On behalf of Maryland Hunger Solutions, I'd like to offer information from the perspective of low-income federal benefits participants. Describing the bag fee (or tax) as de minimis or nominal depends on your perspective. If you utilize the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) formerly known as food stamps, or the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), then you can't use your benefits for non-food items. That includes bags - no matter how nominal the fee. And although I have heard folks from the Sierra Club say that they have never seen it happen, people experiencing poverty often gather up their groceries and carry them out in their arms. Just like they can't use their benefits to purchase diapers or toilet paper or other non-food items with their benefits, they can't use them for bags. It's just like when people sometimes have to put grocery items back; because they are not authorized purchases or they don't have enough benefits.
If I could offer two additional facts for your consideration, it's not as simple as giving away reusable bags. You don't need several hundred bags, or several thousands bags. The truth of the matter is that according to the state of Maryland, there are 18,864 SNAP recipients in Frederick County as of March 2023.(the state only tracks this data by county). If someone is producing and distributing 18,000 bags - once - that is a good start, but not an answer.
Secondly, state and local level policy has often exempted federal benefit purchasers from these fees. From California to New York, from Chicago to Seattle, jurisdictions have recognized the fact that that fees affect consumers differently. I would urge Frederick to also recognize the need for equity, and to ensure that if there are fees, that we exempt low-income members of the community who use public benefits.
On behalf of Clean Water Action, please pass the Carryout Bag ordinance to reduce the impact of plastic pollution in Frederick City with important amendments that will address inequitable impacts of the original drafted ordinance. As noted in the Equity Impact Statement of the Executive Summary, federal assistance programs like SNAP and WIC do not allow their recipients to use funds from those programs to pay for bag fees. Assessing a fee on all customers and all transactions regardless of the use of SNAP/WIC places a disproportionately high burden on customers who rely on SNAP and WIC, who may not have cash available to add to their purchase to pay for the bag fee.
Distributing reusable bags is a great commitment for the City to make, but is not sufficient to address this concern, even if the City's distribution program was able to reach every impacted resident of the City. In circumstances where a customer has forgotten a reusable bag or has to make an unplanned shopping stop, a customer to whom a dollar is not a lot of money would have easy access to paper bags; while for a customer using SNAP/WIC, the City might as well have passed a ban on paper bags, because those paper bags will be out of reach. Having seen the implementation of similar legislation in Baltimore City, which in 2020 passed legislation similar to the original ordinance as introduced (a ban on plastic bags, a fee on paper bags without exemption, and a robust reusable bag distribution program), I have heard directly from impacted residents at community meetings that customers making purchases with SNAP/WIC have faced these barriers.
Eliminating plastic bags and reducing the use of paper bags are valuable steps for Frederick City to take. Like other plastic products, plastic bags contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and environmental justice concerns at every stage of production and disposal, worsening the climate crisis; they also cannot be effectively or efficiently recycled. Banning single-use plastic bags is
an important upstream solution that protects our environment and helps build toward a zero waste future. We should ensure that as we take these steps, we do it in a way that does not disproportionately burden some residents more than others. Please pass this ordinance, but not without amendments to ensure a fee is not assessed on SNAP/WIC customers.
This comment is being entered on behalf of resident Rob Thompson, who experienced tech issues with e-comment: As a resident of Frederick City/County I am 100% in favor of approving the ordinance to ban the use of single-use carry-out bags and requiring a nominal fee for the use of alternative carry-out bags. This would be a small step (with huge benefits) we could take as responsible citizens to curb plastics pollution, thereby improving our environment, human health, and wild/marine life health. PLEASE, vote to approve this much needed ordinance!
Please support the carryout bag legislation. It includes a ban on stores providing single use plastic bags. There will be a 10 cent fee for retailers who provide a non-plastic bag.
I lived in Germany in the late 1980s and there was a bag fee when a bag was provided with a purchase. We quickly learned to bring our own bags. I still use one of those fold up bags. The Germans were very concerned about the environment. We never saw bags in the streets or the streams.
Montgomery County has had a carryout bag policy for years. The policy stops pollution at the source; which is the most cost-effective way to stop pollution. Cleanup afterwards is always more expensive. When people have to pay for a bag, they start thinking about whether they really need one or head it off at the pass by bringing one from home.
This is all very easy to do. I lived in that environment and it became second nature.
Richard Bailey owner of Earthly Elements. I am strongly opposed to any bag fee. No one seems to be talking about the burden on the merchant other than it might be a good thing to ban plastic. No one can tell me how many merchants this effects? Is it 800, 1000? Within the city boundaries. We know there were around 250 Just in the downtown area.
