. If paper bags can be properly recycled, that would be our
preference.
Really? Don't like using plastic bags? Don't, bring your own!!
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/721542495 Here is a nine minute NPR story on how a plastic ban is actually
worse for the environment than the alternatives.
Instead of a punitive consequence for businesses not in compliance as the change occurs, is there a way to
flip it to a reward for compliance? What about providing COFC reusable bags to low income families to use?
Major cities have implement similar policies and it works It's 2020 and it is strange that we can't move past
single use plastics, especially plastic bags. I previously lived in a city that implemented a bag tax and plastic
ban and it was tough to remember to bring your own bag for like 2 weeks, and then you just get used to it.
Fully support this and ways that the city can help low-income households or less profitable businesses make
the adjustments more smoothly.
I do not support this policy. This policy does not address increased costs for EVERYONE in Fort Collins. I
am unaware of a study that says plastics is a serious issue in Fort Collins. The logic of 'everyone else is
doing it' is not a basis for passing new laws. Lastly, the policies described in this survey clearly indicate a
new bureaucracies being created (e.g. auditing business and studying low income impacts) adding bloat to
the city government and diluting resources from other much needed priorities such as economic recovery
from COVID-19.
yes and please do not listen to any excuses as to why any person who can get to a store to buy something,
can't bring their own bag if they need one. period. thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What public outreach and education is planned?
What is recommended in place of the bags previously offered by stores?
hard to do with Covid in play so 2022 is ok
A plastic bag fee would be better than a ban for a variety of reasons, including that studies show it works
better, especially if implemented BEFORE a ban. A more comprehensive program with fees for other items
would be best, and then it would make sense to look at impacts on low-income households. Reusables could
be subsidized by the fees to offset those impacts. FoCo is part of the global issue of a plastic pandemic. We
can do more than a bag ban!
Based on the above questions, this policy is all but approved.
I think it would be ideal if low-income households were provided with reusable bags at no cost as well - to
mitigate cost impacts.
Right now, with covid, customers are discouraged from using their own bags. If a similar situation occurs,
when using bags from stores are required, the fees should not apply.
I'm concerned that enforcement is going to be very difficult, and overtime the policy will diminish... In other
Cities I have lived with fees for plastic bags or bag credits if someone provided a reusable bag - the cashier
was not well trained and did not follow the local requirements. for example $.05 fee or credit doesn't really
matter as a part of the larger grocery bill and so often it was not applied to the order. I would like more
details on how enforcement will ensure compliance and add elements of transparency for shaming those
who do not follow suit. before i vote, I'd like more details on implementation and follow through. also, why
not include restaurants? if I could count how many times i asked for no silverware/cutlery and still received it
with my delivery, I'd run out of fingers and toes real fast. if restaurants are hurting for money as the result of
COVID disruptions, why not focus on their own food waste and wasteful use of disposable cutlery, rather
than tax breaks to do more of the same? if this is a BIG Move as a part of Our Climate Future, I'm not
understanding how this is so "BIG" and transformational....?
Support and resources to provide low-income people with reusable bags and other solutions.
reusable bags are for all regardless of income - and not all reusable bags are free of plastic - so push cotton
or cotton blend bags that can be washed and reused many many times - some of my cloth bags are over 15
years old - canvas lasts!!!
As much as I hate plastic and use reusable bags as much as I can, I think it would make more sense to have
a fee for both plastic and paper. I don't understand why that wasn't an option in this survey. Nor was there a
reusable-only option. The survey basically seems to be assessing how I'm going to vote in April and not
what do I really want to see as a local resident regarding this issue. :-P
Things cost too much the way it is. Way put a burden on us even more. You people are trying to follow in
Boulder's footsteps. We don't make their kind of money. You will just drive good people out on Colorado.
Have non-plastic bags at every register for purchase. Do not use the larger, heavier plastic bags as found in
California. That just exacerbates the issue.
Make it super easy for low income not to have to pay the fee without being embarrassed. Making it super
easy may mean that some (I don't believe many in comparison to the total number of people) that wouldn't
qualify take advantage of this but that's acceptable, in my opinion, in order to easily accommodate low
income. We should be sensitive to low income levels.
I'd like to see expansion of what is recycled. One possibility may be that, instead of duplicating in Fort Collins
something as extensive as CHARM in Boulder, that the City of Fort Collins can work out an arrangement
with them where the items are collected here and trucked to them on a weekly basis or some other type of
cooperative effort with nearby communities. I'm far from knowing the numerous details involved in recycling
but I'd like to see us get to a William McDonough "Cradle to Cradle" approach of every waste item either
being a natural waste that is recycled or a technical waste that is recycled. And much of it starts with the
inputs so we try to eliminate as much of both that we can before it's even generated.
Fort Collins should be a leader in reducing and eventually eliminating pollution from all types of plastics—
bags, food containers, single-use items such as straws and stirrers, and micro plastics. These materials are
overwhelming our planet, and micro plastics are being ingested by people and animals. We do not know the
extent of the damage that these tiny plastic particles are inflicting on living things, but we cannot wait to find
out. We need to take strong, decisive action now.
Bring your own bags or pack it out not sacked. Why do we charge for plastic bags. Just do not have them.
What is the difference in cost between paper & plastic to the stores?
It needs to be all merchants not just grocery stores. Kohls, Jax, Walmart all pass out plastic.
It's hard to people, even though they want to, to get into the habit of taking their alternative bags into the
grocery store every time they shop. This ordinance will nudge them to do this. With this incentive, people will
develop this habit and will feel better about themselves and feel they're helping out, doing their bit as
responsible citizens. This positive aspect of the ordinance should be promoted when it's implemented.
Thanks, and good luck.
Banning the plastic bags is a good idea. I had been using my reusable bags until Covid. Another issue is
recycling all the other plastic items with chasing arrows. This should be addressed. Our curbside pickup
says certain plestic items cannot be recycled. It is confusing as to which can be recycled. It pains me to
know these items are ending up in the landfill.
Our lives and planet will be better off without plastic bags. We got along just fine without them 40 years ago.
I wonder how you will be able to deal with low income persons? Would it not be best to GIVE them reusable
grocery bags? Those last for ages. That would make it easier for the grocers, as they don't have to single
out anyone for different treatment. And, if those people don't use the reusables they will have to pay for the
paper bags. That way everyone has to take the responsibility for their actions.
Wish it wasn’t until 2022. Other localities have already implemented
I don't understand how you would implement the exemption for low-income households. It seems onerous
and could lead to weirdness at the grocery store. Better would be a system to give free re-usable bags to
low-income households, e.g., annually. Also, "a portion" is obviously vague. 1%? 55%? So vague to make it
impossible to gauge/answer the question. (That said, I really appreciate that the city is thinking about this -
and I appreciate all of the work the city has done this year.)
This absolutely needs to be done. I am concerned about the implementation for low-income households and
am curious to hear more about it.
You ban plastic bags and then we have to buy plastic bags from the stores to use for garbage and animal
waste. You are not solving any problem at all..instead you are creating a larger problem by cutting more
trees down for the paper bags. Reusable bags do not wash and last. Common sense is lacking.
