HomeMy WebLinkAbout _ 9.1(d)--Consider adopting a tobacco-oriented retailer ordinance
CITY OF REDDING
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Authorize and approve the following:
(1) Offer an Ordinance amending Redding Municipal Code Title 6 (Business Taxes,
Licenses, and Regulation), Chapter 6.13 (Redding Municipal Code Tobacco-Oriented
Retailing) adopting a Tobacco-Oriented Retail license for first reading by title only,
waive the full reading;
(2) Authorize the City Attorney to prepare a summary ordinance and the City Clerk to
publish the same in accordance with law; and
(3) Find that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to
California Environmental Quality Act guidelines 15060(c)(2) and 15061(b)(3) and
further find that the passage of this ordinance will have no foreseeable direct or indirect
physical change in the environment.
Fiscal Impact
If the new ordinance is adopted, all Tobacco-Oriented Retailers will be required to pay a fee of
$4,828.27 - the fee is based on Code Enforcement administering the Tobacco-Oriented Retailer
Program and that there are 29 vape/smoke shops that will be classified as Tobacco-Oriented
Retailers. As proposed, Code Enforcement staff would include one full-time Neighborhood
Preservation Officer and a half-time Administrative Assistant. The fee could increase or decrease
if the number of Tobacco-Oriented Retailers is found to be more or less than 29.
Alternative Action
The City Council (Council) may choose not to adopt an ordinance regulating Tobacco-Oriented
Retailers or the Council may direct staff to edit the licensing ordinance to incorporate licensing
all tobacco retailers. This will significantly drop the fee for the program to $1,176.63 since it is
spread out over approximately 119 retailers. The Council may also provide alternate direction to
staff.
MEETING DATE: June 17, 2025
ITEM NO. 9.1(d)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
jgibilisco@cityofredding.org
btippin@cityofredding.org
SUBJECT: 9.1(d)--Consider adopting a tobacco-oriented retailer ordinance.
Jason Gibilisco, Management
Assistant to the City Manager
Report to Redding City Council June 12, 2025
Re: 9.1(d)--Consider adopting a tobacco-oriented retailer ordinance Page 2
Background/Analysis
On March 18, 2025, staff presented the Council with background inf ormation on previous
tobacco retail items, including the Council's most recent direction from September 17, 2025,
Council meeting and the fees associated with operating a tobacco retail program through both the
City of Redding Police Department and Code Enforcement Division. At that meeting, the
Council directed staff to return with a licensing ordinance that includes location restrictions and
capacity limit for smoke and vape shops.
Staff worked with Code Enforcement and the City Attorney’s Office to create a draft tobacco
retailing ordinance (Draft Ordinance) that was specific to creating a license requirement for vape
and smoke shops. In addition to creating the draft ordinance staff also added location restrictions
and capacity limit for smoke and vape shops. Staff has confirmed adding these restrictions does
not require an update to the zoning code and can be accomplished via the ordinance.
Under the draft ordinance, all Tobacco-Oriented Retailers will be required to obtain a license
unless they meet at least three out of seven exemption criteria. These criteria are designed to
exclude general tobacco retailers such as gas stations, convenience stores, supermarkets , golf
courses and other similar stores from the definition of “Tobacco-Oriented Retailer.” They
include:
1. Businesses that have contracts with tobacco manufactures;
2. Businesses that have gas pumps and sell gas;
3. Businesses that have licenses to sell beer and wine or liquor;
4. Businesses who have ownership rights to the property;
5. Businesses that have a minimum gross sales of non-tobacco products in excess of 75
percent;
6. Businesses that include a pharmacy on site; and
7. Businesses whose primary use is a golf course.
To create this definition and establish the criteria, staff met with various business owners to learn
the differences in their stores compared to smoke and vape shops. Staff also attempted to meet
with smoke and vape shop staff but they were not interested in discussions.
In the City of Redding (City) there are approximately 29 Tobacco-Oriented Retailers. Staff
determined that the capacity limit for Tobacco-Oriented Businesses is 20 and recommends
reducing the total number of Tobacco-Oriented Retailers respectively. Current Tobacco-Oriented
Retailers will be allowed to continue to operate as long as they submit a complete and accurate
Tobacco-Oriented Retail application and pay the required fee within 60 days of ordinance
adoption.
New Tobacco-Oriented Retailers will not be permitted to operate within 1,000 feet of a youth-
oriented facility following the adoption of the draft ordinance. A youth-oriented facility includes
schools providing instruction of any grades Kindergarten through grade 12, public library, public
parks, and other similar youth-oriented facilities that are primarily used to host recreation and
social activities to youth.
Report to Redding City Council June 12, 2025
Re: 9.1(d)--Consider adopting a tobacco-oriented retailer ordinance Page 3
The final distance requirement of the draft ordinance restricts new Tobacco-Oriented Retailers to
operate within 500 feet of an existing Tobacco-Oriented Retailers. The distance requirements for
both youth-oriented facilities and existing Tobacco-Oriented Retailers will only come into effect
once the total number of Tobacco-Oriented Retailers drops under 20, affecting only new
Tobacco-Oriented Retailers that seek to operate following adoption of the draft ordnance.
The draft ordinance allows for enforcement, inspections, and education to all tobacco retailers
not just Tobacco-Oriented Retailers. All retailers will be subject to inspections; retainment of
purchase invoices for tobacco products for staff review; there will be no sale of flavored tobacco
products; and no tobacco products to be sold to a person under the age of 21. This allows for the
City to investigate complaints on retailers that are not classified as Tobacco-Oriented Retailers
and hold all tobacco retailers accountable.
Pending adoption of the ordinance, staff will bring back a resolution for adoption of a Tobacco -
Oriented Retailer licensing program and a resolution for adoption of administrative fines.
Environmental Review
This is not a project defined under the California Environmental Quality Act, and no further
action is required.
Council Priority/City Manager Goals
• Government of the 21st Century – “Be relevant and proactive to the opportunities and
challenges of today’s residents and workforce. Anticipate the future to make better
decisions today.”
Attachments
^Draft Ordinance
^Public Health Law Center's Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance
Staff Report from September 17, 2024
Staff Report from March 18, 2025
DRAFT NEW ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE NO. ______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF REDDING AMENDING TITLE 6
(BUSINESS TAXES, LICENSES AND REGULATIONS) OF THE
REDDING MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING CHAPTER 6.13 (TOBACCO-
OREIENTED RETAILING), RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF
TOBACCO RETAILERS
Section 1. Redding Municipal Code Title 6 (Business Taxes, Licenses and
Regulations) is amended to read as follows:
Title 6 – BUSINESS TAXES, LICENSES AND REGULATIONS
Chapter 6.13
6.13.010 Legislative findings.
A. State law prohibits the sale or furnishing of cigarettes, tobacco products and smoking
paraphernalia to persons under 21 years of age except active duty military personnel who are
18 years of age or older (California Penal Code § 308).
B. State law requires that tobacco retailers check the identification of tobacco purchasers who
reasonably appear to be under 21 years of age (California Business & Professions Code §
22956) and provides procedures for using persons under 21 years of age to conduct onsite
compliance checks of tobacco retailers (California Business & Professions Code § 22952).
C. State law requires that tobacco retailers post a conspicuous notice at each point of sale stating
that selling tobacco products to anyone under 21 years of age is illegal (California Business &
Professions Code § 22952, California Penal Code § 308).
D. State law prohibits the sale or display of cigarettes through a self -service display and prohibits
public access to cigarettes without the assistance of a clerk (California Business & Professions
Code § 22962).
E. State law prohibits the sale of "bidis" (a type of hand-rolled filterless cigarette) except at those
businesses that prohibit the presence of minors (California Penal Code § 308.1).
F. State law prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or sale of cigarettes in packages of less than
20 and prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or sale of "roll-your-own" tobacco in packages
containing less than six-tenths of an ounce of tobacco (California Penal Code § 308.3).
G. State law prohibits public school students from smoking or using tobacco products while on
campus, while attending school-sponsored activities, or while under the supervision or control
of school district employees (California Education Code § 48901(a)).
H. In 2023, 41.2% of surveyed Shasta County high school students reported having previously
used tobacco, the highest level of tobacco use recorded in the state (2023 California Youth
Tobacco Survey).
I. In 2023, 31.6% of surveyed Shasta County high school students stated that they vape to relax
or relieve stress and anxiety (2023 California Youth Tobacco Survey).
J. In 2023, 16.8% of surveyed Shasta County high school students reported currently using
tobacco products (including vapes, cigarettes, cigars, little cigars and cigarillos, smokeless
tobacco, heated tobacco products, hookah and nicotine pouches) (2023 California Youth
Tobacco Survey).
K. In 2023, Shasta County had the highest level of current tobacco use by high school students in
the State (2023 California Youth Tobacco Survey).
L. In 2023, 63.2% of currently vaping high school students reported that they believed it was easy
to obtain vapes and cigarettes from stores (2023 California Youth Tobacco Survey).
M. In 2023, 32.6% of surveyed Shasta County students reported buying vapes, pods, or e-liquid
directly from a tobacco or smoke shop (2023 California Youth Tobacco Survey).
N. In 2023, 23.4% of surveyed Shasta County students under the age of 18 reported asking
someone to buy them a vape, pod or e-liquid (2023 California Youth Tobacco Survey).
O. The city has a substantial interest in promoting compliance with federal, state, and local laws
intended to regulate tobacco sales and use; in discouraging the illegal purchase of tobacco
products by persons under 21 years of age; in promoting compliance with laws prohibiting
sales of cigarettes and tobacco products to persons under 21 years of age; and in protecting
youth and underserved populations from the harms of tobacco use. California courts in Cohen
v. Board of Supervisors (Cal. 1985) 40 Cal.3d 277, Bravo Vending v. City of Rancho Mirage
(4th Dist. 1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 383, and Prime Gas v. City of Sacramento (3rd Dist. 2010) 184
Cal.App.4th 697, have affirmed the power of local jurisdictions to regulate business activity in
order to discourage violations of law. State law authorizes local tobacco retailer licensing laws
to provide for the suspension or revocation of the local tobacco retailer license for any violation
of a state tobacco control law (California Business & Professions Code § 22971.3).
P. Requiring a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer license will not unduly burden legitimate business
activities of retailers who sell or distribute cigarettes or other tobacco products to adults. It
will, however, allow the city to regulate the operation of lawful businesses to discourage
violations of federal, state, and local tobacco-related laws.
Q. In 2024, the Redding Police Department conducted 41 undercover decoy operations using
underage individuals to attempt to purchase tobacco products. Of these, five businesses
unlawfully sold tobacco products to minors—and all five were Tobacco-Oriented Retailers.
This indicates a disproportionate rate of noncompliance among Tobacco-Oriented Retail
businesses and highlights the need for enhanced local oversight and stricter regulations specific
to this category of retailers.
R. In 2024, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration conducted inspections of
seven Tobacco-Oriented Retail businesses within the city. All seven were found to be in
violation of state law. Documented violations included attempted sales of illegally imported
tobacco products, the unlawful sale of cannabis products, and the confirmed presence of
flavored tobacco products prohibited under state law. This pattern of noncompliance
underscores the necessity for enhanced local regulation and enforcement of Tobacco-Oriented
Retailers.
S. In 2025, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration conducted inspections of
six Tobacco-Oriented Retailers within the city. All six Tobacco-Oriented Retailers were found
to be in violation of state laws or regulations. Violations included the possession of illegal
tobacco products, operating without a valid state tobacco license, offering self-service access
to tobacco products, selling untaxed cigarettes, and failing to maintain required invoices onsite.
These findings demonstrate a continued and widespread pattern of noncompliance among
Tobacco-Oriented Retailers and further support the need for robust local oversight and
regulation.
T. General Tobacco Retailers subject to inspections within the city who have significant
investment in their businesses such as ownership of the real property on which their businesses
are located, contracts with tobacco manufacturers, licenses to sell alcohol, or substantial non-
tobacco-related sales have generally been found to be more compliant with state laws and
regulations.
U. Law enforcement has encountered difficulty enforcing state laws and regulations relating to
tobacco sales in the city due to the transient nature of many Tobacco-Oriented Retailers that
lack significant investment in their business property or operations, are able to quickly and
easily relocate to other locations in the city under different business names, and have little to
lose when circumventing state and local regulations, causing harm to the community and
undermining established safeguards.
V. By excluding businesses that meet certain operational and regulatory benchmarks, such as
those with contracts with tobacco manufacturers, established relationships with alcohol
licensing bodies, and permanent business operations, this regulatory program seeks to ensure
that only businesses that are committed to lawful and responsible retail practices are designated
as Tobacco-Oriented Retail businesses eligible for licensure under this ordinance.
W. During public comment at previous City Council meetings on tobacco, multiple local business
owners testified to significant differences in operational practices between general tobacco
retailers and Tobacco-Oriented Retailers. Specifically, general retailers reported proactive
compliance efforts, including the purchase and use of ID verification software and refusal to
carry banned tobacco or drug-related products. These practices contrast with the perceived lax
compliance and product offerings of Tobacco-Oriented Retailers, suggesting a need for
heightened regulation of Tobacco-Oriented Retailers.
X. Public testimony further indicated that Tobacco-Oriented Retailers often lease rather than own
their business premises and operate with lower financial and regulatory investment compared
to general tobacco retailers such as gas stations and convenience stores. Because it is easier
and cheaper for some Tobacco-Oriented Retailers to open and move locations, they can avoid
accountability and enforcement by quickly relocating or changing their business name. These
characteristics support the imposition of a local licensing requirement to ensure that Tobacco-
Oriented Retailers have a meaningful stake in their ongoing lawful operation within the city.
6.13.020 Purpose
It is the intent of the city, in enacting this Chapter, to ensure compliance with the business standards
and practices of the city, to encourage responsible tobacco retailing, and to discourage violations
of tobacco-related laws, especially those which prohibit or discourage the sale or distribution of
tobacco and nicotine products to youth. This Chapter is not intended to expand or reduce the degree
to which the acts regulated by federal or state law are criminally proscribed or to alter the penalties
provided therein.
6.13.030 Definitions
(1) "Arm's length transaction" means a sale in good faith and for valuable consideration that
reflects the fair market value in the open market between two informed and willing parties,
neither of whom is under any compulsion to participate in the transaction. A sale between
relatives, related companies or partners, or a sale for which a significant purpose is
avoiding the effect of the violations of this Chapter is not an arm's length transaction.
(2) "City" means the City of Redding.
(3) "City Manager" means the manager of the city as appointed by the City Council in
accordance with the City's Municipal Code, or the city manager's designee.
(4) "Department" means any city division or department charged with enforcement or
administration of the provisions of this Chapter.
(5) "Director" means Chief of Police or the director of the Department of Development
Services, the director's designee, or such other director as may be designated by the City
Manager to administer the provisions of this Chapter.
(6) "Flavored tobacco product" means any tobacco product that imparts one or more of the
following:
(A) A taste or odor distinguishable by an ordinary consumer, other than the taste or
odor of tobacco, either prior to or during the consumption of such tobacco product,
including but not limited to tastes or odors relating to any fruit, chocolate, vanilla,
honey, candy, cocoa, dessert, alcoholic beverage, mint, wintergreen, menthol, herb,
or spice; or
(B) A heating, cooling, or numbing sensation distinguishable by an ordinary consumer
during the consumption of such tobacco product.
(7) "General Tobacco Retailer" means any person who sells, offers for sale, or does or offers
to exchange for any form of consideration tobacco products or tobacco paraphernalia. This
definition shall be without regard to the quantity of tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco
paraphernalia sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for exchange. By definition, all
Tobacco-Oriented Retailers are General Tobacco Retailers.
(8) "General Tobacco Retailing" means engaging in any of those activities of a General
Tobacco Retailer. This definition shall be without regard to the quantity of tobacco, tobacco
products, or tobacco paraphernalia sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for
exchange.
(9) “Golf Course” means a business in which all or a portion of land on which the business is
operated is used for the playing of golf. This shall include pitch-and-putt courses but shall
not include stand-alone driving ranges or, miniature golf courses. A golf course may
include a snack bar, pro shop and/or restaurant.
(10) “Lapse” means the cessation or expiration of a Tobacco-Oriented Retail license due to
the failure to renew it within the required time frame or the loss of eligibility for the
Tobacco-Oriented Retail license. A Tobacco-Oriented Retail license is considered lapsed
if the licensee does not complete the necessary steps to renew or maintain the Tobacco-
Oriented Retail license, resulting in the license no longer being valid or active. This does
not include situations in which the license is temporarily suspended.
(11) "License" means a Tobacco-Oriented Retail license issued by the city pursuant to this
Chapter.
(12) "Licensee" means any proprietor holding a Tobacco-Oriented Retail license issued by
the city pursuant to this Chapter.
(13) "Manufacturer" means any person, including any repacker or relabeler, who
manufactures, fabricates, assembles, processes, or labels a tobacco product; or imports a
finished tobacco product for sale or distribution into the United States.
(14) "Owner" means any of the following:
(A) A person with sole or aggregate ownership in the Tobacco-Oriented Retail business
applying for a license or a licensee, unless the interest is solely a security, lien, or
encumbrance;
(B) The chief executive officer of a nonprofit, Tobacco-Oriented Retailer business, or
other entity;
(C) A member of the board of directors of a nonprofit, Tobacco-Oriented Retailer
business, or other entity;
(D) The trustee(s) and all persons who have control of the trust and/or the Tobacco-
Oriented Retailer business that is held in trust;
(E) An individual who participates in the direction, control, or management of the
person applying for a license. Such an individual includes, but is not limited to, any
of the following:
a. A general partner of a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer business that is
organized as a partnership;
b. Anonymous member manager or managing member of a Tobacco-
Oriented Retail business that is organized as a limited liability company;
c. An officer or director of a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer that is organized as
a corporation;
d. Any individual who assumes responsibility for the license.
(15) “Permanent Revocation” means permanent invalidation of a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer
license, which results in the license holder being prohibited from operating as a Tobacco-
Oriented Retailer at the licensed location. This action is final and not subject to
reinstatement unless specifically authorized after a successful appeal. Once a Tobacco-
Oriented Retail license is permanently revoked, the licensee is no longer eligible to operate
under that license at the location, and no further renewal or reissuance of the license will
be allowed unless new application requirements are met.
(16) "Person" means any individual, firm, partnership, joint venture, limited liability
company, nonprofit organization, association, social club, fraternal organization,
corporation, estate, trust, business trust, receiver, trustee, syndicate, state, county, city,
municipality, district, or other political subdivision of the state, or any other group or
combination acting as a unit.
(17) "Pharmacy" means any retail establishment in which the profession of pharmacy is
practiced by a pharmacist licensed by the State of California in accordance with the
Business and Professions Code and where prescription pharmaceuticals are offered for
sale, regardless of whether the retail establishment sells other retail goods in addition to
prescription pharmaceuticals.
(18) "Proprietor" means a person with an ownership or managerial interest in a business. A
managerial interest shall be deemed to exist when a person can or does have or shares
ultimate control over the day-to-day operations of a business.
(19) “Retailer” means a person who engages in this state in the sale of cigarettes or tobacco
products directly to the public from a retail location. Retailer includes a person who
operates vending machines from which cigarettes or tobacco products are sold in this state.
(20) "Sale" or "sell" means any transfer, exchange, barter, gift, offer for sale, or distribution
for a commercial purpose, in any manner or by any means whatsoever.
(21) "Self-service display" means the open display or storage of tobacco products or tobacco
paraphernalia in a manner that is physically accessible in any way to the general public
without the assistance of the tobacco retailer or the tobacco retailer's agent or employee
and without a direct person-to-person transfer between a member of the public and the
tobacco retailer or tobacco retailer's agent or employee. A vending machine is a form of
self-service display.
(22) “Temporary Suspension” means temporary cessation of a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer
license, during which the retailer is prohibited from operating their business for a specified
period of time. This suspension is typically imposed as a penalty for noncompliance with
applicable laws or regulations and can be lifted once the licensee has met all requirements
for reinstatement. A temporary suspension does not result in the permanent loss of the
license, and the retailer may resume business once the suspension period ends or the license
has been reinstated.
(23) “Tobacco-Oriented Retail Business” means any retail business that sells tobacco,
tobacco products, and/or tobacco paraphernalia, including but not limited to cigarettes,
cigars, pipe tobacco, electronic cigarettes, vaping devices, and/or any components, parts,
or accessories related to these items. This includes specific language or symbolism relating
to tobacco retailing such as business names, advertising, products, logos, or promotions.
All Tobacco-Oriented Retail businesses are General Tobacco Retail businesses. Businesses
that meet at least 3 of the 7 criteria below are NOT Tobacco-Oriented Retailer businesses:
1. Businesses that have contracts with tobacco manufacturers;
2. Businesses that have gas pumps and sell gas;
3. Businesses that have active, in good standing, licenses to sell beer and wine or
liquor licenses issued by the Alcohol Beverage Control.