I called a few random merchants including Home Depot on the golden mile and no one had heard that this was going on. For anything to work you need the buy in of all merchants and their employees. It’s obvious that only the Sierra Club and Donna really want this to go thru. It’s disgusting to many of us that this is being driven by an outside environmental group.
No one seems to care about the cost and burden this places on the merchant. It will cost me $5,000 per year to switch back to paper. If I’m an average business and this effects 1000 merchants then this proposal will cost Frederick Merchants $5 Million Dollars per year.
Let that sink in.
Your plan of enforcement and fining Merchants seems mean spirited and feels like punishment for conducting normal business.
It is not the Merchants job to retrain the public!
Downtown Frederick Partnership has conducted two surveys of the downtown retail, restaurant and service community to collect feedback on the proposed legislation. The majority of businesses support a ban of single use plastics bags, but are opposed to a mandatory bag fee. Businesses noted that they already have factored the cost of bags into their pricing and do not want to pass this cost along to the customer. Shopping downtown is focused on the experience and many businesses noted concerns about leaving a negative impression on customers if they were forced to charge a bag fee. Some businesses also noted that, due to the delicate nature of their merchandise, multiple bags may be required to package a customer’s purchase safely. Finally, several businesses expressed concerns about the impact of adding the fee to their point of sales systems, training staff and other administrative burdens. Related to implementation, businesses expressed a preference that the City conduct a significant marketing campaign over the course of three to six months to announce the legislation to the public. The businesses also expressed that the preferred timeframe to launch implementation was March or April, noting that the holiday season would be a difficult time to get the message across to the public.
Ann Payne, Middletown. I remember when we discovered the convenience of single-use plastic bags back in the 1970's. We were seduced by their ease! We had no idea we'd use hundreds of billions of them every year or that they wouldn't fully biodegrade for a century (if ever). We didn't visualize our waterways choked with them. We didn't foresee climate change, fracking for the gas to make them, or the rapid build-out of petrochemical plants to create all those bags. Not a clue - but now we know these things and more. It is time to face up to the true costs of plastic bags and take a stand to ban them. (Btw, pre-plastic bag purchases managed to get safely from market to home.) Thank you.
Mike Koob, Frederick. I support the plastic bag ban. My wife Sherie Koob and I are leading a Creation Care class right now at the Frederick School of Religion meeting at Trinity United Methodist Church. As part of this class we watched and discussed a very short video, called “the story of plastic.” The YouTube video is fast paced and fun to watch. I know you are busy but take a look. https://youtu.be/iO3SA4YyEYU
Before the start of the pandemic, the MACS group had a in person film series, including a film called “Bag It.” Many people in Frederick are aware of the problems of single use plastic bags. It is way past time to ban them. I don’t expect any of you will be primaried because of a positive vote on this Legislation.
Thank you so much.
Kathleen Igo, Frederick MD. I support the approval of ordinance number G-23____ to add Chapter 32, Article i to the Frederick City Code. The proposed ordinance aims to reduce the use of single-use plastic carry-out bags by prohibiting retailers from providing single-use plastic bags and allowing them to charge a nominal fee for paper and other types of bags, thereby encouraging consumers to bring their own, or purchase, reusable bags when shopping for groceries or most other retail items. Single-use plastics create waste products that are harmful to human health and damaging to our environment, particularly to marine life and water ways. We need to act now to prevent further damage and improve sustainable lifestyles, both locally and globally. Please approve this proposed ordinance!
Yes, there are certainly retail instances in which plastic coverings and/or plastic bags are necessary. However, the enormous waste of plastic bags by Giant and other supermarkets cannot be excused. And, if the customer provides his/her own reusable bag, the staff should assist in packing, as staff is required to do with the turntable of plastic bags. It’s about time we cut down on litter, on waste, and on unsightly accumulation of plastic bags on the roadsides and tree branches.
I support approval of the ordinance Carryout Bags with 2 principles: 1) a complete ban of single use carryout plastic bags and 2) a minimum 10 cent fee on any other carryout bag.
