Creative Ways to Flout SF's 10 Cent Shopping Checkout Bag Law

As I feel the 10 cent retail checkout bag is totally evil and it gained some notoriety on SFist, I was thinking of ways that storekeepers and citizens can give the finger to the city by beating the law their own way.

If you recall the so-called "Happy Meal Toy Ban" that's being enforced by the city, the law stated that a toy cannot be given to free for kids meals if it doesn't meet strict nutritional requirements.  The fast food establishments decided to say "shove it [up your ass]" to the city government by still giving out the toys, with a small ten cent charge for the toy when a meal is purchased.  Basically, the law was practically useless.

When I wrote the blog entry about the toy ban, I said that charging the toy item as a separate fee is very legal.  If the city said no hash browns could be given for free in your meal, the store just reduces the meal by a dollar, and charges a side hash brown as a separate item for a dollar, therefore the cost difference is the same and the law is useless.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer and will not be held legally responsible if you get you caught by city officials.  You are responsible for your own actions.  Consult with legal council before you take-on any of the "suggestions" I've provided.

Store owners - How to flout SF's 10 cent bag law or flick-off the city government:

1. If you have the work force, go into the store parking lots and give away free grocery bags as a "random prize" for being a loyal customer.
2. If you go to fairs, they always have those spin wheels for people to win little prizes like flashlights; that's all perfectly legal, so why not just spin the wheel at a grocery store and every space is a prize of a free shopping bag?
3. Instead of recycling those boxes you dump out after shipments, why not give customers a free box?  It's not a bag, it's a box!
4. Give out coupons to your customers or use a store loyalty card: Ten cents off your grocery bill for every visit at the register (just don't mention the word "bag" on the promo). 
5. Encourage people to recycle their cans: Install a recycling machine, for every two cans, you get a paper bag.
6. Have a non-employee or a homeless dude stand outside the store and sell bags for a nickel, or install an old newspaper machine and sell them for a nickel.
7. Make the 10 cent fee a "feel good" proposition: Every bag we sell goes to raising enough money to get the ban the 10 cent law on the ballot.  Or if you want to get cute: Get a bag, we'll donate 10 cents to AIDS research (bring your own bag, and you don't like AIDS research?)
8. Open a Speakeasy on shopping bags, gotta know the secret knock at the customer service counter and they'll sneak a bag from under the counter.
9. During the holidays, do "free gift wrapping" but it also comes with a bow that doubles as a handle.
10. For large items, just get those adhesive stick-on handles.  Makes carrying items easier and there's no 10 cent fee.
11. Give out a punch card (or use one of those punch-card phone apps): For every ten bags you purchase, you get $1 store credit.

Daly City, I still love your free bags.

Citizens: How to make the 10 cent bag law a big joke:

1. Go shop on state or federal property and don't pay the fee (I'm buying my postcards at Hyde Street Pier, National Park Service property).  Just like the fois gras ban was limited to state law, people could go to Native American reservations and federal property for their fix as it's legal.
2. Go shop outside of city/county lines.  Mayor Ed Lee will wonder why there's a drop in local sales tax money.
3. Pay the cashier exact change for the products, but charge the 10 cents on your credit card.
4. Bring a garbage bag to the check-out line.  Don't worry, it's a Hefty!
5. As per Twitter user WagonMoster: "I have closet full of plastic shopping bags, I'm now going to use those when I shop, just so I can get dirty looks.
6. Buy dirty videos and magazines, but refuse to pay for the bag.  Carry them around with you while you get stared upon for being a pervert, but explain to people that you refuse to pay the 10 cent bag fee, and maybe get some pity while they give you a newspaper to wrap that stuff up.

SF's 10 Cent Checkout Bag Ordinance - It's Stupid & Let's Repeal It

Why I shop in Daly City, SF continues to suck ass.

Starting on Monday, October 1, 2012, a revised city ordinance will change the way we shop and purchase items in San Francisco.

All plastic bags issued by all San Francisco retail establishments will be banned and will only be allowed to give out paper and reusable bags.  The law also requires a minimum ten cent charge per bag given to the customer.

The money collected by the vendors for the bags will be kept for their establishments to compensate for the higher cost of paper bags; none of the money collected will be given to the city.

Fines for non-compliance of the no plastic bag rule and failure to charge a minimum of ten cents per bag will range from $100 to $500 per violation.

On the other hand, restaurants in the city can still issue plastic bags with no fees attached until the ordinance affecting them will kick-in on October 1, 2013.

People can avoid paying the minimum 10 cent per bag charge if they bring their own bag, or do it Costco style by not taking a bag and just stuffing it in their coat pockets.  Those using WIC or Food Stamps are exempt from the 10 cent per bag fee.

Akit's Opinions
I personally think the 10 cent minimum charge per paper or reusable bag law sucks big time.  Why force retailers to charge a ten cent fee when establishments should be making their own choice?  As the city doesn't collect any money from the 10 cent minimum policy, establishments can just decide to absorb the cost or slightly raise the cost per item to compensate for the mandatory use of paper bags.  In the past, IKEA decided to charge for every plastic bag at the checkout, but was not forced with a gun by local city governments to charge a mandatory fee, they did it independently and it worked.  People decided to leave the individual items in their carts (like what many do at Costco) or buy one of their 99 cent huge bags.

