Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.1 StopWaste.Org's Proposal to Regulate Disposable Food WarePage 1 of 4 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL DATE: January 14, 2020 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager SUBJECT: StopWaste.Org’s Proposals to Regulate Disposable Food Ware in Eating and Drinking Establishments Prepared by: Shannan Young, Environmental Coordinator EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City Council will receive a report on a potential food ware ordinance proposed by StopWaste and consider implementation options for the proposed ordinance. Potential implementation options include a countywide ordinance banning single-use disposable food ware in Alameda County eating and drinking establishments implemented and enforced by StopWaste; development of a model ordinance that cities could customize, adopt, and enforce as they wish; or no ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive the report on the potential food ware ordinance and discuss the options proposed by StopWaste. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Measure D Funds could be used for implementation of a food ware ordinance. The funding amount necessary to implement an ordinance would depend on the type of ordinance developed by StopWaste. If a countywide ordinance were developed and adopted, the City of Dublin could contribute a proportionate amount of funds to StopWaste for development and implementation. StopWaste estimates it would take approximately $1,000,000 to develop, adopt, and roll-out the ordinance and up to $400,000 annually to implement. If a model ordinance were developed by StopWaste and the City Council adopted the model ordinance, Staff would be required to implement the ordinance. Enforcement could be completed as part of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit business inspection program for which fee recovery is included in the Master Fee Schedule. There would be no impact to the General Fund if a food ware ordinance were adopted by StopWaste. DESCRIPTION: Background On November 14, 2019, StopWaste sent a memorandum and related documents Page 2 of 4 (Attachment 1) to its Board of Directors providing notification of two potential paths that could be taken in regard to banning single-use disposable food ware in Alameda County eating and drinking establishments. The first option is a countywide ordinance implemented and enforced by StopWaste and the second option is development of a model ordinance that cities could customize, adopt, and enforce as they wish. StopWaste suggests a countywide ordinance would only be effective if all member agencies commit to and support the ordinance in its entirety. In contrast, development of a model ordinance would allow more flexibility for member agencies, but implementation and enforcement would have to be borne by the agencies themselves. Not mentioned in the StopWaste memorandum is a status-quo option, where neither a countywide ordinance nor a model ordinance is pursued at this time. The StopWaste memorandum also discusses challenges in developing a food ware ordinance, including its potential impact on SB 1383 assistance. New state-mandated regulations coming from SB 1383, Short-Lived Climate Pollutants, will go into effect beginning January 2022. SB 1383 establishes targets to achieve a 50% reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75% reduction by 2025. The law establishes an additional target that not less than 20% of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption by 2025. SB 1383 grants CalRecycle the regulatory authority to achieve the organic waste disposal reduction targets. CalRecycle is currently in the rulemaking process with the goal of releasing final requirements in January 2020. Staff anticipates implementation of SB 1383 will require substantial time and is anticipating significant StopWaste support to help implement the new requirements. If development of a countywide or model food ware ordinance would shift StopWaste priorities and resources planned to assist cities with SB1383 implementation, then Staff recommends that the food ware ordinance development be postponed. A summary of the food ware ordinance options is provided in Table 1. Table 1: Potential StopWaste Food Ware Ordinance Options Ordinance Options Advantages Disadvantages Model Ordinance • Allows City most flexibility to develop an ordinance based on local needs and policy objectives. • City Staff would be responsible for outreach and enforcement. • Enforcement may be combined with stormwater business inspections. • May be more difficult for corporate and franchised businesses to comply if food ware ordinances are not uniform across the county. • Inconsistent laws across the county may lead to confusion among the public. • Development may have some impact StopWaste’s level of SB 1383 assistance. Page 3 of 4 Countywide Ordinance • StopWaste would provide outreach, implementation, and enforcement. • Allows for consistency countywide. • StopWaste could develop industry partnerships which may lead to efficiencies in outreach and implementation. • Does not allow City control or flexibility to develop ordinance based on local needs. • Requires additional funding from member agencies. • Development and implementation may have a bigger impact on StopWaste’s ability to assist with SB 1383 implementation. No Ordinance • Staff and StopWaste can focus on SB 1383 implementation. • Single-use food ware continues to be allowed • Shift towards reuse is delayed • Waste and litter reduction are delayed Community Considerations for a Possible Reusable Food Ware Ordinance StopWaste has asked for feedback from its Board of Directors on the four questions listed below at the Board meeting on January 22, 2020. Staff provides information for consideration in response to the questions posed by StopWaste immediately following each question. 