HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-03-2015 PH2 E-Cigarette Code Amendments0 Meeting Date: Mar. 3, 2015
Council Agenda Report
Item Number: PH2
ra T
FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Greg Hermann, Special Projects Manager
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE REGULATING RETAIL SALES
AND PROHIBITING THE USE OF ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES IN ALL
PLACES WHERE SMOKING IS CURRENTLY PROHIBITED
RECOMMENDATION
Introduce an Ordinance amending Chapters 8.14, 8.16 and 8.17 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code to prohibit the use of electronic smoking devices in all places where smoking is currently
prohibited and require retailers of electronic smoking devices to obtain a Tobacco Retailer License.
DISCUSSION
Background
At the February 4, 2014 City Council meeting, concerns were raised during public comment
regarding the use of electronic smoking devices ( "e- cigarettes ") in the City. The City Council
unanimously directed staff to address the consideration of regulating e- cigarettes at a future
meeting.
The use of e- cigarettes is a recent trend that is gaining in popularity nationally. E- cigarettes are
battery- operated devices, often designed to resemble a cigarette or a small metal smoking pipe, that
deliver and emit a nicotine containing aerosol. E- cigarettes are largely unregulated and several
studies have raised concerns regarding the health effects related to e- cigarettes. E- cigarettes are also
not currently approved as a smoking cessation device by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Both the FDA and the California Department of Public Health have expressed concerns about the
safety of electronic smoking devices following testing that found some devices contain toxins and
carcinogens.' Subsequent scientific studies have also raised concerns about the safety of electronic
smoking devices to bystanders who involuntarily inhale the released aerosol. The California
Department of Public Health recently released a health advisory regarding e- cigarettes (Attachment
1) stating:
• In 2014, teen use of e- cigarettes surpassed the use of conventional cigarettes for the first
time, with more than twice as many 8th and 10th graders reporting using e- cigarettes than
conventional cigarettes.
• Nearly 20 percent of young adult e- cigarette users in California have never smoked
traditional cigarettes.
• Mainstream and secondhand e- cigarette aerosol has been found to contain at least ten
chemicals that are on California's Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to cause cancer,
birth defects, or other reproductive harm.
' FDA News Release: FDA and Public Health Experts Warn About Electronic Cigarettes,
htt2://www.fda.jzov/newsevents/newsrooM/ pressannouncements/ucml 73222.htm
PH2 -1
Electronic Cigarettes Page 2
• In California, the number of calls to the poison control center involving e- cigarette
exposures in children five and under tripled in one year.
• There is no scientific evidence that e- cigarettes help smokers successfully quit traditional
cigarettes.
In addition to the potential direct health effects, three issues have generated concern with respect to
the use of e- cigarettes. First, e- cigarettes typically do not fall under the existing regulations for
tobacco products and smoke -free air laws because they emit an aerosol in lieu of the smoke
produced by conventional cigarettes. Second, the use of e- cigarettes is often visually similar to the
smoking of conventional cigarettes. These two issues have created concern across cities for
nonsmokers, confusion amongst business owners seeking to comply with smoke -free air laws, and
threaten to interfere with the enforcement of smoke -free air laws. Finally, there is a concern that the
use of e- cigarettes in smoke -free locations may increase the social acceptability of smoking,
particularly for youth, and reverse the progress that has been made over the years to discourage
smoking.
The San Luis Obispo County Department of Public Health and the San Luis Obispo Tobacco
Control Coalition both support amending local smoke -free and tobacco product policies to include
e- cigarettes (Attachment 2). To date, over 40 cities and counties in California (Attachment 3) have
taken similar action.
Project Analysis
In order to develop the draft ordinance staff reviewed existing policies, researched approaches from
other jurisdictions and gathered input from the public. Each of these steps is discussed below.
1. Existing Policies
There are three sections of the City's Municipal Code that address tobacco products and smoking
which are relevant to e- cigarettes. Those sections are:
Chapter 8.14, Tobacco Retailer Licenses - The Tobacco Retailer License program began in 2003 to
discourage violations of laws which prohibit or regulate the sale or distribution of tobacco products
to minors. This is accomplished through an enforcement program by the Police Department. The
ordinance requires each tobacco retailer in the City to obtain a yearly license to sell tobacco
products. A fee in the amount of $524.00 is imposed on the licensee to cover the Police
Department's administrative and enforcement costs for implementation of the program. There are
currently 40 businesses in the City with a license to sell tobacco products.
Chapter 8.16, Smoking Prohibited and Secondhand Smoke Control - In 1985, the City of San Luis
Obispo was the first City in the world to ban smoking from indoor areas, restaurants, and bars. In
2010, this prohibition was expanded to include most public places and workplaces. Special
considerations were made for significant tobacco retailers that were in operation prior to the
effective date of that ordinance.
Chapter 8.17, Cigarette Vending Machines — In 1992 the City Council passed an ordinance to
prohibit any new cigarette vending machines in the City and to require that any current vending
machines be removed.
PH2 -2
Electronic Cigarettes Page 3
The current definitions in the City's Municipal Code for tobacco products and smoking within these
ordinances do not apply to e- cigarettes.
2. Approaches from Other Jurisdictions
Over 40 cities and counties in California have amended their existing regulations to include e-
cigarettes. Staff reviewed a number of theses ordinances to determine the best approach for San
Luis Obispo, including the recent adoption of an ordinance by the City of Santa Monica on this
issue (Attachment 4). Staff has also consulted with the San Luis Obispo County Department of
Public Health and the San Luis Obispo Tobacco Control Coalition on best practice definitions for
inclusion in the proposed ordinance.
3. Community Outreach
Over the past several months, staff gathered input and solicited feedback from community
stakeholders and the general public. Staff facilitated meetings with the San Luis Obispo County
Department of Public Health and members of the San Luis Obispo Tobacco Control Coalition, as
well as affected business owners. In addition, staff used the Open City Hall tool on the City's
website to solicit feedback from the general public on the issue. This forum was advertised through
the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Association, Neighborhood Wellness Group and elsewhere
on the City's website. The Open City Hall topic has had 73 visitors and 27 statements posted or the
equivalent of 1.4 hours of public comment. A complete report of statements from Open City Hall on
this topic is included as Attachment 5.
In general, those who were supportive of regulations for e- cigarettes stated:
• E- cigarettes should be regulated the same as conventional cigarettes
• Concern over secondhand effects of the aerosol emitted
• Concern of the renormalization of smoking
• Concern regarding the lack of regulations for e- cigarettes
• The potential of undermining of existing regulations
In general, those who were not supportive of regulations for e- cigarettes stated:
• E- cigarettes aid in smoking cessation
• There is conflicting scientific data on the effects of e- cigarettes
• General concern over increased regulations
Proposed Ordinance
The proposed ordinance would make two main changes to the City's current regulations. First, it
would include e- cigarettes and the aerosol they emit within the definition of smoking for all places
where smoking is currently regulated in the City. Second, it would add e- cigarettes to the definition
of tobacco products for the City's tobacco retail license program.
The proposed ordinance only includes the following modifications /additions for the definition
sections of the ordinances governing tobacco products and smoking. No other changes to the
requirements and standards of each ordinance are included. The proposed changes to each
ordinance are summarized below:
PH2 -3
Electronic Cigarettes Page 4
Chapter 8.14 Tobacco Retailer Licenses
- Add definition for "Electronic Smoking Device"
- Modify definition for "Tobacco Product" to include electronic smoking devices and
other updates
Chapter 8.16 Smoking Prohibited and Secondhand Smoke Control
- Add definition for "Electronic Smoking Device"
- Modify definition for "Tobacco Product" to include electronic smoking devices and
other updates
- Add definition for "Smoke" which includes aerosol
- Modify definition for "smoking" to include anything that generates "Smoke" as
separately defined
Chapter 8.17 Cigarette Vending; Machines
- Add definition for "Electronic Smoking Device"
- Modify definition for "Tobacco Product" to include electronic smoking devices and
other updates
The specific language for new definitions and modifications to existing definitions can be found in
the proposed ordinance (Attachment 6).
Impacts to Existing Businesses
There are several businesses in the City that sell e- cigarettes. Most of these businesses also sell
other tobacco products and, as such, already have a Tobacco Retailer License. The proposed
Ordinance would not affect these businesses, but they have been notified as a courtesy. Under the
proposed Ordinance, any business that sells only e- cigarettes and no other tobacco products would
be required to have a Tobacco Retailer License as well. The City is currently aware of two
businesses that fall into this category and has notified the business owners regarding this potential
change.
The 2010 changes to the City's Smoking Prohibited and Secondhand Smoke Control Ordinance
included an exception for Significant Tobacco Retailers in existence as of the effective date of that
ordinance to allow smoking inside of their existing stores. The exception included the requirement
that these businesses have a dedicated ventilation system within six months of the ordinance taking
effect. The draft Ordinance regulating e- cigarettes does not currently include any modification to
the previously adopted exception. The effect of leaving the exception provision unaltered is that any
Significant Tobacco Retailer made subject to the Ordinance by these amendments and in existence
as of the effective date of these proposed Ordinance amendments may continue to permit smoking
of e- cigarettes inside their existing business, subject to compliance with the requirements of the
ordinance exception. The City is currently aware of one business that permits smoking of e-
cigarettes inside of the store and would meet the requirements for the exception.
