Charge fee to recycle retail goods

We live in a city where thousands come to San Francisco daily, impacting our residents’ lives with traffic and trash. Our businesses benefit from this daily migration. There is an effort to suggest that perhaps those who benefit from visiting our beautiful city should also assist in recycling.

I am suggesting that we add a recycling fee to all retail purchases — not services — but for retail products that may eventually end up in the landfill: apparel, food, appliances, electronics. The sorting and shipment of recyclables can be enhanced with equipment and training, supplying businesses with recycled materials.

In particular, apparel has great potential to be recycled into new products, yet there is no effort to encourage recycling of clothing and other textile products. We know that a retail fee or CRV refundable fee is a way to motivate recycling of this new category of recyclables.

Gail Baugh

Sustainable Textiles Lecturer, SFSU

San Francisco

Trash added fee on waste

By the Department of the Environment’s own account, San Francisco diverts 69 percent of its waste stream. The amount of waste actually delivered to the landfill, which is a far more accurate indicator of our collective success, has also decreased. Yet this is not good enough for this rogue department. Once again they are suggesting that San Francisco residents and businesses dig deeper in to our already depleted pockets to fund additional diversion programs, programs that will conveniently be hosted by their department.

As stated in your article, the Rate Board granted a garbage/recycling fee increase in 2006 that will be phased in over the coming years. Adding additional fees now is a blatant attempt to circumvent the public process.

Let’s hope that our elected officials have the foresight to put this proposal into the blue recycling bin.

Russel Morine

San Francisco

Small business helps S.F.

We appreciate the economic strategy of supporting small busisness, articulated by Ted Egan in the 3-minute Interview on Tuesday.

Small business represents the backbone of the local economy. One significant way of supporting small business is to provide bonus points for city contracts for those accessible to customers with disabilities, as well as grants and low-interest loans for accessibility upgrades.

Customers with disabilities represent more than 20 percent of the population, not counting family and friends. The AARP points out that those of us older than 50 tend to look for businesses with front doors that are easy to open and no step entrances, with easy-to-navigate aisles. And this group has more disposable income than teens. Support for small business and support for customers with disabilities: seems like a win-win for San Francisco.

Herb Levine

Executive Director

Independent Living Resource Center San Francisco

One-state, two-state solution

Israel has had to endure daily rocket attacks from Gaza since they withdrew two years ago.

It is obvious that the people of Gaza and West Bank are only interested in a one-state solution — only Palestine — whereas Israel desires a peaceful two-state solution.

What other sovereign country would tolerate daily rocket attacks from a people who would want to destroy you?

David Rose

San Francisco

Steroid use and honesty

In Bob Franz’s Jan. 21 column, “Honest steroid users and annoying hairstyles,” he states: “Honesty and regret. Rarer than diamonds and pearls — and far more valuable.” He goes on to say, “By the way, how ironic is it that the most infamous of the A’s steroid cheats, Jason Giambi, is suddenly off the hook, while Miguel Tejada faces suspension, prison or even deportation for allegedly lying to Congress? And by ‘ironic,’ I mean ridiculous.”

When Jason Giambi appeared before the grand jury, he told the grand jury the truth about his steroid use. No one else told the truth. And when he had his chance in front of Congress, it seems like Tejada joined the list of liars.

The only thing “ridiculous” about the Giambi situation is that sports writers continue to write that if the athletes just told the truth, that people would respect them much more than the liars, i.e., Roger Clemens. But that is a big lie by the writers because Giambi told the truth and the writers continue to pounce.

Writers and the majority of the public knew then what all of the athletes knew then — steroids were a big part of the game. Yet today, writers let players such as Andy Pettite and Clemens off the hook while Giambi continues to get ripped. Now that is ironic. And by that, I mean ridiculous.

Rob Painter

Burlingame