This is California negative. They ruined their state and are moving here. Positive: make feed bag carriers
for groceries and retail shopping the proud and desired way to shop. Not only do you need to exempt poor
but also seniors who do not carry heavy loads. Get cooperation from trash companies. Campaign not only
irresponsible plastic use but fabric waste from t-shirts and rugs to showers wasting water because they have
only one flow rate. Let's talk. Edith Brown 970-232-9209.
Do not do this. This is kind of ridiculous, considering that just as most people were starting to bring their own
bags, we were told not to due to the pandemic, which seemingly set us back several years as far as
voluntary compliance/bringing your own bag. Now that we are "allowed" to bring our own bag again, I see
very few people doing it. Rather than draconian laws and expensive auditing and enforcement, why don't
you run a campaign reminding people of the benefits and that they CAN bring their own bags, which was
banned (for seemingly no reason as it's since been allowed again).
I would suggest measures to limit waste from other disposable plastics such as take-out food and fast-food
restaurants, in addition to these proposed measures. A large fraction of trash along roadsides consists of
fast-food containers.
I would like to see more policies that encourage resuse in the economy
I also support measures to reduce restaurant/take-out use of single use plastics like bags, plastic containers,
drink containers/lids/straws and plastic silverware. I would love to see the city take action on these sources
of plastic waste as well.
I think it’s a great step. Though I’m sure there will be some resistance it’s a step we do need to take to
protect our environment.
The plastic bins at the recycle center are always full. Suggest they be emptied daily
Find ways to recycle the plastic bsgs
I would like to see the city move faster and go beyond just large grocers more quickly as well. Thank you!
we have to do it eventually, so let's do it now!
Be sure you are able to target our entire community. Those of us answering this questionnaire obviously
have access to this information, but many won't. Please include those most impacted by these proposals,
part of making the solution/policy/enforcement. Thank you
It’s about time! Do it, sooner the better!
Reporting in impacts and litigating penalties may make this more expensive. I think May of 22 is too far
away. Can we phase in? Can we include making plastic utensils and straws on request only? I see no
signage about that despite all the carryout these days. We could do that TODAY!
Citizens are self regulating! No government intervention is needed
Ban plastic bags, yes. Ban paper bags, no. Do not combine this two issues. They are separate types of
materials. They should be presented to the public as separate issues.
I reuse the plastic bags and recycle my unused newspaper and grocery bags.
Support banning plastic bags, not very clear why the focus on paper bags. Disagree with the differentiation
of low income population. The regulations should cover everyone. Should not be a reason to hire more city
staff.
Bring it on! It's overdue.
Some fees could be used to help provide lower income people with reusable bags. The city could also hold
an event where businesses get together to meet new potential customers and network and whatever. But
the catch is having those businesses give away reusable bags. For example, I have several from Comcast.
I'd much rather see a ban on single use plastic and styrofoam food containers for take out along with straws
and plastic cutlery. I think this would have better impact as clamshell and stryrofoam containers cannot be
recycled. While I welcome a cutdown on plastic bags I am concerned about low-income communities.
Plastic carry out bags provided by retailers would seem to comprise a tiny fraction of plastic packaging sold
by retailers. Many of the items that go into those plastic bags are themselves wrapped in plastic. This is
unnecessary. Dry goods can be packaged in biodegradable paper or cellulose. Wet goods can be packaged
in glass or metal. These old-fashioned materials are phased out largely because of consumer aesthetic
preferences, but why should we prioritize that sort of consumer aesthetic preference over environmental
considerations?
As former chair of the NRAB I testified before council on 1st & 2nd reading for the plastic bag fee several
years ago. Unfortunately, a small band of activists put pressure on the 2nd reading and the policy was
abandoned. I think people are more aware of the damage plastic does in the environment and the majority
are ready to push back on the small segment that sees this (mistakenly) as a civil liberties issue. I say go for
it.
I think this is a great step towards less plastic pollution
Elimination of plastic and paper bags is both simple and vital. Many of us grew up before plastic bags and
know that simply bringing clot bags or other containers is NO PROBLEM once you get used to us. We did it
for decades before plastic!
We also need a ban on other plastic products, such as plastic clamshells used to package bakery items and
produce. We have been led to believe that these items are recyclable when in fact they often are not. This
green-washing is very deceptive and creates consumer confusion.
1) Studies have shown that a plastic bag fee is much more effective than a bag ban, primarily for
psychological reasons. For example: https://econlife.com/2020/02/plastic-bag-bans-and-fees/
2) Paper bags are NOT necessarily a more environmentally friendly alternative to plastic bags and need not
be encouraged as such. This is a complex LCA topic, but here is a good article delving into this-
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47027792.
3) The key is public education on bag reuse, to reduce environmental impact. Paper bags take much more
energy to make and transport, the key is to reuse a certain number of times to reduce the life cycle impact.
This is even more true of the canvas or other plastic reusable bags - these need to be reused over a
hundred times to breakeven according to some estimates, but people tend to buy far too many of these but
keep forgetting them at home and buying more new reusable bags, which is counterproductive as it leads to
more plastic pollution eventually.
Why wait until 2022 Make it May 2021
The community did not support this when it was proposed last time. When reusable bags were banned
under the guise of public safety during the pandemic, it became obvious that this was never about the health
of our community or environment. In addition, more of the community is utilizing grocery delivery and pickup,
which is not addressed by this policy. This “problem” should be solved with education, not bans and fines.
The ban should begin as voluntary on part of providers and consumers. Many shoppers already brought
their own bags to grocery stores before the pandemic. The pandemic required grocery stores to reject
customer provided bags to reduce suspicion of virus transmission. Many customers will return to bringing
their own bags once the covid virus is under control. It's too soon to impose a plastic ban until observation of
plastic reduction can be measured after the pandemic abates. Even May of 2022 may be too early.
Businesses should not be monitored for compliance; businesses have enough to track without adding the
cost of monitoring compliance.
I think grocers should supply paper bags and encourage re-use of them.
No. Just no. This was not popular a few years ago and that was just a fee on plastic bags. Now your
purposing a ban and a fee in paper. No.
Keep it cost neutral, as far as possible
Keep it simple (KISS principle)
Way too aggressive at this time. I would support a fee for plastic bags but no charge for Paper. Why is it the
business fault? why not put the liability on the consumer. it needs to be their responsibility to supply their
own bags.
When the old landfill was viewed as closing city began to look at ways to encourage composting and waste
reduction. Once the new landfill site was acquired the composting and waste reduction initiatives
disappeared. As the pandemic rage(s) plastic use is at an all time high with more items being eliminated
from the list of recyclables. Can staff take a look at a long term approach that will not give our merchants any
more issues to deal with. The amount of un recycled material being shipped to homes via “on line shopping “
is enormous compared to grocery bags. Really? What’s this going to cost to get on a ballot? Please deal
with more important social interests and really focus on your “triple bottom line”. This initiative apply to none
of these and you use an ailing river as the reasoning? Really? Also your demographic question portion of
this only continues to enforce our separation as a society, please be the leaders that work toward bigger
goals!
