Welcome to another deception.

Yet another attempt to hoodwink, put a PLASTIC BAG OVER OUR EYES AND TAKE FROM OUR WALLETS more money.

The Dept of Sanitation is secretly running over LA citizens with a set-up ‘ban’ on the daily useful plastic bags – in which we daily take home all our groceries & purchases. Those we re-use for so many other useful purposes after too.

Welcome to what you missed : “A notice….draft EIR [environmental impact report]… of LA CITY proposed single-use carryout bag ordinance.” aka a ‘public meeting’ for comments about this Public Relations = deceitful presentation = to be voted on by LA City Council soon.

The presenters were pretending to be “impartial” but were obviously totally biased, slanted and lobbyist-connected . They seem to see their function as to insure that City Council members pass an ordinance to BAN PLASTIC BAGS in ll of LA CITY.

there is a * PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD’ … so yes, YOU TOO CAN SEND IN YOUR OWN COMMENTS, but only by postal mail, as no email or phone number was provided {why the secrecy and deliberate making it difficult for some people to respond ? huh ? }

by March 11 to:
Karen Coca, Div Mgr, Solid Resources Recycling…
Bureau of Sanitation, 1149 Broadway, 5th Fl, Mail Stop 944, LA 90015.

At this ‘public meeting’ is when I asked specifically who funded the ‘draft’? and I was told “the City”. So then I asked if no other funders were involved ? They defensively refused to tell me how much was spent on this draft, nor even the NAME OF THE CONSULTANT FIRM !

So I had to return to the sign-in table to see the only 1 cheaply bound 144+ page draft to leaf thru it before meeting began. I noted some wild statistics, such as the huge number of bags used in ’25 years’ and I wondered how they could count or even guess this stat correctly ? 25 years ago we had different markets, populations, shopping habits and incomes. The draft was not available for reading, just glancing at there.

Only on the table-copy of the draft was a back page with this info for your use if it is helpful:

Presenter was Irena Finkelstein, head consultant of the firm: Parsons Brinkerhoff, they are located at 444 So Flower St, #800, LA 90071, Te. 213-362-9470.
This non-personal info was hidden on p. 144 and never shared with the ‘public’ at the meeting or referred to even. Why the secrecy ? What is being hidden ?

*The single ltd sheet of info shared repeated the above review period and contact person stated above.

For us, the public, was a 1 sheet stating where the 5 public meetings were held across the entire city and where the 4 libraries in all of LA had a copy of the draft to read or copy. Of course, the few basics were included:
“significant environmental effect of project” already declared to be “….not result in any significant adverse impacts” but be ‘beneficial’ instead. [no arguments or dissident facts or pts of view included, of course]

The draft EIR can be seen online at
www.lacitysan.org under “what’s new…”
if you can find it, that is.
Nothing else handed out or available to review later. Nothing to contest, to fact-check. Nothing. Hmmmm

Aha, only there was the consultant’s firm’s name and address + phone listed. No where was this info mentioned, nor provided nor offered during the whole meeting. Luckily I copied it for you, see below.

In fact, no official staff in the room identified themselves to ‘the audience’ at all, until I loudly complained. Then suddenly some info was stated, such as we were being ‘recorded’ by the consultant’s asst, and then suddenly some dawning of the arrogant assumptions made by the presenters were notable, to those who noticed their lapse of courtesy.

In the draft on table were copies in the back of people’s ‘public comments’ written on cards with names and emails and addresses, also the sign in sheets with these private bits of information for anyone to see, or memorize.

