Richmond to start charging 5 cents for plastic bags in 2026
Richmond is about to start taxing your single-use plastic bags.
Why it matters: While City Council members lauded the effort to reduce waste and pollution, many shared concerns about how the tax will be passed on to residents on fixed incomes.
Driving the news: City Council approved the 5-cent tax, which takes effect Jan. 1, 2026, on Monday.
The city is the first in the area, and the 11th locality in the state, to pass a tax like this since the legislature gave them the authority to in 2021.
Zoom in: Based on an estimated 8 million bags used in Richmond annually, the tax would generate $400,000 in revenue the first year, said Laura Thomas, director of Richmond's Office of Sustainability.
Between the lines: The city would technically receive about $320,000 of that since 1 cent per bag goes to retailers.
The total annual revenue would drop to around $100,000 to $150,000 as people use fewer bags, Thomas told councilmembers.
Per state law, the revenue can only go toward cleaning up and reducing pollution and providing reusable bags to SNAP and WIC recipients.
Thomas also said the city would use some of its own funds to give reusable bags to residents who need them.
How it works: Grocers, convenience stores and drugstore retailers will report how many plastic bags they've sold to the state, which enforces the tax and then provides the revenue to Richmond.
The tax doesn't include plastic bags used for dry cleaning, prescriptions, trash cans, your dog's poop or packaging meat or produce.
What they're saying: Retailers can choose whether they'd like to pass the fee onto consumers or absorb it, Thomas said.
Some major grocery stores, like Lidl and Aldi, don't even offer plastic bags.
The other side: "Who's going to pay the most are the communities that we've neglected all along, that don't have a quality grocery store," said Councilmember Ellen Robertson, who voted against the tax.
Councilmember Reva Trammell said she decided to also vote "no" after some older constituents who rely on delivery services for groceries, which often use plastic bags, raised concerns about pricier bills.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court backs Catholic Charities' push to object to state taxes on religious grounds
The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for a Catholic Charities chapter in Wisconsin to secure an exemption from certain state taxes in a decision that could expand the type of religious entities entitled to tax breaks under the First Amendment's protections for religion. It was the latest in a series of decisions from the Supreme Court in recent years that have sided with religious groups on everything from public funding for sectarian schools to allowing coaches to offer private prayers on the field after high school football games. 'It is fundamental to our constitutional order that the government maintain 'neutrality between religion and religion,'' Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for a unanimous court. 'There may be hard calls to make in policing that rule, but this is not one. When the government distinguishes among religions based on theological differences in their provision of services, it imposes a denominational preference that must satisfy the highest level of judicial scrutiny,' she added. The Catholic Charities Bureau and four affiliate organizations had claimed that Wisconsin violated the First Amendment's religious protections by denying exemptions from the state's unemployment taxes. Churches already receive that exemption and so the question for the justices was, in essence, whether religiously affiliated entities that don't perform traditionally religious functions – such as services – should also qualify. The bureau describes itself as the 'social ministry arm of the Diocese of Superior' of Wisconsin and says that it carries out a 'wide variety of ministries for the elderly, the disabled, the poor,' and others. Wisconsin had argued that Catholic Charities had been participating in its unemployment insurance program without complaint since 1971. Forty-seven states and the federal government include exemptions from unemployment taxes for religious organizations similar to Wisconsin's, suggesting the court's decision could have an impact beyond the Badger State. The Trump administration sided with Catholic Charities, and it was concerned a broad ruling might affect the similar federal law. The Justice Department told the court it interprets federal law to exempt Catholic Charities and similar groups. Justice Clarence Thomas, a member of the court's conservative wing, wrote separately to argue in favor of a doctrine of 'church autonomy' that would further insulate religious institutions from taxes and government regulations. Thomas argued that the state court went too far by looking into how Catholic Charities was structured. 'The First Amendment's guarantee of church autonomy gives religious institutions the right to define their internal governance structures without state interference,' Thomas wrote. 'Perhaps the most important feature of today's ruling is that there was not a majority to take up the issue Justice Thomas wrote separately to underscore—whether regulations governing the tax-exempt status of religious organizations implicates, in Thomas's words, 'the First Amendment's guarantee of church autonomy,'' said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at Georgetown University Law Center. 