By Philip Sean Curran, Staff Writer
The Princeton Council could require businesses to charge customers fees for single-use shopping bags so long as officials can show the bags pose a local environmental problem, according to the town’s lawyers.
In a nine-page legal opinion, municipal attorney Trishka W. Cecil and assistant municipal attorney Lisa M. Maddox wrote June 15 wrote that reducing litter and controlling pollution of waterways “fall within a municipality’s general police powers.”
“Therefore, if the purpose of the ordinance is to reduce the amount of litter on Princeton’s streets or in Princeton’s storm drains and sewers, or to reduce water pollution, then Princeton would have the authority to adopt the regulation, provided the facts demonstrate that single-use bags pose a local — as opposed to national or international — problem,” the lawyers wrote.
Local environmental advocates are pushing for the town to enact a charge of 10 cents for every single use plastic or paper shopping bag that stores provide their customers. The measure is aimed at reducing pollution, and seeks to mimic other regulations around the country. Princeton would be the first town in New Jersey to do so.
Local woman Bainy Suri, who has led the charge on the issue, said Tuesday that officials “should move forward” and “pass” an ordinance creating the charge. Yet it is unclear if there is support on council to do so.
Councilwoman Jo Butler said Tuesday that there is probably “some interest” on council to take up the issue. She said she did not know if Mayor Liz Lempert would put the item on council’s agenda.
Mayor Lempert did not return a phone call seeking comment Tuesday.
In their opinion, the lawyers touch on the issues related to identifying “the problems caused by single-use bags in Princeton.”
“To that end, information should be gathered as to whether plastic or other single-use bags end up in the water supply and/or waterways, or in Princeton’s sewers and storm drains, and what damage (physical or economic) this causes,” the lawyers wrote. “Similarly, it would be helpful to identify what proportion of litter is made of plastic or other single-use bags and what problems are caused by that litter (such as clean up costs and resulting blight).”
“Lastly, Princeton should be prepared to address why the 10-cent fee should apply to paper as well as plastic bags. The proposed ordinance cites the source of the water pollution and litter problems as the single-use plastic bags, yet the fee applies to all single-use bags, not just plastic,” Ms. Cecil and Ms. Maddox wrote.
Ms. Suri and other advocates point to the outcome of a nonbinding referendum last year that saw Princeton residents overwhelmingly support a 5-cent charge on shopping bags. Mercer County freeholders had put that question on the ballot, and despite the support in Princeton, the measure failed 61-39 overall.
There have been concerns that a bag fee would drive some people to shop outside of town. Recently, the president of supermarket McCaffrey’s wrote in a letter to the editor that his company is opposed to the idea.
“What’s more, the proposed ordinance would place McCaffrey’s at a significant competitive disadvantage. None of our competitors operate within Princeton, which means that none of them would be subject to the mandatory bag fee,” company president James J. McCaffrey wrote.
“I don’t see why there wouldn’t be a will” to adopt the ordinance, said Ms. Suri, who was provided with a copy of the legal opinion.
This story will be updated as more information becomes available.
