HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 4.B 10/21/2019M
FROM:
Agenda Item #4.B
October 21, 2019
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council through City Manager' '
Ingrid Alverde, Director of Economic Development and Open Government
Patrick Carter, Senior Management Analyst, City Manager's Office
SUBJECT: Introduction (First Reading) of an Ordinance Prohibiting Use and Sale of
Specified Disposable Food Service Ware and Other Non -Reusable Products
Containing Polystyrene Foam
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the Council consider an Ordinance (First Reading) to Prohibit Use and Sale of
Specified Disposable Food Service Ware and Other Non -Reusable Products Containing
Polystyrene Foam.
BACKGROUND
Polystyrene, often referred to as the Dow Chemical Company trademarked brand name of
Styrofoam, is a hydrocarbon polymer widely used in plastic products and packaging.
Polystyrene foam is relatively inexpensive and lightweight and has excellent insulation qualities
making it a common choice for building insulation and hot beverage cups, as examples.
However, polystyrene is extremely slow to degrade in the environment, is a common form of
both land -and water-based litter due to its lightweight nature and has very limited recycling
potential. There are no curbside collection options for polystyrene in Sonoma County or in most
jurisdictions throughout the state.
Regional Waste Reduction Efforts: The City of Petaluma is a member of the Sonoma County
Waste Management Agency (SCWMA), a joint powers authority whose mission is to divert
waste from landfill disposal in Sonoma County through reduction, reuse, and recycling. The
SCWMA Board approved a model polystyrene waste reduction ordinance last spring for use by
its member agencies to address polystyrene and food service ware items (e.g. foam cups, to -go
clamshell containers, and foam ice chests), which are common forms of litter. The SCWMA staff
studied polystyrene waste and litter issues and concluded that there are environmentally friendly
alternatives to polystyrene food service ware items and that it would be environmentally
beneficial for SCWMA members to adopt ordinances to reduce the amount of polystyrene waste.
SCWMA staff researched over 100 such ordinances in California and drafted a model ordinance
largely from those adopted by the Counties of Santa Clara and Santa Cruz.
Statewide Waste Reduction Efforts: The California legislature put forth two identical bills (AB
1080 and SB 54) during the 2019-20 legislative session that would establish requirements for
producers to reduce waste from single -use plastic packaging and products, including plastic Lo-
go food ware, by at least 75% by January 1, 2030. Under these bills, all producers of single -use
packaging offered for sale, sold, distributed, or imported into California would be required to
ensure their single -use packaging or products are reusable, recyclable, or compostable. The bills
set interim waste reduction requirements on producers of 20% by 2026 and 40% by 2028. Under
the bills, non-compliant producers could receive administrative civil penalties from the
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery of up to $50,000 per day. The bills
were not approved by both the Assembly and Senate and will not be acted on again until at least
January 2020.
The proposed ordinance is related to the City's waste reduction efforts to reduce a voluminous
and frequently littered waste product; is aligned with the Zero Waste Principles the City Council
adopted pursuant to Resolution No. 2019-114 approved by the City Council on July 15, 2019;
and meets the City Council Goal to "preserve and protect Petaluma's environment with smart
and efficient use of resources."
DISCUSSION
The proposed ordinance is based on a template provided by the SCWMA in the hope that the
ordinances that are being considered by member agencies may achieve some regional
consistency. This would reduce complexity for education and compliance for multi -
jurisdictional food establishments and for County citizens. To date in Sonoma County, only the
City of Sebastopol has adopted the SCWMA model ordinance, which it did at its May 21, 2019
City Council Meeting. Staff understands that the City of Healdsburg will be considering the
SCWMA model ordinance before the end of the year, and several other Sonoma County cities
will be considering the SCWMA model ordinance early next year.
The main elements of the proposed ordinance include:
1. A prohibition against polystyrene foam food service ware distributed by food
establishments and food providers within Petaluma
2. A prohibition against polystyrene foam products sold by retail vendors within Petaluma
3. Authorization for the City Manager or designee to grant exemptions on a case-by-case
basis for up to one year if the food provider or retail vendor demonstrates an undue
hardship resulting from the ordinance.
The proposed ordinance would not:
1. Require all food establishments or retailers to only distribute or sell only reusable,
recyclable, or compostable disposable food service ware
2. Require use of reusable, recyclable, or compostable disposable food service ware in City
facilities
3. Require utensils to be provided only upon customer request
4. Prohibit the sale of products packaged in polystyrene foam outside of Petaluma
5. Prohibit polystyrene foam used as insulation in buildings
6. Prohibit polystyrene use of City facilities, by city personnel, or by city contractors or
lessees
I
Staff intend to draft a City policy restricting the purchase of single -use disposable polystyrene
products and use of single -use disposable polystyrene products in City facilities by City
personnel, outside food service contractors, lessees and other users of City facilities. Staff plan to
have a draft City polystyrene policy ready for consideration by the City Council and
implementation on or before the May 1, 2020, the proposed effective date of the attached
ordinance. This will allow for time to educate the business community and work with the newly -
seated Climate Commission to develop the legislation and outreach strategy.
The SCWMA is willing to indemnify and perform the education and enforcement activities for
member jurisdictions that adopt the proposed ordinance without significant alterations, but may
not do so if significant changes are made. A separate City Council action and agreement between
the SCWMA and City could be used to indemnify the City and to delegate the education, and
enforcement of the proposed ordinance, if desired.
