Editorial by Cheryl Muno

South Evanston residents are fully aware that motorists regularly ignore our traffic laws.  As the weeks, months, and years roll by South Evanston’s “artery street” speed limit laws are only sporadically enforced by our over-burdened police force.  Evanston’s exacerbated crime levels have taken priority leaving minimal attention for enforcing speed zones and other traffic laws on these artery streets, many of which that have schools that see young children come and go on a daily basis.

The solution to a speeding problem doesn’t just lie in rearranging the city’s priorities but will need to also tackle our natural urge to push limits as well as revive the lost art of acting responsibly and courteously toward our neighbors as we proceed throughout each day.

Compounding this issue are the poorly designed streets that, while beautifully wide and tree lined, have thedownside of increasing traffic speed. This comes at the expense of the quality of life of South Evanstonians who made the ill-fated decision to settle on one of these streets during a time when people actually obeyed traffic laws and acted with respect toward each other.  For those of you who don’t live on an artery street, this was just a scant few years ago and for those of us who do live on artery streets, little is being done to ameliorate the speeding problem by our traffic division, who view their role as one of keeping traffic moving through our fair city as quickly as possible.

Great stretches of these streets remain unbroken and unbridled for recalcitrant speeders who expend great efforts to push the absolute limit.  Studies have shown that wide streets cause us to push harder on the gas pedal and we artery street residents have noticed an ever-increasing uptick in the level of speed on our streets.  We have voiced our concerns over many years, but we have been batted down by our traffic division on every request that would bring some level of safety and sanity back to our crazy streets.  Not only has the level of safety been impacted but with each uptick on drivers’ speedometers the noise pollution has increased to the current level of an all-permeating and non-stop roar the seeps through walls into our very homes.

Today, we are left pondering the pros and cons of moving from the homes we love simply to get away from the danger, harassment, and heightened sound pollution interlopers’ speeding is bringing to our daily lives.  We tell ourselves it must be interlopers because our Evanston neighbors would never act in such selfishly bad form!

Your neighbors on these streets face an uphill battle each day as we traverse their length.  We live in or close to the school zones and we know that there is a $500 fine waiting for some unlucky sap in those areas.  We don’t want to be the recipient of that sporadically issued ticket so we travel at the speed limit.  What we get in return for our effort is a long series of harassment that is hair-raising in its audacity.  We have had other drivers blare their horns at us, dangerously tailgate our vehicles, and make rude hand-gestures at us.  These scofflaw drivers will even pass us on the left or right side of our vehicles when their honking and bad behavior doesn’t have the desired effect.

We have learned to use our traffic signals religiously on artery streets, but when we slow to turn onto our driveways, we have epithets shouted at us coupled with rude gestures and we think to ourselves, “That crazy person knows where I live.

Our children travel these streets regularly.  They are put in harm’s way on a daily basis by speeding vehicles where even sidewalks cannot keep them safe.  In over twelve years of living on an “artery street,” I have twice had vehicles sitting on the sidewalk in front of my home due to an accident on the street.  There would have been three such occurrences, but our car acted as a blocking device on one occasion and kept the offending vehicle at bay.  On that occasion, our parked car was totaled.  Fortunately for children everywhere, the only living thing harmed during those three accidents was the tree in front of our home that still bears the scar where it was brutally flattened in its young life.

Our current school speed zones are outdated with their “on school days when children are present” tagline.  Today’s schools use their property for so much more than education.  Chute Middle School uses their play field most weekends for sporting events and many evenings it hosts children in practice or in play as they strive for excellence at the current in vogue or seasonal sport.  The field is even used frequently during the summer months.  Bearing this in mind, all of our school zones should sport a permanent 20 MPH zone for I don’t know a bigger priority than keeping our children safe.  If parents bore witness to the behavior of drivers around their child’s school in the way that residents on the street do, they would revolt and storm the doors of our Civic Center.

