Litespeed

Betty Karnette Contact e-mail: Tell her this is a bad idea!!!

Assemblymember.karnette@assembly.ca.gov

By Michael Gardner
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE

5:09 p.m. February 24, 2005

SACRAMENTO – A South Bay lawmaker has proposed a $7 fee on every new bicycle sold in California to promote a statewide recycling and reuse program. Buyers would receive $3 back when they turned their bikes into a certified recycler or community group that refurbishes and reuses the popular mode of transportation. "Our landfills are jammed. Why not recycle parts of bicycles?" said Assemblywoman Betty Karnette, a Long Beach Democrat who represents parts of the Harbor Area. "We can put bikes together and sell them cheaply or give them to people who can't afford bikes." Karnette's proposal is not unprecedented. For years California has charged a deposit on cans and bottles to fund recycling programs. More recently, California has started collecting $6 to $10 on every new television and computer monitor sold to offset disposal costs.

Nevertheless, the legislation has sparked a debate in the bicycling community over whether the fee would lead to more users by providing affordable bikes or if higher prices would hurt independent dealers who actively promote cycling through rides and education. In Oakland, the Cycles of Change nonprofit works with schools to offer bicycle safety and maintenance programs for 800 students. Those who complete the course can take home a bike. "It would be very helpful," said Maya Carson, the program's co-director. "It would mean we could continue in the future and keep up with demand." Demand also is booming at an innovative bicycle lending program in Arcata, home to Humboldt

State University. Residents check-out bicycles much like books. For a refundable $20 deposit, they can use the bike for six months. "It's a simple way to get people to use bicycles," said Bill Burton, who oversees the Arcata Library Bike project. But not all bicycling enthusiasts eagerly embrace the idea of paying $7 more when they are ready for a new one. "Any time you add a fee to a new product it's almost like an additional tax. Taxes for consumers are unfriendly, to say the least," said Brian Cox, a vice president of Jax Bicycle Center, a five-store chain in Southern California. Cox said there may be better alternatives that the biking community could explore with Karnette since her goals – reducing landfill waste, encouraging more riders and helping those who cannot afford a new bike – are laudable.

Justin Fanslau, a lobbyist for the California Bicycle Coalition, said cyclists and retailers would be more interested in participating in voluntary recycling and reuse programs. "I would imagine folks who purchase bikes in their own community, if given the option,would want to benefit their community," Fanslau said. Fred Clements, executive director of a Costa Mesa-based national coalition of specialty bicycle dealers, worries that higher fees would drive away business. "A $7 charge would be difficult for them to handle," he said. "There's not a lot of profit. It's a business of passion."

Clements said lawmakers could find better targets for a redemption program. "There are things thrown away that seem to be more onerous than bicycles," he said. "Bicycle riding should be encouraged – not discouraged."

Clements and the others are not convinced bicycles are dumped in landfills in large numbers. Many are turned over to charities, resold at yard sales or just gather dust in garages, they said. The higher-end models "are not disposable products. These are lifetime products," Clements said. Californians buy between 3 million and 4 million bicycles a year. Most pay under $100 at discount department stores, according to industry figures. The legislation, AB 1103, leaves it up to the Integrated Waste Management Board to implement the program, including tracking sales of bicycles that qualify for a refund. California landfills take in an estimated 250,000 bicycles a year, Karnette estimated. "We're going to have to do something," she said. "This is a beginning."

cyclezealot

I read about this story in yesterday's LA TImes..I am one to try to be open minded and not knee jerk an event..I do oppose this law , I think..As to any positive intent.
You buy a car in the Netherlands, you have to pay a huge fee to disassemble a car so as to make it unlikely it will ever be stored in a junk yard..Guess, I agree with those sentiments..Poll of the Dutch say they support such a law...As to cars, in the US, I think fields of junk yards are a waste of land..
Now as to bikes...I maintain my bike, doubt it will ever go to a junk yard, unless I start being a collector like Robin WIlliams..Since , I don't that is sort of a waste of my $7....If I could I probably would still be a proud owner of my childhood English racer..Wish I still had that from all those years ago..
If it buys bikes for kids, that might be good for all of us, if it encourages bike riding in the us....It would make us all more like the Dutch.. ie 50 % commute to work on a bike...Wish something like that for the US....But, I remain skeptical of the law, and until convinced of its benefits , oppose it..

