Politics & Government

NYC Bag Fee: Bill's Lovers and Haters Bicker Ahead of Thursday Vote

Brooklyn politicians came under fire this week for backing a citywide 5 cent bag fee, up for final approval Thursday at City Hall.

BROOKLYN, NY — As the New York City Council prepares to vote Thursday on whether to charge New Yorkers a 5 cent fee for requesting a paper or plastic bag while shopping in the city, opponents of the measure have stepped up their attacks.

The legislation is currently backed by 26 of 51 councilmembers — meaning it will fail to pass Thursday if even one member switches their vote.

Because of this, tensions between the bill's supporters and opponents reached fever pitch this week.

Find out what's happening in Brooklynfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

Bag-fee supporters have argued that similar fees have significantly reduced disposable bag use and waste in other cities, such as Washington, D.C., without hurting consumers economically.

Kathyrn Garcia, who heads the NYC Department of Sanitation, told a Council committee in 2014 that her department collects 91,000 tons of paper and plastic bags each year, costing taxpayers $12.5 million.

Find out what's happening in Brooklynfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

New York State residents use an estimated 9.37 billion bags per year, Garcia said.

Despite those statistics, at a Tuesday night forum on the bill held at Fort Greene's Ingersoll Community Center, Councilwoman Laurie Cumbo, a bill co-sponsor, attempted to keep a lid on acrimonious debate.

She didn't have much luck.

"We are going to hang this bill around the necks of those who voted for it as an albatross," NYC pastor Dr. Raymond Blanchette said at the event.

Blanchette called the fee "a regressive tax which is being imposed on the backs of people who cannot afford it."

And on Wednesday, leading plastics manufacturer Novolex accused bill co-author Brad Lander — who represents the majority of Park Slope, Carroll Gardens, Cobble Hill, Red Hook, Gowanus, Windsor Terrace and Kensington of hiding evidence that the city's bags could be recycled for a profit.

Phil Rozenski, director of sustainability for the company — which has also funded a campaign against the bill — said Wednesday that during a January test run, the company used one of its Wisconsin plants to turn bags plucked from NYC's waste system into new bags.

Novolex delivered the findings to Lander, Rozenski said, explaining that it was interested in a recycling contract if the city became "a stakeholder" in the project — such as by investing in a recycling plant.

But Lander allegedly wasn't interested.

"It was almost like he wanted to rush the bill through before people could figure out he could recycle the stuff," Rozenski said.

Lander has offered a different interpretation of the company's findings. He said Wednesday that he is eager to recycle more of the city's waste plastic, but that Novolex's disinterest in building its own recycling operation here shows that bag recycling is "the definition of not economic."

A workable business doesn't require a city "to build them a factory," he said.

Meanwhile, at Tuesday's Fort Greene forum, local bag-fee opponents like Blanchette called for alternatives such as 1) a fee placed on businesses distributing single-use bags or 2) an outright ban on all single-use bags.

However, attorney and anti-bag activist Jennie Romer, who helped write NYC's proposed ordinance, argued that only a consumer fee would change consumption patterns and encourage reusable bag use.

She also cited the experience of Chicago, where a 2015 ban on thin plastic bags has reportedly lead some retailers to hand out thicker bags not covered by the law.

Blanchette, in turn, accused the lawyer of being an outsider without ties to NYC's working communities.

"We get Park Slope doesn't want us to use plastic bags anymore," the pastor said, alluding to Brooklyn's upper crust. "Work with the people, not against the people."

Despite her longstanding support for the bill, Cumbo said Tuesday night that she was "genuinely torn" on whether to vote for it.

"It was very clear who was for it and who's against it," she said after Tuesday's debate, explaining that the legislation had clearly upset a number of low-income residents.

Photo by Kate Ter Harr

Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.