I am writing in support of option 2 of the bag ordinance. We are retailers in Frederick and have long used recycled paper bags to wrap our client purchases and support greener choices and solutions. We have many who use reusable bags which is welcomed with our product assortment. We strongly oppose the 10 cent bag fee due to logistics, training, and undue operational costs and burdens for our sales team. The point of sale is the time where we are making a last impression with our customers and clienteling them. Some purchases like breakables need to be separately bagged for safe transport. We are most concerned with a lasting positive impression and creating an environment for repeat business. The literal nickel and dime-ing is a policy that is not positive for retailers, and is clearly misplaced intentions. We have zero way of separating the bag fee from a total discount, zero way of inventorying that cost for taxes and fees paid, no way of knowing before ringing the purchase how many bags we would need etc. It is just an undue burden that has clearly not been considered in a real life merchant scenario. We are in support of green initiatives, but feel strongly that a fee attached and expecting merchants to bear the burden is not an appropriate action of the government.
As a person who consistently uses reusable bags, and a person of faith and conscience, I am in support of the original ordinance. There is no excuse for people to not use reusable bags consistently. The bags are offered as a convenience, and we have learned to expect them to be part of our shopping experience. This is one of many changes we need to make in our lifestyles to assure a sustainable environment for the future. Please, lead us into this change of habit, for the sake of a livable environment.
I support Option 2 of the proposed bag ordinance. As a retailer who relies on paper bags to deliver our product, we think that customers will not be happy with a mandatory charge for receiving the bags. Many retailers depend on their paper bags with logos as an important marketing tool. We certainly hope our bags will be reused as they are of a quality high enough for this purpose. The high dollar value of our product makes it not practical or safe for someone to slip it into a large reusable bag. Many retailers have other legitimate reasons for needing their own size bags to deliver their product. Please consider the unintended consequences of this well-meaning proposal. It is a good idea in theory, but in practice it could have negative effects on small businesses that already have enough obstacles to deal with. I request that the changes not occur in January, but wait until the second quarter. Many businesses are too focused on fourth quarter sales and depend on dedicated advertising for this important selling season; the lead up to this change could be a distraction; waiting three more months will make little difference. Thank you.
I am writing in support of the alternative version of this proposed ordinance in which art galleries will be allowed to use plastic bags to protect sold artwork from damages that can result from exposure to the elements. While the original version of the ordinance provides for individual citizen equity, it does not provide for individual business equity. The alternative version, if approved, creates an equitable ordinance for businesses which must rely on the use of plastic bags to protect the physical integrity of their sold goods. Just as dry cleaners are allowed in the original ordinance to protect the goods that go out their door, so too should art galleries be allowed to protect their sold goods.
The inclusion of art galleries in the alternative version makes the ordinance equitable for businesses who must use plastic bags to protect their sales from damages resulting from exposure to the elements.
Thank you for your consideration. Lori Niland Rounds
This comment is in support of Alternate Version of the proposed alternative.
We are the owners of DISTRICT Arts at 15 N. Market St, a contemporary art gallery. In 2022, our average transaction was $983.
As individuals, we completely support efforts to reduce plastic in the environment. At the same time, we also think that there can be a reasonable balance in the proposed legislation that doesn’t make “perfect the enemy of the good.”
The largest paintings we sell typically cost between $3,000 and $7,500. There is no good alternative to plastic bags to protect these works of art from rain and snow, and damage that can be caused by moving the paintings into and out of cars.
Many of our customers have travelled to Frederick from NoVa, DC, and Montgomery, Howard, and Baltimore Counties. These are the day-trippers that the Downtown Partnership, the Visitor Center, and the Frederick Council for the Arts work diligently to encourage visiting Frederick, for not only the restaurants and the shops, but also for the Arts and Entertainment.
We believe that our business would be significantly impacted if we have to tell these visitors that we can’t protect the art that they just purchased. “Why don’t you come back when it’s not raining” will not fly with someone who has driven 50 miles and found the perfect artwork.
Unlike the Pop Shop or Curious Iguana, or other shops in Frederick, we are not doing dozens of transactions a day. Some days we don’t sell anything. We are not using dozens of plastic bags per day; we might use 5 or 6 per week.
We, and other galleries in Frederick, are blessed with a clientele that appreciates fine art and all that Frederick has to offer in the visual and performing arts. We fear that a ban that doesn’t exempt galleries may lead to serious declines in business.
One final point – like most businesses we purchase supplies in volume because that’s how we get a price break. Between the various sizes that we inventory, we have a years’ worth of bags on hand. What provision is there for disposal of bags on hand if an exemption is not allowed?
Respectfully, we would request an exemption for plastic bag use for art galleries, similar to the exemption proposed for Dry Cleaners, and endorse the Alternate Version of the ordinance.
Please pass the single use plastic bag ban hybrid with a fee on other bags. Too much waste in our community.
