[00:00:01]
I'M CALLING THE HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING TO ORDER.
UH, THE CALL OF THE MEETING IS TOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TO REVIEW AND DISCUSS CMA 2026 DASH 21 RELATED TO CAMBRIDGE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8 28, WHOSE TITLE IS REGULATION ON YOUTH ACCESS AND SALE OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS, AND ON SMOKING IN WORKPLACES AND PUBLIC PLACES IN ORDER TO, UH, UPDATE THE CURRENT ORDINANCE TO CONFORM TO WIDELY ADOPTED MUNICIPAL POLICIES, NEW STATE LAWS AND COURT DECISIONS, AS WELL AS TO DISCUSS THE RECENT REGULATORY LANDSCAPE IN MASSACHUSETTS REGARDING TOBACCO PRODUCTS.
THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS A ROLE CALLED OF MEMBERS PRESENT, COUNCILOR ZUBI.
PRESENT, PRESENT VICE PRESENT PRESENT, COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN.
ABSENT COUNCILLOR NOLAN, PRESENT, PRESENT, COUNCILLOR ZUI.
PRESENT, PRESENT, FOUR MEMBERS PRESENT, ONE RECORDED AS ABSENT.
AND I WANNA NOTE THAT MAYOR SIDIKI IS WITH US.
AND THAT, UH, COUNCILOR MCGOVERN INDICATED THAT HE HAD AN APPOINTMENT AND WILL BE JOINING US LATER.
UH, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER TWO OF THE ACTS OF 2025, ADOPTED BY THE MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL COURT AND APPROVED BY THE GOVERNOR, THE CITY IS AUTHORIZED TO USE REMOTE PARTICIPATION AT MEETINGS OF THE CAMBRIDGE CITY COUNCIL AND ITS COMMITTEES.
PLEASE NOTE, THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDS THIS MEETING AND MAKES IT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR FUTURE VIEWING.
IN ADDITION, THIRD PARTIES MAY ALSO BE AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDING THIS MEETING.
IN ADDITION TO HAVING MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL PARTICIPATE REMOTELY, WE HAVE ALSO SET UP ZOOM TELECONFERENCE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE VISIT THE CITY COUNCIL SECTION ON THE CITY'S WEBPAGE.
INSTRUCTIONS HOW TO SIGN UP ARE POSTED, AND ONCE YOU'VE COMPLETED SIGNUP PROCEDURE, YOU'LL RECEIVE A LINK TO THE ZOOM MEETING, OR YOU MAY ALSO SIGN UP IN, BE IN PERSON TO WATCH THE MEETING.
PLEASE TUNE TO CHA CHANNEL 22 OR VISIT THE OPEN MEETING PORTAL ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
WITH THAT, ALL OF TODAY'S VOTES, IF ANY, WILL BE BY ROLL CALL AND COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO THIS MEETING.
CITY SOLICITOR HERE, IF WE DON'T HAVE TO READ THIS AT EVERY SINGLE MEETING, JUST ADVISE TO US SO THAT WE CAN, UH, FORGO IT.
I'M NOT SURE IF WE STILL DO, GIVEN THAT THIS IS NOW A YEAR AND A HALF OLD LAW, BUT I'LL CONTINUE TO DO IT UNTIL, UH, I'M TOLD OTHER WORDS.
UM, THIS MEETING, THERE IS A, A PACKET OF INFORMATION THIS FOLLOWS ON SOME DISCUSSION IN THE PAST AROUND, UH, ORDINANCES AND POLICIES RELATED TO SELLING TOBACCO PRODUCTS IN THE CITY.
JUST TO LET FOLKS KNOW WHY WE'RE HERE, THERE'S, THERE'S TWO DISTINCT SETS OF ISSUES THAT WE'LL BE DISCUSSING.
ONE IS AN UPDATING OF SOME OF THE ORDINANCES BASED ON, UH, UM, ADVICE FROM THE CITY IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT ANYTIME THERE'S A CHANGE IN THE STATE LAW OR OTHER REGULATIONS THAT AFFECT US, INSTEAD OF THE COUNCIL HAVING TO COME BACK AND UPDATE OUR ORDINANCES, THAT WE CAN AMEND IT RIGHT NOW TO AUTHORIZE THAT, TO MAKE IT, UH, OUR ORDINANCES COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND LOCAL LAWS.
I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT, UH, UH, MR. LIPSON WILL BE GOING OVER.
AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER KIND OF, UH, THIS, AS SAID IN THE CALL, THE MEETING THE LANDSCAPE OF THERE ARE SOME CITIES THROUGHOUT THE COMMONWEALTH THAT HAVE TAKEN SOME OTHER STEPS RELATED TO TOBACCO.
AND THE IDEA IS, DOES THIS COUNCIL WANT TO CONSIDER ANY OF THOSE? SO THAT'S THE, UH, CALL FOR THIS MEETING.
I AM GONNA BE TURNING OVER TO THE CITY STAFF, AND ONCE WE HAVE THE PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY STAFF, WE WILL HEAR FROM PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A COUNCIL DISCUSSION.
AND ALSO, I NOTICED THAT A CITY SOLICITOR OF BAYER IS HERE AS WELL.
I'M THE SENIOR DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AT THE CAMBRIDGE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT.
UM, AND ALSO, UM, HE COULDN'T END UP BEING HERE TODAY, BUT ASSISTANT CITY SOLICITOR JOSEPH POSNER HAS ALSO BEEN, UM, HELPING SAM ON THESE ISSUES.
SO I DID WANT TO CLARIFY ONE THING ABOUT THE SUMMARY OF THE PURPOSE.
UM, THERE ARE TWO MAJOR, UH, CHANGES TO CONSIDER ON PART OF THE COUNCIL.
ONE OF THEM, UM, IS RATHER THAN SIMPLY CHANGE TO DECLARE THAT IT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL LAWS, BECAUSE THAT CAN MEAN A LOT OF THINGS.
AND THE STATE HAS A MODEL CODE FOR LOCAL TOBACCO ENFORCEMENT, WHICH INCLUDES MANY PROVISIONS THAT ARE NOT UNIVERSALLY ADOPTED.
UM, WHAT WE WERE SEEKING WAS TO HAVE THE CITY COUNCIL FORMALLY RESCIND ONE SECTION OF THIS ORDINANCE IN COORDINATION WITH US PROMULGATING A REGULATION, UH, AT, AT THE CAMBRIDGE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT WOULD MEAN WE WOULD HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THAT ONE SET OF PROVISIONS WHILE THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD RETAIN THE REMAINING PROVISIONS.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
UM, SO AGAIN, AS YOU SAID, TO KIND OF REPEAT, WE ARE LOOKING AT ASKING THE CITY TO, UH, ALLOW THE LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO TAKE OVER PROVISIONS THAT RELATE
[00:05:01]
TO THE SALE OF TOBACCO AND NICOTINE PRODUCTS, WHICH IS ALSO PERTAINS TO YOUTH ACCESS.THOSE ARE SORT OF INTER INSEPARABLE CONCEPTS, AND A LOT OF THE ENFORCEMENT DOES REVOLVE AROUND TRYING TO PREVENT SALES TO YOUTH.
UH, THE BACKDROP TO THIS, UH, IS THAT, UH, THE STRUCTURE OF LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH REGULATIONS AROUND TOBACCO AND NICOTINE IS A VERY UNUSUAL IN CAMBRIDGE, IN THAT THE CITY CHOSE TO REGULATE IT ENTIRELY THROUGH ORDINANCE.
UM, BY AND LARGE, THAT IS NOT HOW THE OTHER 350 COMMUNITIES IN THE STATE HAVE REGULATED IT.
IT'S GENERALLY BEEN THROUGH THE REGULATORY POWER OF THE LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH, THE BOARD OF HEALTH.
AND WE DON'T HAVE A BOARD OF HEALTH, BUT IT'S THE SAME AUTHORITY.
UM, AND, UH, THAT HAS WORKED FINE, I THINK FOR MOST OF THE TIME THAT THE ORDINANCE HAS BEEN IN PLAY.
BUT OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS, THERE'S BEEN A RAPID CYCLE OF LOCAL ADOPTION OF PROHIBITIONS OR RESTRICTIONS OR CONDITIONS ON THE SALE OF CERTAIN TOBACCO AND NICOTINE DELIVERY PRODUCTS WITH QUICK RESPONSES FROM THE INDUSTRY TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO GET AROUND LOCAL RULES.
AND THIS HAS SORT OF BEEN BACK AND FORTH AND BACK AND FORTH.
SO OVER THE LAST DECADE, IT, SINCE THE CITY COUNCIL LAST AMENDED THIS ORDINANCE IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY, UH, THIS DYNAMIC HAS REALLY KICKED IN.
AND CAMBRIDGE HAS FALLEN BEHIND A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE, UH, BY BEING AN ORDINANCE, IT'S A MUCH SLOWER BOAT TO TURN.
UM, ALSO TO KIND OF LINE UP WITH HOW THIS IS APPROACHED IN OTHER COMMUNITIES IN MASS, WE'RE PROPOSING THAT THIS LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH REGULATION BE ALLOWED TO BE PROMULGATED UNDER OUR AUTHORITY.
WE DON'T NEED PERMISSION, BUT WE CAN'T, UH, WE DON'T WANT TO OVERDETERMINE BY CREATING A CONTRADICTORY REGULATION AND THEREFORE ASKING THE COUNCIL TO RESCIND THAT SECTION OF THE CURRENT ORDINANCE.
UM, I THINK THAT'S THE MAIN, UH, SIMPLE STATEMENT OF WHAT WE'RE ASKING IN TERMS OF THE CHANGE IN STRUCTURE OF THE ORDINANCE.
UM, THE SECOND SET OF TOPICS REALLY RELATE TO A VARIETY OF FURTHER CONSTRAINTS ON THE SALE OF TOBACCO AND NICOTINE DELIVERY PRODUCTS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS NOT CONSIDERED YET, ALTHOUGH THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN TAKEN UNDER CONSIDERATION IN MANY COMMUNITIES AROUND THE STATE.
UH, THE LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT IN PRESENTING THESE IS NOT ADVOCATING FOR ANY OF THEM SPECIFICALLY, BUT BECAUSE WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT CAMBRIDGE IS NOT SEEN AS OBLIVIOUS TO THESE, THESE CONSIDERATIONS AND THAT, THAT A DECISION ACTIVELY IS MADE, UH, WE THINK IT'S RESPONSIBLE TO PRESENT THEM, UH, NOT IN GREAT DETAIL.
THESE ARE BROAD STROKE POLICIES.
BUT, UM, SO, UH, THAT'S THE SECOND MAJOR PURPOSE OF OUR PRESENTATION.
UM, SO, UH, I THINK YOU'LL SEE IN THE COVER LETTER WITH THE PACKET THAT CAME PROBABLY SOMETIME TODAY.
UM, I HIGHLIGHT THAT, UH, THE YOUTH SALE, YOUTH ACCESS AND SALE OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS SECTION, WHICH IS THE FIRST OF THE FOUR MAJOR SECTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE HIGHLIGHTED BECAUSE, UH, AS YOU CAN SEE FURTHER INTO THE COVER LETTER, I'M, THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO ASK THE COMMITTEE AND LATER THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER RESCINDING THOSE SECTIONS.
UH, IT'S A RELATIVELY CLEAN, UH, TRANSITION IN THAT ALMOST ALL OF THE PROVISIONS WITHIN THAT SECTION OF THE ONES THAT ARE RAPIDLY BEING REDRAWN, RECONSIDERED, AMENDED IN OTHER COMMUNITIES AND WOULD BENEFIT FROM HAVING A MECHANISM OF AMENDMENT THAT WAS RATHER QUICK.
UM, I, IN DOING THAT, HOWEVER, I WILL POINT OUT THAT WHENEVER WE'VE MADE MAJOR CHANGES OR PROMULGATED NEW REGULATIONS WITHIN OUR DEPARTMENT, WE'VE ALWAYS CONSULTED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AND SOUGHT FEEDBACK AND ALSO WITH THE PUBLIC.
SO IT, EVEN IF WE DID MAKE THESE CHANGES, IF WE ARE GRANTED THE AUTHORITY TO, OR I, WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY, BUT WE'RE GRANTED THE, UH, THE GO AHEAD FROM THE COUNCIL TO LIGHT TO PROMULGATE, WE WOULD COME BACK AND SUMMARIZE THOSE CHANGES AND TAKE FEEDBACK AT THAT TIME.
THE OTHER SECTIONS, THOUGH, I'M NOT, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY SPECIFIC, UH, CHANGES AT THIS TIME.
WE MAY, UH, AFTER TODAY'S DISCUSSION, AND AT A LATER POINT, DEPENDING ON WHERE THIS GOES, IF IT STAYS IN THIS COMMITTEE OR MOVES, UH, WE MAY HAVE SOME OTHER MINOR RECOMMENDATIONS TO CHANGE SOME OF THESE OTHER SECTIONS THAT ARE NOT ABOUT YOUTH ACCESS OR SALE.
UM, SMOKING IN THE WORKPLACES IS RELATIVELY STATIC.
[00:10:01]
OR SCENARIOS HAVE COME UP, BUT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME, UM, BOSTON RECONSIDERED AND, UM, SLIGHTLY TAILORED THEIR DEFINITIONS WITHIN SMOKING IN WORKPLACES SOME YEARS AGO, QUITE A, QUITE A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, BECAUSE OF QUESTIONS THAT AROSE AROUND OUTDOOR WORKING ENVIRONMENTS.CON CERTAIN CONSTRUCTION SITES OR, OR PLACES OF WORK WHERE THERE'S BOTH AN INDOOR AND OUTDOOR AREAS, WOULD THEY BE, UH, FULLY, UH, REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH WORKPLACE RESTRICTIONS ON SMOKING? UM, SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACES WAS PROBABLY THE GREATEST, UH, PART OF THE DISCUSSION THAT OCCURRED HERE IN 2015 AT THE CITY COUNCIL.
BY AND LARGE, AT THAT TIME, I DON'T BELIEVE THE CITY COUNCIL HAD MAJOR PROBLEMS WITH THE OTHER SALES RESTRICTION AND YOUTH ACCESS PROVISIONS, BUT THERE WAS A REALLY ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT WHERE IN PUBLIC IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO SMOKE.
AND IN THE END, UH, THE CITY COUNCIL CHOSE TO CREATE A MUCH MORE NUANCED POLICY CREATING AREAS WHERE OUTDOOR SMOKING WAS, WAS ALLOWED, UH, FAR MORE NUANCED IN MY OPINION, THAN OTHER COMMUNITIES IN THE BOSTON AREA.
UH, THEY CARVED OUT ONLY THOSE POCKET PARKS THAT ARE VERY SMALL, USUALLY THE FOOTPRINT OF A SINGLE BUILDING AND TOT LOTS AND PLAYGROUNDS AS AREAS WHERE NO SMOKING WOULD BE ALLOWED.
BUT THEY DO NOT PO IMPOSE THAT SAME RESTRICTION ON LARGER PARKS AND IN OTHER LARGE PLAY AREA LIKE FIELDS AND, UM, OPEN SPACE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY FOR YOUNGER CHILDREN.
UM, THERE IS A RESTRICTION ON, UM, SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLAZAS, BUT NOT ON PUBLIC SIDEWALKS.
AND I THINK THAT WAS A JUDGMENT THAT WAS MADE BECAUSE PLAZAS ARE GATHERING PLACES FOR EVERYBODY WHERE A SIDEWALK IS REALLY A, A THOROUGHFARE.
AND, UH, GENERALLY SPEAKING, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY COMMUNITIES THAT PROHIBIT SMOKING ON SIDEWALKS, EXCEPT IF A RESTAURANT IS PUTTING SEEDING OUTSIDE THEIR ESTABLISHMENT FOR THEIR OWN CUSTOMERS, THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE NO SMOKING REQUIREMENT THAT WOULD APPLY ON THE INDOOR PART OF THAT RESTAURANT.