Where can the harm be found by adding a moment to a driver’s day with a permanent speed zone when safety is in question?  It only takes the blink of an eye, or a distracted driver texting or dialing on a cell phone to seriously injure a child.  We all know there are distracted drivers out there… we complain about them every time we step foot into our own vehicle.  At 20 MPH, a child has a 95% chance to survive being hit, but at 40 MPH a child only has a 15% chance of surviving being hit.  Skokie too has noticed an increase in the level of speeding and is working to take Oakton Street back from Cook County with an eye toward lowering the speed limit and possibly reducing lanes in some areas from four to two.  Chicago’s Mayor, Rahm Emanuel, recognizes the blatant problem around Chicago’s schools and wants to add speed cameras in the school zones.  Will it come to that for Evanston or are we able to turn it around with some self-policing?

Evanston Neighbor, I appeal to your sense of community when I write that I would like to enlist your help as you travel our Evanston artery streets.  I ask that you set a good example for other drivers by obeying our speed laws and even driving under the posted speed limit if conditions warrant it.  I ask that you recognize residential streets for what they are, in spite of our traffic division’s poorly described label of artery street as though that somehow makes it all right for tax-paying residents on these streets to be treated differently than other tax-paying residents in the Evanston community.  We would like to know the same level of safety and lack of harassment as our side-street neighbors.  We don’t want to be tailgated or sworn at.  We are only asking to have our previously enjoyed quality of life restored through the kindness of the drivers, possibly you, that pass through our neighborhood as they travel to their own home.

If everyone who reads this begins to act responsibly, perhaps it will catch on and spur other drivers to act responsibly…. and if you could also let us pull out of our driveway instead of blocking our aprons as you queue up at the red-light, we’d be most appreciative!  Many of us do not have alleys behind our homes and our only egress is from the “artery street.”

Some ideas for traffic smoothing elicited from local residents who recognize the need:

• Set a good example for the outsiders – Evanston residents should obey the speed laws on all streets
• Camera radar enforcement in school zones enabling police to turn their attention to crime
• Paint SLOW on streets in several locations
• Add at least one additional cross walk on artery streets for local residents’ quality of life – one of Evanston’s stated goals is to be pedestrian friendly and we’d like to see less talk and more action
• Implement slightly raised crosswalks – even at intersections if needed
• Add STOP signs to break up the long stretches of unimpeded speeding areas (there are three STOP signs on Lake Street between Asbury and Dodge and other Evanston “artery streets” have STOP signs – South Evanston “artery street” residents should benefit from safety and traffic smoothing devices used in other areas of our city)
• Add bike lanes to bring safety to our bicyclists – Oakton, with its very wideness would lend itself well for connecting our Asbury and Dodge bike lanes to the North Shore Channel Park
• Public awareness campaign
• The speed limit isn’t always the safe limit (on school days when children are present… vs. Saturday/Sunday/after school hours)
• Flashing speed detector (as promised by our traffic division)
• Signage:  Did you know fines in Evanston school zones are $500?
• Begin a speed monitoring program with residents and police
• Increase speed limit signage – every block, both directions

We live in an urban environment, which increases the chances of crime and the need for emergency response, be it police, fire, or EMS calls.  I want our 9th Ward neighborhoods to be safe.  Specifically:

• I want to ensure that our children can walk down our streets without their parents worrying about their safety.
• I want our merchants and business owners not to be concerned about threats to their activities.
• I want responsive, courteous, pro-active public safety professionals.

I first caught wind of possible renovations to the Skokie Swift late last year (see "Mystery of the Skokie Swift").  Then I was more concerned with the choice of architects - why pay federal tax dollars to an out of state entity to help build Illinois infrastructure?  Why not instead employ the same team that brought us the Brown Line renovations (short answer: because they were unnecessary for the most part and expensive to boot).