4. Businesses with owners who have ownership rights in the property where the
tobacco products are being sold, as reflected on the County Assessment records;
5. Businesses that have minimum gross sales of non-tobacco products in excess of
seventy-five percent (75%);
6. Businesses that include a pharmacy on site; and
7. Businesses whose primary use is a golf course as permitted by the City’s Zoning
Code.
(24) “Tobacco-Oriented Retailer” means any person who engages in the activities of a
Tobacco-Oriented Retail Business. This definition shall be without regard to the quantity
of tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco paraphernalia sold, offered for sale, exchanged,
or offered for exchange.
(25) “Tobacco-Oriented retailing” means engaging in any of those activities of a Tobacco-
Oriented retailer. This definition shall be without regard to the quantity of tobacco, tobacco
products, or tobacco paraphernalia sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for
exchange.
(26) "Tobacco paraphernalia" means cigarette papers or wrappers, pipes, holders of
smoking materials of all types, cigarette rolling machines, and any other item designed for
the smoking, preparation, storing, or consumption of tobacco products.
(27) "Tobacco Product" means any of the following:
(A) A product containing, made, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended
for human consumption, whether smoked, heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved,
inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including, but not
limited to, cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, or snuff.
(B) An electronic device that delivers nicotine or other vaporized liquids to the person
inhaling from the device, including, but not limited to, an electronic cigarette,
cigar, pipe, or hookah.
(C) Any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product, whether or not sold
separately.
“Tobacco product” does not include a product that has been approved by the United States
Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product or for other
therapeutic purposes where the product is marketed and sold solely for such an approved
purpose by this Chapter.
(28) "Youth-oriented facility" means any public or private facility that is primarily used to
host recreational or social activities for minors, including, but not limited to, private youth
membership organizations or clubs, social service teenage club facilities, video arcades, or
similar amusement park facilities.
Part 2 – GENERAL PROVISIONS
6.13.030 Tobacco-Oriented Retail license required.
It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in Tobacco-Oriented Retailing unless under and by
authority of a valid, unexpired, unsuspended, unrevoked Tobacco Retailer License issued pursuant
to this Chapter for each location at which tobacco retailing is to occur.
6.13.040 Operating Regulations and Conditions
A. Operating regulations and conditions.
(1) The provisions of this section shall constitute terms and conditions applicable to each
Tobacco-Oriented Retail license issued by the Director.
(2) The provisions of this section shall also constitute operating regulations that are
applicable to each holder of a Tobacco-Oriented Retail license issued pursuant to this
Chapter.
(3) It shall be unlawful for any person or entity engaged in the retail sale of tobacco
products, regardless of the nature of the business or whether they are licensed under this
Chapter, to violate any provision of this Chapter.
B. Lawful Business Operation.
In the course of tobacco retailing or in the operation of the business or maintenance of the location
for which a license issued or not issued, it shall be a violation of this Chapter for an owner, licensee,
or any of the licensee’s or owner’s agents or employees, to violate any local, state, or federal law
applicable to tobacco products, tobacco accessories, or tobacco retailing.
C. Display of License.
Each Tobacco-Oriented Retailer license shall be prominently displayed in a publicly visible
location at the licensed location.
D. Minimum Legal Sales Age.
No person engaged in tobacco retailing shall sell a tobacco product to a person under twenty-one
years of age except to active duty military personnel who are 18 years of age or older pursuant to
California Penal Code § 308.
E. Self-Service Displays Prohibited.
Tobacco Retailing by means of a self-service display is prohibited.
F. Mobile Vending.
No license may issue to authorize tobacco retailing at other than a fixed location. No tobacco retail
license will be issued to a moveable place of business.
G. Business License.
In addition to the Tobacco-Oriented Retail license, any Tobacco-Oriented Retailer must have a
valid business license as required by Title 6.
H. Limits on eligibility for a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer license.
(1) No Tobacco-Oriented Retailer shall be located within one thousand feet of a school
providing instruction in kindergarten or any grade levels one through twelve, public
park, public library, or youth-oriented facility, as measured in a straight line between
the boundary lines of the parcel of the school, park, library, or youth-oriented facility
and the boundary lines of the parcel of the License applicant's proposed business
location.
(2) No license may be issued to authorize Tobacco-Oriented retailing at a location which is
within five hundred feet of a location occupied by another Tobacco-Oriented Retailer,
as measured in a straight line between the boundary lines of the parcel of an existing
Tobacco-Oriented Retailer's business location and the boundary lines of the parcel of
the license applicant's proposed business location.
(3) The maximum number of Tobacco-Oriented Retailers’ licenses allowed in the City of
Redding at any time is 20.
(4) Notwithstanding subsections 1 through 3 of this section, a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer
operating lawfully on the date the ordinance codified in this Chapter is adopted that
would otherwise be eligible for a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer license for the location for
which a license is sought may receive or renew a license for that location so lo ng as all
of the following conditions are met:
A. A complete and accurate application is submitted to the city within 60 days of
the date this ordinance is adopted;
B. The license is timely obtained, maintained, and renewed without lapse or
permanent revocation (as opposed to temporary suspension);
C. The Tobacco-Oriented Retailer has not experienced a business closure of 60 or
more consecutive days to include the 30-day period immediately preceding the
effective date of this ordinance;
D. The Tobacco-Oriented Retailer maintains the right to operate the business under
all other applicable laws;
E. The Tobacco-Oriented Retailer does not substantially change the business
premises or business operation within 60 days of the date the ordinance codified
in this Chapter is adopted. A substantial change to the business operation
includes, but is not limited to, the transferring of a location:
(1) To a new proprietor(s) in an arm’s length transaction; or
(2) For which a significant purpose is avoiding the licensing requirements of
this Chapter.
F. If the City determines that a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer has substantially
changed their business premises or operation and the Tobacco-Oriented
Retailer disputes this determination, the Tobacco-Oriented Retailer bears the
burden of proving to the Department by a preponderance of evidence that such
change(s) do not constitute a substantial change.
I. Compliance inspection.
The Director, the Chief of Police and any city official charged with enforcing the provisions of
this Code shall have the power and authority to enter any business engaging in general tobacco
retailing during regular business hours to inspect the premises and to determine compliance with
the provisions of this Chapter.
(1) Should any inspection reveal noncompliance with any of the provisions of this Chapter and
should reinspection be needed to determine compliance, the cost of any such reinspection
shall be billed to the owner of the premises, the operator of the business engaging in
tobacco retailing, and/or the holder of the Tobacco-Oriented Retailing license in the
amount set forth in the schedule of fees established by resolution of the City Council.
(2) A tobacco retailer shall retain purchase invoices for all cigarettes or tobacco products the
retailer purchased for a period of four years. The records shall be kept at the retail location.
Invoices shall be made available upon request during normal business hours for review,
inspection, and copying by the Department or by a law enforcement agency. Any retailer
found in violation of these requirements or any person who fails, refuses, or neglects to
retain or make available invoices for inspection and copying in accordance with this section
shall be subject to penalties pursuant to this Chapter.
(3) A tobacco retailer shall retain sales receipts or records for all transactions for a period of
four years. The records shall be kept at the retail location. These records shall be made
available upon request during normal business hours for review, inspection, and copying
by the Department or by a law enforcement agency. Any retailer found in violation of these
requirements or any person who fails, refuses, or neglects to retain or make available these
records for inspection and copying in accordance with this section shall be subject to
penalties pursuant to this Chapter.
J. Flavored Tobacco Products.
(1) It shall be unlawful for any tobacco retailer to sell any flavored tobacco product.
(2) Presumptive Flavored Tobacco Product. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that a
tobacco product is a flavored tobacco product if a tobacco retailer, manufacturer, or any
employee or agent of a tobacco retailer or manufacturer has taken action directed to
consumers that would be reasonably expected to cause consumers to believe the tobacco
product is a flavored tobacco product. Any communication by or on behalf of the
manufacturer or retailer of a tobacco product that such tobacco product imparts a taste or
odor other than the taste or odor of tobacco, and/or that imparts a heating, cooling, or
numbing sensation, constitutes presumptive evidence that the tobacco product is a flavored
tobacco product. This includes but is not limited to public statements that a product is
flavored, such as describing the product as "chill," "ice," "fresh," "arctic," "sweet," "spicy,"
or "frost."
H. Other legal duties.
(1) Each Tobacco-Oriented Retailer shall:
A. Comply with all applicable laws and ordinances governing the sale of any tobacco
products or tobacco paraphernalia;
B. Comply with all conditions imposed by the Director as part of the tobacco retail
license; and
C. Comply with all conditions imposed by any other permit or license required for
a business engaging in tobacco retailing.
(2) Each Tobacco-Oriented Retailer, and any other person(s) responsible for the operation
of the business engaging in tobacco retailing, excluding the city, its agents, officers and
employees, shall be jointly and severally liable for:
A. Any violation of this Chapter;
B. Any violation of the terms of the Tobacco-Oriented Retail license;
C. Any violation of any other license or permit required for the business engaging in
tobacco retailing; and
D. Any violation of any other applicable law that arises out of the sale of tobacco
products or tobacco paraphernalia.
I. Indemnification agreement required.
Any tobacco retailer applying for a Tobacco-Oriented Retail license under this Chapter shall
agree to fully indemnify, defend and hold harmless the city, its officers, employees and agents
for all claims, losses, or liabilities that arise out of the issuance or use of the Tobacco-Oriented
Retail license, or that arise out of any sale, distribution, transfer or use of tobacco products or
tobacco paraphernalia, in a form approved by the City Attorney's Office.
6.13.050 Application Procedure for Tobacco-Oriented Retailer
A. An application for a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license shall be submitted in the
name of each owner or proprietor proposing to conduct retail tobacco sales and shall be
signed by each owner or proprietor or an authorized agent thereof. All applications shall
be submitted on a form supplied by the Department.
B. A license issued contrary to this Chapter, contrary to any other law, or issued on the
basis of false or misleading information shall be revoked pursuant to this Chapter.
Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to vest in any person obtaining or maintaining
a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license any status or right to act as a Tobacco-Oriented
Retailer in contravention of any provision of law.
C. Applicant submissions shall contain the following information:
(1) The name, address, and telephone number of each owner and proprietor of the
business seeking a license.
(2) The business name, address, and telephone number of the location for which a
license is sought.
(3) The name and mailing address authorized by each owner and proprietor to receive
all communications and notices required by, authorized by, or related to the
enforcement of this Chapter.
(4) Proof that the business and location for which a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license
is sought has been issued all necessary state and municipal licenses for the sale of
tobacco products.
(5) Listing of all prior issuances, suspensions, and/or revocations of Tobacco-Oriented
Retail licenses for each named proprietor or owner of the business and the dates of
each action pursuant to this Chapter.
(6) Listing of dates and locations for all prior violations of local, state, or federal law
governing the sale of tobacco products or California Health and Safety Code section
11351, as amended from time to time, by each named proprietor or owner occurring
within the previous five years.
(7) A statement by the applicant that the contents of the application are complete, true,
and correct. Any person who signs a statement pursuant to this subdivision that
asserts the truth of any material matter that he or she knows to be false is guilty of
a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment of up to one year in the county jail, or
a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both the imprisonment
and the fine.
(8) A statement by the applicant that they are the owner, proprietor, or authorized agent
of the Tobacco-Oriented Retail business for which the license is sought pursuant to
this Chapter.
(9) Such other information as the Department deems necessary for the administration
or enforcement of this Chapter as specified on the application form required by this
section
D. A licensed Tobacco-Oriented Retailer or applicant shall inform the Department in writing
of any change in the information submitted on an application for a tobacco-oriented
retailer’s license within ten business days of a change.
6.13.060 License issuance or denial.
Upon the receipt of a complete application and the license fee required by this Chapter, the City
shall issue a license unless substantial evidence demonstrates that one or more of the following
bases for denial exists:
A. The information presented in the application is inaccurate or false. Intentionally supplying
inaccurate or false information shall be a violation of this Chapter.
B. The application seeks authorization for Tobacco-Oriented Retailing at a location for
which this Chapter prohibits issuance of Tobacco-Oriented Retailer licenses. However,
this subparagraph shall not constitute a basis for denial of a license if the applicant
submits a timely and complete application for a license within 60 days of the adoption of
this ordinance that provides documentation to the City that clearly and convincingly
demonstrates that the business was operational at the time of this ordinance’s adoption
and meets the requirements of 6.13.040, subdivision (H)(4).
C. The application seeks authorization for tobacco-oriented retailing for a proprietor to
whom this Chapter prohibits a license to be issued.
D. The application seeks authorization for tobacco-oriented retailing that is prohibited
pursuant to this Chapter; that is unlawful pursuant to this Code, including without
limitation, the zoning ordinance, building code, or business license tax ordinance; or that
is unlawful pursuant to any other law.
E. The retailer, or if the retailer is not an individual, any person controlling the retailer or
retail business, has previously been issued a license that is suspended or revoked by the
Department for violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter.
F. The application is for a license or renewal of a license for a retail location that is the same
retail location as that of a retailer whose license was revoked or is subject to revocation
proceedings for violation of any of the provisions of this division, unless:
(1) It has been more than five years since a previous license for the retail location
was revoked.
(2) The person applying for the license provides the Department with
documentation demonstrating that the applicant has acquired or is acquiring
the premises or business in an arm's length transaction.
G. The retailer, or if the retailer is not an individual, any person controlling the retailer or
retail business, has been convicted of a felony pursuant to Section 30473 or 30480 of the
Revenue and Taxation Code.
6.13.070 License renewal and expiration.
A Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license is invalid if the appropriate fee has not been timely paid in
full, the application is incomplete, or the term of the license has expired. The term of a Tobacco-
Oriented Retailer license is one year. Each Tobacco-Oriented Retailer shall apply for renewal of
their Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license and submit the license renewal fee no later than thirty
days prior to expiration of the current license but no earlier than 60 days prior to the expiration of
the current license. A licensee who submits an incomplete application may resubmit the
application for renewal as long as the current license does not lapse. A Tobacco-Oriented Retailer
that fails to timely submit a renewal application and fee is ineligible for license renewal; however,
a timely and complete application for renewal shall toll the existing license until the renewal
application is approved or denied by the city. A license that has been revoked, or is subject to
revocation proceedings, shall not be renewed.
6.13.080 Licenses nontransferable.
A. A Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license may not be transferred from one person to another
or from one location to another. A new Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license is required
whenever a tobacco retailing location has a change in proprietor(s) or owners or a change
in location.
B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, prior violations at a location shall
continue to be counted against a location and license ineligibility periods shall continue
to apply to a location unless the location has been transferred to new proprietor(s) or
owner(s) in an arm’s length transaction.
6.13.090 License conveys a limited, conditional privilege.
Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to grant any person obtaining or maintaining a Tobacco-
Oriented Retailer’s license any status or right other than the limited conditional privilege to act as
a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer at the location in the city identified on the face of the license.
6.13.100 Fee for license.
The fee to issue or to renew a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license shall be established by
resolution of the City Council, which may be amended as needed at the City Council’s discretion.
The fee shall be calculated so as to recover the cost of administration and enforcement of this
Chapter including, but not limited to, issuances of licenses, administration of the license program,
retailer education, inspection and compliance checks of Tobacco-Oriented Retailing businesses,
documentation of violations, representation of the City at Board hearings, prosecution of violators,
and other enforcement measures but shall not exceed the cost of the regulatory program authorized
by this Chapter. All fees and interest upon proceeds of fees shall be used exclusively to fund the
program. Fees are nonrefundable except as may be required by law.
6.13.110 Suspension or revocation of license.
A. In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, a Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license
shall be suspended or revoked if any court of competent jurisdiction determines, or the
Department finds based upon a preponderance of the evidence that the licensee, or any of
the licensee’s agents, employees, or Tobacco-Oriented Retailer locations, has violated
any of the requirements, conditions, or prohibitions of this Chapter or has pleaded guilty,
"no contest" or its equivalent, or admitted to a violation of any law applicable to the
licensee in violation of this Chapter. Action taken by the director with respect to the
suspension, modification, or revocation of a Tobacco -Oriented Retail license shall be
final and conclusive. Any licensee aggrieved by the suspension, modification or
revocation of a Tobacco-Oriented Retail license may obtain review of such decision by
appeal to the city manager or the city manager’s designee.
(1) Upon a finding by the Department of a first violation of this Chapter at a
location within any five-year period, the license shall be suspended for
fourteen days.
(2) Upon a finding by the Department of a second violation of this Chapter at a
location within any five-year period, the license shall be suspended for 30
days.
(3) Upon a finding by the Department of a third violation of this Chapter at a
location within any five-year period, the license shall be revoked.
(4) Owners of Tobacco-Oriented Retail businesses at more than one location are
subject to increased penalties upon second and subsequent violations of this
Chapter regardless of the business location where the earlier violation
occurred.
B. A Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license shall be revoked if the Department finds, after the
licensee is afforded notice and an opportunity to be heard, that information contained in
the license application, including supplemental information, if any, is false in any material
respect.
C. A Tobacco-Oriented Retailer’s license shall be revoked if the Department finds, after
providing the licensee with notice and an opportunity to be heard, that one or more of the
grounds for denial of a license pursuant to this Chapter existed at the time the application
was made or at any point before the license was issued.
D. A licensee for whom a license suspension is in effect must remove all tobacco products
and tobacco paraphernalia from the sales floor at the address that appears on the
suspended or revoked license. Violation of this subsection or engaging in tobacco
retailing while the license suspension is in effect shall result in a permanent revocation of
the Tobacco-Oriented Retail License.
E. The suspension or revocation shall become effective immediately following notice of
suspension or revocation from the Department, unless the holder of the license files an
appeal in accordance with this Chapter. If such an appeal is filed, the suspension or
revocation shall not become final until the appeal is resolved by a final decision of the
city manager or his designee, or withdrawal of the appeal.
6.13.120 Appeal of Suspension or Revocation.
A. A decision of the Department to suspend or revoke a license is appealable to the City
Manager or his designee and any appeal must be filed in writing with the City Manager
within ten days of mailing of the Department’s decision.
B. If such an appeal is timely made, it shall stay enforcement of the appealed action.
C. The decision by the City Manager or his designee shall be the final decision of the City.
6.13.130 Additional remedies.
A. The remedies provided by this Chapter are cumulative and in addition to any other
remedies available at law or in equity, including, without limitation those remedies
established in Title 1.
B. Violations of this Chapter are subject to a civil action brought by the city, punishable by
an administrative penalty not less than one thousand dollars per violation.
C. Subsequent violations of this Chapter are subject to increased administrative penalty
amounts.
D. Violations of this Chapter may, in the discretion of the City Attorney, be prosecuted as
infractions or misdemeanors when the interests of justice so require. The city may recover
reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit in any civil action brought by the City Attorney
to remedy any violation of this Chapter.
E. In addition to any other remedy or abatement authority allowed by law, the Director may
take reasonable measures to enforce the suspension or revocation of a license. Such
measures may include, but are not limited to, posting notices on the property which state
tobacco products are not to be sold or purchased until the conclusion of the suspension,
or requiring all tobacco products to be removed from the property during the suspension
or revocation period. Removal of notices posted pursuant to this section shall, constitute
a misdemeanor violation of this Chapter.
F. Violations of this Chapter are hereby declared to be public nuisances and subject to
abatement by the city.
G. For the purposes of the civil remedies provided in this Chapter:
(1) Each day on which tobacco products or tobacco accessories are offered for sale in
violation of this Chapter shall constitute a separate violation of this Chapter; and
(2) Each individual retail tobacco product and each individual retail item of tobacco
accessories that is distributed, sold, or offered for sale in violation of this Chapter
shall constitute a separate violation of this Chapter.
H. All tobacco retailers are responsible for the actions of their employees relating to the sale,
offer to sell, and furnishing of tobacco products at the retail location. The sale of any
tobacco product by an employee shall be considered an act of the tobacco retailer.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or
unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of remaining portions of the ordinances.
The City Council of the City of Redding hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance
and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that one
or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases may be held invalid or
unconstitutional.
Section 3. The passage of this ordinance is not a “project” according to the definition
in the California Environmental Quality Act, and therefore is not subject to the provisions requiring
environmental review.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its
adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption thereof and cause publication according
to law.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing ordinance was introduced and read by the City Council
of the City of Redding at a regular meeting on the 17th day of June, 2025, and was duly adopted
at a regular meeting on the ___ day of _______, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
___________________________________
JACK MUNNS, Mayor
ATTEST: FORM APPROVED:
______________________________ ___________________________________
SHARLENE TIPTON, City Clerk CHRISTIAN M. CURTIS, City Attorney
DATE ATTESTED: ____________, 2025
December 2020
www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
Introduction
This Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer
Licensing Ordinance was prepared to assist
California cities and counties interested in
establishing or strengthening a local tobacco
retailer licensing (“TRL”) program and further
regulating the tobacco retail environment.
