Styrofoam Ban To Go To Pittsfield Council Without Subcommittee Support
 Charles Lake said he suffered a number of health issues because of the chemicals in the containers. |
The ban on what is better known as Styrofoam is eyed to extend only to restaurant to-go containers. Proponents and opponents have argued over the matter for more than two years through a number of commissions. The matter will finally go before the City Council.
The ordinance has received endorsement from the Green Commission. But with a 3-2 vote, the City Council's Ordinance and Rules subcommittee filed the petition. Now it will be up to the full council to determine the fate of the proposed law.
"Let's just get it to the full council and have a full discussion," said Ward 5 Councilor Jonathan Lothrop, who along with Councilor at Large Kathleen Amuso voted against filing the petition.
For Lothrop, the issues of litter and health exceeds the impacts the ban will have on businesses. He said the trend is of companies moving away from the containers and there have been a number of products throughout the years that were OK at the time but then found to be hazardous - such as polychlorinated biphenyls and leaded gasoline.
He said it is up to communities to ban hazardous materials and the federal and state governments will follow. Council President Melissa Mazzeo, however, said Massachusetts is already considering a statewide ban and the city should wait for that.
"It may come to become a statewide ban or a federal ban," Mazzeo said. "I didn't really want to sit down and say we are going to ban it. You hear so many different sides."
Mazzeo said businesses and residents are smart enough to make their own decisions. Ward 2 Councilor Kevin Morandi said ultimately a ban would restrict businesses from choosing a product, which could be detrimental to those small companies that would be force to buy more expensive materials.
"It is taking a choice away and to me, that is something that shouldn't be taken away," Morandi said. "I don't think any business should have a choice taken away from them. If they don't want to use Styrofoam then they don't have to."
That sentiment is what attorney Matthew Fisher, who represents the Dart Container Corp., told the committee.
"This is ultimately a tax. It will ban a product," Fisher said, reminding the committee that polystyrene is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Steven Rosario of the American Chemical Council said manufacturers of the product are under scrutiny from 14 different federal agencies as well as numerous state and local agencies. Polystyrene go through the same level of scrutiny as all of the alternatives.
But federal approval doesn't mean much for Charles Lake.
Lake spent two years as a truck driver transporting the containers. He suffered with a series of health issues including several strokes. Doctors couldn't figure it out. Eight years later, the cause was narrowed down to the carcinogenic chemicals in polystyrene, he said.
"I ended up being poisoned and it took doctors eight years to figure out it was from the Styrofoam," Lake said. "It is no good for our health. It is no good for children. It is something that needs to be done away with."
Lake said when acidic or hot foods are in the containers, the chemicals begin to break down and soak into food, providing more harm to those ingesting the food. Resident Tim Wright added that the product is bad for the environment because it isn't recyclable.
Jeff Turner said switching to alternatives doesn't cost businesses that much and will protect the environment.
"Anything we use that can't be recycled is stealing from future generations," Turner said.
Given the health and environmental concerns, the Green Commission approved the ban. Nancy Nilan called on the city to be "leaders" in the state by banning the product.
 Councilors Kathleen Amuso and Melissa Mazzeo agreed they'd like the state to do something but disagreed on whether or not the petition should be filed with no action locally. |
However, Mazzeo said that the petition before the council was "too restrictive and too inconsistent." She said the public conversation about it should help guide decisions and eventually the state will answer the questions through its process, with legislation already filed.
"I think having the conversation we've been having in the community and across the country are pushing people in the direction of coming up with new products or recycling," Mazzeo said. "I don't think it is something we should do right now. It is way too restrictive. It is inconsistent."
One restriction under debate is a clause banning restaurants from using "non-biodegradable" materials for containers, which would expand beyond Styrofoam.
Rinaldo Del Gallo, who submitted the petition, said if that was a hold up, it could be removed.
"I don't want the perfect to be the enemy of the good," Del Gallo said.
Meanwhile, subcommittee Chairman Christopher Connell said where the ban isn't restrictive concerns him. It doesn't include schools because they would not be considered a food establishment. Nor are there restrictions on building materials. Connell said if the concerns were about health, then the schools should be the focus.
Del Gallo agrees that the containers shouldn't be used in schools or in building supplies. But, he limited his petition knowing there'd be backlash.
"I picked what I picked for political reasons," Del Gallo said.
The petition was primarily aimed as an environmental one, he said.
Del Gallo protested being cut off from speaking on the petition on Monday, saying at a previous meeting the opponents of the ban were allowed to speak at length on the subject. Del Gallo was granted only three minutes, but councilors did follow up with some questions.
Tags: ban, ordinance & rules , polystyrene ,