If the City Council does not wish to apply this exception to Significant Tobacco Retailers currently
selling e- cigarettes, then the exception provision in the Smoking Prohibited and Secondhand Smoke
Control Ordinance (SLOMC section 8.16.050.A) would need to be amended to clarify that the
exception originally adopted was intended as a one -time exception for retailers in existence as of the
2010 adoption date of the original ordinance. If Council wishes to limit the application of the
exception, staff recommends that the Council articulate its reasoning. Possible bases for a decision
PH2-4
Electronic Cigarettes Page 5
not to extend the exception to newly covered Significant Tobacco Retailers may include: the
broader appeal and increasing popularity and use of e- cigarettes among youth populations, as
compared to traditional tobacco products; the current lack of long term health impact data regarding
use of e- cigarette products, particularly in younger populations; evolving policy perspectives and
social and community values surrounding the use of tobacco products; and any other data or City
Council or community concerns regarding the continuing application of the exception. Staff will be
prepared to provide specific language at the meeting should the City Council be inclined to move in
this direction.
Enforcement
The proposed Ordinance recommends additions and modifications to only the definition sections of
existing regulations. Enforcement of the recommended changes would continue through the existing
operations and resources of the Police Department.
CONCURRENCES
A team of staff from the Community Development, Police and Administration departments as well
as the City Attorney's Office participated in the development and review of the draft ordinance.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed Ordinance only recommends changes to existing City regulations. These regulations
are currently administered and enforced with existing resources. At this time, the impacts of
implementing and enforcing the additional elements of the ordinances can be incorporated into
existing resources.
ALTERNATIVES
2. Continue the proposed ordinance. The City Council may continue action, if more
information in needed. Direction should be given to staff regarding additional information
needed to make a decision.
3. Reject the proposed ordinance. The City Council may reject the proposed ordinance
although public testimony and current research demonstrate that an ordinance is needed.
ATTACHMENTS
1. The California Department of Public Health E- Cigarette Advisory
2. San Luis Obispo Tobacco Control Coalition Support Letter
3. California Cities and Counties with Electronic Smoking Device Ordinances
4. City of Santa Monica E- cigarette Ordinance
5. Open City Hall Report
PH2 -5
Electronic Cigarettes Page 6
6. Proposed Ordinance
m
T: \Council Agenda Reports\ 2015 \2015- 03 -03\E- Cigarette Ordinance (Johnson- Hermann)\ECAR- Electronic Cigarettes.docx
PH2 -6
Attachment 1
This health advisory seeks to inform health care professionals of the
public health risks posed by the marketing, sale and use of electronic
\• cigarettes (e- cigarettes) especially to children and young people.
Electronic cigarettes (e- cigarettes) are battery- operated devices,
Calif ia Dcpanmcnr of
• PublicHealth often designed to resemble a cigarette, that deliver and emit a
nicotine - containing aerosol. E- cigarettes are considered electronic
nicotine delivery devices (ENDS) and have many names. They are
HEALTHfrequently referred to as a -cigs, e- hookahs, hookah pens, vapes, vape
pens, vape pipes, or mods. There are disposable and rechargeable e-
ADVIS 0 RY — cigarettes as well as refillable "tank systems" that hold a larger
volume of the e- cigarette liquid (e- liquid) and that heat the e- liquid to
January 28, higher temperatures.'
2 015 Toxicity of E- cigarettes and Exposure to Emissions
The heated e- liquid forms an aerosol that contains high
concentrations of ultrafine particles that are inhaled and become
Electronic Cigarettes: A trapped in the lungs .Z Chemicals in the aerosol are absorbed through
the blood stream and delivered directly to the brain and all body
Summary of the Public organs. Analyses of e- liquids by the Food and Drug Administration
Health Risks and (FDA) and other laboratories found variability in the content of e-
Recommendations for liquids and inaccurate product labeling related to nicotine content
Health Care and chemicals.3
Professionals Typically, e- liquids contain nicotine, flavoring agents, propylene glycol
and toxic chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects and other
reproductive harm .''47 While several studies found lower levels of
carcinogens in the e- cigarette aerosol compared to smoke emitted by
traditional cigarettes, both the mainstream and secondhand e-
cigarette aerosol have been found to contain at least ten chemicals
that are on California's Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to
cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm, including
acetaldehyde, benzene, cadmium, formaldehyde, isoprene, lead,
nickel, nicotine, n- nitrosonornicotine, and toluene.', 5-7
E- cigarette emissions are also a health concern for those exposed to
the secondhand aerosol. Although not as dangerous as secondhand
smoke from combustible tobacco products, people exposed to e-
cigarette aerosol absorb nicotine at levels comparable to people
exposed to secondhand smoke.$ E- cigarette emissions also contain
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and fine /ultrafine particles . 6
These ultrafine particles can travel deep into the lungs where they get
trapped and may lead to tissue inflammation.9
PH2 -7
Attachment 1
Electronic Cigarettes: A Summary oti Alth Risks
and Recommendations for Health Care Professionals
Health Effects of Nicotine
Nicotine, the primary psychoactive ingredient in e- liquid, stimulates pleasure /reward pathways in the
brain. It is a highly addictive neurotoxin that is as addictive as heroin and cocaine.'O 11 It affects the
cardiovascular and central nervous systems, causing blood vessels to constrict, raising the pulse and
blood pressure .12 Nicotine adversely affects maternal and fetal health during pregnancy, contributing
to low birth weight, preterm delivery and stillbirth .13 Nicotine is also known to cross the placenta and
is detectable in the breast milk of smoking mothers as well as mothers exposed to secondhand
smoke .14, 15 Preliminary studies show that using a nicotine - containing e- cigarette for just five minutes
causes similar lung irritation, inflammation and effect on blood vessels as smoking a traditional
cigarette, which may increase the risk of a heart attack.'' 9
Exposure to and use of nicotine products by adolescents is of particular concern because adolescence
is a critical period for brain growth and development. As a consequence, adolescents are especially
vulnerable to the toxic effects of nicotine. Exposure to nicotine during adolescence may harm brain
development and predispose future tobacco use .13,16,1' Even a brief period of continuous or
intermittent nicotine exposure in adolescence elicits lasting neurobehavioral damage.18
Nicotine Poisonings
E- liquids are available in flavors such as bubble gum, cherry and chocolate, which makes them
appealing to children and youth. E- cigarette cartridges and e- liquid bottles are not equipped with child
resistant caps and often leak, creating a potential source of poisoning through ingestion and skin or
eye contact. Even a small amount of e- liquid ingested by a small child can be lethal.19
There has been a
significant rise in the
number of calls to poison
control centers for both
adults and children who
were accidently exposed
to e- liquid S.20 Nationally,
the number of calls rose
from one per month in
September 2010 to 215
per month in February
2014.21 Figure 1 depicts e-
cigarette- related calls to
the California Poison
Control Center over a five
year period. In California,
from 2012 to 2014, the
number of calls to the
poison control center
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
E- Cigarette Poisonings, 2010 to 2014
Reported to the California Poison Control System
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
California Poison Control System, San Diego, CA, Jan. 2015
Figure 1: E- cigarette - related calls to the California Poison Control System.
Total
Poisonings,
All Ages
Poisonings,
Children 0
to 5
PH2 -8
Attachment 1
Electronic Cigarettes: A Summary oti Alth Risks
and Recommendations for Health Care Professionals
involving e- cigarette exposures in children five and under increased sharply from 7 to 154. By the end
of 2014, e- cigarette poisonings to young children tripled in one year, making up more than 60% of all e-
cigarette poisoning calls. Adults have also mistakenly used e- liquid in harmful ways, such as eye drops,
and have been harmed by exploding cartridges.
E- cigarette Use and Youth
Recent national and preliminary California data show that youth are experimenting with e- cigarettes at
an alarming rate. In 2014, the Monitoring the Future survey, which tracks substance abuse trends
among over 40,000 youth nationally, found that the use of e- cigarettes among teens surpassed the use
of traditional cigarettes. More than twice as many 8th and 10th graders reported using e- cigarettes
than traditional cigarettes in the survey, and among 12th graders, 17 percent reported currently using
e- cigarettes vs. 14 percent using traditional cigarettes .22 Another survey, the National Youth Tobacco
Survey, found that in 2013, that e- cigarette use among high school students tripled between 2011 and
2013, increasing from 1.5 percent to 4.5 percent.23 Over a quarter million students who reported using
e- cigarettes had never used traditional cigarettes .24 Overall, studies suggest that youth who may have
otherwise never smoked cigarettes are now getting hooked on nicotine due to e- cigarettes, and that
adolescents who use e- cigarettes are more likely to progress from experimenting with cigarettes to
becoming established smokers .zs, 26
E- cigarette devices may also be used to inhale illegal substances, such as marijuana and hash oil.19
Because many of these devices are similar in appearance to a ball point pen, school and law
enforcement personnel are unaware that inappropriate use of nicotine and illegal substances is
occurring.
E- cigarette Use and Adults
Among California adults, use of e- cigarettes in the past 30 days doubled from 1.8 percent in 2012 to
3.5 percent in 2013. For younger adults (18 to 29 year old), e- cigarette use tripled in one year from 2.3
percent to 7.6 percent. Young adults are three times more likely to use e- cigarettes than those 30 and
older. Nearly 20 percent of young adult e- cigarettes users have never smoked traditional cigarettes . 27
E- cigarette Availability
E- cigarettes are readily accessible throughout California, and the number of stores selling e- cigarettes
quadrupled between 2011 and 2013, increasing from 12 percent to 46 percent.28, 29 Figure 2 depicts
the percent of tobacco stores selling e- cigarettes in California counties.
PH2 -9
Leg
Percent of Tobacco Stores selling
E- cigarettes in California
1
Attachment 1
Electronic Cigarettes: A Summary of Aith Risks
and Recommendations for Health Care Professionals
In 2011, only 11.5% of tobacco
stores sold e- cigarettes.
By 2013, the number of tobacco
stores selling e- cigarettes .
quadrupled to 46 %.