1. Is this an important issue for your community? Litter and waste reduction are issues of concern for our community and legislation that supports minimizing single-use disposables is one of the City Council’s adopted Environmental Sustainability legislative priorities for 2020. 2. If important, do you think it should be a countywide ordinance implemented by StopWaste, or a model ordinance that can be customized and implemented directly by cities? As indicated in Table 1, there are pros and cons to both a countywide and a model ordinance. The main benefit of a countywide ordinance is that implementation and enforcement would be uniform across the county and conducted by StopWaste. If a model ordinance were developed, the City Council could choose to adopt the ordinance, or not, along with selecting which elements to incorporate into the ordinance. The main concern Staff has with development of either ordinance is the potential impact to StopWaste assistance to member agencies with SB 1383 implementation. 3. If countywide, would your jurisdiction be willing to contribute resources to StopWaste in order to implement? Measure D funds could be available to contribute to StopWaste in order to implement a food ware ordinance. Measure D is an initiative approved by Alameda County voters in 1989 and among other requirements, established a surcharge on materials disposed of in Alameda County landfills. The collected funds are dispersed back to municipalities in the County; the funds may only be used for waste reduction efforts. Currently, Page 4 of 4 Measure D funds are primarily used to purchase kitchen pails for composting, recycling supplies, and reusable item giveaways (e.g. water bottles, straws, utensils, etc.), and to pay for waste reduction events such as Fix-It clinics. Measure D funds can also be used to pay for Bay Friendly Rated Landscape design, construction, and maintenance, as well as three-stream waste containers at City facilities. Staff anticipates that Measure D funds will be needed to implement SB 1383. Some of the programs currently funded or anticipated to be funded by Measure D funds may need to be reduced, depending on the level of support required by StopWaste to develop and implement the food ware ordinance. 4. If a model ordinance works better, is your jurisdiction able to take on its implementation/enforcement along with the requirements of SB 1383? Depending on the level of effort, StopWaste provides for SB 1383 assistance, Staff may be able to implement and enforce both a model ordinance and SB 1383. If the City Council were to adopt a version of a model ordinance, Staff anticipates implementation and enforcement would occur as part of the regular stormwater business inspections conducted as part of the requirements of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit. These mandated inspections are conducted at all businesses, including food vendors, at least once every five years. However, to make an informed decision, Staff would need more information from StopWaste regarding their level of support for both efforts. Conclusion This report provides an overview of the options for potential food ware ordinances offered by StopWaste. StopWaste has demonstrated leadership and expertise in developing successful ordinances such as the Mandatory Recycling Ordinance and the Reusable Bag Ordinance, in which both of which the City of Dublin participates. Development of a countywide or model single-use food ware ordinance would further efforts by StopWaste to be a waste reduction leader. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE: None. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. StopWaste November 14, 2019 Memorandum and Related Documents DATE: November 14, 2019 TO: Programs & Administration Committee Planning Committee/Recycling Board FROM: Justin Lehrer, Senior Management Analyst SUBJECT: Food Service Ware Ordinance: Options and Impacts SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to discuss with the Board and gather input on potential policy approaches to help reduce consumption of single-use food service ware (e.g. plates, bowls, utensils, and cups) in Alameda County eating and drinking establishments, and promote a shift away from disposables and towards a culture of reuse. DISCUSSION During the priority setting discussions, the Board expressed a strong interest in addressing plastic pollution. Single-use food service ware items, often made from non-recyclable plastic, compostable plastic, or fiber, are prevalent in daily life and result in significant impacts to human health and the environment. At the May 9, 2019 committee meetings, staff provided an overview of environmental issues associated with different types of food service ware. Based on direction received at these meetings, staff has been researching food service ware policies regionally and nationally, and developed concepts for an Alameda County ordinance to address food service ware waste that could be implemented countywide, or provided as a model ordinance to member agencies interested in moving forward on their own. Ordinance Overview The primary objective of a food service