On behalf of Maryland Hunger Solutions, I'd like to offer information from the perspective of low-income federal benefits participants. Describing the bag fee (or tax) as de minimis or nominal depends on your perspective. If you utilize the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) formerly known as food stamps, or the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), then you can't use your benefits for non-food items. That includes bags - no matter how nominal the fee. And although I have heard folks from the Sierra Club say that they have never seen it happen, people experiencing poverty often gather up their groceries and carry them out in their arms. Just like they can't use their benefits to purchase diapers or toilet paper or other non-food items with their benefits, they can't use them for bags. It's just like when people sometimes have to put grocery items back; because they are not authorized purchases or they don't have enough benefits.
If I could offer two additional facts for your consideration, it's not as simple as giving away reusable bags. You don't need several hundred bags, or several thousands bags. The truth of the matter is that according to the state of Maryland, there are 18,864 SNAP recipients in Frederick County as of March 2023.(the state only tracks this data by county). If someone is producing and distributing 18,000 bags - once - that is a good start, but not an answer.
Secondly, state and local level policy has often exempted federal benefit purchasers from these fees. From California to New York, from Chicago to Seattle, jurisdictions have recognized the fact that that fees affect consumers differently. I would urge Frederick to also recognize the need for equity, and to ensure that if there are fees, that we exempt low-income members of the community who use public benefits.
Thank you for your consideration.
On behalf of Clean Water Action, please pass the Carryout Bag ordinance to reduce the impact of plastic pollution in Frederick City with important amendments that will address inequitable impacts of the original drafted ordinance. As noted in the Equity Impact Statement of the Executive Summary, federal assistance programs like SNAP and WIC do not allow their recipients to use funds from those programs to pay for bag fees. Assessing a fee on all customers and all transactions regardless of the use of SNAP/WIC places a disproportionately high burden on customers who rely on SNAP and WIC, who may not have cash available to add to their purchase to pay for the bag fee.
Distributing reusable bags is a great commitment for the City to make, but is not sufficient to address this concern, even if the City's distribution program was able to reach every impacted resident of the City. In circumstances where a customer has forgotten a reusable bag or has to make an unplanned shopping stop, a customer to whom a dollar is not a lot of money would have easy access to paper bags; while for a customer using SNAP/WIC, the City might as well have passed a ban on paper bags, because those paper bags will be out of reach. Having seen the implementation of similar legislation in Baltimore City, which in 2020 passed legislation similar to the original ordinance as introduced (a ban on plastic bags, a fee on paper bags without exemption, and a robust reusable bag distribution program), I have heard directly from impacted residents at community meetings that customers making purchases with SNAP/WIC have faced these barriers.
Eliminating plastic bags and reducing the use of paper bags are valuable steps for Frederick City to take. Like other plastic products, plastic bags contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and environmental justice concerns at every stage of production and disposal, worsening the climate crisis; they also cannot be effectively or efficiently recycled. Banning single-use plastic bags is
an important upstream solution that protects our environment and helps build toward a zero waste future. We should ensure that as we take these steps, we do it in a way that does not disproportionately burden some residents more than others. Please pass this ordinance, but not without amendments to ensure a fee is not assessed on SNAP/WIC customers.
This comment is being entered on behalf of resident Rob Thompson, who experienced tech issues with e-comment: As a resident of Frederick City/County I am 100% in favor of approving the ordinance to ban the use of single-use carry-out bags and requiring a nominal fee for the use of alternative carry-out bags. This would be a small step (with huge benefits) we could take as responsible citizens to curb plastics pollution, thereby improving our environment, human health, and wild/marine life health. PLEASE, vote to approve this much needed ordinance!
Please support the carryout bag legislation. It includes a ban on stores providing single use plastic bags. There will be a 10 cent fee for retailers who provide a non-plastic bag.
I lived in Germany in the late 1980s and there was a bag fee when a bag was provided with a purchase. We quickly learned to bring our own bags. I still use one of those fold up bags. The Germans were very concerned about the environment. We never saw bags in the streets or the streams.
Montgomery County has had a carryout bag policy for years. The policy stops pollution at the source; which is the most cost-effective way to stop pollution. Cleanup afterwards is always more expensive. When people have to pay for a bag, they start thinking about whether they really need one or head it off at the pass by bringing one from home.
This is all very easy to do. I lived in that environment and it became second nature.
