Public Works Department
Environmental Programs Division
May 4, 2011
To: Environmental Quality Commissioners
From: Rebecca Fotu, Environmental Programs Manager
Subject: Source Reduction Subcommittee- Plastics
Potential Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) Action
Identify members, tasks and timelines for the Source Reduction Subcommittee.
Background
At the EQC’s April 2011 meeting, Miriam Gordon, Director of the Clean Water Fund,
presented “Plastic Pollution and Local Solutions” in an effort to call communities to act
in reducing single use plastics. Ms. Gordon presented the negative impacts of single
use plastics in the environment, such as Styrofoam foodware and plastic bags that end
up in local streams, causing long term damage to ecosystems and habitat. Ms. Gordon
also presented local strategies to reduce impacts, such as implementing bans or
charging a user fee on single use plastics. Ms. Gordon also included a model ordinance
to require food establishments to use reusable foodware for customers eating in. See
Attachment A.
After the presentation, the commission voted to form a subcommittee to work on
developing and recommending programs and/or policies that would reduce plastic
pollution and waste in the community.
Attached are documents that provide additional information and case studies on local
strategies to assist the commission in defining tasks and goals for the subcommittee.
Relation to the Environmental Quality Commission’s Work Plan
The Environmental Quality Commission’s 2011-2012 Work Plan has identified resource
conservation and pollution prevention as a priority in the areas of waste reduction,
integrated pest management and water conservation. Forming this subcommittee is
consistent with the EQC’s work plan.
Attachments:
A. Clean Water Action Model Ordinance to “Phase-Out Take”
B. Save the Bay Case Studies for Styrofoam Reduction
C. Save the Bay Case Studies for Plastic Bag Reduction
D. Plastic Bag Fact Sheet by the City of Palo Alto
E. Presentation by the City of San Jose on Plastic Bag Ban
CLEAN WATER ACTION
MODEL ORDINANCE TO “PHASE-OUT TAKE”
Miriam Gordon
California Director, Clean Water Action
(415) 369-9170
mgordoncleanwater.org
FINDINGS:
The state requires that cities and counties reduce waste destined for landfills and
supports the three main tenants of smart trash disposal, which are to reduce, reuse, and
recycle waste.
• Currently, research indicates that more than one-third of all waste that goes into
landfills is packaging waste.
• The cost burden on local governments and taxpayers for managing packaging waste is
conservatively estimated at more than $1.5 billion annually
• Excessive packaging consumes valuable virgin resources, only to be immediately
thrown away by consumers.
• It is in the state’s /county’s / city’s economic and environmental interest to deter
excess packaging or create incentives for reducing the amount of packaging used by
business.
• Take-out food packaging comprises (need to consult the street litter audit of the
relevant local jurisdicition) X% of street litter
• Plastic and paper food packaging, once used, is generally considered to be
contaminated and therefore not recyclable, and litter does not get recycled;
• The City? County? State currently spend XXX$ on street sweeping, and other forms of
litter collection and that would be reduced by XX- XX$ if the food and beverage
packaging litter component were eliminated from the streets;
• Litter is a blight in California’s communities and neighborhoods and can cause property
values to decrease and infringe on the residents’ enjoyment of their local neighborhoods;
• Eighty percent (80%) of the trash and plastics that are filling the Pacific Ocean with
marine debris come from trash in urban runoff, most of which is comprised of disposable
food and beverage packaging from fast food restaurants, convenience stores, grocery
stores, shopping malls, movie theatres, and public institutions including schools, where
take-out food and beverages are sold;
• Packaging comprises 31.7% by weight of municipal solid waste in the United States;
• Preventing the generation of disposable food ware and the disposable portion of
household garbage constitutes a primary method of source reduction, and is known as
the number 1 priority in California’s system of Integrated Waste Management (the first R
in Reduce, Reuse and Recycle);
• Reducing the generation of disposable food ware is consistent with the state’s goal of
achieving zero waste;
• Products and package comprise 44% of the total US emissions of carbon, according to
the US EPA
DEFINITIONS
o ‘Food service establishment”
o “For here” means food or beverages are served for consumption on the premises of a
food service establishment
o “To go” means food or beverages which are served for consumption outside the
premises of a food service establishment
o “Re-usable container” shall mean containers that are designed to be used more than
once.
1
Effective January 1, 2013:
A. Food service establishments shall be prohibited from selling or providing food for
consumption “for here” using disposable plates, bowls, cups, containers, or cutlery.
Customers must be asked whether they want the food or beverage they have
ordered to be “for here” or “to go.” If the customer plans to have the food or beverage
“for here,” the vendor must serve the food and or beverage on non-disposable food-
ware.
B. Food service establishments that do not have sinks or adequate capacity to wash re
usable food ware will be exempt from (A) but will be required to obtain a permit to
distribute food and beverage in disposable packaging. Fees collected will go to a
Disposable Packaging and Litter Reduction Fund, to be administered by the XXXX,
for education programs to encourage consumers to use re-usable food and beverage
containers.
C. After January 2013, any new food service business that is established that plans to
serve food on the premises of the business must have adequate dish-washing
capacity to serve food and beverages on non-disposable plates, bowls, cups,
containers, or cutlery.
Subsection XXXX. Food service businesses serving food and beverage “to go”
Effective January 1, 2013:
A. Food service establishments that sell or provide food or beverage for consumption “to
go” shall determine whether the customer is taking the food or beverage “to go” or
“for here.”
B. Food service establishments that sell or provide food or beverage “to go” shall
provide food and/or beverages to customers who bring their own refillable or reusable
food or beverage container without additional charge for the customer’s use of the
reusable container.
C. A food service establishment that provides food or beverage in a customer’s re
usable container may choose to measure the quantity of food or beverage provided
so it can to charge the same amount as would be charged for food or beverage
provided in a disposable container. Such measurements shall be conducted using
non-disposable containers or measuring devices.
D. For customers who choose to “take out” food or beverages in disposable containers,
the food service establishment operator shall charge customers for each disposable
food service item provided at a cost that covers the reasonable cost of purchasing
and providing disposable food or beverage packaging.
2
Clean Bay Project
Model Program Action
Require the use of compostable food containers
The Goal: Reduce plastic and styrofoam pollution in the Bay and local waterways
The Situation:
Plastic food service containers are a major component of urban litter. These products are
usually polystyrene or expanded polystyrene (such as Styrofoam), and often wind up in the Bay,
where they break into small pieces and leach toxins into the water. Take-out food and beverage
containers, like Styrofoam cups, are some of the most ubiquitous trash items fouling the Bay
and local waterways. Foamed polystyrene and plastic food packaging are also one of the
biggest culprits in clogging municipal storm drains. These types of plastics and Styrofoam never
biodegrade and will remain with us for thousands of years, harming wildlife and polluting our
shores.
Studies have found that styrene, a cancer-causing and neurotoxic component of polystyrene,
can leach into food and drink, posing a human health risk. A Danish study that examined the
environmental impacts of various packaging materials (in the categories of energy consumption,
greenhouse gas effect, and total environmental effect) determined that polystyrene has the
second highest impact, behind aluminum. 1 Styrofoam products also pose a health threat to
wildlife. At least 162 marine species worldwide have been reported to have consumed
polystyrene and other litter. Wildlife that eat polystyrene suffer from loss of appetite, reduced
nutrient absorption, and starvation. 2
Polystyrene food service products have no appreciable recycling market 3 . Companies that claim
to accept polystyrene foam for recycling will only accept materials that are free of food residue,
which effectively renders polystyrene foam food ware unrecyclable.
Affordable alternatives include paper products with recycled content and re-useable, washable
cups and containers. In addition, a wide variety of plastic-like containers made from non-
petroleum-based sources like corn starch are available. Combined with an effective commercial
compost program, these alternatives can reduce landfill loads and polystyrene and petroleum-
based plastic pollution in the Bay and ocean.
State agencies have stressed the need to address urban litter through legislation and municipal
ordinances. The California Ocean Protection Council (OPC) proposes a ban on polystyrene
food containers as one of the top three priority actions for reducing marine debris. 4 Additionally,
under the Water Board’s 2009 Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP), permitees
are repeatedly encouraged to include “any trash reduction ordinances that are being
implemented” as part of their trash control measures and best management practices. 5 There
have been high levels of public support for ordinances to eliminate polystyrene take-out food
ware.