ware ordinance is to reduce consumption of these disposable materials, leading to a reduction in litter, plastic pollution, and compost contamination. Single-use food service ware has a short useful life (often only used for minutes), and must be managed and successfully routed to a recycling facility, industrial compost facility, or a landfill at considerable expense. A critical aspect of any strategy to reduce food service ware is to foster widespread adoption of durable reusable cups, containers, cutlery, and accessories. Switching from single-use plastics to compostable fiber is not a solution because it does not reduce consumption – the compostable materials must still be managed and sent to compost facilities that accept the material but would prefer not to. Even worse, the compostable materials would be screened as contaminants and landfilled. Single-use items also result in more GHG emissions than reusables, due to the energy and material inputs that go into manufacturing each new item. Reusables are the best option for reducing food packaging waste at the source and shifting away from the disposable culture that has become a societal norm. This shift requires a long-term effort. Clear policy, combined with investment in infrastructure, outreach, and technical assistance can be an effective vehicle to help move in this direction. We propose that a basic ordinance includes the following elements: 1. Reusable food service ware required for all dine-in establishments 2. Single-use food ware (plates, cups, bowls) and accessories (straws, utensils, condiment cups) must be BPI certified 1 compostable fiber (non-plastic) 3. Single-use accessories (straws, utensils, condiment cups) available only on demand/self- service A more comprehensive ordinance could include the above elements as well as the following: 4. $0.25 charge on single-use cups 5. $0.25-0.50 charge per meal for to-go food service ware if requested Implementation The ordinance can be developed as a model, ready for customization and adoption directly by member agencies, or implemented countywide. Rolling out the ordinance in distinct phases that add more complex elements over time would allow time for affected parties to prepare for the changes and address operational considerations. Additionally, a phased approach can gradually expand the affected audience – starting with municipal operations and expanding over time to include special events, food vendors, and third party delivery services. If implemented countywide, the ordinance could affect up to 6,000 establishments, including restaurants, food trucks, catering businesses, prepared food vendors, and food provided via third party delivery. A countywide ordinance offers the potential for greatest impact on reducing waste and pollution caused by single-use food service ware. For a countywide ordinance to be effective, it is critical to have commitment and support from all member agencies. Consistent requirements across the county will greatly simplify implementation and enforcement, as well as reduce confusion for businesses and consumers affected by the ordinance. Implementing a countywide ordinance that has inconsistent rules across the jurisdictions adds unnecessary complexity and cost for StopWaste, and will likely lead to confusion and frustration among the public, who will be expected to comply with different rules depending on which city they are dining in. A model ordinance offers the greatest flexibility to member agencies. If some jurisdictions seek a more comprehensive ordinance while others prefer a basic approach or prefer not to use a regulatory approach to address single-use food service ware waste, they can design a policy that meets their needs. StopWaste may coordinate technical assistance and provide countywide outreach, promotional tools and campaigns but not implementation or enforcement. If Member agencies are interested in different approaches, a model ordinance is the best option. 1Compostable certification by the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI), requires all items are PFAS-free. Challenges There are a number of challenges and considerations that inform the design of an effective food service ware ordinance. Avoiding disposable alternatives. In order to be truly effective, the ordinance must reduce consumption of single-use food ware rather than shifting consumption to an alternative that is still disposable. There are many materials and formats used for food service ware that claim to be recyclable or compostable yet pose significant challenges for collection and processing. Many of these items still end up as litter, or are not successfully processed as recycling or compost, and end up in the landfill. Building up reusables infrastructure. Reusables have the potential to significantly reduce consumption of single-use food ware, but local infrastructure for reusables is not well developed in Alameda County. Significant investment is needed to support the growth of services and solutions that facilitate the use of reusables for takeout dining, such as dishwashing services, cup and container rental services, reusable dining ware designed for takeout, etc. Inconsistency across the county. As mentioned above, a countywide ordinance can only be efficient and effective if applied uniformly across the county. Supporting and enforcing an ordinance that affects a portion of cities in Alameda County is a major expense and logistical challenge and StopWaste would need to reassign resources for such an effort. When the