UM, SO THERE'S ONLY ONE OTHER SMALL ISSUE THAT MAY COME UP AS A RECOMMENDED CHANGE IN THE, UH, RESTAURANT'S SECTION, WHICH IS THAT THERE APPEARS TO BE A MINOR LOOPHOLE IN TERMS OF THE ABILITY TO BUY CERTAIN KIND OF FLAVORED VAPES TO USE ON SITE, UH, THAT WOULD NOT OTHERWISE BE SOLD OUTSIDE OF A TAB TOBACCONIST, BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE BEING SOLD FOR USE ON SITE, THERE'S LANGUAGE THAT BASICALLY ALLOWS A CUSTOMER TO PURCHASE THAT FLAVORED VAPE PRODUCT, GO TO A PATIO ATTACHED TO THE RESTAURANT, AND THEN JUST WALK HOME WITH IT.
SO IT'S EFFECTIVELY A WORKAROUND TO A PROHIBITION OF THE SALE FOR A VERY PARTICULAR TYPE OF PRODUCT, WHICH HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ONE OF THOSE THAT ARE REALLY INTENDED TO MARKET TO SMALLER, TO YOUNGER PEOPLE.
UM, THESE ARE VERY SMALL CHANGES.
UM, SO I THINK I'LL STOP THERE FOR A MOMENT.
UM, BECAUSE I THINK I'VE COVERED THE OVERALL CURRENT STRUCTURE OF THE ORDINANCE AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
UH, AND THEN PERHAPS WHEN QUESTIONS COME UP AND I CAN ANSWER THOSE, WE CAN GO ON TO DISCUSS SOME OF THE CITYWIDE POLICIES.
UM, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS, PER THE MEMO, THERE ARE, YOU WENT OVER THE YOUTH ACCESS SALE, DACA, THE LITTLE BIT OF WORKPLACES, PUBLIC PLACES AND RESTAURANTS, AND WE TALK ABOUT RESCISSION.
IT WOULD MEAN CHANGE IN OUR ORDINANCE LANGUAGE SUCH THAT THESE CHANGES COULD BE MADE BY THE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT BASED ON THE, THE DETERMINATION THAT THEY WERE APPROPRIATE.
JUST A QUESTION, WHEN WOULD THE CITY COUNCIL BE INFORMED? WOULD IT, WOULD IT BE THEN CHANGING IT FROM WE HAVE TO REVIEW IT TO WE GIVE YOU AUTHORITY TO DO IT, AND WE WOULD THEN BE INFORMED AFTERWARDS AND HAVE A CHANCE TO GIVE INPUT? OR IS IT JUST COMPLETELY RESCISSION AND THEREFORE AUTHORITY TO YOU? IF THAT MAKES SENSE AS A QUESTION? YEAH.
I THINK THE TIMING OF IT CAN BE WORKED OUT.
WE WOULD WORK WITH THE SAME WITH JOE POSNER AND, UH, THE CITY SOLICITOR, UH, AS WELL.
UH, AND ON BOTH DRAFTING THE REGULATION THAT UNDER OUR AUTHORITY AND PROPOSING THE RESCISSION LANGUAGE TO CITY COUNCIL.
SO, UH, WE CAN DISCUSS THE TIMING.
IT'S ALWAYS BEEN OUR INTENT TO COME TO PROVIDE AT LEAST A SUMMARY OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AT USING OUR AUTHORITY.
WE DON'T, JUST TO CLARIFY, WE DON'T NEED THE CITY COUNCIL TO PROVIDE US THE AUTHORITY TO PRO PROMULGATE, BUT WE WANT TO AVOID A CONFLICT IN DOING SO.
AND I BELIEVE SOLICITOR BAYER HAS SOMETHING.
AND THEN HAPPY TO GO TO, UH, MEMBERS.
I'LL START WITH COUNCILLOR SUZI.
[00:15:01]
TO ADD TO THAT, UM, THE PLAN WOULD BE TO, UH, MY DEPARTMENT AND THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO WORK ON WHAT THE REGULATIONS WOULD LOOK LIKE AND THEN WHAT THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE TO RESCIND THESE SECTIONS WOULD LOOK LIKE AND COME BACK WITH BOTH OF THOSE FOR THE COUNCIL.AND TO MR. LIPSON'S POINT, THE COUNCIL, THE, THE PUBLIC HEALTH COMMISSIONER HAS THE AUTHORITY TO ADOPT THE REGULATIONS AND DOESN'T NEED THAT FROM THE COUNCIL, BUT THE, UM, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, THE PUBLIC HEALTH COMMISSIONER HAVE ALWAYS WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE COUNCIL TO GET FEEDBACK FROM THE COUNCIL ON PROPOSED REGULATIONS, AND ESPECIALLY WHERE HERE WE DON'T WANT A CONFLICT AND WE WANT THE SECTIONS RESCINDED FROM THE ORDINANCE, UM, WOULD DEFINITELY PRESENT IT ALL TO THE COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE MOVING FORWARD.
COUNCILOR SUZI, DID YOU, YEAH, I, I GUESS I HAVE ONE QUESTION, UH, THROUGH CHAIR NOLAN.
SO, UM, UM, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, UH, SAM LIPSON.
SO ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT, UH, CHANGES OUTSIDE OF, SO WERE YOU SAYING THAT WE, YOU MIGHT WANNA CHANGE SOMETHING RELATING TO THE VAPES OFFERED ON SITE THAT PEOPLE CAN BUY FROM THE RESTAURANT IN WALK HOME? IS THAT ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT CHANGING, OR ARE THERE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT CHANGING? SO THAT WAS AN EXAMPLE OF A SMALL CHANGE THAT WOULDN'T BE IN A SECTION OUTSIDE OF THOSE AREAS THAT WE'RE ASKING TO PROMULGATE FOR OUR OWN AUTHORITY, UNDER OUR OWN AUTHORITY.
THIS WOULD BE IN A SECTION, ONE OF THE OTHER THREE SECTIONS, WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD RETAIN.
BUT IT WOULD BE JUST TO, JUST TO PROVIDE A HEADS UP THAT IN RETURNING BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITH THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE, THAT THERE MAY BE A FEW MINOR RECOMMENDATIONS OUTSIDE OF THE SECTION THAT WE WERE INITIALLY TALKING ABOUT.
SO THIS HAPPENS TO FALL INTO THE REST, SMOKING AT RESTAURANTS, BUT I WOULD SAY BY AND LARGE, THERE ARE VERY FEW CHANGES IN THE REST OF THE LANGUAGE OUTSIDE OF SECTION, UH, THE YOUTH ACCESS AND SALE SECTION.
I YIELD COUNCIL ZUBIE THANK YOU, CHAIR THROUGH YOU.
SO I'M MAKING SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS, THE RESCINDING WOULD HAPPEN FOR, ARE YOU, ARE YOU ASKING IT FOR THE YOUTH ACCESS AND SELF TOBACCO PRODUCTS SECTIONS,
WE'RE ONLY ASKING FOR RESCISSION OF THE FIRST SECTION AND, UH, AND SUGGESTING THAT THE COUNCIL RETAINED SMOKING IN WORKPLACE, PUBLIC PLACE AND RESTAURANTS.
AND I'M, I'M CURIOUS IF YOU HAVE THOUGHTS, UM, AT ALL ABOUT HOW A CHANGE LIKE THIS WOULD INFORM HOW YOU INTERACT BETWEEN THE TWO.
LIKE WOULD THAT IN ANY WAY CHANGE HOW YOU ENGAGE THE FIRST PIECE ON YOUTH ACCESS WITH HOW IT MIGHT RELATE TO PUBLIC PLACES OR RESTAURANTS OR, UH, THOUGHT ATTEMPTED TO THINK THROUGH THIS? UM, BECAUSE UNDER BOTH OUR OWN REGULATION AND THE ORDINANCE, WE ARE THE ENFORCING AGENCY, UH, IT IS NOT.
AND, AND BECAUSE MOST OF THE ENFORCEMENT OCCURS AT THE POINT OF SALE, IT'S FAIRLY UNCOMMON FOR US TO HAVE TO GO ENFORCE IN A WORKPLACE, IN A RESTAURANT.
UM, I DON'T FORESEE THERE BEING MUCH OVERLAP, UM, OR CONFUSION.
AND I THINK BECAUSE THESE ORIGINAL ORIGINATED OUT OF A SINGLE ORDINANCE, THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF CONSISTENCY.
SO THAT BY US SIMPLY PLUCKING OUT ONE ENTIRE SECTION, WE'RE NOT REALLY CREATING A LOT OF CONFLICTS.
AND ONE MORE QUESTION FOR NOW.
HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO THE, SO WHAT WAS GIVEN TO US BY THE CITY MANAGER AND THE SUGGESTIONS, WOULD THAT, WOULD THAT AFFECT HOW WE ENGAGE WITH THOSE FOUR SUGGESTIONS IN ANY WAY? OR, UH, SO THAT'S THE SECOND SET OF CONSIDERATIONS WOULD SORT OF CITYWIDE POLICY? UM, I, I THINK, UH, UH, TO MAKE IT CLEAR, WE WERE PROPOSING NO CHANGE IN THE CITY COUNCIL'S AUTHORITY OVER THOSE KINDS OF CITYWIDE POLICIES.
THIS IS ABOUT ZONING, ABOUT CAPS ON PERMITS AND NICOTINE FOR EACH GENERATION, THAT THESE ARE IN FACT CITYWIDE POLICIES THAT SHOULD, SHOULD
[00:20:01]
BE RETAINED BY CITY COUNCIL.SO, UH, THAT WOULD BE, HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR REQUEST ON RESTRUCTURING.
I ASKED THAT, JUST GAUGING THE FIRST PIECE ON HOW IT ADDRESSES LIKE PEOPLE UNDER THE AGE OF 21 AND WAS INTERESTED TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANY INTERACTION BETWEEN WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING AND THE RESCINDING PIECE AND THEN THIS LIKE CITYWIDE POLICY PIECE.
SO THE RESTRICT THE CITYWIDE POLICY SUGGESTIONS, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THEM, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THE COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S, WHAT THEY WOULD INVOLVE IF THEY TOOK THEM ON.
UM, IN ANY CASE, THERE'S NO CHANGE IN WHO'S ACTUALLY GONNA ENFORCE THEM.
IT'S JUST ABOUT WHO'S GONNA DECIDE WHAT THE POLICY IS.
BEFORE WE GO FORWARD, CLERK COUNCILOR MCGOVERN LOOKS LIKE HE RIGHT.
UM, AND BEFORE I MOVE FORWARD WITH FURTHER COMMENT, I I, WE SHOULD DO, I'M, I'M SORRY, MADAM, MY MADAM CHAIRMAN, I'M SORRY, MY SOUND WENT OUT.
SO DID YOU JUST CALL ME? IS THAT YES, I DID YOU BUMP BACK IN AND TO RECOGNIZE THAT YOU'RE HERE? I'M HERE, BUT I, FOR THE LAST, I, THE LAST 10 OR 15 SECONDS I LOST.
WELL, BEFORE WE GO TO YOU, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, UM, I WANNA DO, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT.
IF WE, YOU WANNA CALL IT PUBLIC COMMENT? I REALIZED WE SAID WE WOULD DO IT AFTER A PRESENTATION.
I'M NOT, OR UNLESS YOU WANNA WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE NEXT DISCUSSION, THERE'S THIS ONE PERSON SIGNED UP CURRENTLY.
IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE BECAUSE I HAVE A FEELING A LOT OF, SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT MAY RELATE TO THE SECOND SET OF ISSUES RATHER THAN THE FIRST.
UM, SO I THEN WE WILL GET TO THE SECOND SET OF ISSUES.
WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, GIVEN THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THIS, MY SENSE IS THAT THIS IS A CLEANUP AND AS WE HEARD FROM THE CITY SOLICITOR AND, UM, DIRECTOR LIPSON, THAT THIS DOESN'T CHANGE THE AUTHORITY.
WHAT IT DOES IS, IS CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE AND MAKE IT, UM, MORE CONSISTENT, IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
SO THE QUESTION, MY QUESTION TO YOU, THE, THE CITY SOLICITOR AND DIRECTOR LIPSON, DO YOU WANNA VOTE FROM THIS COMMITTEE TO ASK YOU TO WORK ON IT AND THEN PRESENT TO THE COUNCIL? HOW, HOW IS IT THAT WE WOULD PROCEED TO DO THAT? IF I'M HEARING FROM THE COUNCIL THAT THAT'S FROM THIS COMMITTEE, AT LEAST THAT THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE STEP FORWARD, WHICH I DON'T SEE ANY NOS I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ONLINE, BUT I, I THINK, UH, TO CLARIFY, WE ARE ASKING FOR A CHANGE OF AUTHORITY.
UM, AND THAT WOULD INVOLVE A TWO STEP WHERE WE WOULD HAVE THE COUNCIL RESCIND THAT YOUTH ACCESS SECTION.
AND MEANWHILE WE WOULD WORK ON A DRAFT WHICH WE WOULD BRING TO THE COUNCIL FOR THE LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH REGULATION.
UM, THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE ANYTHING MORE THAN I THINK, THE ASCENT OF THE COMMITTEE TO GO BACK AND PUT TOGETHER THAT LANGUAGE AND THE, AND THOSE MINOR OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT WE DISCUSSED, LIKE THE THINGS ABOUT SMOKING ON THE PATIO OF A RESTAURANT, UM, THAT, THAT WOULD BE ABOUT IT.
SO IF THE SIGNAL TO US IS TO GO BACK AND DO THAT WORK, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
I THOUGHT YOU SAID IT, THAT YOU, THE PUBLIC HEALTH AUTHORITY HAS THE AUTHORITY TO, TO DO THAT JUSTICE.
WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY AND WE COULD GO FORWARD WITH IT, BUT WE HAVE ALWAYS COORDINATED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE CITY COUNCIL ALREADY OCCUPIES THAT SPACE, WE WOULD WOULD LIKE TO SEE A RESCISSION OF THAT SECTION THAT IS IN LOCKSTEP WITH A NEW PROMULGATED REGULATION.
SO THEN I THINK WE WOULD NEED A VOTE OF THE COMMITTEE TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO WORK TOGETHER ON LANGUAGE PURSUANT TO FULFILL THE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS ISSUE.
AND I, I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD NEED TO COME BACK TO THE HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE.
IF WE WANNA DO THIS QUICKLY, WE SHOULD SAY THAT SHOULD GO DIRECTLY TO THE FULL COUNCIL, IS MY SENSE.
I, I'M HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT THE FULL CITY COUNCIL, OKAY.
CLERK HAS THE LANGUAGE THAT THE HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL.
THAT, THAT THE, UM, CITY STAFF BE, UH, DIRECTED TO WORK ON LANGUAGE TO BRING FORTH TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE.
ON THAT MOTION COUNCIL ZUBI? YES.
THAT'S ALL FIVE MEMBERS VOTING? YES.
SO, ON, ON THIS ISSUE, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENT FROM, UH, VICE MAYOR AZI OR COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN ONLINE? SINCE
[00:25:01]
I DON'T SEE YOUR HANDS? OR SHOULD WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT PART OF THE AGENDA? MATT, UM, MADAM CHAIR, UM, I, I APOLOGIZE.UM, I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING LATE.
WHAT, WHAT WAS THE, UH, WHEN WE DID THE REGULATIONS PREVIOUSLY, WE DID HAVE SOME EXEMPTIONS FOR, UM, LIKE, UH, HOOKAH BARS AND SMOKING OUTSIDE.
