Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City and County of San Francisco CA1/2
166 Cal. Rptr. 3d 253
Cal. Ct. App.2013Background
- San Francisco enacted the 2012 Checkout Bag Ordinance expanding restrictions on single-use bags, including a 10-cent charge and outreach, to all stores citywide.
- Save the Plastic Bag Coalition challenged CEQA compliance and preemption by the Retail Food Code; superior court denied relief and the Coalition appealed.
- City relied on CEQA Class 7 (15307) and Class 8 (15308) categorical exemptions, finding the project categorically exempt from further environmental review.
- The Coalition argued the unusual circumstances exception and that a large city cannot use categorically exempt status for a bag-reduction ordinance; Manhattan Beach guidance was discussed but not controlling.
- The court affirmed, holding the 2012 ordinance was categorically exempt, unusual circumstances not shown, and not preempted by the Retail Food Code.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| CEQA categorically exempt validity | Coalition asserts exemptions do not apply | City showed substantial evidence within exempt classes | Exemptions valid; no prejudicial abuse of discretion |
| Unusual circumstances exception | Coalition argues unusual circumstances exist (tourists/commuters; life-cycle studies) | City properly denied unusual circumstances | Unusual circumstances not shown; exemption stands |
| Regulatory vs. legislative action for exemptions | Coalition argues exemption cannot apply to legislative action | Ordinance executed under police powers; regulatory/leg regulatory action | Exemption applicable; city could rely on class exemptions |
| Preemption by Retail Food Code | Code occupies field; ordinance conflicts | Code does not preempt non-health/sanitation environmental standards | Not preempted by Retail Food Code |
Key Cases Cited
- County of Marin v. Save the Plastic Bag Coalition, 218 Cal.App.4th 209 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) (upholds reliance on CEQA exemptions for environmental ordinances)
- Manhattan Beach v. Superior Court, 52 Cal.4th 155 (Cal. 2011) (discusses life-cycle studies and scope of CEQA review in bag bans)
- Davidon Homes v. City of San Jose, 54 Cal.App.4th 106 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997) (exemplifies substantial evidence review of exemptions; outlines standards)
- Magan v. County of Kings, 105 Cal.App.4th 468 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002) (supports that regulatory actions may invoke CEQA exemptions)
- Wollmer v. City of Berkeley, 193 Cal.App.4th 1329 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (illustrates integration of project features with exemption analysis)