This is a no brainer and if it occurs, customers will be forced to go along with the change.
Could we encourage more stores to offer used cardboard boxes instead of bags? A la Natural Grocer,
Mountain Market (co-op), Esh's.
Seems that exempting certain customers is reasonable but hard to implement well. Not sure how to address
this.
I certainly think that paper bags are better than plastic - so glad you are working on this issue - i get so
troubled to see people still requesting their groceries be bagged in plastic. Wondering how stores Or the City
can make reusable bags available at a reasonable cost to get people on board. I appreciate Natural Grocers
system - offering cardboard boxes to those who don't bring their own bags.
Incentivize people to do the thing that's best for our Environment, rather than penalizing individuals for
making their own choices. Give me a $.01 credit every time I shop and use my own bag. Don't charge me
anything for not complying with your rule.
I feel that eliminating single use plastics is an essential part of our future as a city, so am glad to see the
work on this topic. Because it is a complex issue, I hope that additional thought will be put towards other
sources of single-use plastics. E.g. take-out food, local food packaging, etc. I don’t want to see restaurants
any harder hit as they recover form the pandemic, but considering some support and resources for them to
source other types of carry-out containers would be so helpful. Finally, that paper bag “fee” does seem like
a bit of a turn off to the proposal in general, but I understand that the large grocers might “need” that in order
to have a better compliance rate?
Thanks for your consideration of this issue and I look forward to seeing additional solutions and ideas from
the city.
In all the questions I only see the words "fee" and "penalty". I think you are looking at this wrong. How
about an "incentive" or "enticement" for grocers and consumers to wean themselves away from plastic
bags?
I think everyone realizes that we cant just keep producing and throwing away plastic bags my the millions.
But proposing a solution that only has punitive measures is destined to fail. How about a program that
"makes it cool" not to use plastic bags? How about creating an easy "on ramp" and alternative for people of
all income levels? Taking the approach of "Thou shalt not use plastic bags..." is just begging for non-
compliance.
Most other communities have already done this. We need to get on board!
I think these proposals are AMAZING and I really hope the City of Fort Collins helps set the example of how
to make our environment a priority!
Any chance it can happen before May 2022?
Re-usable sturdy shopping bags are a simple solution. The fee on plastic bags can be used to subsidize the
cost of re-usable shopping bags, so they are available in all major shops for a low cost, something like 50
cents.
Thank you so much for considering this. And you addressed my only concern about it...the impact it might
have on low-income households.
I do not like but will live with it and abide by it if implemented
Instead of the ban, are there potential incentives that can be offered to people who do NOT use plastic (ie:
bring their own bags)? Essentially using a carrot instead of a stick... I just worry that there might be more
push-back to a ban as opposed to an incentive program, but an incentive may not get us to where we want
to be in terms of plastic waste diverted.
I think it’s a great idea to get people to get used to using less and using their own bags. We need to keep
moving in this direction.I don’t think it should be based on income, since the cost can be avoided by bringing
your own and using less. Plastic bottles should be next.
A component of the program should be incentivizing or providing reusable bags. Also plastic garbage bags
and baggies should be banned as well.
It's way past time that a plastic ban is put into effect. If it can't be recycled or made of recycled material it
should be banned.
just ban plastic bags. leave the paper bags alone or charge us $0.10 for them. all people can bring a bag or
carry what they buy. we will learn to shop differently.
I think we have been SO Spoiled and thoughtless in our use of plastic. Possibly, a Strong Impact
'consequence' will get our attention...especially if there is a strong eduation component vs. a dictatorial
approach...(even though my responses were strong, it wasn't to 'dictate' but more to get people's attention
while you/we 'educate' at the same time.
I don't think you can make a correlation on a bag fee & low income persons. I'd rather have the city offer
free bags to those who need them. I'm disappointed about all the plastic being used during covid- hope we
can go back to using our own bags soon.
Ban the plastic bags please! Not all plastic can be or is recycled and its lightweight nature means that on
windy days it can be carried out of trash and recycling bins and into the environment, including our rivers.
Single-use plastics, such as plastic bags, are widely used and easily break down into pieces too small to
remove from the environment. This should stop.
We have already been using our own reusable bags for groceries until Covid came along and will resume it
as soon as possible.
Make reusable bags cheap or free for some people or for some time prior to the implementation of the
plastic bag ban.
Can't happen soon enough!
No waste of time seeing how people of low income are being impacted; if there is consistent complaints then
we should spend the additional resources on studying the impacts but why create a problem before it exists?
They or anyone can bring a plastic trash bag grocery bag or home made fabric bag that they already have
from home or pre plastic bag ban bags and/or there can be a free bag bin where precious customers bring
back their paper bags or old plastic bags OR CUSTOMERS ARE PROVIDED WITH PACKAGING BOXES
THAT GROCERY STORES WOULD DISCARD OTHERWISE (See Esh’s market in Loveland for example)
The fee part is stopping me from supporting this. I normally use my own reusable bags but covid-19 stopped
that so now I am forced to receive plastic bags which I recycle. This fee will be passed along to consumers
and any increase the business has to incur to purchase paper bags People in this town are already
struggling. I agree plastic bags are bad for the environment. But so are plastic containers 1&5 yet I'm still
forced to throw those away because they aren't being accepted anymore for recycling.
This should have been in place years ago.
Invest in expertise around community based social marketing or other science-driven behavior change
models as you plan toward 2022. It will take more than education and regulations to make this successful. I
am a a social scientist in the conservation field for the US Fish and Wildlife Service and would be happy to
discuss further or be on a committee or team to help with this initiative in any way I can. 970-222-3881
Natalie Sexton
Encourage people to buy reusable bags.
Could start sooner. Ask people to make bags to distribute to low income popupus
Important step!
Educate people on the issues vice legislate the issue. When you start to do some reading on the issue it
sounds more like a waste/recycling management issue. I personally have reusable bags that I will bring to
the stores, but at the same time I keep some plastic bags around and reuse them for trash can liners,
shipping items for protection, keeping my car clean when I go play in the mountains and get dirty. Are we
going to be selective about banning plastic bags? There are ziplock bags, trash bags, bread bags, meat
separation bags, fruit and vegetable bags. What about other single use plastics? Fruit trays, plastic wraps,
plasticware, food trays, etc.? The COVID pandemic has shown some the importance to single use plastics.
It seems like more and more as I go into places, the business that are sustainable oriented and already
taking action themselves and those will be the places in the future that succeed as we educate the
community and businesses. Don't implement policy that is hard and costly to enforce and will cost the poor
even more money out of their pockets.
I'm tired of you guys trying to shove this down our throats every year. This has nothing to do with the
environment, this is just a way to raise fees and line your pockets.
I volunteer to pick up trash and the 2 worst things are plastic bags and plastic bottles,
Bags r bad
I have exchanged correspondence with some members of City Council on this already. Please cf. those
emails.
Fair for all use paper only with no fees we pay enough for the products
Please also come up with plan for getting rid of these bags at smaller stores as well.
We need a ban!
Plastic bags are a good starting point, but this should move to other containers that don't need to be plastic:
drink bottles and food jars, styrofoam packing material, plastic retail packaging, etc.
