Arnold signed SB 777!!  We're fighting back!!

Stop Bag Tax -- Target:  San Jose City Council

Thanks in part to the 50 plus letters that SVARW members wrote to the County Board of Supervisors.  The Santa Clara County Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission voted to kill the countywide proposal immediately and instead adopt another approach that involves community education. (see below)

We need to stop the bag tax in San Jose!

Please write and fax members of the San Jose City Council.

Sample letter 1

Sample letter 2

Sample Letter 3

Sample Letter 4

Sam Liccardo                     district3@sanjoseca.gov – Fax:  408-292-6456

Pierluigi Oliverio                     district6@sanjoseca.gov – Fax: 408-292-6465

Judy Chirco                               district9@san joseca.gov – Fax:  408-292-6471

Nancy Pyle                                district10@sanjoseca.gov – Fax: 408-292-6478

Backgound information on Bag Tax

Every city in Santa Clara County is being asked to consider a $.25 "fee" (aka TAX!) to be charged on every single use paper and plastic bag.

We need to stop this tax!

Bag Tax Ordinance:

• Each of the cities in Santa Clara County, CA, is considering a new 25-cent tax on plastic and paper bags used at grocery and retail stores.  Consumers will pay what is essentially a new shopping tax, on top of sales tax, for the bag they need to carry their purchases.  

• California already has a comprehensive, statewide program to promote plastic bag recycling at large grocery stores and pharmacies.  For the recycling program to be successful, cities and counties across the state have to participate. 

 The “bag tax” being considered by the cities of Santa Clara County undermines the state’s program.  In fact, current state law AB2449 prohibits cities from imposing fees on bags.

• The proposed bag tax is a tax increase that comes at a time when people can least afford it. In addition to the economic crisis, families in Santa Clara County are facing skyrocketing prices for basics like food and healthcare.

• The bag tax does nothing more than increase the cost of living for our residents and create a new government bureaucracy. 

• The ordinance is a regressive tax on every person who buys groceries and other goods.  It can cost a consumer as much as $2 for every trip to the grocery store, representing an additional hardship for the poorest in our county.

• At-store recycling programs have proven to be a convenient collection point for shoppers.  Stores accept all plastic bags and product wraps – their own bags, as well as dry cleaning bags, newspaper bags, and wraps from paper towels, napkins and bathroom paper. 

• Taxes and bans just don’t work.  Communities that taxed or banned the use of plastic grocery bags found that their efforts to reduce their use actually had the opposite effect.
• A tax on grocery bags in Ireland has not reduced plastic bag use.  While sales of plastic shopping bags declined almost 90 per cent, there was a dramatic increase in the sale of other plastic bags of 400 per cent. Basically, people buy other plastic bags to use as trash containers since plastic shopping bags are no longer available to be re-used for their trash.
• San Francisco’s ban on plastic grocery bags caused shoppers to switch to paper bags, an even bigger strain on the environment.  Plastic grocery bags require 70 percent less energy to manufacture, produce 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions and create five times less waste than bulky paper bags. 

• Recycling plastic bags is the answer, not a bag tax that hits people in their wallets. 

• Recycling benefits consumers, small businesses, and the environment. We encourage the cities and county governments of Santa Clara County to support AB 2449 and plastic bag recycling, before arbitrarily enacting plastic bag bans or taxes that will hurt consumers and in turn further hurt the economy, without a guaranteed benefit to the environment

 Oakland Lawsuit

• A Superior Court Judge invalidated Oakland’s proposed ban on plastic bags after finding that Oakland failed to consider evidence of potentially significant adverse environmental effects of such a ban.  Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch stated:

“It is because of that evidence in the record and the unanimity of the uncertainty whether paper bags are less (or more) environmentally friendly than plastic bags that the City cannot assert that there is 'no possibility' of any significant environmental effect caused by the ban. . . .”

• The Oakland suit presented strong evidence that the City’s ban would actually result in adverse environmental impacts. 

• Santa Clara County is following in Oakland’s footsteps in not considering the environmental impact of assessing a tax on plastic bags.

Recycling 

• Recycling is on the rise, with 812 million pounds of plastic bags and film recycled in 2006 – up 24 percent from 2005.  This dramatic increase in recycling is due in part to the greater demand for recycled plastic and growing opportunities to recycle plastic bags.  In other words, more of the bags shoppers use every day are being diverted from the landfills and reused to make new products. And the value of recycled plastic has led many manufacturers to create new programs to encourage even more plastic bag recycling

• Plastic bags are fully recyclable and can be made into dozens of useful new products, such as building and construction materials, low-maintenance fencing and decking, and, of course, new bags.

• We know from experience that all consumers need is education and convenient collection points, and they will be motivated to recycle.  Santa Clara’s proposedbag tax penalizes consumers but doesn’t promote recycling.    

Pornography Filters on Libary Computers

Pornography Filters on Libary Computers to Protect Children

Date for vote by San Jose City Council is still in flux.  Tenative Feb. 24th date has not yet been confirmed. 

How you Can Help Today

Contact each member of the San Jose City Council and tell them that you support pornography filters to protect children.   This easy-o-use form enables you to send a message to the Mayor and each member of the city council with a few clicks.  YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE A RESIDENT OF SAN JOSE!!  Anyone who has an "interest" can speak and contact the San Jose City Council

Get the details on the pornography filters from the VAC website.

San Jose City Councilman Pete Constant is leading the effort to protect children from second-hand porn by requiring the libraries in the city of San Jose to put pornography filters on the library computers.   The recommendation is currently under review.  Sign up for email updates and we will make sure that you are advised if Pete needs SVARW to show up at a San Jose City Council Meeting.

State of California

Protection of marriage--Victory !!!

.

Federal Government

North American Union

 The North American Union (NAU) and the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) operate to merge functions of Canada, the USA and Mexico.  Work on America’s part is through the Commerce Department.  Congress does not vote on its development except in immigration bills.  In fact, many elected officials know little about its plans and progress.  Our people know less because little is reported in the newspaper and discussed in the other news outlet.

 To find out more about this, visit government websites and non governmental ones including:

PRO sites

www.spp.gov

www.NASCOcorridor.com

www.KeepTexasMoving.com

www.kcsmartport.com

ANTI sites

www.jbs.com

www.worldnetdaily.com

www.unitedpatriotsofamerica.com

www.cis.org  June 2007 Backgrounder

Call elected officials and ask if they support the NAU or SPP.

Ask about this at Town Meetings.

Call the press and demand more information.