CC SR 20200804 D - SB793
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 08/04/2020
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter in support of
SB 793.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Authorize the Mayor to sign a letter in support of SB 793 to prohibit the retail sale
of flavored tobacco products.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Megan Barnes, Senior Administrative Analyst
REVIEWED BY: Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Draft letter in support of SB 793 (page A-1)
B. SB 793 Fact Sheet (page B-1)
C. Text of SB 793 (as amended July 27, 2020) (page C-1)
D. PVPUSD California Healthy Kids Survey data (Page D-1)
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
In response to an alarming rise in vaping among teens, in January 2020, Senator Jerry
Hill of San Mateo introduced legislation that would ban the retail sale of flavored
tobacco products across the state.
Senate Bill No. 793 would prohibit retailers from selling flavored e-cigarettes, e-pipes,
and other vaping devices, as well as flavored smokable and non-smokable tobacco
products, such as cigars, cigarillos, pipe tobacco, chewing tobacco, snuff, and tobacco
edibles. The bill would also prohibit the sale of “flavor enhancer” e-liquids sold
separately from e-cigarettes to enhance or add candy, fruit, menthol, or other flavors.
1
The bill would establish a civil penalty of $250 per violation, and would not prevent local
jurisdictions from enacting stricter prohibitions on the sale of flavored tobacco products.
SB 793 follows previous legislation authored by Senator Hill in 2018, SB 38, which was
ultimately withdrawn because numerous revisions weakened it.
SB 793 passed the Senate in June after it was amended to exempt hookah products.
The bill is now in the Assembly. SB 793 is supported by a coalition of health, youth, and
community advocates, and is opposed by tobacco retailers and the e-cigarette industry.
For some background on the prevalence of teen vaping, in November 2018, the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) released data showing more than 3.6 million middle and high school
students are using e-cigarettes — an increase of 1.5 million compared to 2017 and
almost 13 times higher than the number of youths using e-cigarettes in 2011
(Attachment B). The growth between 2017 and 2018 amounted to a 78% increase in e-
cigarette use by high school students and a 48% increase by middle school students.
By 2018, one in five high school students were using e-cigarettes and one in 20 middle
school students were doing the same. The year-over-year spike in e-cigarette use also
drove up the use of tobacco products overall to almost 4.9 million students in 2018.
These rates continued to rise in 2019, with the overwhelming majority of youths citing
the use of popular fruit and menthol or mint flavors. According to data released by FDA
and CDC, there are now 5.3 million young Americans who vape regularly, an increase
of 1.7 million youth compared to 2018.
A 2015 study led by the FDA researchers showed that 80% of young people who have
ever used tobacco started with a flavored product. Flavored cigarettes, except for
menthol, are banned under federal law, but these rules do not apply to other tobacco
products, such as e-cigarettes, cigars, and cigarillos. As a result, a variety of flavored
tobacco products, such as cotton candy, bubble gum, and mango, are widely available.
These products often mimic popular candies, drinks, or snacks in both packaging and
flavor, making them particularly appealing to youths.
Locally, according to the California Healthy Kids Survey, in the 2018-19 school year,
23% of Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified eleventh graders reported using e-cigarettes on
one or more days in the past month — an increase of 8% since 2013-14. Usage
increased from 6% of ninth graders in 2013-14 to 11% in 2018-19 and hovered from 1-
2% among seventh graders.
Due to these trends, both nationally and locally, Staff recommends the City Council
authorize the Mayor to sign a letter to Senator Hill, as drafted, or with revisions,
supporting SB 793.
ALTERNATIVES:
2
In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative action s are available
for the City Council’s consideration:
1. Identify revised language to add to the letter.
2. Do not authorize the Mayor to sign the letter.
3. Take other action as deemed appropriate by the City Council.
3
August 4, 2020 Via Email
The Honorable Jerry Hill
California State Senate
State Capitol, Rm. 5035
Sacramento, CA 95814
SUBJECT: Notice of Support for SB 793
Dear Senator Hill:
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes supports SB 793, which would ban the sale of
flavored tobacco products and protect youths from the harms of nicotine addiction.
Citing an alarming rise in e-cigarette use among youths, the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
released a report in November 2018 showing that more than 3.6 million middle and high
school students were using e-cigarettes. By 2018, one in five high school students were
using e-cigarettes and one in 20 middle school students were doing the same. The
disturbing rates of teen e-cigarette use continued to rise in 2019 with the overwhelming
majority of youths citing the use of popular fruit and menthol or mint-flavored products.