Better messaging to make clear that plastic isn't truly recyclable and that users of plastic bags and
packaging are being subsidized by the rest of the society will help.
I came from CA, where they passed the ban on plastic bags at retailers and put a fee on single use plastic
bags beginning in 2014. Over several years people's behaviors changed to where instead of paying a fee
for bags, people bought reusable bags of many types for use in grocery stores and retail. Reusable bags
were often used as giveaways to promote a store brand. There is also the trend for restaurants not to
provide foam or plastic take out containers but use compostable containers instead. It takes some years to
wean people off single use bags, but with CO growing, it will make a big impact here in time.
Very good thoughts of the city council, and hope it works. In Galapagos Islands in Ecuador, a group of
conservation leaders manged to get the towns to stop all use of not just plastic bags, but also all plastic soda
bottles and cups and eliminated all throw away glass bottles forcing all companies to sell beer and soda
glass bottles be reused. The only one they never could do was eliminating plastic water bottles in markets
and shops in Galapagos. And of course USA was the country that created plastic bottles, cans, bags, etc.
Western Europe does it much better than USA manages such trash and much better efficient recycling.
Long overdue. It's time to get rid of single-use plastics!
Currently some stores in town don't even want you bringing your bags in due to the pandemic. Seems like
an odd time for the City to be dreaming up the next way to impact the citizen's lives. Rather than a ban, I
would look at a bag surcharge. I would also like to see more data on total cost/environmental impact of
bagging options. Also not clear is what will happen with the plastic bags for packing vegetables. Am I to find
a solution for this as well? I think the City should spend more effort painting a realistic picture of what they
think a sustainable system looks like and the advantages it confers rather than just given us the next edict of
what we can't do.
NO FEES INVOLVED AT ALL
Would have to make reusable bags available for free.
I think the ban on plastic bags could be part of a larger project to reduce plastic consumption. I would also
like to see the city educating the public on proper recycling and reducing our consumption of plastic. For
instance many people do not know what types of plastic are and are not recyclable so they put all plastics
and plastic bags in their recycling. To reduce our consumption of plastic we need business (especially the
large ones in our city: Walmart, Target, King Soopers) to tell manufactures they won't buy their products with
obscene amounts of plastic and packaging are eliminated or far reduced. The ban on plastic bags in a small
dent on what we should be doing to curb our plastic consumption.
I strongly oppose any initiatives that implement a regressive end-user fee which will disproportionately
impact poor and working class people in our community (to address a problem that is largely not due to their
actions). Instead of putting the burden of reducing plastic pollution on individuals, I instead support system
changes that reduce plastic at the business level. These could include:
- Enacting an “opt-in” versus “opt-out” policy on single-use plastic utensils for restaurant take-out and
delivery
- Ending the use of single-use plastics for dine-in restaurants
- Enacting a business-focused single-use plastics ban similar to Palo Alto’s Disposable Foodware Reduction
Plan
- Funding further programs to incentivize consumers to bring their own reusable bags to retail stores
- Funding further programs to incentive the use of compostable foodware
Paper bags are essentially environmentally friendly. They can be burned with little impact and also have
more re-uses. People can donate to tree planting causes to offset the limited resource use. Reusable bags
are great and I use them, but I’d rather see plastics not be used than punishing folks who forget their bag.
Fees should not be considered if they are to fall disproportionately on low-income individuals. If anyone is to
be charged, the costs should fall on the businesses and manufacturers most responsible for the pollution (or
at least those that can most afford it). If this isn't possible practically or politically then fees should not be
charged.
Please ban plastic bags and make reusable bags available to low income households.
Plastic grocery bags are still useful for many people in lieu of plastic trash bags (trash can liners, pet waste
bags). An out-right ban may not be the best option-- perhaps still allowing use of plastic bags but charging a
fee per bag is a good compromise, along with encouraging/reminding people to use reusable shopping
bags.
Absolutely ban plastic bags! However, I am concerned about the potential impact of a paper bag fee on low
income families. If a fee is instituted with an exception for low income families, how will these customers be
identified? If it's whether they receive a form of food assistance, that won't cover families who do not receive
food assistance, but still would be impacted by the bag fee. Also, there should be a program through the
grocery stores to get free reusable bags into the hands of low income families. If the family qualifies to not
pay the paper bag fee, they should receive at least one reusable bag for each shopping trip for the first
month after the policy is put in place.
I would also strongly support marketing with explanations for why the climate emergency is such a pressing
issue. For example, reusable bags can be printed with climate change statistics which effect Fort Collins and
surrounding areas. Many climate change deniers will most likely scoff at these measures because they lack
education.
I strongly support a ban on single use plastic bags. I do not support charging for paper bags. I would like to
see Fort Collins become a national leader in plastic recovery.
This would be an amazing move for the city.
The ban on plastic bags needs to be put into action as soon as possible. The sooner it is put into action the
sooner the rivers, reservoirs, and other water sources, as well as natural environments, are free of plastic
pollution. The ban needs to also be expanded to include other single-use plastics such as plastic straws,
styrofoam, plastic cutlery, plastic takeout containers, and more.
Personally I too love the convenience of use-n-toss bags — but we just can’t afford this extravagance
anymore.
I'd like to know if question 3(c) above implies that there will be requirements (ordinances) for the grocers to
do training, signage and provide reusable bags? Will those requirements also be audited?
Homelessness, hungry children, crime, depression, poverty. And you are focused on plastic bags. Shame on
you.
This last point in the survey on "disproportionate impacts of the policy on low-income households" shows
you already have an inkling that this policy is a bad idea. I 100% support plastic pollution mitigation but
doing so on the backs of Fort Collins' working class people is cruel and unfair. A tax on the wealthiest
residents will hurt them the least and could fund all kinds of programs like a cloth bag campaign, stream
cleanups, etc. etc. I would also support an "opt in" versus "opt out" ordinance when it comes to single use
plastic utensils at restaurants.
Although I support a ban on plastic bags, I would prefer a fee instead. Fees allow for people to adjust to the
change and think about their impact
There’s a plastic king scoopers bag in a tree outside of our apartment right now 😐😐
as a low income individual, I don't even know anyone who throws away plastic bags. I, and most people I
know, use them as garbage bags. They come free with my groceries and the thinner plastic actually creates
less plastic pollution than commercial trash bags. they are also better than paper bags due to the increased
cost of transportation per bag and the processes used to create paper. I strongly oppose a plastic bag ban,
but I would like to see more incentives and opportunities to use reusable bags (discounts, free bags, etc).
Plastic bags are a very small part of the issue of pollution. the fact that this survey asks about the impacts of
this ban on low-income households means it's being aknowledged that this has the potential to
disproportionately impact low-income groups. We would need to have measures in place to fix negative
impacts while people have to wait for the results of those studies and changes to be implemented.
I think a phase in policy would be needed to educate and get support from the community. What will replace
current plastic bags for bulk item purchases like loose vegetables in the grocery stores?