james Haury

I distrust politicians the money will probably be used elsewhere or line someones pockets.Why do politicians think they can take peoples money all the time.

cyclezealot

The LA story said some of the money might be used to buy bikes for kids in underpriviliged neighborhoods...I would want specifics as to how the program works..But if it encourages a greater percentage of the population to cycle, it indirectly helps us all , by making cyclists more visible and there for advocacy more effective....As to the recycing aspects..I oppose it...I do not recycle my bikes.

cyclezealot

The LA story said some of the money might be used to buy bikes for kids in underpriviliged neighborhoods...I would want specifics as to how the program works..But if it encourages a greater percentage of the population to cycle, it indirectly helps us all , by making cyclists more visible and there for advocacy more effective....As to the recycing aspects..I oppose it...I do not recycle my bikes. I pretty much keep them for posterity....They would be suitable to be passed on to another generation , when I felt the need.....Guess, you buy 3.5 million JUNK bikes, there is a disposal problem..What they might have a shelf life of 6 months, before they fall apart.....$ 7 seems pretty steep since I recall the recycling fee for cars in the Netherlands was like $100.

JamesV

I support this law 100%. I mean, the last time I went to the county landfill you should have seen all the Colnago and Pinarello frames just piled high and taking up lots of space. We need to do something about that!

Mtn Mike

I agree, and I would oppose this tax on good quality bikes. Adding a "deposit" to the cost of a quality bike, as if it were a soda bottle, is silly. Who would ever throw away a high dollar investment? Are you Californians seeing a lot of Treks, Specialized, and Giants filling up your landfills? I doubt it, and this seems like just another flat out tax. I would support taxing other recreational and fitness equipment such as stair climbers and other JUNK because you do see those things in landfills. I would also support a tax on "Mart" bikes that cost under $100, for example, because they are much more likely to end up in landfills 6 months after the purchase..

Mtn Mike

Okay, I'm coming down this weekend. I'd be happy to do my part for the earth and dispose of that euro trash.

dobber

Innovative taxation at work.

el twe

Come on, guys. If you're sending $1K on a bike, ore even half that, what's another $7? The state is broke, and it encourages more places like the Bike CHurch here in Santa Cruz: non-profit bike recycle/junk/repair "yard."

cyclezealot

Should do a little research on how many Colagno frames inhabit the landfills as opposed to the Nameless junk they peddle at Wally World. I might think there is a junk control problem of these junkers.

Doctor Morbius

Imagine that. A democrat proposing a tax increase on the populace. And they wonder why the keep losing elections.

cyclezealot

Is not a part of the proposed law to bring about a fund to provide bikes for kids in neighborhoods where the kids are denied bikes. . That aspect sounds like a worthy project..Maybe that is her major intent and in reality she is a bike friendly legislator ? ...I agree I am skeptical, but would not mind knowing more about it's purposes...
Worth listening in on committee hearings, before I automatically oppose..$7 does seem steep..Maybe a $5 fee to 1- junk junkers 2-bring about some chance to put a bike into a kids life ( a great christmas activity), 3-maybe, encourage the construction of bike lanes and their marking.
Let's say 2 million junker Wal Mart bikes are in need of being junked per year- that is a couple acre feet of land.

Guest

What they should do is find out what's clogging up the landfills and tax for that. Do they really think that if people stopped throwing away bikes, there would be a massive increase in extra space at the landfills? Put the blame where the blame belongs. Why not promote RECYCLING... do a BLUE BAG PROGRAM and get people to start recycling ALL THEIR GARBAGE. That will definitely create more space in the landfill and be a positive impact on the environment.

The problem with California is that they don't want to tax cars. Now they're looking for other ways to tax folks to raise money. They don't tax cars and they don't tax land. If they did both, they'd be so far in the black that they probably wouldn't need to tax for anything else! But the rich people protest, so the governor backs down and looks for other ways to tax. So he taxes the poor and the people with less so that the rich people can continue to buy more land and drive their luxury cars. This is so obviously a ploy to bypass the rich to get more money, and they're talking it up so that people don't get all upset when it happens. Californians need to get real and start finding real solutions to their problems- identify where the problems start, then find solutions to solve it without trying to trick the poor and the people with less into paying to make up the budget shortfalls that their novice governor can't figure out.