According to data released by the FDA and CDC, there are now 5.3 million young
Americans who use e-cigarettes regularly.
Eighty percent of young people who have ever used tobacco started with a flavored
product. These products often mimic popular candies, drinks, or snacks in both
packaging and flavor, making them particularly appealing to youths. A variety of flavored
tobacco products, such as cotton candy, bubble gum, and mango are widely available
on retail shelves. In 2018, the CDC found that 67 % of high school students and 49% of
middle school students who used tobacco products in the past 30 days reported using a
flavored tobacco product during that time.
According to the California Healthy Kids Survey, in the 2018-19 school year, 23% of
eleventh graders in our local school district, Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified, reported
using e-cigarettes on one or more days in the past month — an increase of 8% since
2013-14, and usage increased from 6% of ninth graders in 2013-14 to 11% in 2018-19.
A-1
Senator Jerry Hill
August 4, 2020
Page 2
With the recent surge in youth tobacco usage and associated public health risks,
California needs to take action. While the FDA recently announced a partial ban on
certain flavored electronic cigarette products, its action does not go far enough to
protect the health and safety of California children and youth by making dangerous
exemptions.
For these reasons, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes supports SB 793.
Sincerely,
John Cruikshank
Mayor
cc: Assemblymember Jim Wood, Chair, Health Committee
Ben Allen, Senator, 26th State Senate District
Al Muratsuchi, Assembly Member, 66th Assembly District
Jeff Kiernan, League of California Cities
Meg Desmond, League of California Cities
Marcel Rodarte, California Contract Cities Association
Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
Ara Mihranian, City Manager
Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager
A-2
Page 1 of 4
SB 793 – Protecting Youth from Flavored E-Cigarettes and Tobacco Products
IN BRIEF
SB 793 will prohibit the retail sale of flavored tobacco
products – including flavored electronic cigarettes – to
address an unprecedented surge in youth nicotine
consumption.
SURGE IN YOUTH TOBACCO USE
Citing an alarming rise in e-cigarette use among youth
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
released a report in November 2018 showing that more
than 3.6 million middle and high school students are
using e-cigarettes. This is an increase of 1.5 million
compared to 2017 and almost 13 times higher than the
number of youth using e-cigarettes in 2011.1
The stunning growth between 2017 and 2018 amounted
to a 78 percent increase in e-cigarette use by high school
students and a 48 percent increase by middle school
students. By 2018, 1 in 5 high school students were
using e-cigarettes and 1 in 20 middle school students
were doing the same.2 The year-over-year spike in e-
cigarette use also drove up use of tobacco products
overall to almost 4.9 million students in 2018, erasing
decades of declining youth tobacco use.3
The disturbing rates of teen e-cigarette use continued to
rise in 2019 with the overwhelming majority of youth
citing use of popular fruit and menthol or mint flavors.4
According to data released by FDA and CDC, there are
now 5.3 million young Americans who vape regularly,
an increase of 1.7 million youth compared to 2018.5
Image Source: FDA - 2019 National Youth Tobacco Survey
HEALTH IMPACTS
Flavored tobacco products are a gateway to harder
nicotine use. 80 percent of young people who have ever
used tobacco started with a flavored product.6 Flavored
cigarettes, except for menthol, are banned under Federal
Law, but these rules do not apply to other tobacco
products like e-cigarettes, cigars, and cigarillos. As a
result, a variety of flavored tobacco products like cotton
candy, bubble gum, and mango are widely available.
These products often mimic popular candies, drinks, or
snacks in both packaging and flavor, making them
particularly appealing to youth.
Candy or Tobacco?