Privacy was not of concern to the presenters, nor did anyone ever mention that what I wrote in comments or if I sent in an email, it was going to made PUBLIC and available to anyone anywhere. No mention of lack of privacy and loss of personal security. We think we are communicating with the City dept who w

But we assume wrong I was then told, ‘it is a public meeting’ as if citizens would know the laws, rules, methods of how LA CITY public meetings are held. How would we ? only those who work there do. Not us, the PUBLIC !

when the director of project =works for LA City Sanitation Dept 1. never identified himself or others, until I asked 45” into meeting after their biased VERSION of ordinance was shown as power pt and dully read to the few who attended.= = 5 people in audience, 4 people ‘staff’ = 2 from Dept of sanitation, 2 “consultants” who prepared slanted partial and exaggerated stats “draft”.

of 5 ‘others’ 2 were from orgs supporting ban automatically.
1 was “Save the Plastic Bag Coalition” against ban.
1 woman didn’t speak nor ID herself.
and me- only 1 public citizen…huh?
how representative is one woman for the whole WLA region ?????

The frustration of having these presenters even mildly admit their biases and pushes to pass the ordinance they prepared “for the City” was awful. I felt disappointment, anger, and helplessness and being the ONLY PUBLIC person, not organization rep there made it worse.

But that is what activists do, as you would do if you only knew of the meetings still in your area – 3 next ones left can be found on line :
2/25 at Panorama City, and
2/26 at Canoga Park in their rec centers
And all at 5:30 pm inconvenient to those employed or traffic bound or with small children to feed too.

All of these deceptive procedures then produces even more mistrust of govt …especially when such biased and obscured “public meetings…we are following CA state laws” are pretend-offered.. but hidden from sight from most people in LA who will be affected by the LOSS…. and the REAL GENERAL PUBLIC is thus not hardly notified - so then most not able to respond with their own opinions and be heard or counted in either.

The latest NPR news today stated that Americans’ trust of Congress has risen, yep, all the way ‘up’ to 31% ! ? …oh wow !

And this obvious desired manipulation of the LA Citizens – by eliminating our plastic bags for daily purchases -- will now insure that not we will not just mistrust, but we cant help but have more resistances and dislike of all groups that are called ‘governments’ - that are ‘ours’ …..because all govt employees and their contracted workers [as are these consultants, tho unidentified by company name at this meeting] are paid for by all our tax dollars.

We know - We pay - for the city officials who are trying to take away our simple daily conveniences and utilitarian 1-use-plastic-bag which are not “1-use” but recycled and reused by most purchasers who are frugal, conscientious, and ‘recyclers by good upbringing’ anyhow.

The bags re creatively REUSED by everyone except those consumers who think they are ‘rich’ because they love to throw away anything to prove they ‘can’ or can afford to do so.

Most people do not have this callous unenvironmentally-conscious attitude, not in LA. Most people do not want nor do they ‘pollute’ their city. And even their draft stated that what was found as debris in waters the plastic bag was BEHIND other garbage such as cigarettes and many other throw-aways. Butts are not useful. Plastic bags are.

If you have a concern or an opinion, please make it quick and clear to those who are aiming to PUSH THRU THEIR VERSION OF WHAT IS USEFUL or HELPFUL to us as citizens and we who Are The Environment as much as anything else in that word includes.

Act Now or be sorry to lose what you have used so well, been accustomed as a handy recycled practical bag, that can be used for so much and is:
line garbage or other holders, as dog feces carriers, as covers for refrigerated items, as keeping bread fresher, as containers for gardening needs, for automotive parts, as protection for any ‘dirty’ objects, as holders for baby’s needs, as animal needs, as holding unwanted or contaminated liquids, as art supply containers/ holders, as drawer liners, and so many creative uses that ordinary people have found to REUSE their own plastic bags…..
or returned them to city in Blue Recycling Container.

And when pretenses such as this “public” meeting are bare & unattended by those who will be paying…paying more and frequently ---- [10c for paper bags and more than 1 may be needed, so add up more costs to items purchased…. those paper handles that often easily un-glue + break off dumping stuff on ground …

or WE THE PEOPLE will have to pay more for ‘reusable bags’ if they can afford these unhygienic cumbersome never-large-enough bags…and the poor or car-less will less be able to purchase, always carry and save the soon-dirty-inside heavier bags sold in stores.

Call or write or organize NOW….before you will be deprived of your friendly old plastic bagees.