Mandatory Recycling Ordinance (MRO) was implemented, a number of Member agencies opted for a phased approach to participation, resulting in varied implementation schedules and rules across the county. City-specific outreach and training materials and technical assistance were required, and the implementation process had to be repeated multiple times as new rules were phased in across jurisdictions. Business owners with affected eating establishments across multiple jurisdictions would bear the additional burden of keeping track of and complying with city-specific rules. With uniform adoption of a countywide ordinance, not only is compliance simplified for businesses, but consumers only need to learn one set of rules regardless of the Alameda County city they are dining in. Ultimately, an inconsistently implemented countywide ordinance will cost more, create more confusion and inefficiency, and is not recommended. Concurrent implementation with SB 1383. New regulations coming from SB 1383 will go into effect January 2022 and considerable effort is needed from both StopWaste and member agency staff to prepare for compliance countywide. Staff anticipates that SB 1383 will require additional enforcement resources and potential passage of additional local ordinances in order to develop clear guidance and an enforceable mechanism for recovery of edible food from food establishments. These additional State-mandated requirements will add regulatory burden to some of the same businesses that would be covered by a food service ware ordinance. The Technical Advisory Committee members voiced a strong desire for StopWaste’s assistance in complying with SB 1383 requirements. Burden on businesses and consumers. Outreach and education to food vendors is needed to address health code-related concerns about reusables, and to ensure equity and accessibility to less-abled customers, lower-income individuals, and transient populations just ‘passing through’ and not likely to have reusable food service ware readily available. As mentioned earlier, if ordinance terms are inconsistent across the jurisdictions, it will cause confusion and frustration among the public, and unfair burden on some businesses. Agency Role StopWaste has developed and implemented several countywide ordinances and can apply this experience to plan and develop an effective food service ware ordinance. Some roles the Agency can play in this process include: Convening regional partners and stakeholder outreach. StopWaste has been involved with two food service ware stakeholder groups – one for Alameda County member agency staff and the other a regional working group comprised of Bay Area municipal staff, elected officials, and nonprofits working to reduce disposable food service ware. This regional working group provides Agency staff insight on innovative reusable food ware infrastructure, newly passed or proposed ordinances and best practices, as well as feedback and input on potential ordinance approaches. Coordinating efforts regionally is an important step to create infrastructure and align policies throughout the Bay. Outreach to additional stakeholders, including affected food vendors, third party delivery services, water and energy agencies, and reusable packaging innovators will be part of the ordinance development timeline. Environmental review. Overseeing environmental impact study to assess impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) can be centralized with StopWaste, saving member agencies from this time consuming and costly effort, and providing some protection against legal challenges from packaging and materials industry opposition. Funding for innovation and reusables infrastructure. StopWaste may consider directing grant funds to support projects that develop infrastructure to support the adoption of reusables and identify other opportunities to provide funding and support for innovation in this area. Outreach and marketing (for countywide ordinance). StopWaste can develop outreach and promotional content that ensures clear and consistent messaging countywide, as we have done in the past for the Mandatory Recycling Ordinance, Reusable Bag Ordinance, and more recently the Stop Food Waste campaign. Technical assistance (for countywide ordinance). StopWaste manages contracted technical assistance (TA) to support MRO implementation and works with Clean Water Fund’s Rethink Disposable campaign to help food establishments make the switch to reusable food service ware. Some member agencies have their own contracts with Clean Water Fund and others may contribute funds toward a master contract to augment efforts in their jurisdictions; this approach could be utilized to implement TA for a countywide food service ware ordinance. Enforcement (for countywide ordinance). Based on the Agency’s experience implementing both a routine inspection program for MRO enforcement and a complaint-based approach for the Reusable Bag Ordinance, staff recommends a complaint-based approach to enforcement for a countywide food ware ordinance. The focus is on compliance and helping affected parties comply with the law rather than issue citations that place a burden on small businesses. Even complaint- based enforcement entails significant costs; some member agency staff have already signaled willingness to contribute funds from Measure D or other sources in support of a centralized enforcement effort conducted by StopWaste. In the case of a model ordinance, member agencies that opt to implement the ordinance in their jurisdiction