In researching single -use disposable food ware items, staff made the following findings:
• On a per unit basis, compostable alternatives (uncoated paper, birch wood, bamboo, or
bagasse feedstocks) are about 2 to 10 times more expensive than the single -use
polystyrene counterparts. While this ordinance would not require replacement of
polystyrene items with compostable items, this information is useful for potential future
action.
• Recyclable PET or Polyethene cups and containers are similar in price to non -recyclable
polystyrene cups and containers.
• Hot beverage cups do not have an alternative product that would be allowed in the City's
composting or recycling programs. Paper cups do not work because the plastic lining
that prevents liquid absorption is problematic for recycling or composting. The lack of a
viable compostable or recyclable hot beverage cup replacement is a major issue to be
addressed in potential future action.
• "Compostable" cup liners are not accepted at the composting facilities which receive
Petaluma material.
The public response to the City's outreach regarding the proposed polystyrene prohibition has
been favorable. Most of the input received indicates that the public understands that reasonable
alternatives to polystyrene foam exist, and while some alternatives may be more expensive,
increased customer container reuse may allow food vendors to offset some the additional costs.
During development of the proposed ordinance, staff presented the public with an option to
include a single -use plastic ban with the polystyrene prohibition language. Alameda County,
Arroyo Grande, Brisbane, Concord, City and County of San Francisco, San Pablo, Santa
Barbara, and Solana Beach include provisions requiring that all single -use food ware items be
compostable or recyclable in their waste reduction ordinances. Single -use food ware items such
as utensils, cups, containers, straws, lids, stirrers, and napkins are included in such bans unless
the items are recyclable at a local compost facility. Many of the single -use items listed have
recyclable, compostable, or reusable alternatives, though these alternatives are typically
significantly more expensive on a per unit basis. The prohibition of single use plastic items has
notable, vocal support in Petaluma.
Single -use hot beverage cups are discarded in large volumes daily throughout Petaluma.
However, staff is not aware of any recyclable or compostable alternative that could replace those
cups. Businesses selling hot beverages to -go would be required to make expensive changes to
their business practices to accommodate a single use item ban. Staff believes further outreach
and feedback from affected businesses and their customers is need before moving forward with a
ban on all single -use food ware products that are not reusable, compostable, or recyclable under
the City's waste reduction ordinance. For these reasons, staff is not recommending inclusion of a
"single -use plastics" ban in the proposed ordinance at this time. Additional outreach and
community acceptance are recommended. Accordingly, the proposed ordinance does not include
"single -use plastics" ban provisions.
Staff believe the proposed ordinance is exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the
California Environmental Code of Regulations because it can be seen with certainty that there is
no possibility that the ordinance will have a significant negative effect on the environment, and
on the separate but related ground that the proposed ordinance is an action of the City to assure
the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment where the
regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment in accordance with
Section 15308 of the CEQA Guidelines. The restrictions on polystyrene products contained in
the proposed ordinance constitute regulatory procedures for protection of the environment in
accordance with Section 15308 because the ordinance provisions will reduce the negative
environmental impacts of disposal and littering of polystyrene products. The draft ordinance and
its expected environmental impact are analogous to those of plastic bag ban regulations which
have been adopted in many local jurisdictions. Such ordinances were found to qualify for the
Section 15308 exemption in Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. Countv of Marin (2013) 218
CA4th 209 and Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City and County of San Francisco (2013) 222
CA4th 863.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
SCWMA Outreach: SCWMA staff conducted outreach to residents and businesses within
Sonoma County to determine interest and the potential impacts on local businesses caused by
adopting an ordinance regulating polystyrene products. SCWMA staff publicized an online
survey, contacted Chambers of Commerce, trade organizations, and local businesses that
generated approximately 3,000 responses. Respondents overwhelmingly supported the model
ordinance as highlighted below:
• 91 % supported a ban on polystyrene food containers at food establishments
0 89% supported a ban on the sale of polystyrene foam products at retail stores
0 87% supported straws being provided upon request, rather than automatically
0 69% supported food establishments charging a fee for compliant food containers
Petaluma Outreach: City staff published information about the proposed ordinance in all
Petaluma commercial utility bills, the Petaluma Chamber of Commerce newsletter, posted
information on the City's Facebook and NextDoor sites, placed advertisements running in the
0
September 19 and 26 Petaluma Argus Courier editions, and had multiple discussions with
Petaluma Argus Courier reporters, which resulted in articles published on June 30, 2019 and July
12, 2019, and September 26. Staff presented the proposed ordinance to the Chamber of
Commerce Government Affairs subcommittee on September 6, 2019.
Feedback from outreach fell into the following categories: support, concern regarding financial
impacts to businesses and customers, desire for City resources to be directed elsewhere, and
concern regarding how consumers would be able to handle to -go food. These comments were
taken into consideration as reflected in City staff next steps above.
