Calif. Puts Hold on Foam Takeout Ban

Legislation banning polystyrene takeout food packaging in California has been placed on hold and won’t be voted on this year. Photo: Flickr/Pierre LaScott

Legislation that would have made California the first state to ban polystyrene takeout food packaging has been placed on hold and won’t be voted on this year.

State Senator Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), who originally introduced the bill, placed Senate Bill (SB) 568 on the inactive file, believing the measure didn’t have enough votes to pass the state Assembly floor at this time, according to advocacy group Californians Against Waste.

But SB 568 isn’t dead, the group says.

“The California State Legislature runs on a two-year cycle, with 2011 being the first year of the current session… inactive bills can be taken up after the session reconvenes next January in the same location that the bills were last placed, without having to start over as a new bill,” Californians Against Waste writes on its website.

To become law, the state Assembly must vote to pass SB 568 next year, before it heads back to the Senate to vote on any Assembly amendments and then finally to the governor’s desk for approval.

SEE: 3 Ways to Reduce Your Takeout Waste

In June, the state Senate had approved the legislation that would prohibit restaurants and other food vendors from distributing prepared food in single-use plastic #6 polystyrene cups, bowls, plates, trays or clamshell containers.

The ban would take effect in 2016 for most businesses, but they could continue to use foam takeout packaging if their jurisdiction establishes a recycling program for polystyrene and 60 percent of the material is recycled.

School districts would have until 2017 to comply with the law or set up a polystyrene recycling program.

Environmental groups and various cities supported the bill, citing the material’s impact on marine life and a lack of convenient recycling programs, while organizations such as the American Chemistry Council and the California Chamber of Commerce opposed the legislation, saying the ban will increase businesses’ operating costs and threaten jobs.