Recently I attended the second public meeting on the Yellow Line renovation.  The four hundred plus respondents to their first survey indicated the desire for a stop at Dodge, across from the Jewish Reconstructionist Synagogue, Levy Senior Center and James Park.  However preferences were all over the map, with many people indicating Ridge and Asbury as preferred.  Their presentation in September helped provide additional information.  It also eliminated the Ridge stop as my preferred option.  No mystery here however.  While the Ridge stop would entertain close to 280,000 boardings a year (number of times someone walks in trains at that stop), the most boardings of the three, its lack of a dedicated bus stop lane, proximity to Howard Street and distance from identified Evanston bike lanes makes it not-quite-as-preferrable.  What we of the ninth ward may do if and when the CTA demolishes the South Blvd is anybody's guess..

(Asbury stop circa 1925 - dig the retail space!)

Asbury seems the next logical choice.  The Yellow Line Feasibility Study site offers information on boardings, proximity to local attractions, and connections with bus and bicycles.  Asbury is closest to major attractions like the Howard Street commercial corridor, stands on a bike lane, directly connects to the 206 bus and indirectly with the 97 bus (travelling to Old Orchard) and the 49B Western Ave bus. Most important it would entertain an estimated 263000 boardings a year - thirty percent more than Dodge Ave.  No mystery there either, but I'll let you be the judge of that.  Their second survey is ready for your feedback.

Before you send this Mystery Van packing however a few unanswered questions remain for this meddling kid -

1. Ann Rainey, Coleen Burrus and others have assured me they would stoutly defend the South Blvd stop from any CTA plans to close it.  The CTA scoping report on Red/Purple line renovations however require closing the stop for anything but the most basic repairs.  This makes some sense from the view of train speed, as would closing stops at Dempster and Foster in Evanston.  Of course, if speed were all that important we wouldn't have the CTA we do today, but simply lots of 'Swifts'..

2. Where is Citizen's Greener Evanston in this discussion?  Now flush with $15000 in grant money from the City and provided in large part by Wal Mart, the ostensibly grass roots organization would conceivably chime in on this development, using it as an opportunity to encourage greater mass transit use, and incorporating it into their Community Agenda.  I'm a part of CGE, and have asked board members.  They tell me the ridership isn't substantial enough.  Hm, 263000 boardings a year.  If each of those equated instead to entrances of an automobile, and we appended X as the carbon footprint of the resulting trip, how much CO2 would we avoid with such a train stop?  What am I missing?

3. Has the City actually received the blessing and support of the CTA in this venture?  You will note the feasibility study is a City website.  The September presentation indicated this was mainly the domain of Ann Rainey, 8th ward alderman.  And she indicated this wasn't yet a CTA project.  Hmm.  I wondered about the first of many stops on a renovated Yellow Line last December.  Perhaps we should question insead the availability of funds for just one stop, especially with a Tea Party House bent on destroying the federal government.

4. I hate to sound like one of those youngsters occupying Wall Street god-bless-'em, but really, why have we let the Skokie Swift make just one stop for fifty years?  There's this city along the way see, and the train runs through it, but doesn't make a single stop.  Why?

To celebrate Earth Day Coleen has among other things reintroduced her bag tax ordinance.  It differs from the one she avoided introducing in September.

1. This bag tax ordinance levies both paper and plastic bags, avoiding legal hurdles that have stymied such clean up efforts in cities like Oakland CA.

2.  Bag tax revenue collected would go towards educating Evanstonians to get over the Paper vs Plastic paradigm, and help businesses get in on the act.

3. Fifty percent of revenues would go towards the Evanston Ecology Center.

4. This bag tax ordinance charges one fifth the previous proposed bill; just a nickel bag.

5. This ordinance clearly defines the candidate objects for taxation, leaving dry cleaning bags, bags for produce, poultry, fish and deli meats untouched.

Furthermore the context for such an ordinance has changed.  Over a dozen more states and municipalities have passed or announced consideration of laws regulating or banning disposable carryout bags.  The city council of Santa Monica CA recently banned plastic bags, taxing the remaining paper carryout bags and provided for a reusable bag exchange to help shoppers kick the Paper or Plastic paradigm.  Prince Georges Co. Maryland is considering a tax on bags as is Toledo OH.  Bag It the movie went from winning film awards to giving pointers on how to become Bag It towns.  To see their interactive map showing bag bans and regulations worldwide click here.