Require the use of compostable food containers
Several cities around the Bay Area have taken action on polystyrene food containers. There
are now more than 45 cities in California and more than 20 in the Bay Area that have banned
the use of polystyrene foam. The following case study illustrates one city’s approach.
Case Study: City of Millbrae:
Recognizing the need to reduce pollution in local waterways and city streets, Millbrae adopted a
ban on polystyrene food packaging in January 2008.
What it does: City ordinance requires all restaurants or sellers of take-out food to use only
take-out containers that are reusable, biodegradable, compostable or recyclable under current
city programs. Styrofoam and polystyrene plastics are prohibited. The ordinance includes cups,
lids, straws, clamshells, plates, bowls, and utensils.
How it was implemented: City staff sent two informational reports to the City Council and
prepared the city to address industry concerns. The Recycling & Waste Program created
postcards and flyers to distribute to businesses and had discussions with the Chamber of
Commerce prior to the ordinance adoption. The program offers online resources and materials
to educate business owners about how to comply (Millbrae Sustainable Food Service Ware
Ordinance & Information: http://www.ci.millbrae.ca.us/index.aspx?page=236). Enforcement is
complaint-driven and compliance is near 100%.
Costs: Cities and counties should be prepared to cover a minimum of .25 FTE to work on the
legislation, as well as the development and translation of outreach materials, staff time to
manage an informational website (as applicable), staff time for complain-driven enforcement,
and costs for in-house mailing of outreach materials and enforcement letters. City and County
attorneys will also need to be consulted during the development phase of an ordinance to make
sure that it is compliant with any existing local, state, or, federal legislation.
Contact: Shelly Reider, Environmental Programs Manager, City of Millbrae: (650) 259-2444
Additional Program Information: San Francisco:
We also recommend reviewing the City and County of San Francisco’s ordinance, which may
have useful findings and other helpful language for cities looking to draft their own legislation:
http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/fswr/documents_forms/FSWR_Ordinance295-06.pdf
Enclosures:
Millbrae ordinance and sample outreach materials.
General Considerations:
CEQA: Millbrae’s ordinance includes an explanation of their exemption for the ordinance under
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This negative declaration clarifies the city’s
obligations and the impact of the ordinance for legal purposes.
Addressing Industry Opposition: Some plastics manufacturers and their associations
surprised cities early on by dispatching lobbyists to oppose these ordinances through letters and
at public meetings. Cities should be prepared to address industry claims. Save The Bay can
direct city staff to simple facts that refute plastic industry claims. Please see our Myth vs. Fact
sheet for more information.
Recycling as an alternative: A polystyrene ban ordinance work best in coordination with cities’
litter abatement, composting and recycling programs. It’s important to note that most food
service plastics are not easily or affordably recycled, because the market for recycling such
material is limited, especially because food service plastics are soiled. CalRecycle has said,
“There is no meaningful recycling of food service polystyrene.” (2004 report to the Legislature.)
Changing current recycling programs to include recycling food service polystyrene is not
recommended.
Helping to achieve municipal environmental goals: Banning the use of polystyrene food
containers can contribute to the overall environmental goals of municipalities. For those cities
and counties engaging in Environmentally Preferable Purchasing or Extended Producer
Responsibility initiatives, a Styrofoam ban is a step toward achieving sustainable material
consumption and disposal. Because polystyrene is a major component of water pollution and
coastal trash debris, eliminating its use will help municipalities achieve their Zero Waste goals.
Finally, a Styrofoam ban would address several components of a Climate Action Plan;
eliminating this source of pollution will help protect wetland health, in turn protecting cities
against rising sea levels. Reducing or eliminating local Styrofoam production also helps to
reduce the amount of greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere.
Public education and outreach on compostable foodware: Some composting operations
have noted that people often do not dispose of compostable products properly, putting them in
recycling or trash bins rather than compost bins. These mistakes can lead to compostable
products ending up in landfills just like their non-compostable counterparts. People also
confuse compostable plastic with other plastic foodware. To ensure the effectiveness of a
transition to sustainable foodware, cities should engage in targeted efforts to educate the
community on the definition of “compostable” and the appropriate way to dispose of these items.
Please contact Save The Bay’s Clean Bay Project program staff for additional resources,
including sample ordinances, CEQA information, and examples of stakeholder outreach
approaches and materials.
Policy Department
510-452-9261 x118
cleanbay@savesfbay.org
Revised 2-1-11
Partial funding for this project comes from the USEPA San Francisco Bay Water Quality Improvement Fund (2009) in collaboration
with the San Francisco Estuary Partnership and ABAG.
1
California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). Use and Disposal of Polystyrene in California (2004).
2
City and County of San Francisco, Food Service Waste Reduction Ordinance (Ordinance No 295-06).
3
California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). Use and Disposal of Polystyrene in California (2004).
4
Implementation Strategy to Reduce & Prevent Ocean Litter (2008).
5
MRP Section C.10, pages 84, 86.
ORDINANCE NO. 717
SUSTAINABLE FOOD SERVICE WARE ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE TO ADD CHAPTER 6.40 TO THE MILLBRAE MUNICIPAL CODE
PROHIBITING THE USE OF POLYSTYRENE FOAM AND SOLID DISPOSABLE FOOD
SERVICE WARE AND REQUIRING THE USE OF BIODEGFUDABLE,
COMPOSTABLE, REUSABLE OR RECYCLABLE FOOD SERVICE WARE BY FOOD
VENDORS IN THE CITY
WHEREAS, the City has a duty to protect the natural environment, the economy, and the
health of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, effective ways to reduce the negative environmental impacts of disposable
food service ware include reusing or recycling food service ware and using'biodegradable or
compostable take-out materials made from renewable resources such as paper, corn starch, potato
starch, and sugarcane; and
WHEREAS, polystyrene is a common environmental pollutant as well as a non-
biodegradable, non-compostable, non-recyclable or non-reusable substance used as food service
ware by food vendors operating in the City; and
WHEREAS, there continues to be no substantial recycling of polystyrene food service
ware; and
WHEREAS, affordable compostable food service ware products are increasingly becoming
available for most food service applications such as cups, plates, and hinged containers and these
products are more ecologically sound than polystyrene materials and can be turned into a compost
product; and
W H E P A S , residents can get discounted composting bins from the County of San Mateo
Recycleworks Program, which can be used to compost food scraps and biodegradable,
compostable, or food soiled paper take out food service ware; and
WHEREAS, natural compost products are used as a very effective soil amendment for
farms and gardens that conserves water, prevents erosion and adds to soil "tilth" to reduce the need
for applications of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, thereby moving towards a healthier zero
waste system; and
WHEREAS, disposable food service ware constitutes a portion of the litter in Millbrae's
streets, parks and public places which increases City costs; and
WHEREAS, polystyrene foam is a common pollutant that fragments into smaller, non-
biodegradable pieces that are ingested by marine life and other wildlife thus harming or killing
them; and
Page 1 of 7
1355798.4
WHEREAS, due to the physical properties of polystyrene, the EPA states "that ,such
materials can also have serious impacts on human health, wildlife, the aquatic environment and the
economy"; and
WHEREAS, in the manufacturing process as well as the use and disposal of products, the
energy consumption, greenhouse gas effect, and other environmental effects, polystyrene's
environmental impacts are rated second highest, according to the California Integrated Waste
Management Board; and
WHEREAS, styrene, a component of polystyrene, is a known hazardous substance that . .
medical evidence and the Food and Drug Administration suggests leaches from polystyrene
containers into food and drink and is a suspected carcinogen and neurotoxin which potentially . .
threatens human health and the general public is not typically warned of such potential hazards; and
WHEREAS, due to these concerns, cities began banning polystyrene foam food service
ware including several California cities such as Berkeley (1990), Oakland (2007), and San
Francisco (2007) where local businesses and several national corporations have successfully
replaced it and other non-biodegradable food service ware with affordable, safe, biodegradable
products; and
WHEREAS, restricting the use of polystyrene foam and solid disposable food service ware
products and replacing non-biodegradable, non-compostable, non-reusable, or non-recyclable food
service ware with biodegradable, compostable, reusable, or recyclable food service ware products
in Millbrae will further protect the public health and safety of the residents of Millbrae, the natural
environment, waterways and wildlife and would advance the City's goal of developing a
sustainable City, and
WHEmAS, in light of the foregoing, the City Council desires to institute two specific
practices by all food vendors in Millbrae and to regulate said practices in City facilities. The first is
that the use of Foam Polystyrene or Solid Polystyrene disposable food service ware will be
prohibited. The second is that all disposable food service ware will be required to be
biodegradable, compostable, reusable, or recyclable unless there is no available biodegradable,
compostable, reusable, or recyclable alternative for a specific application.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP MILLBRAE HEREBY DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Page 2 of 7
1355798.4
SECTION 1. ADDITION OF CHAPTER 6.40.