I, I KNOW IT WAS, I BELIEVE IT WAS ADDRESSED HERE, BUT CAN YOU JUST, UM, I TRIED TO FIND IT IN THE, JUST QUICKLY ONLINE, CAN YOU, UH, THROUGH YOU, MADAM CHAIR, JUST WHAT'S THE, WHAT, WHAT'S, ARE THERE ANY CHANGES BEING RECOMMENDED? YEP.
DIRECTOR LIPSON OR SOLICITOR BAYER, UH, THROUGH YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
UM, WE AREN'T SUGGESTING THAT WOULD BE IN THE RESTAURANT SMOKING IN RESTAURANTS SECTION.
UM, THERE IS A CURRENT CARVE OUT FOR HOOKAH AND VAPE IN PA PATIO AREAS OF RESTAURANTS BECAUSE THERE'S NO EVIDENCE OF ANY SUBSTANTIAL EXPOSURE COMING FROM THOSE PRODUCTS.
AND, UH, TODAY'S, UH, REQUEST TO CHANGE THE STRUCTURE BY RESCINDING THE SECTION AROUND YOUTH ACCESS WOULDN'T HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THAT.
UM, WE HAVE SIGNALED THOUGH THERE ARE SOME VERY MINOR CHANGES THAT APPEAR TO BE LOOPHOLES IN HOW WE WROTE SOME OF THE ALLOWANCES, UH, THAT FOR INSTANCE, ALLOWED THE PURCHASE OF CERTAIN TYPE OF FLAVORED VAPE AT AN ESTABLISHMENT THAT HAS AN OUTDOOR SEATING PATIO THAT ESSENTIALLY BECOMES A WAY TO JUST BUY IT AND TAKE IT HOME.
AND WE'RE NOT, I'M NOT, WE STILL NEED TO WORK ON SOME LANGUAGE ON IT.
IT'S A MINOR LOOPHOLE, BUT, UM, THAT WOULD BE THE SCALE OF THE KIND OF CHANGE WE WOULD BRING BACK.
SO, UM, THROUGH YOU MADAM CHAIR, SO IF YOU WERE, IF YOU WERE AN ESTABLISHMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, PART OF YOUR BUSINESS RELIED ON, ON HOOKAH, UH, SMOKING OUTSIDE, YOU WERE, YOU'RE STILL EXEMPT? THAT'S CORRECT.
ANYONE ELSE BEFORE WE MOVE ON? AND IS THAT SUFFICIENT FOR THE, I THINK FOR THE STAFF ON THIS ISSUE? IT IS.
NOW THE NEXT ONE IS, UM, THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER CITYWIDE POLICIES AND AS, UH, DIRECTOR NIPPON HAS MADE CLEAR, THIS DOESN'T COME WITH A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT.
IT COMES WITH INFORMATION THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF, UH, MUNICIPALITIES AND PARTICULARLY ON THE RINE, NICOTINE FREE GENERATION 22 COMMUNITIES HAVE ADOPTED APPARENTLY THIS POLICY.
IF YOU WANNA BRIEFLY REVIEW WITH US WHAT THESE POLICIES ARE, UM, DIRECTOR NIPSEY, THEN WE CAN DISCUSSION WITH THAT.
AND I BELIEVE IF YOU COULD CONFIRM THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE ON THIS WOULD BE, HERE ARE SOME THINGS OTHER CITIES ARE DOING.
DOES THIS COUNCIL WANNA CONSIDER THIS WOULD STILL BE WITHIN THE COUNCIL REALM.
DOES THIS COUNCIL WANNA CONSIDER, UH, ADOPTING ANY OF THESE OURSELVES? OKAY.
I APPRECIATE, UH, THERE ARE THREE BROAD SETS OF POLICY CHANGES THAT WOULD BE CITYWIDE THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN UNDER CONSIDERATION BY MANY COMMUNITIES IN MASS.
I THINK THERE ARE SOME THAT STILL HAVE NOT TAKEN THEM, TAKEN A DECISION ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
BUT WE DO HAVE, UH, THE FIRST AND MOST RECENTLY PROMINENT, PARTLY BECAUSE IT'S GOTTEN A LOT OF PRESS, PARTLY BECAUSE IT'S BEEN THE SUBJECT OF A MAJOR ADVOCACY CAMPAIGN, UH, TO CITIES AND TOWNS AND LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENTS.
IT WAS ALSO THE SUBJECT OF A SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT RULING IN 2024, UPHOLDING IT.
UH, THE TOWN OF BROOKLINE'S, UH, POLICY, THIS IS THE NICOTINE FREE GENERATION POLICY.
AND I TRIED TO USE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT CAN BE CONFUSING TO EXPLAIN, BUT BASICALLY IT WOULD MEAN THAT RETAILERS COULD SELL COMMERCIAL TOBACCO PRO PRODUCTS, CIGARETTES, EVPS, ALSO VAPES, THEY'RE CALLED, UH, TO ANYONE WHO IS 21 YEARS OF, OF AGE OR OLDER ON AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
AND THAT DATE IS GENERALLY WOULD BE ABOUT 21 YEARS BEFORE THE DATE OF ENACTMENT.
SO BY DOING THIS, FOR EXAMPLE, UH, A DATE SUCH AS JANUARY 1ST, 2006, UH, THOSE RETAILERS CAN SELL TOBACCO TO ANYONE WHO IS AT LEAST 21 YEARS OLD, BORN BEFORE JANUARY 1ST, 2006.
ANYBODY BORN AFTER THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED FROM PURCHASING EITHER CIGARETTES OR ANY NICOTINE DELIVERY PRODUCT OR VAPE PRODUCT IN THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE.
DO UH, I LOVE SOME GUIDANCE FROM THE COMMITTEE.
DO WE WANNA GO? 'CAUSE THERE'S THREE OTHERS ON HERE, RIGHT? DO WE WANNA GO THROUGH THESE ONE BY ONE OR WOULD WE LIKE TO DISCUSS KIND OF THE FOUR IN TOTAL? AND IT,
[00:30:02]
BECAUSE I THINK IT MIGHT BE MORE USEFUL TO HAVE A, HUH, MADAM CHAIR, COUNCILOR ZUBIE.SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS, AT THE END OF THIS, WILL WE BE VOTING ON OUR, WILL WE BE VOTING ON WHICH ONES WE WANNA MOVE FORWARD ON AND SENDING THAT TO COUNCIL? OR, I THINK THE INTENT IS TO GET A SENSE OF THIS AS A COMMITTEE, WHAT TO MOVE FORWARD TO, UH, TO THE FULL COUNCIL.
I THINK ONE BY ONE WORKS, AT LEAST FROM MY, OKAY.
IS THERE ANYONE IN PUBLIC COMMENT WHO WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS? THE TOBACCO FREE GENERATION? AND, AND JUST LET, LET PEOPLE KNOW IN OUR PACKET, THERE'S TWO ELEMENTS IN THE MEMO FROM THE CITY MANAGER DATED FEBRUARY 9TH, 2026, WHICH WAS, WHICH WAS REFERRED TO THIS COMMITTEE RE-REFERRED.
THERE'S A PARAGRAPH ON THE NICOTINE FREE GENERATION POLICY.
AND SEPARATELY, THERE'S A MEMO FROM THE CAMBRIDGE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT THAT CAME TO US TODAY WHERE STARTING ON PAGE THREE, THERE'S ACTUALLY A TITLE OF NICOTINE FREE GENERATION, WHICH GOES FOR SEVERAL PAGES.
MY NAME IS STEVEN FER AND I REPRESENT CAMBRIDGE CITIZENS FOR SMOKERS' RIGHTS.
WE ACCEPT NO FUNDING FROM ANY SOURCE WHATSOEVER.
TO KIND OF MAKE IT CLEAR, IF IT'S NOT CLEAR, UH, IN BROOKLINE, IF YOU'RE BORN ON DECEMBER 31ST, 1999, YOU'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO BUY A NICOTINE OR TOBACCO PRODUCT FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE.
BUT FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE, YOU'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO BUY A NICOTINE OR TOBACCO PRODUCT.
IF YOU'RE BORN ON JANUARY 1ST, 2000, EXCUSE ME, JANUARY 2ND, 2000, UH, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO BUY NICOTINE PRODUCTS, PRESUMABLY FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE BOTH 25 AND A HALF.
SO IT DOES DIVIDE PEOPLE, NOT JUST BY AGE, BUT BY BIRTH DATE, UH, WHICH SOME PEOPLE FEEL IS A, UM, VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW CLAUSE IN THE CONSTITUTION.
IT HAS BEEN PASSED BY THE SUPREME COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS.
WHETHER IT GETS PASSED BY THE, UM, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, I, I DON'T KNOW.
UM, THERE IS NO PUBLIC DEMAND FOR A GENERATIONAL TOBACCO AND NICOTINE BAN.
THIS IS NOT COMING FROM THE PUBLIC.
THIS IS COMING FROM FULL-TIME ACTIVISTS, UH, IN THE MANY ANTI-SMOKING ORGANIZATIONS AND FOUNDATIONS.
AND I WOULD ASK THE CITY COUNCIL IN THIS CASE, UH, WHEN TEEN SMOKING, ACCORDING TO THE CDC, IS AT A 25 YEAR LOW TEEN VAPING, ACCORDING TO THE FDA, IS IT A 10 YEAR LOW? AND AGAIN, ACCORDING TO THE FDA NICOTINE POUCH USED BY TEENS AS AT A, IT REMAINS LOW.
IS THERE REALLY A NEED FOR THIS REGULATION? IF IT'S NOT BROKE, WHY FIX IT? I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT MOST OF THE STORES THAT SELL NICOTINE AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS ARE OWNED BY IMMIGRANTS OF COLOR.
THESE ARE ENTRY LEVEL BUSINESSES AND THEY DEPEND VERY MUCH ON THESE KINDS OF SALES TO KEEP THEIR BUSINESSES AFLOAT.
AND BROOKLINE A VERY AFFLUENT COMMUNITY, HIGHLY EDUCATED AFFLUENT COMMUNITY, WHICH PASSED THIS PROHIBITION, WHICH IS REALLY A GENERATIONAL PROHIBITION.
CONVENIENCE STORES HAVE SEEN OVERALL SALES DECLINES, NOT JUST IN TOBACCO AND NICOTINE PRODUCTS.
PEOPLE DON'T GO THERE 'CAUSE THEY CAN'T GET THEIR TOBACCO OR NICOTINE PRODUCTS, SO THEY DON'T BUY THEIR SODA OR THEIR BREAD, ET CETERA.
NONE OF THE STORES HAVE CLOSED, BUT THEY HAVE SEEN SALES DECLINES IN MASSACHUSETTS.
WE ALLOW ADULTS 21 AND OVER TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES WHETHER TO BUY MARIJUANA OR ALCOHOL, BOTH OF WHICH ARE INTOXICANTS.
I THINK THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE THEIR OWN DETERMINATION REGARDING NICOTINE AND TOBACCO, NEITHER OF WHICH IMPAIRS JUDGMENT OR COMPROMISES DRIVING SKILLS.
SO THAT WAS THE, UH, ONLY PERSON RECORDED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, JUST KIND OF TO FOLLOW UP, UM, UH, ON THAT PUBLIC COMMENT, UH, COUPLE THINGS.
SO THIS IS, YOU'RE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ONLY BANNING THE SALE FOR ANYONE UNDER THE AGE OF 21?
[00:35:02]
THE, UH, YEAH, GO AHEAD.IF YOU WANNA ANSWER WHAT THROUGH, THROUGH M SORRY.
UM, THE STATE LAW ALREADY ESTABLISHES A SALE LIMITED AGE OF 21.
SO IT WOULD BASICALLY LET THAT CREEP UP FOR PEOPLE WHO WERE BORN AFTER A CERTAIN DATE.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT WOULD TRAVEL WITH THEM AS THEY GOT OLDER.
BUT IT'S NOT, I MEAN, IT'S NOT COUNCILOR MCGOVERN DO, SORRY.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT THIS DOES, WHICH I THINK IS PRETTY CONFUSING.
'CAUSE I THINK IT'S, THE ONLY THING I KNOW OF THAT HAS EVER BEEN PROPOSED THIS WAY IS RIGHT NOW IT'S 21.
SO YOU CANNOT BUY IT IN BROOKLINE.
ANYONE BORN, ANYONE WHO IS NOW 25 AND UNDER CANNOT BUY IT.
AND IN 10 YEARS IT'LL BE ANYONE 35 AND YOUNGER CANNOT BUY IT.
AND IN 50 YEARS IT'LL BE ANYONE WHO'S 75 AND YOUNGER CANNOT BUY IT.
SO IT ESTABLISHES BY LAW THAT IF YOUR BIRTH DATE IS ON A CERTAIN DATE FOR US, IF WE DID IT, YOU KNOW, 20 YEARS LATER, IT, IT WOULD'VE THE SAME EFFECT.
DOES THAT HELP CLARIFY AT ALL WHAT THIS PROPOSAL IS? AGAIN, THAT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT IS NOT RECOMMENDING IT.
IT'S SAYING, LOOK, THERE'S A LOT OF TOWNS IN THE COMMONWEALTH WHO ARE DOING THIS.
DOES CAMBRIDGE WANNA CONSIDER THIS IF, YEAH, YEAH.
UH, THANK YOU THAT, THAT, THAT DOES HELP.
AND I, AND I GUESS SORT OF IN GENERAL, UH, A GENERAL QUESTION, 'CAUSE ALL THIS WHOLE SECTION HAS TO DO WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, BUSINESSES AND, AND, AND WHAT RESTAURANTS AND WHATNOT.
WHAT WAS, DID, DID THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT DID, DID WE DO ANY OUTREACH TO THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, TALK TO THEM ABOUT ANY OF THIS? OR IS THAT SOMETHING YOU ANTICIPATE WILL COME LATER, UM, THROUGH YOU CHAIR? UM, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PROPOSING THIS CHANGE, WE HAVE NOT REACHED OUT TO, UH, TO FIND OUT IF THERE WAS ANY PUSHBACK OR CONCERN.
UH, IF THE CITY COUNCIL CHOSE TO MAKE THIS CHANGE, WE WOULD, UH, BE HAPPY TO PARTICIPATE IN SOME PROCESS OF STAKEHOLDER PROCESS TO GET FEEDBACK.
BUT, UM, SINCE WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY ACTION, WE HAVE NOT REACHED OUT.
UM, AND WOULD THERE BE, AS OPPOSED TO DOING IT SORT OF THE WAY BROOKLINE DID AND, YOU KNOW, THE AGE CREEPS UP, YOU KNOW, OVER TIME, IS THERE, UM, IS THERE ANY BENEFIT TO SAYING, YOU KNOW, WE DID RAISE, I MEAN, WE ACTUALLY RAISED THE AGE TO 21, I I BELIEVE, PRIOR TO THE, TO THE STATE.
UM, AND, AND IS THERE ANY BENEFIT TO SAYING, RAISING THAT, LET'S SAYING ANYONE UNDER THE AGE OF 25 AND IT STOPS AT 20 AND THEN OVER 25 CAN, CAN PURCHASE OR, UM, OR IS THE WAY BROOKLINE DOING IT, THE, YOU KNOW, IS THAT MAKES MORE SENSE? I I, I THINK THE QUESTION IS TO EITHER THE CITY SOLICITOR OR DIRECTOR, WHETHER WE, WE COULD, IF WE SO CHOOSE, COULD WE DO THAT, UM, THROUGH MUTE CHAIR? UM, WE COULD, UH, I THINK THERE'S BEEN AN IMPORTANT MILESTONE AT 21 THAT'S BEEN OBSERVED FOR A LOT OF OTHER ADULT RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES.
SO THAT WOULD BE, UM, KIND OF NEW TERRITORY, NOT, NOT SO DIFFERENT FROM THE NEW TERRITORY THAT THE IDEA OF RESTRICTING IN THIS FASHION THROUGHOUT YOUR LIFE WOULD ALSO BE NEW TERRITORY.