Richard Bailey owner of Earthly Elements. I am strongly opposed to any bag fee. No one seems to be talking about the burden on the merchant other than it might be a good thing to ban plastic. No one can tell me how many merchants this effects? Is it 800, 1000? Within the city boundaries. We know there were around 250 Just in the downtown area.
I called a few random merchants including Home Depot on the golden mile and no one had heard that this was going on. For anything to work you need the buy in of all merchants and their employees. It’s obvious that only the Sierra Club and Donna really want this to go thru. It’s disgusting to many of us that this is being driven by an outside environmental group.
No one seems to care about the cost and burden this places on the merchant. It will cost me $5,000 per year to switch back to paper. If I’m an average business and this effects 1000 merchants then this proposal will cost Frederick Merchants $5 Million Dollars per year.
Let that sink in.
Your plan of enforcement and fining Merchants seems mean spirited and feels like punishment for conducting normal business.
It is not the Merchants job to retrain the public!
Downtown Frederick Partnership has conducted two surveys of the downtown retail, restaurant and service community to collect feedback on the proposed legislation. The majority of businesses support a ban of single use plastics bags, but are opposed to a mandatory bag fee. Businesses noted that they already have factored the cost of bags into their pricing and do not want to pass this cost along to the customer. Shopping downtown is focused on the experience and many businesses noted concerns about leaving a negative impression on customers if they were forced to charge a bag fee. Some businesses also noted that, due to the delicate nature of their merchandise, multiple bags may be required to package a customer’s purchase safely. Finally, several businesses expressed concerns about the impact of adding the fee to their point of sales systems, training staff and other administrative burdens. Related to implementation, businesses expressed a preference that the City conduct a significant marketing campaign over the course of three to six months to announce the legislation to the public. The businesses also expressed that the preferred timeframe to launch implementation was March or April, noting that the holiday season would be a difficult time to get the message across to the public.
Ann Payne, Middletown. I remember when we discovered the convenience of single-use plastic bags back in the 1970's. We were seduced by their ease! We had no idea we'd use hundreds of billions of them every year or that they wouldn't fully biodegrade for a century (if ever). We didn't visualize our waterways choked with them. We didn't foresee climate change, fracking for the gas to make them, or the rapid build-out of petrochemical plants to create all those bags. Not a clue - but now we know these things and more. It is time to face up to the true costs of plastic bags and take a stand to ban them. (Btw, pre-plastic bag purchases managed to get safely from market to home.) Thank you.
Mike Koob, Frederick. I support the plastic bag ban. My wife Sherie Koob and I are leading a Creation Care class right now at the Frederick School of Religion meeting at Trinity United Methodist Church. As part of this class we watched and discussed a very short video, called “the story of plastic.” The YouTube video is fast paced and fun to watch. I know you are busy but take a look. https://youtu.be/iO3SA4YyEYU
Before the start of the pandemic, the MACS group had a in person film series, including a film called “Bag It.” Many people in Frederick are aware of the problems of single use plastic bags. It is way past time to ban them. I don’t expect any of you will be primaried because of a positive vote on this Legislation.
Thank you so much.
Kathleen Igo, Frederick MD. I support the approval of ordinance number G-23____ to add Chapter 32, Article i to the Frederick City Code. The proposed ordinance aims to reduce the use of single-use plastic carry-out bags by prohibiting retailers from providing single-use plastic bags and allowing them to charge a nominal fee for paper and other types of bags, thereby encouraging consumers to bring their own, or purchase, reusable bags when shopping for groceries or most other retail items. Single-use plastics create waste products that are harmful to human health and damaging to our environment, particularly to marine life and water ways. We need to act now to prevent further damage and improve sustainable lifestyles, both locally and globally. Please approve this proposed ordinance!
Yes, there are certainly retail instances in which plastic coverings and/or plastic bags are necessary. However, the enormous waste of plastic bags by Giant and other supermarkets cannot be excused. And, if the customer provides his/her own reusable bag, the staff should assist in packing, as staff is required to do with the turntable of plastic bags. It’s about time we cut down on litter, on waste, and on unsightly accumulation of plastic bags on the roadsides and tree branches.
I support approval of the ordinance Carryout Bags with 2 principles: 1) a complete ban of single use carryout plastic bags and 2) a minimum 10 cent fee on any other carryout bag.