would be responsible for enforcement, which potentially could be addressed through existing environmental services staff. Resource Analysis The Agency’s guiding principles, adopted in December 2018 to inform Agency strategy and budget development, direct staff to conduct a comprehensive resource analysis prior to adopting new mandatory measures so we understand the full impacts on budget and staff assignments. Developing, adopting, and implementing an ordinance of this nature is a major undertaking, as we know from experience with MRO and the Reusable Bag Ordinance. We estimate development, adoption, and rollout of the ordinance will require approximately 1.5 FTE and up to $1,000,000 in hard costs, depending on whether the Agency develops a model ordinance or adopts a countywide ordinance and assumes responsibility for technical assistance and enforcement. Member agencies may also contribute funds in support of ordinance implementation. The above estimates cover impacts anticipated in FY 19-20 and 20-21. Ongoing costs thereafter are estimated to be $300,000- $400,000 per year. Approximately 500 hours of staff time have already shifted from other Agency projects in order to staff the effort this year. Adopting a food service ware ordinance would add another resource intensive, regulatory project to the Agency’s budget. We continue to be responsible for implementing other mandatory projects, most notably the Mandatory Recycling Ordinance (MRO). The timing is also challenging because new regulations from SB 1383 will go into effect in January 2022 and considerable effort is needed from both StopWaste and member agency staff to prepare for compliance countywide. Some member agencies may opt to contribute funds to assist with implementation of SB 1383 instead of a food service ware ordinance. Other Efforts Several jurisdictions in California and elsewhere are considering or adopting food service ware ordinances. To date, we are aware of 27 ordinances in place or in development throughout California, with nine in the SF Bay Area. Attachment 1 includes a map of local ordinances currently adopted in the nine Bay Area counties. There is also the prospect of state legislation addressing food service ware in 2020, although a state law would likely not be as comprehensive as a local effort and would still leave cities responsible for implementation and enforcement. Recology, the waste hauler, along with some environmental groups filed a proposed plastic waste reduction initiative for the November 2020 ballot. The measure would require manufacturers to make all plastic packaging and single-use food ware items, including cups, straws and utensils, recyclable or compostable by 2030 and charge manufacturer’s a fee for production of plastic food ware items. See Attachment 2. Next Steps At the November 14 meeting, staff and Board members will discuss options for moving forward. This discussion will include the factors described above, giving consideration to resource impacts on existing Agency work, and impacts on other anticipated needs, such as SB 1383. Board members will be asked to bring the discussion back to their cities and assess if there is interest in a uniform countywide ordinance or a customizable model ordinance. This item will be brought to the WMA Board in January for further discussion and direction. RECOMMENDATION This item is for discussion and information only. Attachment 1: Map of Bay Area ordinances Attachment 2: California’s plastic pollution fight may be headed to voters - SFChronicle.com ATTACHMENT 1 11/7/2019 https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/California-s-plastic-pollution-fight-may-be-14809106.php 1/5 POLITICSPOLITICS California’s plastic pollution fight may be headed toCalifornia’s plastic pollution fight may be headed to votersvoters Dustin GardinerDustin Gardiner Nov. ,  Nov. ,  Updated: Nov. ,  : p.m.Updated: Nov. ,  : p.m. SACRAMENTO — California environmentalists battling to stop plastic from polluting theSACRAMENTO — California environmentalists battling to stop plastic from polluting the ocean and piling up in landfills say they can’t wait for state lawmakers to act — they’reocean and piling up in landfills say they can’t wait for state lawmakers to act — they’re hoping to take the fight to the ballot box.hoping to take the fight to the ballot box. Plastics are separated from other recyclables on a conveyor belt in this  le photo. An initiative proposed forPlastics are separated from other recyclables on a conveyor belt in this  le photo. An initiative proposed for California’s November  ballot would dramatically reduce the amount of disposable plastic that could be used inCalifornia’s November  ballot would dramatically reduce the amount of disposable plastic that could be used in the state.the state. Photo: Michael Maloney / The Chronicle Photo: Michael Maloney / The Chronicle  LocalLocal Sporting GreenSporting Green PoliticsPolitics Biz+TechBiz+Tech FoodFood Culture DeskCulture Desk DatebookDatebook US & WorldUS & World OpinionOpinion VauVau Sign InSign InCalifornia’s plastic pollution fight may be headed to voters - SFChronicle.com ATTACHMENT 2 11/7/2019 California’s plastic pollution fight may be headed to voters - SFChronicle.com https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/California-s-plastic-pollution-fight-may-be-14809106.php 2/5 Recology, the Bay Area waste hauler, and environmental groups filed a proposedRecology, the Bay Area waste hauler, and environmental groups filed a proposed initiative Monday that would