FOAM CONTAINER BAN COULD RETURN

S.D. halted enforcement after lawsuit filed, but new study points to restart

Two years after San Diego halted enforcement of the city’s controversial ban on polystyrene foam food containers and similar products, city officials say they’ve completed a comprehensive analysis that seems likely to revive the ban.

The 224-page analysis, called an environmental impact report, concludes that there would be a minimal increase in greenhouse gases if San Diego follows through on forcing restaurants and other businesses to switch away from foam.

The California Restaurant Association, which filed a lawsuit that prompted the new analysis, argues in its litigation that replacing foam with heavier products like paper would spike greenhouse gas emissions by placing added strain on delivery trucks.

Environmental groups, which strongly support the city’s proposed ban, have called that argument disingenuous and counterintuitive, because the goal of banning foam products is to protect the environment.

Polystyrene is not biodegradable and is blamed for poisoning fish and other marine life and damaging the health of people who eat seafood. The material continuously breaks into steadily smaller pieces, allowing it to enter local waterways and easily get consumed by wildlife.

If the ban were revived, it would apply to food containers used by restaurants, polystyrene egg cartons, coolers, ice chests, pool toys, dock floats and mooring buoys. Residents wouldn’t be able to use those products and retail stores wouldn’t be able to sell them.

The San Diego law also would make it illegal to distribute plastic utensils or straws, unless requested by customers.

The owners of some small restaurants that still use foam products to save money asserted that the ban was an unfair hardship, and then the restaurant association

filed suit in spring 2019 just as the ban was taking full effect.

The new analysis shows that the ban could move forward without any fundamental changes, said Heidi Vonblum, the city’s deputy director of environmental policy and public spaces.

“Even projecting that worst-case scenario, the increase in greenhouse gas emissions is very, very, very minimal,” Vonblum said this week. “There’s nothing that turned up during the more detailed environmental analysis that would necessitate a change to what was initially brought forward.”

But Vonblum said city officials are taking the conservative approach in the environmental impact report by saying that the ban could have “potentially significant” impacts.

They aren’t proposing any mitigation measures or changes to the ban, but they included in the analysis two alternatives to the city’s proposed ban.

One proposal is to enact the ban along with a “codified list” of acceptable alternative materials to use in place of foam products. The second proposal includes that list and would add a 25cent fee on businesses for each disposable cup they use.

Vonblum said the final legislation the city enacts could change if new ideas or new creative solutions emerge during the final approval process, which is likely to take place this spring.

The environmental impact report was released for public review Dec. 10, launching a 45-day comment period that ends Jan. 24. City officials must then respond to those comments and present a final EIR to the City Council for approval.

Alex Ferron, chair of the San Diego Surfrider Foundation, said Friday it has been frustrating to see San Diego’s polystyrene ban stalled for so long when more than 100 other California cities have bans in place.

San Diego, the largest city in the state to adopt a ban, was the first and only city to face a lawsuit for not doing an environmental impact report.

The restaurant association, a statewide lobbying group, has managed to delay implementation of the ban nearly three years, partly thanks to COVID-19 delays.

“They tried to kick the can down the road and they did it at the perfect time,” Ferron said. “It’s good to see this finally move forward. San Diego gets lots of attention because it’s such a big city.”

The restaurant association did not respond Friday to requests for comment.

Nearly all national and regional restaurant chains long ago stopped using polystyrene in response to lobbying from environmental groups and backlash from customers concerned that foam isn’t biodegradable.

But many taco shops, pizza parlors, convenience stores and other small businesses continue to use foam products to save money.

To soften the impact on those businesses, San Diego’s ban included phased implementation of the new rules and the opportunity for businesses to apply for hardship exemptions. It’s unclear whether the three-year delay will make the council less inclined to be so generous.

Ken Prue, a manager in the city’s Environmental Services Department, said there hasn’t been outreach to affected businesses during the creation of the EIR.

“It’s kind of been a holding pattern to determine what the next steps are, if any,” he said this week.