This March the Evanston Environment Board recommended city council adopt an ordinance "to eliminate if not seriously reduce disposable shopping bag use," a call now taken up by the activist group Citizens' Greener Evanston.

Now that Evanston has language to consider, and a committee to consider, what should the next steps be?  Well the city itself has called for increased waste reduction efforts in its Climate Action Plan, specifically recommending the consideration of a tax on disposable carryout bags.  It should follow through with specific plans for educating businesses and consumers to bring their own bags.  Helping folks change their behavior will save the environment.  The bag tax revenue will help the fifty thousand plus shoppers in Evanston change those behaviors.  Mandating that the disposable bags provided be made of recycled material, and in turn prove recyclable would also help.  And for the sake of realism the bill should account for how businesses should handle folks who reuse disposable shopping bags.  Those plastic bags last a long time after all..

You can tune into the Bag Tax conversation during the Administration and Public Works Committee meeting tomorrow night at the Civic Center.  See you there!

Given the success rate of most bills Coleen shouldn't feel too down about her bid to bring one before the A&PW Committee this fall. Nationwide the expected lifespan of ordinances designed to curb disposable bag use don't far outstrip the period between when you pick up the bag at check out and drop off the bag in the bag bin. Blame for the failure of proposed bills in Seattle and the state of California falls squarely, but not exclusively on the shoulders of the American Chemistry Council. Their crack team of lobbyists shut down both efforts faster than you can say 'paper or plastic' using arguments that could arise around any kitchen table. How can you ban plastic bags when paper bags require four times the energy to create? Shouldn't the ultimate decision of how to carry your groceries rest with the people? Why punish people for shopping? Although each of these reasons have serious merit, should they prevent us, the community, from taking action to protect the natural heritage we hope to bequeath our kids?

Ironically we have to visit the other coast, in fact the nation's capitol for a good working example of an ordinance for reducing disposable bags. Rather than shout louder into the bullhorn community activists in Washington DC attended to each of the above points, responding to the input of citizen's groups and the city council to craft the Anacostia River Cleanup Act .

Point #1: Draft a bill that aims to improve the community

Note the title points to the purpose of the bill, not its effect. This bill aims to generate the funds Washington DC needs to clean and maintain a healthy river. The Anacostia River Cleanup Act will fund education, provide reusable bags to the needy and disadvantaged, and prevent further degradation of the river.

Point #2: Identify the guilty culprit

Yes, reducing the number of disposable bags we use will certainly decrease our contributions to landfills. It also could make bringing home the fish filet rather tricky. We could go back to wrapping the ground chuck in newspaper, or simply recognize we may need plastic bags for some tasks. Rather than penalize the use of all plastic and paper bags, the Anacostia River Clean Up Act clearly targets disposable carryout bags (ie the bags to carry your take out, not garbage bags or that sack of granola from Blind Faith Cafe).

Point #3: Help fund the solution, not more government

Revenue from the surcharge goes to the Anacostia River Cleanup Fund; a dedicated source of revenue generated from a nickel surcharge on the provision of disposable carryout bags. The District of Columbia collects surcharge revenue, but only for deposition to the fund. Now make no bones about it – the City of Evanston could use additional revenue. We seem to like world class police and fire protection, visiting lots of libraries and having healthy trees and nice parks. But in this case the cost should match the solution, not simply cover a budget hole.

Point #4 Cover all the bases.

The Cleanup Act raises awareness of the impact our choices have at the checkout counter. But it also actively involves retailers in the solution by mandating the provision of recyclable and recycled disposable bags. So even if you left your reusable bags at home (and don't feel like buying more) you will know the bags you're carrying won't outlive your grandkids.

In a nutshell the Anacostia River Cleanup Act charges consumers the true price cost of their disposable bags, offsetting the choice by funding conservation activities, and reducing the impact of that choice by making the bags recyclable and recycled. It actively and positively engages the community in improving behaviors and reducing impacts.  The Evanston City Council would do well to heed such a precedent.