UM, THE, ONE OF THE ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF DOING IT IN THE WAY THAT BROOKLINE CHOSE TO DO IT IS THAT IT BECOMES, IT'S GRADUAL AND YOU DON'T LOSE YOUR CUSTOMER BASE ALL AT ONCE.
THAT IT, YOU ONLY SLOWLY LOSE OVER TIME AS PEOPLE AGE OUT.
UM, AND THAT IT, THERE'S PLENTY OF AMPLE TIME TO ADJUST THIS MIXTURE OF PRODUCTS THAT ARE SOLD AND THAT SORT OF THING.
MADAM CHAIR, ONE MORE AND THEN I'LL STOP.
UM, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.
UM, DO WE HAVE, I MEAN, I THINK WHEN WE RAISED IT TO 21, 1 OF THE, UM, I THINK I, I WAS THE LEAD ON THAT ACTUALLY.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE, UH, THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WAS THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE TENDED TO NOT, THERE WAS A BIG DROP OFF IN THE OLDER YOU, YOU GOT IN TERMS OF PEOPLE STARTING SMOKING, RIGHT.
SO, UM, I MEAN, DO WE HAVE STATISTICS ON THAT? I MEAN, I CAN'T, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THERE AREN'T A LOT OF 35 YEAR OLDS THAT START SMOKING.
THEY MAY HAVE BEEN SMOKING LONG BEFORE, UM, BUT THEY DON'T PICK UP THE HABIT, YOU KNOW, IN THEIR LATER TWENTIES AND, AND, AND THIRTIES AND BEYOND.
IS THAT, AM I RIGHT ABOUT THAT OR THROUGH YOU TO, UM, I, I DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF DATA.
I THINK ANECDOTALLY THAT SOUNDS LIKE AN UNLIKELY SCENARIO.
PEOPLE DON'T TEND TO PICK OFF LIFELONG HABITS LATER IN LIFE IN THAT WAY.
[00:40:01]
SOME DATA THAT WE FELT WOULD BE USEFUL IN CONSIDERING THIS OR ANY OTHER RESTRICTIVE POLICY, WHICH IS WHAT THE CURRENT PREVALENCE OF THE USE OF CIGARETTES AND EVPS IS AMONG YOUTH IN CAMBRIDGE.UM, AND THE AS HAS BEEN, I THINK POINTED OUT IN THE TESTIMONY, UH, IT'S FAIRLY LOW AND IT'S NOT PARTICULARLY GOING UP AT THIS POINT.
THIS HAS TAKEN A GENERATION TO GET TO THE POINT WE'RE AT.
DIDN'T HAPPEN OVERNIGHT, BUT IT'S BEEN PRETTY STEADY.
THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN GOVERNOR.
AND YOU ARE NOT IN THE CHAMBER, BUT IF, UM, ON THE BACKUP FOR THE MEETING, IT'S ON PAGE 29, OR THE THIRD TO LAST PAGE OF THE DOCUMENT FROM THE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT DOES HAVE CURRENT SUBSTANCE ABUSE.
AND FOR THOSE OF US IN THE CHAMBER WHO SEE IT, WHERE, UM, IT SHOWS ALCOHOL USE FROM 2014 TO 2024 EVP USE FOR CAMBRIDGE SPECIFIC DATA, ALCOHOL USE, EVP, WHICH IS THE VAPE MARIJUANA USE AND CIGARETTE SMOKING.
AND HIS DIRECTOR LIPSON AND PUBLIC TESTIMONY SAID CIGARETTE SMOKING IS THE LOWEST OF ALL OF THOSE.
VAPING USE HAD A HIGH OF 18%, BUT IS NOW DOWN TO 10% IN THE LATEST DATA WE HAVE IN CAMBRIDGE OF 2024.
WHEREAS ALCOHOL USE HAS DOUBLED THAT AT 19% IN MARIJUANA USE IS 15%.
THESE ARE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.
SO, UM, PROBABLY A FAIR REPRESENTATION OF, OF, OF THE, THE AGE GROUP THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
UM, SO ON NICOTINE FREE GENERATION COUNSELOR ZUZI, AND THEN COUNSELOR ZUBI.
UH, AS I WAS DISCUSSING WITH COUNSELOR ZUBI BEFORE, I, I THINK IT WOULD BE WEIRD TO HAVE, UM, OUR REGULATIONS FOR CIGARETTE USE TO BE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN ALCOHOL AND MARIJUANA USE.
SO, UM, I GUESS I'M TENDING TO THINK THAT, UM, WE SHOULDN'T SIGN ON TO A NICOTINE FREE GENERATION POLICY AT THIS TIME, BUT WE ALWAYS COULD IF THERE, WE FELT THERE WAS A NEED, RIGHT? SO IT'S LIKE WE, WE DON'T HAVE TO DECIDE TODAY.
WE COULD DECIDE AT ANOTHER POINT IF IT SEEMED APPROPRIATE.
I MEAN, I, I, WE, I I LIKE WHAT YOU PRESENTED HERE THAT, UM, UH, OF COURSE WE WANNA ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO MAKE HEALTHY CHOICES AND IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH THROUGH EDUCATION, PEOPLE ARE MAKING HEALTHIER CHOICES.
BUT, UM, WE COULD ALWAYS CHOOSE TO, TO SIGN ON TO THIS LATER IF WE FELT THERE WAS A NEED OR FELT LIKE THAT IT WOULD BE A, A USEFUL POLICY.
UM, YEAH, OF COURSE THE CITY COUNCIL COULD CHOOSE TO, UH, ADOPT THIS AT ANY POINT IN THE FUTURE.
AND THE, TO BENEFIT, I THINK A GOOD DECISION MAKING PROCESS, THE TEEN HEALTH SURVEY IS A REMARKABLE INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN COLLECTED FOR ABOUT 30 YEARS IN CAMBRIDGE AND VERY CONSISTENT ON THE KINDS OF QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED.
SO WE HAVE A HIGH LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE IN THE KINDS OF RESPONSES.
WE PROTECT INDIVIDUALS WHO RESPOND VERY CAREFULLY.
AND, UM, I THINK THAT DATA WILL HELP INFORM CITY COUNCIL.
I YIELD THANK YOU COUNCILOR ZUBIE, AND THEN VICE MAYOR AZI.
DO YOU HAVE ANY INFO ON THE SAMPLE SIZE FOR THE CAMBRIDGE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS BY CHANCE? THROUGH YOU CHAIR? I DON'T HAVE THE FULL REPORT.
I HAVE IT IN MY COMPUTER AT WORK.
UM, I, IT'S IN THE MANY HUNDREDS FOR SURE.
WE HAVE PRETTY HIGH PARTICIPATION RATES, BUT, UM, I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER.
JUST TO, IT'S THROUGH TO COUNSELORS.
IT'S ADMINISTERED IN THE SCHOOL, SO IT'S A VERY HIGH PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS WHO FILL IT OUT BECAUSE IT'S DONE, I THINK IN THE EQUIVALENT OF HOMEROOM, UH, WHICH IS COMMUNITY MEETINGS, SO STUDENTS, AND WE DO IT FOR, WE HAVE A MIDDLE, UH, MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENT HEALTH SURVEY AS WELL THAT WE DO.
YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S HELPFUL TO KNOW.
AND ANY MORE DETAIL ON THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL JUST AS I SIT WITH SOME OF THESE PERCENTAGES.
UM, AND I'M CURIOUS, LIKE, ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS, UM, I, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT, YOU KNOW, A PROHIBITION ON THE, THE SALE OF THIS GENERATIONAL PIECE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY STOP SOMEONE FROM GOING TO A NEIGHBORING CITY.
I KNOW, RIGHT? BETWEEN OUR CITIES, THERE'S A LOT OF TRANSIENTS AND MOVEMENT.
SO I'M CURIOUS IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT ASPECT OF HOW WE LOOK AT THIS SPECIFIC SUGGESTION, UH, PER CHAIR.
UM, AT THIS POINT, SOMERVILLE IS THE
[00:45:01]
LARGEST CITY IN THE STATE THAT'S ADOPTED THIS.SO IT WOULD BE PERHAPS MORE INCONVENIENT FOR KIDS IN CAMBRIDGE IF CAMBRIDGE AND SOMERVILLE HAD PROHIBITED IT.
I THINK THE IDEA OF HAVING LOCAL POLICIES ADAPTED, WOULD, MY UNDERSTANDING GENERALLY IS THAT THIS WOULD CREATE PRESSURE FOR THE STATE TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER THIS STATEWIDE BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S NOT VERY PRACTICAL TO EXPECT THAT A SINGLE MUNICIPALITY WILL HAVE, UH, A MAJOR IMPACT IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO BUY THAT PRODUCT AND THEY ONLY HAVE TO GO A MILE AWAY.
UM, BUT IT DOES CREATE MOMENTUM THAT IS ALSO HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND.
I, I KNOW ONE THING I'M SITTING WITH AS I READ THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE ALL ALSO WAYS TO APPROACH THIS FOR YOUNGER PEOPLE FROM A CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE.
I KNOW THERE ARE TRENDS RIGHT NOW AROUND, YOU KNOW, E-VAPOR AND, YOU KNOW, IT BEING COOL.
UM, AND WONDER IF LIKE THERE ARE PATHWAYS TO NOT NECESSARILY DO IT THROUGH THIS WAY, BUT TO SAY, UM, IN AN EDUCATIONAL WAY THAT IT ISN'T WHAT'S, WHAT'S, WHAT'S BEST FOR YOU.
ANYONE ELSE ON THIS QUESTION? UM, UH, OH, RIGHT.
UM, I WANTED TO JUST BRIEFLY RESPOND TO THIS AND THEN, UM, I WILL HAVE TO DROP OFF AT FOUR, SO I APOLOGIZE.
UM, UH, I, I THINK THAT IT'S A GOOD IDEA.
UM, I WOULD START IT SUCH THAT WE ARE STARTING AT 21 INSTEAD OF AT THE 2000 DATE.
UM, JUST SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT INITIAL LOSS OF CUSTOMERS FOR THE SMALL BUSINESSES.
UM, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT FRAMEWORKS.
LIKE I THINK THAT, LIKE COUNSELOR ZUZI SAID, YOU CAN THINK OF IT AS COMPARED TO ALCOHOL, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE RESTRICTIONS ON, RIGHT? I THINK THERE'S AN ALTERNATIVE WAY TO LOOK AT IT, WHICH IS COMPARING IT TO VAPING, RIGHT? WE HAVE MUCH MORE RESTRICTIONS ON VAPING THAN WE DO ON CIGARETTES, RIGHT? UH, MASSACHUSETTS HAS SOME OF THE STRICTEST VAPING LAWS IN THE COUNTRY.
ALL FLAVORED VAPES ARE, UH, UH, BANNED IN MASSACHUSETTS.
UM, THERE'S RESTRICTIONS ON HIGH NICOTINE VAPES AND UM, YOU CAN ONLY SELL THEM IN SMOKING BARS.
UM, AND THERE'S ALL SORTS OF OTHER RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE AS WELL.
UM, AND EVEN AS LIMITATION OF LIKE IT'S MANY ONLINE PLACES REFUSE TO SELL A VAPE IN MASSACHUSETTS.
SO EVEN DELIVERY IS RESTRICTED IN ALL THESE WAYS.
UM, I WOULD SAY THAT THESE CONVERSATIONS ARE ALSO ALWAYS DIFFICULT.
YOU WANT TO HAVE AS MUCH FREEDOM AS POSSIBLE, AND LIKE THAT INCLUDES THE FREEDOM TO DO THINGS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY END UP BEING GOOD FOR YOU, YOU KNOW, LIKE HAVING A COCA-COLA OR OTHER SORTS OF STUFF.
AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE DO HAVE A PROPENSITY TO GET ADDICTED TO THINGS.
AND I THINK OF IT LIKE THIS SPECIFIC SITUATION, MUCH MORE LIKE GAMBLING WHERE I'M NOT SO SURE IT WAS A SOCIETAL BENEFIT TO LEGALIZE GAMBLING IN ALL OF ITS VARIOUS FORMS IN ALL 50 STATES.
AND I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF NEGATIVE TRAPS THAT YOU CAN GET INTO AND HOW IT CAN REALLY DESTROY YOUR LIFE.
AND I THINK SMOKING IS THAT SAME WAY.
I WOULD DRAW A DISTINCTION BETWEEN MARIJUANA USE AND ALCOHOL.
AND THAT MARIJUANA DOES NOT HAVE AS MANY NEGATIVE SIDE EFFECTS.
I THINK ALCOHOL ALSO HAS SOCIAL BENEFITS.
UM, AND I THINK THAT NICOTINE HAS THIS SIDE EFFECT, ESPECIALLY OF CIGARETTES OF LIKE YOU GETTING ADDICTED, RIGHT? OF IT NOT HAVING A PARTICULAR HIGH.
BUT IT'S MORE THAT PEOPLE TRY IT, THEY THINK THAT IT'S COOL AND THEN THEY GET ADDICTED AND IT'S REALLY, REALLY HARD TO MOVE, RATHER THAN IT HAS THOSE OTHER, YOU KNOW, SOCIAL SORTS OF BENEFITS.
AND I THINK THAT THERE IS A CASE TO BE MADE FOR, UM, SQUEEZING PEOPLE OUT AND THE HEALTH, YOU KNOW, IMPLICATIONS ARE VERY, VERY BAD AS WELL.
AND I THINK THAT THERE IS A CASE TO BE MADE OF REGULATING MUCH MORE LIKE WE DO VAPES.
UM, AND IT'S KIND OF SURPRISING IN SOME WAYS VAPES ARE MORE DANGEROUS, SOME WAYS THEY'RE LESS DANGEROUS THAN CIGARETTES, BUT WE RESTRICT THEM MUCH MORE HEAVILY.
SO JUST SOME THINGS TO THINK ABOUT, UM, FOR MY COLLEAGUES AS WELL.
BUT, UM, I THINK THAT THERE IS A CASE TO BE MADE HERE FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, SAYING THAT WE WOULD, UH, BE IN A BETTER PLACE IF WE DECIDE TO SLOWLY OVER THE NEXT A HUNDRED YEARS PHASE OUT, UH, REGULAR CIGARETTES.
I, I HAVE NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER IN DOING THE NICOTINE FREE GENERATION.
I'M THE DAUGHTER OF TWO PARENTS WHO SMOKED NONSTOP, BOTH OF WHOM DIED EARLY.
SO I AM TOTALLY AWARE OF THE DANGERS OF TOBACCO.
I'M SURE THAT ANY RISK I HAVE, I HAVE RELATIVES WHO DIED OF SECONDHAND SMOKE.
HOWEVER, THIS JUST SEEMS LIKE QUITE AN OVERREACH TO SUGGEST THAT SOMEONE WHO IS 21 YEARS OLD RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE TO BE 21 IN ORDER TO EVEN BUY ANY OF THIS.
AND AS WAS NOTED FOR A VAPE, IT CAN'T BE, UM, FLAVORED VAPES IN MASSACHUSETTS.
BUT ALCOHOL IS FAR MORE DANGEROUS FROM A PUBLIC HEALTH PERSPECTIVE.
AND AS WAS MENTIONED IN PUBLIC COMMENT, SOMETHING I ALWAYS REFLECT ON IS YOU HURT YOURSELF A LOT BY SMOKING, BUT WHEN YOU DRINK AND
[00:50:01]
YOU ARE OUT DRIVING, WHICH WE KNOW HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, YOU PUT OTHER PEOPLE AT RISK AS WELL.AND I'M, I'M SOMEONE WHO'S ON RECORD.
I DON'T, I, I, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE PROMOTING IT.
I THINK PEOPLE SHOULD, BUT PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE THE CHOICE TO DECIDE.
