From: "Greto, Lindsey" To: "Pearson, Anne" <[email protected]> Date: 1/4/2011 2:18:34 PM Subject: e-cig regulation questions - Seattle Schools hi Anne, Seattle Public Schools has some questions about the e-cigarette regulation that I think you can better answer. They would like to use our regulation to improve their district policy, but since we don't ban possession by youth, are having a hard time. Do you know if we had thought about the possession piece? And why we didn't go that route? I talked to Scott a bit about it - seems to be that possession would have to be banned at the state level. I let Seattle Schools know this answer, but wanted to be sure that there wasn't something else they should know. Also, Scott mentioned that they should call under drug paraphernalia, since they're not cigarettes or tobacco products. But Seattle Schools is wondering how - do you know that? If not, no worries. Just thought I'd check. Thanks! Lindsey --- Lindsey Greto, MPA Tobacco Prevention Program Public Health - Seattle & King County Ph: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177 From: Sharp, Lisa M [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 1:40 PM To: Greto, Lindsey Subject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations Not sure yet…how can we be sure that it falls under drug paraphernalia? If it does, then they would be covered by our drug possession policy. Hmmm…. From: Greto, Lindsey [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 1:07 PM To: Sharp, Lisa M Subject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations Just got clarification - possession would have to be restricted on the state level. The Board of Health wouldn't have the authority necessarily to enact it, which is why youth possession of tobacco is an RCW, not a Board of Health code. However, e-cigarettes are not classified as a tobacco product or cigarette, both at the state and the federal levels. So their possession should fall under drug paraphernalia. does that help at all? Or make the School Board work trickier? --- Lindsey Greto, MPA Tobacco Prevention Program Page 1 8_19_2011
hi Anne,Seattle Public Schools has some questions about the e-cigarette regulation that I think you can better answer. Theywould like to use our regulation to improve their district policy, but since we don't ban possession by youth, are having ahard time. Do you know if we had thought about the possession piece? And why we didn't go that route? I talked to Scott a bitabout it - seems to be that possession would have to be banned at the state level. I let Seattle Schools know thisanswer, but wanted to be sure that there wasn't something else they should know. Also, Scott mentioned that they should call under drug paraphernalia, since they're not cigarettes or tobacco products.But Seattle Schools is wondering how - do you know that? If not, no worries. Just thought I'd check. Thanks!Lindsey
---Lindsey Greto, MPATobacco Prevention ProgramPublic Health - Seattle & King CountyPh: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177
From: Sharp, Lisa M [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 1:40 PMTo: Greto, LindseySubject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations
Not sure yet…how can we be sure that it falls under drug paraphernalia? If it does, then they would becovered by our drug possession policy. Hmmm…. From: Greto, Lindsey [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 1:07 PMTo: Sharp, Lisa MSubject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations Just got clarification - possession would have to be restricted on the state level. The Board of Health wouldn't have theauthority necessarily to enact it, which is why youth possession of tobacco is an RCW, not a Board of Health code. However, e-cigarettes are not classified as a tobacco product or cigarette, both at the state and the federal levels. Sotheir possession should fall under drug paraphernalia. does that help at all? Or make the School Board work trickier?
---Lindsey Greto, MPATobacco Prevention Program
Page 1
8_19_2011
Public Health - Seattle & King CountyPh: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177
From: Sharp, Lisa M [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 1:02 PMTo: Greto, LindseySubject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations
RCW 70.155.080 From: Greto, Lindsey [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 1:01 PMTo: Sharp, Lisa MSubject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations I can only find the law about selling or giving tobacco to minors, not possession...
---Lindsey Greto, MPATobacco Prevention ProgramPublic Health - Seattle & King CountyPh: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177
From: Sharp, Lisa M [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 1:00 PMTo: Greto, LindseySubject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations
Yes, it does. That’s why kids can get tickets for smoking. From: Greto, Lindsey [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 1:00 PMTo: Sharp, Lisa MSubject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations I don't think it's possible to restrict possession by youth - I'm looking now, but do you know if the law restricts youthfrom possessing cigarettes? I don't think it does - just sale.
