Last autumn Culver City was agog over the coming ban on polystyrene usage by restaurants in deference to the environmental harm caused by Styrofoam remnants in nearby waters and walkways.

Hardly a word has been mentioned lately.

The headlines have gone to pot and to sanctuary city status, which will be determined at Monday evening’s City Council meeting.

Meanwhile, the polystyrene ban, supposed to go into effect around mid-summer, is on Mayor Jim Clarke’s mind.

How is such a prohibition working with Culver City’s neighbors?

Mr. Clarke investigated.

“I reached out to a City Councilman in Manhattan Beach whom I serve on a board with,” he said.

“When I went down to Manhattan Beach, he put me in touch with a staffer. I talked with them about what their experience has been (with the polystyrene prohibition).”

“They are 35,000 people, a little smaller in population, and about 200 restaurants.”

Mayor Clarke reported that during the two-year-old ban, no restaurant has asked for an exemption.

“I thought that sounded pretty good,” he said. “The staffer took me downtown where they have regular stand-alone restaurants. We didn’t visit any chains.

“We went into three restaurants, and all three were in violation of the ordinance, including one that was still using Styrofoam.”

At that surprising point, Mayor Clarke asked himself, “What’s going on here?

“The enforcement isn’t happening.

“Restaurants aren’t asking for exemptions. They are just ignoring it and going ahead and using these products.”

What message do these illustrations send to Culver City?

“If restaurants are not going to ask for exemptions, maybe alternatives are not available or it is cost-prohibitive.”

That gave Mr. Clarke an idea for inclusion in the Culver City ban that passed at a meeting last month.  The amendment says that a list will be drawn up annually of any alternative usages for restaurants that are not available or cost-prohibitive. The list will be submitted to the City Council for approval.