My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
02
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2020
>
102020
>
02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/12/2021 1:29:20 PM
Creation date
10/14/2020 10:26:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/20/2020
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
Tracy Farhad, noted that it is National Travel and Tourism Week and remarked on the negative impacts <br /> that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on travel and tourism but anticipates that the Tri-Valley tourism <br /> industry will rebound. <br /> PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS <br /> 7. Public Hearing: Consider information about minimum package sizes and prices for tobacco <br /> products. and introduce an ordinance based on approvals from February 18, 2020 to: (1) prohibit <br /> the sale of flavored tobacco citywide; (2) prohibit the sale of electronic smoking devices and related <br /> paraphernalia citywide; (3) prohibit new tobacco sales within 1,000 feet of public schools, parks and <br /> recreation centers; (4) delegate implementation of tobacco retailer licensing (TRL); and (5) address <br /> possession of tobacco products by persons under age 21 by amending Municipal Code Chapter <br /> 9.32 and Title 18 <br /> Assistant City Attorney Larissa Seto stated that this item is returning to Council after being introduced at <br /> the meeting of February 18, 2020. At that meeting, Staff was asked to return with information about <br /> minimum package size and pricing for tobacco products as well as to revise the ordinance. <br /> Assistant City Attorney Seto stated that federal law requires cigarettes to be sold in minimum packs of <br /> 20 and that there are no other federal or state laws setting minimum package sizes or pricing for tobacco <br /> products. Although there are some cities in Alameda County that have minimum package sizes and <br /> pricing, none of those cities are in the Tri-Valley. Staff recommendation remains that Council should not <br /> adopt minimum package sizes or pricing. This is based partially on a study from UCSF whose findings <br /> indicate that underage students in communities with demographics similar to Pleasanton are using higher <br /> priced tobacco products as well as the fact that the ordinance prohibits sales of flavored tobacco and e- <br /> cigarettes, which are the products most favorable by underage users. <br /> Assistant City Attorney Seto stated that alternatively, Council may direct Staff to prepare an ordinance <br /> based on the similarity of cigarettes to little cigars and cigarillos and higher priced minimums like those <br /> in other cities in Alameda County. <br /> Assistant City Attorney Seto then stated that of the other parts of the ordinance, Council was most <br /> interested in prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco city-wide with no exemptions. A speaker at the <br /> February 18th meeting requested that Council make an exemption of loose, flavored pipe tobacco and <br /> premium flavored cigars costing at least $7 per cigar because young people are not interested in these <br /> products. Assistant City Attorney Seto informed that the City of Livermore introduced similar exemptions <br /> in March 2020 but is currently reconsidering these exemptions. <br /> Assistant City Attorney Seto stated that the second item Council considered as part of this ordinance was <br /> the prohibition of electronic smoking devices and related paraphernalia, with no exceptions. These <br /> prohibitions are in place in the cities of Livermore and Dublin and in unincorporated Alameda County. <br /> Assistant City Attorney Seto commented that the third item discussed as part of this ordinance was not <br /> allowing new tobacco sales within 1,000 feet of public schools. parks, and recreation facilities but would <br /> `grandfather' existing retailers and tobacco stores without allowing them to expand or relocate. Some <br /> City Council Minutes Page 2 of 8 May 5, 2020 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.