My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2013_1021
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2013
>
CC_Minutes_2013_1021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/12/2013 3:25:03 PM
Creation date
11/4/2013 3:09:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
10/21/2013
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
DRAFT Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday, October 21,2013 <br /> Page 12 <br /> Councilmember Etten noted the need to focus on how to address the Chiefs con- <br /> cerns in regulating and enforcing nicotine and non-nicotine products based on <br /> their definition. <br /> At the request of Mayor Roe as to whether State law already regulates sale of e- <br /> cigarettes to minors, City Attorney Gaughan advised that he could not respond, <br /> but suggested that Ramsey County may have more information on that. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte stated that she would be voting in opposition to the mo- <br /> tion, for reasons previously stated, opining that there were clearly more questions <br /> yet to be vetted before taking this action. <br /> Mayor Roe concurred that there wasn't a lot of regulatory information available, <br /> with the FDA still conducting their study and their conclusions eventually dictat- <br /> ing how the State and local government moved forward. However, Mayor Roe <br /> opined that he found this proposed amendment to be a relatively simple change, <br /> and while recognizing that business owners may disagree, it provided the City to <br /> continue compliance checks and enforce sales within the community. Mayor Roe <br /> further opined that the consternation seemed to be with sampling and by defini- <br /> tion without exception elsewhere in ordinance, all provisions in Chapter 306 <br /> would apply to this product as well. Mayor Roe stated that he was supportive of <br /> making that amendment at this time, with the understanding that further amend- <br /> ments may be indicated in the future; but opined that he didn't think it was appro- <br /> priate to wait for that. <br /> Mayor Roe referenced concerns brought up during public comment at last week's <br /> meeting, until a determination was made that non-nicotine vapors or product use <br /> were not dangerous, until that FDA conclusion was available, the City needed to <br /> take this action. Mayor Roe noted that there may be some products that would be <br /> imported from overseas that were not FDA regulated, and with that and other un- <br /> known factors, it also caused him to err on the side of caution and provide the Po- <br /> lice Department with the ability to not have to distinguish between one or the oth- <br /> er. <br /> At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mayor Roe clarified and confirmed <br /> that this amendment would apply only to sales, and provide a mechanism for en- <br /> forcement, with current State law provisions allowing for the potential pathway <br /> for smoking for kids; making regulating this through the City's licensing scheme <br /> of vital importance to him. <br /> Councilmember Willmus concurred with Mayor Roe's comments; however, he <br /> noted that he also struggled with the discussion and guidance of the City Attorney <br /> in how to defend this amendment. While wanting to err on the side of caution as <br /> well, Councilmember Willmus noted his hesitation until there was firm guidance <br /> from the FDA. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.