'By deciding this case (unanimously) on narrower grounds, the Court saves the much more fraught question of the extent to which the First Amendment does require church autonomy—and what that would mean for all kinds of local, state, and federal regulations—for a future case.' The majority concluded that Wisconsin's law, as interpreted by the state's top court, discriminated between religions because the groups performing the charity work did not proselytize – even though the group's faith bars practitioners from doing so. 'A law that differentiates between religions along theological lines is textbook denominational discrimination,' Sotomayor wrote for the court. 'Wisconsin's exemption, as interpreted by its Supreme Court, thus grants a denominational preference by explicitly differentiating between religions based on theological practices,' she wrote. Though technical, the case raised fundamental questions about the ability of courts to look behind the pulpit to assess the religiosity of certain organizations. Chief Justice John Roberts pressed the attorney representing Catholic Charities in March by asking whether a vegetarian restaurant might be entitled to an exemption from state taxes in the group's view if its owners claimed they were following a religious tenet against eating meat. Along those same lines, a question lurking behind the case was how it might apply to religiously affiliated hospitals. Approximately 787,000 employees work for six multibillion-dollar Catholic-affiliated health care systems, according to the Freedom from Religion Foundation, which filed a brief supporting the state. The Service Employees International Union, which also backs the state, estimated that more than a million workers are employed by religiously affiliated organizations. The conservative justices on the Supreme Court have in recent years blurred the line that once clearly separated church from state in a series of rulings siding with religious entities. They have done so in part on the theory that some government efforts intended to comply with the First Amendment's establishment clause have been overbroad and discriminated against religion. The court has expanded the circumstances under which taxpayer money may fund religious schools, for instance, it allowed a public high school football coach to pray on the 50-yard line and ruled that Boston could not block a Christian group from raising a flag at City Hall. But in this case, liberal Justice Elena Kagan signaled during the argument that she, too, had concerns with the idea that courts might take it upon themselves to second guess what sorts of activities might count as religious. It was clear in March that a majority of the justices were alarmed by the decision from the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which concluded that the work Catholic Charities performed was 'wholly' secular. 'Such services can be provided by organizations of either religious or secular motivations, and the services provided would not differ in any sense,' the majority wrote. In a dissent, two Wisconsin justices said that the court's decision 'looks through a seemingly Protestant lens to deem works of charity worthy of the exemption only if accompanied by proselytizing – a combination forbidden by Catholicism, Judaism, and many other religions.' By choosing which religions may benefit from the break, the dissent said, the state court's interpretation violated the First Amendment. Catholic Charities argued that its employees would continue to have unemployment coverage but that it would be provided by a church-affiliated entity rather than the state. The group's opponents say employees in other workplaces may not be so lucky and have noted that the state cannot guarantee that those plans will pay out when employees lose their jobs. This story has been updated with additional details.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Adrienne Adams launches first NYC mayoral campaign ad blitz, but is there time to break through?
Mayoral hopeful Adrienne Adams is launching a multi-million dollar campaign ad portraying her as a drama-free professional who can 'rise above' the fray of New York politics — her first big spend of the 2025 election cycle, which comes amid signs of growing momentum, but also as questions loom about whether she has enough time to break through. The 30-second ad, entitled 'Rise Above' and set to hit television and digital airwaves Thursday, less than three weeks ahead of the primary, features a piano-led gospel track, as Adams declares: 'In New York City, we know drama, but as City Council speaker, I rise above it.' Pictured behind a church pulpit, she then touts how she as speaker reversed library and child care budget cuts enacted by Mayor Adams — who is not related to her — and recently secured a temporary restraining order blocking President Trump's administration from putting federal immigration agents on Rikers Island. 'And now I'm running for mayor, not for power or praise, but for my children and for yours, for affordability, for safety, for justice,' she says in the ad, which the Daily News got an exclusive preview of. 