|
that no alternative exists at the same or lower cost. There are monetary penalties for non compliance,
<br /> which are investigated based on complaints.
<br /> Alameda. The City of Alameda adopted a ban in early 2008, and it applies to food vendors
<br /> (grocery store, deli, restaurant), City facilities and City departments. Biodegradable or compostable
<br /> disposable food service ware are to be used instead, unless shown to be unavailable or unaffordable. If
<br /> unaffordable, a take-out' fee can be charged to customers to cover the increased cost. Exemptions were
<br /> available for the first six months that the ban was in place to allow use of existing stocks, ice chests and
<br /> coolers are exempt, as well as food prepared and packaged outside of the city. Businesses can also
<br /> make applications for a hardship waiver. Fines can be levied for violations.
<br /> Albany. The City of Albany adopted is ban in 2008. It applies to all city facilities, franchises,
<br /> contractors, and vendors doing business in city facilities or on city projects, all retail food vendors
<br /> (restaurants or retail food vendors, itinerant restaurants, push carts, food trucks; stores, shops selling
<br /> prepared foods, either eaten on premises or taken out). Exemptions are allowed upon a decision by the
<br /> city administrator that suitable biodegradable or compostable recyclable alternative does not exist.
<br /> Containers banned include cups, plates, "clam- shell" boxes, bowls, trays, cartons, cups, lids, straws,
<br /> forks, other items designed for one -time use, including items for take -out food and leftovers. Fines can
<br /> be levied on violators.
<br /> Livermore. The City of Livermore just considered options for banning foam food containers.
<br /> Livermore's analysis included staff discussions with stakeholders (downtown association, chamber of
<br /> commerce, restaurant and bar association, etc.) about the cost impacts of a ban. Policy scenarios
<br /> considered included: (1) taking no action; (2) ban applying only to the downtown redevelopment area;
<br /> and (3) ban applies city-wide. The Livermore City Council asked staff for additional information, and a
<br /> draft ordinance for consideration later this year.
<br /> Fremont. The City of Fremont adopted a ban in May 2010 which applies to all restaurants,
<br /> grocery stores, caterers, cafeterias, and large groups at city facilities. The ban takes effect January 1,
<br /> 2011, with exemptions available to deplete existing stocks, and if there are no feasible alternatives. Fines
<br /> can be levied on violators.
<br /> DISCUSSION
<br /> In contrast to the many lawsuits arising from plastic bag bans, there have been no reports of any
<br /> legal challenges to bans on foam food containers. However, in the April 12, 2010, report to the
<br /> Livermore City Council on this topic, it was mentioned that in the City of Union City in 2008 there was
<br /> organized opposition from the California Restaurant Association and American Chemistry Council to a
<br /> proposed ban, which Union City did not adopt.
<br /> If Pleasanton does decide to pursue a ban on foam food containers, research can be conducted
<br /> to support the ban, including local concerns about litter, as well as general health and waste issues raised
<br /> in other communities.
<br /> Consideration of a ban on foam food containers would have to include consideration of several
<br /> issues, including:
<br /> 1. What foam food containers to ban
<br /> 2. What to allow as substitutes biodegradable, compostable, recyclable, etc.
<br /> 3. Where to apply ban restaurants, food vendors, City facilities, etc.
<br /> 4. What type of community outreach input from stakeholders
<br /> 5. Whether to allow any exemptions, and on what basis (no substitutes available, cost), etc.
<br /> Page 7 of 9
<br />
|