SO AT LEAST FROM, FROM MY VOTE, IT WOULD NOT BE AT ALL TO HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THIS.
WE HAVE HEARD FROM A COUPLE COLLEAGUES, UH, VICE MAYOR ZIM SAID HE'D BE OPEN TO IT.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S NOT, CERTAINLY NOT CONSENSUS THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD WANNA DO IF, UH, MOVING FORWARD.
SO I'M NOT SURE IF WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE ON THIS OR JUST HOLD IT FOR NOW TO DECIDE WHETHER WE'D MOVE FORWARD.
BUT AGAIN, IF YOU KNOW THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL WAS TO DO THIS, THAT'S FINE, BUT I WOULD NOT EVER BE VOTING FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
IT IS ALSO, I FEAR SOMETHING THAT LEADS PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE A PARTICULAR STATE THAT IS, UH, HYPOCRITICAL BY REIGNING IN ONE FORM OF PRODUCT AND NOT OTHER FORMS OF CLEARLY UNHEALTHY, UH, THINGS THAT, THAT HAVE REPERCUSSIONS.
UM, THE AGE LIMITS ON ALCOHOL AND MARIJUANA MAKES SENSE FROM A BRAIN DEVELOPMENT POINT OF VIEW, AND CERTAINLY FOR NICOTINE AS WELL.
BUT MAKING IT SO THAT 10 YEARS FROM NOW, IF YOU'RE 35 YEARS OLD, YOU COULDN'T MAKE THAT CHOICE TO, TO SMOKE AGAIN.
I, I WOULD HOPE IT WOULD BE ZERO THAT NOBODY WOULD DO IT.
BUT IT, IT ALSO, IT CONCERNS ME THAT IT WOULD BE YET ANOTHER THING TO REGULATE AND YET ANOTHER THING, UM, FOR, UH, REGULATIONS AND FOR US TO SPEND TIME REGULATING INSTEAD OF DOING OTHER THINGS WE NEED TO DO, BUILD ROADS AND, AND HOUSES.
UM, SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO GO FROM THIS.
I'VE ONLY HEARD ONE COLLEAGUE WHO SAY HE WAS INTERESTED IN DOING THIS, SO I DON'T, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE WOULD BE MOVING FORWARD, UM, FOR THE WILLA COUNCIL.
I THINK THE, THE NEXT THING TO GO TO, UNLESS PEOPLE HAVE MORE TO SAY ON THIS, I'M SURE YES.
WOULD IT BE, UM, SORT OF GOES TO COUNCILOR ZU BE'S POINT EARLIER.
I MEAN, DO YOU WANT, SHOULD WE VOTE ON EACH ONE WHETHER WE WANT ONE AT A TIME AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT THEM TO PURSUE THIS OR NOT? YEAH, I THINK, AND MAYBE THE WAY WE FRAME IT, SINCE WE'RE A COMMITTEE, NOT A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE IS TO SAY, UH, SO I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO MOVE THE RECOMMENDATION TO DO A NICOTINE FREE GENERATION POLICY FORWARD TO THE FULL CITY COUNCIL WITH A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEN THE FULL COUNCIL WILL END UP WEIGHING IN ON IT.
IS THAT THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO FRAME THIS LIKE WE DO WITH, UM, MADAM CHAIR? YES.
UM, I THINK THAT MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE WE CAN JUST DROP IT.
LIKE I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S SUPPORT FOR THIS AT THIS POINT, AND IF SOMEONE REALLY WANTS TO DO IT, THEY CAN BRING IT TO THE COUNCIL.
BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT IF WE BRING IT TO THE COUNCIL, LIKE I THINK THERE'S GONNA BE A WHOLE DISCUSSION AND IT'S GONNA DRAG ON AND I THINK THAT WE JUST DON'T NEED TO PROCEED FROM THIS COMMITTEE HEARING.
DOES THAT SATISFY YOU, UH, COUNCILMAN MCGOVERN THAT FOR THIS ONE WE, WE WON'T GIVE ANY RECOMMENDATION.
'CAUSE THERE, THE SENSE IS THERE WON'T BE SUPPORTIVE.
I JUST DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WOULD BE EASIER FOR, FOR THE CITY IF WE DID.
YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE WE MAY, THERE MAY BE OTHERS IN THIS LIST THAT WE DO WANNA FORWARD.
THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE EASIER TO GIVE THEM DIRECTION, BUT I'M, I DON'T, IT'S FINE WITH ME.
ALRIGHT, SO THEN THE NEXT ONE, THANK YOU FOR THAT.
UH, UH, VICE MAYOR ZE AND COUNCILMAN MCGOVERN IS CITYWIDE CAP ON SALES PERMITS.
IF, UH, DIRECTOR LIPSON, IF YOU JUST WANNA SUMMARIZE THIS, IT'S IN OUR PACKET.
THIS ONE IS MUCH EASIER TO EXPLAIN.
UM, THERE ARE TWO VERSIONS OF THIS.
ONE IS A SOFTER CAP THAT ESSENTIALLY TRIES TO KEEP THE NUMBER OF ESTABLISHMENT PERMITS FOR THE SALE OF TOBACCO AND NICOTINE PRODUCTS AT THE CURRENT LEVEL.
THE OTHER IS TO CREATE A HARDER CAP THAT REDUCES THE NUMBER OF SUCH PERMITS OR LICENSES, I SHOULD SAY.
UH, AS INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES GIVE UP THEIR LICENSES, MOVE OUT OF THE CITY, OR UH, GO OUT OF BUSINESS.
SO IS, AS YOU SAID THIS, THE IDEA FOR RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NO CAP.
IS THAT CORRECT? THERE IS NO CAP.
UM, BUT THE NUMBER OF ESTABLISHMENTS THAT SELL THAT HAVE A LICENSE TO SELL IS, DOESN'T CHANGE VERY MUCH.
IT'S BEEN PRETTY STEADY FOR A WHILE.
AND SO AN OPTION WOULD BE TO CONTINUE WITH NO CAP OR TO HAVE A CAP WHICH IS SET.
OR IF YOU HAVE AN EXISTING PERMIT AND THERE'S A RETIREMENT OR SALE OR REVOCATION OR FAILURE TO RENEW, THAT DISAPPEARS AND GOES AWAY.
THAT'S A, THAT'S A BETTER DESCRIPTION OF THE THREE CHOICES.
[00:55:01]
OH, OH, I, I'M SORRY.SO HOW MANY, HOW MANY STORES SELL TOBACCO NOW? AND SO DO THEY PAY FOR A PERMIT AND WHAT YES.
DO THEY PAY? THEY DO PAY FOR A PERMIT.
IT'S THROUGH INSPECTION SERVICES.
I DON'T HAPPEN TO HAVE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ESTABLISHMENTS.
UM, WE DO ENFORCE, IT'S A, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN, IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING 'CAUSE THEY ISSUE THE PERMIT.
THEY HAVE THE HEARINGS IF THERE'S A VIOLATION, BUT THE ACTUAL ENFORCEMENT AT THE POINT OF SALE IS CARRIED OUT BY OUR DEPARTMENT THROUGH OUR PARTICIPATION IN THE SIX CITY TOBACCO COLLABORATIVE.
SO WE DON'T TEND TO SEE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PERMITS.
IT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING WE MANAGE.
BUT I CAN EASILY GET THAT IF YOU NEED IT.
'CAUSE I, I, I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW HOW WIDESPREAD TOBACCO SALE IS, AND IT DOES SEEM LIKE ONE MORE THING TO MANAGE IF WE PUT A CAP ON SALES.
BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE HEARING FROM YOU THE, UM, THE PROS AND CONS TO THIS OUTSIDE OF, I MEAN, A CON WOULD BE ONE MORE THING TO MANAGE THE PRO WOULD BE, UM, MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT MAYBE TO ACCESS TOBACCO.
UM, IT DOES SEEM WIDELY AVAILABLE.
WE'RE A VERY DENSE COMMUNITY IN THE PAST ON TOPICS LIKE CANNABIS, UH, ESTABLISHMENTS.
IT'S GENERALLY BEEN DISCUSSED HOW IT MAKES LESS SENSE IN A CITY THIS DENSE TO CREATE THESE KINDS OF RESTRICTIONS IN GENERAL ABOUT DISTRIBUTION AND NUMBER THAT THE MARKET KIND OF TAKES CARE OF A LOT OF THAT.
UM, I THINK THE AVAILABILITY IS NOT THE DR THE MOST IMPORTANT DRIVING FACTOR OR EVEN A VERY IMPORTANT ONE.
UM, BUT, UM, I, SO I, I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE ANY REASON FOR ACTION.
AGAIN, LOOKING BACK TO THE USE DATA IN YOUNGER PEOPLE, UM, WE WOULD LOVE TO, WE COULD LOOK AT STATE AND NATIONAL NUMBERS FOR ADULTS IF WE WANT TO GET A COMPARABLE NOTION OF HOW MANY CONSUMERS OF EVP PRODUCTS OR CIGARETTES THERE ARE.
BUT IT, IT'S A GENERALLY SLOW AND DOWNWARD TREND AND HAS BEEN FOR ABOUT 30 YEARS.
SO AS A, THAT'S A BIT OF A SIDEBAR, BUT TO SUPPORT THE POINT THAT THIS WOULD BE A MAJOR CHANGE OF POLICY AND, UM, IT'S NOT CLEAR WHAT WOULD BE DRIVING THAT CHANGE OR WHAT PURPOSE.
THERE IS, HOWEVER, THROUGH YOU CHAIR, UM, THE, UH, SOME CITIES HAVE HAD SPECIFIC CARVE OUTS FOR PROHIBITION ON SALES IN, ON, UH, CAMPUSES OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS OR IN PHARMACIES.
UM, THE PHARMACY RESTRICTION I THINK ACTUALLY IS A STATEWIDE AND IT'S ALREADY IN PLACE, BUT, UM, THAT, THAT'S ONE OF THOSE LITTLE LOCAL CARVE OUTS FOR HARVARD, I BELIEVE ALREADY HAS A POLICY WHERE THEY DO NOT SELL CIGARETTES ON THEIR CAMPUS.
UM, THAT WOULD BE ONE EXAMPLE OF A, IT'S NOT EXACTLY A CAP, BUT AN ACTUAL FORMAL PROHIBITION ON ISSUING A LICENSE THAT I CAN THINK OF.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S ABOUT ALL I CAN THINK OF.
SO WOULD, WOULD THAT BE NUMBER TWO, OR WOULD THAT BE NUMBER THREE? WOULDN'T THAT BE MORE NUMBER THREE, RESTRICTED ZONES FOR SALES? YEAH, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.
I, I YIELD, I, I THINK I TEND, AGAIN, I DON'T WANT PEOPLE SMOKING.
I, I, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A JOKE IN MY FAMILY.
MY SISTER MUST HAVE TRIED TO QUIT SMOKING ABOUT 20 TIMES.
AND SHE'S A LOT HEALTHIER FOR IT.
UM, BUT I, IT SEEMS LIKE ONE MORE THING TO MANAGE IF, UM, IF SMOKING, UH, TRENDS ARE DOWN.
I WOULD THINK MAYBE NOT TO IMPOSE A CITYWIDE CAP AT THIS TIME, BUT I AM, I'M EAGER TO HEAR FROM THE REST OF YOU.
UM, COUNCIL ZUBIE AND THEN ANYONE ONLINE OR NO? YEAH, I THINK SIMILAR TO COUNCILORS, ZUI HAVING THE DATA ON HOW MANY PERMITS WE HAVE, UH, FOR TOBACCO SALES WOULD BE HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND THE SPECIFIC, UH, ITEM.
AND I, I AM CURIOUS FOR THE ALTERNATIVE HERE, COULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO ALSO INCLUDE UNI UNIVERSITIES AS LIKE, ARE THERE WAYS TO AMEND THAT SECOND PIECE SO THAT YOU KNOW, LET ACTUALLY, NO, HOLD ON, LET ME GO BACK.
SO IF THERE'S A LOCAL BUSINESS THAT IS TRYING TO,
[01:00:01]
IS PLANNING TO RETIRE IN SOME WAY, CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THEIR BUSINESS, IS THERE A WAY TO AMEND THAT SPECIFIC ALTERNATIVE SO THAT YOU GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR WHOEVER THAT STAKEHOLDER IS TO BE ABLE TO DICTATE LIKE HOW THEY WANNA BE ABLE TO PROTECT MAYBE THE CULTURE OF THEIR BUSINESS, UM, IF THEY CAN'T MAINTAIN IT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.UM, SO IF THEY'RE LIKE GETTING DISPLACED IN ANY WAY.
UM, BUT WOULD, IS THERE A WAY TO HAVE THAT SPECIFIC PIECE BE ADDRESSED IN HOW WE APPROACH THE CAP SO THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE WHO ISN'T TRYING TO RETIRE ON PURPOSE, IT IS TRYING TO KEEP THEIR BUSINESS ALIVE, BUT JUST CAN'T KEEP UP IS IN SOME WAY AN EXCEPTION TO THE CAP.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
SO KIND OF CREATING A, UM, THROUGH YOUR CHAIR, UH, A, A HARDSHIP PROVISIONS FOR THE, UNDER A CAP, IN OTHER WORDS, ALLOWING FOR A CAP, BUT HAVING CARVE-OUTS.
SPECIFICALLY FOR, AGAIN, LIKE BUSINESSES WHO DIDN'T REALLY CHOOSE TO, YOU KNOW, RETIRE FOR ANY REASON.
AND IT'S KIND OF MORE OF A SITUATION OF DISPLACEMENT, WHAT THAT COULD MEAN IF THEY WANNA KEEP THAT CULTURAL INSTITUTION OR WHATEVER IT IS ALIVE.
UH, IF THROUGH YOU CHAIR, IF THEY ALREADY HAVE A PERMIT, THAT PROBABLY WOULDN'T APPLY TO THEM BECAUSE IT, IT WOULD BE A QUESTION GIVING IT UP ONCE THEY CHOSE TO CLOSE THE BUSINESS, THERE WOULD BE SOME LOSS OF VALUE IF THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WORKS EXACTLY THE WAY, AND I THINK UNLIKE AN ALCOHOL PERMIT, YOU CAN'T TRANSFER TO ANOTHER OWNER.
THE NEW OWNER WOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR THAT, UH, PERMIT TO SELL.
BUT, UH, SO IF THEY ALREADY ARE AN EXISTING BUSINESS, THEY CAN KEEP THAT, UH, PERMISSION TO SELL AS LONG AS THEY WANT.
SO IT'S REALLY ONLY FOR NEW APPLICANTS THAT SOME KIND OF HARDSHIP WOULD BE APPLICABLE, AS I UNDERSTAND.
SO THERE WOULDN'T BE A WAY TO NAVIGATE EXCEPTIONS TO A BUSINESS THAT WOULD NOT OUT OF, OUT OF A LACK OF CHOICE IN WHICH THEY HAD TO LIKE CLOSE DOWN THEIR BUSINESS IN ANY WAY, BE ABLE TO, UM, SEEK A NEW, I WOULD IMAGINE THEY WOULD NEED TO SEEK A NEW PERMIT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
IF THEY OPENED UP A DIFFERENT BUSINESS AT POTENTIALLY THE SAME ONE, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE THAT WOULD REQUIRE A NEW PERMIT.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF I'M GETTING A LITTLE TOO COMPLICATED.
IF THEY ALLOWED THEIR PERMIT TO LAPSE ENTIRELY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR A NEW PERMIT.
UM, AND IF WE HAD A HARD CAP OR A HARD CAP, LIKE THE HARDER, THE HARSHER OF THE TWO VERSIONS, THEN THEY MIGHT BE STUCK WITH BEING, BEING DISALLOWED FROM GETTING THAT PERMIT AFTER THEY GAVE UP THEIR PREVIOUS PERMIT, I GUESS.