Communities adopt TRL laws to ensure
compliance with local business standards,
reduce youth access to tobacco products, limit
the negative public health and equity impacts
associated with tobacco use, and enforce
local, state, and federal tobacco control laws.
The Public Health Law Center revised and
updated this 2020 model ordinance, which
was originally developed by ChangeLab
Solutions and released in 2018. The Center
acknowledges the excellent work done by
ChangeLab Solutions in creating the original
ordinance. This revised model ordinance takes
a comprehensive approach to regulating the
sale of tobacco products and the tobacco retail
environment. It builds on core provisions such
as requiring a local tobacco retailer license by
incorporating several innovative policy options.
It also reflects changes to state and federal
tobacco control laws such as Tobacco 21 and the
federal Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA”)
Deeming Rule that expands the FDA’s regulatory
COMPREHENSIVE TOBACCO RETAILER LICENSING ORDINANCE
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 2 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
authority to all tobacco products. The model ordinance offers cities and counties a variety of
options to tailor this policy to meet the needs of their communities.*
The model ordinance is based on an independent and objective analysis of the relevant
law, evidence, and available data. Readers should consider all the evidence and decide for
themselves which approach is appropriate for their local jurisdiction.
Customizing the Ordinance
Context boxes are included throughout the ordinance to explain some key provisions. These
boxes are not meant to be included in any final ordinance. A city wishing to adopt all or part of
this ordinance should keep this in mind and remove the context boxes.
In some instances, blanks (such as [ _____________ ] ) prompt you to customize the language
to fit your community’s needs. In other instances, the ordinance offers you a choice of options
(such as [ choice one/choice two ]). Some options are followed by a comment that describes the
legal provisions in more detail. A degree of customization is always necessary to make sure the
ordinance is consistent with a community’s existing laws. Such customization also ensures that
communities are using this model ordinance to address local needs and engender health equity.
Tips for Using This Model Ordinance
The best possible world is one without the death and health harms associated with commercial
tobacco use.† Communities differ on their readiness and willingness to adopt certain tobacco
control policies that are intended to help make that world a reality. Accordingly, this model
ordinance represents a balance between state and federal minimum standards, best public
health policy practices, and practicality for city governments in California. This model
ordinance contains several policy components that communities may or may not choose to
adopt at this time that may go beyond minimum state and federal requirements.
* This model ordinance uses “community” as shorthand for a group of people who will be impacted, either directly or
indirectly, by a proposed changemaking strategy. People in a community (1) are in a particular geographic area, like a
neighborhood or jurisdiction, and/or (2) share a common identity or characteristic.
† The Public Health Law Center recognizes that traditional and commercial tobacco are different in the ways they are
planted, grown, harvested, and used. Traditional tobacco is and has been used in sacred ways by Indigenous communi-
ties and tribes for centuries. Comparatively, commercial tobacco is manufactured with chemical additives for recre-
ational use and profit, resulting in disease and death. For more information, visit: http://www.keepitsacred.itcmi.org.
When the word “tobacco” is used throughout this document, a commercial context is implied and intended.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 3 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
While the Public Health Law Center does not lobby, advocate, or directly represent
communities, we can provide assistance through our publications and referrals to experts in
the field. Education, stakeholder and community engagement, and a strong advocacy plan are
key steps in the adoption of effective tobacco control policies. If a community is unaware of
the resources available to it for engaging the community and developing an advocacy plan, or
if a city is considering adopting an ordinance and is interested in learning about the range of
resources available, please contact the Public Health Law Center. If you have any questions
about this ordinance, you can reach us at www.publichealthlawcenter.org.
This publication was prepared by the Public Health Law Center, a nonprofit organization that provides information
and legal technical assistance on issues related to public health. The Center does not provide legal representation
or advice. The information in this document should not be considered legal advice. This model ordinance was made
possible by funds received from Grant Number 19-10229 with the California Department of Public Health, California
Tobacco Control Program, and the American Lung Association in California.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 4 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
AN ORDINANCE OF THE [ city/county ] OF
[ insert jurisdiction name ] REGULATING TOBACCO PRODUCT
SALES, REQUIRING THE LICENSURE OF TOBACCO RETAILERS, AND
AMENDING THE [ Insert Jurisdiction Name ] MUNICIPAL CODE
The [ city council of the city/board of supervisors of the county ] of [ insert jurisdiction name ]
does ordain as follows:
Note
This is introductory boilerplate language that should be adapted to the conventional form used in
the jurisdiction.
SECTION I. [ See Appendix A: Findings ]
Note
The findings section is part of the ordinance and legislative record, but it usually does not become
codified in the municipal code. An ordinance based on this model ordinance should include
findings of fact — data, statistics, relevant epidemiological information, for instance — that support
the purposes of this ordinance, as well as any legal precedent that directly supports the ordinance.
In addition to serving an educational purpose and building support for the ordinance, the findings
can also serve a legal purpose. If the ordinance is challenged in court, the findings are an admissible
record of the factual determinations made by the legislative body when considering the ordinance.
Courts will generally defer to legislative determinations of factual issues, which often influence legal
conclusions. A list of findings supporting this model ordinance appears in “Appendix A: Findings.”
Jurisdictions may select findings from that list to insert here, along with additional findings on local
or regional conditions, outcomes, and issues that help make the case for the law.
SECTION II. [ article/section ] of the County/City Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. [ ____ (*1) ]. DEFINITIONS. The following words and phrases, whenever used in this
[ article/chapter ], shall have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly
requires otherwise:
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 5 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(A) “Arm’s Length Transaction” means a sale in good faith and for valuable consideration that
reflects the fair market value between two informed and willing parties, neither of which is
under any compulsion to participate in the transaction.
(B) “Cannabis” has the meaning set forth in California Business and Professions Code Section
26001, as that section may be amended from time to time.
(C) “Cannabis Product” has the meaning set forth in California Business and Professions Code
Section 26001, as that section may be amended from time to time.
(D) “Cannabis Retailer” means any retail establishment in which cannabis or cannabis
products are sold or offered for sale to persons that do not hold a license to engage in
commercial cannabis activity issued by the State of California in accordance with the
Business and Professions Code Section 26000 et seq., as that section may be amended
from time to time.
(E) “Child-Resistant Packaging” means packaging that meets the definition set forth in Code
of Federal Regulations, title 16, section 1700.15(b), as in effect on January 1, 2015, and was
tested in accordance with the method described in Code of Federal Regulations, title 16,
section 1700.20, as in effect on January 1, 2015.
(F) “Cigar” means any roll of tobacco other than a cigarette wrapped entirely or in part in tobacco
or any substance containing tobacco and weighing more than 4.5 pounds per thousand.
(G) “Cigarette” means: (1) any roll of tobacco wrapped in paper or in any substance not
containing tobacco; and (2) any roll of tobacco wrapped in any substance containing
tobacco which, because of its appearance, the type of tobacco used in the filler, or
its packaging and labeling, is likely to be offered to, or purchased by, consumers as a
cigarette described herein.
(H) “Compliance checks” means systems the department uses to investigate and ensure
that tobacco retailers are following and complying with the requirements of this [ article/
chapter ]. Compliance checks may involve the use of persons between the ages of 18 and
20 who purchase or attempt to purchase tobacco products. Compliance checks may also
be conducted by the department or other units of government for educational, research,
and training purposes or for investigating or enforcing federal, state, or local laws and
regulations relating to tobacco products.
(I) “Coupon” means any voucher, rebate, card, paper, note, form, statement, ticket, image, or
other issue, whether in paper, digital, or other form, used for commercial purposes to obtain
an article, product, service, or accommodation without charge or at a discounted price.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 6 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(J) “Delivery sale” means the sale of any tobacco product to any person for personal
consumption and not for resale when the sale is conducted by any means other than an
in-person, over-the-counter sales transaction in a tobacco retail establishment. Delivery
sale includes the sale of any tobacco product when the sale is conducted by telephone,
other voice transmission, mail, the internet, or app-based service. Delivery sale includes
delivery by licensees or third parties by any means, including curbside pick-up.
(K) “Department” means [ insert department name ] and any agency or person designated by
the Department to enforce or administer the provisions of this [ article/chapter ].
(L) “Electronic smoking device” means any device that may be used to deliver any aerosolized
or vaporized substance to the person inhaling from the device, including, but not
limited to, an e-cigarette, e-cigar, e-pipe, vape pen, or e-hookah. Electronic smoking
device includes any component, part, or accessory of the device, and also includes any
substance that may be aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the
substance contains nicotine. Electronic smoking device does not include drugs, devices,
or combination products authorized for sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as
those terms are defined in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
(M) “Flavored Tobacco Product” means any tobacco product that contains a taste or smell,
other than the taste or smell of tobacco, that is distinguishable by an ordinary consumer
either prior to, or during the consumption of, a tobacco product, including, but not limited
to, any taste or smell relating to fruit, menthol, mint, wintergreen, chocolate, cocoa,
vanilla, honey, molasses, or any candy, dessert, alcoholic beverage, herb, or spice.
(N) “Full Retail Price” means the price listed for a tobacco product on its packaging or on any
related shelving, advertising, or display where the tobacco product is sold or offered for sale,
plus all applicable taxes and fees if such taxes and fees are not included in the listed price.
(O) “Little Cigar” means any roll of tobacco other than a cigarette wrapped entirely or in part
in tobacco or any substance containing tobacco and weighing no more than 4.5 pounds
per thousand. “Little Cigar” includes, but is not limited to, tobacco products known or
labeled as small cigar, little cigar, or cigarillo.
(P) “Manufacturer” means any person, including any repacker or relabeler, who
manufactures, fabricates, assembles, processes, or labels a tobacco product; or imports a
finished tobacco product for sale or distribution into the United States.
(Q) “Moveable place of business” means any form of business that is operated out of a kiosk,
truck, van, automobile or other type of vehicle or transportable shelter and not a fixed
address store front or other permanent type of structure authorized for sales transactions.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 7 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(R) “Person” means any natural person, partnership, cooperative association, corporation,
personal representative, receiver, trustee, assignee, or any other legal entity.
(S) “Pharmacy” means any retail establishment in which the profession of pharmacy is
practiced by a pharmacist licensed by the State of California in accordance with the
Business and Professions Code and where prescription pharmaceuticals are offered for
sale, regardless of whether the retail establishment sells other retail goods in addition to
prescription pharmaceuticals.
(T) “Proprietor” means a person with an ownership or managerial interest in a business. An
ownership interest shall be deemed to exist when a person has a 10% or greater interest
in the stock, assets, or income of a business other than the sole interest of security for
debt. A managerial interest shall be deemed to exist when a person has or shares ultimate
control over the day-to-day operations of a business.
(U) “Recreation Facility” means an area, place, structure, or other facility that is used either
permanently or temporarily for community recreation, even though it may be used for
other purposes, and includes but is not limited to a gymnasium, playing court, playing
field, and swimming pool.
(V) “Sale” or “Sell” means any transfer, exchange, barter, gift, offer for sale, or distribution for
a commercial purpose, in any manner or by any means whatsoever.
(W) “Self-Service Display” means the open display or storage of tobacco products in a manner
that is physically accessible in any way to the general public without the assistance of
the retailer or employee of the retailer and a direct face-to-face transfer between the
purchaser and the retailer or employee of the retailer. A vending machine is a form of self-
service display.
(X) “Smoking” means inhaling, exhaling, burning, or carrying any lighted or heated cigar,
cigarette, or pipe, or any other lighted or heated product containing, made, or derived
from nicotine, tobacco, marijuana, or other plant, whether natural or synthetic, that is
intended for inhalation. “Smoking” includes using an electronic smoking device.
(Y) “Tobacco Product” means:
(1) any product containing, made of, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended
for human consumption or is likely to be consumed, whether inhaled, absorbed, or
ingested by any other means, including but not limited to, a cigarette, a cigar, pipe
tobacco, chewing tobacco, snuff, or snus;
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 8 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(2) any electronic smoking device and any substances that may be aerosolized or
vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine; or
(3) any component, part, or accessory of (1) or (2), whether or not any of these contains
tobacco or nicotine, including but not limited to filters, rolling papers, blunt or hemp
wraps, hookahs, mouthpieces, and pipes.
“Tobacco product” does not mean drugs, devices, or combination products authorized for
sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as those terms are defined in the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Note
Both the definition of “electronic smoking device” and “tobacco product” in this model include
substances that go into an electronic smoking device regardless of whether they contain
nicotine. In a jurisdiction that already regulates the commercial sale of cannabis products,
these definitions might result in an overlapping and possibly confusing regulatory regime
where certain products are covered by both the tobacco and cannabis laws. The Center can
provide additional language to exclude regulated cannabis products under a TRL.
(Z) “Tobacco Retailer” means any person who sells, offers for sale, or exchanges or offers to
exchange for any form of consideration, tobacco products. This definition is without regard to
the quantity of tobacco products sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for exchange.
(AA) “Tobacco Retailing” means engaging in the activities of a tobacco retailer.
(AB) “Youth-Oriented Facility” means a parcel in the [ city/county ] that is occupied by:
(1) a private or public kindergarten, elementary, middle, junior high, or high school;
(2) a library open to the public;
(3) a playground open to the public;
(4) a youth center, defined as a facility where children, ages 6 to 17, inclusive, come
together for programs and activities;
(5) a recreation facility open to the public, defined as an area, place, structure, or other
facility that is used either permanently or temporarily for community recreation, even
though it may be used for other purposes;
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 9 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(6) a park open to the public or to all the residents of a private community;
(7) a licensed child-care facility or preschool [other than a small-family day care home
or a large-family day care home [as defined in California Health & Safety Code
§ 1596.78]];
Sec. [ ____ (*2) ]. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND PROHIBITIONS.
(A) TOBACCO RETAILER’S LICENSE REQUIRED. It shall be unlawful for any person to engage
in tobacco retailing in the [ city/county ] without first obtaining and maintaining a valid
tobacco retailer’s license for each location at which tobacco retailing is to occur. Tobacco
retailing without a valid tobacco retailer’s license is a nuisance as a matter of law.
(B) LAWFUL BUSINESS OPERATION. In the course of tobacco retailing or in the operation of
the business or maintenance of the location for which a license issued, it shall be a violation
of this [ article/chapter ] for a licensee, or any of the licensee’s agents or employees, to
violate any local, state, or federal law applicable to the sale of tobacco products.
(C) SMOKING PROHIBITED. Smoking, including smoking for the purpose of sampling
any tobacco product, is prohibited within the indoor area of any retail establishment
licensed under this chapter. Smoking also prohibited outdoors within 25 feet of any retail
establishment licensed under this [ article/chapter ].
(D) MINIMUM LEGAL SALES AGE. No person engaged in tobacco retailing shall sell a tobacco
product to a person under 21 years of age.
(E) DISPLAY OF LICENSE. Each tobacco retailer license shall be prominently displayed in a
publicly visible location at the licensed location.
(F) POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION REQUIRED. No person engaged in tobacco retailing shall
sell a tobacco product to another person without first verifying by means of government-
issued photographic identification that the recipient is at least 21 years of age.
(G) SELF-SERVICE DISPLAYS PROHIBITED. Tobacco retailing by means of a self-service
display is prohibited.
(H) ON-SITE SALES. All sales of tobacco products shall be conducted in-person in the licensed
location. It shall be a violation of this [ article/chapter ] for any tobacco retailer or any
of the tobacco retailer’s agents or employees to engage in the delivery sale of tobacco
products or to knowingly or recklessly sell or provide tobacco products to any person that
intends to engage in the delivery sale of the tobacco product in the [ city/county ].
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 10 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
Sec. [ ____ (*3) ]. SALE OF FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCTS
PROHIBITED.
(A) FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCT SALES PROHIBITED. It shall be unlawful for any
tobacco retailer to sell any flavored tobacco product.
(B) PRESUMPTIVE FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCT. A public statement or claim made or
disseminated by the manufacturer of a tobacco product, or by any person authorized or
permitted by the manufacturer to make or disseminate public statements concerning such
tobacco product, that such tobacco product has a taste or smell other than tobacco shall
constitute presumptive evidence that the tobacco product is a flavored tobacco product.
Sec. [ ____ (*4) ]. TOBACCO PRODUCT PRICING AND PACKAGING.
(A) PACKAGING AND LABELING. No tobacco retailer shall sell any tobacco product to
any consumer unless the tobacco product: (1) is sold in the manufacturer’s packaging
intended for sale to consumers; (2) conforms to all applicable federal labeling
requirements; and (3) conforms to all applicable child-resistant packaging requirements.
(B) DISPLAY OF PRICE. The price of each tobacco product offered for sale shall be clearly
and conspicuously displayed on the tobacco product or on any related shelving, posting,
advertising, or display at the location where the item is sold or offered for sale.
(C) DISTRIBUTION OF TOBACCO SAMPLES OR PROMOTIONAL ITEMS. It is unlawful for any
person to distribute free or nominally priced tobacco products.
(D) PROHIBITION OF TOBACCO COUPONS AND DISCOUNTS. No tobacco retailer shall:
(1) honor or redeem, or offer to honor or redeem, a coupon to allow a consumer to
purchase a tobacco product for less than the full retail price;
(2) sell any tobacco product to a consumer through a multiple-package discount or
otherwise provide any such product to a consumer for less than the full retail price in
consideration for the purchase of any tobacco product or any other item; or
(3) provide any free or discounted item to a consumer in consideration for the purchase
of any tobacco product.
(E) MINIMUM PACKAGE SIZE FOR LITTLE CIGARS AND CIGARS. No tobacco retailer shall sell:
(1) any little cigar unless it is sold in a package of at least [ 20 ] little cigars; or
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 11 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(2) any cigar unless it is sold in a package of at least at least [ 6 ] cigars ; provided,
however, that this subsection shall not apply to a cigar that has a price of at least
[ $X.00 ] per cigar, including all applicable taxes and fees.
(F) MINIMUM PRICES FOR CIGARETTES, LITTLE CIGARS, AND CIGARS. No tobacco retailer
shall sell:
(1) Cigarettes at a price that is less than [ $X.00 ] per package of 20 cigarettes, including
all applicable taxes and fees;
(2) Little cigars at a price that is less than [ $X.00 ] per package of little cigars, including
all applicable taxes and fees; or
(3) Cigars at a price that is less [ $X.00 ] per cigar, including all applicable taxes and fees.
The minimum prices established in this section shall be adjusted annually by the
Department in proportion with the Consumer Price Index, using a system established
by the Department.
Note
Indexing minimum prices to inflation is an efficient policy that does not require decision-
makers to amend the TRL annually to keep up with prevailing prices. Jurisdictions in
California have pegged the prices to the nearest U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics statistical
area, and the language here is broad enough that a jurisdiction can take that approach or
determine another effective way to adjust the prices over time.
Sec. [ ____ (*5) ]. LIMITS ON ELIGIBILITY FOR A TOBACCO RETAILER
LICENSE.
(A) MOBILE VENDING. No license may issue to authorize tobacco retailing at other than a
fixed location. No tobacco retail license will be issued to a moveable place of business.
(B) LICENSED CANNABIS BUSINESSES. No license may issue, and no existing license may
be renewed, to authorize tobacco retailing at a location licensed for commercial cannabis
activity by the State of California under Business and Professions Code Division 10.
(C) PHARMACIES. No license may issue, and no existing license may be renewed, to
authorize tobacco retailing in a pharmacy.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 12 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(D) PROXIMITY TO YOUTH-ORIENTED FACILITIES. No license may issue, and no existing
license may be renewed, to authorize tobacco retailing within [ 1000 ] feet of a youth-
oriented facility as measured by a straight line from the nearest point of the property line
of the parcel on which the youth-oriented facility is located to the nearest point of the
property line of the parcel on which the applicant’s business is located.
(E) PROXIMITY TO OTHER TOBACCO RETAILERS. No license may issue, and no existing
license may be renewed, to authorize tobacco retailing within [ 1000 ] feet of a tobacco
retailer location already licensed pursuant to this [ article/chapter ] as measured by
a straight line from the nearest point of the property line of the parcel on which the
applicant’s business is located to the nearest point of the property line of the parcel on
which an existing licensee’s business is located.
(F) PROXIMITY TO CANNABIS RETAILERS. No license may issue, and no existing license may
be renewed, to authorize tobacco retailing within [ 1000 ] feet of an existing cannabis
retailer as measured by a straight line from the nearest point of the property line of the
parcel on which the applicant’s business is located to the nearest point of the property
line of the parcel on which an existing cannabis retailer is located.