require plastic manufacturers to dramatically reduce theinitiative Monday that would require plastic manufacturers to dramatically reduce the amount of products that people use once and toss in the trash.amount of products that people use once and toss in the trash. The initiative, aimed at the November 2020 ballot, is a more far-reaching version of twoThe initiative, aimed at the November 2020 ballot, is a more far-reaching version of two waste-reduction bills that waste-reduction bills that died at the state Capitol this year,died at the state Capitol this year, both were opposed by the both were opposed by the plastics and petroleum industries.plastics and petroleum industries. Unlimited Digital Access for 95¢Unlimited Digital Access for 95¢ Read more articles like this by subscribing to the San Francisco ChronicleRead more articles like this by subscribing to the San Francisco Chronicle S U B S C R I B ESUBSCRIBE Eric Potashner, vice president of Recology, said the consequences of inaction areEric Potashner, vice president of Recology, said the consequences of inaction are mounting as plastic strangles marine habitats and overwhelms recycling facilities. Hemounting as plastic strangles marine habitats and overwhelms recycling facilities. He also signaled that qualifying the initiative for the ballot is intended in part to get statealso signaled that qualifying the initiative for the ballot is intended in part to get state lawmakers to do something in 2020 that they could not this year — pass a major billlawmakers to do something in 2020 that they could not this year — pass a major bill designed to cut plastic pollution.designed to cut plastic pollution. “We’re running out of time,” Potashner said. “We need a backup plan if the Legislature is“We’re running out of time,” Potashner said. “We need a backup plan if the Legislature is not able to do something significant on plastic-packaging pollution.”not able to do something significant on plastic-packaging pollution.” Supporters must collect 623,212 signatures of registered California voters by the end ofSupporters must collect 623,212 signatures of registered California voters by the end of April to qualify the proposed initiative for the November ballot.April to qualify the proposed initiative for the November ballot. Related StoriesRelated Stories B Y D U S T I N G A R D I N E RBY D U S T I N G A R D I N E R How industry ‘environmental’How industry ‘environmental’ group helped foil...group helped foil... P O L I T I C SPOLITICS B Y E L E N A S H A OBY E L E N A S H A O San Francisco is surviving theSan Francisco is surviving the global recycling crisis. But...global recycling crisis. But... B I Z & T E C HBIZ & T E C H LocalLocal Sporting GreenSporting Green PoliticsPolitics Biz+TechBiz+Tech FoodFood Culture DeskCulture Desk DatebookDatebook US & WorldUS & World OpinionOpinion VauVau Sign InSign In 11/7/2019 California’s plastic pollution fight may be headed to voters - SFChronicle.com https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/California-s-plastic-pollution-fight-may-be-14809106.php 3/5 Tim Shestek, a lobbyist for the American Chemistry Council, which represents theTim Shestek, a lobbyist for the American Chemistry Council, which represents the plastics industry, said the “timing of this new proposal strikes us as odd,” given thatplastics industry, said the “timing of this new proposal strikes us as odd,” given that lawmakers are working on a major packaging recycling bill that could pass in January.lawmakers are working on a major packaging recycling bill that could pass in January. “This new initiative proposal will only serve as a distraction, and resources that could be“This new initiative proposal will only serve as a distraction, and resources that could be going toward recycling could now be unnecessarily wasted,” Shestek said in an email.going toward recycling could now be unnecessarily wasted,” Shestek said in an email. The measure would require manufacturers to make all plastic packaging and single-useThe measure would require manufacturers to make all plastic packaging and single-use foodware items, including cups, straws and utensils, recyclable or compostable by 2030.foodware items, including cups, straws and utensils, recyclable or compostable by 2030. It would also:It would also: • Create a fee of up to 1 cent for manufacturers on every plastic item or product with• Create a fee of up to 1 cent for manufacturers on every plastic item or product with plastic packaging. The money would be used to build recycling and composting facilities,plastic packaging. The money would be used to build recycling and composting facilities, and to pay for restoration projects such as beach cleanups.and to pay for restoration projects such as beach cleanups. • Prohibit food vendors, including restaurants and grocery stores, from using Styrofoam• Prohibit food vendors, including restaurants and grocery stores, from using Styrofoam and other plastic-foam takeout containers.and other plastic-foam takeout containers. • Require manufacturers to reduce to the “maximum extent possible” the plastic• Require manufacturers to reduce to the “maximum extent possible” the plastic packaging and single-use products they create. That could require them to offer morepackaging and single-use products they create. That could require them to offer more reusable containers.reusable containers. Caryl Hart, a member of the California Coastal Commission who lives in Sebastopol, co-Caryl Hart, a member of the California Coastal