Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Status Report on Single-Use Plastic Carryout Bags Prohibition 05-06-14

Status Report on Single-Use Plastic Carryout Bags Prohibition 05-06-14

Ratings: (0)|Views: 15|Likes:
Published by L. A. Paterson
Carmel City Council Agenda Item
Carmel City Council Agenda Item

More info:

Published by: L. A. Paterson on May 06, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/06/2014

pdf

text

original

 
76
CITY
OF
CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Council Report
ay
6
2014
To
Honorable
ayor
and Members
of
the
City Council
From:
Jason
Stilwell, City Administrator
Submitted by:
Rob
Mullane,
AICP
Community Planning and Building Director
Subject:
Status Report on Single-
Use
Plastic Carryout
Bags
Prohibition
Recommendation:
Receive a status
report
on implementation
of
the
City s
Si
ngle-
Use
Pla
stic Carryout
Bags
Ordinance
Executive Summary:
On
July
3
2012,
the
City Council adopted an ordinance (Ordinance 2012-04)
that
prohibited single-use plastic
ca
r
ryout
bags
with
limited exceptions. The
new
carry
out
bag regulations have been in effect since February 3, 2013. The Council requested a status
report
on
the
effectiveness
of
the
Ordinance
at
approximately
th
e one-year mark
of
the
programs implementation. Several
other
local jurisdictions in our area either
ha
ve
or
are de
ve
loping similar bans on single-use plastic
bags
, and
the
State Legislature is considering a State-wide ban.
Analysis Discussion:
Ordinance 2012-04 established a
new
chapter in Title 8
of
the City s
unic
ipal Code: Chapter 8.74. Single-Use Plastic Carryout
Bags. Th
is chapter
is
included as Attachment
A
The n
ew
regulations, which
went
into
effect on July
3
2012: • Eliminated
the
use
of
single-use plastic bags by retail establishments
with
some exceptio
ns
; and • Encouraged
the
use
of
reusable bags In deliberating
the
Ordinance
in
2012,
the
Council considered
but
ultimately
did
not
include a requirement
to
charge a small fee
for
each paper bag distributed. The fee was
to
encou
rage
customers
to
bring
their
own reusable bags
or
decline a bag altogether. Ul
timately
,
the
City Council
omitted
a paper bag fee component.
1
 
77
In
the
adoption hearing on July
3
201
2
the
Council identified
th
ree areas where the effectiveness
of
the
Ordi
na
nce could be measured. These three measures
of
effectiveness were:
the
type
of
bags
that
the City's businesses are using
the
type
of
bags
that
customers are using
the
type
of
bags
that
are being collected on
the
beach
Compliance
and
Effectiveness
Compliance with the prohibition on single-u
se
plastic carryout
bags
has
been very
good 
with City
staff
receiving very
few
complaints
of
noncompliance. Members
from
Save
our
Shores have collected data on the effectiv
eness
of
the
ordinance
to
encourage use
of
reusable bags and have expressed a desire
for
the City Council
to
revisit the per-bag fee component. Recent correspondence
from
Save
our
Shores including a comparative pre-ban and post-ban analysis
of
the
frequency
that
shoppers in Carmel use reusable
bags
or
no bags
is
provided
as
Attachment
B.
Legislature
at
the
Local
and tate
L
ev
el
Several
other
local jurisdictions including many in
onterey
and Santa Cruz Counties have similar bans on single-use plastic
ca
rr
yout
bags.
ost
of
these local bans do require
that
merchants charge a per-bag fee.
In
addition, the State Legislature
is
working on a
potent
i
al
State-wide singleuse plastic carryout bag ban
SB
270
Padilla). The current version
of
thi
s legislation, which
is
included
as
Attachment
C
would require a 0.10 perbag fee. The current version
of
SB
270 would allow cities and counties
with
local plastic bag ordinances
that
were adopted
prior
to
September 2014
to
continue
to
enforce these local ordinances. However, any modifications
to
such a local ordinance after September
1 
2014 would need
to
be consistent
with
the
new legislation,
if
passed. The pertinent section
that
di
scusses
preemption
is
Section 42287 (c). The County
of ont
erey Board
of
Supervisors on March
18 2014
decided
to
proceed
with
the
consideration a reusable bag ordinance that
would
apply
to
the unincorporated areas
of
onterey
County. The
intent
is
to
get
a locally
-a
dopted ordinance in place
prior
to
any pre-emption by
th
e
po
ss
ible passage
of
SB
270. County
staff
have asked if any
of
the
2
 
78
Alternatives:
iscal
Impact:
cities
within onterey
County would like
to
collaborate on and participate in the development
of
a
new
ordinance. The
letter from onterey
County is included
as
Attachme
nt
D.
The Council could direct
staff
to
bring
forth
an
ordinan
ce
amendment
for
revisions
to the
existing ordinance. This would need
to
be adopted
prior
to
September
1
2014 in
order
for
the
City
to
avoid pre-emption by any
new
State legislation. Should this alternative be selected
it
would
entail a new unanticipated undertaking requiring staff and public outreach efforts. There are no significant costs
with
monitoring
the
compliance
with
this ordinance. Reports
of
non-compliance are rare and are investigated
as
part
of
the normal workload
of
Code Compliance staff. Should
the
Council direct staff
to
revise
the
Ordinance this could be included
as
an additional activity
of
the
City. Additional
CEQA
analysis may be required however and
the
cost
of
this environmental analysis
is
unknown
but
likely would be approximately
10,000
or
l
ess
.
Previous Council Action Decision History: Attachments:
The City Council adopted Ordinance 2012-04 on July
3
2012. There
wa
s also a Council workshop related
to
possible alternatives
to
a mandatory ban on single-use plastic carryout
bags
on July
2
2012. The Council continued this item
as
part
of
agenda management on March
4
2014. Attachment Single-Use
Pla
s
tic
Carryout
Bags
Ordinance Attachment
B
Recent Correspondence
from
Save
our
Shores regarding
the
Ordinance Attachment
C
Current Version
of
SB
270 Attachment
D
April 8 2014
letter
from
onterey
County
Reviewed
by
City
dministr tor
 
City Attorney
D
Adm
inis
tr
ative
Services
D
Asst.
City
Admin.
D
Dir
of
CPB
Dir
of
Public
Svcs
D
Public
Safe
ty Dir
D
Library
Dir
D
Other
D

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->