The other problem I hate about the 10 cent minimum charge is being told to carry my own bags.  That's fine for me when I drive my car to go shopping as I carry a variety of bags in my trunk for big and small things.  But how about those times I may take the bus and I see in the store window something I like?  Do I carry bags in my coat pocket?  No.  There's no room in my pockets as I have other items like a tissue packet, hand sanitizer, and my glasses case.

It makes practical sense to eliminate plastic bag usage, but sometimes plastic is better than paper; for example, when the ban goes into affect for restaurants, paper bags are not the best item to hold hot food.  When the city banned styrofoam food containers, the new paper containers did not work great on items like steamed rice, spaghetti, and anything that uses some kind of sauce like gravy or curry on rice; the container would get so soggy, you could poke a finger into the container.

I've lived here in San Francisco my entire life and will continue to do so, but I'm getting real tired of the city government and it's Board of Stupidvisors turning us into a nanny state telling us what aspects of our lives should be good and bad.  We had clowns pass a law saying that kids toys can't be free in their fast food meals, and now we're forced to pay a fee for every single shopping bag?

I'll be happy to do one of two things: Vote for any city supervisor candidate who will repeal the 10 cent minimum charge law, or get it repealed by getting it on the ballot.  Angry citizens should unite together and lets kick this city's government's ass.

And while I'm angry, I don't mind continuing to shop in Daly City and Colma, San Mateo County is happy to accept my sales tax money and doesn't have a stupid 10 cent bag charge.

For information about the new ordinance: http://sfenvironment.org/article/prevent-waste/checkout-bag-ordinance

Mayor Gavin Newsom + Twitter = Very Bad Idea

Our (cough!) beloved Mayor, Gavin Newsom uses Twitter as a way of public relations with the public. He posts announcements of fundraisers he will attend and other self promoting things, such as his recent posting of being on Larry King Live.

But let's ask ourselves the question, is Newsom's use of Twitter such a good idea or a really bad PR stunt that has gone horribly wrong?

BART did bad PR for their "hall of shame" photo gallery
If you recall from one of my postings on January 2, 2009, BART decided to open a Facebook page and invited people to post photographs of bad passengers in the act. Unfortunately, it came at a really bad time, when the local blog sites like SFist caught on to the story just one day after the shooting of Oscar Grant by a BART Police officer. I personally felt that having a government agency legitimize the posting of "bad" passengers in the act is absolutely inappropriate, and especially just after a police shooting, it's in really bad taste to sanction something like this.

Just one day after the negative remarks made by commentators on SFist, Gothamist (New York's version of SFist), my reaction, and websites that already posts snapshots (BARTrage), BART decided to take the photo album down. BART doesn't like negative publicity, so it did the right thing to stop the already bad PR bleeding from the shooting incident.


Newsom loves to block people on Twitter who challenge him
Gavin Newsom using Twitter is in really bad taste. While he is not involved in a high profile incident like how BART was, he should really consider quitting the Twitter stuff and let his press secretary do the work for him the old fashioned way.

The SFGate's "City Insider" reported that some of Newsom's critics are being blocked from his Twitter, and while only five have been blocked, it shows that Newsom is afraid of some criticism from the public. It should be noted that the "City Insider" entry states that only five people have been blocked from the Mayor's twitter for what his campaign representative calls "terms of service" violations, however it was not a Twitter TOS violation. So what is Newsom's list of self proclaimed "terms of service" violations? When people challenge his authority or policies? (Get your press secretary to answer this question in my comments box).

People known to have been banned:

• League of Young Voters: Newsom or his "crew" decided to ban them, even though this group only wanted to question Newsom's " legitimate policy issues related to his agenda" (Quote from Jonah Horowitz in the City Insider story).
  
• Steven T. Jones of the SF Bay Guardian questioned Newsom on Twitter asking "Why do you think Twitter is a good communication medium for you?" and instead of receiving a reply, got banned from Newsom's Twitter. Jones questioned the the Mayor's authority to do this through his public relations person and that person accused Jones of being an "internet troll."

I don't understand why Newsom blocking/banning certain people from his Twitter is even appropriate. The League of Young Voters asked legitimate questions about some of his policies, and I think that Gavin doesn't want to answer them because he's afraid of a good challenge.

Also, blocking Steven Jones is a really terrible idea. He asked the question that I think was absolutely appropriate and not made for "internet trolls." Having the press secretary of a major city government call you a "troll" for any reason, is just absolutely absurd, stupid, and really inappropriate. Plus, you never block the press. NEVER. They tell the stories to the public.

Here are some things to think about:

1. First of all, Gavin Newsom using Twitter is a poor use of public relations.
2. Posting on Twitter is a risky thing anyway (security wise), it's like putting a GPS device in your coat and everyone knows where you are at all times.
3. He represents a major city government. Whatever he says, basically goes, or can be misused or misinterpreted by the public.
4. By blocking Twitter users from his blog while using the service during his working hours on the TAXPAYER'S MONEY, he is promoting government sponsored censorship; which is absolutely inappropriate morally and ethically.
5. If he uses Twitter during the hours that he is paid by the taxpayers, is that considered public record under San Francisco's "Sunshine Ordinance?" Does this include any of replies back to Twitter members and commands on Twitter to block individuals?

In conclusion
Newsom should get out of Twitter NOW. He is opening up a can of worms and they are slowly sneaking away. Blocking the media and legitimate organizations asking the tough questions is absolutely inappropriate for a head of a major city.

Hey Newsom, it's time to stop running away from the hard questions and start taking them head-on. You want to call yourself a Mayor, prove it; otherwise, you will be as unpopular as Ron Dellums.