image description

Pittsfield Subcommittee Continues Debate On Plastic Bag Ban

By Andy McKeeveriBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story
PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The proposed plastic bag ban will remain at the subcommittee level for councilors to wordsmith the ordinance and consider alternative bag options.
 
After two hours of conversation on Monday, the Ordinance and Rules subcommittee voted to table the five-year-old proposal. The councilors heard from GXT Green, a company which manufactures biodegradable bags, about providing an alternative bag option for retailers and the Health Department raised concerns about the enforcement policies.
 
The bulk of the conversation revolved around Michael Vanin, chief operating officer for GXT Green, who made a presentation regarding his bags. He said the bags do not break down the way plastics do, which provides the same environmental protections as a ban would, while giving retailers a lower cost option than paper bags.
 
"Not only is it good for the environment but for the consumers, and critically important for businesses," Vanin said.
 
Vanin hopes for language that would allow his types of bags to be allowed in the city. He said paper bags are worse for the environment "on the front end" and a ban would promote the use of that.
 
However, Rinaldo Del Gallo, an attorney who first proposed the ban, said he doesn't believe the bags are as environmentally friendly as Vanin presented. He is looking for the passage of the ban as written and said consideration of Vanin's technology could always come as an amendment later. He believes a debate on the science behind the bags could become a lengthy discussion.
 
"There is a lot of science and it is very debatable," Del Gallo said.
 
Del Gallo was supported in that thought by Jane Winn of the Berkshire Environmental Action Team.
 
A few local businesses could appreciate the lower cost option. A representative from Stop and Shop estimated that it would cost the store $120,000 more a year. She said the store uses 3.3 million plastic bags per year and that would then have to be shifted to the more expensive paper bags. Meanwhile, Berkshire Wine and Liquor suggesting the city instead adopt a mandatory 5 cent charge for plastic bags instead so the businesses don't have to should the cost of the switch.
 
Council Vice President John Krol, however, said the cost increase won't be nearly as dramatic. He said when bag bans are put in place most residents switch to reusable carriers.
 
"I don't see the degradable plastic bag as a real option and I don't necessarily see the cost to establishments as being as dramatic as $120,000," Krol said.
 
Krol is wary of putting too much debate into Vanin's request at this moment, saying it "muddies the waters." He said he'd rather move forward with the ban and consider adding language to support that technology later.
 
Councilor At Large Melissa Mazzeo, however, thinks providing alternatives is a critical discussion to have before writing an ordinance. She believes a lot more companies will be impacted by the ban than many think. Ward 5 Councilor Donna Todd Rivers said the city should be keenly aware of the impact on businesses. 
 
Rivers was also particularly interested in the Health Department's concerns. Director Gina Armstrong said the department does not have the staff to inspect every single establishment for plastic bags. She proposes language that would make the Health Department's enforcement actions be based on complaints, not inspections.
 
"The Health Department will not have the opportunity to monitor implementations in all of our establishments," Armstrong said.
 
She also would like to get the Board of Health away from being the deciding factors on deferments. If a company wants some additional time to comply with the ban to get rid of old stock, Armstrong wants that decision to be made by a small internal committee consisting of a representative from the Green Commission, the Health Department, and one other city official.
 
The Ordinance and Rules Committee opted to table the issue for more discussion.
If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Pittsfield CPA Committee Funds Half of FY24 Requests

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — A few projects are not getting funded by the Community Preservation Committee because of a tight budget.

The projects not making the cut were in the historic preservation and open space and recreation categories and though they were seen as interesting and valuable projects, the urgency was not prevalent enough for this cycle.

"It's a tough year," Chair Danielle Steinmann said.

The panel made its recommendations on Monday after several meetings of presentations from applications. They will advance to the City Council for final approval.  

Two cemetery projects were scored low by the committee and not funded: A $9,500 request from the city for fencing at the West Part Cemetery as outlined in a preservation plan created in 2021 and a $39,500 request from the St. Joseph Cemetery Commission for tombstone restorations.

"I feel personally that they could be pushed back a year," Elizabeth Herland said. "And I think they're both good projects but they don't have the urgency."

It was also decided that George B. Crane Memorial Center's $73,465 application for the creation of a recreational space would not be funded. Herland said the main reason she scored the project low was because it didn't appear to benefit the larger community as much as other projects do.

There was conversation about not funding The Christian Center's $34,100 request for heating system repairs but the committee ended up voting to give it $21,341 when monies were left over.

The total funding request was more than $1.6 million for FY24 and with a budget of $808,547, only about half could be funded. The panel allocated all of the available monies, breaking down into $107,206 for open space and recreation, $276,341 for historic preservation, and $425,000 for community housing.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories