The L.A. City Council should approve a ban on the carry-out bags to protect the environment.

The City Council on Wednesday will consider whether to ban stores in Los Angeles from offering single-use plastic carry-out bags. A ban would take some getting used to, but examples from other jurisdictions, including the unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County, show that it can be done and that shoppers and stores quickly adapt. A ban is the right move. The council should adopt it.

For a city with such a strong environmental ethic, Los Angeles is lagging on the plastic bag issue. It has been batting around the idea of a ban for three years as cities up and down the state acted to keep millions of the bags from being freely distributed, only to end up fouling waterways, beaches and the ocean.

Like the Styrofoam containers that once held fast-food hamburgers, plastic bags became popular because they seem cheap and convenient. But it turns out they seem cheap only because the true costs aren’t assessed directly to the seller or the buyer, but to all of us when we bear the burden of environmental degradation and cleanup. Some fast-food chains recognized that they, their customers and our society could take a step forward by reaching back and returning to the use of paper containers. Others caught up when laws required them to. No one is the worse off for it, and we’re all better off without the Styrofoam clogging streets and sewers and, eventually, forming part of a floating mid-ocean garbage patch.

Likewise, plastic bags are more costly to all of us than they appear and won’t be missed once they are gone. Stores do offer an alternative — asking modern life’s essential question, “Paper or plastic?” — but there are even better options. More shoppers now carry reusable totes, and for those who won’t, don’t or just forgot, paper bags would still be available in Los Angeles stores for a modest fee.

Isn’t a plastic shopping bag ban just as foolish as the new requirement, panned on this page last week, that stores put locking wheels or other devices on shopping carts to make sure that they don’t end up on city streets? Not at all. Losing carts is costly for stores, and they have a financial incentive to self-police and to round up carts that have gone astray. There is no inducement for stores to gather up all the disposable plastic bags they send home — nor do they have the ability to do so — so they freely distribute them at little cost to themselves but at a huge cost to the environment.

Law or regulation is required when the free market and habit lead us to do things that produce hidden and unacceptable costs. That’s the case with single-use plastic bags. It’s time for the state’s largest city to catch up and ban them.

Reprinted from The Los Angeles Times (5/22/2012)

Governor Brown today released his May Revise – an updated budget proposal designed to reflect the reality of 2011’s tax take and newer revenue estimates. According to the document, California’s estimated shortfall has grown substantially to $15.7 billion, up from the $9 billion anticipated in the Governor’s January budget proposal. The Governor blamed that increase on three factors: his prior revenue estimates were too high; mandated spending to education under Proposition 98 increased; and courts have blocked some $1.7 billion in cuts included in the FY 2011-12 enacted budget.

That forced the Governor to propose additional cuts, which he called “more difficult” than initially anticipated but also necessary to restore the state to fiscal balance by reducing overall spending to a sustainable level. Overall, the proposal seeks an additional $8.3 billion in cuts and $5.9 billion in revenues. $5.6 billion of the revenues are attributed to passage of the Governor’s temporary tax increases that will likely appear before voters on the November ballot.

Included in the May Revise proposal are:

• A 5% across-the-board reduction in State worker pay (achieved through either reduced workweek or pay reduction);
• Implementation of some co-payments for Medi-Cal beneficiaries including pharmacy co-pays of $1 and $3 (based on drug status and method of dispensing);
• A reduction of $2.5 Million in funding to the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA saw a $31 Million reduction in the prior budget);
• Trigger cuts totaling $6.1 Billion should the Governor’s proposed temporary tax increases fail to reach the ballot or be rejected by voters.

CGA is continuing to review the proposal and will provide updates as warranted. In the meantime, should you have any questions about today’s proposal from Governor Brown please do not hesitate to contact Keri Askew Bailey.

The Los Angeles City Council approved a new law Tuesday that requires some markets to install systems to prevent the theft of shopping carts from store property.

The law was intended to reduce the proliferation of abandoned shopping carts on city streets and sidewalks.

The plan, approved on a 12-0 vote and sent to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, will apply only to new markets and those in which at least 50 percent of the store is being remodeled. The city Planning Department is studying ways the law can be expanded to all markets.

“It’s a massive study,” said Tom Rothmann of the code studies section of the Planning Department. “There will be thousands of stores affected.”

The law passed Tuesday applies to stores that have at least six carts. It gives them a variety of options to keep the carts on site, including posts that block removal, wheel locks or other options, including customer service to keep the carts on the property.

Councilman Tony Cardenas said he’s wanted to limit abandoned shopping carts for years, prompted by complaints from residents.

“They are not only an eyesore, but they are a danger as well,” Cardenas said. “Imagine if you are driving along and a cart is suddenly in your path. Every driver knows it will cause damage.”

Councilman Dennis Zine said he is concerned about the city’s ability to enforce the measure.

“Street Services does not have the people now,” Zine said. “What can we do to get enforcement now? I don’t want to be anti-business, but these carts are a major nuisance.”

Sarah Paulson Sheehy, local government relations director for the California Grocers Association, said her organization is concerned about the cost of the city’s proposal, which will be about $40,000 per market.

Stuart Waldman of the Valley Industry and Commerce Association said his organization has recommended the city also consider allowing the stores to develop cart retrieval programs as one of the alternatives.

“That would be less expensive for the stores and a better way to get the carts off the streets,” Waldman said.

Reprinted from Los Angeles Daily News

The Food Marketing Institute (FMI) previewed the findings of its 2012 U.S. Grocery Shopper trends research in a presentation by FMI President and CEO Leslie G. Sarasin at FMI2012, the Food Retail Show in Dallas, recently. Seeking to help retailers shape their strategies for future growth, Sarasin identified and examined the implications of four significant and interrelated movements.

Undergirded by data provided by FMI research partner and global consulting firm Booz & Company, and making use of video, social media, and an expert panel of food retailers, Sarasin’s presentation focused on the significance of the following four trends, laying the groundwork for a broader FMI and Booz & Company collaborative education series in the coming months.

Value-Seeking as a Way of Life

Consumers responded to the 2007–2009 recession by choosing private brands and less expensive food options, making fewer trips and buying fewer items at the grocery store, shopping around for deals, and generally seeking value in their grocery shopping. Interestingly, even consumers in segments not directly affected by the recession exhibited some of these behaviors. As the slow economic recovery continues, research indicates these cost-cutting behaviors are persisting and will continue to do so in the immediate future. This has resulted in a “new normal,” reshaping consumer shopper patterns.

Technology as a Fact of Shopping Life

More than half of all shoppers now use technology either before or during their shopping trips. Much of this activity focuses on “value discovery”—deals, coupons, price comparisons, etc. As technology improves, more and more customers will be able to readily discover the lowest prices for the goods they want. In a world in which the lowest price can be located with a few swipes or clicks, retailers are encouraged to utilize online means to build relationships with customers.

Online Shopping Eating Away at Center Store

More than a decade has elapsed since online grocer Webvan sank without a trace. But online grocery shopping is making a comeback, as specialist online retailers carve out target categories. Sales numbers of these new specialists now equal those of full-line e-commerce grocers. Online “old-timers” also continue to chip away at key categories with simple searching and subscription purchasing. More than half of shoppers buy a grocery category online at least occasionally. As digital natives become household shoppers, this is likely to become much more common, pushing retailers to look for ways to better blend their bricks-and-mortar stores with their (or others’) online presence.

Format Innovation Pointing to New Differentiators

Over the last five years, the grocery industry has added approximately 150 million square feet of new capacity. None of that new space was built by traditional supermarket retailers; rather, it was added by supercenters, dollar stores, drugstores, and other small formats like fresh specialists and hard discounters. New formats continue to expand, making it more likely that tomorrow’s shopper will have a landscape of options to meet any and all of his or her food retail needs. In this environment, retailers will seek ways to differentiate themselves through merchandise selection, value, convenience, in-store services, customer relationships, and innumerable combinations of these attributes.