Chapter 6.40 hereby is added to the Millbrae Municipal Code to read as follows:
SUSTAINABLE FOOD SERVICE WARE ORDINANCE
Sections:
6.40.010 Definitions
6.40.020 Prohibited Use of Disposable Food Service Ware
6.40.030 Required Use of Biodegradable, Compostable, Reusable or Recyclable Food
Service Ware
6.40.040 Exemptions
6.40.050 Regulations; Enforcement
6.40.060 Violations and Penalties
6.40.010 Definitions
"ASTM Standard" means meeting the standards of the American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) International Standards D6400 or D6868 for biodegradable and compostable plastics, as
those standards may be amended D6400 is the specification for plastics designed for
compostability in municipal or industrial aerobic composting facilities. D6868 is the specification
for aerobic compostability of plastics used as coatings on a compostable substrate.
"Biodegradable" means the entire product or package will completely degrade and return to nature,
i.e., decompose into elements found in nature within a reasonably short period of time after
customary disposal.
"City Facilities" means any building, structure or vehicles owned or operated by the City of
Millbrae, its agent, agencies and departments.
"Compostable" means all materials in the product or package will degrade into, or otherwise
become part of, usable compost (e.g., soil-conditioning material, mulch) in a safe and timely
manner. Compostable disposable food service ware must meet ASTM-Standards for
compostability and any bio-plastic or plastic-like product must be clearly labeled, preferably with a
color symbol, such that any customer or processor can easily distinguish the ASTM Standard
compostable plastic from non-ASTM Specification compostable plastic.
"Customer" means any person obtaining prepared food from a food vendor.
"Disposable Food Service Ware" means all containers, bowls, plates, trays, cartons, cups, lids,
straws, forks, spoons, knives, and other items designed for one-time or non-durable uses on or in
which any food vendor directly places or packages prepared foods or which are used to consume
foods. This includes, but is not limited to, service ware for takeout foods andlor leftovers from
partially consumed meals prepared at food vendors.
Page 3 of 7
"Food Vendor" means any and all sales outlets, stores, shops, vehicles or other places of business
located within the City of Millbrae which operate primarily to sell or convey foods or beverages
directly to the ultimate consumer, which foods or beverages are predominantly contained, wrapped
or held in or on packaging, including both restaurants and retail food vendors. "Restaurant" means
any establishment located within the City of Millbrae that sells prepared food for consumption on,
near, or off its premises by customers. For the purposes of this chapter the term includes a
restaurant operating from a temporary facility, cart, vehicle or mobile unit. "Retail Food Vendor"
means any place, other than a restaurant, located within the City of Millbrae where food is
prepared, mixed, cooked, baked, smoked, preserved, bottled, packaged, handled, stored,
manufactured and sold or offered for sale, including, but not limited to, drive-in, coffee shop,
cafeteria, short-order cafe, delicatessen, luncheonette, grill, sandwich shop, soda fountain, bed and
breakfast inn, tavern, bar, cocktail lounge, nightclub, roadside stand, take-out prepared food place,
industrial feeding establishment, catering kitchen, mobile food preparation unit, commissary,
grocery store, public food market, produce stand, food stand, venue, special event, or similar place
in which food or d i k is prepared for sale or for service on the premises or elsewhere, and any
rn
.other establishment or operation where food is processed, prepared, stored, served or provided for
the public for charge.
"Polystyrene" means and includes blown polystyrene and expanded and extruded foams
(sometimes called "~t~rofoam@," a Dow Chemical Co. trademarked form of EPS insulation) also
referred to as expanded polystyrene (EPS) which are thermoplastic petrochemical materials
utilizing a styrene monomer and processed by any number .of techniques including, but not limited
to, fusion of polymer spheres (expandable bead polystyrene), injection molding, form molding, and
extrusion-blow molding (extruded foam polystyrene); and in-thischapter i s referenced as "Foam
Polystyrene." Foam Polystyrene is generally used to make cups, bowls, plates, trays, cl'amshell
containers, meat trays and egg cartons. The term "polystyrene" also means and includes clear or
solid polystyrene which is also known as "oriented," and referenced in this chapter as "Solid
Polystyrene." "Solid Polystyrene" is generally used to make clear clamshell containers, and clear
or colored straws, lids and utensils. . .
"Prepared Food" means food or beverages, which are served, packaged, cooked, chopped, sliced,
mixed, brewed, frozen, squeezed or otherwise prepared on the food vendor's premises within the
City of Millbrae. Prepared food may be eaten either on or off the premises, also known as "takeout
food."
"Recyclable" means material that can be sorted, cleansed, and reconstituted using Millbrae's
available recycling collection programs for the purpose of using the altered form in the manufacture
of a new product. Recycling does not include burning, incinerating, converting, or otherwise
' thermally destroying solid waste.
"Reusable" means all materials in the product or package will be used more than once in its same
form by the customer, food vendor or other reuse programs. Reusable food service ware includes:
food or beverage containers, packages or trays, such as, but not limited to, soft drink bottles and
milk containers that are designed to be returned to the distributor and customer that is provided
take-out containers. Reusable also includes durable containers, packages or trays used on-premises
or returnable containers brought back to the food vendor.
Page 4 of 7
6.40.020 Prohibited Use of Disposable Food Service Ware
A. Food vendors are prohibited from providing prepared food to customers in Foam Polystyrene or
Solid Polystyrene disposable food service ware.
B. No Foam Polystyrene or Solid Polystyrene disposable food service ware shall be used in any
City Facilities. No city department or agency will purchase or acquire Foam Polystyrene or Solid
Polystyrene disposable food service ware for use at City Facilities.
C. All individuals, entities or organizations using City Facilities for public or private events shall
comply with the requirements in this chapter.
6.40.030 Required Use of Biodegradable, Compostable, Reusable or Recyclable Food Service
Ware
A. All food vendors using any disposable food service ware will use biodegradable, compostable,
reusable or recyclable food service ware. All food vendors are strongly encouraged to use reusable
food service ware in place of using disposable food service ware for all food served on-premises.
A food vendor may price its products or services to customers in a manner to cover any cost
differential.
B. All individuals, entities or organizations that rent or use City Facilities will use biodegradable,
compostable, reusable or recyclable food service ware.
6.40.040 Exemptions
A. Foods prepared or packaged outside the City of Millbrae are exempt from the provisions of this
chapter. Purveyors of food prepared or packaged outside the City of Millbrae are encouraged to
follow the provisions of this chapter.
B. Food vendors will be exempted from the provisions of this chapter for specific items or types of
disposable fobd service ware if the City Manager or hisher designee finds that a suitable
biodegradable, compostable, reusable or recyclable alternative does not exist for a specific
application andor that imposing the requirements of this chapter on that item or type of disposable
food service ware would cause undue hardship. Any person may seek an exemption from the
requirements of this chapter by filing a request in writing with the City Manager. The City
Manager may waive any specific requirement of this chapter for a period of not more than one year
if the person seeking the exemption has demonstrated that strict application of the specific
requirement would cause undue hardship. A person granted an exemption must re-apply prior to
the end of the one year exemption period and demonstrate continued undue hardship if the person
wishes to have the exemption extended. The City Manager's decision to grant or deny an
exemption or to grant or deny an extension of a previously issued exemption shall be in writing and
shall be final.
C. Coolers and ice cheststhat are intended for reuse are exempt from the provisions of this chapter.
Page 5 of 7
1355798.4
6.40.050 Regulations;'Enforcement
A. The City Manager or hisher designee will have primary responsibility for enforcement of this
chapter. The City Manager or hisher designee is authorized to promulgate regulations and to take
any and all other actions reasonable and necessary to enforce this chapter, including, but not limited
to, entering the premises of any food vendor to verify compliance in accordance with applicable
law.
B. Anyone violating or failing to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter will be guilty
of an infraction pursuant to Chapter 1.05 of the Municipal Code.
C. The City Attorney may seek legal, injunctive, or other equitable relief t o enforce this chapter.
6.40.060 Violations and Penalties .
A. If the City Manager or hisher designee determines that a violation of this chapter occurred,
helshe will issue a written warning notice to the food vendor that a violation has occurred.