'I'm in it for us.' The speaker's campaign didn't immediately have an exact figure for how much she expects to plunk down on the ad. But her spokeswoman Lupe Todd-Medina said it will be in the 'multi' millions. The ad blitz comes after the speaker unlocked matching funds for her campaign last week, netting more than $2 million in the coveted public cash. Had she not gotten that cash boost, she wouldn't have been able to qualify for matching cash until June 20, just four days before the June 24 Democratic mayoral primary. Even before getting matching funds, signs have emerged Adrienne Adams' mayoral pitch is gaining traction with voters. A recent Marist poll put her in third place, behind front-runner Andrew Cuomo and No. 2 candidate Zohran Mamdani, marking her best showing to date. Her rise in the polls came after she was endorsed by New York Attorney General Letitia James and DC 37, the city's largest public sector union. Still, the speaker, whose name-recognition on a citywide level is low, has lots of ground to catch up with less than four weeks to go until the primary and early voting starting June 14. The Marist poll projected her clutching 11% support in a simulated first ranked-choice voting round, well behind Mamdani's 22% and Cuomo's 44%. Trip Yang, a New York City Democratic strategist who isn't involved with any mayoral campaigns this year, said the fact that Adrienne Adams was already climbing in the polls before she launched a major ad blitz is a positive sign. 'She absolutely has a shot,' he said. 'She has already been in third place in some polls without much spending, and now she has the matching funds. That's a huge boost of adrenaline for her campaign.' Yang noted City Comptroller Brad Lander has typically grabbed the No. 3 spot in most mayoral race polls. 'But Brad has already spent millions of dollars [on ads], and she barely has spent any and she's already climbing,' he said. 'By that logic, Adrienne has a much higher ceiling.' The ad rollout comes after the mayoral candidates faced off at the first Democratic primary debate on Wednesday night. The debate was dominated by the eight other candidates on stage ganging up on Cuomo, blasting his record and accusing him of being unfit for office, having resigned as governor in 2021 amid sexual misconduct accusations he denies. Speaker Adams made waves when she interrupted Cuomo on stage after he declined to offer any 'personal regrets' when asked by moderators. 'No regrets when it comes to cutting Medicaid or health care, no regrets when it comes to cutting child care, when it comes to slow walking [personal protective equipment] and vaccinations in the season of COVID to Black and brown communities — really, no regrets?' she fumed at Cuomo while shaking her head.
Chicago Tribune
2 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Pope Leo XIV meets with child protection advisory board amid survivor calls for zero tolerance on abuse
VATICAN CITY — Pope Leo XIV met with members of the Vatican's child protection advisory commission on Thursday for the first time amid questions about his past handling of clergy sex abuse cases and demands from survivors that he enact a true policy of zero tolerance for abuse across the Catholic Church. The Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, which is made up of religious and lay experts in fighting abuse as well as survivors, called the hourlong audience a 'significant moment of reflection, dialogue, and renewal of the church's unwavering commitment to the safeguarding of children and vulnerable people.' The group said it updated history's first American pope on its activities, including an initiative to help church communities in poorer parts of the world prevent abuse and care for victims. The Vatican did not provide the text of Leo's remarks or make the audio of the audience available to reporters. Pope Francis created the commission early on in his pontificate to advise the church on best practices and placed a trusted official, Boston's then-archbishop, Cardinal Sean O'Malley, in charge. But as the abuse scandal spread globally during Francis' 12-year pontificate, the commission lost its influence its crowning recommendation — the creation of a tribunal to judge bishops who covered up for predator priests — went nowhere. After many years of reform and new members, it has become a place where victims can go to be heard and bishops can get advice on crafting guidelines to fight abuse. O'Malley turned 80 last year and retired as archbishop of Boston, but he remains president of the commission and headed the delegation meeting with Leo in the Apostolic Palace. It has often fallen to O'Malley to speak out on egregious cases that have arrived at the Vatican, including one that remains on Leo's desk: The fate of the ex-Jesuit artist, the Rev. Marko Rupnik, who has been accused by two dozen women of sexual, psychological and spiritual abuse over decades. After coming under criticism that a fellow Jesuit had apparently received preferential treatment, Francis in 2023 ordered the Vatican to waive the statute of limitations on the case and prosecute him canonically. But as recently as March, the Vatican still hadn't found judges to open the trial. Meanwhile, the victims are still waiting for justice and Rupnik continues to minister, with his supporters defending him and denouncing a 'media lynching' campaign against him. Leo, the Chicago-born former Cardinal Robert Prevost, has been credited by victims of helping to dismantle an abusive Catholic movement in Peru, where he served as bishop for many years. But other survivors have asked him to account for other cases while he was a superior in the Augustinian religious order, bishop in Peru and head of the Vatican's bishops' office. The main U.S. survivor group, SNAP, has also called for Leo to adopt the U.S. policy calling for any priest who has been credibly accused of abuse to be permanently removed from ministry.