Fees at the point of purchase disproportionately impact those who cannot justify the expense of reusable
bags, unfairly target lower-income individuals, and would be seen as an undesirable tax by many
consumers. More equitable and acceptable policies to reduce pollution from single-use products could
include:
- Incentives for reusable bags, designed carefully to avoid the costs of such a measure being shifted onto
poor and working-class individuals (environmental impact of reusable bags themselves should be
considered before implementing these)
- Requiring that businesses ask customers before providing single-use products (opt-in), so products are not
provided to customers who do not need or want them
- Restrictions or incentives on the business side that encourage businesses to use alternative bags,
containers, utensils, etc. that reduce pollution
In a sentance, the burden must be on the corporate groccers and not the consumers.
Ban Plastics
I strongly oppose a regressive end-user fee on plastics which will disproportionately impact poor and working
class people in our community (who are largely not responsible for the plastic pollution this initiative aims to
address). I instead support efforts that more equitably aim to address pollution such as the following:
- Enacting an “opt-in” versus “opt-out” policy on single-use plastic utensils for restaurant take-out and
delivery
- Ending the use of single-use plastics for dine-in restaurants
- Enacting a business-focused single-use plastics ban similar to Palo Alto’s Disposable Foodware Reduction
Plan
- Funding further programs to incentivize consumers to bring their own reusable bags to retail stores
- Funding further programs to incentive the use of compostable foodware
I think this is an awesome first step.
Considering ANY paper bag fee nullifies the entire concept. I fully understand the arguments and
STRONGLY disagree and will refuse any such policy that includes ANY paper bag fees.
I do not support a fee or ban unless the impact on low income people is mitigated.
I am concerned that bag fees and bans disproportionately affect people with low income and any exemption
for low income people would place a stigma on the use of bags which are often necessary for carrying
things.
Rather than charge a fee for paper bags or ban plastic, why not make it more inviting to have people bring
their own bags (paper, plastic or store brands)? Encouragement and incentives go much further than
punishments and fees.
I strongly oppose a regressive end-user fee on plastics which will disproportionately impact poor and working
class people in our community (who are largely not responsible for the plastic pollution this initiative aims to
address). I instead support efforts that more equitably aim to address pollution such as the following:
Like an “opt-in” versus “opt-out” policy on single-use plastic utensils for restaurant take-out and delivery or a
ban on plastics for dine-in restaurants, asking consumers to bring their own reusable bags to retail stores.
Low-income households should be given reusable bags rather than having to pay for paper bags.
This is misguided virtue signaling and ends up hurting the poorest populations the most.
I am thinking that the proposed policy needs to be divided into two issues; 1. the banning of plastic bags 2.
putting a fee on paper bags #1 is a no brainer. NO PLASTIC BAGS #2 turns into a very complicated and
unfair approach to solving the problem. The burden of the cost should be assumed by the large grocers,
those with the ability to bear the cost. Many large retail stores give credit to shoppers for bringing their own
bags. Just as many home sewers have responded to the need for masks, bags could be created by
sewers with donated fabric.
This is a burden on low income people, you dumb asses
Prefer implementation earlier than May 2022
Now let’s talk about eliminating air pollution from combustion engines.
I greatly appreciate your willingness to tackle this issue! As a wildlife biologist I have seen first hand the
impacts plastics cause for wildlife, natural areas, and our waterways and feel this is long overdue for a
community such as ours that prides itself on caring for the environment. I would like to see this ban
extended well beyond grocers to all businesses in our community - although grocery stores produce the
greatest impact in regards to plastic bags, there are so many other businesses that need to make this
change! I would also ask that the City begin to evaluate alternatives to all plastic bags and incentive
programs to switching to compostable, bio-degradable, or other more environmentally-friendly bags for trash,
etc. If there was a place to upload images, I would share a photo I took yesterday of a waste disposal site in
eastern Colorado where they have erected huge chain-link fences around the dump that was literally
covered with plastic bags. Please let me know what I can do to help! I work with hundreds of college
students dedicated to sustainability and would be happy to share information with them. Thank you again for
addressing this important issue!
Sincerely,
Ann Randall
Banning plastic bags is good, but a paper bag tax is regressive and only impacts the most needy. It's
possible to make progress without creating new problems and making existing ones worse.
all for a cleaner environment, not at the expense of the working class or low income peoples! if there is an
exemption for them, it has to be highly accessible, publicised, and in no way a burden to achieve
I do not support regressive measures that charge the consumer. How about a yearly fee charged to any
business using plastic bags or utensils? How about a city wide internal audit of plastic use within the city
systems? How about providing reusable bags to residents using a property tax on large homes? There are
many ways to help without laying more burden on the working class.
Ban bottled water
Hello. I cannot believe we are waiting for 2022. The city should of already had this issue resolved, but I do
appreciate the survey. We cannot continue to turn our heads on the plastic bag issue. Its time to move
forward.
Fee for plastic and paper bags
I support banning single-use plastics/plastic bags, but strongly oppose this regressive fee passed on to the
customer. Seriously, fuck off with that. Individuals are not the main polluters and a fee only harms the poor.
Our local DSA chapter has put together the following proposal, which I wholeheartedly support:
- Enacting an “opt-in” versus “opt-out” policy on single-use plastic utensils for restaurant take-out and
delivery
- Ending the use of single-use plastics for dine-in restaurants
- Enacting a business-focused single-use plastics ban similar to Palo Alto’s Disposable Foodware Reduction
Plan
- Funding further programs to incentivize consumers to bring their own reusable bags to retail stores
- Funding further programs to incentive the use of compostable foodware
I’m glad to see the City taking action on this issue. We need to reduce the use of plastic bags and if
shoppers can’t bring their own reusable bags, they should have to pay. Boulder, Breckenridge, and many
other cities in CO have this policy. It works!
Fort Collins should be a leader in reducing and eventually eliminating pollution from all types of plastics—
bags, food containers, single-use items such as straws and stirrers, and micro plastics. These materials are
overwhelming our planet, and micro plastics are being ingested by people and animals. We do not know the
extent of the damage that these tiny plastic particles are inflicting on living things, but we cannot wait to find
out. We need to take strong, decisive action now.
Very good. I have doubts regarding the bags that they use for dog poop, that the City distributes in the natural
areas. What is going to happen with those? Impossible to remove.
Attachment VI: Potential Paths to Further Action on Plastic Pollution:
Expanded Polystyrene and Single-Use Plastic Accessory Items
Expanded Polystyrene (Also known as Styrofoam)
Action Type Pros Cons
Require
compostable
alternatives
- Shifts to potentially
compostable materials
- Retailers can continue to
provide takeout options as
usual
- Could apply to food and
beverage containers
- Alternatives typically cost more; potential
financial burden on business and/or
customers
- No nearby compost infrastructure that
accepts compostable single use items
(and Larimer County considering not
accepting these materials in future
compost facility based on peer facility
feedback)
- No community-wide compost collection
system currently in Fort Collins
- Compostable single use items still have
the possibility to be littered/create litter in
the community
Require recyclable
alternatives
- Shift to locally recyclable
materials
- Prevent shift to non-
recyclable materials other
than EPS
- Could apply to food
containers
- Few recyclable container options exist
(primarily aluminum tins or #5 plastic
tubs)
- Could not apply to beverage containers
as no locally recyclable options for
beverages exist
- Provides fewer choices for restaurants
and may not work well for all foods
- Containers more expensive than EPS
Develop community-
wide reusable
container system
- Shifts away from single-
use alternatives to
reusable options
- Reduces litter materials at
the source
- Could apply to food and
beverage containers
- Would have to develop system to make
this possible (sanitation systems for
reusables, connecting businesses in the
system, fund purchase of containers,
etc.)