B. If the food vendor engages in subsequent violations of this chapter, the penalties set forth in
Section 1.05.010 of this Municipal Code will apply.
C. Food vendors may request an administrative hearing to adjudicate any penalties issued under
this chapter by filing a written request with the City Manager or hisher designee. The hearing
procedures set forth in Section 1.05.030 shall be followed. Any determination fiom the
administrative hearing on penalties issued under this chapter will be final and conclusive.
SECTION 2. AMENDMENT OF SECTION 1.05.020
Section 1.05.020 of the Millbrae Municipal Code hereby is amended as follows:
Under Item 1, "Community Development," add Chapter 6.40 as an authorized chapter for the Code
Enforcement Oficer/Cornmunity Preservation Specialist.
Under Item 5, "Public Works," add Chapter 6.40 as an authorized chapter for the following
positions: Director of Public Works and Industrial Waste Inspector.
SECTION 3. CEQA DETERMINATION
Pursuant to Title 14 of the California Administrative Code, the City Council finds that this
Ordinance is exempt fiom the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
for the following reasons: (1) under Section 15061(b)(3), it is not a project which has the potential
for causing a significant effect on the environment; (2) under Section 15308, it is an authorized
action by an agency with regulatory authority for the purpose of assuring the maintenance,
restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment; (3) under Section 15378(a), it is not a
project which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment or a
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; and (4) under Section
15378(b)(3), it is an action that consists of continuing administrative or maintenance activities in
the form of general policy and procedure making.
Page 6 of 7
1355798.4
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE
This chapter will become effective on January lSt,2008.
SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be
invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall
not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence,
clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of
the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 6. PUBLICATION
Within five (5) days of the enactment of this Ordinance and fifteen (15) days following its
enactment, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance prepared by the City Attorney.
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Millbrae held on
September 25,2007.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Millbrae
held on October 9,2007 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Hershman, Holober, Larson, Papan and Gottschal k
.A
None
NOES:
ABSENT: None
CLERK
Page 7 of 7
1355798.4
What is wrong with polystyrene food service ware?
It is not recyclable.
It is a common item that is littered on streets that ends up in
storm drains, on beaches, and in the Bay and Ocean.
It breaks down into smaller pieces that may be ingested by
wildlife resulting in reduced appetite, reduced nutrient absorption,
and starvation.
It contains hazardous chemicals that may leach from polystyrene
containers into food and drink and may cause cancer.
I
What does the Ordinance require?
The use of biodegradable, compostable, reusable, or recyclable food service ware.
. e .*
Acceptable Products: Aluminum, plastics (no black) coded with TI , ~ 2 . , * a or 4" ,
p3 .4
r5
uncoated or coated paper, cardboard, and plastics made from c o ~ f p o f & e ~ u g a r , or other
plant based products.
Please see the separate list of Sustainable Food Service Ware for more details.
Some examples of acceptable products are shown below:
A
What are the penalties for non-compliance?
Violations may result in fines according to the Municipal Code:
1st = warning, 2nd = $100, 3rd = $200,4th = $500.
Enforcement is by the City of Millbrae, not the County Health Inspector.
What can my business do to reduce food service ware costs?
Allow and encourage customers to bring their own mugs to buy drinks.
Charge a "take out fee" to cover the cost difference.
Use reusable dishes and cups instead of disposable ones for "eat-in" customers.
More questions?
Call the Recycling 8 Waste Prevention Program at 259m2345
~~~~~ci.rn9llbrae.ca~us
I
Clean Bay Project
Model Program Action
Adopt a Ban or Consumer Charge on Single-use Bags
The Goal: Protect Bay wildlife and habitats from entanglement and ingestion of plastic
bags
The Situation:
Enormous quantities of plastic bags pollute our waters and entangle and kill marine life.
The average Californian uses an estimated 400 plastic bags per year for a total of 19
billion plastic bags annually statewide. The average use time of a plastic bag is 12
minutes. Most are then sent to the landfill. However, many plastic bags find their way to
our creeks, Bay and ocean where they entangle, suffocate and kill seals, birds, sea
turtles and other marine life. Save The Bay estimates that one million plastic bags end
up in the Bay each year.
Plastic bag pollution also has significant economic consequences. Bags litter streets and
parks, and clog storm drains and recycling equipment, costing cities millions. The cost of
bags is embedded in our food prices and the taxes we pay. Like any product, single-use
bags are not free. The out-of-pocket cost is passed from the retailer to the consumer
through increased food prices. Fortune Magazine estimated the plastic bag industry
collects $4 billion per year in profits from retailers.1 The cost to cities and neighborhoods
is even greater, as municipalities know well.
Adopting policies that end the distribution of plastic and paper single-use bags is a
proven way to create a mass switch to reusable bags, which will help clean up our
communities and our Bay while saving cities and consumers money.
Unfortunately, recycling isn't a viable solution. In 2008, the US generated 3,960
thousand tons of plastic waste – including bags, sacks, and wraps – and only one
percent was recycled 2 . California has pushed a statewide effort to recycle plastic bags
for 15 years. Despite this, CalRecycle estimates that less than five percent of all single
use plastic bags in the state are actually recycled. 3 Recycling firms have reported
extensive costs associated with attempts to recycle even this small portion of plastic
bags. The bags jam machinery, cause work stoppages, and endanger workers who must
remove the plastic film. Plastic bags also contaminate other more valuable recyclable
materials, decreasing their value to recycling facilities.
In many instances, plastic bags must be stockpiled for lack of buyers. Buyers often
require photographs of the recycled film and want to know how contaminated it is,
making the process of selling plastic film time-consuming for recycling facilities. San
Jose recycling firms have had to pay up to $140 per pound to have their bag film hauled
away. According to Jared Blumenfeld, former director of the San Francisco Department
of the Environment, it costs recyclers $4,000 to process and recycle one ton of plastic
bags, which can then be sold for $32 on the commodities market. 4
Single-use paper bags are less detrimental to the marine environment. However, most
do not contain recycled content, and they carry their own production costs in resources
and carbon emissions for a short-lived product. An ordinance that covers all single-use
bags, including paper, provides the best solution by encouraging consumers to adopt the
habit of bringing their own reusable bags.
Under the Water Board’s 2009 Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit (MRP), permitees are encouraged to
include “any trash reduction ordinances that are being implemented” as part of their
trash control measures and best management practices. 5 Save The Bay’s Clean Bay
Project offers assistance to cities and counties to implement ordinances that reduce
plastic and paper bag litter and pollution, and help build community support for these
programs.
In order to be effective at changing consumer habits, municipal policies to reduce
single-use bags should:
1. Place a substantive charge, ban or combination on both plastic and paper
single-use bags to ensure a switch to reusable cloth bags.
2. Provide consistency through broad coverage across all retail outlets.
3. Include a plan for stakeholder outreach, enforcement and administrative
activities.
Adopt a Ban or Consumer Charge on Single-use Bags - Case Studies
A growing number of cities around the country are enacting single-use bag reduction
ordinances, which may have useful findings and other helpful language for cities looking
to draft their own legislation.
1. Case Study: Model Ordinance (attached)
In the wake of AB 1998, the proposed bill that would have banned plastic bags and
placed a charge on recycled-content paper bags at supermarkets, pharmacies and
convenience stores throughout the state, cities and counties across the Bay Area and
around the state have been eagerly pushing legislation at the local level in hopes that it
will eventually bolster state-wide legislation.
Green Cities California, along with participation from various stakeholders, developed
what is referred to as a “Model Ordinance.” This template ordinance language contains
the basic tenets that stakeholders including environmental groups and the California
Grocer’s Association have agreed upon. The intent of the “model ordinance” is to
provide local jurisdictions with a template ordinance that could be proposed as-is, or to
use as a guide to developing a full ordinance.
Save The Bay considers the model to be a great jumping-off point for cities and counties
that have not already begun drafting an ordinance: it is straightforward, covers all
retailers, and provides consumer incentive for bringing one’s own bag by both banning
plastic bags and placing a small charge on paper bags. However, Save The Bay wants
to be clear that while the so-called “model” ordinance is an effective tool for cities and
counties in the early stages of developing ordinances, it should not be viewed as the
only pathway to a strong and comprehensive piece of legislation.