---Lindsey Greto, MPATobacco Prevention ProgramPublic Health - Seattle & King CountyPh: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177
From: Sharp, Lisa M [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 12:59 PM
Page 2
8_19_2011
To: Greto, LindseySubject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations
That sucks. From: Greto, Lindsey [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 12:58 PMTo: Sharp, Lisa MSubject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations It doesn't restrict possession
---Lindsey Greto, MPATobacco Prevention ProgramPublic Health - Seattle & King CountyPh: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177
From: Sharp, Lisa M [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 12:58 PMTo: Greto, LindseySubject: RE: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations
I see it restricts the sale of e-cigs to kids, but what about possession? From: Greto, Lindsey [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 9:19 AMTo: Undisclosed recipientsSubject: FW: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations Greetings,Please see the press release below about action taken by the King County Board of Health yesterday. The addition of e-cigarettes to the smoke-free indoor air restrictions definitely helps to give weight to the addition of e-cigarettes to other smoke-free air policies. If you have any questions or need any resources on e-cigarettes, please don'thesitate to contact me. Lindsey---Lindsey Greto, MPATobacco Prevention ProgramPublic Health - Seattle & King CountyPh: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177
From: Ross, KathrynSent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 5:34 PMSubject: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations
Contact: Julia Patterson 206-296-1005, [email protected] December 16, 2010
Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulationsRegulations will limit sales to adults only, prohibit free samples,
and restrict use in public places and places of employment King County, WA—The King County Board of Health passed regulations today to protect KingCounty youth from electronic smoking devices and unregulated nicotine delivery devices. The Board of Health voted unanimously to:
restrict the sales of e-cigarettes or any other unapproved nicotine delivery devices only topeople 18 and older;prohibit free or highly discounted electronic smoking devices or unapproved nicotine deliveryproducts;prohibit the use of e-cigarette devices in places where smoking is prohibited by law.
“I am pleased that the Board of Health acted today to prohibit the sale of e-cigarettes to youthand to restrict their use in public spaces,” said Board of Health Chair Julia Patterson. “E-cigarettes are used as a means to encourage people, especially our youth, to begin smoking. Their safety and long-term health impacts are untested and unknown. The Board of Health’sresponsibility is to create policies that foster the health and well being of our community, andtoday’s action will help achieve that objective.” Electronic smoking devices, commonly known as “e-cigarettes,” are battery-operated devicesdesigned to look like and to be used in the same manner as conventional cigarettes. E-cigarettesuse cartridges to deliver vaporized nicotine, the same highly addictive drug that’s in tobacco. The FDA is investigating e-cigarettes, but the products are currently unregulated at the federallevel. “This Board of Health proposal is a reasonable step to protect youth immediately in King Countywhile federal authorities continue to look into these products,” said Dr. David Fleming, Directorand Health Officer for Public Health – Seattle & King County. “Through this regulation, youngpeople in King County have one less opportunity to get hooked on nicotine.” E-cigarettes have a high appeal to youth. They are sold in convenience stores and mall kiosksand come in candy flavors including chocolate, vanilla and mint. The FDA has warned that e-cigarettes can increase nicotine addiction among young people and may lead youth to tryconventional tobacco products."The Board of Health's action will help protect our youth from the addictive effects of nicotine,"said Boardmember Dr. Bud Nicola. “The Board of Health heard from a number of people who use these as an alternative to realcigarettes, and there may be a harm-reduction role,” said Boardmember and Seattle CityCouncilmember Sally Clark. “But nicotine remains addictive, and the steps we took today areabout protecting youth.” As these products have become more widely available, public use has also increased. E-cigarettes mimic the appearance of regular cigarettes because the user exhales a smoke-likevapor similar in appearance to the exhaled smoke from a cigarette. Their use is virtuallyindistinguishable from the use of traditional tobacco products in public, which leads to confusionand prompts people to light and smoke traditional tobacco products. “No matter how it’s delivered, nicotine is highly addictive. We took an important step today tokeep these unknown products out of the hands of kids in King County,” said Boardmember andLake Forest Park Mayor David Hutchinson.
Page 4
8_19_2011
The Board of Health convened a Tobacco Policy committee in June 2010 to review the evidenceand develop new tobacco policies that respond to current policy opportunities and disparities inKing County. Today’s regulations were endorsed by the committee members. Several other jurisdictions across the nation have created similar regulations related to e-cigarettes but it is believed that King County’s regulations are the most comprehensive in thenation. The King County Board of Health sets county-wide public health policy, enacts and enforces localpublic health regulations, and carries out other duties of local boards of health specified in statelaw. These duties include enforcing state public health statutes, preventing and controlling thespread of infectious disease, abating nuisances, and establishing fee schedules for licenses,permits and other services.