Public Comment can be found online at cityofpetaluma.net/cclerk/archives in the October 21,
2019 Agenda under Item 4.13.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Financial impacts to the City are expected to be minimal as a result of adopting the proposed
ordinance. Reduced sales tax collections from the prohibition of purchasing polystyrene service
ware items are expected to be offset by the purchase of alternative service ware. There will be an
undetermined, but minimal impact to budget for enforcement and education, if performed by
City staff. Enforcement would focus on education first, would be complaint driven, and, based
on the experiences in the Counties of Santa Clara and Santa Cruz, an initial spike in staff time
needed to respond to complaints in the first months after the ordinance takes effect is expected,
which should taper off afterwards.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance Prohibiting Use and Sale of Specified Disposable Food Service Ware and
Other Products Containing Polystyrene Foam
EFFECTIVE DATE ORDINANCE NO. N.C.S.
OF ORDINANCE
Introduced by
Seconded by
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA ADDING
CHAPTER 8.17 TO THE PETALUMA MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING THE USE
AND SALE OF SPECIFIED DISPOSABLE FOOD SERVICE WARE AND OTHER
PRODUCTS CONTAINING POLYSTYRENE FOAM
WHEREAS, the California Integrated Waste Management Board ("CIWMB") estimates
that Californians use 165,000 tons of expanded polystyrene (foam and Styrofoam TM products)
each year for packaging and food service purposes; and
WHEREAS, a 2004 study by the CIWMB ranked polystyrene's environmental impacts
second highest among materials in terms of both manufacturing and disposal, behind aluminum,
in the categories of energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and total environmental
effect; and
WHEREAS, a 2014 waste characterization study performed on behalf of the California
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery ("Cal Recycle") estimated that 11,310 tons of
remainder/composite plastic materials, including polystyrene food ware, were disposed in
Sonoma County; and
WHEREAS, according to the 2004 CIWMB study, as well as studies published in
Materials Science and Technology, a trade journal, expanded polystyrene is not fully
biodegradable, takes hundreds of years to deteriorate or breakdown in the environment or a
landfill, and currently no effective or economically feasible means of recycling polystyrene is
available in Sonoma County; and
3
WHEREAS, according to the 2004 CIWMB study, a 2009 United Nations Environment
Programme Report on Marine Litter, and Environment California, a non-profit organization,
polystyrene foam litter breaks down into smaller, non -biodegradable pieces that pose significant
threats to marine and other wildlife from ingestion, and poses an environmental threat to creeks
and waterways due to its potential for clogging estuaries; and
WHEREAS, according to Cal Recycle, polystyrene foam litter contaminates the public
drainage systems, requiring the expenditure of limited public infrastructure maintenance
resources for removal and disposal, and;
WHEREAS, over one hundred -twenty jurisdictions in California have adopted
ordinances banning the use of polystyrene foam packaging, with local and national businesses
successfully replacing polystyrene packaging with affordable, durable, recyclable and/or
biodegradable alternatives; and
WHEREAS, although clean polystyrene is recyclable, there are no curbside polystyrene
recycling programs within Sonoma County due to its low density and high transportation cost;
WHEREAS, Petaluma is situated near the Sonoma Coast and near waterways which
drain to the marine environment, and marine animals and birds often confuse polystyrene foam
pieces with food and ingest them, which often leads to death, according to Environment
America, a non-profit; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Petaluma to preserve natural resources, protect
wildlife and natural habitat, reduce waste, litter and marine pollution and protect the public
health, safety and welfare
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Petaluma as
follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are hereby declared to be true and correct and
hereby incorporated into this ordinance as findings of the City Council.
Section 2. CEQA Compliance. The City Council finds this ordinance is exempt from
environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to
Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California Environmental Code of Regulations because it
can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the ordinance will have a significant
negative effect on the environment, and on the separate but related ground that the ordinance is
an action of the City to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the
environment where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment
in accordance with Section 15308 of the CEQA Guidelines. The restrictions on polystyrene
products contained in the proposed ordinance constitute regulatory procedures for protection of
the environment in accordance with Section 15308 of th3 CEQA Guidelines because the
ordinance provisions will reduce the negative environmental impacts of disposal of polystyrene
products.
Section 3. Authority. The City Council adopts this ordinance in reliance on the City's
police power as a California municipal corporation and charter city pursuant to Article XI,
Sections 5 and 7, of the California Constitution.
Section 4. Chapter 8.17 Entitled "Sale and Use of Polystyrene Foam Products" is hereby
added to the Petaluma Municipal Code to read as follows:
8.17.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the sale and use of specified disposable food service
ware and other products containing polystyrene foam in the city to protect the environment and
the public health, safety and welfare from the environmental impacts of such products. Large
volumes of polystyrene foam products are disposed of in Sonoma County, and such products are
not fully biodegradable, and currently have no locally available, economically feasible recycling
program. Polystyrene foam products also pose a threat to marine and other wildlife as well as to
creeks and waterways and contaminate the public drainage system. This chapter is intended to
reduce the environmental and public health, safety and welfare threats from disposal of
polystyrene foam products.
8.17.020 Definitions.
For purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
A. "City" means the City of Petaluma, California, a California municipal corporation and
charter city, and the area within the territorial limits of the City.
B. "Disposable food service ware" includes all containers, bowls, plates, trays, cartons,
cups, lids, straws, stirrers, forks, spoons, knives, napkins and other food ware items
designed for one-time use for prepared foods, including, without limitation, service ware
for take-out foods and/or leftovers from partially consumed meals prepared by food
providers. The term "disposable food service ware" does not include items composed
entirely of aluminum.
C. "Food provider" means any vendor, business, organization, entity, group or individual,
and includes retail food establishments located or providing food within the city that offer
food or beverages for sale or purchase to the public.
