|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Having already banned plastic bags from grocery stores, Palo Alto is now targeting another common food-storage pollutant: the Styrofoam container.
The debate over polystyrene — better known as Styrofoam — will take center stage at the City Council meeting tonight (Monday), when the council is scheduled to hold a public hearing on a new staff proposal for a Styrofoam ban. And just as with the bag ban — which the city passed earlier this month and which is already being challenged in court — the city can expect a swell of opposition from local establishments.
Under the staff proposal, the Styrofoam ban would have a much broader scope than the plastic-bag restriction. When the bag ban takes effect on Sept. 19, the only businesses affected will be the city’s seven supermarkets, and three of which have already voluntarily stopped using them.
The polystyrene ordinance, meanwhile, would apply to a wide range of food establishments, many of which are long accustomed to relying on the foamy boxes.
The environmental review accompanying the ordinance states that the ban would apply to local “food service establishments, restaurants, retail food vendors, sales outlets, stores, shops, cafeterias, vehicles, sidewalk and other outdoor facilities, caterers, lunch trucks or other places of business located within the City of Palo Alto which sell or convey prepared and ready-to-consume foods or beverages, including fruits and vegetables, directly to the ultimate consumer.”
The ban would take effect within a year of the ordinance’s implementation.
In banning Styrofoam containers, Palo Alto would be joining a growing list of California cities that have already banned particular forms of the foamy container. These include Oakland, San Francisco, Millbrae, Santa Monica and Malibu.
But some local restaurant owners have argued that banning Styrofoam would create new expenses and make it even more difficult for them to function in the current economic recession.
Yessenia Cervantes, whose University Avenue sandwich shop, New York New York, relies on foam containers for to-go orders, was one of several food providers who wrote the council a letter earlier this year urging members to reconsider the ban.
“Restaurants use this product because it is so much cheaper than other options,” Cervantes wrote. “And customers like it because it keeps the costs down and is recyclable.”
But staff argues in its report that Styrofoam litter poses a threat to the environment because of its light weight and tendency to break up into tiny pieces that are then swallowed by some wildlife species. Polystyrene also contains the styrene monomer, a chemical that has been identified as a suspected carcinogen and neurotoxin by the federal Environmental Protection Agency.
Staff also points out that the city does not accept polystyrene in its curbside recycling program, which puts more pressure on landfills and creates more litter. The city hopes that once the ban is in place, many establishments will switch over to reusable containers, or when that’s not possible, to recyclable-plastic or paper containers.
The Styrofoam-ban discussion will be one of several green-themed items on the council agenda. The council is also scheduled to discuss a staff update on the city’s environmental initiatives and the city’s 2009 goals for green-house-gas reduction. Mayor Peter Drekmeier is also scheduled to hold a forum on energy efficiency from 4 to 6:30 p.m.
The regular council meeting will begin at 7 p.m. at the Council Chambers in City Hall, 250 Hamilton Ave.
Most of the “staff” does not live here. Tell them to go back to their own communities and upset everything and everyone. Do they “practice” on us? They have better things to do at City Hall – like cutting costs
and not increasing costs for businesses. Maybe they don’t have enough to do – and we need 50% less staff.
After spending 100’s of millions of dollars on affordable housing, and not paying property taxes on such housing, I would expect the city of Palo Alto to set an example and have a higher percentage of staff live in the city. The city council needs to look at this and tell us why they keep approving these dense housing developments, yet we don’t see any city workers moving into the community that they are suppose to serve.
Wow Kate, every time you post, you “beat up” on the city employee. Even things that we have no control over like the banning of plastic bags and now styrofoam containers.
Do you think we really care what is ban in Palo Alto? These bans are pushed by people like you that live in the city, not us.
You really need to get a life or maybe you should go work for the city since you feel we have it so good.
Oh, by the way, I can’t buy a home in this city with my salary. But that’s OK, I live in a small community that does not waste their time with things like this. Have a good day Kate.
For once, I heartily agree with the council’s proposal to ban polystyrene. The restaurants who argue that styrofoam is “cheaper” are short-sighted and self-serving. It’s only “cheap” because they and the manufacturers are not accountable for the disposal of styrofoam. The impact of polystyrene on the environment (and yes, that means the people who live in it too) is devastating. C’mon people, stop polluting the pot we ALL live in just to save a few cents. Have your customers bring their own containers or use foil. Save containers that your ingredients come in and reuse them for take out. Just takes a mind shift that our collective convenience should not trump our collective health.
What evidence are they basing this potential ban upon? It seems like there are dozens of scientific journals that refute this sort of hysteria as a myth.
Unbelievable. This incredible “nanny state” form of hippy government almost makes me want to become a Republican!
I guess the solution is to take my family’s business elsewhere. We are already beginning to shop in other towns and bring our groceries (and plastic bags) back to Palo Alto. Now, it looks like I will have to purchase my take-out elsewhere (if I want to keep it warm).