2. City of San Jose, CA
In December 2010, the City of San Jose adopted the broadest piece of legislation to
date limiting the free distribution of single-use bags. San Jose, the largest city in the Bay
Area and the 3rd largest in the state, passed an ordinance that will ban plastic bags and
place a consumer charge on 40% post-consumer recycled content paper bags at all
retailers starting January 2010. Save the Bay strongly encourages cities and counties to
follow San Jose’s lead and ban plastic bags at all retailers.
Benefits to this approach: A combined ban and fee will be the most effective at
encouraging a behavior shift to reusable bags. Covering all retailers will result in
the greatest environmental benefit and reduction of plastic bags in the
environment.
Concerns: San Jose’s ordinance does not explicitly ban the free distribution of
reusable bags. Though Save the Bay strongly encourages cities and retailers to
promote free bag giveaways, we are concerned that reusable bags may become
the new single-use bags. A similar loophole was responsible for the free
distribution of thick plastic bags in San Francisco—a loophole that has since
been closed through prompting by the San Francisco Department of the
Environment and the Board of Supervisors. Save the Bay worked with San Jose
Councilmembers to develop a staff memo that addresses this potential loophole
and directs City staff to diligently monitor the types of bags that are freely
distributed in San Jose. Save the Bay encourages cities and counties to include
language in their ordinances that specifically addresses this issue.
3. City and County of San Francisco, CA
San Francisco’s ordinance was adopted in April 2007 and went into effect in
November 2007. It mandates that large grocery stores and pharmacies (over $2 million
in annual revenue) distribute only paper bags with 40 percent recycled content,
compostable plastic bags and reusable bags.
Benefits to this approach: A ban makes a clear statement to the public and
avoids the administration of a charge and questions about a charge's impact on
consumers.
Concerns: This ordinance is limited to large grocers and pharmacies, which
comprise only a portion of retail sales in the City and County of San Francisco. It
also does not address paper bags which have their own negative environmental
impacts. Given an easy option to avoid changing behavior, many San Francisco
shoppers continue to use single-use paper bags. Though city agencies report a
decrease in the overall distribution of paper bags, results of fees around the
world would suggest that San Francisco’s ban, if coupled with a charge on paper
bags, would drastically decrease the use of single-use bags and increase the use
of reusable bags.
San Francisco is eager to expand their plastic bag reduction ordinance to include
more retailers and a charge on paper bags, similar to other proposals around the
Bay Area and the state to further encourage the use of reusable bags.
Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, sponsor of the current ordinance, expects to
introduce an ordinance early in 2011.
4. City of Fairfax, CA
Fairfax’s ordinance was passed by voters on November 4, 2008. The City of Fairfax
had adopted a ban on plastic bags in August 2007, but was forced to make it voluntary
after a coalition of plastic bag manufacturers sued the city. Fairfax residents responded
by collecting signatures to put the issue on the ballot, and Measure C passed with 79
percent of the vote, banning all plastic single-use bags from all retail establishments and
food vendors. The "Plastic Waste Reduction Ordinance" went into effect in May 2009.
Benefits to this approach: Voter-approved initiatives are not subject to the
same CEQA requirements as city legislation. The measure covers all retail
establishments and food vendors, which makes it consistent for consumers and
can be expected to eliminate far more plastic bags than applying the law to only
certain types of retailers.
Concerns: This is a newly implemented policy, so it remains unclear if
consumers in Fairfax will switch en masse to reusable bags without a parallel
policy to reduce dependence on single-use paper bags.
General Considerations:
1. Addressing Industry Opposition: The plastic bag industry is active in its opposition to
these source reduction efforts and has opposed restrictions under several guises,
including Progressive Bag Alliance, savetheplasticbag.com, and the American Chemistry
Council – the industry lobby for chemical companies and plastic manufacturers. In June
2009, Council Member Frank DiCicco of Philadelphia was quoted in the Philadephia
Inquirer as saying “I have never dealt with an industry that has been so manipulative.”
It is much easier to overcome opposition when staff and elected officials are prepared.
Washington D.C. recently triumphed in passing a bag fee despite concerted industry
efforts. Save The Bay has compiled resources so that cities can anticipate common
plastics industry arguments (see attached Myth vs. Fact sheet). Local advocates and
recyclers can also be enlisted to help counter industry arguments.
2. CEQA: The plastic bag industry has seized on California's Environmental Quality Act to
sue cities such as Oakland, arguing that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is
needed to demonstrate that a ban on plastic bags will not harm the environment by
pushing consumers to paper bags. Cities with ordinances addressing both paper and
plastic are less vulnerable on this front.
Green Cities California has compiled a Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) on
single-use and reusable bags, which can aid cities that decide to complete an EIR:
http://greencitiescalifornia.org/mea
The City of Milpitas wrote a summary of the MEA, which highlights the most useful
information (see page 13):
http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/commissions/rsrac/2010/042710/attachments.pdf
3. Public Support and Local Businesses: There have been high levels of public support
for single-use bag reduction ordinances. But the issue has generated controversy,
including strong opposition and lawsuits from the national plastic bag industry and their
affiliates. Local business support is more likely to be secured when the ordinance makes
implementation and administration simple and cost-effective for local retailers.
Early outreach to local retailers, chambers of commerce and business associations is
highly recommended. Most businesses are eager to take on practices that will make them
more environmentally-friendly. Businesses around the world have reported that although
they were at first skeptical, that the implementation of bag bans and fees or charges has in
the long-term, had a positive impact on business.
4. Costs:
Costs associated with the development and implementation of ordinances related to
limiting the free distribution of single-use bags through bans and charges include staff time
to develop the ordinance, the cost of conducting environmental review, development of
outreach materials, and potential legal fees should the ordinance be legally challenged.
A ban on plastic bags requires some mechanism of enforcement, which may be
proactively enforced or complaint driven. Violations commonly result in a fine, which
increases with multiple violations. Associated costs would include staff time to respond to
complaints, send notices of violation and collect fines. Some cities integrate enforcement
into existing municipal activities including inspections of weights and measures.
Pros and cons of various legislative approaches:
Save The Bay recommends that jurisdictions address both paper and plastic bags in
their ordinances. This approach will help to ensure a transition in consumer behavior
from single-use to reusable bags. It is important to note that there are two state laws that
restrict certain types of fees or taxes on bags. AB 2449, which will sunset in 2013,
prohibits the placing of a fee on plastic bags. The recently passed Proposition 26
requires a 2/3 vote on any new taxes to consumers either by the state legislature or by
the public. Save the Bay therefore recommends a consumer charge where the cost of
the bag is retained by the retailer. Various city and county attorneys have advised that
such proposals are not subject to Prop 26.
Plastic Bag Ban & Paper Bag Charge*
Pros: Cons:
Proven to motivate people to switch to Does not allow the jurisdiction to raise
reusable bags funds for pollution prevention or other
similar programs
Does not require much extra administration May not be preferred in hard economy;
for government staff or retailers opponents claim avoidable fee is taxation
* AB 2449 prohibits stores in California from assessing a fee on plastics bags until 2013. CA Prop 26
effectively prohibits taxes by requiring a 2/3 vote.
Plastic Bag Ban & Paper Bag Fee*
Pros: Cons:
Proven to motivate people to switch to May not be preferred in hard economy;
reusable bags opponents claim avoidable fee is taxation
Revenue can recoup costs, subsidize Cities and retailers must administer the fee
reusable bags and fund litter abatement
Leaves consumers with an option of paper Fees must be placed on consumers; state
or plastic law bars placing fees on retailers
Can be seen as unfair burden on low-
income consumers who choose not to use
reusable bags
* AB 2449 prohibits stores in California from assessing a fee on plastics bags. CA Prop 26 requires a
2/3 vote to approve taxes.
Plastic Bag Ban
Pros: Cons:
A simple way to reduce plastic bag litter A ban on only plastic bags may leave cities
and pollution vulnerable to legal challenge
More direct; it forces shoppers to switch to Retailers may need to provide some carry-
reusable bags out vessel for consumers
Retailers will not have to purchase plastic Consumers may switch to paper bags
bags
5. Meeting mandated program requirements: Ordinances that reduce the distribution of
plastic and paper single-use bags will also contribute to cities' efforts to meet requirements
to implement the following programs: Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP), Zero
Waste and Climate Action Plans.