Commission who lives in Sebastopol, co- authored the initiative. She said the popularity of plastic, made from fossil fuels, hasauthored the initiative. She said the popularity of plastic, made from fossil fuels, has exacerbated climate change.exacerbated climate change. “We’re seeing activity in the Legislature, but there’s not success,” Hart said. “If California“We’re seeing activity in the Legislature, but there’s not success,” Hart said. “If California is not going to lead, who is going to?”is not going to lead, who is going to?” Potashner said the penny-or-less fee would build infrastructure like recycling plants andPotashner said the penny-or-less fee would build infrastructure like recycling plants and composting facilities so more California communities can dispose of waste locallycomposting facilities so more California communities can dispose of waste locally instead of shipping it overseas.instead of shipping it overseas. “This initiative aims to hold the plastics industry accountable for the products they“This initiative aims to hold the plastics industry accountable for the products they create,” Recology CEO Mike Sangiacomo said in a statement.create,” Recology CEO Mike Sangiacomo said in a statement. LocalLocal Sporting GreenSporting Green PoliticsPolitics Biz+TechBiz+Tech FoodFood Culture DeskCulture Desk DatebookDatebook US & WorldUS & World OpinionOpinion VauVau Sign InSign In 11/7/2019 California’s plastic pollution fight may be headed to voters - SFChronicle.com https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/California-s-plastic-pollution-fight-may-be-14809106.php 4/5 Recology, like many waste haulers, sends thousands of tons of plastic waste to landfillsRecology, like many waste haulers, sends thousands of tons of plastic waste to landfills every year. The recycling industry has been upended recently, as overseas markets,every year. The recycling industry has been upended recently, as overseas markets, including including ChinaChina and the Philippines, have begun rejecting U.S. plastics. and the Philippines, have begun rejecting U.S. plastics. Recology has pledged to spend $1 million to qualify the initiative for the ballot, but theRecology has pledged to spend $1 million to qualify the initiative for the ballot, but the effort could cost at least several million dollars more. Potashner said other groups plan toeffort could cost at least several million dollars more. Potashner said other groups plan to contribute to the fight, but none has made a public commitment.contribute to the fight, but none has made a public commitment. Environmentalists anticipate opposition from the deep -pocketed plastics industry,Environmentalists anticipate opposition from the deep -pocketed plastics industry, which spent heavily to defeat bills in the Legislature this year. One company, Novolex,which spent heavily to defeat bills in the Legislature this year. One company, Novolex, spent more than $959,000.spent more than $959,000. Dustin Gardiner is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email:Dustin Gardiner is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: dustin.gardiner@sfchronicle.comdustin.gardiner@sfchronicle.com Twitter: Twitter: @dustingardiner@dustingardiner A B O U TABOUT N E W S R O O MNEWSROOM C O N TA C TCONTACT S E R V I C E SSERVICES Our CompanyOur Company Privacy NoticePrivacy Notice Your California Privacy RightsYour California Privacy Rights Interest Based AdsInterest Based Ads Terms of UseTerms of Use CareersCareers AdvertisingAdvertising Ethics PolicyEthics Policy Correction PolicyCorrection Policy Visual Ethics GuidelinesVisual Ethics Guidelines Anonymous Sources PolicyAnonymous Sources Policy Endorsement ProcessEndorsement Process News TipsNews Tips Customer ServiceCustomer Service FAQFAQ Newsroom ContactsNewsroom Contacts Homepage Redesign FeedbackHomepage Redesign Feedback ProleProle Subscriber ServicesSubscriber Services e-editione-edition AppApp ArchivesArchives MembershipMembership TOPTOP LocalLocal Sporting GreenSporting Green PoliticsPolitics Biz+TechBiz+Tech FoodFood Culture DeskCulture Desk DatebookDatebook US & WorldUS & World OpinionOpinion VauVau Sign InSign In 11/7/2019 California’s plastic pollution fight may be headed to voters - SFChronicle.com https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/California-s-plastic-pollution-fight-may-be-14809106.php 5/5 © Hearst© Hearst StoreStore Subscription OersSubscription Oers sfgate.comsfgate.com LocalLocal Sporting GreenSporting Green PoliticsPolitics Biz+TechBiz+Tech FoodFood Culture DeskCulture Desk DatebookDatebook US & WorldUS & World OpinionOpinion VauVau Sign InSign In Model Ordinance + Greatest flexibility to member agencies + StopWaste provides ordinance language, menu of elements, and messaging templates + Best option if one size doesn’t fit all - Could result in inconsistent implementation and confusion across jurisdictions Plastic single-use food ware items like plates, bowls, and utensils are prevalent in daily life. And while straws often get the most attention, these food ware items are also problematic, as they frequently serve a useful life of just minutes while their impact on human health and the environment is significant and long lasting. StopWaste is currently considering options, including a possible ordinance, to reduce consumption of such items. If adopted countywide, the ordinance would apply to all Alameda County eating and drinking establishments, including food trucks and fast food establishments, as well as third-party delivery