YEAH, THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION AROUND EXCEPTIONS.
UM, I THINK THIS ONE I'M MORE OPEN TO EXPLORING.
I THINK I JUST HOLD THE PIECE ON THE STAKEHOLDERS AND AGAIN, BUSINESSES THAT DON'T REALLY HAVE THE CHOICE AND HOW THEY'RE NAVIGATING THEIR SITUATION AND THE IMPACTS THAT THAT WOULD HAVE.
UM, WHEN IT COMES TO, AGAIN, LIKE BEING ABLE TO RUN A SMALL BUSINESS, IT'S SOMETIMES HARD TO KEEP UP AND WOULDN'T WANT SOMEONE TO NECESSARILY BE PUNISHED, UM, FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH KEEPING THEIR BUSINESS ALIVE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
ALL YOU'LL COUNCILOR MCG, GOVERNOR, VICE MAYOR, AZIM, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ON THIS? AND IF AI IS CORRECT, AS DIRECTOR LIPSON SAID, THERE'S A STATE LEVEL LICENSE YOU HAVE TO GET THROUGH MAX MASS TAX CONNECT FOR SALE OF CIGARETTE CIGARS AND SMOKING AND A SEPARATE MUNICIPAL PERMIT THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEALTH.
UM, IN OUR CASE IT'S THROUGH INSPECTION.
YEAH, IT SAYS, OR CITY COUNCIL, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER EVER HAVING APPROVED A PERMIT.
SO, UM, AND THOSE ARE GOOD FOR A COUPLE YEARS AND YOU HAVE TO CONTINUE TO RENEW THEM.
UM, AND IT IS AN INTERESTING QUESTION.
WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED WITH TAXI LICENSES WHEN THERE'S A CAP, THEN THE PRICE OF THAT MEDALLION WENT UP.
I'M NOT SURE THAT WOULD HAPPEN HERE, DEPENDING ON THE PROFITABILITY OF, OF CIGARETTES.
UM, COUNCIL COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR THROUGH YOU.
UM, MR. LIPKIN, UM, UH, SORRY, I WAS THINKING OF MY OLD HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER.
UM, DID YOU SAY THEY SMOKE? DID I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY? NO, I, I DON'T, I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
UM, DID YOU SAY, UH, DID I HEAR YOU RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING THAT, OF, OF THE SECTION THAT YOU, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU WERE SAYING THAT, THAT THERE WASN'T A REAL JUSTIFICATION FOR, FOR CAPPING WELL, UM, THAT, UH, THROUGH YOU CHAIR.
UM, I GUESS I WAS ASKED TO PRESENT
[01:05:01]
AN ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OR AGAINST, AND I MADE THE OBSERVATION THAT IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DATA USAGE DATA, ESPECIALLY IN THE MOST CRITICAL AGE GROUPS, THAT UH, THIS WOULD BE A CONSIDERABLE CHANGE OF POLICY.AND IT'S NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR THAT IT'S SERVING AN URGENT PURPOSE.
UM, THAT'S JUST MOSTLY AN OBSERVATION.
UM, I THINK THAT THERE ARE, UH, THOSE REST, THOSE ESTABLISHMENTS, SMALL BUSINESSES, CONVENIENCE STORES, BODEGAS THAT SELL THESE PRODUCTS TEND TO BE, UH, MORE HEAVILY REPRESENTED IN IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES.
AND YOU CAN MAKE AN ARGUMENT IN BOTH DIRECTIONS THAT, THAT PUTS THOSE COMMUNITIES AT GREATER RISK, BUT ALSO THAT THEY, IT FORMS A BIT OF AN ECONOMIC LIFELINE TO THOSE KINDS OF SHOPS.
UM, AND IF THERE WERE A CAP, IT MIGHT DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECT THOSE KINDS OF ESTABLISHMENTS IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, BUT I DON'T HAVE MUCH ELSE TO DRAW ON FROM A DATA POINT OF VIEW.
YEAH, I MEAN, I, I MEAN, AT THIS POINT, I'M NOT SURE THIS IS, UM, IS, IS NECESSARY.
BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED, YOU KNOW, IF, IF, IF WE DID, IF YOU WERE ABLE TO COME BACK WITH DATA AND, AND THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST TWO YEARS, THERE'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED STORES IN CAMBRIDGE THAT HAVE, THAT HAVE OPENED AND, AND ARE NOW SELLING TOBACCO PRODUCTS THAT IT MAY BE A PROBLEM, YOU KNOW, UM, AND WE MAY WANNA HAVE SOME KIND OF CAP, BUT I, SHORT OF THAT INFORMATION, UM, I'M NOT SURE I CAN TAKE A POSITION ON THIS ONE, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
I HAVE ONE FOLLOW UP THROUGH YOU CHAIR.
UM, I THINK THE OUTCOMES WE'RE ALL LOOKING FOR ARE ABOUT THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES THAT WE ALREADY HAVE AROUND MAKING SURE THAT SHOPS AREN'T SELLING TO PEOPLE WHO ARE UNDERAGE OR NOT SELLING PRODUCTS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN FDA APPROVED IN THE CASE OF SOME KIND OF VAPE PRODUCTS OR ARE PROHIBITED FOR SOME OTHER REASON.
UM, AND I FEEL LIKE THE EMPHASIS ON GOOD COMPLIANCE CHECKS AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXISTING RULES IS WHERE WE GET THE MOST BENEFIT.
UM, SO, UH, IF THERE WERE A MAJOR TREND OR SHIFT IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF PERMITS, UM, I WOULD, I, I'M GOING TO CHECK IN WITH THE INSPECTION TO SEE IF THERE HAVE BEEN TRENDS.
BUT, UH, IF THE GREATER GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PROTECTING PEOPLE WHO ARE THE MOST VULNERABLE, THAT ARE BEING MARKETED TO BY THE INDUSTRY AND THAT SORT OF THING, I THINK THE BIGGER BENEFIT IS FROM GOOD ENFORCEMENT OF THE EXISTING RULES.
UM, I THINK IT WOULD BE INTERESTING, UH, ANYONE ELSE, I THINK, UM, TO HAVE THE INFORMATION, WHAT I HEARD THOUGH WAS THAT THE NUMBER OF PERMITS TENDS TO STAY THE SAME.
WE HAVEN'T SEEN BIG INCREASES OR DECREASES.
AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING THAT DENSITY MATTERS THAT IN A PLACE WHERE EVERYTHING'S MORE SPREAD OUT, IF YOU HAVE A COUPLE PEOPLE WHO DON'T SELL IT, THERE MAY BE MORE OF A GEOGRAPHIC, UM, INABILITY TO, OR MAKING IT LESS ACCESSIBLE.
WHEREAS IN A CITY LIKE CAMBRIDGE, THINGS ARE SO CLOSE, EVEN IF THERE'S A FEW FEWER ESTABLISHMENTS THAT SELL IT, I THINK WOULD BE, FOR THOSE WHO WANT IT WOULD BE PRETTY EASY TO GET.
I, I DO THINK THE KEY IS, AS DIRECTOR LIPSON SAID, ENFORCEMENT AND IN PARTICULAR EDUCATION AROUND THE DANGERS OF IT, WHICH IS WHAT HAS LED TO THAT DECLINE OVER TIME? UM, I, I KNOW AS A KID I WENT AND BOUGHT MY PARENTS CIGARETTES ALL THE TIME, SO THERE WAS NO AGE LIMIT.
'CAUSE EVEN WHEN I WAS EIGHT YEARS OLD, I WAS OUT THERE BUYING THEM, EVEN THOUGH WE ALSO WOULD BUY THEM EVERY SINGLE THING ON THE MARKET THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO HELP THEM STOP SMOKING, WHICH NEVER WORKED.
UM, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING WE MAYBE WANT SOME DATA ON THE NUMBER OF PERMITS, BUT WE'RE NOT READY TO MOVE FORWARD TO SUGGEST THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD GO FORWARD WITH.
I'M NOT SURE IF RESTRICTED ZONES FOR SALES IS A SIMILAR SITUATION.
I DUNNO IF THERE'S ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON THAT.
AM I CORRECT? JUST A FACTUAL CLARIFICATION.
RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NO RESTRICTION, I REMEMBER THIS WITH CANNABIS, THAT THERE'S A STATE LAW THAT RESTRICTS CERTAIN CANNABIS WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OR SOMETHING OF A SCHOOL.
AND WHAT I REMEMBER AT THE TIME WAS, IT WAS ODD TO ME THAT THAT HAPPENED BE, AND THERE WAS NO VISIBLE, YOU COULDN'T PUT ANYTHING VISIBLE ABOUT WHAT YOU WERE SELLING.
AND YET, ACROSS THE STREET FROM A BUNCH OF OUR SCHOOLS, THERE'S A LIQUOR STORE ADVERTISING THEIR LIQUOR.
UH, THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL.
COUNCILOR SUZI, UH, THIS IS ONE WHERE I ACTUALLY WAS THINKING IT MIGHT BE A GOOD, GOOD IDEA AND I JUST, SO CURRENTLY, UH,
[01:10:02]
I MEAN, 'CAUSE I I, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD TO BE SELLING CIGARETTES RIGHT AROUND THE HIGH SCHOOL.IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S WHERE THE, IT'S 12TH GRADE GIRLS THAT ARE SMOKING ACCORDING TO THESE STATS.
UM, SO I THINK MAKING IT A LITTLE HARDER, LIKE WE MAKE IT A LITTLE HARDER WITH MARIJUANA, UM, MIGHT MAKE SOME SENSE.
AND SO I'M, I GUESS I'M EAGER THROUGH YOU CHAIR NOLAN, TO HEAR YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, ABOUT THIS.
LIKE, I GUESS YOU DON'T REALLY WANT PEOPLE SELLING CIGARETTES AT THE BROADWAY MARKET OR AT THE PIZZA SHOP, RIGHT? OR, OR WHAT DO YOU THINK? AND BEFORE WE LEAVE MAYOR SIDIKI, ANY ANY WORDS YOU WANNA SAY? I REALIZE I DIDN'T CALL ON YOU.
ANYTHING YOU WANNA ADD TO THIS OR, OKAY.
THANKS SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE THROUGH YOU CHAIR IN RESPONSE.
UM, IT'S HARD TO KNOW WHETHER THAT WOULD MAKE MUCH A DIFFERENCE IN THE USE AMONG STUDENTS WHO ARE SMOKING AND WHAT WE TALKING ABOUT 6% IN THE SURVEY.
UM, IF THAT SIX, IT'S, IT'S IMPLIES THAT THAT CHOICE TO SMOKE IS TO SOME IMPORTANT DEGREE, A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE THAT IF IT WEREN'T SO CONVENIENT THAT THEY WOULD NOT SMOKE.
I SUSPECT THAT'S NOT THE CASE, ESPECIALLY IF YOU ONLY CREATE STRICT ZONES AROUND A FEW LOCATIONS.
UM, IT IS A SIGNAL THAT THE CITY HAS SAID THIS AREA, YOU KNOW, IT SHOULD NOT BE MADE AS EASY AS IT IS IN OTHER AREAS.
BUT AS FAR AS THE ACTUAL IMPACT OF THAT POLICY, UH, I THINK IT'S MORE OF A GESTURE THAN HAVING A MEANINGFUL IMPACT.
IT, UH, AGAIN, THROUGH YOU CHAIR NOLAN, IT, UM, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT WOULD BE, I DON'T KNOW IF CIGARETTES ARE SOLD AT THESE LOCATIONS ALL, UH, ALREADY, BUT, UM, UH, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT WOULD BE A GREAT HARDSHIP TO, TO DISALLOW, UM, SELLING CIGARETTES RIGHT.
AR RIGHT AROUND THE HIGH SCHOOL.
UM, AGAIN, I THINK THAT'S WHEN MOST, MOST KIDS START IN HIGH SCHOOL.
AND I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A RELATIVELY SMALL NUMBER OF KIDS, BUT I CAN'T ARGUE WITH THAT REASONING.
I THINK THAT'S NOT UNREASONABLE.
AND I ALSO THINK THERE'S A PLACE AND A TIME FOR MAKING A, A STATEMENT ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS, EVEN WHEN YOU CAN'T BE SURE THAT IT'S GONNA HAVE A MAJOR IMPACT.
I I THINK IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE PROTECTIVE TO A VULNERABLE POPULATION.
BUT I, I'M EAGER TO HEAR, UM, THE THOUGHTS OF MY COLLEAGUES, COUNCILOR ADI AND THEN COUNCILOR MCGOVERN.
I, I THINK SIMILAR TO COUNSELOR MCGOVERN'S POINT ON THE LAST ITEM, THAT HAVING MORE DATA ON CURRENTLY, LIKE WHAT PERMITS ARE WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE OF AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OR SECONDARY SCHOOL, SO THAT WE CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THE, WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH, SIMILAR TO ITEM TWO, WHERE WE'RE HAVING THAT INFORMATION ON THE NUMBER OF PERMITS THAT WE HAVE, UM, JUST TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE DENSITY COMPONENTS, LIKE IF THAT IS SOMETHING FOR US TO ASSESS.
AND I'D BE CURIOUS ALSO TOO, IF MAYBE WE CAN EVEN ADD QUESTIONS TO THE SURVEY THAT'S SENT OUT TO HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TO ASK IF, UNLESS I'VE MISSED IT, UH, TO ASK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT HOW THEY GET ACCESS TO THEIR ALCOHOL OR THEIR TOBACCO.
LIKE, UM, HOW, HOW DO THEY, IF THEY DO, UM, TO BE ABLE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND, LIKE, ARE THEY GOING TO SOME PLACE IN THE VICINITY OF THEM? I THINK SIMILAR TO THE, I THINK ALL THREE THAT WE'VE STARTED TO DISCUSS HERE IS THE IDEA OF, WELL, IF YOU RESTRICT IT, WILL IT NECESSARILY STOP THE BEHAVIOR OR WILL PEOPLE JUST NAVIGATE TO THE NEXT POSSIBLE LOCATION THEY CAN GET ACCESS TO IT.
SO THE RESTRICTED OF ZONING FOR SALES SEEMS LIKE IT'S JUST A FAR MORE FOCUSED WAY OF APPROACHING IT THAN THE OTHER TWO IN THE SENSE THAT YOU'RE KIND OF CONFINING THE DISTANCE IN WHICH SOMEONE WOULD NEED TO STEP OUT OF TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS IT.
SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING FOR US TO SIT WITH TOO.
SO I'D BE CURIOUS TO HEAR THE PART ON THE SURVEY PIECE IF YOU GUYS HAVE AT ALL EXPLORED THAT KIND OF QUESTION THROUGH YOU CHAIR.
UM, THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THE, IN THE QUESTIONS I THINK ABOUT HOW YOU OBTAINED THE, UM, PRODUCT.
UM, THEY'RE REALLY CAREFUL ABOUT NOT CHANGING QUESTIONS ON THE SURVEY.
THEY OCCASIONALLY WILL ADD A QUESTION AND, AND VERY OCCASIONALLY TAKE ONE OFF.
[01:15:01]
ONE OF THE VALUES OF HAVING A SURVEY THAT'S DONE METHODOLOGICALLY IN THIS WAY IS THAT THE DATA'S QUITE RELIABLE AS A TREND.UM, I WOULD BE VERY WILLING TO LOOK FOR ANY STUDIES OR OTHER EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION THAT MIGHT BE OUT THERE ALREADY ABOUT PATTERNS OF ACCESS.
LIKE WHERE WOULD PEOPLE IN THEIR TEENS TEND TO ACCESS? MAYBE SOMEBODY'S DONE SOME GOOD SOCIOLOGICAL WORK OR SOME OTHER STUDIES.
