(May 26, 2011) Legislation that threatens thousands of California jobs by banning food vendors from using polystyrene foam food service containers is awaiting action by the Senate.

The California Chamber of Commerce opposes SB 568 (Lowenthal; D-Long Beach), a “job killer” bill, which inappropriately bans all food vendors from using polystyrene foam food service containers, ignoring the numerous environmental benefits associated with polystyrene products and threatening thousands of manufacturing jobs within the state.

The CalChamber and a coalition of 14 other business groups are urging senators to oppose SB 568. The coalition points out that legislation addressing takeout food packaging should focus on recycling, help grow manufacturing jobs and reduce the already-high restaurant operating costs. SB 568 fails on all these counts.

Reasons to Oppose

• Hundreds of good-paying manufacturing jobs at California based companies that make polystyrene containers will be in jeopardy if SB 568 is passed. As a result, payroll and property taxes will diminish and goods and services provided by suppliers, vendors and others will decline as well. Can California afford a decline in state tax revenue and in today’s economy, where would these laid-off employees find equivalent-paying work?
• Restaurants, caterers, delis and other food providers will see their operating costs rise as polystyrene containers are two to three times more affordable than replacement products, which in some cases do not perform as well, especially for very hot and cold food and beverages. This could result in reduced worker hours, potential employee cutbacks at restaurants that are operating on thin margins and higher costs for consumers. 
• Foam recycling is on the rise with more than 40 California cities now having access to curbside recycling for protective foam packaging, as well as clean food service foam. Businesses that recycle polystyrene into products like picture frames and crown molding also will suffer. All polystyrene is about 1 percent of the entire waste steam. The foam food service packaging targeted by SB 568 makes up only a third of that 1 percent. Promoting recycling programs instead could help the environment and help create more jobs.
• Banning polystyrene does not reduce litter. The city of San Francisco banned polystyrene containers, but according to a 2008 litter audit conducted for the city, paper cup litter increased after the ban was enacted. Bans result in litter substitution, not elimination. 
• The bill exempts correctional facilities but ignores higher costs for state agencies, schools, universities. A Bay Area hospital reported that its costs would rise by $140,000 to purchase alternative food packaging products if a similar, local ordinance was passed.

Action Needed

Staff Contact: Brenda M. Coleman