D. "Person" means natural person, joint venture, joint stock company, partnership,
association, club, company, corporation, business, trust, organization, or the manager,
lessee, agent, servant, officer or employee of any of them.
E. "Polystyrene foam" means blown polystyrene and expanded and extruded foams
(sometimes called Styrofoam TM) which are thermoplastic, petrochemical materials
utilizing a styrene monomer processed by any number of techniques including, but not
limited to, fusion of polymer spheres (expandable bead polystyrene), injection molding,
foam molding, and extrusion -blown molding (extruded foam polystyrene). Polystyrene
foam is generally used to make cups, bowls, plates, trays, clamshell containers, meat
trays and egg cartons. Polystyrene products subject to this chapter are those imprinted
with the number 6 resin identification code, as illustrated by the number six inside a
triangle with three arrows (L�).
F. "Prepared food" means food or beverages prepared for consumption within the city,
using any cooking or food preparation technique. Prepared food includes food prepared
for consumption off the food provider's premises, also known as "take-out" food.
G. "Retail vendor" means any store or other business that sells retail goods or merchandise
and that is located or operating within the city.
8.17.020 Prohibited polystyrene food service ware and products.
Beginning on and after May 1, 2020, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, food providers
shall not sell, hand out, give away, distribute or otherwise make available for public or customer
use prepared food in disposable food service ware that contains polystyrene foam.
8.17.030 Prohibited polystyrene retail sales.
Beginning on and after May 1, 2020, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, no retail
vendor shall sell, rent or otherwise provide any disposable food service ware which is composed
I
in whole or in part of polystyrene foam, and no retail vendor shall sell, rent or otherwise provide
the any of following products that contain polystyrene foam:
A. coolers, ice chests, or similar containers, unless they are wholly encapsulated or encased
within a more durable material so as to be durable and reusable;
B. pool or beach toys, not including personal floatation devices such as life jackets; and
C. packing peanuts or other packaging materials.
8.17.040 Exemptions.
A. The City Manager or the City Manager's designee may waive the applicability of this
chapter to food providers and retail vendors for a one-year period upon the City Manager
or City Manager's designee determining, in his or her sole discretion, that this chapter
would create an undue hardship or practical difficulty not generally applicable to other
persons. To be eligible for waiver, food providers and retail vendors must apply in
writing to the City Manager's office documenting how this chapter would create an
undue hardship. Determinations regarding waiver applications shall be in writing.
Waivers may be granted in whole or in part, with or without conditions, and shall expire
one year after issuance without further action of the city. To renew a waiver granted
pursuant to this paragraph, food providers and retail vendors must reapply at least 30
days prior to expiration of the waiver. Renewal waiver applications are subject to the
same requirements as new waiver applications.
B. Foods prepared or packaged outside the city and sold inside the city are exempt from the
provisions of this chapter.
C. Polystyrene products, that such as insulation or personal flotation devices, that are
completely encased in a more durable material are exempt from the provisions of this
chapter. Examples of such exempted products include, but are not limited to, surfboards,
boats, life preservers, construction materials, craft supplies, and coolers in which
polystyrene materials are encased in more durable material.
D. Packaging for raw, uncooked meat and fish is exempt from the provisions of this chapter.
8.17.050 Enforcement and penalties.
A. Informal resolution. The city may in the city's sole discretion seek informal resolution of
violations of this chapter.
10
B. Violations a nuisance. Violations of this chapter are hereby declared to be public
nuisances in accordance with Chapter 1.10 of this code, and subject to enforcement in
accordance with Chapter 1. 10, Code Enforcement Generally, Chapter 1. 13, Violations
Enforced by Civil Action, Chapter 1. 14, Administrative Enforcement, and Chapter 1. 16,
Administrative Citations, of this code.
C. Business license revocation. The city business licenses of persons in violation of this
chapter are subject to suspension or revocation in accordance with Section 6.01.350 of
this code.
8.17.060 No city duty created.
This chapter does not create, and may not be construed so as to create, any city duty to
implement or enforce the requirements of this chapter.
8.17.070 No cause of action against the City.
To the maximum extent permitted by law, nothing in this chapter may be construed to create a
cause of action against the city or a basis for seeking an award of attorneys' fees against the city
pursuant to the private attorney general's statute in California Code of Civil Procedure Section
1021.5 or on any other basis arising from or related to alleged violations of the requirements of
this chapter and/or based on or related to the city's prosecution or enforcement or alleged failure
to prosecute or enforce such alleged violations, and/or based on or related to the city's
implementation or alleged failure to implement the requirements of this chapter.
Section 5. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or the
application thereof to any entity, person or circumstance is held for any reason to be invalid or
unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or
applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council
hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, sentence, clause or
phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences,
clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its
adoption by the City Council. By their express terms, the prohibitions in Sections 8.17.020 and
8.17.030 will not become effective until May 1, 2020.
Section 7. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby directed to post and/or publish this
ordinance or a synopsis for the period and in the manner provided by the City Charter and any
other applicable law. The City Clerk is also hereby directed to file a Notice of Exemption
concerning this ordinance with the Office of the Sonoma County Clerk in accordance with
Section 15062 of the CEQA Guidelines.
INTRODUCED and ordered posted this 21 st day of October 2019.