I am writing in support of option 2 of the bag ordinance. We are retailers in Frederick and have long used recycled paper bags to wrap our client purchases and support greener choices and solutions. We have many who use reusable bags which is welcomed with our product assortment. We strongly oppose the 10 cent bag fee due to logistics, training, and undue operational costs and burdens for our sales team. The point of sale is the time where we are making a last impression with our customers and clienteling them. Some purchases like breakables need to be separately bagged for safe transport. We are most concerned with a lasting positive impression and creating an environment for repeat business. The literal nickel and dime-ing is a policy that is not positive for retailers, and is clearly misplaced intentions. We have zero way of separating the bag fee from a total discount, zero way of inventorying that cost for taxes and fees paid, no way of knowing before ringing the purchase how many bags we would need etc. It is just an undue burden that has clearly not been considered in a real life merchant scenario. We are in support of green initiatives, but feel strongly that a fee attached and expecting merchants to bear the burden is not an appropriate action of the government.
As a person who consistently uses reusable bags, and a person of faith and conscience, I am in support of the original ordinance. There is no excuse for people to not use reusable bags consistently. The bags are offered as a convenience, and we have learned to expect them to be part of our shopping experience. This is one of many changes we need to make in our lifestyles to assure a sustainable environment for the future. Please, lead us into this change of habit, for the sake of a livable environment.
I support Option 2 of the proposed bag ordinance. As a retailer who relies on paper bags to deliver our product, we think that customers will not be happy with a mandatory charge for receiving the bags. Many retailers depend on their paper bags with logos as an important marketing tool. We certainly hope our bags will be reused as they are of a quality high enough for this purpose. The high dollar value of our product makes it not practical or safe for someone to slip it into a large reusable bag. Many retailers have other legitimate reasons for needing their own size bags to deliver their product. Please consider the unintended consequences of this well-meaning proposal. It is a good idea in theory, but in practice it could have negative effects on small businesses that already have enough obstacles to deal with. I request that the changes not occur in January, but wait until the second quarter. Many businesses are too focused on fourth quarter sales and depend on dedicated advertising for this important selling season; the lead up to this change could be a distraction; waiting three more months will make little difference. Thank you.
I am writing in support of the alternative version of this proposed ordinance in which art galleries will be allowed to use plastic bags to protect sold artwork from damages that can result from exposure to the elements. While the original version of the ordinance provides for individual citizen equity, it does not provide for individual business equity. The alternative version, if approved, creates an equitable ordinance for businesses which must rely on the use of plastic bags to protect the physical integrity of their sold goods. Just as dry cleaners are allowed in the original ordinance to protect the goods that go out their door, so too should art galleries be allowed to protect their sold goods.
The inclusion of art galleries in the alternative version makes the ordinance equitable for businesses who must use plastic bags to protect their sales from damages resulting from exposure to the elements.
Thank you for your consideration. Lori Niland Rounds
This comment is in support of Alternate Version of the proposed alternative.
We are the owners of DISTRICT Arts at 15 N. Market St, a contemporary art gallery. In 2022, our average transaction was $983.
As individuals, we completely support efforts to reduce plastic in the environment. At the same time, we also think that there can be a reasonable balance in the proposed legislation that doesn’t make “perfect the enemy of the good.”
The largest paintings we sell typically cost between $3,000 and $7,500. There is no good alternative to plastic bags to protect these works of art from rain and snow, and damage that can be caused by moving the paintings into and out of cars.
Many of our customers have travelled to Frederick from NoVa, DC, and Montgomery, Howard, and Baltimore Counties. These are the day-trippers that the Downtown Partnership, the Visitor Center, and the Frederick Council for the Arts work diligently to encourage visiting Frederick, for not only the restaurants and the shops, but also for the Arts and Entertainment.
We believe that our business would be significantly impacted if we have to tell these visitors that we can’t protect the art that they just purchased. “Why don’t you come back when it’s not raining” will not fly with someone who has driven 50 miles and found the perfect artwork.
Unlike the Pop Shop or Curious Iguana, or other shops in Frederick, we are not doing dozens of transactions a day. Some days we don’t sell anything. We are not using dozens of plastic bags per day; we might use 5 or 6 per week.
We, and other galleries in Frederick, are blessed with a clientele that appreciates fine art and all that Frederick has to offer in the visual and performing arts. We fear that a ban that doesn’t exempt galleries may lead to serious declines in business.
One final point – like most businesses we purchase supplies in volume because that’s how we get a price break. Between the various sizes that we inventory, we have a years’ worth of bags on hand. What provision is there for disposal of bags on hand if an exemption is not allowed?
Respectfully, we would request an exemption for plastic bag use for art galleries, similar to the exemption proposed for Dry Cleaners, and endorse the Alternate Version of the ordinance.
Bill and Staci McLauchlan
DISTRICT Arts