Note
The three proximity limitations above would prohibit tobacco retailing within a certain
distance of relevant businesses and facilities with no grandfathering of existing licensed
retailers. As a result, retail licenses for locations that do not meet these proximity limitations
would not be renewable after expiring. Issuing a tobacco retail license is a privilege, not
a right, and jurisdictions have the authority to grant or deny tobacco retailer licenses.
Accordingly, it would be unlikely for a tobacco retailer to successfully argue that refusing
to renew their license is a violation of the constitutional guarantee against taking property
without due process. To deal with potential “takings” claims, some jurisdictions have created
a hearing process for affected businesses where they can make hardship arguments and ask
for additional time to sell prohibited products, allowing for some more flexibility on a case-
by-case basis and under extraordinary circumstances.
(G) POPULATION AND DENSITY. The issuing of tobacco retailer licenses is limited as follows:
(1) The total number of tobacco retailer licenses within the [ city/county ] shall be limited
to one for each [ 2,500 ] inhabitants of the [ city/county ].
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 13 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(2) For the purposes of this subsection, the total population of the [ city/county ] shall be
determined by the most current published total available from the U.S. Census Bureau
or the California State Department of Finance, whichever has been more recently
updated, as of the date the license application is filed.
(3) No new license may issue to authorize tobacco retailing if the number of tobacco
retailer licenses already issued equals or exceeds the total number authorized
pursuant to subsection (1).
Sec. [ ____ (*6) ]. APPLICATION PROCEDURE.
(A) An application for a tobacco retailer’s license shall be submitted in the name of each
proprietor proposing to conduct retail tobacco sales and shall be signed by each
proprietor or an authorized agent thereof. All applications shall be submitted on a form
supplied by the Department.
(B) A license issued contrary to this [ article/chapter ], contrary to any other law, or on the
basis of false or misleading information shall be revoked pursuant to Section [ ____(*13)
(c) ] of this [ article/chapter ]. Nothing in this [ article/chapter ] shall be construed to
vest in any person obtaining and maintaining a tobacco retailer’s license any status or
right to act as a tobacco retailer in contravention of any provision of law.
(C) Applicant submissions shall contain the following information:
(1) The name, address, and telephone number of each proprietor of the business seeking
a license.
(2) The business name, address, and telephone number of the location for which a
license is sought.
(3) The name and mailing address authorized by each proprietor to receive all
communications and notices required by, authorized by, or convenient to the
enforcement of this [ article/chapter ].
(4) Proof that the location for which a tobacco retailer’s license is sought has been issued
all necessary state licenses for the sale of tobacco products.
(5) Whether or not any proprietor or any agent of the proprietor has admitted violating,
or has been found to have violated, this [ article/chapter ] or any other local, state, or
federal law governing the sale of tobacco products and, if so, the dates and locations
of all such violations within the previous five years.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 14 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(6) A signed affidavit affirming that the proprietor has not sold and will not sell any
tobacco product without a license required by this [ article/chapter ].
(7) Such other information as the Department deems necessary for the administration or
enforcement of this [ article/chapter ] as specified on the application form required by
this section.
(D) A licensed tobacco retailer shall inform the Department in writing of any change in the
information submitted on an application for a tobacco retailer’s license within [ 10 ]
business days of a change.
Sec. [ ____ (*7) ]. LICENSE ISSUANCE OR DENIAL.
(A) ISSUANCE OF LICENSE. Upon the receipt of a complete and adequate application for
a tobacco retailer’s license and the license fee required by this [ article/chapter ], the
Department may approve or deny the application for a license, or it may delay action for a
reasonable period of time to complete any investigation of the application or the applicant
deemed necessary.
(B) DENIAL OF APPLICATION. The department may deny an application for a tobacco
retailer’s license based on any of the following:
(1) The information presented in the application is inaccurate or false. Intentionally
supplying inaccurate or false information shall be a violation of this [ article/chapter ];
(2) The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing at a location for which this
[ article/chapter ] prohibits a licensed to be issued;
(3) The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing for a proprietor to whom this
[ article/chapter ] prohibits a license to be issued; or
(4) The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing in a manner that is
prohibited pursuant to this [ article/chapter ], that is unlawful pursuant to any other
[ article/chapter ] of this Code, or that is unlawful pursuant to any other law.
(5) Any other any other suitable reason the granting of a license to the applicant is not
consistent with the public health and welfare, including the applicant’s history of
noncompliance with this [ article/chapter ] and other laws relating to the sale of
tobacco products.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 15 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
Sec. [ ____ (*8) ]. LICENSE RENEWAL AND EXPIRATION.
(A) RENEWAL OF LICENSE. A tobacco retailer’s license is invalid if the appropriate fee
has not been timely paid in full or if the term of the license has expired. The term of a
tobacco retailer license is [ 1 year ]. Each tobacco retailer shall apply for the renewal
of their tobacco retailer’s license and submit the license fee no later than [ 30 ] days
prior to expiration of the current license. A retailer that fails to timely submit a renewal
application and fee is ineligible for license renewal and must submit a new application
pursuant to Section [ ____ (*6) ].
Sec. [ ____ (*9) ]. LICENSES NOT TRANSFERABLE, PAST VIOLATIONS AT
RETAIL LOCATION.
(A) LICENSES NOT TRANSFERRABLE. A tobacco retailer’s license may not be transferred
from one person to another or from one location to another. A new tobacco retailer’s
license is required whenever a tobacco retailing location has a change in proprietors.
(B) PAST VIOLATIONS. Notwithstanding any other provision of this [ article/chapter ],
prior violations at a location shall continue to be counted against a location and license
ineligibility periods shall continue to apply to a location unless:
(1) the location has been transferred to new proprietor(s) in an arm’s length transaction; and
(2) the new proprietor(s) provide the [ city/county ] with clear and convincing evidence
that the new proprietor(s) have acquired the location in an arm’s length transaction.
Sec. [ ____ (*10) ]. LICENSE CONVEYS A LIMITED, CONDITIONAL
PRIVILEGE.
Nothing in this [ article/chapter ] shall be construed to grant any person obtaining and
maintaining a tobacco retailer’s license any status or right other than the limited conditional
privilege to act as a tobacco retailer at the location in the [ City/County ] identified on the
face of the permit. Nothing in this [ article/chapter ] shall be construed to render inapplicable,
supersede, or apply in lieu of, any other provision of applicable law.
Sec. [ ____ (*11) ]. FEE FOR LICENSE.
The fee to issue or to renew a tobacco retailer’s license shall be established from time to time
by resolution of the [ city council/board of supervisors ]. The fee shall be calculated so as to
recover the total cost of administration and enforcement of this [ article/chapter ], including,
but not limited to, issuing a license, administering the license program, retailer education,
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 16 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
retailer inspection and compliance checks, documentation of violations, and prosecution of
violators, but shall not exceed the cost of the regulatory program authorized by this [ article/
chapter ]. All fees and interest upon proceeds of fees shall be used exclusively to fund the
program. Fees are nonrefundable except as may be required by law.
Note
The California Constitution places some limits on how much a jurisdiction can charge in a fee,
deeming excessive fees to be taxes that require a vote of the people. Nonetheless, without
a referendum, it is lawful to impose a fee on applicants in an amount sufficient to offset the
reasonable regulatory cost of the entire tobacco retailer enforcement program of the locality.
Sinclair Paint Co. v. Board of Equalization, 15 Cal. 4th 866 (1997); Griffith v. City of Santa Cruz, 207
Cal. App. 4th 982 (2012).
The license fee can incorporate the cost of enforcing all tobacco laws related to tobacco retailing
because a violation of any tobacco-related law is a basis for suspension of a license. The Public
Health Law Center can provide further information on some of the factors to consider when
calculating a reasonable license fee.
Sec. [ ____ (*12) ]. COMPLIANCE MONITORING.
(A) Compliance with this [ article/chapter ] shall be monitored by the Department. In
addition, the [ City/County ] may designate additional persons to monitor compliance
with this [ article/chapter ]. All licensed premises must be open to inspection by [ city/
county ] staff or designated persons during regular business hours.
(B) The Department shall inspect each tobacco retailer at least [ 3 ] times per 12 month
period to ensure compliance with this [ article/chapter ].
Note
Subsection (b) allows for the inspection of licensed premises to check for any violations
of this ordinance or other tobacco control laws. For example, some inspections might
focus on pricing or flavored product violations, but preferably inspectors would be able to
review compliance with all applicable laws during the inspections. For more information on
challenges and case studies in enforcing TRL requirements please contact the Center.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 17 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(C) The [ city/county ] will conduct at least [ one ] compliance check per 12-month period
that involves the participation of persons between the ages of 18 and 20 to enter licensed
premises to attempt to purchase tobacco products.
Note
This underage sales compliance provision requires a minimum of one check per year, but
jurisdictions might choose to require more frequent compliance checks to ensure consistent
compliance.
(D) Nothing in this section shall create a right of action in any licensee or other person against
the [ city/county ] or its agents.
Sec. [ ____ (*13) ]. SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE.
(A) SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE FOR VIOLATION. In addition to any other
penalty authorized by law, a tobacco retailer’s license shall be suspended or revoked if
the Department finds, based on a preponderance of the evidence, after the licensee is
afforded notice and an opportunity to be heard, that the licensee, or any of the licensee’s
agents or employees, have violated any of the requirements, conditions, or prohibitions
of this [ article/chapter ]; such violation is determined by any court of competent
jurisdiction; or the licensee has pleaded guilty, “no contest” or its equivalent, or admitted
to a violation of any law designated in Section [ ____(*2) ] above.
(1) Upon a finding by the Department of a first violation of this [ article/chapter ] at a
location, the license shall be suspended for [ 30 ] days.
(2) Upon a finding by the Department of a second violation of this [ article/chapter ] at a
location within any [ 5 ]-year period, the license shall be suspended for [ 90 ] days.
(3) Upon a finding by the Department of a third violation of this [ article/chapter ] at a
location within any [ 5 ] year period, the license shall be suspended for [ 1 ] year.
(4) Upon a finding by the Department of four or more violations of this [ article/chapter ]
at a location within any [ 5 ] year period, the license shall be revoked.
(B) APPEAL OF SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION. A decision of the Department to suspend
or revoke a license is appealable to [ the name of appellate agency, panel, or person (for
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 18 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
example, Board of Supervisors, city manager, or director of the health department) ] and
any appeal must be filed in writing with [ the name of the agency, panel, or person to
receive the notice (for example, Board of Supervisors) ] within 10 days of mailing of the
Department’s decision. If such an appeal is timely made, it shall stay enforcement of the
appealed action. An appeal to [ the name of appellate agency, panel, or person ] is not
available for a revocation made pursuant to subsection (c) below.
(C) REVOCATION OF LICENSE WRONGLY ISSUED. A tobacco retailer’s license shall be
revoked if the Department finds, after the licensee is afforded notice and an opportunity
to be heard, that one or more of the bases for denial of a license under Section [ ____(*7) ]
existed at the time application was made or at any time before the license issued. The
decision by the Department shall be the final decision of the [ city/county ].
Sec. [ ____ (*14) ]. TOBACCO RETAILING WITHOUT A VALID LICENSE.
(A) INELIGIBLE FOR LICENSE. In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, if the
Department finds, or if a court of competent jurisdiction determines, based on a
preponderance of evidence after notice and an opportunity to be heard, that any person
has engaged in tobacco retailing at a location without a valid tobacco retailer’s license,
either directly or through the person’s agents or employees, the person shall be ineligible
to apply for, or to be issued, a tobacco retailer’s license as follows:
(1) After a first violation of this section at a location, no new license may issue for the
person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been
transferred in an arm’s length transaction), until [ 30 ] days have passed from the
date of the violation.
(2) After a second violation of this section at a location within any [ 5 year ] period,
no new license may issue for the person or the location (unless ownership of the
business at the location has been transferred in an arm’s length transaction), until
[ 90 ] days have passed from the date of the violation.
(3) After of a third or subsequent violation of this section at a location within any
[ 5 year ] period, no new license may issue for the person or the location (unless
ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an arm’s length
transaction), until [ 5 ] years have passed from the date of the violation.
Sec. [ ____ (*15) ]. ADDITIONAL REMEDIES.
(A) The remedies provided by this [ article/chapter ] are cumulative and in addition to any
other remedies available at law or in equity.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 19 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(B) Whenever evidence of a violation of this [ article/chapter ] is obtained in any part through
the participation of a person under the age of 18 years, such a person shall not be required
to appear or give testimony in any civil or administrative process brought to enforce
this [ article/chapter ] and the alleged violation shall be adjudicated based upon the
sufficiency and persuasiveness of the evidence presented.
(C) Violations of this [ article/chapter ] are subject to a civil action brought by the [ district
attorney ] or the [ county counsel ], punishable by a civil fine not less than [ $250 ] and
not exceeding [ $1,000 ] per violation.
(D) Violations of this [ article/chapter ] may, in the discretion of the [ district attorney/county
counsel ], be prosecuted as infractions or misdemeanors when the interests of justice so
require.
(E) Violations of this [ article/chapter ] are hereby declared to be public nuisances.
(F) In addition to other remedies provided by this [ article/chapter ] or by other law,
any violation of this [ article/chapter ] may be remedied by a civil action brought by
the [ district attorney/county counsel ], including administrative or judicial nuisance
abatement proceedings, civil code enforcement proceedings, and suits for injunctive relief.
(G) Tobacco products offered for sale in violation of this [ article/chapter ] are subject to
seizure by the Department or its designee and shall be forfeited after the licensee or any
other owner of the tobacco products seized is given reasonable notice and an opportunity
to demonstrate that the tobacco products were not offered for sale in violation of this
[ article/chapter ]. The decision by the Department may be appealed pursuant to the
procedures set forth in Section [ ____(*13)(b) ]. Forfeited tobacco products shall be
destroyed and properly disposed of at the cost of the seller after all internal appeals have
been exhausted and the time in which to seek judicial review pursuant to California Code
of Civil Procedure section 1094.6 or other applicable law has expired without the filing of
a lawsuit or, if such a suit is filed, after judgment in that suit becomes final.
(H) For the purposes of the civil remedies provided in this [ article/chapter ]:
(1) Each day on which a tobacco product is distributed, sold, or offered for sale in
violation of this [ article/chapter ] shall constitute a separate violation of this
[ article/chapter ]; and
(2) Each individual tobacco product that is distributed, sold, or offered for sale in
violation of this [ article/chapter ] shall constitute a separate violation of this
[ article/chapter ].
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 20 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
(I) All tobacco retailers are responsible for the actions of their employees relating to the
sale, offer to sell, and furnishing of tobacco products at the retail location. The sale of any
tobacco product by an employee shall be considered an act of the tobacco retailer.
Sec. [ ____ (*16) ]. EXCEPTIONS.
(A) Nothing in this [ article/chapter ] prevents the provision of tobacco products to any
person as part of an indigenous practice or a lawfully recognized religious or spiritual
ceremony or practice.
(B) Nothing in this [ article/chapter ] shall be construed to penalize the purchase, use, or
possession of a tobacco product by any person not engaged in tobacco retailing.
Sec. [ ____ (*17) ]. CONSTRUCTION & SEVERABILITY. It is the intent of the [ board of
supervisors/city council ] of [ county/city ] to supplement applicable state and federal law
and not to duplicate or contradict such law and this ordinance shall be construed consistently
with that intention. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or
phrase of this [ article/chapter ], or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any
reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect
the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs,
sentences, clauses, or phrases of this [ article/chapter ], or its application to any other person
or circumstance. The [ board of supervisors/city council ] of [ jurisdiction ] hereby declares
that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause,
or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections,
subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or
unenforceable.
Sec. [ ____ (*18) ]. PUBLIC RECORDS. All information provided to the Department by a
licensee or license applicant pursuant to this [ article/chapter ] shall be subject to disclosure
under the California Public Records Act (California Government Code section 6250 et seq.) or
any other applicable law.
SECTION III. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after
[ 30 days after date of enactment ]; provided, however, that Section [ ____(*3) ] shall not take
effect until [ 6 months after date of enactment ].
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 21 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
Appendix A: Findings.