- Could present significant up-front costs
Charge a fee - Could contribute to
funding and supporting
businesses to make the
change
- Could apply to food and
beverage containers
- Could put undue financial burden on low-
income customers and businesses to
administer
- Unclear if it would alter consumer
behavior
- No peer community examples
Ban EPS
(Polystyrene)
- Removes polystyrene
from the system
- Alternatives cost more, could have
undue financial burden
- In other communities, restaurants have
primarily shifted to other non-recyclable
single-use plastic items
ATTACHMENT 6
Single-Use Plastic Accessory Items
Action Type Pros Cons
Accessory Items On
Request Only
- Businesses do not need
to change what they
currently use
- Businesses can save
money on these products
- Inclusive towards
accessibility community
- Effectiveness depends on
many factors, including staff
training, and can have
varied impact
- Still puts non-
recyclable/compostable
items into the landfill
Require Compostable
Accessory Items
- Prevents single-use
plastics in landfill and
litter
- Some alternatives are
now competitively priced
with single-use plastic
options
- Single use compostable
items can be more
expensive and harder to
source
- No local infrastructure to
compost single use items
Ban on Accessory Items
- Would increase use of
reusable items
- Reduces cost for
businesses to purchase
single-use accessory
items
- Decreases accessibility for
community members who
need accessory items
- Need to consider other
repercussions this would
have on businesses
operations
- No peer community
examples
Additional Information
• Any of these options could be accomplished via ordinance that could be developed in
conjunction with 6-9 months of community engagement (after COVID impacts decrease in
the community).
• Could take a phased approach to any option
o Could begin with ban at all City facilities
Could include vendors at City properties
o Could expand to all mobile vendors at festivals, food trucks, etc.
o Could expand to at all restaurants
o Could potentially include EPS coolers and packing peanuts
• Ordinance implementation could be planned to give retailers time to use up stocks
• Other communities often include an economic hardship provision that allows establishments
to obtain a conditional, time-limited exemption
Peer and Leading City Examples
• EPS is currently banned in two states and over a dozen cities
• No cities in Colorado have legislation targeting EPS
• Single-use items are required to be dispensed by request only in Eugene OR
• Compostable single use items are required in Seattle, WA
DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY – SUBJECT TO REVISION
Pending/disposable bags ORD
- 1 -
ORDINANCE NO. ___, 2021
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS TO
ESTABLISH REGULATIONS REGARDING DISPOSABLE BAGS AND MITIGATION OF
OTHER SOURCES OF SINGLE USE PLASTIC POLLUTION
WHEREAS, on March 3, 2015, City Council adopted Resolution 2015-030, updating
community greenhouse gas goals and targets to be achieved by 2020, 2030, and 2050; and
WHEREAS, staff has developed an implementation plan based on the accelerated goals
of the Climate Action Plan (“CAP”) and has identified several initiatives for immediate action
and investment based on guidance provided by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, City Council has also identified plastics pollution as a priority concern,
which aligns with the CAP goals of reducing greenhouse gasses and with the community’s Road
to Zero Waste goal to produce zero waste by 2030 and the City’s strategic objective to sustain
and improve the health of the Cache la Poudre River and all watersheds within the city; and
WHEREAS, because plastic makes up about 10% of landfilled as “municipal solid
waste”, mitigating plastic pollution will be a necessary component of achieving the City’s goal
of producing zero waste by 2030; and
WHEREAS, the use of plastic or paper disposable bags also has other significant impacts
on the environment on a local and global scale, including greenhouse gas emissions, litter, harm
to wildlife, atmospheric acidification, and water consumption, in addition to solid waste
generation; and
WHEREAS, plastic disposable bags must be separately recycled and when incorrectly
included in other recycling streams cause operational problems at recycling processing facilities;
and
WHEREAS, although disposable paper bags may have a lesser impact on waterways and
wildlife than disposable plastic bags, they have higher greenhouse gas emissions and water
impacts throughout their lifecycle; and
WHEREAS, Fort Collins consumers use approximately fifty (50) million disposable bags
from large grocers each year; and
WHEREAS, Fort Collins taxpayers bear the costs associated with the effects of
disposable bags on the solid waste stream, greenhouse gas emissions, the Cache la Poudre
watershed, litter, and other adverse impacts to their environment; and
WHEREAS, City Council has discussed various options for mitigating single-use plastic
pollution, including disposable plastic and paper bags, while continuing to study microplastic
pollution, at three Council Work Sessions on February 11, 2020, October 27, 2020, and
December 8, 2020; and
ATTACHMENT 7
DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY – SUBJECT TO REVISION
Pending/disposable bags ORD
- 2 -
WHEREAS, by adoption of Resolution 2020-118 on December 15, 2020, City Council
directed development of an ordinance regulating the use of disposable bags and recognizing that
further regulation of single-use plastics may be adopted by future Council action; and
WHEREAS, City Council desires to adopt this ordinance to protect the public health,
safety and welfare, to maintain and improve the health of the Cache la Poudre watershed and to
further the City's Climate Action Plan and Road to Zero Waste, all of which serve the best
interests of the residents of Fort Collins.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated herein as findings of
the City Council.
Section 2. That Chapter 12 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by the addition of a new Article XIII which shall read in its entirety as follows:
ARTICLE XIII
REGULATION OF DISPOSABLE BAGS AND MITIGATION OF OTHER SOURCES OF
SINGLE USE PLASTIC POLLUTION
Sec. 12-300. Scope and Purpose.
The purpose of this Article is to protect the public health, safety and welfare, to maintain
and improve the health of the Cache la Poudre watershed and to further the City's Climate
Action Plan and Road to Zero Waste, all of which serve the best interests of the residents
of Fort Collins. The provisions of this Article shall be effective beginning May 1, 2022.
Sec. 12-301. Definitions.
The following terms used in this Chapter shall have the meanings ascribed to them below
unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Disposable bag shall mean a bag, other than a reusable bag, provided to a customer at a
checkout stand, cash register, point of sale, or other point of departure by any retail
establishment for the purpose of transporting and carrying away items purchased at the
store. A disposable bag may be made primarily of paper (a disposable paper bag) or
plastic (a disposable plastic bag) or other material that does not meet the standards for a
reusable bag. Disposable bag shall not include:
(a) bags used by consumers inside the store, before the point of sale, to:
DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY – SUBJECT TO REVISION
Pending/disposable bags ORD
- 3 -
(1) package bulk items, such as fruit, vegetables, nuts, grains, candy or small
hardware items;
(2) contain or wrap frozen foods, meat, or fish;
(3) contain or wrap flowers, potted plants, or other items where dampness
may be a problem; or
(4) contain unwrapped prepared foods or bakery goods.