Koffee

Doctor Morbius

Californians have already started by getting that tard Gray Davis out of office. Ah-nold may not do much help but at least he won't screw things up to the extent that Davis did.

California has such serious problems that nobody is going to be able to turn them back into the powerhouse they once were. They're suffering a death of 1000 cuts and it's all starting to rear its ugly head. The same thing is going to happen to the rest of the country when the baby boomers retire and suck Social Security, Medicare and the new Bush drug entitlement program dry. It is inevitable that America will fall flat on her face and China will take over as the world's leading economic and military super power. I dread the day.

BlazingPedals

I doubt that $7.00 will do more than pay for the paperwork to collect the money. Recycling efforts will be the same as now - non-profits working with donated bikes/parts. No state money will change hands because all of that $7.00 will have been spent elsewhere.

Bikes aren't like soda cans that are used once and pitched; even a cheapie Huffy lasts for years.

PWRDbyTRD

such crap.

Mtn Mike

Exactly. Put a tax on new washers and dryers, or on new tires, or on plastic cups. I think what is most appalling to me is the concept of taxing (penalizing) cyclists, of all groups of people, for a problem that has nothing to do with bicycles. It would be almost as stupid as taxing cyclists to gain funds to build new parking garages.

DieselDan

There's Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, catalouges, and the internet.

deastin

Yet another reason why I m glad I dont live in California, and another reason why I wont be moving there anytime soon. That being said, I cant help but feel like this is just a way for the state gov to dig into an untapped resource. Seems like someone said Hey lots of people are buying bikes these days, HMMMMMMM maybe we put a tax on em and rake in the cash! They tried this a few years ago in Iowa on our Hunting and Fishing Liscenses. They were going to put a $10 "usage" tax on it because we were "using state resources". The figures were something like 15 mill a year the state would gain just off the fisherman and hunters. It went to a vote, needless to say it got voted down. Sounds like the same thing here, a large group of untaxed state citizens and the state wants to get some more money. Stupid.
Deastin

Dahon.Steve

Agreed.

What's happening are these disposable department store bikes are filling up landfills so now we all have to pay for it. Why not go after Walmark, Target and Kmart for pushing this disposable junk out the door. Real bikes are not sent to landfills in any significant numbers but those heavy dual suspension Magnas are being hauled off by the truckloads each and every day.

I would agree to taxing the "Marts" and leaving the LBS's alone.

raverson

Couldn't agree more. Used/junk bicycles are not clogging the landfills, at least not in my neck of the woods. All the bicycles I see go to the landfill are either sorted for scrap metal or taken to the reuse/recycle yard and sold for whatever they can get. Garbage companies are making handsome profits from recycling and the whole program was implemented by raising the collection rates. They operate with a franchise/monopoly and buy the local politicians to keep it that way. Such crap indeed!

allgoo19

I don't mind paying for it, if it really works. Like some of you said, bicycle is one of the first thing to be picked up by recycling people at the dump site. I think it's the most reused item. We can't avoid dump site being filled with more and more waste in the future, if we keep the way it is now. I think, in the future, eventually everything, we buy has to be paid with diposal fee at the store. But I'm not sure bicycle should be one of the first one.
In the opposite end, I think it's a great idea to pay a disposal fee for computers. Computers people throw away are absolete and no use in new computers.

Poguemahone

"Who would ever throw away a high dollar investment?"

I cant speak for Californians, but a large number of older, quality bikes are given to charity and then, if not sold at auction, sold for scrap. For instance, I picked up a nice Bianchi this week-- needed some work, a new derailleur, but certainly could be made rideable again, along with a very nice Columbus tubed eighties Schwinn. I was the only bidder. I've found discarded LeJeunes, Peugeots, Treks, Specializeds, Cannondales, Bianchis, Schwinns (including a Paramount), Raleighs, and more. No Pinarellos, though. I believe more bikes are probably recycled through this sort of maechanism than end up in landfills, although I really have no evidence to back this claim.

I do agree that the tax is in the wrong place if the intent is to reduce landfills.

Travelinguyrt

Cross the border and buy your bike in Nevada