The [ city council of the city/board of supervisors of the county ] of [ insert jurisdiction name ]
hereby finds and declares as follows:
WHEREAS, the [ city council/board of supervisors ] finds that a local licensing system for
tobacco retailers is appropriate to ensure that retailers comply with tobacco control laws and
business standards of the [ city council/board of supervisors ], to protect the health, safety,
and welfare of our residents;
WHEREAS, approximately 480,000 people die in the United States from smoking-related
diseases and exposure to secondhand smoke every year, making tobacco use the nation’s
leading cause of preventable death;2
WHEREAS, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that tobacco kills 8 million
people and causes over 1.4 trillion dollars in economic damage each year;136
WHEREAS, 5.6 million of today’s Americans who are younger than 18 years of age are
projected to die prematurely from a smoking-related illness;2
WHEREAS, tobacco use is the number one cause of preventable death in California137 and
continues to be an urgent public health issue, as evidenced by the following:
{40,000 California adults die from their own smoking annually;1
{More than 25% of all adult cancer deaths in California are attributable to smoking;138
{Smoking costs California $13.29 billion in annual health care expenses, $3.58 billion in
Medicaid costs caused by smoking, and $10.35 billion in smoking-caused productivity
losses;139
{Tobacco use can cause disease in nearly all of the organs of the body and is responsible for
87% of lung cancer deaths, 32% of coronary heart disease deaths, and 79% of all cases of
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the United States;2
WHEREAS, tobacco use among priority populations in California contributes to health
disparities and creates significant barriers to health equity, as evidenced by the following:
{African American (20.4%), Asian or Pacific Islander (11.4%), and Hispanic (15.2%) males all
report a higher smoking prevalence than the statewide average among all adults (11.0%);9
{American Indian/Alaska Native Californians have the highest smoking prevalence (19.1%)
among all reported adult demographic populations;9
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 22 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
{Smoking is more prevalent among rural (14.9%) compared to urban (10.6%) Californians;9
{Californians with the highest levels of educational attainment and annual household
income have the lowest smoking prevalence;9
{Adults who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender report smoking at a higher rate
(17.4%) than the statewide average (11.0%);9
{Those who reported experiencing psychological distress in the past month smoke at rates
(26.7%) higher than the statewide average (11.0%);9
[ insert local data if available ]
WHEREAS, despite the state’s efforts to limit youth access to tobacco, youth are still able to
access tobacco products, as evidenced by the following:
{In California, research indicates over 67% of current and former adult smokers started by
the age of 18 and almost 100% start by age 26;140
{In California, from 2017 to 2018, approximately 13% of high school students reported using
tobacco;9
{Disparities in tobacco use exist among California high school students, with higher rates
found among LGBTQ, American Indian, and Pacific Islander youth;9
{Unless smoking rates decline, an estimated 441,000 of all California youth who are alive
today will die prematurely from smoking-related diseases;2
{In 2017, 22.8% of high school students in California had tried cigarette smoking;141
{Between 2014 and 2018, electronic smoking device use among California youth increased
from 14.1% to 46.2%;8
[ insert local data if available ]
WHEREAS, the tobacco industry encourages youth and young adult tobacco initiation through
predatory targeting,11 as evidenced by the following:
{Tobacco companies target young adults ages 18 to 24 to increase their frequency of
tobacco use and encourage their transition to habitual users;66
{Tobacco industry documents state that if “a man has never smoked by the age of 18, the
odds are three-to-one he never will. By age 24, the odds are twenty-to-one”;142
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 23 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
{The tobacco industry spends an estimated $496 million annually to market tobacco
products to California residents;139
WHEREAS, California retailers continue to sell tobacco to underage consumers, evidenced by
the following:
{9.3% of high school students in California reported buying their own electronic cigarette
from a store;141
{19.1% of California tobacco retailers unlawfully sold tobacco products to underage persons
in 2018;9
[ insert local data if available ]
WHEREAS, requiring tobacco retailers to obtain a tobacco retailer license will not unduly
burden legitimate business activities of retailers who sell tobacco products to adults but will,
however, allow the [ city council/board of supervisors ] to regulate the operation of lawful
businesses to discourage violations of federal, state, and local tobacco control and youth
tobacco access laws, as evidenced by the following:
{Tobacco products are the number one seller in U.S. convenience stores, and in 2018, they
generated an average of $523,084 in sales per store;143
{Systematic scientific reviews indicate that merchant compliance with youth tobacco sales
laws reduces the rate of tobacco use among adolescents;26,27
{Studies found increased retailer compliance and reduced tobacco sales to youth following
implementation and active enforcement of youth tobacco sales laws paired with penalties
for violations;144,145
{A review of 41 California communities with strong tobacco retailer licensing ordinances
found that youth sales rates declined in 40 of these communities after the ordinances were
enacted, with an average 69% decrease in the youth sales rate;25
WHEREAS, the federal Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (“Tobacco Control
Act”), enacted in 2009, prohibited candy- and fruit-flavored cigarettes,28 largely because these
flavored products are marketed to youth and young adults,26,35,145 and younger smokers were
more likely than older smokers to have tried these products;26
WHEREAS, neither federal nor California state laws restrict the sale of menthol cigarettes or
flavored non-cigarette tobacco products, such as cigars, cigarillos, smokeless tobacco, hookah
tobacco, electronic smoking devices, and the solutions used in these devices;
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 24 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
WHEREAS, in 2018, more than 86% of tobacco retailers in California sold flavored non-
cigarette tobacco products, over 91% of tobacco retailers sold menthol cigarettes,80 and,
as of 2016, 8 out of 10 tobacco retailers near schools sold flavored non-cigarette tobacco
products;147
WHEREAS, flavored tobacco products are used by the majority of youth and young adult
tobacco users (86.4% and 57.7%, respectively) in California;9
WHEREAS, mentholated and flavored products have been shown to be “starter” products for
youth who begin using tobacco26,148,149 and that these products help establish tobacco habits
that can lead to long-term addiction;26,150,151
WHEREAS, between 2004 and 2014, use of non-menthol cigarettes decreased among all
populations, but overall use of menthol cigarettes increased among young adults (ages 18 to
25) and adults (ages 26+);30
WHEREAS, flavored tobacco has significant public health implications for youth and people of
color as a result of targeted industry marketing strategies and product manipulation;11,26,152,153
WHEREAS, a review of advertising, promotions, and pack prices near California high schools
found that “for each 10 percentage point increase in the proportion of Black students, the
proportion of menthol advertising increased by 5.9% … the odds of a Newport [a leading brand
of mentholated cigarettes] promotion were 50% higher … and the cost of Newport was 12
cents lower.” There was no such association found for non-mentholated cigarettes;154
WHEREAS, scientific reviews by the FDA and the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory
Committee (“TPSAC”) found marketing of menthol cigarettes likely increases the prevalence
of smoking among the entire population, but especially among youth, African Americans,33
and possibly Hispanic and Latino individuals;34 and that menthol cigarettes are associated
with increased initiation and progression to regular cigarette smoking, increased dependence
on cigarettes, and reduced success in smoking cessation, especially among African American
menthol smokers;33
WHEREAS, research indicates that the FDA ban in 2009 on all flavored cigarette products
(except menthol) led to a 6% decrease in youth tobacco use and a 17% decrease in the
likelihood of a youth becoming a cigarette smoker;155
WHEREAS, studies indicate that laws prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco products lead to
decreases in youth tobacco use, as evidenced by the following:
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 25 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
{An evaluation of New York City’s law, which prohibits the sale of all flavored tobacco,
excluding menthol, indicated that as a result of the law, youth had 37% lower odds of ever
trying flavored tobacco products and 28% lower odds of ever using any type of tobacco;156
{An evaluation of a law in Providence, Rhode Island, which prohibits the sale of all flavored
tobacco, excluding menthol, indicated that as a result of the law, current use of any tobacco
product among high school youth declined from 22% to 12% and e-cigarette use declined
from 13.3% to 6.6%, even as statewide e-cigarette use among high school increased to
more than 20%;157
WHEREAS, the health effects of non-cigarette tobacco products such as cigars, cigarillos,
smokeless tobacco, and shisha are substantial as demonstrated by research that shows
that non-cigarette tobacco products have addictive levels of nicotine, harmful toxins, and
dangerous carcinogens;158-164
WHEREAS, unlike cigarette use that has steadily declined among youth, the prevalence of the
use of non-cigarette tobacco products has increased among California youth;9
WHEREAS, the availability of inexpensive tobacco products leads to increased tobacco use
as evidenced by more than 100 academic studies that conclusively show that when tobacco
products are made more expensive, fewer people use tobacco, fewer initiate tobacco use, and
more people quit tobacco use;2,48-51,53-58
WHEREAS, research has also consistently shown that increases in cigarettes prices will result
in less smoking across various sociodemographic populations;165
WHEREAS, a systematic review by the U.S. Community Preventive Services Task Force found that
a 20% price increase would reduce demand for cigarettes by approximately 10.4%, the prevalence
of adult tobacco use by 3.6%, and initiation of tobacco use by young people by 8.6%;49
WHEREAS, unequal price increases across different types of tobacco products lead to
substitution from one product to another;56,58
WHEREAS, youth are particularly responsive to changes in tobacco prices,26,52,54,166 and evidence
suggests that tobacco companies deliberately target youth with price reductions;26,51,64-66,167
WHEREAS, evidence also suggests that cigarettes are cheaper in neighborhoods with lower
household incomes,118,168 Newport menthol cigarettes cost less in areas with higher proportions
of African Americans,118 and underserved communities are targeted with price discounts and
coupons;169-171
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 26 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
WHEREAS, tobacco companies spend considerably to decrease the price of their products in
order to counter state and local tobacco control efforts, appeal to price-sensitive consumers,
and increase demand for tobacco products. For example, tobacco companies spent the
majority of their cigarette marketing budgets on price discounts, accounting for nearly $6.2
billion of $8.6 billion advertising and promotional expenditures in 2018; 50,51,62
WHEREAS, the tobacco industry’s price discounting strategies, such as coupons and multiple-
package discounts, are popular among consumers, with more than half of adults using some
price minimization strategy.70 Coupon receipt and redemption appears more prevalent among
white, younger, female, sexual minority, and more nicotine dependent smokers.172 In California,
individuals who used price minimization strategies saved an average $1.04 per pack (or 18.6%
off the total) in 2010;70
WHEREAS, price-discounted sales account for a substantial proportion of overall tobacco
product sales;63
WHEREAS, although federal and state law ban the sale of individual cigarettes,78,173 neither
federal nor California state laws restrict the sale of individual little cigars and cigars;
WHEREAS, many retailers sell little cigars and cigars individually, making them more
affordable and appealing to youth.79 Additionally:
{78.3% of California tobacco retailers sell a popular brand of youth-friendly cigars for less
than $1.00;79
{Between 2012 and 2016, annual sales of cigarillos increased by 78% overall and by 155%
for “concept-flavored” (e.g., Jazz) cigarillos;174
WHEREAS, a 10% increase in cigar prices has been associated with decreased cigar sales175,176
and may significantly reduce cigar use among youth;177
WHEREAS, neither federal nor California state laws set a minimum price for tobacco products;
WHEREAS, minimum price markups and related laws in other states have been shown to be
effective at increasing the price of cigarettes but may remain vulnerable to price manipulation
by the tobacco industry without attention to coupons and discounts;82
WHEREAS, studies have estimated that if price discounts were prohibited across the United
States, the number of people who smoke would decrease by more than 13%;68 the impact of
a $10 federal minimum floor price for cigarettes could reduce the number of packs sold in the
United States by 5.7 billion per year and prompt more than 10 million smokers to quit;55 and
that a state-level minimum floor price law designed to raise the average price of cigarette
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 27 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
packs by just under $2.00 could decrease the prevalence of cigarette use and consumption by
by more than 4% and reduce income-based smoking disparities in California;86
WHEREAS, by selling tobacco products, pharmacies reinforce positive social perceptions of
smoking, convey tacit approval of tobacco use, and send a message that it is not so dangerous
to smoke;178,179
WHEREAS, pharmacies sell cigarettes cheaper than other stores118 and advertise tobacco
product discounts more than other stores in California;80
WHEREAS, tobacco-free pharmacy sales policies decrease the availability of tobacco products
by reducing tobacco retailer density by up to three times compared with communities that do
not have such policies,119 and immediately after the nationwide CVS policy change to not sell
tobacco products, cigarette purchases declined and smokers who had previously purchased
their cigarettes exclusively at CVS were up to twice as likely to stop buying cigarettes entirely;120
WHEREAS, research indicates that the density and proximity of tobacco retailers increase
smoking behaviors, including number of cigarettes smoked per day,90 particularly in
neighborhoods experiencing poverty;90,180-182
WHEREAS, the density of tobacco retailers near adolescents’ homes has been associated with
increased youth smoking rates101 and initiation of noncigarette tobacco product use;183
WHEREAS, adults who smoke are likely to have a harder time quitting when residential
proximity to tobacco retailers is closer107 and density is higher;184-186
WHEREAS, tobacco retailers are more prevalent in underserved communities, especially in
neighborhoods with a higher proportion of African American or Hispanic residents;93-98
WHEREAS, tobacco retailer density is higher in urban compared to rural areas, except for low-
income communities, which have higher tobacco retailer densities regardless of geography, and
Hispanic communities, which are associated with variable retailer densities across geography;97,187
WHEREAS, policies to reduce tobacco retailer density have been shown to be
effective103,104,188,189 and can reduce or eliminate inequities in the location and distribution of
tobacco retailers;103,104
WHEREAS, six out of 10 tobacco retailers in California sold cigar products using cannabis-
related flavor descriptors and these retailers were more prevalent in school neighborhoods
with lower median income;190
WHEREAS, both youth and adult tobacco users are more likely to also use cannabis;191,192
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 28 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
WHEREAS, strict enforcement of policies prohibiting retail sales of cigarettes to youth, sales of
cigarettes via vending machines, and other means through which youth gain access to tobacco
in the commercial settings can limit their opportunities to obtain these products;26,27
WHEREAS, strong policy enforcement and monitoring of retailer compliance with tobacco
control policies (e.g., requiring identification checks) is necessary to achieve reductions in
youth tobacco sales;193,194
WHEREAS, the Institute of Medicine recognizes that retailers are not likely to comply with
youth tobacco access laws unless such laws are actively enforced through retailer compliance
checks paired with meaningful penalties on business owners for violations;195
WHEREAS, state law explicitly permits cities and counties to enact local tobacco retail
licensing ordinances, and allows for the suspension or revocation of a local license for a
violation of any state tobacco control law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22971.3);
WHEREAS, California courts have affirmed the power of the [ city council/board of
supervisors ] to regulate business activity to discourage violations of law. See, e.g., Cohen v.
Board of Supervisors, 40 Cal. 3d 277 (1985); Bravo Vending v. City of Rancho Mirage, 16 Cal. App.
4th 383 (1993); Prime Gas, Inc. v. City of Sacramento, 184 Cal. App. 4th 697 (2010);
WHEREAS, over 180 cities and counties in California have passed tobacco retailer licensing
ordinances in an effort to stop youth from using tobacco;9
WHEREAS, the [ city council/board of supervisors ] has a substantial interest in protecting
youth and underserved populations from the harms of tobacco use; and
WHEREAS, the [ city council/board of supervisors ] finds that a local licensing system for
tobacco retailers is appropriate to ensure that retailers comply with tobacco control laws and
business standards of the [ Insert jurisdiction name ] in order to protect the health, safety, and
welfare of our residents;
NOW THEREFORE, it is the intent of the [ city council/board of supervisors ], in enacting
this ordinance, to ensure compliance with the business standards and practices of the [ city/
county ] and to encourage responsible tobacco retailing and to discourage violations of
tobacco-related laws, especially those which prohibit or discourage the sale or distribution of
tobacco products to youth, but not to expand or reduce the degree to which the acts regulated
by federal or state law are criminally proscribed or to alter the penalties provided therein.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 29 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
References
1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs — 2014. U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic
Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health. 2014. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/
tobacco/stateandcommunity/best_practices/pdfs/2014/comprehensive.pdf.
2 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking: 50 Years of Progress. A Report of
the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health.
2014. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK179276/pdf/Bookshelf_NBK179276.pdf.
3 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act § 3(1), Pub. L. No. 111-31, 123 Stat. 1776-1858 (2009).
4 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Public Health Consequences of E-Cigarettes. 2018. Wash-
ington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/24952.
5 Fowles J, Barreau T, Wu N. Cancer and Non-Cancer Risk Concerns from Metals in Electronic Cigarette Liquids and
Aerosols. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(6):2146. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17062146.
6 Romberg AR, Miller Lo EJ, Cuccia AF, et al. Patterns of nicotine concentrations in electronic cigarettes sold in the
United States, 2013-2018. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019:201:1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.05.029.
7 Wang TW, Coats EM, Gammon DG et al. National and State-Specific Unit Sales and Prices for Electronic Cigarettes,
United States, 2012–2016. Prev Chroni Dis. 2018;15:E99. doi: 10.5888/pcd15.170555.
8 Lin C, Baiocchi M, Halpern-Felsher B. Longitudinal trends in e-cigarette devices used by Californian youth, 2014–2018.
Addict Behav. 2020;108:106459. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106459.
9 California Tobacco Control Program. California Tobacco Facts and Figures 2019. Sacramento, CA: California Department
of Public Health. 2019. Available at: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/CDPH%20Docu-
ment%20Library/ResearchandEvaluation/FactsandFigures/CATobaccoFactsandFigures2019.pdf.
10 U.S. National Cancer Institute. A Socioecological Approach to Addressing Tobacco-Related Health Disparities. National
Cancer Institute Tobacco Control Monograph 22. NIH Publication No. 17-CA-8035A. Bethesda, MD: U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. 2017.
11 United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 449 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2006), aff’d in part, vacated in part, 566 F.3d 1095
(D.C. Cir. 2009), and order clarified, 778 F. Supp. 2d 8 (D.D.C. 2011).
12 California Tobacco Control Program. California Tobacco Facts and Figures 2018. Sacramento, CA: California Department
of Public Health. 2018. Available at: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/CDPH%20Docu-
ment%20Library/ResearchandEvaluation/FactsandFigures/CATobaccoFactsFigures2018.pdf.
13 California Tobacco Education and Research Oversight Committee. New Challenges — New Promise for All: Toward a
Tobacco-Free California Master Plan 2018–2020. Sacramento, CA: California Tobacco Education and Research Oversight
Committee. 2018. Available at: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/CDPH%20Docu-
ment%20Library/TEROC/MasterPlan/TEROCMasterPlan2018-2020.pdf.
14 California Tobacco Control Program. Story of Inequity. 2019; http://tobaccofreeca.com/story-of-inequity. Accessed
May 22, 2020.
15 Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22972(a).
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 30 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
16 Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22970.1 (Finding that state tobacco excise tax revenues “have declined by hundreds of mil-
lions of dollars per year due, in part, to unlawful distributions and untaxed sales of cigarettes and tobacco products,”
and that “the licensing of … retailers will help stem the tide of untaxed distributions and illegal sales of cigarettes and
tobacco products.”).
17 Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 30111 (providing that state tobacco taxes “are in lieu of all other state, county, municipal, or
district taxes on the privilege of distributing cigarettes or tobacco products.”); Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22964 (provid-
ing that the Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Act does not “preempt or otherwise prohibit the adoption of a local standard
that imposes a more restrictive legal age to purchase or possess tobacco products.”).
18 Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22971.3 (“Nothing in this division preempts or supersedes any local tobacco control law other
than those related to the collection of state taxes. Local licensing laws may provide for the suspension or revocation of
the local license for any violation of a state tobacco control law.”).
19 Cal. Penal Code § 308(a)(1)(A).
20 Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 22950-22964.
21 21 C.F.R. §§ 1140.14(a)(4), 1140.16(b).
22 21 C.F.R. § 1140.14(a)(2), (b)(2).
23 The American Lung Association in California, Center for Tobacco Policy and Organizing. Matrix of Strong Local Tobacco
Retailer Licensing Ordinances. 2018.
24 The American Lung Association in California Center for Tobacco Policy and Organizing. Local Tobacco Policies in the
Retail Environment. 2017.
25 The American Lung Association in California Center for Tobacco Policy and Organizing. Tobacco Retailer Licensing is
Effective. 2018.
26 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of the
Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Pre-
vention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health. 2012.
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK99237/pdf/Bookshelf_NBK99237.pdf.
27 DiFranza JR. Which interventions against the sale of tobacco to minors can be expected to reduce smoking? Tob Con-
trol. 2012;21:436-442. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050145.
28 21 U.S.C. § 387g(a)(1)(A).
29 Villanti AC, Johnson AL, Glasser AM. Association of Flavored Tobacco Use With Tobacco Initiation and Subsequent
Use Among US Youth and Adults, 2013-2015. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(10):e1913804. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworko-
pen.2019.13804.
30 Villanti AC, Mowery PD, Delnevo CD, Niaura RS, Abrams DB, Giovino GA. Changes in the prevalence and correlates
of menthol cigarette use in the USA, 2004-2014. Tob Control. 2016;25(Suppl 2):ii14-ii20. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocon-
trol-2016-053329.
31 King BA, Dube SR, Tynan MA. Flavored cigar smoking among U.S. adults: findings from the 2009-2010 National Adult
Tobacco Survey. Nicotine Tob Res. 2013;15(2):608-614. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nts178.
32 D’Silva J, Cohn AM, Johnson AL, Villanti AC. Differences in Subjective Experiences to First Use of Menthol and Non-
menthol Cigarettes in a National Sample of Young Adult Cigarette Smokers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2018;20(9):1062-1068.
doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntx181.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 31 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
33 Food and Drug Administration. Preliminary Scientific Evaluation of the Possible Public Health Effects of Menthol Versus
Nonmenthol Cigarettes. 2013. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/PeerRev-
iewofScientificInformationandAssessments/UCM361598.pdf.
34 Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee. Menthol Cigarettes and Public Health: Review of the Scientific Evidence
and Recommendations. 2011. Available at: https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20170405201731/https://www.fda.
gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/TobaccoProductsScientificAdvisoryCommit-
tee/UCM269697.pdf.
35 Villanti AC, Collins LK, Niaura RS, Gagosian SY, Abrams DB. Menthol cigarettes and the public health standard: a
systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):983. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4987-z.
36 Fallin A, Goodin AJ, King BA. Menthol cigarette smoking among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adults. Am J
Prev Med. 2015;48(1):93-97. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.07.044.
37 Cohn AM, Johnson AL, Hair E, Rath JM, Villanti AC. Menthol tobacco use is correlated with mental health symptoms
in a national sample of young adults: implications for future health risks and policy recommendations. Tob Induc Dis.
2016;14:1. doi: 10.1186/s12971-015-0066-3.
38 Chen C, Isabelle LM, Pickworth WB, Pankow JF. Levels of mint and wintergreen flavorants: smokeless tobacco prod-
ucts vs. confectionery products. Food Chem Toxicol. 2010;48(2):755-763. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2009.12.015.
39 Morris DS, Fiala SC, Pawlak R. Opportunities for policy interventions to reduce youth hookah smoking in the United
States. Prev Chronic Dis. 2012;9:120082. doi: 10.5888/pcd9.120082.
40 Cameron JM, Howell DN, White JR, Andrenyak DM, Layton ME, Roll JM. Variable and potentially fatal amounts of
nicotine in e-cigarette nicotine solutions. Tob Control. 2014;23(1):77-78. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2012-050604.
41 Tsai J, Walton K, Coleman BN, et al. Reasons for Electronic Cigarette Use Among Middle and High School Students
- National Youth Tobacco Survey, United States, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(6):196-200. doi:
10.15585/mmwr.mm6706a5.
42 Wang TW, Gentzke AS, Creamer MR, et al. Tobacco Product Use and Associated Factors Among Middle and High
School Students - United States, 2019. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2019;68(12):1-22. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.ss6812a1.
43 Kuiper NM, Gammon D, Loomis B, et al. Trends in Sales of Flavored and Menthol Tobacco Products in the United
States during 2011–2015. Nicotine Tob Res. 2018;20(6):698-706. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntx123.
44 Cullen KA, Ambrose BK, Genztke AS, et al. Notes from the field: use of electronic cigarettes and any tobac-
co product among middle and high school students—United States, 2011-2018. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.
2018;67(45):1276-1277. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6745a5.
45 Cullen KA, Gentzke AS, Sawdey MD, et al. e-Cigarette Use Among Youth in the United States, 2019. JAMA.
2019;322(21):2095-2103. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.18387.
46 Ambrose BK, Day HR, Rostron B, et al. Flavored Tobacco Product Use Among US Youth Aged 12-17 Years, 2013-2014.
JAMA. 2015;314(17):1871-1873. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.13802.
47 Bonhomme MG, Holder-Hayes E, Ambrose BK, et al. Flavoured non-cigarette tobacco product use among US adults:
2013-2014. Tob Control. 2016;25(Suppl 2):ii4-ii13. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053373.
48 Institute of Medicine. Ending the Tobacco Problem: A Blueprint for the Nation. Washington, DC. 2007. Available at:
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11795/ending-the-tobacco-problem-a-blueprint-for-the-nation.
49 Community Preventive Services Task Force. Reducing Tobacco Use and Secondhand Smoke Exposure: Interventions to
Increase the Unit Price for Tobacco Products. 2012. Available at: https://www.thecommunityguide.org/findings/tobac-
co-use-interventions-increase-unit-price-tobacco.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 32 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
50 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. State Cigarette Minimum Price Laws — United States, 2009. MMWR
Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010;59(13):389-392.