40%-50%
51 % -80%
Source: Healthy Stores for a Healthy Community Survey, 2013
Sawcea: Eri, 11565. NflKq
Figure 2: Percent of tobacco stores selling e- cigarettes in CA.
E- cigarette Marketing
Over the past 40 years, great strides
have been made to protect youth from
tobacco marketing. Numerous state
and federal laws and litigation regulate
the sale, marketing and distribution of
traditional tobacco products and
tobacco - related paraphernalia. These
restrictions include: prohibiting
tobacco advertising on television, radio
and billboards; prohibiting youth -
oriented tobacco products marketing,
including a ban on the sale of flavored
cigarettes and the use of cartoon
characters; prohibiting free sampling of
cigarettes and restrictions on sampling
of other tobacco products; restrictions
on brand name sponsorship of
sporting, music, and cultural events;
restrictions on giving away branded
promotional items such as t- shirts .30
Presently in California, these
restrictions are not interpreted to
apply to e- cigarettes. As a result, the e-
cigarette industry is legally allowed to
use marketing strategies and tactics
that are no longer permissible for
traditional tobacco products.
Many television networks (e.g., ABC Family, USA, Bravo, E!, MTV, VH1 and Comedy Central) with a
substantial proportion of youth viewers, are airing e- cigarette advertising. There is also e- cigarette
advertising on radio, internet, billboards, in magazine and print publications, and in stores .31 E- liquid
containing nicotine is frequently marketed as "e- juice" and is sold in fruit and candy flavors. Promoting
and labeling nicotine containing products as 'juice" may mislead consumers to believe that e- liquid is
safe to ingest and that e- cigarettes pose no health risk.
PH2 -10
Attachment 1
Electronic Cigarettes: A Summary oti Alth Risks
and Recommendations for Health Care Professionals
The use of cartoon characters in advertising and promoting of e- cigarettes
as fashion accessories are other ways these products appeal to youth with
the implication that these products are harmless (see Figure 3). E-
cigarette manufacturers report sponsoring concerts, sporting events, and
parties that include the distribution of free samples; many of these events
occurred in California .32 Another tactic to create a perception that e-
cigarettes are family friendly is through the association of these products
with family oriented attractions.
Figure 3: E- cigarette products and accessories.
Cessation Claims
There is no scientific evidence that e- cigarettes help smokers to successfully quit traditional cigarettes
or that they reduce consumption of traditional cigarettes .2s, 33 A number of recent studies show that
e- cigarette users are no more likely to quit than regular smokers. One study found that 89 percent of
e- cigarette users are still using them one year later and another study found that e- cigarette users are
a third less likely to quit cigarettes .34, 35 These studies suggest that e- cigarettes are effectively inhibiting
people from successfully kicking their nicotine addiction. In addition, dual use of cigarettes and e-
cigarettes is continuing to rise, which may diminish any potential benefits of cutting back on traditional
cigarettes .36 Continuing to smoke traditional cigarettes, while also using e- cigarettes, does not reduce
the cardiovascular health risks. 1,37,38
PH2 -11
Attachment 1
Electronic Cigarettes: A Summary oti Alth Risks
and Recommendations for Health Care Professionals
California health care providers are recommended to:
Educate, Advise and Protect Unborn Children, Young Children and Adolescents.
• Educate parents, adolescents, and the public, as well as health care personnel, school
personnel, child care providers, and community leaders, about these products:
o Nicotine is contained and is highly addictive and toxic
o Increases in e- cigarette related poisonings, especially to children.
• Advise that these products are especially harmful to adolescents and pregnant women.
• Advise and warn e- cigarette users about toxicity of these products to themselves and those
subjected to secondhand emissions.
Educate About Clean Indoor Air.
• Educate parents and the public to take steps to protect children and themselves from exposure
to e- cigarette emissions.
Encourage Cessation.
• Current smokers and e- cigarette users should be advised to quit and offered support.
• Refer users to cessation resources offered by their health insurance plan including access to
FDA approved cessation medications.
• The California Smokers' Helpline at 1- 800 -NO BUTTS is another cessation resource.
Protect Children from Nicotine Poisoning.
Inform parents and e- cigarette users that e- cigarette cartridges and e- liquid bottles are a
potential source of poisoning through ingestion, skin or eye contact. Store these materials out
of the reach of children, away from medications, and call the California Poison Control Center
at 1- 800 - 222 -1221 for expert help in case of accidental exposure.
Promote Health Literacy: Educate about Misleading Marketing.
• Educate parents and e- cigarette users about misleading advertising and labeling.
• Educate adolescents, parents and others about unknown ingredients and rights as consumers
to have ingredient disclosure readily accessible.
PH2 -12
References
1. Grana, R., N. Benowitz, and S. Glantz, Background Paper on E-
cigarettes. Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education,
University of California, San Francisco and WHO Collaborating
Center on Tobacco Control, 2013.
2. Fuoco, F.C., et al., Influential parameters on particle concentration
and size distribution in the mainstream of e- cigarettes. Environ
Pollut, 2014. 184: p. 523 -9.
3. Food and Drug Administration, FDA and public health experts
warn about electronic cigarettes. 2009.
4. California Office of Environmental Health Hazzard Assessment,
Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. Current
Proposition 65 List [Online].
5. Goniewicz, M.L., et al., Levels of selected carcinogens and
toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes. Tob Control, 2014.
23(2): p. 133 -9.
6. Schripp, T., et al., Does e- cigarette consumption cause passive
vaping? Indoor Air, 2012. 23(1): p. 25 -31.
7. Williams, M., et al., Metal and silicate particles including
nanoporticles are present in electronic cigarette cortomizer fluid
and aerosol. PLoS One, 2013. 8(3): p. e57987.
8. Flouris, A.D., et al., Acute impact of active and passive electronic
cigarette smoking on serum cotinine and lung function. Inhal
Toxicol, 2013. 25(2): p. 91 -101.
9. Schober, W., et al., Use of electronic cigarettes (e- cigarettes)
impairs indoor air quality and increases FeNO levels of e- cigarette
consumers. Int J Hyg Environ Health, 2013.
10. C Everett Koop, M., Health Consequences of Smoking: Nicotine
Addiction a Report of the Surgeon General 1988. 1988: DIANE
Publishing.
11. Diagnosis Dictionary - Nicotine. Available online at
http://Www.psycholoqvtoday.com/Conditionslnicotine.
Psychology Today.
12. US Department of Health Human Services, How tobacco smoke
causes disease: the biology and behavioral basis for smoking -
attributable disease: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA:
US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic
Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and
Health, 2010. 2.
13. US Department of Health Human Services, The health
consequences of smoking -50 years of progress: A report of the
Surgeon General, in Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and
Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health. 2014.
14. Koren, G., Fetal toxicology of environmental tobacco smoke. Curr
Opin Pediatr, 1995. 7(2): p. 128 -31.
15. Luck,. W. and H. Nau, Nicotine and cotinine concentrations in
serum and milk of nursing smokers. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 1984.
18(1): p. 9 -15.
16. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Incidence of initiation
of cigarette smoking -- United States, 1965 -1996. MMWR.
Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 1998.47(39): p. 837.
17. US Department of Health Human Services, Preventing tobacco use
among youth and young adults: A report of the Surgeon General.
Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for
Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on
Smoking and Health, 2012. 3.
18. Abreu - Villaca Y., S.J., Tate C.A., Slotkin T.A., Nicotine is a
neurotoxin in the adolescent brain: critical periods, patterns of
exposure, regional selectivity, and dose thresholds fro
macromolecular alterations. Brain Research, 2003. 979: p. 114-
128.
Attachment 1
Electronic Cigarettes: A Summa ilth Risks
and Recommendations for Health Care Professionals
19. Cobb, N.K. and D.B. Abrams, E- cigarette or drug - delivery device?
Regulating novel nicotine products. N Engl J Med, 2011. 365(3): p.
193 -5.
20. Cantrell, F.L., Adverse Effects of e- Cigarette Exposures. J
Community Health, 2014. 39(3): p. 614 -6.
21. Chatham- Stephens, K., et al., Notes from the field: calls to poison
centers for exposures to electronic cigarettes - United States,
september2010 february 2014. MMWR Morbidity and mortality
weekly report, 2014. 63(13): p. 292 -3.
22. Miech, R.A., Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., &
Schulenberg, J. E., E- cigarettes surpass tobacco cigarettes among
teens., in National press release. 2014, University of Michigan
News Service: Ann Arbor.
23. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Tobacco Use Among
Middle and High School Students - United States, 2013. MMWR.
Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 2014. 63(45): p. 1021-
1026.
24. Bunnell, R.E., et al., Intentions to smoke cigarettes among never -
smoking U.S. middle and high school electronic cigarette users,
National Youth Tobacco Survey, 2011 -2013. Nicotine & Tobacco
Research, 2014.
25. Dutra, L.M. and S.A. Glantz, Electronic Cigarettes and
Conventional Cigarette Use Among US Adolescents: A Cross -
sectional Study. JAMA Pediatr, 2014.
26. Lee, S., R.A. Grana, and S.A. Glantz, Electronic Cigarette Use
Among Korean Adolescents: A Cross - Sectional Study of Market
Penetration, Dual Use, and Relationship to Quit Attempts and
Former5moking. J Adolesc Health, 2013.
27. California Tobacco Control Program. California Department of
Public Health, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS)
2012 -2013. 2014.
28. California Tobacco Control Program. California Department of
Public Health, Final report for the California Tobacco Advertising
Survey (2011). 2013.
29. California Tobacco Control Program. California Department of
Public Health. Health Stores for a Health Community. 2013;
Available from:
http: // www .healthystoreshealthycommunity .com /.