Attachments: Green Cities California model ordinance; San Jose Single-Use Bag
ordinance and staff memo
Please contact Save The Bay’s Clean Bay Project program staff for additional
resources, including sample ordinances, CEQA information, and examples of
stakeholder outreach approaches and materials.
Policy Department
510-452-9261 x118
cleanbay@savesfbay.org
Revised 2/11/11
Partial funding for this project comes from the USEPA San Francisco Bay Water Quality Improvement
Fund (2009) in collaboration with the San Francisco Estuary Partnership and ABAG.
1 May 12, 2008.
2 US EPA Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States, Detailed Tables and Figures for 2008, Table 7.
3 US EPA 2005 Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste, Table 7.
4 Joyce, Shawn Dell. “Web Exclusive: Sustainable Living – End to Plastic Bags.” San Fernando Valley Sun. March 25, 2010.
http://www.sanfernandosun.com/sanfernsun/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5033&Itemid=0
5 San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board. Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit, Section C.10, pages 84, 86.
ORDINANCE NO. _____________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE [NAME OF
JURISDICTION] REGULATING RETAIL
ESTABLISHMENTS PROVISION OF SINGLE-
USE CARRY-OUT BAGS
THE [GOVERNING BODY OF JURISDICTION] ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
CHAPTER ______ DISPOSABLE BAG REDUCTION ORDINANCE
ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS
For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
(a) "Director" means City/County Manager, or his/her designee.
(b) “Postconsumer recycled material” means a material that would otherwise be
destined for solid waste disposal, having completed its intended end use and
product life cycle. Postconsumer recycled material does not include materials and
byproducts generated from, and commonly reused within, an original manufacturing
and fabrication process.
(c) "Recycled paper bag" means a paper carryout bag provided by a store to a
customer at the point of sale that meets all of the following requirements:
(1) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the paper carryout bag
contains a minimum of 40 percent postconsumer recycled materials.
(B) An eight pound or smaller recycled paper bag shall contain a
minimum of 20 percent postconsumer recycled material.
(2) Is accepted for recycling in curbside programs in a majority of households
that have access to curbside recycling programs in the state.
(3) Is capable of composting, consistent with the timeline and specifications of
the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard D6400
(4) Has printed on the bag the name of the manufacturer, the location (country)
where the bag was manufactured, and the minimum percentage of
postconsumer content.
(d) "Reusable grocery bag" on and after January 1, 2012, means a bag that meets
the requirements of Article 3.
Page 1 of 3
September 21, 2010
(e) (1) "Single-use carryout bag" means a bag made of plastic, paper, or other
material, that is provided by a store to a customer at the point of sale and that is not
a reusable grocery bag that meets the requirements of Article 3.
(2) A single-use carryout bag does not include either of the following:
(A) A bag provided by a pharmacy pursuant to Chapter 9
(commencing with Section 4000) of Division 2 of the California Business and
Professions Code to a customer purchasing a prescription medication.
(B) A nonhandled bag used to protect a purchased item from
damaging or contaminating other purchased items when placed in a recycled paper bag
or reusable bag.
(f) "Store" means a retail establishment licensed to do business in the City/County. The
following are excluded from the definition of “store”: restaurants, take-out food
establishments, or any other businesses that receive 90% or more of their revenue from
the sale of food prepared or packaged at the establishment.
ARTICLE 2. CARRYOUT BAG REGULATION
(a) On and after January 1, 2012, a store shall not provide a single-use carryout
bag to a customer at the point of sale, except as provided in this section.
(b) (1) A store shall make reusable bags available for purchase by a customer.
(2) (A) A store may provide reusable bags to customers at no cost, until
December 31, 2012.
(B) On and after January 1, 2013, a store may provide reusable bags
to customers at no cost only when combined with a time-limited store promotional
program.
(C) Notwithstanding any other law, on and after January 1, 2012, a
store shall provide a customer participating in the California Special Supplemental Food
Program for Women, Infants, and Children pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with
Section 123275) of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division 106 of the California Health and
Safety Code and a customer participating in the Supplemental Food Program pursuant
to Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 15500) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the California
Welfare and Institutions Code, with a reusable bag or a recycled paper bag at no cost at
the point of sale.
(D) On and after January 1, 2012, a store may provide to a customer
a recycled paper bag upon request but shall charge the consumer, except as provided
in subdivision (C), a reasonable cost, but not less than five cents.
Page 2 of 3
September 21, 2010
ARTICLE 3. REUSABLE GROCERY BAGS
(a) On and after January 1, 2012, a reusable grocery bag shall meet all of the
following requirements:
(1)
(A) Be designed and manufactured to withstand, at a minimum, 125
uses.
(B) For purposes of this paragraph, "uses" means the capability of
carrying a minimum of 22 pounds 125 times over a distance of at least
175 feet.
(2) Be made from a material that can be cleaned and disinfected.
(3) Have printed on the bag, or on a tag attached to the bag that is not
intended to be removed, and in a manner visible to the consumer the
following information:
(A) The name of the manufacturer
(B) The location (country) where the bag was manufactured
(C) A recycling symbol or end-of-life management instructions
(D) The percentage of postconsumer recycled material, if any.
(4) It shall not contain lead, cadmium, or any other heavy metal in toxic
amounts.
(b) Notwithstanding Article 5, any violation of this article shall be subject to an
administrative civil penalty assessed by the director in an amount not to exceed five
hundred dollars ($500) for the first violation. A subsequent violation may be subject
to an increased penalty of up to five hundred dollars ($500) per violation, not to
exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000) per violation.
ARTICLE 4. RECOGNITION OF STATEWIDE IMPORTANCE
[Name of Jurisdiction] recognizes carryout bag regulation as a matter of statewide
interest and concern and is best applied uniformly throughout the state. In the absence
of statewide regulation [Name of Jurisdiction] believes it is in the best interest of the
[Name of Jurisdiction] to regulate carryout bags.
ARTICLE 5. ENFORCEMENT
The City/County may impose civil liability in the amount of five hundred dollars ($500)
for the first violation of this chapter, one thousand dollars ($1,000) for the second
violation, and two thousand dollars ($2,000) for the third and subsequent violations.
Page 3 of 3
September 21, 2010
City of Palo Alto
Plastic Bag Restriction and Reusable Bag Promotion
(http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/environment/news/details.asp?NewsID=1024&TargetID=59)
NEW ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
Palo Alto’s new Ordinance
(http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/fileba
nk/blobdload.asp?BlobID=15550) prohibits
large grocery stores from distributing single
use plastic checkout bags as of September
18, 2009. Materials prepared to advise store
personnel and customers about the new
restriction can be seen on the Palo Alto
website:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/fileban
k/blobdload.asp?BlobID=17476
Highlights:
Single-Use Plastic Carryout Bags not allowed.
Applies only to large grocery stores for now.
Paper bags are allowed if the post-consumer recycled content is 40% or greater.
Plastic bags are allowed in produce and meat departments.
Reusable bags are encouraged to save resources and minimize conversion to
paper.
Public Outreach:
Meetings were held with grocery stores, drug stores, and food service facilities.
Regulatory action on drug stores and food service facilities was deferred pending further
work on pharmacy and prepared food issues.
Environmental Review (CEQA):
Although limited in number and
scope, studies done by others have
concluded that paper bags consume
more energy to produce than plastic
bags. Since an Ordinance restricting
Did You Bring Your Own Bag? plastic bags could lead to a switch to
paper, Palo Alto conducted an
environmental review resulting in a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). The MND
(http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=13928) concluded
that any potential increases in greenhouse gas emissions from increased vehicle trips and
Page 1
short-term conversion to paper bags would be reduced to a less than significant level by
Palo Alto’s programs to promote the use of reusable bags by shoppers.
Savetheplasticbag.com initiated litigation because an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
was not prepared. The case was settled out of court to save City staff time and resources.
Palo Alto agreed to prepare an EIR before extending the plastic bag restriction to other
stores.
Council Direction for Further Action:
Other Stores: Staff is working on extending the plastic bag restriction to other
stores. Based on plastic bags found in the natural environment, it appears the
most important category to address next are other stores selling food. First, an
EIR must be prepared. Palo Alto is contributing to work being done on an EIR by
California Green Cities and following similar work being done by San Jose and
others. Palo Alto will collaborate with others to produce the most cost effective
EIR possible.
Fee on Paper Bags: Palo Alto staff were directed by Council to prepare
recommendations on a fee system on single-use paper bags and are currently
working on fee program issues. If a fee is be imposed and retained by
government, a study must be performed demonstrating that the fee is needed to
offset City costs. If the fee is to be retained by stores, supporting rational and
authorization will need to be identified.