51 Chaloupka FJ, Cummings KM, Morley C, Horan J. Tax, price and cigarette smoking: evidence from the tobacco docu-
ments and implications for tobacco company marketing strategies. Tob Control. 2002;11(Supplement 1):i62-i72. doi:
10.1136/tc.11.suppl_1.i62.
52 Chaloupka F. Tobacco Control Lessons Learned: The Impact of State and Local Policies. ImpacTeen. 2010. Available at:
http://tobaccopolicycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/153.pdf.
53 Chaloupka FJ, Yurekli A, Fong GT. Tobacco taxes as a tobacco control strategy. Tob Control. 2012;21(2):172-180. doi:
10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050417.
54 Maciosek MV, LaFrance AB, St. Claire AW, et al. The 20-year impact of tobacco price and tobacco control expenditure
increases in Minnesota, 1998-2017. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(3): e0230364. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230364.
55 Doogan NJ, Wewers ME, Berman M. The Impact of a Federal Cigarette Minimum Pack Price Policy on Cigarette Use in
the USA. Tob Control. 2018;27(2):203-208. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053457.
56 Huang J, Gwarnicki C, Xu X, Caraballo RS, Wada R, Chaloupka FJ. A comprehensive examination of own- and
cross-price elasticities of tobacco and nicotine replacement products in the U.S. Prev Med. 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.
ypmed.2018.04.024.
57 Pesko MF, Huang J, Johnston LD, Chaloupka FJ. E-cigarette price sensitivity among middle- and high-school students:
evidence from monitoring the future. Addiction. 2018;113(5):896-906. doi: 10.1111/add.14119.
58 Jawad M, Lee JT, Glantz S, Millett C. Price elasticity of demand of non-cigarette tobacco products: a systematic review
and meta-analysis. Tob Control. 2018. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-054056.
59 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. STATE System Excise Tax Fact Sheet. https://www.cdc.gov/statesystem/
factsheets/excisetax/ExciseTax.html. Accessed May 27, 2020.
60 Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 30111.
61 Schleicher NC, Johnson T, Ahmad I, Henriksen L. Tobacco Marketing in California’s Retail Environment (2011–2014). Palo
Alto, CA: Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine. 2015.
62 Federal Trade Commission. Cigarette Report for 2018. 2019. Available at: https://www.ftc.gov/reports/feder-
al-trade-commission-cigarette-report-2018-smokeless-tobacco-report-2018.
63 Wang TW, Falvey K, Gammon DG, et al. Sales Trends in Price-Discounted Cigarettes, Large Cigars, Little Cigars, and
Cigarillos-United States, 2011-2016. Nicotine Tob Res. 2018;20(11):1401-1406. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntx249.
64 White VM, White MM, Freeman K, Gilpin EA, Pierce JP. Cigarette promotional offers: who takes advantage? Am J Prev
Med. 2006;30(3):225-231. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.11.001.
65 Pierce JP, Gilmer TP, Lee L, Gilpin EA, de Beyer J, Messer K. Tobacco industry price-subsidizing promotions may over-
come the downward pressure of higher prices on initiation of regular smoking. Health Econ. 2005;14(10):1061-1071.
doi: 10.1002/hec.990.
66 Ling PM, Glantz SA. Why and How the Tobacco Industry Sells Cigarettes to Young Adults: Evidence From Industry
Documents. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(6):908-916. doi: 10.2105/ajph.92.6.908.
67 Lempert LK, Glantz SA. Tobacco Industry Promotional Strategies Targeting American Indians/Alaska Natives and
Exploiting Tribal Sovereignty. Nicotine Tob Res. 2019;21(7):940-948. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nty048.
68 Slater SJ, Chaloupka FJ, Wakefield M, Johnston LD, O’Malley PM. The impact of retail cigarette marketing practices on
youth smoking uptake. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007;161(5):440-445. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.161.5.440.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 33 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
69 Xu X, Wang X, Caraballo RS. Is Every Smoker Interested in Price Promotions? An Evaluation of Price-Related Dis-
counts by Cigarette Brands. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2016;22(1):20-28. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000223.
70 Xu X, Pesko MF, Tynan MA, Gerzoff RB, Malarcher AM, Pechacek TF. Cigarette price-minimization strategies by U.S.
smokers. Am J Prev Med. 2013;44(5):472-476. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.01.019.
71 Cal. Health & Safety Code § 118950(b)-(c)(1). The California Supreme Court upheld this law, finding that federal law
did not preempt the state law. People v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 124 P.3d 408 (Cal. 2005).
72 Chicago Municipal Code § 4-64-905.
73 New York City Administrative Code § 17-176.1.
74 Oakland, California, Municipal Code § 5.91.040.
75 Providence, Rhode Island Municipal Code § 14-303.
76 Nat’l Ass’n of Tobacco Outlets, Inc. v. City of New York, 27 F. Supp. 3d 415 (S.D.N.Y. 2014).
77 Nat’l Ass’n of Tobacco Outlets, Inc. v. City of Providence, R.I., 731 F.3d 71 (1st Cir. 2013).
78 21 C.F.R. § 1140.16(b).
79 Schleicher NC, Johnson T, Rigdon J, et al. California Tobacco Retail Surveillance Study, 2017. Available at: https://www.
cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/CDPH%20Document%20Library/ResearchandEvaluation/SurveyIn-
strumentsTrainingManualsAndProtocols/CaliforniaTobaccoRetailSurveillanceStudt2017-CTRSS%206-4.pdf.
80 Schleicher NC, Johnson T, Vishwakarma M, et al. California Tobacco Retail Surveillance Study 2018. Available at:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/CDPH%20Document%20Library/ResearchandEvalua-
tion/Reports/CaliforniaTobaccoRetailSurveillanceStudyReport-2018.pdf.
81 Henriksen L, Andersen-Rodgers E, Zhang X, et al. Neighborhood Variation in the Price of Cheap Tobacco Products
in California: Results From Healthy Stores for a Healthy Community. Nicotine Tob Res. 2017;19(11):1330-1337. doi:
10.1093/ntr/ntx089.
82 Huang J, Chriqui JF, DeLong H, Mirza M, Diaz MC, Chaloupka FJ. Do state minimum markup/price laws work?
Evidence from retail scanner data and TUS-CPS. Tob Control. 2016;25(Suppl 1):i52-i59. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocon-
trol-2016-053093.
83 Sonoma County, California Municipal Code § 32A-3(k).
84 Windsor, California Municipal Code § 3-11-115(l).
85 San Leandro Municipal Code § 4-36-150(k).86 Golden SD, Kim K, Kong A, et al. Simulating the Impact of a Cigarette
Minimum Floor Price Law on Adult Smoking Prevalence in California. Nicotine Tob Res. 2020;ntaa046. doi: 10.1093/
ntr/ntaa046.
87 Golden SD, Farrelly MC, Luke DA, Ribisl KM. Comparing projected impacts of cigarette floor price and excise tax
policies on socioeconomic disparities in smoking. Tob Control. 2016;25(Suppl 1):i60-i66. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocon-
trol-2016-053230.
88 Brock B, Carlson SC, Moilanen M, Schillo BA. Effectiveness of Local Policy Efforts to Increase the Price of Cheap Cigars
in Minnesota. Am J Public Health. 2017;107(1):127-129. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2016.303517.
89 Hill S, Amos A, Clifford D, Platt S. Impact of tobacco control interventions on socioeconomic inequalities in smoking:
review of the evidence. Tob Control. 2014;23(e2):e89-97. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2013-051110.
90 Chuang YC, Cubbin C, Ahn D, Winkleby MA. Effects of neighbourhood socioeconomic status and convenience
store concentration on individual level smoking. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59(7):568-573. doi: 10.1136/
jech.2004.029041.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 34 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
91 Lipperman-Kreda S, Grube JW, Friend KB, Mair C. Tobacco outlet density, retailer cigarette sales without ID checks
and enforcement of underage tobacco laws: associations with youths’ cigarette smoking and beliefs. Addiction.
2016;111(3):525-532. doi: 10.1111/add.13179.
92 Novak SP, Reardon SF, Raudenbush SW, Buka SL. Retail tobacco outlet density and youth cigarette smoking: a propen-
sity-modeling approach. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(4):670-676. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.061622.
93 Siahpush M, Jones PR, Singh GK, Timsina LR, Martin J. Association of availability of tobacco products with so-
cio-economic and racial/ethnic characteristics of neighbourhoods. Public Health. 2010;124(9):525-529. doi: 10.1016/j.
puhe.2010.04.010.
94 Lee JG, Sun DL, Schleicher NM, Ribisl KM, Luke DA, Henriksen L. Inequalities in tobacco outlet density by race,
ethnicity and socioeconomic status, 2012, USA: results from the ASPiRE Study. J Epidemiol Community Health.
2017;71(5):487-492. doi: 10.1136/jech-2016-208475.
95 Loomis BR, Kim AE, Goetz JL, Juster HR. Density of tobacco retailers and its association with sociodemographic char-
acteristics of communities across New York. Public Health. 2013;127(4):333-338. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2013.01.013.
96 Yu D, Peterson NA, Sheffer MA, Reid RJ, Schnieder JE. Tobacco outlet density and demographics: analysing the rela-
tionships with a spatial regression approach. Public Health. 2010;124(7):412-416. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2010.03.024.
97 Rodriguez D, Carlos HA, Adachi-Mejia AM, Berke EM, Sargent JD. Predictors of tobacco outlet density nationwide: a
geographic analysis. Tob Control. 2013;22(5):349-355. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050120.
98 Fakunle DO, Curriero FC, Leaf PJ, Furr-Holden DM, Thorpe RJ. Black, White, or Green? The Effects of Racial Com-
position and Socioeconomic Status on Neighborhood-Level Tobacco Outlet Density. Ethn Health. 2019;1-16. doi:
10.1080/13557858.2019.1620178.
99 Finan LJ, Lipperman-Kreda S, Abadi M, et al. Tobacco outlet density and adolescents’ cigarette smoking: a meta-anal-
ysis. Tob Control. 2019;28:27-33. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-054065.
100 Schleicher NC, Johnson TO, Fortmann SP, Henriksen L. Tobacco outlet density near home and school: Associations
with smoking and norms among US teens. Prev Med. 2016;91:287-293. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.08.027.
101 Finan LJ, Lipperman-Kreda S, Abadi M, et al. Tobacco Outlet Density and Adolescents’ Cigarette Smoking: A Me-
ta-Analysis. Tob Control. 2019;28(1):27-33. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-054065.
102 Lovato CY, Hsu HCH, Sabiston CM, Hadd V, Nykiforuk CIJ. Tobacco Point-of-Purchase marketing in school neighbour-
hoods and school smoking prevalence: a descriptive study. Can J Public Health. 2007;98(4):265-270. doi: 10.17269/
cjph.98.865.
103 Ribisl KM, Luke DA, Bohannon DL, Sorg AA, Moreland-Russell S. Reducing Disparities in Tobacco Retailer Density by
Banning Tobacco Product Sales Near Schools. Nicotine Tob Res. 2017;19(2):239-244. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntw185.
104 HG, Henry KA, Scheeres A, et al. Tobacco Retail Licensing and Density 3 Years After License Regulations in Philadel-
phia, Pennsylvania (2012-2019). Am J Public Health. 2020;110(4):547-553. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2019.305512.
105 Cantrell J, Pearson JL, Anesetti-Rothermel A, Xiao H, Kirchner TR, Vallone D. Tobacco Retail Outlet Density and Young
Adult Tobacco Initiation. Nicotine Tob Res. 2016;18(2):130-137. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntv036.
106 Young-Wolff KC, Henriksen L, Delucchi K, Prochaska JJ. Tobacco retailer proximity and density and nicotine de-
pendence among smokers with serious mental illness. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(8):1454-1463. doi: 10.2105/
AJPH.2014.301917.
107 Reitzel LR, Cromley EK, Li Y, et al. The effect of tobacco outlet density and proximity on smoking cessation. Am J Public
Health. 2011;101(2):315-320. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2010.191676.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 35 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
108 Luke DA, Ribisl KM, Smith C, Sorg AA. Family Smoking Prevention And Tobacco Control Act: banning outdoor tobacco
advertising near schools and playgrounds. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40(3):295-302. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.11.018.
109 Fakunle DO, Milam AJ, Furr-Holden CD, Butler J, 3rd, Thorpe RJ, Jr., LaVeist TA. The inequitable distribution of tobac-
co outlet density: the role of income in two Black Mid-Atlantic geopolitical areas. Public Health. 2016;136:35-40. doi:
10.1016/j.puhe.2016.02.032.
110 Galiatsatos P, Kineza C, Hwang S, et al. Neighbourhood characteristics and health outcomes: evaluating the asso-
ciation between socioeconomic status, tobacco store density and health outcomes in Baltimore City. Tob Control.
2018;27(e1):e19-e24. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053945.
111 Berg CJ, Henriksen L, Cavazos-Rehg PA, Haardoerfer R, Freisthler B. The emerging marijuana retail environment:
Key lessons learned from tobacco and alcohol retail research. Addict Behav. 2018;81:26-31. doi: 10.1016/j.add-
beh.2018.01.040.
112 Feighery EC, Schleicher NC, Boley Cruz T, Unger JB. An examination of trends in amount and type of cigarette
advertising and sales promotions in California stores, 2002-2005. Tob Control. 2008;17(2):93-98. doi: 10.1136/
tc.2007.022046.
113 Jernigan DH, Sparks M, Yang E, Schwartz R. Using public health and community partnerships to reduce density of
alcohol outlets. Prev Chronic Dis. 2013;10:E53. doi: 10.5888/pcd10.120090.
114 Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 23817.5.
115 Bright Research Group for the San Francisco Tobacco-Free Project. Reducing Tobacco Retail Density in San Francisco: A
Case Study. 2016. Available at: https://sanfranciscotobaccofreeproject.org/wp-content/uploads/Retail-Density-Case-
Study-1.27.16-FINAL-to-TFP.pdf.
116 Center for Public Health Systems Science. Point-of-Sale Report to the Nation: Realizing the Power of States and Commu-
nities to Change the Tobacco Retail and Policy Landscape. St. Louis, MO: Center for Public Health Systems Science at the
Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis and the National Cancer Institute, State and Community Tobac-
co Control Research Initiative. 2016. Available at: https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.wustl.edu/dist/e/1037/
files/2017/10/Reporttothenation_2016-2mfepqr.pdf.
117 Attorneys General Call on Retail Pharmacies to Stop Selling Tobacco Products [press release]. March 28, 2014. Avail-
able at: https://news.delaware.gov/2014/03/18/attorneys-general-call-on-retail-pharmacies-to-stop-selling-tobac-
co-products.
118 Henriksen L, Schleicher NC, Barker DC, Liu Y, Chaloupka FJ. Prices for Tobacco and Nontobacco Products in Pharma-
cies Versus Other Stores: Results From Retail Marketing Surveillance in California and in the United States. Am J Public
Health. 2016;106(10):1858-1864. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2016.303306.
119 Jin Y, Lu B, Klein EG, Berman M, Foraker RE, Ferketich AK. Tobacco-Free Pharmacy Laws and Trends in Tobac-
co Retailer Density in California and Massachusetts. Am J Public Health. 2016;106(4):679-685. doi: 10.2105/
AJPH.2015.303040.
120 Polinski JM, Howell B, Gagnon MA, Kymes SM, Brennan TA, Shrank WH. Impact of CVS Pharmacy’s Discontinu-
ance of Tobacco Sales on Cigarette Purchasing (2012-2014). Am J Public Health. 2017;107(4):556-562. doi: 10.2105/
AJPH.2016.303612.
121 Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22963.
122 Prevent All Cigarettes Trafficking Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-154, 124 Stat. 1087 (2009).
123 21 U.S.C. § 387f(d)(4)(A).
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 36 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
124 Food and Drug Administration. Report to Congress — Progress and Effectiveness of the Implementation of the Family Smok-
ing Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2013. Available at: https://
www.fda.gov/downloads/tobaccoproducts/labeling/rulesregulationsguidance/ucm371271.pdf.
125 Williams RS, Derrick J, Phillips KJ. Cigarette sales to minors via the internet: how the story has changed in the wake of
federal regulation. Tob Control. 2017;26(4):415-420. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2015-052844.
126 Williams RS, Derrick J, Liebman AK, LaFleur K, Ribisl KM. Content analysis of age verification, purchase and delivery
methods of internet e-cigarette vendors, 2013 and 2014. Tob Control. 2018;27(3):287-293. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocon-
trol-2016-053616.
127 Williams RS, Derrick JC. Internet Little Cigar and Cigarillo Vendors: Surveillance of Sales and Marketing Practices via
Website Content Analysis. Prev Med. 2018;109:51-57. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.01.017.
128 FDA announces comprehensive regulatory plan to shift trajectory of tobacco-related disease, death [press release].
July 28, 2017. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/newsevents/newsroom/pressannouncements/ucm568923.htm.
129 Stebbins KR. Tobacco, politics and economics: Implications for global health. Social Science & Medicine.
1991;33(12):1317-1326. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90275-h.
130 Wang TW, Gentzke A, Sharapova S, Cullen KA, Ambrose BK, Jamal A. Tobacco Product Use Among Middle and High
School Students - United States, 2011-2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(22):629-633. doi: 10.15585/
mmwr.mm6722a3.
131 Pesko MF, Robarats AM. Adolescent Tobacco Use in Urban Versus Rural Areas of the United States: The Influence of
Tobacco Control Policy Environments. J Adolesc Health. 2017;61(1):70-76. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.01.019.
132 Chaffee BW, Couch ET, Urata J, et al. Predictors of Smokeless Tobacco Susceptibility, Initiation, and Progression Over
Time Among Adolescents in a Rural Cohort. Subst Use Misuse. 2019;54(7):1154-1166. doi: 10.1080/10826084.2018.
133 Healthy Retail SF. https://susanahennessey-lavery.squarespace.com. Accessed July 13, 2018.
134 Davis KC, Grimshaw V, Merriman D, et al. Cigarette trafficking in five northeastern US cities. Tob Control.
2014;23(e1):e62-68. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2013-051244.
135 Kurti MK, von Lampe K, Thompkins DE. The illegal cigarette market in a socioeconomically deprived inner-city area:
the case of the South Bronx. Tob Control. 2013;22(2):138-140. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050412.
136 World Health Organization. WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic, 2019: Offer Help to Quit Tobacco Use. 2019.
Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/326043.
137 California Department of Public Health, California Tobacco Control Program. The #1 Preventable Cause of Death.
https://tobaccofreeca.com/health/tobacco-is-the-number-one-preventable-cause-of-death. Accessed May 12, 2020.
138 Lortet-Tieulent J, Goding Sauer A, Siegel RL, et al. State-Level Cancer Mortality Attributable to Cigarette Smoking in
the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(12):1792-1798. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.6530.
139 Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. The Toll of Tobacco in California. https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/problem/toll-us/
california. Accessed May 12, 2020.
140 California Tobacco Control Program. California Tobacco Facts and Figures 2016. Sacramento, CA: California Department
of Public Health. 2016.
141 Kann L, McManus T, Harris WA, et al. Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance — United States, 2017. MMWR Surveill Summ.
2018;67(8):1-114 and Supplementary Tables 52-93. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.ss6708a1.
142 Burrows, D.S. “Estimated Change in Industry Trend Following Federal Excise Tax Increase.” UCSF Library Truth Tobacco
Industry Documents. Date Mod. Industry, Apr. 17, 2012: https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/
docs/nnnw0084. Accessed May 12, 2020.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 37 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
143 National Association of Convenience Stores. U.S. Convenience Store Count. Available at: https://www.convenience.
org/Research/FactSheets/ScopeofIndustry/IndustryStoreCount; Statista. In-store merchandise sales of convenience
stores in the United States in 2018, by product category. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/308783/us-
convenience-stores-in-store-merchandise-sales-by-category (Cigarettes + Other Tobacco Products Sales = $81.056
billion).
National Association of Convenience Stores. Convenience Stores and Their Communities. 2019. Available at: https://www.
convenience.org/Topics/CommunityToolkit/How-Stores-Work.
144 McLaughlin I. License to Kill?: Tobacco Retailer Licensing as an Effective Enforcement Tool. Tobacco Control Legal Consortium.
2010. Available at: http://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/tclc-syn-retailer-2010.pdf.
145 Institute of Medicine. Public Health Implications of Raising the Minimum Age of Legal Access to Tobacco Products. Wash-
ington, DC: The National Academies Press. 2015. Available at: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18997/public-health-im-
plications-of-raising-the-minimum-age-of-legal-access-to-tobacco-products.
146 Villanti AC, Johnson AL, Ambrose BK, et al. Flavored Tobacco Product Use in Youth and Adults: Findings From the First
Wave of the PATH Study (2013-2014). Am J Prev Med. 2017;53(2):139-151. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.01.026.
