The West Hollywood City Council has opted to further alter its fur ban ordinance, and is scheduled to vote on the matter on first-read during its Nov. 7 meeting. The city would not release copies of the new ordinance before 3 p.m. today.

Arcade Boutique is one of the stores in West Hollywood that would be affected by the fur ban. (photo by Aaron Blevins)

West Hollywood Chamber of Commerce president and chief executive officer Genevieve Morrill said the ban has been expanded, and she is calling on chamber members to voice their opinions at the Nov. 7 meeting.

She said “apparel” has been defined to include hats, gloves, scarves and more. In a recent study by the Fur Information Council of America, 46 percent of West Hollywood fashion retailers carry some kind of fur apparel, a total of more than 90 stores. With a broader definition of “apparel,” that number is likely to increase, Morrill said.

“We think … the impact is a lot greater,” she said. “We are pleading with the council to listen to the business community.”

Morrill said chamber representatives recently sat down with some council members and suggested alterations to the ordinance. The chamber representatives asked for a longer transition to prepare for the ban and to remove wool for the council’s fur definition, she said.

The chamber also proposed some alternatives to the ban: fur-free certification programs, public relations campaigns against animal cruelty and consumer education label programs, such as Origin Assured. Morrill said some suggestions were heard; others were not.

While it appreciated the opportunity to give input, chamber representatives are still opposed to the ban, which they say will hurt the city’s fashion industry in the midst of a poor economic climate. Morrill said it is also concerning that the council is trying to dictate morality.

“When government begins to do that, it can become muddy,” she said. “It’s about a fashion industry in a district that’s being singled out to ban fur and make a political statement.”

Ed Buck, one of the founders of Fur Free West Hollywood, was pleased to hear that the ban had been expanded in some ways. He said the ban is symbolic and should raise the consciousness of consumers in the area.

“We are having a moral debate with the cash register,” Buck said.

He said the ban is necessary, because education can only go so far. At the end of the day, a well-informed individual could still make a poor decision, Buck said, adding that he disagreed with the opponents’ assertions that the ban wouldn’t save any animals.

“This is going to save thousands and may lead to millions,” he said.

Buck dismissed Origin Assured, “which is kind of like the tobacco companies saying their kind of cigarettes won’t cause cancer.” He also denied the fur council’s study, which he said is biased.

West Hollywood businesses will be affected, but Buck doesn’t believe the impact will be as significant as the chamber alleges. He said fur only makes up for more than 10 percent of sales in two West Hollywood stores, and no retailer sells fur exclusively.

“Doing the right thing has a price,” Buck said.

He said some stores have already pulled their fur items off the shelves, and some, like Stella McCartney on Beverly Boulevard, refuse to sell fur anyway.

Overall, Buck believes the ban will be a “net positive,” with additional humane shoppers and events coming to West Hollywood as a result.

“The humane movement has spoken,” he said.