Date: 1/14/2011 6:29:03 PMSubject: Follow up from today's call
Greetings,
Here's a few examples of what locals can do once preemption is lifted:
1. SIGNAGE. Locals know their jurisdictions the best and can create signage requirements tailored to their specificconstituents. They can do this by requiring signs to be displayed in certain languages or with messages that aretargeted to their communities.
2. TRAINING. Locals can create training programs for retailers that are specific to their needs. For example, theycan require additional retailer training in areas that historically have low compliance rates.
3. NEW PRODUCTS. Locals are able to respond quickly to emerging products on the market (such as e-cigarettesin King County).
Hope that helps. Let us know if you need more or different examples.
Also, here is the link to the news article about Buffalo, NY and the planned work to regulate and restrict tobaccosales. http://www.buffalonews.com/city/communities/buffalo/article305870.ece
Anne has a copy of the proposed regulations and I think she can pass that along if anyone is interested.
Thanks everyone for a good call!
Joy Hamilton, MPHPublic Health - Seattle & King CountyCommunities Putting Prevention to WorkTobacco Policy and Advocacy Manager401 5th Ave. Suite 900Seattle, WA 98104(206) [email protected]
HI – I think she mis-spoke. We were able to restrict e-cigs because they are not tobacco products as defined by ourstate law, so we aren’t preempted. Anne Pearson, JD, MAPublic Health - Seattle & King County401 5th Avenue, Suite 900Seattle, WA 98104(206) [email protected]
From: Apa, JamesSent: Monday, January 31, 2011 4:16 PMTo: Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne; Muhm, JenniferCc: Ross, KathrynSubject: FW: I'm confused Scott, Joy and Anne – please see below. Do you have a suggested answer for Carol? I was a little confused myself whenMary Selecky said that the local option was needed to allow Spokane to ban e-cigarettes. Thanks.
From: Carol Ostrom [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 4:03 PMTo: Apa, JamesSubject: I'm confused
I will read the law, and won't be so dumb, but didn't king county board of health ban e-cigarettes? I thot the state lawrestricted local action on tobacco products. Or is that only a nicotine product, not tobacco? Do you have a ref to the statelaw? I have vague editor interest…..
Carol M. OstromHealth reporterThe Seattle TimesPO Box 70, Seattle, WA 98111Desk: 206-464-2249Fax: 206-464-2261Email: [email protected]: www.seattletimes.com
If I recall, when I spoke with the guy from TFK about this, he said that there are a few flavors that make up the bulkof flavored OTP, and that menthol wasn't even close to the top of the list. In light of the fact that mentholated OTPsmay represent such a tiny portion of the market, it didn't make sense to create a specific exemption for them, as wasmade for cigs which are a big part of the market.
So Lindsey is right, those few mentholated OTPs that are out there would be covered (e.g. restricted) by theproposed state bill.________________________________________From: Hamilton, JoySent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:18 PMTo: Pearson, Anne; Ross-Viles, SarahSubject: FW: Menthol Info
FYI
______________________________________________From: Greto, LindseySent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:13 PMTo: Hamilton, JoySubject: Menthol Info
Apparently there are menthol non cigarette products:• e-cigarettes: http://www.ecigarettesnational.com/products/SS-Choice-No.-7-Disposable-Menthol-Flavored-E%252dCigarette.html• Little cigars (Gambler): http://www.bnbtobacco.com/productdetails.aspx?iid=999960;• Little cigars (Swisher Sweets) http://www.gothamcigars.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SSLCMEN&utm_medium=shoppingengine&utm_source=googlebase - which you can also see on theSwisher Sweet site: http://www.swisher.com/web/main/map#/store/products/americasFavCigars
From my non-lawyerly reading, it looks like menthol is a flavor like any other. And in order to exempt it, a bill wouldhave to expressly say "excluding menthol flavors"
---Lindsey Greto, MPATobacco Prevention ProgramPublic Health - Seattle & King CountyPh: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177