ADOPTED this _ day of , 2019 by the following vote:
Ayes: Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
ATTEST:
Teresa Barrett, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Claire Cooper, CMC, City Clerk Eric W. Danly, City Attorney
12
Pascoe, Samantha
From: Carol Brandt <carolbrandt@comcast.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2019 1:46 PM
To: Carter, Patrick
Subject: RE: Test Email
---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM. ---
Dear Mr. Carter:
I have a question regarding this proposed ordinance. I see where food/beverage providers will have the option of the 25
cent credit or charge. Does this apply to places like Peet's Coffee? I am pissed with them anyway because they now
hide their straws behind the counter in their effort to "save the planet" yet they have plastic lids, single use wood coffee
stirrers and tiny little plastic things to stick in your plastic coffee lid to keep it from spilling — quite hypocritical in my
opinion as a consumer. My guess is, that if this passes, most vendors won't miss a chance to ding the customer 25 cents
for a lid and 25 cents for a straw and if they do, you can bet they will promptly lose my business.
Also the first part below is very disturbing to me. Prohibiting a provider to give the appropriate tools (straws, lids,
cutlery) to eat/drink their food ONLY upon customer request is just ridiculous. Like the Peet's straw thing, it makes the
customer then feel like they have to ask for one more thing — if you are getting an iced tea "to -go" as is most of the case
at Peet's, then do you think people want to carry their drink (coffee or tea) to their car of back to the office without a lid
or straw? So now as a consumer I will be forced to say "medium iced tea please and include a lid and straw with that and
no, I will not pay you 50 cents for a lid and straw!"
Thank you,
Carol Brandt
Also under the proposal, food/beverage providers would be able to provide straws, lids, cutlery, and
to -go condiment packages only upon request of customers.
Food providers are encouraged (but not required) to provide a $0.25 credit to customers bringing
their own reusable containers, and to charge a $0.25 take-out fee for disposable items to offset the
potential cost difference of compostable or recyclable food service ware.
From: Carter, Patrick[mailto:PCARTER@cityofpetaluma.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2019 1:45 PM
To: carolbrandt@comcast.net
Subject: Test Email
Patrick Carter
Management Analyst II
City of Petaluma ( Public Works & Utilities Dept.
202 N. McDowell Blvd., Petaluma, CA 94954
707-778-4560
pcarter@citvofpetaIuma.org
Regular Schedule: M-Th
m
City of Petaluma records, including emails, are subject to the California Public Records Act. Unless exemptions apply, this email, any attachments and any replies are
subject to disclosure on request, and neither the sender nor any recipients should have any expectation of privacy regarding the contents of such communications
Pascoe, Samantha
From: lendri purcell <lendrip@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 10:52 PM
To: Carter, Patrick
Cc: Trathen; Adriann Saslow; Nichole Warwick; Kerry Fugett; D'Lynda; Margie Helm;john crowley; Teresa
Barrett; Bev Alexander
Subject: Re: what would it take for Petaluma to ban the sale of styrofoam and other single use plastics?
Should we look city-wide or county -wide?
---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM.
Hi Patrick,
Thank you for this information. Do you anticipate there being a need for the Petaluma community to express broad
support for a local ban? If so, do you feel a petition would be helpful? Also, has there been talk about bans of other
single use plastic items (straws, plastic bags, etc. non -biodegradable take away cups and plates, etc.). Also, Is there
anything written in on enforcement? For instance, I think we have a plastic bag ban but somehow Target may have
found a loophole by calling theirs reusable. Sincerely, Lendri Purcell
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 3:18 PM Carter, Patrick <PCARTER@citvofpetaluma.org> wrote:
Hello all,
As mentioned in the first email below, there is a countywide effort for all cities and the county to consider an ordinance
to ban single -use polystyrene products from retail sale and use in municipal facilities. The ordinance adopted by
Sebastopol was created by Zero Waste Sonoma (htt s: /zerowastesonoma.gov ), who recommended it be considered
throughout Sonoma County.
Petaluma staff is working to get the polystyrene ordinance on the City Council agenda for September 9, 2019. As the
ordinance is based off the same model, the Petaluma ordinance will start off nearly identical to the Sebastopol
ordinance. Ultimately, the City Council will decide what changes would be made or whether the ordinance is passed.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions on this subject.
Thank you!
Patrick Carter
Management Analyst II
City of Petaluma I Public Works & Utilities Dept.
202 N. McDowell Blvd., Petaluma, CA 94954
UWANT-IM001
ocarter@cityofpetaIuma.org
Regular Schedule: M -Th
City of Petaluma records, including emails, are subject to the California Public Records Act. Unless exemptions apply, this email, any attachments and any replies are
subject to disclosure on request, and neither the sender nor any recipients should have any expectation of privacy regarding the contents of such communications
From: Trathen <trathen@dailvacts.org>
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2019 2:00 PM
To: lendri Purcell <lendrip@gmail.com>; Adriann Saslow<factscommunications@gmaii.com>; Nichole Warwick
<nicholewarwick@Rmail.com>; Kerry Fugett <kerry@dailvacts.ora>; D'Lynda <dlyndaf@gmail.com>; Margie Helm
<helmatkin@earthlink.net>; john Crowley <iohn@aclus.com>; Teresa Barrett <teresa4petaluma@comcast.net>; Bev
Alexander <smileybev@gmail.com>
Cc: Carter, Patrick <PCARTER@citvofpetal uma.org>
Subject: Re: what would it take for Petaluma to ban the sale of styrofoam and other single use plastics? Should we look
city-wide or county -wide?