This September Coleen put an ordinance on the Administration and Public Works Committee agenda that would tax consumers a quarter for each plastic shopping bag they received while shopping in Evanston.  The blogosphere surrounding Evanstonnow.com immediately lit up with accusations of another "knee jerk tax" forwarded by "elite green PC cultist savants" designed to drive consumers straightaway to the retail outlets of Skokie and Wilmette.  Some sarcastically celebrated the perservative powers plastic bags have on dog poop, while others criticized placing an "unnecessary financial burden" on poorer residents to bolster the city's general fund.  Many readers wondered why folks couldn't just BYOB to avoid the tax, and those read in the plastic bag tax literature (Bill Smith for one) pointed out the low success rate such bills have had elsewhere.

Coleen pulled the ordinance before the committee date for further consideration.  A $.25 tax on plastic shopping bags would curb their use if it passed, and given the current political environment regarding "Big Government" and taxes you have to wonder.  Precedent elsewhere suggests it wouldn't survive passage.  Oakland, CA tried the same thing several years ago, only to have the chemical industry charge the tax did nothing to address paper bag use.  So given the noise and bluster around this apparently straightforward legislation you have to wonder; what was Coleen thinking?

Coleen was thinking we should discuss how to reduce the use of plastic bags in Evanston.  Being our alderman she took action to start the conversation by bringing it to committee; the place conversations start on future legislation.  Bill Smith at Evanston Now brought it to our attention, not because of any personal animosity towards bags, but because that's what news guys should do; inform public discourse.

As a small businessman and community activist I was heartened by Coleen's action, and worried about its success.  So I took it to Citizens' Greener Evanston (CGE) and the Governmental Affairs Committee of the Evanston Chamber of Commerce.  To round out the conversation I included ISEN-SE, the environmental umbrella student group at Northwestern.  Perhaps not surprisingly both CGE and ISEN-SE liked the idea of reducing plastic bag use.  Both also leaned towards education rather than taxation as the main tool for making it happen.  As an environmentalist I'd heard the argument before; people will stop using plastic bags if you demonstrate the bags' impact.  Whole Food eliminated their plastic bag use, and had substituted donations to reward those BYOB folks.  Couldn't we apply the model elsewhere?

Paper bags require four times the resources in production and distribution than plastic bags, and take more space in the landfill.  Unless we really want to tussle with the US Chemistry Council we need to consider both paper and plastic.  Which made the reaction of the Chamber of Commerce that much more surprising, because after a long and spirited conversation they came away thinking Evanston businesses could survive a bag ordinance.

I should stress spirited.  Noone would readily entertain a tax.  They saw such a spigot to the general fund as punitive and detrimental to Evanston business.  So we kept talking.  As it turns out most of the folks at the Governmental Affairs Committee routinely carried reusable shopping bags in their cars, and even admitted to using them on occasion.  Everyone admitted an honest and abiding concern for the environment.  And most agreed Evanston would need some help in changing shopping behaviors.  They even helped identify specific tools (Trash-o-Saurus; how about check out displays) for moving customers past the paper-or-plastic paradigm.

So where have these conversations led?  Seems like most folks want to move past paper-or-plastic, and recognize the need to educate their neighbors to do the same.  Most important; they wanted to make a difference.  If we were to keep using disposable plastic bags, Jonathan Perman wondered, couldn't we use recycled, oxo-biodegradable bags?  Why not reintroduce the Trash-o-Saurus, or for that matter check out displays hawking Jewel-Osco's cheap reusable bags?  And if a modest surcharge for the use of disposable bags went to fund sustainability efforts in Evanston, perhaps it would help remind folks to pull the reusable bags from the back seat next time.

Coleen will hopefully reintroduce legislation this January that accounts for the conversation thus far.  It won't go directly to City Council; may in fact take a few months of percolating through the A&PW Committee first.  And that's a good thing, because after many years of attending to this issue I've come to realize that, above and beyond inspiring documentaries, effective legislation or grass roots organizing, its the conversation including all those things, incorporating all those ideas that brings about positive change.