Image Source: Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
Flavors mask the naturally harsh taste of tobacco,
making these products easier to use and more appealing
to youth. 7 Not only are flavored tobacco products more
appealing, but the presence of flavors in tobacco
products like menthol make it more difficult for users to
quit.8
Prohibiting the sale of flavored products, including
menthol, is also a social justice issue. Targeted
marketing to communities of color, low income
communities, and LGBTQ communities adds to the
health disparities in populations already impacted by
social inequities. African American neighborhoods
have disproportionately higher numbers of tobacco
retailers and tobacco marketing, particularly of menthol
products.9
Flavored e-cigarettes are falsely marketed as a “safe
tobacco alternative,” yet they pose a significant public
health risk, particularly to youth. One vape pod from
JUUL, a leading e-cigarette manufacturer, is equivalent
to the nicotine in 20 cigarettes.10 Exposure to nicotine
during adolescence can harm brain development and
predispose youth to future tobacco use.11
Senator Jerry Hill, 13th Senate District
B-1
Page 2 of 4
Image Source: Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
Kids who use e-cigarettes are more likely to begin
smoking traditional cigarettes as well as increase the
frequency and intensity of smoking and vaping.12
“These results bolster findings for vaping as a one-way
bridge to cigarette smoking among adolescents,” said
the authors of the study.13 “To the best of our
knowledge, the risk for future cigarette smoking is
currently one of the strongest, scientific-based
rationales for restricting youth access to e-cigarettes.”14
“These results bolster findings for vaping
as a one-way bridge to cigarette smoking
among adolescents.” - Richard Miech,
MPH, PhD, University of Michigan
A growing body of evidence suggests that teens are
more likely to use flavored e-cigarettes than adults. One
model even found that for every adult who quits
smoking using e-cigarettes, 80 additional youth initiate
daily tobacco use through e-cigarettes.15
The American College of Cardiology found that
compared with nonusers, e-cigarette users were 56
percent more likely to have a heart attack and 30 percent
more likely to suffer a stroke. E-cigarette users were
also twice as likely to suffer from depression, anxiety,
and other emotional problems.16 The first long-term
study on the health effects of using e-cigarettes found
that they significantly increase the risk of developing
chronic lung disease.17
Image Source: Parents Against Vaping E-Cigarettes
CURRENT LAW __
Flavored cigarettes, except for menthol, are banned
under Federal Law, but these rules do not apply to other
tobacco products.
In 2016, California enacted the Stop Tobacco Access to
Kids Enforcement Act, which regulates e-cigarettes in
the same manner as other tobacco products and
prohibits the sale of any tobacco products to a person
under 21 years of age.
On January 2, 2020 the FDA announced a plan to
restrict the sale of flavored cartridge-based e-cigarettes.
Unfortunately, The Trump Administration’s policy
exempts all menthol and tobacco flavored e-cigarettes
and only restricts flavors in some cartridge-based e-
cigarettes, leaving flavored e-liquids in every
imaginable flavor widely available.
While there is no state law restricting the sale of
flavored tobacco products, nearly 80 California local
governments have taken action to restrict youth access
to flavored tobacco products.
THE SOLUTION
Under SB 793, retail stores and vending machines in
California would be prohibited from selling flavored
tobacco products. The legislation covers flavored e-
cigarettes, e-hookahs, e-pipes, and other vaping devices
as well as flavored smokable and nonsmokable tobacco
products, such as cigars, cigarillos, pipe tobacco,
chewing tobacco, snuff, and tobacco edibles.
SB 793 would also prohibit the sale of “flavor
enhancer,” e-liquids sold separately from e-cigarettes to
enhance or add candy, fruit, menthol, or other flavors.
Flavor enhancers are used to make DIY vape juices and
undermine local and federal tobacco control policies.
Tobacco retailers that violate the law would face a civil
penalty of $250 per violation.
SB 793 creates a threshold for restrictions and
prohibitions regarding tobacco product sales and would
not prevent local jurisdictions from taking further steps.
B-2
Page 3 of 4
SUPPORT
Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis
(Cosponsor)
American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network
(Cosponsor)
American Heart Association (Cosponsor)
American Lung Association (Cosponsor)
Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (Cosponsor)
Common Sense (Cosponsor)
State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tony
Thurmond
African American Tobacco Control Leadership
Council
African Communities Public Health Coalition
American Academy of Pediatrics, California
Chapter
American College of Cardiology, California
Chapter
Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights
Anti-Vaping Alliance
Association of California Healthcare Districts
Association of California School Administrators
Association of Northern California Oncologists
Black Arts Los Angeles, Inc
Black Caucus of Health Workers
Breast Cancer Prevention Partners
BREATHE California of Los Angeles County
BREATHE California, Sacramento Region