Pre-Existing Ordinance
Palo Alto’s pre-existing Ordinance on single-use bags requires that a store, any store,
offering single-use plastic bags, must also offer paper bags. This provision remains in
effect in Palo Alto.
REUSABLE BAG PROMOTIONS
Palo Alto has actively been promoting reusable bag use since the 1990’s locally and in
collaboration with Santa Clara County-wide and San Francisco Bay Area-wide efforts.
Prior to 2008, Palo Alto estimates that it has distributed approximately 20,000 reusable
bags at various events and through a series of programs. These efforts have included
newspaper advertising, radio and television promotions, utility bill inserts, participation
at community events, store posters and reusable bag giveaways. In 2008, Palo Alto began
a more concerted and focused effort to increase reusable bag use.
2008 Bring Your Own Bag (BYOBag)
Campaign
In February 2008, Palo Alto conducted an
observational study of shopper’s bag use habits
and launched a campaign April – December,
2008 to increase reusable bag use. The
campaign consisted of partnering with retail
stores and community organizations to facilitate
engaging the community. In exchange for their
efforts, the 38 participating partners were
acknowledged in print and online advertising at
Page 2
a level that corresponded to a tiered reward system. Shoppers were enticed to use
reusable bags with incentives from retail partners and coupons for discounts on reusable
bag purchases. Campaign promotion included a website, newspaper ads, online ads,
discount coupon in utility bill insert, store posters, parking lot signs, campaign buttons for
store clerks, a bag monster character that made scheduled and impromptu public
appearances, the painting of reusable bags by children at local art camps, girl scouts
tabling at store entrances, community members creating a display at a neighborhood
block party, tabling at corporate employee events, stores hanging BYOBag banners, City
staff participating in a children’s parade, bag giveaways and local news stories on the
campaign.
The www.cityofpaloalto.org/BYOBag web site included education on the issues with
single-use carryout bags, where to purchase reusable bags, incentives offered by partner
stores, and downloadable BYOBag promotional materials.
In April 2008, Palo Alto also helped lead a San Francisco Bay Area-wide campaign in
conjunction with the Bay Area Recycling Outreach Coalition (BayROC), BayROC is a
partnership of over 100 cities in the nine Bay Area Counties that pool their resources to
create shared outreach, education messages and promotional campaigns. The campaign
consisted of online click ads to targeted audiences, bag giveaways, radio spots and the
creation of the www.igotmybag.org web site.
March/April 2009 Financial Hardship Reusable Bag Giveaway
During March and April 2009 Palo Alto coordinated the giveaway
of reusable bags to Palo Alto households for whom the purchase of
bags may be a financial hardship. The City partnered with Mollie
Stone’s Market and a postcard was mailed to 1,700 Palo Alto
households. For the month of April 2009, the postcard was
redeemable for three reusable bags. No purchase was necessary
and the City reimbursed the grocer for the costs of the bags.
In addition, the City worked with housing organizations for direct
distribution of reusable bags to residents by the property
management. Bags were purchased by the City and distributed to
219 households.
Households targeted for the giveaways were identified by their qualification in other
programs that provide financial support such as Utilities Rate Assistance Program,
affordable housing programs, and the Palo Alto Unified School Districts low/not cost
lunch programs. At total of 1,338 bags were distributed to Palo Alto households in need.
September 18, 2009 Reusable Bag Give-Away:
On the effective date of Palo Alto’s new
Ordinance for large grocery stores approximately
3,000 bags were given away at affected stores,
with almost all affected stores participating.
Page 3
2009 Reusable Bag Campaign:
As a follow-up to the 2008 Campaign, the City repeated its observational survey of
shopper’s bag use habits in February 2009. Survey results, anecdotal data and focus
group findings indicated that Palo Altans had reusable bags but remembering them was
the barrier to using them. The September 2009 –
April 2010 campaign, is focused on just that. The
theme of the campaign is humorous and
lighthearted with a lonely bag longing to be taken
shopping and the tagline, “Make it a habit and Grab
it.”
Again Palo Alto is partnering with retailers and
organizations to promote remembering to bring
reusable bags. Tools for retailers include shopping
cart corral signs, store posters, campaign buttons for
store clerks, static cling window decals, floor
decals, store banners and parking lot and shopping center signs. A reminder kit for
shoppers was created that includes a static cling window decal, sticky note reminders and
a shopping list magnet. Retail stores and organizations are distributing reminder kits to
shoppers. Other campaign components include video blog testimonials featuring how
shoppers remember their bags. Shopper and store challenges, an updated website and
creative store incentives are in development to help shoppers remember whenever and
wherever they shop. Campaign publicity includes traditional methods of reaching the
community and utilization of social media such as blogging and usage of Facebook® and
Twitter®.
Also in September 2009, Palo Alto helped lead a renewed BayROC Bay Area-wide
campaign promoting remembering reusable bags. The BayROC campaign, conducted
September – October 2009, partnered with San Francisco State University Students to
create campaign components for radio, cable and broadcast television. Several cities,
including Palo Alto, held press events in September to kick-off their local and BayROC
regional campaigns. Palo Alto’s press event, held at Piazza’s Fine Foods, included the
stenciling of “Got Bags?” graphics on the parking lot by a Girl Scout Troop and video
blogging by shoppers providing tips for remembering bags. The parking lot stencil was
provided in partnership with Keep California Beautiful’s statewide campaign and the
City has made the stencils available to Palo Alto stores for stenciling their parking lots.
Page 4
RESULTS
The key program goals are to:
1. Reduce single-use plastic bags, and
2. Increase the use of reusable bags.
Single-Use Plastic Bag Reduction
The primary measure of success of this goal is the compliance percentage at stores
affected by the Ordinance. One hundred percent of the affected large grocery stores have
complied.
Reusable Bag Percentage
Beginning 2008 and repeated the first quarter of the calendar year, Palo Alto has
conducted observational surveys of shoppers exiting grocery stores and pharmacies to
quantify reusable bags use. The results to date are:
Percent Reusable Bag Use
At Palo Alto Grocery
Stores and Pharmacies
2008 (First Quarter) 9%
2009 (First Quarter) 18%
Refrigerator “BYOBag” Magnet Car Windshield Decal “Don’t Leave Me Behind”
PALO ALTO WEB SITE LINKS
Plastics (including links to Reusable Bag Promotions and Palo Alto Plastics Policy):
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/environment/news/details.asp?NewsID=1374&TargetID=63
Plastic Bag:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/environment/news/details.asp?NewsID=1024&TargetID=63
Expanded Polystyrene:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/environment/news/details.asp?NewsID=1277&TargetID=63
Page 5
Key Provisions
Palo Alto Plastic Bag Ordinance
5.35.030 Type of Checkout Bags Permitted at Supermarkets
(a) All supermarkets within the City of Palo Alto shall provide only the
following as Checkout Bags to customers: Reusable Bags and/or
Recyclable Paper Bags.
(b) Nothing in this Chapter shall be read to preclude Supermarkets from
making Reusable Bags available for sale to customers.
(c) All Supermarkets are strongly encouraged to educate their staff to promote
Reusable Bags.
5.35.020 Types of Checkout Bags Permitted at Retail Establishments
(a) All Retail Establishments within the City of Palo Also shall provide the
following as Checkout Bags to customers: Paper bags only, or a choice
between paper or plastic bags. If the Retail Establishment offers
customers a choice of paper or plastic bags at the checkstand, cash register
or other point of departure, the customer shall be asked whether he or she
requires or prefers that the good purchased be placed in paper or plastic
bags. The goods shall be placed in the type of bag requested by the
customer.
(b) Nothing in this Section shall be read to preclude Retail Establishments
from making Reusable Bags available for sale to customers.
(c) This Section shall not apply to Supermarkets as defined in Section
5.35.010(f).
5.35.010 Definitions
(b) “Recyclable Paper Bag” or “Recyclable Paper Checkout Bag” means a
paper bag that meets all of the following requirements: (1) contains no old
growth fiber, (2) is 100% recyclable overall and contains a minimum of
40% post-consumer recycled content, and (3) displays the word
“Recyclable” on the outside of the bag.
(d) “Reusable Bag” means a bag with handles that is specifically designed and
manufactured for multiple reuse and is either (1) made of cloth or other
machine washable fabric, and/or (2) made of durable plastic that is at least
2.25 mils thick and is suitable for reuse.
