SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA - Laserfiche WebLink

If the goal of this initiative is to prevent teen use, than it shouldn't begin with banning the lawful products from citizen adults. It should be focused on education, on protocols and processes put in place for stores that illegally sell to minors. Our store has never once sold to a minor and has passed many undercover sting operations. Businesses should pay fines,pay extra taxes,and have suspensions based on their conduct.There is should be a thorough discussion and legislation regarding the administration of this industry, and the rules and regulations,along with strict guidelines for offenders. But to ban an otherwise legal product from our city is overreaching and broad,and beyond the constitutional umbrella of the City Council. Alcohol is a much more serious problem with teens and that has less city regulations. We need more education for parents and teens in regards to these products.The flavored tobacco industry can't be punished as a whole because of Teen use. 100%of my customers are law abiding Pleasanton residents that will be forced to go to San Ramon and other cities, rather than their own hometown. Our client has published over 120 different signatures for his petition. He would like an opportunity for them to voice their protest.The ZOOM call from the City Council meetings is an unfair medium for these adults to voice their concerns.All the speakers from the May 5th meeting were properly coached kids and individuals who were reading pre-scripted blurbs from anti-tobacco companies who have monetary gain from this ban.There were individuals from focus groups and non-profit organizations who are not present in Pleasanton and not residents of this city.They don't accurately reflect the desires of the community that you represent. My client on the other hand has 120 signatures from Pleasanton Residents,adults who pay property taxes,who abide by the law,who have no monetary incentive from this ordinance.Their story and their voice should be considered having more merit than these trained puppets. In conclusion,we are writing to the city council to reconsider their ordinance decision, to at least give the residents an ample opportunity to properly object to this ordinance rather than a rushed, haste decision during this pandemic and Shelter in Place period.At the bare minimum a prolonged period of time for the mandatory sales of existing inventory. Please be on notice,that within 90 days time,we will be filing a lawsuit for damages challenging this decision if unfavorable. Please reach out to us with any further questions and concerns as we shall wait for your response. Thank you, A. Ta q Mojaddidi Esq.