30. ChangeLab Solutions, Tobacco Laws Affecting California. 2014.
31. Legacy, Vaporized: E- cigarettes, Advertising, and Youth. 2014.
32. A report written by the staff of Senator Richard J. Durbin (D -IL),
Representative Henry Waxman (D -CA), Senators Tom Harkin (D-
IA), John D. Rockefeller IV (D -WV), Richard Blumenthal (D -CT),
Edward J. Markey (D -MA), Sherrod Brown (D -OH), Jack Reed (D-
RI), Barbara Boxer (D -CA), Jeff Merkley (D -OR), and
Representative Frank Pallone (D -NJ), Gateway to Addiction ?: A
Survey of Popular Electronic Cigarette Manufacturers and
Targeted Marketing to Youth. 2014.
33. World Health Organization, Marketers of Electronic Cigarettes
Should Halt Unproven Therapy Claims. September 19, 2008.
34. Etter, J.F. and C. Bullen, A longitudinal study of electronic cigarette
users. Addict Behav, 2014. 39(2): p. 491 -4.
35. Vickerman, K.A., et al., Use of electronic cigarettes among state
tobacco cessation quitline callers. Nicotine Tob Res, 2013. 15(10):
p. 1787 -91.
36. Adkison, S.E., et al., Electronic nicotine delivery systems:
international tobacco control four- country survey. Am J Prev Med,
2013.44(3): p. 207 -15.
37. Barnoya, J. and S.A. Glantz, Cardiovascular effects of secondhand
smoke: nearly as large as smoking. Circulation, 2005. 111(20): p.
2684 -98.
38. Pope, C.A., 3rd, et al., Cardiovascular mortality and exposure to
airborne fine particulate matter and cigarette smoke: shape of the
exposure- response relationship. Circulation, 2009. 120(11): p. 941-
8.
PH2 -13
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
February 17, 2015
City Council of San Luis Obispo
900 Palm St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dear Honorable City Council Members:
Attachment 2
San Luis Obispo County
Tobacco Control Coalition
Electronic smoking devices are rising in popularity and there is growing concern with their sale
and use in public spaces. In order to protect public safety, it is imperative to include electronic
smoking devices into the current tobacco ordinances in San Luis Obispo.
The Tobacco Control Coalition extends our support for the use of the definitions provided from
ChangeLab Solutions in your ordinance amendments. ChangeLab Solutions is a respected
statewide organization that specializes in researching and drafting model laws and policies. The
definitions they provide are considered industry standards and are formed after consultation with
local, state and national agencies. These definitions are intended to ensure that electronic
smoking devices are subject to the same sale and use restrictions as conventional tobacco
products. The definitions recommended in the staff report for: tobacco product, electronic
smoking device, smoke and smoking were created utilizing the ChangeLab Solutions
recommended definitions and have the full support of the Tobacco Control Coalition.
The Tobacco Control Coalition also recommends that the exemption for existing vape shops be
removed from the proposed ordinance. From a public health perspective, there is no benefit
gained by exempting vape only shops from the proposed restrictions. In a recent health advisory
released by State Health Officer, Dr. Richard Chapman, he stated that e- cigarette emissions are a
public health threat and the public should protect themselves from e- cigarette emissions.
Exempting vape shops unnecessarily exposes employees and customers e- cigarette emissions.
The Tobacco Control Coalition applauds all efforts made by the Council to restrict electronic
smoking devices in the city and commends their commitment to the public health of San Luis
Obispo residents.
Sincerely,
(27UZ-e�
David Clous
Tobacco Control Coalition Chair
PH2 -14
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
California Cities and Counties with Electronic Smoking Device Specific Regulations
City of Arcata
City of Berkeley
City of Beverly Hills
City of Campbell
City of Carlsbad
Contra Costa County
City of Corte Madera
City of Davis
City of Del Mar
City of Dublin
City of El Cajon
City of El Cerrito
City of Eureka
City of Fairfax
City of Folsom
City of Foster City
City of Fremont
City of Goleta
City of Laguna Hills
City of Long Beach
City of Los Angeles
City of Manhattan Beach
Marin County
City of Mill Valley
City of Morgan Hill
City of Mountain View
City of Oroville
City of Petaluma
City of Richmond
City of San Bernardino
City of San Diego
City of San Francisco
San Mateo County
Santa Clara County
City of Santa Maria
City of Santa Monica
City of Seal Beach
City of Sebastopol
City of Solana Beach
City of Temecula
City of Tiburon
City of Union City
City of Walnut Creek
Attachment 3
PH2 -15
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Attachment 4
ID
City ui
City Council Report
Santa Monica'
City Council Meeting: September 23, 2014
Agenda Item: 7 -A
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney
Subject: Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Anti -
Smoking Law to Regulate Electronic Smoking Devices The Same As
Traditional Cigarettes
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading the attached proposed
ordinance which would include electronic smoking devices within the definition of
"smoke" and "smoking" for purposes of the City's anti - smoking laws.
Executive Summary
The proposed ordinance would make two changes to the City's anti - smoking laws as
Council directed. First, it would include electronic smoking devices within the definition
of smoking for all places where smoking is regulated in the City, including the new
location of vaping lounges. The two existing vaping lounges in Santa Monica would be
exempted from this rule. Second, it would add electronic smoking devices to the
definition of tobacco products for purposes of the City's tobacco retailer licensing law.
Background
On June 24, 2014, Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance to add the use of
electronic smoking devices to the definition of smoking under the City's anti - smoking
laws; to add vaping lounges to the places where smoking is prohibited while exempting
the two existing vaping lounges in the City; to include electronic smoking devices within
the definition of tobacco products under the City's tobacco retailer licensing laws; and to
review other issues related to electronic smoking devices for possible regulation.
Discussion
The attached proposed ordinance brings electronic smoking devices within the definition
of smoking for purposes of the City's restrictions on smoking in specified locations. It
also adds a new location where smoking — which would now include "vaping" — is
1
PH2 -16
Attachment 4
prohibited: vaping lounges. As Council requested, the two local businesses which were
licensed as vaping lounges as of June 24, 2014, are exempted from the new restriction.
These are Fix Vapor at 2909 Main Street and Vapor Delight at 1855 Lincoln Boulevard
(Any successor businesses to at those addresses would not be exempted). It was
necessary to add vaping lounges as a restricted location because California state law
permits smoking in tobacco shops and lounges by exempting them from the statewide
ban on smoking at indoor workplaces.
The ordinance also requires that minors be excluded from the two exempted vaping
lounges pursuant to Council's request. Council could also consider a more general rule
prohibiting minors from entering e- cigarette shops at all. However, staff recommends
against such a rule since various types of retail stores such as chain pharmacies sell
electronic smoking devices: it would be difficult to define which businesses would have
to exclude minors. If the act of vaping is allowed only in the two grandparented lounges,
and they cannot admit minors, as proposed, that may provide sufficient protection to
children from the undesired influence of electronic smoking devices.
Other issues under consideration
Council directed staff to consider three additional issues in the context of regulating
electronic smoking devices: proximity to schools, ventilation, and potential proliferation
of vaping lounges.
1) Proximity to schools
Staff shares Council's concern over the potential for vaping lounges being located close
to schools where children might inappropriately be influenced by them. However, under
the proposed ordinance the only two grandparented businesses at which vaping would
be allowed are both located a substantial distance from any schools. If Council wanted
to prohibit the location of any vaping stores (whether or not the act of vaping is allowed
there) within, for example, 500 or 1,000 feet of any school, staff recommends
addressing the subject when Council next revisits the zoning code. In any event, such a
2
PH2 -17
Attachment 4
rule would be problematic since, as noted above, many general retail stores sell
electronic smoking devices. Also, there is no current rule in local or state law about the
location of stores that sell cigarettes.
2) Ventilation
The proposed ordinance requires that, in order to allow the use of electronic smoking
devices, the two exempted businesses must have "appropriate ventilation so as not to
interfere with neighboring occupants." This standard is intentionally general since to
date, the state Occupational Safety and Health Administration has not adopted
standards for ventilation to regulate the spread of second -hand smoke. Council could
consider removing the ventilation requirement since there is no similar requirement for
tobacco lounges under state law; and since studies show that vapor from electronic
smoking devices is less harmful than cigarette smoke.
3) Proliferation of vaping lounges
Council expressed concern about the possible proliferation of vaping lounges in the
City, given the trend of greatly increasing popularity of electronic smoking devices.
Presumably the prohibition against the use of such devices in all but the two
grandparented businesses, would allay this concern. If Council determines in the future
that businesses selling electronic smoking devices have proliferated excessively, it
could consider a restrictive ordinance at that time, based on the facts.
Alternatives
Council could consider various alternatives to the proposed ordinance as described in
more detail above.
3
PH2 -18
Attachment 4
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
The proposed ordinance would restrict the locations where electronic smoking devices
can be consumed and it might result in modestly increased enforcement activity in
locations where smoking is already prohibited. Adopting this ordinance will result in
marginal additional costs for outreach and communication. The City Attorney's Office,
and any other departments conducting outreach, will cover these costs within existing
budgets.