Palo Alto is filled with “liberals without a clue!” Do you want to know just WHY California can’t balance its budget — even with the highest taxes, state income tax and enlarged population? Look no further than our BIG BROTHER NANNY GOVERNMENT! They prefer to take your money and spend it on what THEY think is best. Is this “democracy” or economic communism?
Geez…other states are starting to look very, very good.
Why stop here?
Why not ban air conditioners, heaters, electriciy and automobiles?
Maybe we need a government to tell us what is right and what is wrong. Oh wait — that is exactly what we didn’t like about the Bush Administration. Yet we have extreme liberals in Palo Alto who want to dictate their OPINION as if it is the only one that matters. They dictate to us what is right and wrong in regard to the environment, taxes and certain moral issues. How is this any different from the Bush Administration…except that liberals think that their opinion is correct?
This big brother government is starting to get old…fast. It just goes to prove how OUT OF TOUCH our elected officials are with the hurting middle class in this town.
How about the city encouraging businesses here rather than giving them restrictions? At the same time, how about taking styrofoam at the curb?
I am tired of the timewasting poppycock this city gets involved in when the nuts and bolts stuff gets ignored.
Thanks BP.
Whole foods has a lightweight, recycled fiber takeout container. Could it at 5 cents to a takeout meal? C’,mon people, takeout is a luxury to start with; its a reward at the end of a hard day which cost more than a home cooked meal.
Ah, visions of sending one of the kids down to the pub with our own pint container for some fresh draft beer. How about a reusable, insulated zippered sac for pizza? Yep. Already available.
If we want to delay the buildup of mountains of garbage accumulating in our landfills, we have to take individual and collective action.
That’s a far cry from “communism”. Its called responsibility. Its what adults do.
Gee, the third paragraph starts “Under the staff proposal,….” therefore, Dear City Employee I would suggest you put the “real” person’d name on this idea instead of STAFF PROPOSAL.
As you said “I live in a small community that does not waste their time with things like this” it would be great if the City Council would follow your community and NOT WASTE OUR time or the COUNCILS.
City Council that would honestly say “Developer (Contractors) Lobby, Developer (Contractors) Donate, We approve!!!!”
It would be great if the City Council learned a new word – NO or new phase – DISAPPROVED….
There is no sane reason except MONEY, MONEY, MONEY and not care about the people of Palo Alto and the surrounding areas that use the Shopping Center and eating places….. What are you to use when we want to “doggy bag”?????
In Switzerland, did you know that EVERYBODY brings their own reusable bags to the grocery store? That’s the spirit of the plastic bag ban. The question is not so much impact on business as it is helping bring about a cultural shift in the US about how we operate as consumers. The styrofoam ban, however, is a bigger issue, and I don’t think we’re ready for it. Takeout food is a major business and I haven’t seen a cost-effective alternative to styrofoam for certain types of food. So although I think we can “survive” a plastic bag ban, the idea of banning styrofoam right now is a bit premature.
I support the ban on plastic bags and styrofoam. I just wish we could make it statewide or at least countywide so the benefit would be palpable. Using ordinary paper “doggie bags” works for me. I agree the City Council is totally dysfunctional when it comes to taking care of basic problems like infrastructure. We all know the City is overstaffed and fiscally irresponsible, but each issue should be judged on its own merits after weighing the benefits and risks. In this case the benefits seem to outweigh the risks.
What a ridiculous waste of time and money.
Another feel good initiative that does nothing to stimulate the local economy, save lives or health, help the poor,or anything of value.
Fortunately the new residents of Palo Alto are beyond these hippy- narcissistic preoccupations.
The geriatric hippies are moving out in droves fortunately, one way or another.
This is beyond idiotic. We need to ban City Council for wasting our tax dollars on this kind of silliness. The ban on plastic bags was dumb enough. Get to work on real issues rather than handcuffing people and businesses from using worthwhile products in their daily lives.
“Are you my conscience?” – Dora the fish, FINDING NEMO
Do we really need a government telling us how to run every detail of our lives? This is the “big government” monster that Ronald Reagan spoke against.
I find it funny that we want the government out of our phones and international policies — but we invite the government into our pocketbooks and even day-to-day regulations.
I moved to California from Texas last year. This is such a beautiful place. It is only the “big brother” government that makes it difficult to live here. Texas is not perfect, but it was nice having a government that stayed out of our pocket book so often. There is no state income tax, no grocery tax, no mandatory “deposits” on bottles and cans, and far fewer laws regarding our day-to-day living. $150-200K can buy you a beautiful, two story brick home on one acre in most cities (and much better deals outside of the cities). It has wonderful roads, an extremely low cost of living, friendly people and a plethora of jobs!
Why can’t California realize that there is something wrong with the government here? The state and local government are making it difficult for middle class citizens to survive here. We are taxed beyond belief (seriously) and the people keep voting for the candidates who want to spend more money!
What is so difficult to understand about having less government?
Didn’t Thomas Paine say that “the government is best which governs least?” Why do we need a local government that tries to act like our conscience or moral compass? Is this the role of government?