(b) bags used to protect a purchased item from damaging or contaminating other
items when placed in a reusable bag;
(c) bags provided by pharmacists to contain prescription drugs; or
(d) newspaper bags, door-hanger bags, laundry-dry cleaning bags, or bags sold in
packages containing multiple bags for uses such as food storage, garbage, pet
waste, or yard waste.
Large grocer shall mean a retail business within the city limits that is located in a
permanent building containing at least ten thousand (10,000) square feet of retail space,
that operates year round offering for sale staple foodstuffs, meats, produce, dairy
products or other perishable items primarily for human consumption. Large grocer shall
not include:
(a) temporary vending establishments for fruits, vegetables, packaged meats, and
dairy;
(b) vendors at farmers' markets or other temporary events;
(c) businesses at which foodstuffs are an incidental part of the business. For the
purposes of this subsection (c), food sales will be considered to be “incidental” if such
sales comprise no more than two percent (2%) of the business’s gross sales in the city as
measured by the dollar value of food sales as a percentage of the dollar value of total
sales at any single location.
Reusable bag shall mean a bag that is:
(a) designed and manufactured to withstand repeated uses over a period of
time and have a minimum lifetime of one hundred seventy-five (175) uses;
(b) made from a material that can withstand regular machine washing;
(c) if made from plastic material, not made of plastic film where thickness is
measured in mils;
DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY – SUBJECT TO REVISION
Pending/disposable bags ORD
- 4 -
(d) designed with the capability to carry minimum of twenty-two (22) pounds over
one hundred seventy-five (175) feet.
Disposable bag fee shall mean a fee collected pursuant to the provisions of this Article
upon each disposable paper bag provided to and used by customers to transport goods
from the store. The amount of the disposable bag fee shall be twenty cents ($0.20) per
bag
Vendor share shall mean ten cents ($0.10) of the disposable bag fee.
Waste reduction program shall mean a plastic pollution mitigation and solid waste and
litter reduction program carried out by the City, which may include, without limitation:
(a) the administration and operation of the Waste Reduction Program and
administration activities to collect all disposable bag fees;
(b) activities and campaigns conducted by the City (or a contracted vendor) to
provide reusable bags to residents and visitors, educate residents, businesses and
visitors about the impact of disposable bags, trash, single-use plastics and other
waste on the waterways and environment and on the health and welfare of its
residents and visitors, the importance of reducing the number of disposable bags
entering the waste stream and to raise awareness about waste reduction and
recycling;
(c) community clean-up events, City activities, and other community-led activities to
reduce or mitigate solid waste and litter;
(d) programs and infrastructure to facilitate and encourage the community to reduce
waste and recycle, including community-led efforts;
(e) creating, expanding, and maintaining equitable outreach and engagement
strategies, including a public website to educate residents on the progress of waste
reduction efforts;
(f) other activities directly related to the reduction of waste from disposable bags,
trash, single-use plastics and other waste and its impact on the waterways and
environment within the city and the Cache la Poudre watershed; and
(g) funding or providing other support for programs and activities conducted by
others in furtherance of these purposes.
Sec. 12-302. Prohibitions.
(a) No large grocer shall provide a disposable plastic bag to a customer at the point of
sale.
DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY – SUBJECT TO REVISION
Pending/disposable bags ORD
- 5 -
(b) No large grocer shall provide a disposable paper bag to a customer at the point of
sale unless such bag is made of at least forty percent (40%) post-consumer paper
material that is one-hundred percent (100%) recyclable and designed to carry
purchases out of stores.
(c) Nothing in this Article XIII shall prohibit a large grocer from making reusable
bags available for sale or for no cost to customers.
Sec. 12-303. Disposable bag fee requirements.
(a) For each disposable paper bag a large grocer provides to a customer, the large
grocer shall collect from the customer, and the customer shall pay, at the time of
purchase, the disposable bag fee.
(b) All large grocers shall record on the customer transaction receipt the number of
disposable paper bags provided to each customer and the total amount collected
from such customer for the disposable bag fee.
(c) No large grocer may provide a rebate or in any way reimburse a customer for any
part of the disposable bag fee.
(d) No large grocer may exempt any customer from any part of the disposable bag fee
for any reason except as stated in § 12- 305.
(e)The vendor share of all disposable paper bag fees collected by a large
grocer may be retained by the large grocer and used in accordance with
this subsection (e). Each large grocer must create a plan for its use of the
vendor share to implement the disposable bag fee program and encourage
customer use of disposable bags, which plan shall be approved by the City
prior to expenditure of the vendor share.
A plan for use of the vendor share shall be submitted for City approval for each
calendar year from 2022 through 2025, inclusive, and for each 4-calendar year
calendar period thereafter. An approved plan may be amended with the approval
of the City. Each large grocer must use its vendor share of disposable paper bag
fees collected to implement and administer its approved plan. An approved plan
may include, but is not limited to, reimbursement of expenses for signage, staff
training, and support for customers in advance of the initiation of the disposable
bag fee, as well as ongoing expenses for compliance and promotion of the use of
disposable bags. No penalties or fines assessed for noncompliance may be paid
using disposable bag fee revenues.
(f) Each large grocer shall annually report the number and type of disposable and
reusable bags it furnishes, the amount of disposable bag fee revenue collected, the
number of reusable bags sold, and any other elements of the approved plan for use
DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY – SUBJECT TO REVISION
Pending/disposable bags ORD
- 6 -
of its vendor share. The City Manager shall designate, from time to time, the form
and timing of the annual report due under this subsection.
(g) Nothing in this Article shall prohibit large grocers from providing incentives for
the use of reusable bags through credits or rebates for customers who bring their
own bags to the point of sale for the purpose of carrying away goods.
(h) Nothing in this Article shall prohibit customers from using bags of any type that
they bring into the store themselves or from carrying away goods that are not
placed in a bag.
Sec. 12-304. Payment to and administration of the disposable bag fee by the City.
(a) All disposable paper bag fees collected in excess of the vendor share shall be paid
by the large grocer to the City of Fort Collins Finance Department and used for
the operation and administration of the waste reduction program.
(b)
The City Manager shall administer the disposable bag fee and adopt (and may amend,
from time to time) the waste reduction plan consistent with the scope and purpose
set forth in § 12-301 and the parameters of the definition set forth in § 12-302
above.
(c) The City Manager may adopt administrative rules and regulations to implement
the provisions of this Article.
(d)The City Manager and City Council may suspend the collection and payment of
disposable bag fees and other regulations set forth in or adopted pursuant to this
Article as deemed necessary due to public health emergencies or other unforeseen
circumstances.
Sec. 12-305. Exemptions – Low Income Relief.
A large grocer may provide a disposable paper bag to a customer at no charge if the
customer presents, at the time of purchase, a benefit card reflecting participation in a
federal, state, or county income-qualified aid program, including but not limited to
benefits delivered via Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) such as the federal
Supplemental Nutrition Assistant Program (SNAP) or Supplemental Nutrition Program
for Women, Infants and Children (WIC).