Prepared by: Adam Radinsky, Head, Consumer Protection Unit
Approved:
Marsha Jones Moutrie
City Attorney
Attachment A: Proposed Ordinance
0
Forwarded to Council:
Rod Gould
City Manager
PH2 -19
City Council Meeting: September 23, 2014
ORDINANCE NUMBER
(City Council Series)
Attachment 4
ATTACHMENT A
Santa Monica, California
(CCS)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA AMENDING CHAPTERS 4.44 AND 4.45 OF THE SANTA MONICA
MUNICIPAL CODE ON SMOKING TO REGULATE ELECTRONIC SMOKING
DEVICES SIMILARLY TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS
WHEREAS, during the past several years the popularity of electronic smoking
devices including electronic cigarettes or "e- cigarettes" in this country has grown
exponentially, especially among young people; and
WHEREAS, Santa Monica has been at the forefront of adopting and enforcing
laws to protect people from involuntary exposure to the dangers of secondhand smoke;
and
WHEREAS, electronic smoking devices are used in the same manner as
conventional tobacco products and operate by heating a liquid chemical solution
typically made up of propylene glycol or glycerin, nicotine, and flavored chemicals, with
the user exhaling a smoke -like vapor similar in appearance to the exhaled smoke from
cigarettes; and
WHEREAS, the use of electronic smoking devices in smoke -free locations may
increase the social acceptability and appeal of smoking, particularly for youth,
1
PH2 -20
Attachment 4
undermining the progress that has been made over the years in discouraging smoking;
and
WHEREAS, e- cigarettes are widely believed to be a "gateway" to cigarette use,
especially among youth, since they contribute to nicotine addiction and glamorize
smoking; and
WHEREAS, nicotine is a highly addictive neurotoxin and is included in the
Proposition 65 list of Chemicals Known to the State to Cause Cancer or Reproductive
Toxicity and is known to cause birth defects and is particularly dangerous for vulnerable
populations including children, pregnant women and people with cardiovascular
conditions; and
WHEREAS, numerous studies have shown the potential health risks from the
vapor of e- cigarettes, including a significant increase in airway resistance among users
and cell mutations similar to those caused by cigarette smoke; and
WHEREAS, a 2013 study found a total of 22 different elements in the vapors of
electronic smoking devices, three of which appear on the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration's (FDA) list of harmful and potentially harmful chemicals; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control recently reported a sharp rise
in emergency calls to poison centers due to exposure to toxic e- cigarette liquids
contemporaneous with the rise in e- cigarette use, with such calls rising from around one
per month in 2010, to 215 per month in 2014; and
4
PH2 -21
Attachment 4
WHEREAS, e- cigarette manufacturers have not submitted clinical studies about
the safety or efficacy of the devices to the FDA, so consumers have no way of knowing
what types or concentrations of potentially harmful chemicals they are inhaling and
exhaling when they consume them or are exposed to them; and
WHEREAS, e- cigarettes have not been scientifically proven to be safe for users
or persons exposed to their vapor; and
WHEREAS, the marketing and advertising of e- cigarettes in television, radio,
online and print advertisements is expanding rapidly with no restrictions or regulation,
with much of the advertising directed at children; and
WHEREAS, e- cigarettes appear visually similar to traditional cigarettes from
even a short distance, leading to confusion of the two and giving the visual impression
that smoking is again allowed in locations where smoking is banned, thus hampering
public and private enforcement of no- smoking laws; and
WHEREAS, the scientific evidence to date does not support the claim that e-
cigarettes are an effective smoking cessation tool, but rather indicates that e- cigarette
users actually have significantly lower odds of quitting smoking cigarettes, by more than
30 percent; and
WHEREAS, California state law prohibits the sale of electronic smoking devices
to minors; and
WHEREAS, the City's tobacco retailer licensing law is intended to aid efforts to
prevent illegal sales of tobacco products to minors; and
3
PH2 -22
Attachment 4
WHEREAS, more than 45 California cities, the cities of New York, Chicago,
Washington, D.C. and Boston, and at least five states have regulated e- cigarettes the
same as traditional tobacco products; and
WHEREAS, in order to protect the health, welfare and safety of its residents and
visitors by protecting them from exposure to the byproducts of electronic smoking
devices, facilitating uniform enforcement of smoke -free air laws, reducing the potential
for re- normalizing smoking where tobacco use is prohibited, and protecting youth from
observing behavior that could encourage them to smoke, the City has decided to
legislatively prohibit the use of electronic smoking devices in all areas where the
smoking of tobacco products is currently prohibited and to include electronic smoking
devices in its tobacco retailer licensing law;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 4.44.010 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Section 4.44.010 Definitions.
The following words and phrases, as used in this Chapter or in any
other applicable law regulating smoking, shall have the following
meanings:
(a) Dining Area. A non - residential location where food or
beverages are served by a business or routinely consumed by
0
PH2 -23
Attachment 4
customers. This includes, but is not limited to, restaurant or bar
seating areas and patios.
(b) Electronic smoking device. An electronic or battery-
operated device that delivers vapor for inhalation. The term
includes every variation and type of such devices including
electronic cigarettes, electronic cigars, electronic cigarillos,
electronic pipes, electronic hookahs or any other similar
product.
M(c) Multi -Unit Common Area. Any indoor or outdoor area at a
multi -unit residential property (which include rental properties and
condominiums) that is accessible to and usable by the occupant of
more than one unit, including, but not limited to, halls, walkways,
lobbies, laundry rooms, common cooking areas, outdoor dining
areas, patios, play areas, swimming pools, gardens, and parking
lots. The term also includes all outdoor areas that are within twenty-
five feet of any door, window or vent at a multi -unit residential
property, including private -use balconies, porches, decks, and
patios, and regardless of whether or not the included area is
located on the same property.
{O(d) Santa Monica Pier. The Santa Monica Pier, consisting of
both the Newcomb Pier and the Municipal Pier, protruding from the
Santa Monica State Beach at the southwesterly terminus of
5
PH2 -24
Attachment 4
Colorado Avenue, and extending for approximately two thousand
one hundred thirty -five feet into the Santa Monica Bay.
04(4) Service Area. A place where people use or wait for services
provided by a private or government entity. This includes, but is not
limited to, bus stops, ATM lines, information kiosks and theater
lines.
{e4ffi Smoke or Smoking. The carrying or holding of a lighted or
activated pipe, cigar, cigarette, electronic smoking device, or
any other lighted or activated smoking product or equipment used
to burn any tobacco products, weed, plant, or any other
combustible substance. Smoking includes emitting or exhaling the
fumes or vapor of any pipe, cigar, cigarette, electronic smoking
device, or any other lighted smoking equipment used for burning
any tobacco product, weed, plant, or any other combustible
substance.
SECTION 2. Section 4.44.020 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Section 4.44.020 Prohibitions.
(a) Smoking in Specific Locations. It is unlawful to smoke in the
following places:
(1) Any elevator;
(2) Any public park;
3
PH2 -25
Attachment 4
(3) Any public beach;
(4) Anywhere on the Santa Monica Pier;
(5) Any outdoor service area;
(6) Inside any public building (as that term is defined in
Government Code Section 7596);
(7) Any outdoor dining area;
(8) Within twenty feet of the entrance, exit or open window of any
building open to the public;
(9) The Third Street Promenade;
(10) Any farmers' market;
(11) The property of any public library;
(12) Any hotel for which an occupancy permit is issued on or after
February 9, 2012.
(13) Any "vaping lounge" or other business that sells
electronic smoking devices; except that electronic smoking
devices may be used at the two such businesses that were
locally licensed as such lounges in Santa Monica as of June
24, 2014; provided there is appropriate ventilation so as not to
interfere with neighboring occupants and provided no minors
are allowed in the businesses.
7
PH2 -26
Attachment 4
(b) Disposal of Smoking Waste. No person shall dispose of any
cigarette, cigar or tobacco, or any part of a cigarette or cigar, in any
place where smoking is prohibited under this Chapter, except in a
designated waste disposal container.
(c) Liability of Businesses. No business owner, operator or
manager shall knowingly or intentionally allow smoking in an
outdoor dining area that is under his, her or its control. This law
does not require the physical ejection of any person from the
business or the taking of steps to prevent smoking under
circumstances that would involve a significant risk of physical harm.
(d) Posting of Signs. Every business that owns or controls an
outdoor dining area covered under subsection (a)(7) shall post one
or more prominent signs in conspicuous locations to apprise users
of the prohibition of smoking in that outdoor dining area. Multiple
signs must be provided as needed for larger areas to ensure that
signs are readily visible to all users of the area.
(e) Enforcement and Penalties.
(1) Infraction. A violation of this Section is an infraction and shall
be punished by a fine of one hundred dollars for the first violation;
two hundred dollars for a second violation within one year; and five
hundred dollars for a third and subsequent violations within one
year.
PH2 -27
Attachment 4
(2) Nonexclusive Remedies and Penalties. Punishment under this
Section shall not preclude punishment pursuant to Health and
Safety Code Section 13002, Penal Code Section 374.4, or any
other law proscribing the act of littering. Nothing in this Section shall
preclude any person from seeking any other remedies, penalties or
procedures provided by law.
SECTION 3. Section 4.45.020 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Section 4.45.020 Definitions.
The following words and phrases, as used in this Chapter, shall
have the following meanings:
(a) "Electronic smoking device" means an electronic or
battery- operated device that delivers vapor for inhalation. The
term includes every variation and type of such devices
including electronic cigarettes, electronic cigars, electronic
cigarillos, electronic pipes, electronic hookahs or any other
similar product.
04(4) "Person" means any natural person, partnership, cooperative
association, corporation, personal representative, receiver, trustee,
assignee, or any other legal entity.
M(c) "Proprietor" means a person with an ownership or managerial
interest in a business covered by this Chapter. An ownership
7
PH2 -28
Attachment 4
interest shall be deemed to exist when a person has a ten percent
or greater interest in the stock, assets, or income of a business
other than the sole interest of security for debt. A managerial
interest shall be deemed to exist when a person can or does have
or share ultimate control over the day -to -day operations of a
business.
{0 (d) "Tobacco product" means any substance containing tobacco
leaf, including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco,
hookah tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco or bidisi
and any electronic smoking device.