---`Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR ENMAII.
SYSTEM. ---
Hi Lendri,
I spoke with Patrick Carter at the City after the last Council meeting and I believe he maybe working on this for
the city. I've cc'd him here.
Take heart, take action
Trathen
Trathen Heckman
Executive Director, Daily Acts
(707) 789-9664
`vvvw. dailvac ts. orL,
From: Lendri Purcell <lendrip@t;mail.com>
Date: Monday, July 22, 2019 at 10:18 AM
To: Adriann Saslow<factscommunications@gmail.com>, Nichole Warwick <nicholewarwick@gmail.com>, Trathen
Heckman <trathen@dailvacts.org>, Kerry Fugett <kerry@dailvacts.org>, D'Lynda Fischer <dlvndaf@t;mail.com>,
Marjorie Helm <helmatkin@earth link.net>, John Crowley <iohn@aqus.com>, Teresa Barrett
<teresa4petaluma@comcast.net>, Bev Alexander <smilevbev@gmail.com>
Subject: what would it take for Petaluma to ban the sale of styrofoam and other single use plastics? Should we look
city-wide or county -wide?
Hi Friends,
I wanted to open this conversation up to some other great minds. I am wondering if single use
plastic bans are being considered in city-wide and county -wide climate action plans. For instance, as
you probably know, the City of Sebastopol has adopted a Styrofoam ban. It applies not just to
official City business, but also to retailers who would sell it or restaurants that would pack with
it. There are a lot of easy Styrofoam alternatives and since its made of plastic, it is toxic for human
health, ocean life and it contributes to global warming. Is anyone working on banning Styrofoam and
single use plastics in general at the city of county level? If not, what is the best way to engage in this?
Sincerely, Lendri
httt)s://`ti-\N-\v.ansN\-ers.com/O/NX'hat is global warminv, and how does styrofoam contribute to global Nvarmi
9
Vice President, Jonas Philanthropies
Co -Founder, FACTS (Families Advocating for Chemical and Toxics Safety)
www.fami|yactsorR
|endrip@Kmai|zum
Democracy isn't aspectator sport. USE [TORLOSE IT.
September 18,ZO19
City ofPetaluma
Mayor Teresa Barrett and City Council
11English Street
Petaluma, CA 95952
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
The Petaluma Area Chamber of Commerce would like to go on record in support of the
goal of limiting the use of polystyrene,
The draft ordinance prepared hvCity staff, based onthe model ordinance prepared 6m
the Sonoma County Waste Management Agency, is a reasonable starting point. However,
asdiscussed with Patrick Carter atthe Chamber's Government Affairs Committee
meeting, certain changes need to be made for the ordinance to be acceptable —
Remove §06 ("Required Compostable Or Recyclable Disposable Food Service Ware") Lf -
until the City has had
f-untUtheCityhashad anopportunity tocanvas the numerous businesses affected
bythe provision and assess the economic impact Vnthese businesses.
• Add a provision that makes clear there is no private right of action to enforce the
ordinance.
• Add aprovision that makes clear that the public does not have aright toseek a
writ of mandamus to require the City to enforce the ordinance.
City staff has stated that the City will use education as the primary means of enforcing the
ordinance. The Chamber agrees that fines should bmasecondary enforcement method
only after efforts to educate have not been successful in creating compliance with the
ordinance.
The Chamber remains concerned that City is addressing environmental issues on a
piecemeal basis. Ultimately, this kind of targeted legislation will create a material burden
onlocal businesses. Rather than legislation targeted atone material that has anegative
environmental impact, the Chamber encourages the City to work with this business
community to define a comprehensive strategy for managing the need for, and
minimizing the economic impact of, reducing waste, increasing recycling and integrating
composting into business practices,
Yours Truhy,
04L-4�—�v�~_�
OnitaPellegrini, "(CEOn
CEO Petaluma Area Chamber ofCommerce
Warren Dranit, Chairperson
Government Affairs Committee
E
Y
? � '' , ti �
w e � �� � �'
f
�t � .
t C, � r�
p �
i
^ .
�e t
i
�
v
.,{{,
gyp;
h sgy qq ,
04
CA
..� � �-, �^ � �•^'- + i��d $., � ��� alw! d, t �'^ `� $' ; � e'�'�',r � 9 �.. �, �'br; ^d ' 'i—r. ¢ ,q�' --.. ,cwt , -_.P..,
)0 .a
9 I
e)AA
a ,
;4
�.i
Cf,u'Y.,
p b
VI
n �� � V� �'ad ti•::,�° �� ',,; =,x, "4 $�"��, 3,^. � � a, � � J m� q y, , �.,. m ' .n .�^✓a "d, 4 °..�.�
e p o
x
.''
191,
vv 0
VY/
4-7
/Vj
an
f
ci
1 j
fit;
hy,
1
tl
Will
()
lo
q 1 k (1, 1 )) ,
MA
I
wll"MWMJMl! Avmll� Tam
oC f"eq+ I- ''I'l
�YIIAY
m
e y
t is J\A
r
e
1 p a h
a 4
5
Y
1 - G n
At
OWN, -
b" All a ':.