Sec. 12-306. Recordkeeping and Audits.
DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY – SUBJECT TO REVISION
Pending/disposable bags ORD
- 7 -
(a) Each large grocer shall maintain accurate and complete records of the disposable
bag fees collected under the provisions of this Article and the number of
disposable bags provided to customers, and shall also maintain such books,
accounts, invoices, or other documentation necessary to verify the accuracy and
completeness of such records. It shall be the duty of each large grocer to keep and
preserve all such documents and records, including any electronic information, for
a period of three years from the end of the calendar year in which the documents
or records were generated. In the event of an audit, investigation or other
enforcement action, records and documents must be retained until three years
after notice of completion or resolution of such audit, investigation or
enforcement action.
(b) If requested, each large grocer shall make the foregoing records available for
inspection and audit by the City during regular business hours so that the City
may verify compliance with the provisions of this Article. To the extent
permitted by law, all such records shall be treated as confidential commercial
information.
Sec. 12-307. Reporting; Modifications.
(a) The City Manager shall provide to the City Council an annual report on
implementation and status of the matters described in this Article after the end of
2022 and each calendar year thereafter, which shall address:
(1) equity impacts;
(2) compliance and outcomes including performance metrics related to
number and type of bags distributed; and
(3) presence of single-use plastic bags in the environment as a percentage of
litter removed from sensitive areas such as Natural Areas and the Poudre
River; and
(4) Other relevant and complementary metrics consistent with the scope and
purpose of this Article as recommended by City staff.
(b) Without limitation, City Council reserves the authority and intends to evaluate
and adjust, whether by expanding, contracting or modifying, the requirements and
provisions of this Article:
(1) based on stakeholder engagement or other unforeseen circumstances;
(2) to regulate single-use plastic items in addition to disposable bags; and
DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY – SUBJECT TO REVISION
Pending/disposable bags ORD
- 8 -
(3) to regulate the use of such items by vendors in the city in addition to large
grocers.
Sec. 12-308. Violations and penalties.
Any person who violates any provision of this Article, whether by acting in a manner
declared to be unlawful or by failing to act as required, commits a civil infraction and
shall be subject to the penalty provisions of City Code subsection 1-15(f).
Section 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is
for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this article or
chapter.
Section 4. This Ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare of the residents of the city and covers matters of local concern.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this ___ day of
___________, A.D. 2021, and to be presented for final passage on the ___ day of ______, A.D.
2021.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on this ____ day of ________, A.D. 2021.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR DISCUSSION ONLY – SUBJECT TO REVISION
Pending/disposable bags ORD
- 9 -
City Clerk
1Mitigating Plastics Pollution
Jacqueline Kozak Thiel and Molly Saylor
ATTACHMENT 8
Questions to Council
1.Do Councilmembers have input regarding the fee per
paper bag at 10 cents,20 cents,or an amount in
between?
2.Do Councilmembers support staff’s recommendations
on key policy and related program details?
2
STRATEGIC
ALIGNMENT
Environmental Health
•4.4 Zero waste
•4.9 Poudre River health
BUDGET
Midcycle funding
•$35K each for
macroplastics and
microplastics
Plastics Pollution
3
COUNCIL
PRIORITY
Plastics Pollution
•Microplastics
•Macroplastics
Plastic Pollution Ballot Resolution
Resolution directed staff to prepare ballot language with the
following policy elements and logistical considerations:
•Po licy details (Staff recommended base case)
•Hybrid approach –ban plastic bags, fee on paper
•Large grocers
•Referendum
4
Engagement
5
•Online survey tools for engagement and comments on ballot
language and related ordinance.
•Begin: Mid-December
•End: January 31
Fee Structure
Staff recommendation: Split the fee 50-50 between City and grocer
Context: Local grocer costs to implement ordinance are unclear and
may range from 1 to 10 cents/bag
•By requiring a grocer fee revenue plan
•Understand their costs
•Allow room for innovative ideas
•Flexible over time
Alternatives: Scale grocer share up or down; consider additional
requirements if grocer keeps all or large share
6
Fee Amount
•Options:
•10 cents –Most common for Colorado communities with fee or hybrid
approaches, lower impact on low-and medium income households
•20 cents –Greater behavior change and environmental outcomes
•An amount between 10 and 20 cents
•Legal requirement: Establish a nexus between the fee and the
related benefit to fee payer through fee study
7
Program Costs
·Administration of ordinance
·Providing reusable bags, education and outreach
·Litter and waste reduction and clean-up activities
·Programs and infrastructure to reduce waste and increase recycling,
including community-led efforts
·Equipment designed to minimize trash and pollution
·Equitable outreach and engagement strategies
·Other activities related to litter and waste reduction and recycling
8
9
Cost description Annual cost range (low)(high)
a.Ordinance admin, outreach, engagement $260,000 $300,000
b.Reusable bags, starting with low-and medium-
income $10,000 $30,000
c.Litter related City-costs $100,000 $150,000
d.Plastic and paper recycling costs at TRC $50,000 $100,000
e.Expanded equitable engagement, outreach, and
community partnership $175,000 $300,000
f.Solid waste reduction, recycling, plastic pollution
mitigation efforts $200,000 $500,000
To tal Cost $795,000 $1,380,000
Cost per Bag (50%retained by City; 75%reduction in
bags)$0.12 $0.21
Cost Recovery
Fee Amount
•Bottom line: Fee summary supports 10-20 cent/paper bag
•Options:
•10 cents –Most common for Colorado communities with fee or hybrid
approaches, lower impact on low-and medium income households
•20 cents –Greater behavior change and environmental outcomes
•An amount between 10 and 20 cents
10
Income Qualified Relief
11
Staff recommendation: Customers with benefit card reflecting
participation in a federal, state, or county income-qualified aid programs,
including:
•Supplemental Nutrition Assistant Program (SNAP)
•Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children
(WIC).
Context:
•Common approach in other cities
•Standardized form of ID
•Low-and medium-income households receive free reusable bags first
12
Income Qualified Exemption
13
2021 Resources
2021 Outreach to prepare for 2022 ordinance:
•Free reusable bags for low-and moderate-income households
•Outreach and engagement campaign
•New FTE to roll out ordinance
Scalable costs: $70k-87.5k in 2021
14
Council Consideration Points
Consideration Points Recommendation
Fee amount Could range from 10-20 cents
Fee structure 50-50 split between grocer and City
Program costs and cost recovery Plastic pollution mitigation and solid
waste reduction
Income-qualified relief Federal, State, County income
qualified aid programs
e.g. WIC and SNAP benefits
2021 resources Fund 2021 ordinance implementation
prep and outreach: $70k-87.5k
15
Questions to Council
1.Do Councilmembers have input regarding the fee per paper bag at 10 cents,
20 cents,or an amount in between?
2.Do Councilmembers support staff’s recommendations on key policy and
related program details?
·City and grocer each retain 50%of the fee
·Fee revenue supports costs of new plastic pollution mitigation and solid waste reduction
program
·Income-qualified exemption for WIC and SNAP benefit recipients
·Provide resources to support the program before ordinance implementation
16