I I I THINK THAT WOULD BE GREAT TO SEE IF THERE'S DATA ON THAT, ESPECIALLY TOO, RIGHT? LIKE IF IT'S THE CASE THAT A YOUNG PERSON'S GETTING ACCESS TO IT BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS IN THEIR HOME LIFE VERSUS IT'S, UH, SOMETHING THAT THEY DO BECAUSE OF THEIR FRIEND GROUP OR BECAUSE THEY HAVE LOCAL ACCESS TO A TOBACCO SHOP OR AN ALCOHOL SHOP.
UM, I, I DO THINK ALSO THE POINT THAT OTHER COUNSELORS HAVE MADE ALREADY TOO.
UM, GETTING SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THE ENFORCEMENT PIECE WOULD HELP IN THESE DISCUSSIONS BECAUSE WE'RE ALMOST NAVIGATING TWO PIECES WHERE IT'S LIKE, WHERE IS OUR CURRENT ENFORCEMENT AT? IS IT DOING OKAY? IS IT NOT? ARE THERE PLACES OF CONVERSATION FOR US TO HAVE THERE? AND THEN I FEEL LIKE THIS PIECE IS KIND OF, SORT OF THE NEXT STEP, BUT ALSO PART OF THIS LARGER CONVERSATION IS WHAT CAN WE DO TO DO MORE TO HELP ENCOURAGE, UM, PEOPLE TO NOT NECESSARILY USE THESE SUBSTANTIVE SUBSTANCES.
UM, I WAS CURIOUS TO HEAR IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON DATA ON ENFORCEMENT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UM, OR EVEN LIKE THE EDUCATIONAL PIECES OF ARE, ARE THERE SPECIFIC AVENUES IN WHICH WE'RE ALREADY DOING WORK TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ON HARMS OF THESE SUBSTANCES, UM, THROUGH YOUR CHAIR? UM, THE, SO I DON'T HAVE ALL THE DATA DATA SHEETS ON ENFORCEMENT YEAR OVER YEAR, BUT I'M IN REGULAR CONVERSATION WITH THE DIRECTOR OF THE SIX CITY TOBACCO CONTROL PROGRAM THAT WE'RE PART OF.
AND SHE REPORTS TO ME WHEN THERE ARE VIOLATIONS WE HAVE TO SEND CEASE AND DESIST LETTERS.
UH, WE HAVE GOOD CONVERSATION ABOUT TRENDS.
AND I'D SAY FROM SORT OF ANECDOTALLY OR THROUGH NARRATIVE, I WOULD SAY WE GET GENERALLY VERY GOOD COMPLIANCE.
WE OCCASIONALLY THERE ARE NEW TYPES OF PRODUCTS WHERE THERE'S CONFUSION IN THE, I THINK, GENUINE CONFUSION ON THE PART OF THE OWNER OF THE BUSINESS AS TO WHETHER IT'S ALLOWED OR NOT.
SO, UM, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO PICK UP ON THESE MICRO TRENDS BECAUSE, UH, PUSHING OUT GOOD CLARIFYING INFORMATION TO STORE OWNERS IS ACTUALLY A REALLY BIG PART OF COMPLIANCE.
WHEN PEOPLE GET GOOD INFORMATION, THEY TEND TO COMPLY AT A PRETTY HIGH LEVEL.
UM, WE, UH, UH, DO HAVE A SET OF RULES THAT THE STATE IMPOSES ON COMPLIANCE CHECKS AS WELL THAT, UH, SO IT'S A COMPLICATED PICTURE 'CAUSE WHATEVER THE CITY CHOOSES TO DO, PLUS WHAT THE STATE REQUIRES, AND THE FDA ACTUALLY DOES CHECKS AS WELL.
UM, THERE'S QUITE A LOT OF CHECKS GOING ON.
UM, SO I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT TRENDS LIKE THE FACT THAT THERE'S BEEN A CONFUSION AND BROAD SORT OF HAZY GRAY AREA UNDERSTANDING OF EVP PRODUCTS THAT HAVE, ARE NOT FBDA APPROVED BEING SOLD ALL OVER THE STATE.
THEY SHOULD NOT BE SOLD ANYWHERE AND THEY'RE WIDELY SOLD.
SO, UH, SOME LE LEGAL CLARIFICATION IS BEING, IS TAKING PLACE, UH, THROUGH, UH, THE CITY SOLICITORS IN MANY TOWNS, AND I BELIEVE THROUGH THE STATE AS WELL TO BE ABLE TO SHOW PROPRIETORS, UH, THAT THESE DEVICES HAVE NOT BEEN FDA APPROVED AND OR THEREFORE MAY NOT BE SOLD.
THAT'S THE KIND OF CLEANUP WORK THAT'S KIND OF ONGOING, UH, AS NEW PRODUCTS AND NEW AND THE RULES AT DIFFERENT LOCAL STATE AND FEDERAL LEVEL ARE SOMETIMES MISUNDERSTOOD.
UM, SO, UH, I'D SAY, UH, WE'RE DOING A PRETTY GOOD JOB IN ENFORCEMENT.
THERE'S A LOT THEY'RE SUCCESSFULLY ABLE TO RECRUIT.
UH, THEY DO SECRET SHOPPER CHECKS WHERE THEY RECRUIT YOUNGER PEOPLE, UH, WHO MAY LOOK A LITTLE YOUNGER THAN THEY ACTUALLY ARE, OR LOOK, I'M SORRY, A LITTLE OLDER THAN THEY ACTUALLY ARE.
AND, UH, SO THERE'S BEEN A PRETTY, PRETTY GOOD CAMPAIGN THERE.
AND, UM, I THINK WITH THE ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY WE WOULD GET BY HAVING THE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT BE ABLE TO MAKE QUICK SMALL CHANGES THAT I THINK WE'LL BE ABLE TO KEEP, UH, OUR COMPLIANCE AT A PRETTY GOOD RATE.
WAS THERE ANOTHER QUESTION? YEAH, I WAS ON THE EDUCATIONAL PIECE.
UM, GENERALLY THAT KIND OF PSA LEVEL, THAT LEVEL OF PROMOTION OF HEALTH IS DONE AT THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVEL AND THROUGH NONPROFIT LIKE PSAS AND THAT KIND OF THING.
UM, THEIR, UM, IS, YOU KNOW, UM, ROOM ON
[01:20:01]
OUR WEBSITE FOR MORE PROMOTIONAL INFORMATION OF COURSE.UM, BUT WE DON'T GET AS MANY VISITORS AS SOMEBODY WHO PUTS UP A PSA ON THE TRAIN OR THE BUS.
UM, WE COULD EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES TO USE THE ACCESS TO THE BUS DEPOTS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT, UM, TRYING TO USE FOR PERIODICALLY FOR MESSAGING.
FOR INSTANCE, WE'RE PUTTING SOME UP ABOUT THE, ALL THE NEW SHARPS KIOSKS THAT ARE BEING PUT UP AROUND THE CITY, UM, AND WHERE TO FIND THEM.
AND SO THERE'S, THERE'S PLACES IF WE LOOK FOR THEM, I THINK TO PUT ADDITIONAL MESSAGING OUT.
I DEFINITELY BE, WOULD BE INTERESTED TO HEAR MORE ON LIKE THE MICRO TRENDS AND IF TO SEE IF THERE ARE PATHWAYS FOR US TO FOCUS ON THOSE TOO TO SOME EXTENT.
AND ANOTHER THING THAT JUST CAME TO MIND, EVEN IN DISCUSSING WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, I KNOW ONE OF THE HIGHER, UH, REASONS FOR, UH, FIRES IN THE CITY IS BECAUSE PEOPLE LEAVE THEIR CIGARETTES OUT THAT LIT AFTER THEY'VE FINISHED SMOKING.
SO I'M LIKE CURIOUS TO HEAR IF THERE, I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO HEAR IF THERE ARE WAYS FOR US TO ALSO ADDRESS THAT ASPECT IN TERMS OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH COMPONENT OF WHAT TOBACCO USE COULD, COULD MEAN.
COUNCILOR MCGOVERN, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? YEAH, YEAH.
I I JUST WANNA BRING THIS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS IN A SORT OF A BIG PICTURE.
I KIND OF WANNA BRING THIS DOWN TO THIS QUESTION ABOUT THE REGIONAL PIECE AND THE TALK ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, THE HIGH SCHOOL.
AND SO LET'S REMEMBER A COUPLE THINGS.
NUMBER ONE IS THAT NO ONE UNDER THE AGE OF 21 IS ALLOWED TO BUY CIGARETTES, RIGHT? AND MOST HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ARE NOT OVER THE AGE OF 21.
SO THIS, THERE ARE TWO STORES.
WE HAVE ONE PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL, THERE ARE TWO STORES.
THERE'S BROADWAY MARKET, AND THEN THERE'S THE CONVENIENCE STORE ON THE OTHER ON CAMBRIDGE STREET NEXT TO THE PIZZA PLACE.
I DON'T KNOW IF BROADWAY MARKET CIGARETTES OR NOT.
I DO KNOW THEY SELL ALCOHOL AND WE TRUST THEM TO BE ALLOWED TO SELL ALCOHOL AND NOT SELL IT TO HIGH SCHOOL KIDS, RIGHT? IT'S THE SAME AGE REQUIREMENT.
UM, SO THERE'S ESSENTIALLY ONE STORE THAT IF WE DID THIS AND SAID, YOU CAN'T SELL WITHIN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF FEET FROM THE SCHOOL, THERE'S ONE STORE THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS.
AND BEFORE I WOULD WANT TO MAKE A REGULATION THAT WOULD IMPACT ONE BUSINESS.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF THAT BUSINESS IS IN COMPLIANCE OR NOT.
YOU KNOW, HOW MANY VIOLATIONS IS THAT CRIME STORE HAD? IF THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOB AND THEY'RE ONLY SELLING TO PEOPLE 21 AND OVER, THEY'RE NOT SELLING TO HIGH SCHOOL KIDS.
UM, AND SO IF WE, IF WE BAN THEM FROM SELLING CIGARETTES, THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE LOSING ALL THAT BUSINESS FROM ANYBODY WHO'S 21 AND OVER WHO'S BEEN BUYING CIGARETTES THERE.
SO I'M NOT SURE THAT'S REALLY FAIR.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, THERE IS THE STATEMENT PIECE, RIGHT? THAT'S, THAT'S NOT INSIGNIFICANT.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, I, I JUST, IF IF, IF WE'RE THINKING ABOUT DOING THIS BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT STORES SELLING TO HIGH SCHOOL KIDS AND WE'RE GONNA PUT SOME, SOME, YOU KNOW, BAN ON, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY FEET YOU HAVE TO BE AWAY FROM THE SCHOOL.
I JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S ESSENTIALLY ONE BUSINESS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS.
UM, AND I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT IS WORTH IT.
UM, IF THEY'RE IN VIOLATION, THIS GOES BACK TO WHAT SAM WAS SAYING EARLIER.
IF THEY'RE VIOLATING, THAT'S AN ENFORCEMENT ISSUE.
WE CAN TAKE THEIR LICENSE AWAY, WE CAN FIND THEM, WE SHOULD DO THAT.
MAYBE KEEP A CLOSER EYE ON THEM, THEN MAYBE SOME OTHER, SOME OTHER PLACES BECAUSE THEY ARE SO CLOSE TO THE HIGH SCHOOL.
UM, BUT THIS, I DON'T SEE THIS AS A WIDESPREAD ISSUE ACROSS THE CITY.
I YIELD THANK YOU COUNCIL MCGOVERN.
AND I THINK YOU POINTED OUT TO ME AND HELP ME CLARIFY.
YEAH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE RIGHT IN THAT IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HIGH SCHOOL, THEY'RE ALL UNDER 21.
IN FACT, ON MOST CAMPUSES, ALMOST ALL THE STUDENTS ARE ALSO UNDER 21.
SO HARVARD AND MIT, UM, I MEAN GRAD STUDENTS ARE DIFFERENT, BUT ALMOST EVERY UNDERGRAD IS ALSO UNDER 21.
SO HAVING IT NOT AVAILABLE ON CAMPUS MAKES SENSE.
BUT AT, CERTAINLY AT CRS THERE'S JUST A COUPLE STORES.
I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS THERE, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO JUST HAVE MORE DATA WHETHER WE MOVE FORWARD OR NOT ON THE NUMBER OF PERMITS OVERALL, THE NUMBER THAT ARE NEAR SCHOOLS, AND ALSO COMPLIANCE IF THERE'S ANY MEASURE WE HAVE OF COMPLIANCE.
UM, 'CAUSE I THINK AS COUNCIL MCGOVERN AND OTHERS HAVE SAID, IF, IF COMPLIANCE IS THERE, THEN THAT'S PARTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR US TO MAKE SURE WE, UM, HAVE THOSE, UH, KIDS WE'RE MOST CONCERNED ABOUT NOT START.
'CAUSE THEY, IF THEY CAN'T GET ACCESS TO IT, I, IF I KNOW THAT IF I LET MY UNDERAGE CHILD WHO I NO LONGER HAVE UNDERAGE ONES, BUT WHEN I DID AND THEY WENT OUT AND I SUPPLIED THEM WITH ALCOHOL AND
[01:25:01]
THEY CAUSED A PROBLEM, I'M RESPONSIBLE AND I CAN BE CHARGED.IS THAT TRUE THAT IF I GAVE MY UNDERAGE STUDENT OR NEIGHBOR OR ANYONE TOBACCO, IS THERE A SIMILAR KIND OF, I MEAN, THE, THE PROBLEM IS YOU DON'T GO OUT AND DRIVE WHILE SMOKING AND IF YOU DO, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HURT SOMEONE.
SO I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE.
BUT IS THERE ANY SIMILAR PENALTY FOR SHARING OR GIVING AWAY SO THAT IF, IF, IF A NEIGHBOR BUYS CIGARETTES AND HANDS 'EM OVER TO THEIR, TO A 18-YEAR-OLD OR 16-YEAR-OLD, BECAUSE THAT, THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE PEOPLE ARE GETTING IT THROUGH YOU FIRST, LET'S HEAR FROM THE SOLICITOR AND THEN COUNSELOR SUZIE TO YOU, MADAM CHAIR, I, I'M NOT POSITIVE.
I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY CONSEQUENCES LIKE THERE ARE WITH ALCOHOL.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT, IT IS THEN A VIOLATION FOR THE STORE OWNER TO SELL TO SOMEONE WHO'S UNDERAGE.
BUT IF SOMEONE WHO IS OF THE CORRECT AGE BUYS IT AND GIVES THE PRODUCT TO SOMEONE ELSE, I, MY GUT INSTINCT IS THERE PROBABLY IS NOT ANY TYPE OF CONSEQUENCE.
RIGHT? SO, SO THAT GETS BACK TO THE EDUCATION AND THE ENFORCEMENT FOR THE INITIAL SALE.
THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT AND SOMETHING WE DO CONTROL THE EDUCATION.
AND DID YOU WANNA ADD TO THAT COUNCILORS? ZERO? NO, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY THERE IS A, A PERSON THAT WAS YOUNG THAT WILL REMAIN UNNAMED THAT I KNOW WOULD ACTUALLY ACCESS, UM, ALCOHOL AT CENTRAL SQUARE THROUGH THE UNHOUSED POPULATION.
AND YOU KNOW, SO THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT BUYING THE STUFF AT THE BROADWAY MARKET.
EVEN IF THEY SELL CIGARETTES, THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO CENTRAL SQUARE.
SO I, I THINK MAYBE THIS IS, UM, A MOOT.
IT'D BE GOOD TO HAVE MORE INFORMATION, BUT I, I THINK IT, UM, I THINK WE CAN MOVE ON TO NUMBER FOUR.
AND AS COUNCIL MCGOVERN NOTED, IF THERE'S ONE OR TWO STORES, THOSE ARE THE ONES PROBABLY MOST CONCERNED ABOUT SELLING TO HIGH SCHOOL.
