By Olin
Ericksen
Staff Writer
December 8 -- With the costs to local businesses unclear
and a possible lawsuit looming, the Santa Monica City Council
on Tuesday unanimously passed one of California's broadest bans
on Styrofoam and non-recyclable plastic carry-out containers.
After listening to comments by environmentalists who say the
products harm marine birds and fish and plastic industry representatives
who argue other products will end up polluting the Bay, the council
acted decisively with little to say on the issue, which was first
brought before the council five months ago.
"We're all in this together and it's our planet, so let’s
do it," said Council member Kevin McKeown shortly before
the council voted for the measure 7 to 0.
With a hardship provision for businesses in place, the ban now
prohibits food providers from serving food – mostly to go
items – in containers made from blown polystyrene –
or Styrofoam – a ban similar to that in several other cities.
But the Santa Monica law also goes a step further, banning non-recyclable
plastic, including "expanded polystyrene and clear polystyrene
with the designated recycling symbol "#6," according
to the staff report.
Staff noted that such "6" products are not economically
viable to recycle at the city level.
Plastic containers with the recycling symbols "#1"
through "#5" -- which are recycled currently by the
City -- are still allowed under the ordinance, states staff.
In total the law applies to plates, bowls, cups, trays and hinged
or lidded containers. Not included in the ban are disposable items
such as straws, cup lids or utensils, nor single use disposable
packing for unprepared foods such as meat trays at grocery stores.
Also not included are plastic bags from food stores, which cannot
be regulated by cities currently under recent State law.
While some cautioned that the law would only be truly effective
if surrounding communities enact similar bans, environmentalists,
such as Heal the Bay executive director, Dr. Mark Gold, said the
new law is a solid win as a model for other cities across the
state.
"Santa Monica's action tonight was progressive because it
banned all polystyrene," said Gold. "Most other cities
that have done this, such as Malibu, banned blown polystyrene,
or Styrofoam -- and this ban in Santa Monica is for all polystyrene."
But Gold, who is also the chair of Santa Monica's Environmental
Task Force, said even more could be done.
"We at Heal the Bay are disappointed with the decision here
today… most notably that the plastic marine debris problem
is not only polystyrene, it is all plastic,” he said. “And
#3 through #7 (plastics) don't have a market at all, and they
only dealt with #6's tonight."
"Our feeling is they should have gotten rid of all #3 through
#7, and there is plenty of products that are compostable,"
he said. "They could have stepped up to the plate more than
they did."
While it was a partial victory for environmentalists, the plastics
industry is still exploring ways to undo the ban, even if it means
going to court.
On November 12 -- shortly before the council was originally scheduled
to hear the item -- the Polystyrene Packaging Council (PSPC) made
its objections known in an 11-page letter to the City.
In the letter, the PSPC officials said the City failed to conduct
an environmental analysis they believe is mandated under the landmark
1972 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The study would
have determined how other products used to replace Styrofoam and
non-recyclable plastic could impact habitat.
"We'll have to consider the results of the City council
vote tonight,” Mark Walton, a representative of DOW chemicals,
told The Lookout shortly after the council vote.
“We do believe that a CEQA analysis is appropriate, because
there is the possibility of an environmental impact, but how we'll
encourage that is unclear at this time," he said.
In the November letter, PSPC officials argued that case law
is settled in the area, a contention disputed by the City, as
are the PSPC's claims that a CEQA review is mandated in this case.
Officials in the City’s Environmental and Publics Works
Department said they feel the use of more biodegradable materials
would, in fact, help, rather than harm, the environment. If that
is the case, an analysis would not be required under a CEQA clause
known as "common sense."
With cities such as San Francisco and Calabasas considering their
own bans, Santa Monica's action Tuesday could extend the limits
of what products should be banned in the Golden State.
However, because of the expanded scope of the ban, it may also
make Santa Monica an attractive target for an industry lawsuit.
|