> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Council declares war on ’foam - URL: https://www.smdp.com/council-declares-war-on-foam/ - Published: 2006-11-14T16:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-23T22:06:38.000Z - Author: Kevin Herrera - Tags: Government & Politics, Santa Monica, #archive-import *The foam party appears over for restaurants* CITY HALL — Elected officials are looking to put the squeeze on Styrofoam. Restaurants may have to consider cutting back on their take-out menus as City Hall mulls a sweeping ban of non-recyclable plastic food containers in an effort to protect the environment. Citing numerous studies documenting the prevalence of expanded polystyrene and other non-recy-clables landing in storm drains and on beaches, costing thousands in clean-up costs, the council directed staff in June to draft a law banning the products heavily used by restaurants, delis, grocery stores and other groups serving prepared food. The law being considered tonight also forces City Hall to serve food only in containers made from biodegradable materials. City staff was also considering imposing a fee or tax on plastic shopping bags, and possibly a mandatory recycling program for bag providers, but legislation signed into law in September by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger prohibited local agencies from enforcing such a law until 2013. If the council approves the ban on non-recyclable plastic food containers, they will join elected bodies in more than 100 other cities across the country that have passed a similar law. When the ban was first proposed, restaurant owners, backed by the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce and the California Restaurant Association (CRA), argued against it, claiming it would hurt them financially because of the added costs associated with more environmentally friendly materials that they say have been found to not perform as well as Styrofoam and other plastics. “Cost is not so much of an issue as having alternatives that work,” said Jordan Traverso, a spokesperson for the CRA, which represents more than 22,000 food-service businesses statewide. “Other products don’t insulate. They don’t keep the hot in or the cold. A very good example are the paper cups at Starbucks. Without a jacket the heat escapes rather quickly.” Supporters of the ban said alternatives do exist that can insulate just as well and are becoming cheaper given the increase in costs for plastic products, which are made from petroleum, a non-renewable resource. Despite that, Alfonso Alvarez, manager of Café Crepe on the Third Street Promenade, said he was concerned about a drop off in customers, especially now that the council has banned smoking in all outdoor dining areas and the promenade. “I’m all for protecting the environment, but we need to find alternatives that work and that won’t hurt our bottom line,” Alvarez said. “It really is all about cost. Restaurants operate with a very thin profit margin. You start messing with that and you could force some out of business.” Elected officials and other supporters said the environmental costs associated with non-recyclable plastics far outweigh costs businesses may incur considering Styrofoam, even when it is disposed of properly, can break into thousands of smaller pieces that are so light they float on water and are easily carried by the wind. Marine animals and birds have been found to consume the plastic foam which results in reduced appetite and nutrient absorption, even possible starvation. The ban would apply to plates, bowls, cups, trays and hinged or lidded containers, often called “turtle shell” containers. The ban does not include single-use disposable items such as straws, cup lids or plastic utensils. To help businesses comply, the ordinance being proposed allows for a one year renewable, economic-hardship exemption, which would include evidence of no reasonably feasible alternatives available. The decision to provide exemptions will be made by the director of environmental and public works management or his or her designee and will be based on an exemption application that includes documentation showing factual support for the claimed exemption. For the first violation, a written notice will be issued. The penalty for subsequent violations will be a fine in increasing amounts from $100 to $500, depending on the number of times the food provider has previously violated the law. Enforcement will be primarily conducted on a complaint basis and will be carried out by existing inspectors with public works. The ban will go into effect one year after council adoption, during which time city staff will conduct workshops and other outreach to assist food providers in identifying alternatives to plastic foam and other non-recyclables. It is estimated that implementing the ban will cost roughly $31,000 a year. If the ban is approved, Jim Lynch, president of the chamber, said he would like to see City Hall expand recycling programs so that recyclable items do not end up in the Santa Monica Bay. “This is about litter, getting rid of it properly,” said Lynch, who has agreed to work with City Hall in informing chamber members about the ban. “This will do nothing if we can’t get more people to recycle.” *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on November 14, 2006.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/111406.pdf?ref=smdp.com)