(e) "Tobacco retailer" means any person who sells, offers for sale
or sample, advertises or otherwise promotes, or does or offers to
exchange for any form of consideration, in public view, any tobacco
products.
SECTION 4. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices
thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such
inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary
to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would
10
PH2 -29
Attachment 4
have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause,
or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion
of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 6. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage
of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the
official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become
effective 30 days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
11
PH2 -30
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Attachment 5
Electronic Cigarettes
What do you think of including e- cigarettes in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and requiring
retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license?
All Statements sorted chronologically
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM
'i
`d. I rr
o.. r
As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is voluntary. The statements in this record are not necessarily
representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.
All Statements sorted chronologically PI-12-31
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM http: / /peakdemocracy.com /2419
Electronic Cigarettes Attachment 5
What do you think of including e- cigarettes in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and requiring
retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license?
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM, this forum had:
Attendees: 73
All Statements: 27
Hours of Public Comment: 1.4
This topic started on January 28, 2015, 5:13 PM.
All Statements sorted chronologically P H2 -32
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM http: / /peakdemocracy.com /2419 Page 2 of 8
Electronic Cigarettes Attachment 5
What do you think of including e- cigarettes in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and requiring retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license?
Name not available (unclaimed) February 10, 2015, 7:01 AM
E cigarettes should be treated like cigarettes.
Name not available (unclaimed) February 9, 2015, 9:36 PM
It is a tough call to make at this time, but I think it makes a lot of sense to regulate electronic cigarettes the
same as traditional cigarettes are currently regulated. Personally I find e- cigarettes to be offensive and consider
them to be a nuisance. The use of e- cigarettes should be restricted just as cigarettes are. I hope the City can
make a strong case to do so.
Name not available (unclaimed) February 9, 2015, 6:16 PM
First of all, the city needs to do a better job with enforcing the current restrictions. So many people smoke
downtown. Are there any signs downtown that state no smoking anywhere ? ??
Name not shown inside Neighborhood 4 (on forum) February 9, 2015, 5:49 PM
Please read this new report from our CA State Health Dept. - -we need this new ordinance for our protection
now.
http: / /www.cdph.ca.gov /programs/ tobacco / Documents / Media / State %20HeaIth- e- cig %20report.pdf
Name not available (unclaimed) February 4, 2015, 5:02 PM
I'm in support of including E- cigarettes in the City Ordinance of no smoking in SLO County. Cigarettes are
cigarettes - they both have negative impacts to them to both the inhaler and second- hand smoke. I noticed an
e- cigarette smoker outside our door on the patio today and was in a dilemma as to what to do .... say "no
smoking" here, as I would to a nicotine cigarette smoker, or not say anything - so I lean toward the side of
caution, but I am glad this is an issue now with the city. I'm for it - no smoking "e" or otherwise. We dont know
quite yet what the detriments are for the "e" cigarettes, but I feel confident to say... "it cant be good!" Thanks
David Clous outside Neighborhoods (on forum) February 4, 2015, 4:38 PM
To members of the City Counsel:
I am not by any means an expert on the health effects of e- cigarettes. However, I have read carefully the "State
Health Officer's Report on E- cigarettes" . I offer several comments in the report made by the director and state
health officer. Dr. Ron Chapman. I would encourage the City Counsel members to consider these concerns
carefully when deciding to include e- cigarettes in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and
All Statements sorted chronologically PH2 -33
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM http: / /peakdemocracy.com /2419 Page 3 of 8
Electronic Cigarettes Attachment 5
What do you think of including e- cigarettes in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and requiring retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license?
requiring retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license.
(1) The appeal of e- cigarettes:
"The availability of e- cigarettes in a variety of candy and fruit flavors such as cotton candy, gummy bear,
chocolate mint. and grape makes these products highly appealing to young children and teens ".
(2) Misleading Marketing Information:
The use of marketing terms may further mislead consumers into believing that these products are harmless and
safe for consumption ".
(3) E- Cigarette Poisonings Among Young Adults
"Among children 0 -5 years old, e- cigarette poisonings have increased sharply in recent years. By the end of
2014, e- cigarette poisonings to young children tripled in one year to 150 for children under 5 and to 250 for total
poisonings:"
(4) E- Cigarettes Harmful Chemicals
It is know that e- cigarettes emit at least 10 chemicals that are know to cause cancer, birth defects and other
reproductive harm"
While there is still much to be learned about individual and public health impact of e- cigarette use, the
referenced report provides factual information about what we do know about e- cigarettes.
David Clous
Chair of the tobacco control Coalition SLO, CA.
Member of the County Health Commission
Thank you for your consideration to the facts outlined in making your decision.
Name not available (unclaimed) February 4, 2015, 2:51 PM
I think we SHOULD include E- Cigarettes in the ban. They are obnoxious to the public, thanks!
Name not available (unclaimed) February 4, 2015, 2:43 PM
I've read that e- cigarettes utilize liquid nicotine. It would seem that the nicotine conveyance may have changed
here, but there is second -hand "huffing" going on, nonetheless . Yes, e- cigarettes fall under current smoking
restrictions established for use in public places.
Name not shown inside Neighborhood 5 (on forum) February 4, 2015, 12:51 PM
The health effects of e- cigarettes are still largely debated and it's also unknown if the secondhand smoke
causes any negative health effects, so I don't think we can base this argument on those two variables. However,
the smoke or "vapor" emitted from e- cigarettes can be a nuisance to others, similar to cigarettes, and for that
reason I do not think they should be allowed in public places. I agree with requiring retailers to get a license to
sell e- cigarettes.
All Statements sorted chronologically P H 2 -34
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM http: / /peakdemocracy.com /2419 Page 4 of 8
Electronic Cigarettes Attachment 5
What do you think of including e- cigarettes in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and requiring retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license?
http://www.forbes.com / sites /sallysatel/ 2015 /02/02/ new - surgeon - general - should - prescribe- scientific - honesty -on-
e- cigarettes -2/2/
Name not shown inside Neighborhood 5 (on forum)
February 4, 2015, 12:48 PM
The ban on smoking wasn't because we didn't want to see people in the "act" of smoking - -it was about the
effects of secondhand smoke on our health and environment. Just because e- cigarettes look like real ones is
not a good reason to ban them.
Web MD states that it is loo early to know the long -term risks or the effects of secondhand exposure from e-
cigarettes. That could be a legitimate argument to restrict them until we learn more about them. I don't know
that I have an opinion either way, but I think their needs to be a legitimate reason (like public health) behind the
ban if that is the way we are headed, not because they "look like" and "mimic" cigarettes.
Name not available (unclaimed) February 4, 2015, 10:07 AM
I think e- cigarettes will prove to be just as bad as regular ones and should be treated exactly the same way. It's
another insidious attempt by the tobacco industry to sell their product.
Name not shown inside Neighborhood 5 (on forum) February 2, 2015, 1:32 PM
I think it makes a lot of sense to regulate electronic cigarettes exactly the same as traditional cigarettes. As I
understand what is being proposed, it's not saying that people can't use them at all just that they can't use them
where smoking currently isn't allowed. Sounds fair to me. I'm proud of this city's history on progressive
smoking /tobacco policy and think this is the next chapter.
Name not available (unclaimed) January 31, 2015, 9:51 PM
E cigs and cigarettes have nothing to do with each. To say that ecigs have toxins in them without scientific proof
(under normal conditions) is not right,
Name not available (unclaimed) January 30, 2015, 9:12 PM
There should be no retailing of a health hazard like this a cigarette activity. All it does is enrich the tobacco
companies, and addict more young people.
Name not available (unclaimed) January 30, 2015, 6:18 PM
All Statements sorted chronologically P H 2 -35
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM http: / /peakdemocracy.com /2419 Page 5 of 8
Electronic Cigarettes Attachment 5
What do you think of including e- cigarettes in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and requiring retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license?
I think that they should be treated no differently than cigarettes. The Department of Public Health report shows
that electronic cigarettes emit cancer - causing chemicals.
Richard Ferris inside Neighborhood 6 (on forum) January 30, 2015, 5:24 PM
E -Gigs are the best harm reduction device ever invented. The lives and improved health outcomes E -Cigs offer
to addicted smokers is without equal.
Health officials who should be promoting E -Cigs are instead circling their wagons and telling what that which is
not true to protect their tobacco settlement funding that the use of E- Cigarettes is already reducing by the FACT
that less adults and less teens are smoking.
Most E -Cig devices do NOT remotely resemble an actual cigarette..... only the disposable type look similar, but
they produce NO smell or odors so anyone can easily tell them from real stinky tobacco products from 20 feet
away.
Banning something because you think it looks like something it is not .... is only ok in fascist and communist
countries, not in the land of the free.
Name not available (unclaimed) January 30, 2015, 5:08 PM
PLEASE , THINK, RESEARCH, STUDY before you over react and harm the greatest advance in smoking harm
reduction to ever come along . LIES, and do not be confused , lies are being told by the beneficiaries of the
tobacco settlement agreement to keep their cash flowing and to actually keep people smoking. These people
are villains who would lie to preserve the status qou and their funding. Please go to American Council on
Science and Health to inform yourself of the facts before leaping to a opinion. E -Cigs cannot be mistaken for
real cigarettes as they have no smell ... DUH.
Only the disposable a -cigs look similar to the real thing. The devices regular VAPORs use do not remotely
resemble real cigarettes.
Banning something because you think it might look like something else is not a good reason in a free
society .... it would be ok under fascism or communism where the elite know what is best for everyone.
Vote for freedom every time or lose your freedom one blow at a time
Name not available (unclaimed)
January 30, 2015, 1:06 PM
I support including e- cigarettes in the current restrictions. I also believe the City should have restrictions on the
serving of alcoholic beverages to limited hours (9PM to 5PM no beverages sold in City). Just think of the
reduction of crime and better health our community would have. Both restrictions would be a shining model for
our community and an example for others.
