2013_1014_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Department Approval �� t�"�i �� REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: 10/14/13 Item No. : 14. c City Manager Approval �� Item Description: Consider an Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 306: Cigarette and Tobacco Products BACKGROUND At the February 13, 2012 City Council meeting the Council adopted a revised Tobacco Ordinance to address new forms of tobacco products and devices that had recently become available to consumers. One of those new tobacco products included electronic cigarettes or `e-cigarettes'; a smokeless device designed to deliver nicotine by inhaling a water vapor mist. This delivery process is known as `vaping' as opposed to smoking. The revised Ordinance prohibited smoking indoors under all circumstances and covers products that are derived from tobacco and are ingested by inhaling. City Staff and the City Attorney have concluded that the current ordinance sufficiently covers e- cigarettes that feature a nicotine delivery system, because nicotine is derived from and historically linked to tobacco. However, in the past 18 months e-cigarettes have evolved further and in some cases no longer contain nicotine but rather feature other substances and flavorings. Because they lack nicotine, we have concluded that they would NOT be subj ect to the existing ordinance. From a regulatory standpoint, this is problematic because a casual observer would be unable to detect which e-cigarettes contain nicotine and which do not. This is especially problematic given that some tobacco retail establishments have begun to actively market their establishment as `vaping lounges' where customers can freely use their e-cigarettes. Currently, e-cigarettes are NOT regulated under the State's Minnesota Clean Indoor Act of 1975 or the Freedom to Breathe Act of 2007 — both of which, along with other statutory provisions, provide explicit authority for local governments to impose their own regulations on tobacco-related products. Nor are they regulated by the U. S. Food and Drug Administration like tobacco is, although the FDA itself is suggesting that it is moving in that direction. City Staff does not have the expertise to highlight the long-term health or societal implications of e- cigarettes. While manufacturers might conclude that they are safer than regular cigarettes, others suggest that "not all of the science is in". The question before the Council is whether the City should regulate all e-cigarettes or similar devices the same. A secondary question is whether the City Council has the authority to impose restrictions on e-cigarettes that do not feature any tobacco-related products. Page 1 of 2