(e) “Single-Use Plastic Checkout Bag” means any Checkout Bag made from
plastic, excluding Reusable Bags.
(f) “Supermarket” means a full-line, self service grocery store within the City
of Palo Alto with gross annual sales of two million dollars ($2,000,000.00)
or more which sells several lines of dry grocery, canned goods, perishable
food, produce and meat and some nonfood items. The City shall use the
annual updates of the Progressive Grocer Marketing Guidebook and any
computer printouts developed in conjunction with the guidebook to
determine gross annual sales.
A complete copy of the Ordinance may be viewed at the following location:
Plastic Bag:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/environment/news/details.asp?NewsID=1024&TargetID=63
Page 6
San José Single Use Bag Ordinance
Plastics Pollution
Prevention Summit
February 23, 2011
How it started
San José Adopted Green Vision – 2007
Stakeholders meetings started – 2008
Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission –
December 2008
September 2009, Council directs staff to develop
ordinance prohibiting single-use, carryout plastic
and paper shopping bags.
Why it started
Machine jams
cost City
$1M/year
Impact at MRF
•Dry cleaning
bags, clean
plastic bags
• Not at
curbside
• No impact
on litter
•Bags jam
machinery
Curbside recycling
Bags jam machinery
Bags stockpiled - no markets
Impact on watershed
R ST
LO
AY
ET
N
N
T Proposed for Listing
1S
24
RS
N1
T
T
O
YL
H
9T
ST
TA Not Proposed
ST
HS
W
T
Minor Creeks
N1
Storm Drain Outfalls
3T
HS
T
N4
T
TH
S
IAN
ST
UL
EJ
N1
S T
1T
N1
ES
HS
AM
0T
TJ
T
ES
HS
VE
T
NA
MA
LE
CO
87
87 ST
RA
S1
LA
AC
1T
NT
H
A
N
ES
ST
MA
RK
ET
NO
Co y
ST
TR
ED
ot
T
IAN S
W JU L
eC
GUA DAL
AM
reek
E
ST
ST
A RA
U
CL
PE PKY
N TA
S1
SA
Gu
W
ST
ad
ST
CA-87
al
SA
up
T
SS
LM
eR
R LO
A
CA-82 CA
iv e
DE
Los Gatos Creek
AN
ES
r
N
BL
S1
VD
ST
S AUTUMN ST
IAM
0T
T
SS I LL
HS
RL
O EW
T
CA
S
S4
M
AN
AR
S
TH
CA-82
W
KE
W
-82 280
OZ
ST
T
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 CA
ST
RET ST
WA
Miles MARGA
Y
Proposed for Listing
N
N1
N1
ST
24
Not Proposed
ST
OR
TH
9T
YL Minor Creeks
ST
ST
HS
TA
W Storm Drain Outfalls
T
N1
Storm Drain Inlets
3T
HS
ST
T
N
N4
LIA
JU
TH
N1
E
ST
ST
ES
1T
M
HS
JA
N1
CO T
ES
T
0T
LE
M
HS
AN
T
AV
E
T
87
87 AS
S1
AR
CL
NM
S1
1T
NTA
HS
AR
0T
E SA
HS
KE
T
TS
T
Co y
T
IAN S
T
GUA DALUP
ot
W JUL
eC
ST
r eek
RA
LA
E PKY
AC
S1
NT
SA
Gu
ST
W
ad
S4
ST
al
up
TH
eR
CA-87
SA
ST
iv e
Los Gatos Creek
LM
r
ST
AD
-82 IAM
ILL
EN
CA
CA-82
S
EW
M
BL
AR
-82
VD
CA-82
KE
CA 280
T
RET ST
0 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
MARGA
ST
Miles
Taking Action
United States California
Washington DC - 5 cent fee on
San Francisco
paper and plastic started 1/1/10
Fairfax
Outer Banks, NC – plastic bags
Malibu
banned 2009
Palo Alto
Brownsville, TX – plastic bags
banned 1/1/11
LA County
Alaska: Since 1998, 30
San Jose
communities banned plastic
bags.
Manhattan Beach
Hawaii: plastic bags banned
Oakland
Kaui and Maui
Santa Monica
Taking action - 2009
United States California
Berkeley Palo Alto
Alaska New York State
Encinitas Palm Springs
Austin 4 New York
Fairfax San Diego
Arizona Counties
Fresno San Francisco
Boston Phoenix
Gilroy San Jose
Chicago Portland
Los Angeles Santa Barbara
Florida Rhode Island
LA County Santa Clara
Lake County Seattle County
Malibu
Maui Tempe 15 Santa Clara
Manhattan Beach
Michigan Washington DC. Mendocino County Cities
New Jersey West Virginia County Santa Monica
New York City Westport Oakland Solana Beach
Pasadena
Actions around the world
International Actions – Ban or Fee
Argentina Ethiopia Somaliland
Australia (7 cities) France South Africa
Bangladesh Germany Spain
Belgium Ghana Taiwan
Bhutan Hong Kong Tanzania
Brazil India United Kingdom
Buenos Aires Ireland (12 Cities)
Canada (8 Cities) Israel Uganda
Chile Italy Uruguay
China Kenya Zanzibar
Denmark Lesotho Uganda
Eritrea Rwanda
Regional Partners for Success
• Santa Clara County Recycling
& Waste Reduction
Commission
• Santa Clara County Board of
Supervisors
• Santa Clara County Cities Association
• BayROC Reusable Bag Campaign
Community Engagement
Conducted regularly scheduled Stakeholder
meetings.
Mailed notices to 4,900 businesses.
Held nine community meetings.
Conducted door-to-door outreach to 300
businesses with a focus on small and ethnic
businesses.
Community Engagement
Conducted four community engagement
meetings with newspaper announcements to the
public.
Attended 36 community events,
neighborhood association and
community meetings.
Distributed over 8,000 bags.
Contacted all 10 ethnic chambers in San Jose.
Media Events
PW markets
April 2010
In coordination with the Grocer’s Association and
Keep California Beautiful.
Hai Thanh Market
February 10, 2010 at
In coordination with California Waste Solutions.
Mi Pueblo
October 9, 2010 at
In coordination with California Waste
Solutions.
Green Cities California
Press Event November 2010, Sacramento
Milpitas, Santa Clara County
(uninc), Fremont, Marin County,
Richmond, San Rafael, Santa
Cruz (city & county) Sacramento
County, Ventura, Culver City
Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, San Jose
Councilmember Kansen Chu and other elected
officials.
San José Bag Ordinance
• Ban single-use plastic bags
• Prohibit free distribution of paper bags
• Exempt: 40% recycled paper bags
• Paper Bag minimum store charge 10¢
• Applies to all retailers
• Start January 2012
Environmental & legal issues
Environmental Impact Report
• November 2009 Scoping Meeting
• Draft available July 2010
• Final available October 2010
Legal challenges
Cockroaches love
Prop 26 paper bags
Where is San José
• 11/17 - EIR to Planning
Commission
• 11/18 - Proposed Ordinance-
Citywide Community Meeting
• 12/14 – City Council Considers
Ordinance
• 1/2012 – Ordinance in effect
Nexus study,
litter characterization
Communications Goals & Objective
PLANS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
IN COMING YEAR:
Goals:
• Ensure the public is aware of the adopted
ordinance.
• Accelerate the use of reusable shopping bags
prior to the start of the ordinance.
Objective:
Before start date, 50% of consumers will shop
with a reusable bag.
Key Strategies
Use public input to guide outreach recommendations.
Stores want the City to run an aggressive campaign so
that customers will know the bag ban is a City decision not
the stores.
Nearly all retailers say they would like the City to be
responsible for signage at their stores telling customers
about the regulation. Many feel the cost for signage should
be paid for by the City.
Retailer Toolkit
Store Posters
(Prompt)
Parking lot stencils
(Prompt)
Cash register tent cards
Business Outreach
Letter notifying businesses of the approved
ordinance, details of the ordinance, when they
should use up their bags and to look for more
information about self-certification.
Post announcements in business association
newsletters and other free media opportunities to
announce the start of the ordinance.
Business self-certification certified letter.
General Public Outreach
Point of service bag distribution with
signing of a pledge to shop with a
reusable bag.
(Prompt & Commitment)
Veggielution
Seek Non-Profit Food Banks to assist with distribution
of reusable bags.
(Prompt)