Name not available (unclaimed) January 29, 2015, 5:17 PM
Tim may have a valid argument. I think the test should probably be whether a -cigs emit anything that would be
All Statements sorted chronologically P H 2 -36
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM http: / /peakdemocracy.com /2419 Page 6 of 8
Electronic Cigarettes Attachment 5
What do you think of including e- cigarettes in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and requiring retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license?
a nuisance to passers -by. If they do, then they should probably be regulated the same as other tobacco
products.
Name not available (unclaimed) January 29, 2015, 5:08 PM
asdfasfasadsafaf
Mary Lou Johnson inside Neighborhood 7 (on forum) January 29, 2015, 4:06 PM
e- cigarettes should be included in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and the city should
require retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license.
Enforcement of present ordinance would be quite confusing given the e- cigarettes mimic cigarettes so closely.
Trying to explain and enforce one and not the other is not an efficient use of city resources.
Name not available (unclaimed) January 29, 2015, 2:58 PM
Enough already. Maybe council could deal with important issues instead. Not all E cigs have nicoteen anyway.
Are you going to make exemptions for them? Shall we issue cops test kits to check them? The existing outdoor
smoking ban is already a selective "License Plate light" law. The police get to just use it at their discretion when
they need a quick reason to stop somebody. The bike Patrol officers roll by smokers all night long down town,
but only those causing other troubles get stopped. Lets not put another pretend law on the books.
Name not available (unclaimed)
January 29, 2015, 1:38 PM
I feel strongly that a cigarettes should be treated the same as regular cigarettes. If they could be banned
completely, that would be great.
Tim Waag inside Neighborhood 8 (on forum)
January 29, 2015, 9:00 AM
- E -cigs help smokers quit, thereby saving their lives, so banning a life- saving product is cruel. Those who can
quit smoking real cigarettes have already done so, and those who struggle to quit need all the tools they can to
help them quit. Ask someone who is trying to quit real cigarettes whether they want to ban E -cigs.
- Banning something like E -cigs will make it "cool" with the teens, and thus will encourage it's use among the
under -aged
- Yes, it may look like a cigarette, but so what? it's not. The popular candy cigarettes of yesteryear also look like
cigarettes, and we didn't ban them
- Most smokers are low income and homeless; E -cigs are cheaper than regular cigarettes, so banning E -cigs
cause an additional financial burden on the low income and homeless, who we are supposed to be trying to
help
All Statements sorted chronologically PH2 -37
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM http: / /peakdemocracy.com /2419 Page 7 of 8
Electronic Cigarettes Attachment 5
What do you think of including e- cigarettes in the current restrictions on smoking in public places and requiring retailers of e- cigarettes to get a license?
- E -sigs have not been proven to have any negative health benefits. Why ban them just because they look like
something that does kill?
Name not available (unclaimed) January 29, 2015, 8:27 AM
I support a full ban of e- smoking, also called "vaping ", as it vaporizes the tobacco and other stuff put inside.
They not only emit harmful chemicals from tobacco, but are commonly used for marijuana consumption by
burning "honey oil" in them. The use of "honey oil" (concentrated THC) promotes very dangerous production
practices in our neighborhoods by cooking marijuana with butane. Why should my health and safety be
subjected to the harm of a cigarettes: public vaping? I believe adults should be able to do what they want to
their own bodies, but when it effects others' health or puts minors in harms way, public policy should be put in
place to protect us. Licensing sales should be done as well as minimum age requirements for purchasing. This
should go for purchasing medical and recreational marijuana as well.
Rosemary Wilvert inside Neighborhood 1 (on forum)
January 29, 2015, 7:57 AM
Since e- cigarettes can look like the real thing, and one would have to look close to tell the difference, allowing
e -cigs in public places would undermine our City's admirable restriction.
Name not available (unclaimed)
January 29, 2015, 7:48 AM
If the e- cigarettes increase the difficulty of enforcing the City's cigarette ban, I would be in favor of banning e-
cigarettes.
All Statements sorted chronologically P H 2 -38
As of February 18, 2015, 3:14 PM http: / /peakdemocracy.com /2419 Page 8 of 8
Attachment 6
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 8.14, 8.16 AND 8.17 OF THE SAN LUIS
OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE SALE AND USE OF ELECTRONIC
SMOKING DEVICES
WHEREAS, the popularity of electronic smoking devices including electronic cigarettes
or "e- cigarettes" has grown exponentially, especially among young people; and
WHEREAS, electronic smoking devices are designed to be used in the same manner as
conventional tobacco products and operate by heating a liquid chemical solution with the user
exhaling a smoke -like vapor similar in appearance to the exhaled smoke from cigarettes and
other conventional tobacco products; and
WHEREAS, a study published in the Journal of Environment and Public Health suggests
that electronic smoking devices "may have the capacity to `renormalize' tobacco use in a
demographic that has had significant de- normalization of tobacco use previously "; and
WHEREAS, the use of electronic smoking devices in public increases the social
acceptability and appeal of smoking, particularly for youth, undermining the progress that has
been made over the years in discouraging smoking; and
WHEREAS, the use of electronic smoking devices in smoke -free locations threatens to
reverse the progress that has been made in establishing the social norm that smoking is not
permissible in public places or places of employment in San Luis Obispo, and will threaten the
City's enforcement of these laws; and
WHEREAS, manufacturers of electronic smoking devices have not submitted clinical
studies about the safety and efficacy of these products to the FDA; and, therefore, consumers
currently have no way of knowing what types or concentrations of potentially harmful chemicals
they are inhaling and exhaling when they use these products; and
WHEREAS, nicotine is a highly addictive neurotoxin and is included in the Proposition
65 list of Chemicals known to the State to Cause Cancer or Reproductive Toxicity. Nicotine is
known to cause birth defects and is particularly dangerous for vulnerable populations including
children, pregnant women and people with cardiovascular conditions; and
WHEREAS, a recent study confirmed that electronic smoking devices that contain
nicotine also emit nicotine in the released vapor and involuntarily expose nonsmokers to
nicotine; and
WHEREAS, a recent study found a total of 22 elements in the vapors produced by
electronic smoking devices, three of these elements (lead, nickel, and chromium) appear on the
FDA's "Harmful and Potentially Harmful Chemicals List "; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Center for Disease Control recently reported a rise in emergency
calls to poison centers due to exposure to toxic e- cigarette liquids contemporaneous with the rise
PH2 -39
Attachment 6
in e- cigarette use, with calls rising from around one per month in 2010, to 215 per month in
2014; and
WHEREAS, electronic smoking devices currently are not an FDA - approved smoking
cessation device; and
WHEREAS, the World Medical Association has determined that electronic smoking
devices "are not comparable to scientifically- proven methods of smoking cessation and that
neither their value as therapeutic aids for smoking cessation nor their safety as cigarette
replacements is established "; and
WHEREAS, in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community the City
has decided to legislatively prohibit the use of electronic smoking devices in all areas where the
smoking of tobacco products is currently prohibited.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as the
findings of the City Council by this reference.
SECTION 2. Section 8.14.020 of Chapter 8.14 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
is hereby amended to read as follows:
8.14.020 Definitions.
The following words and phrases, whenever used in this chapter, shall have the meanings
defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise:
A. `Electronic Smoking Device" means an electronic device which can be used to deliver an
inhaled dose of nicotine or any other substances, including any component, part, or accessory of
such a device, whether or not sold separately. `Electronic Smoking Device" includes any such
electronic smoking device, whether manufactured, distributed, marketed, or sold as an electronic
cigarette, an electronic cigar, an electronic cigarillo, an electronic pipe, an electronic hookah, or
an, other ther product name or descriptor.
B. "Person" means any natural person, partnership, cooperative association, private
corporation, personal representative, receiver, trustee, assignee, or any other legal entity.
C. "Proprietor" means a person with an ownership or managerial interest in a business. An
ownership interest shall be deemed to exist when a person has a ten percent (10 %) or greater
interest in the stock, assets, or income of a business other than the sole interest of security for
debt. A managerial interest shall be deemed to exist when a person can or does have, or can or
does share, ultimate control over the day -to- day operations of a business.
Q D. "Tobacco product" means any s„bee product containing, made from, or derived from
tobacco 4a€ or nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether smoked, heated,
PH2 -40
Attachment 6
chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including
but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping
tobacco, Electronic Smoking Devices or any other preparation of tobacco including Indian
cigarettes called "bidis." "Tobacco product" does not include any product that has been approved
by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product or for
other therapeutic purposes and is marketed and sold solely for such an approved purpose.
D E. "Tobacco retailer" means any person who sells, offers for sale, or does or offers to
exchange for any form of consideration, tobacco, or tobacco products; "tobacco retailing" shall
mean the doing of any of these things.
E— F. "Licensing agent" means a city employee designated by the city administrative officer to
serve in this capacity.
G. 'Enforcement agency" means the San Luis Obispo police department.
SECTION 3. Section 8.16.020 of Chapter 8.16 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
is hereby amended to read as follows:
8.16.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter the following definitions shall govern unless the context clearly
requires otherwise:
A. "Business" means any sole proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, corporation, association,
or other entity formed for profit- making purposes or that has an employee, as defined in this
section.
B. "Dining area" means any area available to or customarily used by the general public, that is
designed, established, or regularly used for consuming food or drink.