147 California Department of Public Health, California Tobacco Control Program. 2016 Healthy Stores for a Healthy Com-
munity Survey Results-all counties. 2016. Available at: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/
CDPH%20Document%20Library/ResearchandEvaluation/Reports/HSHCTechnicalReport2016.pdf.
148 Hersey JC, Ng SW, Nonnemaker JM, et al. Are menthol cigarettes a starter product for youth? Nicotine Tob Res.
2006;8(3):403-413. doi: 10.1080/14622200600670389.
149 Wackowski O, Delnevo CD. Menthol cigarettes and indicators of tobacco dependence among adolescents. Addict
Behav. 2007;32(9):1964-1969. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.12.023.
150 Oliver AJ, Jensen JA, Vogel RI, Anderson AJ, Hatsukami DK. Flavored and nonflavored smokeless tobacco products:
rate, pattern of use, and effects. Nicotine Tob Res. 2013;15(1):88-92. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nts093.
151 Villanti AC, Johnson AL, Glasser AM, et al. Association of Flavored Tobacco Use With Tobacco Initiation and Subse-
quent Use Among US Youth and Adults, 2013-2015. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(10):e1913804. doi: 10.1001/jamanet-
workopen.2019.13804.
152 Yerger VB, Przewoznik J, Malone RE. Racialized geography, corporate activity, and health disparities: tobacco industry
targeting of inner cities. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2007;18(4 Suppl):10-38. doi: 10.1353/hpu.2007.0120.
153 Kreslake JM, Wayne GF, Alpert HR, Koh HK, Connolly GN. Tobacco industry control of menthol in cigarettes and tar-
geting of adolescents and young adults. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(9):1685-1692. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.125542.
154 Henriksen L, Schleicher NC, Dauphinee AL, Fortmann SP. Targeted advertising, promotion, and price for menthol ciga-
rettes in California high school neighborhoods. Nicotine Tob Res. 2012;14(1):116-121. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntr122.
155 Courtemanche CJ, Palmer MK, Pesko MF. Influence of the Flavored Cigarette Ban on Adolescent Tobacco Use. Am J
Prev Med. 2017;52(5):e139-e146. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.11.019.
156 Farley SM, Johns M. New York City flavoured tobacco product sales ban evaluation. Tob Control. 2017;26(1):78-84. doi:
10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2015-052418.
157 Pearlman DN, Arnold JA, Guardino GA, Boles Welsh E. Advancing Tobacco Control Through Point of Sale Policies,
Providence, Rhode Island. Prev Chronic Dis. 2019;16:E129. doi: 10.5888/pcd16.180614.
158 Hoffmann D, Hoffmann I. Chapter 3: Chemistry and Toxicology. In: Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 9:
Cigars: Health Effects and Trends. National Cancer Institute; 1998.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 38 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
159 National Cancer Institute. Cigar Smoking and Cancer. 2020; https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-preven-
tion/risk/tobacco/cigars-fact-sheet. Accessed May 12, 2020.
160 Waziry R, Jawad M, Ballout RA, Al Akel M, Akl EA. The effects of waterpipe tobacco smoking on health outcomes: an
updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46(1):32-43. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyw021.
161 Stepanov I, Biener L, Knezevich A, et al. Monitoring tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines and nicotine in novel Marl-
boro and Camel smokeless tobacco products: findings from Round 1 of the New Product Watch. Nicotine Tob Res.
2012;14(3):274-281. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntr209.
162 National Cancer Institute. Monograph 2: Smokeless Tobacco or Health: An International Perspective. 1992.
163 Pickworth WB, Rosenberry ZR, Koszowski B. Large Cigars: Smoking Topography and Toxicant Exposure. Nicotine Tob
Res. 2018;20(2):183-191. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntw289.
164 Pickworth WB, Rosenberry ZR, Yi D, et al. Cigarillo and Little Cigar Mainstream Smoke Constituents from Replicated
Human Smoking . Chem Res Toxicol. 2018;31(4):251-258. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.7b00312.
165 Yao T, Ong MK, Max W, et al. Responsiveness to cigarette prices by different racial/ethnic groups of US adults. Tob
Control. 2018;27(3):301-309. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053434.
166. Levy DT, Tam J, Kuo C, Fong GT, Chaloupka F. The Impact of Implementing Tobacco Control Policies: The 2017 Tobacco
Control Policy Scorecard. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2018;24(5)448-457. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000780.
167 Tessman GK, Caraballo RS, Corey CG, Xu X, Chang CM. Exposure to tobacco coupons among U.S. middle and high
school students. Am J Prev Med. 2014;47(2 Suppl 1):S61-68. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.05.001.
168 Mills SD, Golden SD, Henrisksen L. Neighbourhood disparities in the price of the cheapest cigarettes in the USA. J
Epidemiol Community Health. 2019;73(9):894-896. doi: 10.1136/jech-2018-210998.
169 Counter Tobacco. Disparities in Point-of-Sale Advertising and Retailer Density. Available at: https://countertobacco.
org/resources-tools/evidence-summaries/disparities-in-point-of-sale-advertising-and-retailer-density. Accessed
May 18, 2020.
170 Lempert LK, Glantz SA. Tobacco Industry Promotional Strategies Targeting American Indians/Alaska Natives and
Exploiting Tribal Sovereignty. Nicotine Tob Res. 2018. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nty048.
171 Henriksen L, Schleicher NC, Johnson TO, Roeseler A, Zhu SH. Retail Tobacco Marketing in Rural Versus Nonru-
ral Counties: Product Availability, Discounts, and Prices. Health Promot Pract. 2020;21(1_suppl):27S-36S. doi:
10.1177/1524839919888652.
172 Osman A, Queen T, Choi K, Goldstein AO. Receipt of direct tobacco mail/email coupons and coupon redemption:
Demographic and socioeconomic disparities among adult smokers in the United States. Prev Med. 2019;126:105778.
doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.105778.
173 Cal. Penal Code § 308.3(a).
174 Gammon DG, Rogers T, Coats EM, et al. National and state patterns of concept-flavoured cigar sales, USA, 2012-2016.
Tob Control. 2019;28(4):394-400. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054348.
175 Gammon DG, Loomis BR, Dench DL, King BA, Fulmer EB, Rogers T. Effect of price changes in little cigars and cig-
arettes on little cigar sales: USA, Q4 2011-Q4 2013. Tob Control. 2016;25(5):538-544. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocon-
trol-2015-052343.
176 Jawad M, Lee JT, Glantz S, Millett C. Price elasticity of demand of non-cigarette tobacco products: a systematic review
and meta-analysis. Tob Control. 2018;27(6):689-695. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-054056.
December 2020
Comprehensive Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance 39 www.publichealthlawcenter.org/caltobacco
177 Ringel JS, Wasserman J, Andreyeva T. Effects of public policy on adolescents’ cigar use: evidence from the Na-
tional Youth Tobacco Survey. Am J Public Health. 2005;95(6):995-998. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2003.030411.178; Katz
MH. Banning tobacco sales in pharmacies: the right prescription. JAMA. 2008;300(12):1451-1453. doi: 10.1001/
jama.300.12.1451.
179 Hudmon KS, Fenlon CM, Corelli RL, Prokhorov AV, Schroeder SA. Tobacco sales in pharmacies: time to quit. Tob Con-
trol. 2006;15(1):35-38. doi: 10.1136/tc.2005.012278.
180 Golden SD, K T-M, Kong AY, et al. County-level associations between tobacco retailer density and smoking prevalence
in the USA, 2012. Prev Med Rep. 2020; Mar:17:101005. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2019.101005.
181 Leas EC, Schleicher NC, Prochaska JJ, Henriksen L. Place-Based Inequity in Smoking Prevalence in the Largest Cities in
the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179(3):442-444. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.5990.
182 Farley SM, Maroko AR, Suglia SF, Thorpe LE. The Influence of Tobacco Retailer Density and Poverty on Tobacco Use in
a Densely Populated Urban Environment. Public Health Rep. 2019;134(2):164-171. doi: 10.1177/0033354918824330.
183 Abdel Magid HS, Halpern-Felsher B, Ling PM, et al. Tobacco Retail Density and Initiation of Alternative Tobacco Prod-
uct Use Among Teens. J Adolesc Health. 2020;66(4):423-430. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.09.004.
184 Cantrell J, Anesetti-Rothermel A, Pearson JL, Xiao H, Vallone D, Kirchner TR. The impact of the tobacco retail outlet
environment on adult cessation and differences by neighborhood poverty. Addiction. 2015;110(1):152-161. doi: 10.1111/
add.12718.
185 Vyas P, Tsoh JY, Gildengorin G, et al. Disentangling individual and neighborhood differences in the intention to quit
smoking in Asian American male smokers. Prev Med Rep. 2020;18:101064. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101064.
186 Shareck M, Datta GD, Vallee J, Kestens Y, Frohlick KL. Is Smoking Cessation in Young Adults Associated With Tobacco
Retailer Availability in Their Activity Space? Nicotine Tob Res. 2020;22(4):512-521. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nty242.
187 Rodriguez D, Carlos HA, Adachi-Mejia AM, Berke EM, Sargent J. Retail tobacco exposure: using geographic analysis
to identify areas with excessively high retail density. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014;16(2):155-165. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntt126.
188 Myers AE, Hall MG, Isgett LF, Ribisl KM. A comparison of three policy approaches for tobacco retailer reduction. Prev
Med. 2015;74:67-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.01.025.
189 Luke DA, Hammond RA, Combs T, et al. Tobacco Town: Computational Modeling of Policy Options to Reduce Tobacco
Retailer Density. Am J Public Health. 2017;107(5):740-746. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2017.303685.190; Henriksen L, Schle-
icher NC, Ababseh K, Johnson TO, Fortmann SP. Marijuana as a ‘concept’ flavour for cigar products: availability and
price near California schools. Tob Control. 2017. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053961.
191 Richter L, Pugh BS, Smith PH, Ball SA. The co-occurrence of nicotine and other substance use and addiction among
youth and adults in the United States: implications for research, practice, and policy. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse.
2017;43(2):132-145. doi: 10.1080/00952990.2016.1193511.
192 Conway KP, Green VR, Kasza KA, et al. Co-occurrence of Tobacco Product Use, Substance Use, and Mental Health
Problems Among Youth: Findings From Wave 1 (2013-2014) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health
(PATH) Study. Addict Behav. 2018;76:208-217. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.08.009.
193 DiFranza JR. Best Practices for Enforcing State Laws Prohibiting the Sale of Tobacco to Minors. J Public Health Manag
Pract. 2005;11(6):559-565. doi: 10.1097/00124784-200511000-00014.
194 Macinko J, Silver D. Impact of New York City’s 2014 Increased Minimum Legal Purchase Age on Youth Tobacco Use.
Am J Public Health. 2018;108(5):669-675. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304340.
195 Institute of Medicine. Public Health Implications of Raising the Minimum Age of Legal Access to Tobacco Products. Wash-
ington, DC: National Academies Press. 2015.
December 2020
CITY OF REDDING
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Accept the report on tobacco retailing and provide direction to staff regarding next steps.
Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact with accepting the report. If the City Council (Council) would like to
pursue drafting an ordinance on tobacco retailing, there would be associated staff time costs.
Currently, the Redding Police Department (RPD) is running decoy operations through a grant.
The grant consists of five operations a year with each operation consisting of 10-12 retailer visits
per operation - revenue received per operation is $1,500.
If the Council pursues a Tobacco Retail License (TRL) Program that is to be managed and
enforced by Code Enforcement, staff would need to further examine cost recovery of the
program. In TRL programs, the costs of education, inspections, and enforcement are funded by
the cost of the license, and can be supplemented with grants. The cost of the license could fund a
full time Code Enforcement position and even an administrative position to process the licenses.
Further examination would be required.
Alternative Action
The Council could choose to not accept the report.
Background/Analysis
On February 6, 2024, staff presented to the Council a report regarding what California (State)
laws are in place and what other jurisdictions are doing in regards to tobacco enforcement. Staff
presented a broad scope of what the majority of State jurisdictions are doing in regards to
tobacco enforcement and specifically what the jurisdictions are doing in Shasta County. The
MEETING DATE: September 17, 2024
ITEM NO. 9.1(a)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
jgibilisco@cityofredding.org
btippin@cityofredding.org
SUBJECT: 9.1(a)--Consider report regarding tobacco retailing in the City of Redding.
Jason Gibilisco, Management
Assistant to the City Manager
Packet Pg. 260
Report to Redding City Council September 12, 2024
Re: 9.1(a)--Accept Report and Provide Direction Regarding Tobacco Retailing Page 2
Council accepted the report and advised staff to further canvas State municipalities to determine
what is and is not working regarding tobacco enforcement, retailer density, how youth are
targeted, and any other information as it relates to tobacco retailers.
Since the previous meeting, the 2023 California Youth Tobacco Use Survey (survey) was
released for Shasta County and there is new legislation, that, if signed by the Governor, will
increase the fine for selling a tobacco product to youth. The surve y was released in March 2024,
and shows Shasta County has the highest rate of tobacco ever used by youth in the State of
California at 41.2 percenti. The report shows that one in three Shasta County Youth report being
able to purchase tobacco directly form a tobacco retaileri. On average, students reported first
using tobacco at age 13 and 82.2 percent of students who have used tobacco reported trying
vapes as their first tobacco producti.
Potential new tobacco enforcement legislation has moved forward to Governor Newsom for
consideration. Senate Bill (SB) 2021 supplements the existing fine that can be issued to an
individual who knowingly sells a tobacco product to a person under 21 years of age. This new
bill allows for a fine to be issued to the retailing businesses or corporation. The fine amount that
can be issued to the business for knowingly selling to a youth is punishable by a fine of $500 for
the first offense, $1,000 for the second offense, and $5,000 for the third offense.
The California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) requires all retailers who
sell cigarettes, or tobacco products, to obtain a cigarette and tobacco retailer's license. The
CDTFA defines a tobacco product on their website as:
• “any product containing, made, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for
human consumption;”
• “Any electronic smoking or vaping device that delivers nicotine or other vaporized
liquids;” and
• “Any component, part, or accessory of tobacco product, whether or not sold separately.”
Data Collection and Benchmarking
Staff analyzed 48 various jurisdictions throughout the State on what types of tobacco ordinances
and enforcement other jurisdictions have in place. Staff specifically asked jurisdictions if they
have a tobacco ordinance, if they enforce their tobacco ordinance, and if the ordinance is
working. Staff also viewed each jurisdiction’s municipal code for specifications on tobacco
related ordinances. Staff analyzed if a TRL is required, how many tobacco retailers are in the
jurisdiction, what are the associated fees, population, penalties, and what specific ordinances are
in place. Staff did not hear back from some jurisdictions through phone or email which resulted
in reviewing online ordinances and information.
Of the 48 jurisdictions that were analyzed, 28 of them require retailers to have a local TRL. As of
October 2023, at least 226 municipalities in California require a TRL to sell tobacco products.
Jurisdictions that require a TRL, required them to be renewed annually, allow them to have local
control, and enforcement capabilities of the tobacco retailers in their jurisdiction. This allows the
jurisdiction to set any additional requirements such as limits on how many retailers are operating
in their jurisdiction and general oversight. It makes enforcement more effective and efficient and
gives local governments the ability to intervene when needed. Many jurisdictions have set their
ordinances to go above and beyond of what the federal and state law requires.
Staff found several jurisdictions have adopted tobacco ordinances but currently have no funding
for their tobacco program or for enforcement. These jurisdictions are Butte County, Oroville,
Packet Pg. 261
Report to Redding City Council September 12, 2024
Re: 9.1(a)--Accept Report and Provide Direction Regarding Tobacco Retailing Page 3
Hollister, San Benito County, Arroyo Grande, and Merced County. The Cities of Anderson,
Santa Rosa, and Vallejo, stated that they are in the process of working on updating or creating a
TRL program.
The City of Benicia was found to have the most restrictive requirements for tobacco retailers.
Followed by Sonoma County and Sonoma County cities such as Petaluma, Sebastopol, Windsor,
and Sonoma. These jurisdictions require each tobacco retailer to hold a TRL, implemented
density requirements (with some no longer issuing TRLs due to being over density), proximity
requirements to youth areas, distance/proximity requirements to other tobacco retailers, no
selling of flavored tobacco, no tobacco retailing at pharmacies, minimum pricing requirements,
and some even banning the sale of electronic cigarettes or vaping products.
There was a wide array of specific ordinances that have been implemented throughout the State.
The various ordinances in place include:
Proximity Requirement to a Youth Sensitive Area
Jurisdictions have set requirements for tobacco retailers operating near youth sensitive
facilities. Youth sensitive facilities mainly include, schools, parks, libraries, day cares,
playgrounds, and ultimately, specific areas defined by the jurisdiction. Jurisdictions set
prohibitions for tobacco retailers near schools because of the belief that children are more
likely to experiment with tobacco products when tobacco retailers are near youth areas.
Setting distance restrictions near youth areas may assist with reducing youth smoking
rates. There are 16 jurisdictions that have set a distance requirement for tobacco retailers
near youth sensitive areas. The distance set by the jurisdictions analyzed ranges from 300
feet to 1,000 feet.
Proximity Requirements Near Existing Tobacco Retailers
There are 10 jurisdictions that have requirements for no new tobacco retailers to operate
within a specific proximity to other tobacco retailers. This requirement prevents the over
concentration of tobacco retailers within particular neighborhoods and how close they
can operate from one another. The overconcentration of tobacco retailers may affect
youth smoking behaviors and youth access to tobacco products. The distance set by the
jurisdictions analyzed ranges from 500 feet to 1,000 feet.
Tobacco Retailers per Population Density or Cap on the Amount of Tobacco Retailers
Jurisdictions have imposed requirements for tobacco retailers based on the local
population. Jurisdictions have based this requirement off of the State’s ability to limit the
number of alcohol licenses. Greater tobacco density may lead to higher smoking rates. In
the jurisdictions analyzed, 12 jurisdictions have adopted an ordinance based off the
population. The jurisdictions analyzed had various densities adopted that include one
tobacco retailer for every 1,500 residents (one jurisdiction), 1,750 residents (one
jurisdiction), 2,000 residents (four jurisdictions), and 2,500 residents (three jurisdictions).
This sets local capacity of tobacco retailers based on the number of residents. If
population increases then the number of tobacco retailers can be increased. The City of
Sonoma has a set capacity of 15 retailers, and Nevada City has a set limit of five. The
City of Oroville requires a use permit from planning and has a density requ irement of one
for every 4,000 residents for significant tobacco retailers which has been reached.
Packet Pg. 262
Report to Redding City Council September 12, 2024
Re: 9.1(a)--Accept Report and Provide Direction Regarding Tobacco Retailing Page 4
No Selling of Flavored Tobacco
With the passing of SB 793, effective January 1, 2023, flavored tobacco or tobacco
product flavor enhancers are now illegal to sell, offer for sale, or possess with the intent
to sell or offer for sale in the State with a few exceptions. Flavored tobacco is considered
a starter product for youth that assists with long term tobacco use. There are countless
flavors that range from Cotton Candy, Cherry Crush, Pop Tart, Banana Blast,
Wintergreen, and many more. There are 17 jurisdictions that were analyzed that have an
ordinance that prohibits the sale of flavored tobacco with some going above and beyond
SB 793 and banning all flavored tobacco. In communications with jurisdictions, flavored
tobacco products are still being found, mainly at significant tobacco retailers such as
smoke shops.
No Sale of Electric Smoking Devices (ESDs)/ Vapes
Electronic Cigarettes are also known as e-cigarettes, vapes, or e-vaporizers, and are
battery operated devices used to deliver nicotine, flavorings, and other chemicals into the
body in an aerosol form rather than smoke. The majority of ESDs or vapes are widely
used for flavors. Following the ban on flavored tobacco, jurisdictions noticed that tobacco
companies are finding ways to circumvent the flavor ban and are calling products by the
names of colors such as “Blue.” Blue could mean that its flavor is blue raspberry or
blueberry. ESDs are also what the youth are using in higher rates. The State’s flavor ban
does leave room for interpretation on what is and is not considered flavored tobacco.
Jurisdictions have decided to go one step further and prohibit the sale of all ESDs for this
reason. Since the majority of ESDs are flavored, jurisdictions reported minimal impacts
to prohibiting the sale of ESDs. The Environmental Protection Agency classifies ESDs as
hazardous waste due to their lithium batteries and nicotine in the liquid. There are seven
jurisdictions analyzed that have prohibited the sale of ESDs.
No Selling of Tobacco at Pharmacies
Jurisdictions have restricted pharmacies from selling tobacco and tobacco related
products. This ordinance is based off pharmacies being a place people go to for health
care and medicine. It can send a mixed message about their safety because it is where
people purchase healthcare products. There are 11 jurisdictions analyzed that have an
ordinance in place prohibiting the sale of tobacco products at pharmacies.