'g' y r
YY 4'i rKf I �4 N4 a,Y
_fi.w., ,. "
yy
(A
jry)
5 Cal
rl V) (I
P. (I o
r e '
I2 Wof
new how, i W 1- 1
x
1.), o\AA, -v'P)PIA 1 0)
61
wear,
Oc zoo 1.231)
1 ACV).
I rj
O(o'
tA
e-
�)(A
\Jv
M' 1 ,i
zj� �:
C((6
Q -4�
Ol o
06
OEM
-7 e
; N�
� i
i.
s
F � �g r � � i ' yj� � . � {p /j A
w _, r L d _ _ __ �. __ _.
ri�, � � - _. _ . _ .0 .
ry i A
a r V) v
n nt
p' eall
7, ve
_pp r �;
b i R ? der ' i' i ,_ �''�m' o s, � � �'',{ Y
-s
�^,
u' pp ;
jt
:'1 ` �
.. - � 7' 1
4...
# �� i ° � i
w
-IJ
J
C4
�'i
ro u",
w
ivi
r ` i
_....._. _...
9�
.;�--�
...
'{ t i
� p
9
,. �
k +
t
i Y
d ! a i
� ' a �
r
,�
.
1
f tt
� Y
t
,
C Y_
C a r Alta, Or b F
M
T'
5 1.i ', t Cuv C
1 p0he I" rf—A 100 1 4 .
RA it OPI I A r"r
o
9 jyjako"I our"( C I I ow) elf a Voy I j
pit pol I no.,
1"Hij cW4,10 lei
" I W
j41v nv v r'.rLjr WrAl I c 1 0 ol IN
Q MFUM C. VIA 1 11 n
y qovy I p 1 (vr I j n 1 0 "1
r C A
tor
WN,
A
Jj
pit
1. 0. 1 \1 ( J
ty" y01;
A AT. iii
-
j Y,
wr
lid top J
AV
Vic rA
Vc' (I
Vv/ at, j pm 0 too ON
(Iwl 1;
RA c
wK IV! lox 01
it
v
r "
af, A
a ryss-
Po
L t M
I
c-) c) (".I. (k ra V) of CA I v rm rip
uk) 0
c) n
fh
befo 0 j o (I
d
All
ljld (5 �j
Urn ;VP"
111,(, S(kn4a barbra, wag
p(--flw)al CA VMT
nA
I�M
—I(
C
( AYA t v
14
f"
( (x" � i
1a�.
o
AN
Any - AA geti
sky jy) lot,
Wool, ln�
PAN
,,Y1 t�AvV3 ,,�Ntj couls; I s
UP "k I 114 101
10 sho COMAS c1sh, wh qp�j j -'-f) (/
I% m.
CA ya
UNMOOR!
- I )� - -
gqsrA.'e, X-,4 0
4�,A-cA (/A r) cj
°
nY ,
c _ ► �P..
4 �
u t
1
mix
CLEO It
'„ °�-R��CR'#�° ' i t.1 .,Y SS"°q� Sq "''S� f �'r' `t,.,ti�+'.�" �• 4�_ " ��
�O
t g$ y
CyS, �h ' i y+,y, o 'Y �, M
t`t, M1 i \ t .. a�ym,x
Viv
how gwNW &ah yAa{" lot
w,
fly6d�uR
PRO
e C 1 �4'�'k ���' �y'w
S r'g c . gym;
1 1
AOL
.k f, (lek
14�
1 t "sa
y
t`
oci Mark
01:
.,
e
�a Vit:
@ 1V�
now
p
K I X P
cr1i , n1,% 4,
� 1
4 .
LIP
An
CAM
y
w
s
. Pm
dp �
.r
w
°
q �r
s
F
Ott
fill
{
�`...�f fes.
S.
a,.,
. , anj for . , , gym;
y
w P .It°i.,t.��t } 'YZ
all l .. $ g 1,71Poll
CAI
:�k6 ,Clr"�
w
i
sray..aw'ru_____. e. w -ac sw»i.. .. "+1''-..r-^..�. i, � . utLw•x " ..
VJI't hx ao"I ro'll-I)l
pIf (,(6 C-
t/kAp"L 0o(
ph,41�qfl,_
BW., IMih
11
S
C7
n
�A-4
'i a V 'b Oy �� b 4 m �'m�". k N� oC' 'Y�+' � � ri R y-} •S rY RV d y �r �;'i ` e "� y ^o- 'aw'A
'" r '} , 4" �;x f P,�}� "'n�'cd`, C'•�,�'a'Y <a" to {r % R a ,^ b �' "'
^
yp'
I
r
lot
PTA 0
„
V d8N
I v
O a.
P P n
K W,
Al v
v
N
.
' , � $•�� v
r,.f � r
Y r,
r �
Y
„
ddd
' k .
V -•,r" 0 j
I.w d i'' �
a, �i ��� .. I. orf,,
� a�.e� �ti q,{ 1,.+� �'f� ��
.>t � C,�•—�.�„ f�
� ,
x
k�
r u
/ x 4
4'.
r
y
n,
lei
a
p
^
i
I p.
t
�t
1' n 7 § , °45d'
5, °Z,
i.l
A
�A-4
'i a V 'b Oy �� b 4 m �'m�". k N� oC' 'Y�+' � � ri R y-} •S rY RV d y �r �;'i ` e "� y ^o- 'aw'A
'" r '} , 4" �;x f P,�}� "'n�'cd`, C'•�,�'a'Y <a" to {r % R a ,^ b �' "'
16
l')
To
15 4-
SI�C�'Y �C'/
Vlt-
i
�f`�w.. �� ``�
���
,,..