SO IT'S THE ONES ACROSS THE CITY THAT'RE NOT.
SO WE HAVE ONE MORE, IT SOUNDS LIKE I, I DUNNO IF YOU NEED A FORMAL MOTION, BUT JUST AT LEAST MORE INFORMATION, HOPEFULLY NOT TAKE WEEKS AND WEEKS TO ASSEMBLE, BUT JUST NUMBER OF PERMITS, HOW MANY ARE NEAR SCHOOL AND ALSO WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT COMPLIANCE, YOU KNOW, AND, AND WOULD BE, I THINK, HELPFUL AND IS WHAT I'M HEARING FROM, FROM THE COMMITTEE.
AND THEN THE, THE FINAL ONE IS THE SMOKING BAN IN RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS OR BARS, AS HAS BEEN NOTED.
AND, UH, DIRECTOR ARDI SAID WE, THERE IS ONE NARROW EXCEPTION TO OUR, UH, BAN OF SMOKING BARS, WHICH IS, I'M LOOKING AT, UH, ONLY AN ESTABLISHMENT WHERE HOOKAHS OR WATER PIPES ARE BASICALLY THEIR BUSINESS MODEL, RIGHT? IT'S, IT'S THE, A TOBACCONIST YEAH, IT HAS TO BE A TOBACCONIST WHERE THEIR PRIMARY SALES ARE BASED ON TOBACCO AND NICOTINE PRODUCTS.
AND I, I, I WOULD GUESS WE DON'T HAVE TOO MANY OF THOSE, BUT, UM, THE QUESTION IS WE COULD CHOOSE TO ELIMINATE ALL OF THAT.
IT'S, IT'S NOT, I WOULD GUESS WE DON'T HAVE VERY MANY, SO I'M NOT SURE WE SHOULD AGAIN, DO THAT.
I BELIEVE IN ADULTS BEING ABLE TO CHOOSE TO DO THAT IF THEY WANT.
BUT EAGER TO HEAR FROM ANYONE.
AND I DON'T KNOW, COUNCILOR MCGOVERN, YOU ASKED ABOUT THIS EARLIER.
I DUNNO IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT THIS, WHETHER WE WOULD WANT TO CONSIDER NOT ALLOWING THAT? YEAH, YEAH.
I MEAN, I GUESS I'M, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DID THIS BEFORE AND WHEN WE DID THE, I WAS, NONE OF US WERE ON THE CONSOLE.
UM, WELL, UNLESS CONS IS HERE.
UM, WHEN WE, WHEN WE BANNED SMOKING IN RESTAURANTS, I MEAN, THE MAIN PURPOSE WAS, UH, BECAUSE OF, UH, SECONDHAND SMOKE AND THE IMPACT THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULDN'T JUST HAVE A NON-SMOKING SECTION, COULDN'T CONTAIN THE SMOKE AND PEOPLE WE, THE FEARS OF SECONDHAND SMOKE.
AND IF I HEARD CORRECT EARLIER THAT, THAT THAT EVIDENCE ISN'T REALLY THERE WITH, UM, THE DANGERS AREN'T, AREN'T REALLY THERE WITH, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO HOOKAH AND, AND WATER PIPES AND, AND VAPES AND SUCH.
SO, UM, I KNOW THE BUSINESSES THAT WE DO HAVE THAT ALLOW IT, UM, RELY VERY HEAVILY.
IT, IT IS A, IT IS WHAT ATTRACTS A LOT OF PEOPLE TO THEIR BUSINESS.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, IF THAT WERE TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM, I THINK WE WOULD, WE WOULD POTENTIALLY SEE THOSE BUSINESSES, UH, GO UNDER, UM, WHICH, UM, I DON'T THINK WOULD, WOULD, WOULD, WOULD BE A GOOD THING.
AND IF THERE'S NOT A HEALTH RISK OF SECONDHAND SMOKE, THEN I DON'T SEE THE NEED THAT TO CHANGE WHAT WE HAVE NOW.
ANY OTHER MY COLLEAGUES OR DIRECTOR LIPSON, OR DID YOU WANNA ADD TO THAT OR, UM, YES.
THE, JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS IS NOT ABOUT, UH, WATER PIPES HOOKAH OR VAPE.
IT'S ABOUT ACTUAL THE ABILITY TO, UH, USE, UH, ENJOY A COMBUSTIBLE TOBACCO PRODUCT INSIDE.
AND THE ONLY EXCEPTION WAS CARVED OUT FOR
[01:30:01]
LEVITON PIERCE AT ONE TIME, MANY, MANY YEARS AGO WHEN THEY HAD A SMOKING ROOM IN THE BACK.THERE WERE SIMILAR CARVE OUTS IN OTHER COMMUNITIES AROUND THE STATE.
THEY, THIS ONE HAPPENED TO HAVE A PROVISION REQUIRING, UH, OF SUFFICIENT HVAC VENTILATION AIR EXCHANGE IN THAT ROOM.
UH, FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, LEVI AND PIERCE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THAT, BUT THEN CLOSED DOWN THAT ROOM.
AND THAT, I BELIEVE IS THE ONLY TIME THIS ONE CARVE OUT HAS BEEN USED.
UM, BUT THERE ARE COMMUNITIES AROUND THE STATE THAT DO ALASKA CIGAR BARS AS A CATEGORY.
UM, WE DO NOT, THIS WAS THE ONLY EXCEPTION, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THERE ARE ANY ESTABLISHMENTS TAKING ADVANTAGE OF IT.
I I, I APOLOGIZE IF I'M, IF I MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT THE, WHAT, WHAT THIS WAS.
UM, JUST A QUICK QUESTION MAYBE TO THE SOLICITOR.
UM, I KNOW THAT THERE'S TALK AT, WELL, THE, THE, THE STATE I BELIEVE IS ALREADY, I THINK IT THEY'RE COMING UP WITH REGULATIONS ABOUT CAN INDOOR CANNABIS USAGE AND I DON'T KNOW, I'M, I'M NOT FROM, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THAT STANDS RIGHT NOW.
AND I I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S JUST, UM, EDIBLES THAT THEY WOULD ALLOW IN, IN, IN THOSE ESTABLISHMENTS OR DO WOULD THEY ALLOW SMOKING AND IF WE BAN, WOULD THIS IMPACT THOSE ESTABLISHMENTS IF THE STATE MOVES? I MEAN, HOW, HOW WOULD, HOW DOES THAT WORK? HOW WOULD THAT WORK? UH, THANK YOU THROUGH THE CHAIR TO YOU.
THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION.
THE STATE HAS PROMULGATED THE SOCIAL CONSUMPTION CANNABIS REGULATIONS.
UM, WE ARE STARTING TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH, UM, CDD WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF CDD ABOUT HOW THE CITY MIGHT MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE.
UM, AND THERE MAY HAVE TO BE SOME, IF THE CITY WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ALLOWING SOCIAL CONSUMPTION WITHIN THE CITY, THERE MAY HAVE TO BE SOME, UM, LOOKING AT THE SMOKING ORDINANCE AND MAKING CHANGES TO MAKE THINGS CONSISTENT.
UH, IT'S A LITTLE EARLY ON AND I HAVEN'T BEEN TOTALLY KEYED IN, SO I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK MORE TO IT.
BUT I KNOW, UM, YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY THE SMOKING ORDINANCE WOULD PROHIBIT BECAUSE OF THE WORKPLACE SMOKING WOULD PROHIBIT CANNABIS, UM, SMOKED CANNABIS IN A WORKPLACE.
UH, SO BASICALLY, LONG STORY SHORT, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO THIS WHILE WE'RE LOOKING AT SOCIAL CONSUMPTION AND SEE IF THERE'RE GONNA BE CHANGES NEEDED TO THE TOBACCO ORDINANCE IF THIS IS THE DIRECTION THE CITY WANTS TO GO.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, IF THIS WAS, UM, IF, IF THIS WAS ON, IF, IF LEVITON PIERCE WAS THE ONLY PLACE THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, HAD THIS EXEMPTION AND NOW THEY DON'T DO THAT ANYMORE, AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CLEAN THIS UP, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT'S A BIG PROBLEM.
IS IT BETTER THAT WE WAIT AND KIND OF DO ALL OF THIS AT THE SAME TIME? OR DO WE FIX THIS NOW AND THEN COME BACK IN SIX MONTHS OR HOWEVER LONG IT TAKES AND POTENTIALLY CHANGE THINGS AGAIN? UM, MIGHT BE EASIER TO DO IT ALL IN ONE IN ONE SWOOP IF WE GO THAT ROUTE.
ANY RESPONSE TO THAT? AND I, I, I DO THINK COUNCIL MCGOVERN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS SET OF THINGS THAT WE MIGHT GET MORE INFORMATION ON, WHEREAS THE SEPARATE ONE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER WAS SOMEWHAT MORE DISCREET AND RELATES TO SOME OTHER YEAH, I'M, IF, IF, IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING A SEPARATE ROOM, LIKE A CIGAR BAR OR THERE, THERE'S, THERE'S GONNA BE A ROOM IN THE BACK OF A BAR WHERE PEOPLE CAN SMOKE MARIJUANA.
IF THAT'S WHAT THE STATE ALLOWS AND THE BUSINESS WANTS TO DO THAT, IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO ADJUST A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ORDINANCES TO ALLOW THAT.
I, WHY DON'T WE, AND THIS DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT'S A PRESSING PROBLEM.
WHY DON'T WE JUST WAIT AND DO IT ALL AT ONCE VERSUS HAVE YOU GUYS DO ALL THIS WORK NOW AND THEN HAVE TO MAYBE COME BACK AND SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS OR A YEAR, HOWEVER LONG IT TAKES US TO, UM, TO MAYBE REDO IT.
I DON'T, YOU KNOW, THROUGH YOU CHAIR, UM, I AGREE THAT I DON'T THINK IT'S A PRESSING ISSUE.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN, I MEAN, SINCE ONLY A TOBACCONISTS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE AND NONE ARE, THERE'S CLEARLY NOT A LOT OF DEMAND FOR THIS CARVE OUT.
UM, SO IT SEEMS REASONABLE AND PERFECTLY FINE TO WAIT UNTIL WE CLARIFY ANY CONFLICTS BETWEEN SOCIAL CONSUMPTION
[01:35:01]
SITE STATE LAW AND THE LOCAL WORKPLACE PROVISIONS.THAT SEEMS LIKE A SERIES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS THAT HAVE TO GET WORKED OUT ACROSS THE STATE.
SO WE'RE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHO HAVE TO GET CLARITY.
I DON'T THINK THE WORKPLACE SMOKING PROHIBITIONS DID APPLY TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN TOBACCO, THOUGH.
UM, THERE MAY HAVE BE OTHER STATE LAWS THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO CHANGE, BUT, UM, I MAY BE WRONG ABOUT THAT, BUT I THOUGHT THEY WERE SPECIFIC TO TOBACCO COUNCIL MCGOVERN, ANYTHING.
SO IT SOUNDS, UH, IF, IF I'M HEARING THIS CORRECT, I THINK COUNCIL MCGOVERN WAS MAKING SURE THAT, AND THIS IS A QUESTION PARTLY TO THE STAFF, UM, EARLIER IN THE MEETING WE PASSED A MOTION FOR THE FULL COUNSEL TO CONSIDER ASKING FOR THESE, UH, CHANGES TO THE RESCISSION AND THE CLARIFICATION OF SOME OF THE WAYS IN WHICH THE ORDINANCE IS THAT'S SEPARATE FROM THESE QUESTIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.
NOW, I BELIEVE WHAT COUNCIL MCGOVERN WAS ALSO WANTING TO KNOW IS SINCE THAT DOES INVOLVE THE SAME ORDINANCE, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO WAIT AND HOLD ON WHETHER WE GET THIS INFORMATION OR IS IT A KIND OF EASY FIX TO DO THE RESCISSION, GET THAT CLEANED UP, AND THEN IF WE CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION AFTER SOME ADDITIONAL DATA THAT THERE MAY BE FURTHER CHANGES WE WOULD MAKE.
ALTHOUGH IT ALSO SOUNDS LIKE ON THE, UH, THE FINAL ONE ON THE SMOKING BAN IN RETAIL, WE MAY WANNA WAIT FOR SOME CLARIFICATION FROM THE STATE ON CANNABIS.
SO MY QUESTION TO THE STAFF IS, DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT ONE MOTION WHICH WILL APPEAR ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA, I BELIEVE? CORRECT, YEAH.
AND THEN IS THERE ANY REASON TO HOLD OFF ON THAT TO DISCUSS THESE OTHER QUESTIONS? I, I, I THINK PART OF THAT GETS TO, DO WE WANNA DO THE, THE FIRST PART RELATIVELY QUICKLY TO ENSURE, RIGHT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S A YES.
SO LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
AND THEN LET'S THINK ABOUT, I DUNNO IF YOU NEED DIRECTION TO, UM, TO HAVE A MOTION TO GATHER SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WE HAD, WHICH MAY ALSO INVOLVE REACHING OUT TO CDD TO SEE IF THEY KNOW OF ANY OF THE INFORMATION, UH, AROUND THE, THE RESPONSE FROM SOME OF THE SMALL BUSINESSES IF WE WERE TO CONSIDER ANY KIND OF RESTRICTION ON SALES.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE AS QUESTIONS? UH, I DID GET ALL, I WROTE DOWN ALL THE QUESTIONS AS THEY CAME UP AND THEY'RE ALL FAIRLY, I THINK WE CAN GET RESPONSES PRETTY QUICKLY.
UM, THE, THE LAST ONE THOUGH, I WANTED TO GET CLARITY ON ASKING CDD ABOUT THE IMPACT ON SMALL BUSINESSES.
IF WE PUT CAPS, I I THINK IT JUST AT ONE POINT, BUT IT MAY BE BETTER.
LET'S GET THE, THE DATA ON THE NUMBER, WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH ENFORCEMENT.
YOU KNOW WHAT, AND THEN DECIDE IF WE WANT TO HAVE A SOMEWHAT LARGER EFFORT TO REACH OUT TO THE SMALL BUSINESS COMMUNITY WHO, UH, ISN'T WOULD, WOULD BE INVOLVED IN ANY CAP.
'CAUSE IF WE'RE NOT GONNA LOOK SERIOUSLY AT ANY KIND OF CAP OR CHANGE, THERE'S NO SENSE IN, IN HAVING CITY STAFF SPEND TIME ON SOMETHING THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE, THE OTHER INFORMATION IS RELATIVELY EASY TO GATHER, IS NOT AT A HEAVY LIFT.
AND THEN IT COULD COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL THROUGH YOU, THROUGH JUST A COMMUNICATION FROM THE CITY MANAGER ON OUR AGENDA AND WE CAN THEN DECIDE HOW TO MOVE FORWARD.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AND COUNCILMAN GOVERNOR, DOES THAT SOUND LIKE A GOOD WAY TO MOVE FORWARD ON THESE QUESTIONS? UH, SOUNDS GOOD TO ME, MADAM CHAIR.
ANY OTHER, UH, COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE FROM THE BODY ON THIS TOPIC? ALL RIGHT.
WELL THEN, UM, UH, MOVE TO ADJOURN FROM COUNCILOR ZUBI.
VICE MAYOR ABSENT COUNCILLOR MCGOVERN? YES.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE, WE MAY BE ABLE TO GET THAT ON THE AGENDA BY FOR NEXT WEEK FOR JUST TO START THE PROCESS FOR YOU TO ALL COME BACK FOR THE FIRST PART OF THE, THE RESCISSION AND THE CLEANUP OF THE, I VIEW THAT AS CLEANUP OF THE ORDINANCE, RIGHT? I MEAN, IT'S A CHANGE, BUT IT ALSO MAKES IT CONSISTENT AND CLEANER.