Minimum Package Pricing/ Quantity Requirements/ No Free Samples or Discounts
Jurisdictions have imposed minimum pricing requirements and minimum packaging
requirements. The implementation of pricing requirements is that if tobacco products are
priced higher, then they are likely to be unaffordable by youth. Higher prices make
products less appealing and can make people use tobacco products less. Minimum
packing requirements is thought to have the same logic. Cigarettes are already required to
be sold in packs of 20 but cigars can be sold in singles. Some examples analyzed include:
minimum price for a pack of cigarettes to be no lower than $7 or $10; little cigars to be
sold in packs of five or more and to be priced no less than $7; and smokeless tobacco to
be no less than $10. Jurisdictions that have imposed minimum pricing and packaging
ordinances have also imposed discount restrictions to back up the minimum pricing
Packet Pg. 263
Report to Redding City Council September 12, 2024
Re: 9.1(a)--Accept Report and Provide Direction Regarding Tobacco Retailing Page 5
requirement. Coupons and free samples are prohibited under State law. Six jurisdictions
analyzed have requirements on tobacco pricing and quantity packaging requirements.
Smoke Free Multi-Family Housing
Jurisdictions have set no smoking requirements for multi-family housing. This restriction
is in place to protect residents from second hand smoke, minimize fire risk, and provide
overall quality of life to residents. The restriction includes no smoking in the building and
in common areas with a designated smoking area away from the building or any units.
There are nine jurisdictions that were analyzed that have created an ordinance prohibiting
smoking in multi-family housing.
Other Regulations Found
• Tobacco retailer must obtain a use permit through the jurisdiction’s planning
department to operate within a certain distance to a youth facility;
• No significant tobacco retailers. A significant tobacco retailer can be defined as their
primary purpose is to sell tobacco and tobacco related products;
• No significant tobacco retailers to operate within a certain distance to residential
property;
• No deliveries of tobacco products to be made by employees or by private delivery
drivers;
• No placing tobacco products or advertising within 5 feet of candy, snacks, and
nonalcoholic beverages;
• No advertising of tobacco products within 500 feet of a youth sensitive area; and
• No advertising of tobacco products on windows or advertising to be seen from
outside the establishment.
Majority of all jurisdictions analyzed that have imposed tobacco retailing restrictions allowed
legally operating tobacco retailers to continue to operate post adoption of their ordinance as long
as the tobacco retailer was in good standing. This included businesses that were within required
distances to youth facilities and within proximity to other tobacco retailers, and if a TRL cap was
initiated. Some offered grace periods such as San Jose, to sell off flavored tobacco which was
prior to the State banning flavored tobacco. Santa Maria required pharmacies to immediately
stop selling tobacco and San Luis Obispo County immediately required businesses to cease
selling ESDs. Further break down of ordinances and analysis can be found on the attached
Tobacco Retailer Regulation Comparison spreadsheet.
What is and is not working
The Council directed staff to follow up on what is and is not working. The jurisdictions that are
successfully running a TRL program, provide education, inspections, and enforcement, feel like
their ordinance is working to prevent youth access to tobacco products. If the jurisdiction has a
density limit, it prevents the over density of more tobacco retailers from operating. Jurisdictions
feel that to be able to back up enforcement with fines and TRL suspension and revocation assist
greatly in preventing retailers from being a bad actor. Fines allow the jurisdiction to immediately
issue a citation for when violations are found such as a business selling flavored tobacco. If a
business continues to sell flavored tobacco a jurisdiction can then issue a second citation and can
suspend their TRL or work towards full revocation. Many jurisdictions expressed the use of
discretion when deciding on the level of enforcement to be issued. It was reported that
Packet Pg. 264
Report to Redding City Council September 12, 2024
Re: 9.1(a)--Accept Report and Provide Direction Regarding Tobacco Retailing Page 6
suspension and revocation of TRL can be stronger than fines but having all available options is
best.
The City of San Jose operates a decoy program and issues a citation amount of $2,500 for selling
to a youth. The San Jose City Code Enforcement Inspector felt like the fine amount should be
higher due to one business being fined twice for selling to a decoy on two different occasions.
The City of San Jose has smaller fine amounts for other violations such as selling flavored
tobacco. Other cities have set fine amounts up to $5,000, and include suspension and revocation
of the stores’ TRL. A TRL suspension could have a higher business impact over a smaller fine
amount on a business because the store physically has to remove all tobacco products from their
store shelfs for a certain amount of time. Sonoma County has the ability to suspend a TRL and
issue a citation. Some jurisdictions are able to suspend a TRL for any violation of their Tobacco
Retail Ordinance. Jurisdictions with higher fines, suspensions and revocation of TRL are able to
effectively enforce tobacco restrictions to ensure retailers are always in compliance.
In the study that was performed, 2021 State of Tobacco Control: California Local Gradesii, for a
TRL ordinance to be successful in reducing the sale of tobacco to minors it should include:
• A sufficient fee for the TRL to cover administration and enforcement efforts;
• Permission to sell tobacco through an annual license that must be renewed annually;
• Include provisions against any state laws in ordinance; and
• Financial deterrent that includes fines, penalties, suspensions and revocation of the
license.
In the report Tobacco Retailer Licensing is Effective, 41 jurisdictions were analyzed in 2018 and
determined that youth sales rates dropped following the adoption of a strong tobacco retailer
licensing ordinance. This was determined from youth purchase surveys administered by local
agencies. The report indicates that a TRL alone will not decrease youth access but with
enforcement and education regarding the local regulations will always be needed. Six of the
jurisdictions that were analyzed were included this report (Davis, Elk Grove, Grass Valley,
Oroville, San Luis Obispo County, and Woodland).
City of Redding (City) Tobacco Retailer Landscape
In the City there are 119 tobacco retailers. Staff worked with the County of Shasta and the State
to obtain the actual amount of tobacco retailers to include sole proprietors, husband and wife co-
owners, and domestic partners. The below table shows the number of store types that hold a
CDTFA issued tobacco retailers license:
Redding Tobacco Retailers
Gas Station 39
Smoke Shop/ Significant Tobacco Retailers 29
Small Market/ Convenience Store 25
Liquor Store 8
Pharmacy 8
Super Market 7
Golf Course 2
Winery 1
Staff worked with the City’s Information and Technology Department’s Geographic Information
System personnel to map all tobacco retailer adresses and compare their distance to youth
Packet Pg. 265
Report to Redding City Council September 12, 2024
Re: 9.1(a)--Accept Report and Provide Direction Regarding Tobacco Retailing Page 7
sensitive locations, and their distance to other tobacco retailers. Staff defined youth sensitive
locations as the same as in the City’s cannabis ordinance which includes schools, parks, and
child care facilities. Of these stores there are 20 youth sensitive areas that are located within
1,000 feet of a tobacco retailer. There are 100 tobacco retailers that are located within 500 feet of
another tobacco retailer. The population density is one tobacco retailer for every 787 residents.
Local Enforcement
RPD received a grant earlier this year to perform decoy operations. RPD receives $1,500 per
operation and must perform five operations a year with each operation requiring 10-12 retailer
visits. To date, RPD has performed three tobacco decoy operations that included 41 decoy
attempt purchases of tobacco. In all, five sales were made by a youth decoy. One tobacco retailer
sold to a decoy twice on two different operations. The four stores are smoke shops and would be
considered a significant tobacco retailer. Of these four store stores, two are located within 500
feet of another tobacco retailer and none are located within 1,000 feet of a youth sensitive area.
In June of 2024 the CDTFA was in in the City doing inspections with Shasta County’s Tobacco
Compliance Specialist and RPD. Their mission was to ensure tobacco retailers were properly
licensed through the State and have all proper invoices for their products dating back to a year.
They are also able to confiscate illegally imported tobacco and cannabis products. They are
unable to confiscate flavored tobacco which falls under the California Department of Public
Health (CDPH) and they did not perform underage decoy purchases. They inspected seven
tobacco retailers in Redding and found violations at all seven of the retailers. The violations
range from confiscation of illegally imported products, confiscation of cannabis products, and
confirmation of flavored tobacco. The seven stores inspected were all smoke shops. Two of these
stores were issued a citation and the total amount of confiscated illegal products exceeded
$9,000. Three of these seven retailers sold to a minor as part of RPDs decoy operations earlier
this year.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) performs random and unannounced decoy operations
and has their inspection logs publicly available on their website. From January 1, 2022, to July
16, 2024, there was one sale to a decoy out of 22 attempts. Their follow up procedure for a decoy
sale is to send a warning letter, then after another confirmed sale, the FDA can follow up with
civil penalties, injunctions, and criminal prosecution. The confirmed sale to a decoy was made at
a smoke shop or significant tobacco retailer.
How Kids are Targeted
Kids are targeted by tobacco companies in several different ways. The largest is advertising. The
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that cigarette and smokeless tobacco
companies spent $8.2 billion in 2019 on advertising and promotional expenses iii. This includes
incentives to retailers by tobacco companies to offer price discounts, promotions, and stocking
certain brands. Lower prices and discounts are more appealing to lower income residents and
more appealing to youth. Tobacco products such as a pack of three small cigars can be found for
$1.19 in the City.
The advertising of tobacco products includes how they are packaged. The packaging of tobacco
products is made and designed similar to candy products. This can make it very appealing to
youth. The placement of tobacco products and advertising are typically placed near candy, soft
drinks, and adjacent to the cash register in places likely to be seen by youth. Advertisements can
also be strategically placed outside to be seen by youth passing by.
Packet Pg. 266
Report to Redding City Council September 12, 2024
Re: 9.1(a)--Accept Report and Provide Direction Regarding Tobacco Retailing Page 8
Flavors and ESDs are also more appealing to youth. Flavors can hide the distinct tobacco flavor
and can make products easier to inhale. Flavored tobacco products have been banned in the State
but flavored products are still being found in stores. ESDs come in a variety of designs, relatively
low in price, easily concealable, and have high nicotine content that can make it very addicting to
users.
Next Steps
If the Council would like to move forward with any potential tobacco retail ordinance and/ or
TRL program, staff can further analyze and prepare an ordinance to bring back to the Council at
a future date for possible adoption. This process will include necessary outreach with
stakeholders, work with the City Attorney’s Office and any other necessary departments.
Environmental Review
This is not a project defined under the California Environmental Quality Act, and no further
action is required.
Council Priority/City Manager Goals
• Public Safety – “Work to improve all aspects of public safety to help people feel secure
and safe where they live, work, and play in the City of Redding.”
Attachments
^Tobacco Staff Report February 6, 2024
^Tobacco Retailer Licensing is Effective September 2018
^California Youth Tobacco Survey-Shasta County Data
California Youth Tobacco Survey 2023 Annual Report
^Jurisdictional Data
i Clodfelter, R., Dutra, L. M., Bradfield, B., Russell, S., Levine, B., & von Jaglinsky, A. (2023). Annual results
report for the California Youth Tobacco Survey 2023. RTI International.
ii County Grades. (2021). https://www.lung.org/getmedia/3b258a14 -f355-42d0-9cac-18901c1802eb/state-of-
tobacco-control-california-local-grades.pdf
iii CDC. (2018, May 4). Tobacco Industry Marketing. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/tobacco_industry/marketing/index.htm
Packet Pg. 267
CITY OF REDDING
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommendation
Accept the report on tobacco retailing and provide direction to staff regarding next steps.
Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact with accepting this report. If the City Council (Council) would like to
alter the former Council’s September 2024 previous direction to staff which was to create a
Tobacco Retail License (TRL) ordinance specific to vape/smoke shops there would be associated
staff time costs with updating the ordinance.
The Redding Police Department (RPD) has received two tobacco use prevention related grants.
The first grant is with the County of Shasta to perform decoy operations through March 15,
2026. The grant consists of five operations a year with each operation consisting of 10 to 12
retailer visits per operation – revenue received per operation is $1,500. The second grant is
through the California Department of Justice that provides $630,569 through October 31, 2027.
This grant funds police officers to administer and conduct enforcement operations that include
retail inspections, decoy operations, shoulder tap, undercover buys, and retailer education.
Alternative Action
The Council could choose to not accept the report or move forward with implementation of a
TRL or provide other direction.
MEETING DATE: March 18, 2025
ITEM NO. 9.1(c)
FROM:
***APPROVED BY***
jgibilisco@cityofredding.org
btippin@cityofredding.org
SUBJECT: 9.1(c)--Consider accepting report regarding tobacco retailing in the City of
Redding.
Jason Gibilisco, Management
Assistant to the City Manager
Report to Redding City Council March 12, 2025
Re: 9.1(c)--Accept Report and Provide Direction Regarding Tobacco Retailing Page 2
Background/Analysis
On February 6, 2024, staff presented a report to the Council outlining current California laws and
tobacco enforcement practices in various jurisdictions, including Shasta County. The Council
accepted the report and directed staff to conduct further research on tobacco enforcement
practices in other California municipalities and determine what is and is not working regarding
tobacco enforcement, and any other information as it relates to tobacco retailers.
Staff canvased the municipalities for information related to tobacco retailers and returned to
Council on September 17, 2024 to present this information. Staff analyzed 48 jurisdictions with
28 of them requiring retailers to have a local TRL. This is in addition to the state license that is
required by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration for any retailers who sell
tobacco products. The cost of the state license is $265 and must be renewed annually. It is
intended to prevent retailers from selling unregulated tobacco products.
Municipalities that require a TRL also require an annual fee in concert with the TRL, and allows
for local control, and enforcement capabilities over tobacco retailers in their jurisdiction. Many
jurisdictions have set their ordinances to go above and beyond what the federal and state law
requires. Jurisdictions that are successfully running a TRL program also provide education,
inspections, and enforcement to their tobacco retailers.
The Council accepted the September 17, 2024 staff report on tobacco retailing and directed staff
to return with a TRL ordinance for vape and smoke shops, and include fee options to fund
enforcement through both code enforcement and law enforcement, for consideration at a future
Council meeting.
Following the September 17, 2024 meeting, staff worked on both a TRL ordinance specific to
vape and smoke shops and worked on fee options to fund the TRL program. The TRL ordinance
specific to vape and smoke shops is still under review and not ready to be presented at this time.
The options to oversee the TRL program could be either RPD or Redding Code Enforcement
(RCE).
If the Council would like to pursue implementing a TRL program, the fee for the TRL will vary
depending on the overseeing department; RPD or RCE. The fee will also vary depending if it is
vape/smoke shop only, or for all tobacco retailers. It was noted at the September 17, 2024
Council meeting, that there are 29 vape/smoke shops and 119 tobacco retailers in the City of
Redding.
RPDs identified resource needs to oversee a TRL program would be one full-time Police Officer
position and a half-time Sergeant position. RPD is currently receiving funding through the
above-mentioned grant for tobacco use prevention related enforcement and education activities.
RCE’s identified resource needs to run the TRL program would be one full-time Neighborhood
Preservation Officer and a half-time Admin Assistant. The following are the estimated costs for
RPD and RCE to successfully cover administration and enforcement efforts based on their
identified needs to run a TRL program based off the number of tobacco retailers.
Report to Redding City Council March 12, 2025
Re: 9.1(c)--Accept Report and Provide Direction Regarding Tobacco Retailing Page 3
Redding Police
Department
Cost of a Full-time
Police Officer and half-
time Sergeant
Estimated Cost of TRL
for Vape/ Smoke shops
only (29)
Estimated Cost
of TRL for all
Tobacco
Retailers (119)
$379,000 $13,068.96 $3,184.87
Redding Code
Enforcement
Cost of a Full-time
Neighborhood
Preservation Officer and
half-time Admin
Assistant
Estimated Cost of TRL
for Vape/ Smoke shops
only (29)
Estimated Cost
of TRL for all
Tobacco
Retailers (119)
$140,020 $4,828.27 $1,176.63
The TRL program costs are significantly reduced if requiring all tobacco retailers to be licensed
versus the vape/smoke shops only. TRL program costs are even further reduced with RCE
overseeing the program. The cost of the TRL covers staff time costs to run the TRL program and
includes education, inspections, and enforcement for tobacco retailers. Of course the cost could
be further reduced if the Council wanted to lower the amount of oversight or wished to subsidize
the activity with the General Fund.
At the February 18, 2025, Council meeting, agenda item 12, the Council directed staff to bring
back the TRL item for further direction. If the Council would like to move forward with altering
the previously directed tobacco retail ordinance for vape/smoke shops, staff can further analyze
and update the ordinance to bring back to the Council at a future date for possible adoption. This
process will include necessary outreach with stakeholders, work with the City Attorney’s Office
and any other necessary departments.
Environmental Review
This is not a project defined under the California Environmental Quality Act, and no further
action is required.
Council Priority/City Manager Goals
• Public Safety – “Work to improve all aspects of public safety to help people feel secure
and safe where they live, work, and play in the City of Redding.”
Attachments
^Tobacco Staff Report February 6, 2024
^Staff Report City Council 9-17-24
^Jurisdictional Data
Tobacco Retailer Licensing is Effective September 2018
California Youth Tobacco Survey-Shasta County Data
California Youth Tobacco Survey 2023 Annual Report
Tobacco-Oriented Retailing
June 17, 2025
Jason Gibilisco, Management Assistant to the City Manager
Stacy Larson, Assistant City Attorney
Background
March 18, 2025, City Council meeting
•Ordinance for smoke/vape shops
•Capacity limit
•Location restrictions
Education, Inspections, and
enforcement of all businesses
•Only requires license for
smoke/vape shops
Goals
•Regulate the most non-compliant—smoke/vape shops
•Regulate—but not burden—compliant businesses
•Fund program through permit/license fees
•Create an enforceable program
•Withstand legal challenge
Legal Challenge: Rational Basis
Is the ordinance rationally related to a
legitimate governmental purpose?
Purpose: Findings
City’s Interests
•Protect youth
•Promote compliance
•Discourage illegal purchases
Statistics
•Shasta County Statistics
•Smoke/Vape Shops Noncompliance
Statistics
Enforcement Difficulties
•Transient nature of businesses
•Easily relocated or change forms
•Little to lose
Who to Regulate: Defining
Tobacco-Oriented Retailers
Broad Category: General Tobacco Retailer
Sells . . . for any consideration tobacco
products or tobacco paraphernalia
Subset: Tobacco-Oriented Retailer
Carve out those that are most compliant
because they have the most to lose
(pharmacies, supermarkets, gas station,
convenience stores, golf courses)
General Tobacco Retailers
Tobacco-Oriented Retailer
Proposed Ordinance:
NOT Tobacco-Oriented Retail Business: Businesses that meet at least 3 of 7
criteria:
1.Businesses that have contracts with tobacco manufacturers;
2.Businesses that have gas pumps and sell gas;
3.Businesses that have active, in good standing, licenses to sell beer and wine
or liquor licenses issued by the Alcohol Beverage Control;
4.Businesses that have owners who have ownership rights in the property
where the tobacco products are being sold, as reflected on the County
Assessment Records;
5.Businesses that have minimum gross sales of non-tobacco products in excess
of 75%;
6.Businesses that include a pharmacy on site; and
7.Businesses whose primary use is a golf course as permitted by the City’s
Zoning Code
Regulation
Generally
•One license per location
•Renewed annually (30/60 days pre-
expiration) (RMC 6.13.070)
•Nontransferable
Density
•No more than 20 within City (eventually)
Proximity
•> 1000 feet of K-12 schools, parks, libraries,
youth-oriented facilities
•> 500 feet of another smoke/vape shop
Existing Businesses
“Grandfathered in” (6.13.040(H))
•Application < 60 days of ordinance
adoption
•No business closure within 60 days
•No substantial change in operations (sale,
transfer, or avoidance of requirements)
Safeguards
Education and Inspections for ALL
•Costs of reinspection billed to owner
License/Permit Scheme for Smoke/Vape Shops
•License fees fund program
Record Retention for ALL
•Invoices for tobacco products for 4 years
•Sales receipts for all transactions for 4 years
Penalties
Denial
•Application denied
Suspension (6.13.110)
•1st violation in 5 years = 14 days
•2nd violation in 5 years = 30 days
Revocation (6.13.110)
•3rd violation in 5 years = revocation
•Material false information in application
Other Penalties (6.13.130)
•Criminal prosecution (infractions/misdos)
•Civil administration penalties & fines
*increased penalties if more than one location
Penalty
Denial
Revocation Suspension
Costs,
Penalties &
Fines
Criminal
Prosecution
Nuisance
Abatement
Recommendation
Offer Ordinance for First Reading by Title only
•Resolutions forthcoming
•adoption of Tobacco-Oriented Retailer licensing program
•adoption of administrative fines
OR Provide Additional Direction
Thank You!
Questions?