', �,r`j
tt
e
a,
���
C
� i'` '� .F
Hr
r.
q
NW i
w
r k
ry "
M �
f,
r.
q
NW i
w
r k
ry "
M �
9��.`�r;� �'1_a
jj t
�'`
�___ __ i r _.. - - --7 , _ _
_�
Mi ?
'w it ,,, � H � `�
9 � .,, � �o
� 4
d.
u
� µ
�. i" e
__. _.�._. e,.._ - � - .,. ,�
,,.- -
�
�
-
.� �
AA
wm
a c,-
tQJ,
ep
h .j
�ck
09.
10
Jill j
I aO y
N
a
I
0 0 G
A�a
elf t ii�?1{��"',4� i4'.� 'a_°I`"; -'�,.� st ;�., _ t wti .�<.�!I 'j
13
Ilk, 00
13 it LAW
Als—
yml�
cl 1. 1�
a'
F
o� 1 .� p R. r' (� � d � e a' �pwtix�M�• rq
F
q
4 _ min
w � �' rs
t
1 ,
r.
i —
F'
Pascoe, Samantha
From: Michael Thoma <mpj.thoma@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2019 7:28 PM
To: Carter, Patrick
Subject: I support the ban on POLYSTYRENE FOAM
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM. ---
Yes yes yes.
Thank you in advance.
I live on Skillman Ln so I'm outside the Petaluma City Limits but I order from restaurants that will be impacted by the
ban. Just less junk I put into the landfill.
A
Michael
Michael P. Thoma, CPCC
Executive Coach / Career Mentor
Mobile 1.650.922.3898
Office 1.707.981.8735
Pacific Time Zone
1
Pascoe, Samantha
From: Eugene Rougeau <edwilson301@outlook.com>
Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 8:13 AM
To: Carter, Patrick
Subject: Re: Polystyrene
---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM. ---
Patrick,
If it is voluntary, there would be no need to include it in the measure. The intention is to introduce the idea and then
slowly make it part of the expectation.
Sincerely,
Eugene Rougeau
E D Wilson Roses, Oddities & Amazing Things
From: Carter, Patrick <PCARTER@cityofpetaluma.org>
Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 7:50:58 AM
To: Eugene Rougeau <edwilson301@outlook.com>
Subject: RE: Polystyrene
Good morning Mr. Rougeau,
Thank you for your response. It will be noted in the record when this item comes before the City Council.
Please correct me if I misinterpret your response, but I want to make it clear that there is no $0.25 tax associated with
this item. The only reference to $0.25 in the draft version of the ordinance was a suggestion, a voluntary measure to
both encourage the use of reusable containers and discourage single use items. As that suggestion is not mandatory,
there is no tax.
I hope this helps clarify the ordinance. Please feel free to contact me with any other questions or comments you may
have on this issue.
Thank you!
Patrick Carter
Senior Management Analyst
City of Petaluma ( City Manager's Office
11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952
707-778-4560
pcarter@citvofpetaluma.org
Regular Schedule: M -Th
City of Petaluma records, including emails, are subject to the California Public Records Act. Unless exemptions apply, this email, any attachments and any replies are
subject to disclosure on request, and neither the sender nor any recipients should have any expectation of privacy regarding the contents of such communications
1
From: Eugene Rougeau <edwilson301@outlook.com>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:08 PM
To: Carter, Patrick <PCARTER@cityofpetaluma.org>
Subject: Polystyrene
---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM. ---
Hello,
Although I do support good environmental standards, I have a couple of questions as well as concerns and a very strong
opinion.
The majority of my vendors use packing that is good for the environment. A very few, however use polystyrene to
protect more fragile material. "Peanuts" and form fitting polystyrene seem to be their choice, which 1 have little say. I
could shop elsewhere, but vendor packing material isn't high on my to do list.
After the decision to increase the minimum wage this year. 1 have decided to voice my opinion. I want smaller
government, not more mandates. It should be up to the vendor to hear their clients wishes on what to have or not to
have. A smart business looks for popular consensus. I hear my clients and I respond to their needs as best 1 can.
Seriously, add $0.25 to cover waste cost?
In addition, to require $0.25 fee on top to cover refuge processing is ridiculous. As a business, we pay a premium for
waste disposal as compared to the community. To pass more cost onto the customer shows that our city council
believes in big government and more taxes, not ways to bring dollars into our city from customers and tourists. Can we
make business any more difficult?
I won't be directly impacted by your rule if this passes, but I will suffer because the dollar will be spent in a more
affordable community. I will be watching who and how things will be voted upon by our council. If they want to be voted
out of office, this is one more way to accomplish that goal.
Sincerely,
Eugene Rougeau
E D Wilson Roses, Oddities & Amazing Things
Pascoe, Samantha
From: John Steiner <jmsstuff@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2019 11:57 AM
To: Carter, Patrick
Subject: Re: POLYSTYRENE BAN ORDINANCE
---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM. ---
My wife and I support the ban.
John Steiner
Petaluma