Butte County Department of Public Health
California Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry
California Academy of Family Physicians
California Academy of Preventive Medicine
California Alliance of Boys and Girls Clubs
California Alliance of YMCAs
California Black Health Network
California Children’s Hospital Association
California Dental Association
California Emergency Nurses Association
California Medical Association
California Optometric Association
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
California School Boards Association
California School-Based Health Alliance
California Society of Addiction Medicine
California State Parent Teacher Association
CALPIRG
Change for Justice
City of Alameda
City of Berkeley
City of Beverly Hills
City of Encinitas
City of Oakland
City of Orinda
City of Palo Alto
City of San Jose
City of San Leandro
City of San Pablo
Community Action Service Advocacy
Coastal Communities Drug Free Coalition
County Health Executives Association of
California
County of Alameda
County of Contra Costa
County of Lake Health Services Department
County of Los Angeles
County of San Bernardino
County of San Diego
County of San Mateo
County of Santa Clara
County of Solano
CVS Health
Cynthia Perry Ray Foundation
Emphysema Foundation of America
Equality California
First 5 Association of California
Flavors Addict Kids – Livermore
The G.R.E.E.N. Foundation
Green Technical Education and Employment
Health Access
Health Officers Association of California
International Youth Tobacco Control
Kaiser Permanente
L.A. Families Fighting Flavored Tobacco
Latino Coalition for a Health California
Los Angeles Unified School District
Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford
Medical Oncology Association of Southern
California
Parents Against Teens Vaping E-Cigarettes
(PAVE)
Providence St. Joseph Health
Public Health Advocates
Public Health Institute
Redwood City
San Bernardino County District Advocates for
Better Schools
San Diego Unified School District
B-3
Page 4 of 4
San Francisco Bay Area Pediatric Nurse
Practitioner Association
San Marcos Prevention Coalition
San Mateo County Office of Education
Santa Cruz County Tobacco Education Coalition
Sierra Club
Siskiyou County Public Health
Thirdhand Smoke Research Center
Tobacco Education and Research Oversight
Committee
USC Health, Emotion, and Addiction Laboratory
Vista Community Clinic
Wellness & Prevention Center
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Jano Dekermenjian
916-651-4013
Jano.Dekermenjian@sen.ca.gov
1 Cullen KA, Ambrose BK, Gentzke AS, Apelberg BJ, Jamal A, King BA. Notes from the Field: Use of Electronic Cigarettes and Any
Tobacco Product Among Middle and High School Students — United States, 2011–2018. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018;67:1276–
1277. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6745a5
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
4 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Press Release. “Trump Administration Combating Epidemic of Youth E -Cigarette Use
with Plan to Clear Market of Unauthorized, Non -Tobacco-Flavored E-Cigarette Products.” 11 Sep 2019.
https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2019/09/11/trump-administration-combating-epidemic-youth-ecigarette-use-plan-clear-market.html
5 Cullen KA, Gentzke AS, Sawdey MD, et al. e -Cigarette Use Among Youth in the United States, 2019. JAMA. Published online November
05, 2019. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.18387
6 California Department of Public Health. The Truth about Flavored Tobacco Info Graphic.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/CDPH%20Document%20Library/Policy/FlavoredTobaccoAndMenthol/FinalFl
avoredTobaccoInfographic.pdf.
7 King, B. A., et al. “Flavored Cigar Smoking Among U.S. Adults: Findings From the 2009 -2010 National Adult Tobacco Survey.” Nicotine
& Tobacco Research, vol. 15, no. 2, 2012, pp. 608–614., doi:10.1093/ntr/nts178.
8 Delnevo, Cristine D, et al. “Smoking-Cessation Prevalence Among U.S. Smokers of Menthol Versus Non-Menthol Cigarettes.” American
Journal of Preventative Medicine, vol. 41, no. 4, Oct. 2011, pp. 357–365.,
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379711004624?via=ihub.
9 Lee, Joseph G. L., et al. “A Systematic Review of Neighborhood Disparities in Point -of-Sale Tobacco Marketing.” American Journal of
Public Health, vol. 105, no. 9, Sept. 2015, doi:10.2105/ajph.2015.302777.
10 Truth Initiative. “6 Important Facts about JUUL.” Truth Initiative, Truth Initiative, 29 Aug. 2018, truthinitiative.org/news/6-important-
facts-about-juul.
11 Goriounova, N. A., and H. D. Mansvelder. “Short - and Long-Term Consequences of Nicotine Exposure during Adolescence for Prefrontal
Cortex Neuronal Network Function.” Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine, vol. 2, no. 12, 2012, doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a012120.
12 Miech, Richard, et al. “E-Cigarette Use as a Predictor of Cigarette Smoking: Results from a 1-Year Follow-up of a National Sample of 12th
Grade Students.” Tobacco Control, vol. 26, no. e2, Jun. 2017, doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053291.
13 Ibid.
14 Ibid.
15 Soneji, Samir S., et al. “Quantifying Pop ulation-Level Health Benefits and Harms of e-Cigarette Use in the United States.” Plos One, vol.
13, no. 3, 2018, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0193328.