C. "Electronic Smoking Device" means an electronic device which can be used to deliver an
inhaled dose of nicotine or any other substances, including any component, part, or accessory of
such a device, whether or not sold separately. `Electronic Smoking Device" includes any such
electronic smoking device, whether manufactured, distributed, marketed, or sold as an electronic
cigarette, an electronic cigar, an electronic cigarillo, an electronic pipe, an electronic hookah, or
any other product name or descriptor.
C D. "Employee" means any person who is employed; retained as an independent contractor by
any employer, as defined in this section; or any person who volunteers his or her services for an
employer, association, nonprofit, or volunteer entity.
E. "Employer" means any person, partnership, corporation, association, nonprofit or other
entity who employs or retains the service of one or more persons, or supervises volunteers.
& F. "Enclosed" means:
PH2 -41
Attachment 6
1. Any covered or partially covered space having more than fifty percent of its perimeter area
walled in or otherwise closed to the outside such as, for example, a covered porch with more
than two walls; or
2. Any space open to the sky (hereinafter "uncovered ") having more than seventy -five percent of
its perimeter area walled in or otherwise closed to the outside, such as, for example, a courtyard.
G. "Multi -unit residence" means a building or portion thereof that contains more than one
dwelling space consisting of essentially complete independent living facilities for one or more
persons, including, for example, permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and
sanitation. A single - family house shared by roommates is not a multi -unit residences for
purposes of this chapter.
C. H. "Multi -unit residence common area" means any indoor or outdoor common area of a
multi -unit residence accessible to and usable by more than one residence, including but not
limited to halls, lobbies, laundry rooms, outdoor eating areas, play and swimming areas.
I. "Nonprofit entity" means any entity that meets the requirements of California Corporations
Code section 5003 as well as any corporation, unincorporated association or other entity created
for charitable, religious, philanthropic, educational, political, social or similar purposes, the net
proceeds of which are committed to the promotion of the objectives or purposes of the
entity and not to private gain. A public agency is not a nonprofit entity within the meaning of this
section.
L J. "Place of employment" means any area under the legal or de facto control of an employer,
business or nonprofit entity that an employee or the general public may have cause to enter in the
normal course of operations, but regardless of the hours of operation, including, for example,
indoor and outdoor work areas, construction sites, vehicles used in employment or for business
purposes, taxis, employee lounges, conference and banquet rooms, bingo and gaming facilities,
long -term health facilities, warehouses, and private residences that are used as child care or
health care facilities subject to licensing requirements.
K. "Playground" means any park or recreational area designed in part to be used by children
that has play or sports equipment installed or has been designated or landscaped for play or
sports activities, or any similar facility located on public or private school grounds, or on city
grounds.
K—. L. "Public place" means any place, public or private, open to the general public regardless of
any fee or age requirement, including, for example, streets, sidewalks, parking lots, parking
garages, bars, restaurants, clubs, stores, stadiums, parks, playgrounds, taxis, and buses.
1✓. M. "Reasonable distance" means a distance that ensures that occupants of an area in which
smoking is prohibited are not exposed to secondhand smoke created by smokers outside the area.
This distance shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet.
PH2 -42
Attachment 6
M-. N. "Recreational area" means any area, public or private, open to the public for recreational
purposes regardless of any fee requirement, including, for example, parks, gardens, sporting
facilities, stadiums, and playgrounds.
N-. O. "Service area" means any area designed to be or regularly used by one or more persons to
receive or wait to receive a service, enter a public place, or make a transaction whether or not
such service includes the exchange of money including, for example, ATMs, bank teller
windows, telephones, ticket lines, bus stops, cab stands, and takeout counters.
P. "Significant tobacco retailer" means any tobacco retailer that derives seventy -five percent
(75 %) or more of gross sales receipts from the sale or exchange of Tobacco Products and
Tobacco Product paraphernalia.
Q. "Smoke" means the ag ses, particles, or vapors released into the air as a result of combustion,
electrical ignition, or vaporization of Tobacco Products or any other weed or plant product, when
the apparent or usual purpose of the combustion, electrical ignition, or vaporization is human
inhalation of the byproducts. The term "Smoke" includes, but is not limited to, tobacco smoke,
Electronic Smoking Device vapors and marijuana smoke.
1?. R. "Smoking" means engaging in an act that generates Smoke, such as inhaling, exhaling,
burning or vaporizing any Tobacco Product a lighted pipe, lighted eigarette of any
k or any other weed or plant product intended for human inhalation; or the lighting of wipe;
nN, ^ eigarette of any kin any Tobacco Product ineluding, bu4 not limited to, , or
any other weed or plant product intended for human inhalation. "Smoking" shall not include the
igniting, combusting or vaporizing of material that contains no Tobacco Products where the
purpose of such igniting, or vaporizing is solely olfactory, such as, for example,
smoke from incense.
Q S. "Tobacco product" means any stibstanee product containing, made from, or derived from
tobacco lea€ or nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether smoked, heated,
chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including
but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping
tobacco, Electronic Smoking Devices or any other preparation of tobacco including Indian
cigarettes called "bidis." "Tobacco product" does not include any product that has been approved
by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product or for
other therapeutic purposes and is marketed and sold solely for such an approved purpose.
SECTION 4. Section 8.17.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
8.17.010 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall be defined as set forth below:
A. "Cigarette vending machine" means any electronic or mechanical device or appliance the
operation of which depends upon the insertion of money, whether in coin or paper bill, or other
PH2 -43
Attachment 6
thing representative of value, which dispenses or releases a tobacco product and /or tobacco
accessories.
B. "Electronic Smoking Device" means an electronic device which can be used to deliver an
inhaled dose of nicotine or any other substances, including any component, part, or accessory of
such a device, whether or not sold separately. "Electronic Smoking Device" includes and
electronic smoking device, whether manufactured, distributed, marketed, or sold as an electronic
cigarette, an electronic cigar, an electronic cigarillo, an electronic pipe, an electronic hookah, or
any other product name or descriptor.
R: C. "Person" shall mean an individual, firm, partnership, joint venture, unincorporated
association, corporation, estate, trust, trustee, or any other group of combination of the above
acting as a unit, excepting however, the United States of America, the State of California, and
any political subdivision or unit thereof.
E D. "Tobacco accessories" means cigarette papers or wrappers, pipes, holders of smoking
materials of all types, cigarette rolling machines, and any other item designed primarily for the
smoking or ingestion of tobacco products.
E. "Tobacco product" means any substanee product containing, made from, or derived from
tobacco leaf or nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether smoked, heated,
chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested _ by any other means, including
but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping
tobacco, Electronic Smoking Devices or any other preparation of tobacco including Indian
cigarettes called "bidis." "Tobacco product" does not include any product that has been approved
by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product or for
other therapeutic purposes and is marketed and sold solely for such an approved purpose.
SECTION 5. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the
remaining portions of this ordinance, or any other provisions of the City's rules and regulations.
It is the City's express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective
of the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be
declared invalid or unenforceable.
SECTION 6. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting
for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune,
a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the
expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. A copy of the full text of this ordinance shall
be on file in the Office of the City Clerk on and after the date following introduction and passage
to print and shall be available to any member of the public
INTRODUCED on the day of March 2015, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council
of the City of San Luis Obispo on the day of March 20151 on the following roll call vote:
PH2 -44
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
Anthony J. Mejia
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
Attachment 6
PH2 -45
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
E-cigarette Ordinance
City Council Meeting – March 3, 2015
Recommendation
Introduce an Ordinance amending Chapters 8.14, 8.16 and
8.17 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code to prohibit the
use of electronic smoking devices in all places where smoking
is currently prohibited and require retailers of electronic
smoking devices to obtain a Tobacco Retail License.
Council Direction
February 4, 2014 City Council Meeting
Direction to address the consideration of adding e-cigarettes to
current tobacco and smoking regulations
What is an e-cigarette?
4
E-cigarette Concerns
5
Health Effects
Renormalization
Enforcement
Existing Policies
1985 1st Public Smoking Ordinance
1992 Cigarette Vending Machine Ordinance
2003 Tobacco Retailer License Ordinance
2010 Smoking Prohibited and Secondhand Smoke Control
Ordinance
Research
7
Community Outreach
8
Proposed Ordinance
Chapter 8.14 Tobacco Retailer Licenses
Add definition for “Electronic Smoking Device”
Modify definition for “Tobacco Product” to include
electronic smoking devices and other updates
9
Proposed Ordinance
Chapter 8.16 Smoking Prohibited and Secondhand
Smoke Control
Add definition for “Electronic Smoking Device”
Modify definition for “Tobacco Product” to include
electronic smoking devices and other updates
Add definition for “Smoke” which includes aerosol
Modify definition for “smoking” to include anything that
generates “Smoke” as separately defined
10
Proposed Ordinance
Chapter 8.17 Cigarette Vending Machines
Add definition for “Electronic Smoking Device”
Modify definition for “Tobacco Product” to include
electronic smoking devices and other updates
11
Impacts to Business
40 businesses with Tobacco Retailer Licenses
At least 2 businesses that currently sell e-cigarettes
and do not have a Tobacco Retailer License
At least 1 Significant Tobacco Retailer that allows
smoking of e-cigarettes inside of the store
12
Recommendation
Introduce an Ordinance amending Chapters 8.14, 8.16 and
8.17 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code to prohibit the
use of electronic smoking devices in all places where smoking
is currently prohibited and require retailers of electronic
smoking devices to obtain a Tobacco Retail License.
2010 Significant Tobacco Retailer
Exemption
The City Council would need to clarify that the exception
originally adopted was intended as a one-time exception for
retailers in existence as of the 2010 adoption date of the
original ordinance.
Enforcement
Enforcement of the recommended changes would continue
through the existing operations and resources of the Police
Department.
Increase public awareness
County Tobacco Control Coalition
Press Release