services such as DoorDash and Uber Eats. To date, 16 ordinances are in place or in development throughout California, with nine in the Bay Area alone. A critical aspect of any strategy is to foster widespread adoption of durable reusable cups, containers, and cutlery. Switching from single-use plastics to compostable fiber is not a solution because it does not reduce consumption – many of these items still end up as litter, or are not successfully processed as recycling or compost, and end up in the landfill. Potential Implementation Approaches One option is to develop a model ordinance, ready for customization and implementation directly by member agencies. The second would be a countywide ordinance, which could be rolled out in distinct phases that add more complex elements over time. This would allow aected parties to prepare for the changes and address operational considerations. Topic Brief November 2019 Reusable Food Ware Ordinance StopWaste • 1537 Webster St, Oakland, CA 94612 • 510-891-6500 • www.StopWaste.org Reusable food ware required for all dine-in establishments Single-use food ware must be BPI-certified compostable fiber (non-plastic) Single-use accessories available only on demand/self-service 25¢ charge on single-use cups 25¢ - 50¢ charge per meal for to-go food ware if requested Countywide Ordinance + Greatest waste reduction impact + StopWaste coordinates TA, outreach, and promotion + Requires consistency across county - Would require StopWaste to shift resources away from other priorities Possible Ordinance Elements OR Single-use food ware at a dine-in establishment A durable, reusable food ware alternative Community Considerations for a Possible Reusable Food Ware Ordinance: 1. Is this an important issue for your community? 2. If important, do you think that it should be a countywide ordinance implemented by StopWaste, or a model ordinance that can be customized and implemented directly by cities? 3. If countywide, would your jurisdiction be willing to contribute resources to StopWaste in order to implement? 4. If a model ordinance works better, is your jurisdiction able to take on its implementation/enforcement along with the requirements of SB 1383? November 14, 2019 Reusable Food Ware Ordinance: Options and Impacts Shift towards reusables, making the greatest impact we can Eliminate PFAS compounds Waste Reduction Develop Reuse Infrastructure Toxics Reduction Policy Objectives Avoid landfill and contamination of compost and recycling streams Address litter/pollution Single-Use / Disposable Product Types •Unlined/uncoated paper/fiber products •Non-compostable poly-coated paper •PLA-coated paper •Compostable plastics •Wood products Policy Focus: Reusable Alternatives Basic Ordinance Elements Reusable food service ware required for all dine-in establishments Single-use food ware must be BPI- certified compostable fiber (non-plastic) Single-use accessories available only on demand/self-service Key Terms What’s Included Food Service Ware Plates, cups, bowls Accessories Straws,utensils, condiment cups Comprehensive Ordinance Elements $0.25 charge on single-use cups $0.25-0.50 charge per meal for to-go food service ware if requested •Food service ware: plates, cups, bowls, accessories Basic ordinance elements, plus: $0.25 $0.25 $0.25 Other Bay Area Food Ware Ordinances 16 ordinances in place or in development in CA 9 Bay Area ordinances adopted 1 proposed state bill 1 proposed ballot measure Map does not include straw-only ordinances Implementation Approach Countywide Ordinance •Greatest waste reduction impact •StopWaste coordinates TA and outreach/promotion. •Requires consistency across county •Complaint-based enforcement •Greatest flexibility to member agencies •StopWaste provides ordinance language, menu of elements, and messaging templates •Best option if one size doesn’t fit all For both ordinance options: StopWaste conducts environmental review Model Ordinance Challenges •Avoiding disposable alternatives •Reusables Infrastructure Needed •Inconsistency across County •Resources to implement SB 1383 •Burden on businesses and consumers •Health code concerns •Accessibility Cost Estimate Fiscal Year Scope Estimated Cost 2019-20 Ordinance Development $430,000 2020-21 Option 1: Countywide Ordinance Adoption, rollout, TA, enforcement ~$768,000 Option 2: Model Ordinance TA and outreach assistance ~$450,000 Total Development Cost:$880,000 -$1.2M 2021-22 Ongoing Annual Cost for Countywide Ordinance (Only) $300K -$400K OR Board Members Next Steps Discuss with your Councils Q: Are all three basic ordinance elements something your jurisdiction would adopt? Reusable food service ware required for all dine-in establishments Single-use food ware must be BPI-certified compostable fiber (non-plastic) Single-use accessories available only on demand/self-service Discussion/Decision: January WMA StopWaste Role Model & Countywide Ordinances: •Environmental review •Promotional messaging templates •Infrastructure support and development Countywide Ordinance Only (all of the above, plus): •Outreach and marketing •Manage master contracts for TA •Enforcement/assistance •Stakeholder Outreach Enforcement / TA: Implementation & Funding Options Ordinance Option Enforcement & TA Lead Implementation & Funding Option 1: Countywide Ordinance StopWaste •Complaint-based vs. Inspections •Member Agency funding support •SW manages master contracts Option 2: Model Ordinance Member Agencies •Utilize Stormwater or Environmental Services depts. •SW provides general countywide promotional messaging