16 “E-Cigarettes Linked to Heart Attacks, Coronary Artery Disease and Depression.” 7 Mar. 2019, www.acc.org/about -acc/press-
releases/2019/03/07/10/03/ecigarettes-linked-to-heart-attacks-coronary-artery-disease-and-depression.
17 Bhatta, Dharma N., and Stanton A. Glantz. “Association of E-Cigarette Use With Respiratory Disease Among Adults: A Longitudinal
Analysis.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2019, doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2019.07.028.
B-4
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 27, 2020
AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 18, 2020
AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 5, 2020
SENATE BILL No. 793
Introduced by Senators Hill, Glazer, McGuire, Pan, Skinner, and
Wiener
(Principal coauthor: Senator Durazo)
(Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Bauer-Kahan, Berman, Bloom,
Gonzalez, McCarty, Muratsuchi, Robert Rivas, and Wood)
(Coauthors: Senators Allen, Archuleta, Beall, Caballero, Dodd,
Lena Gonzalez, Hertzberg, Jackson, Leyva, Monning, Nielsen,
Portantino, and Rubio)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Boerner Horvath, Bonta, Chiu, Chu,
Cooley, Frazier, Cristina Garcia, Holden, Levine, Limón, Low, Mullin,
O’Donnell, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Luz Rivas, Blanca Rubio,
Santiago, Mark Stone, Ting, and Wicks)
January 6, 2020
An act to add Article 5 (commencing with Section 104559.5) to
Chapter 1 of Part 3 of Division 103 of the Health and Safety Code,
relating to tobacco products.
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 793, as amended, Hill. Flavored tobacco products.
Existing law, the Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement (STAKE)
Act, prohibits a person from selling or otherwise furnishing tobacco
products, as defined, to a person under 21 years of age. Existing law
also prohibits the use of tobacco products in county offices of education,
96 C-1
on charter school or school district property, or near a playground or
youth sports event, as specified.
This bill would prohibit a tobacco retailer, or any of the tobacco
retailer’s agents or employees, from selling, offering for sale, or
possessing with the intent to sell or offer for sale, a flavored tobacco
product or a tobacco product flavor enhancer, as those terms are defined,
except as specified. The bill would make a violation of this prohibition
an infraction punishable by a fine of $250 for each violation. The bill
would state the intent of the Legislature that these provisions not be
construed to preempt or prohibit the adoption and implementation of
local ordinances related to the prohibition on the sale of flavored tobacco
products. The bill would state that its provisions are severable. By
creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local
program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.
Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act
for a specified reason.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
line 1 SECTION 1. Article 5 (commencing with Section 104559.5)
line 2 is added to Chapter 1 of Part 3 of Division 103 of the Health and
line 3 Safety Code, to read:
line 4
line 5 Article 5. Tobacco Sale Prohibition
line 6
line 7 104559.5. (a) For purposes of this section, the following
line 8 definitions apply:
line 9 (1) “Characterizing flavor” means a distinguishable taste or
line 10 aroma, or both, other than the taste or aroma of tobacco, imparted
line 11 by a tobacco product or any byproduct produced by the tobacco
line 12 product. Characterizing flavors include, but are not limited to,
line 13 tastes or aromas relating to any fruit, chocolate, vanilla, honey,
line 14 candy, cocoa, dessert, alcoholic beverage, menthol, mint,
line 15 wintergreen, herb, or spice. A tobacco product shall not be
line 16 determined to have a characterizing flavor solely because of the
96
— 2 — SB 793 C-2
line 1 use of additives or flavorings or the provision of ingredient
line 2 information. Rather, it is the presence of a distinguishable taste or
line 3 aroma, or both, as described in the first sentence of this definition,
line 4 that constitutes a characterizing flavor.
line 5 (2) “Constituent” means any ingredient, substance, chemical,
line 6 or compound, other than tobacco, water, or reconstituted tobacco
line 7 sheet, that is added by the manufacturer to a tobacco product during
line 8 the processing, manufacture, or packing of the tobacco product.
line 9 (3) “Flavored shisha tobacco product” means any shisha tobacco
line 10 product that contains a constituent that imparts a characterizing
line 11 flavor.
line 12 (4) “Flavored tobacco product” means any tobacco product that
line 13 contains a constituent that imparts a characterizing flavor.
line 14 (5) “Hookah” means a type of waterpipe, used to smoke shisha
line 15 or other tobacco products, with a long flexible tube for drawing
line 16 aerosol through water. Components of a hookah may include heads,
line 17 stems, bowls, and hoses.
line 18 (6) “Hookah tobacco retailer” means a tobacco retailer that is
line 19 engaged in the retail sale of shisha tobacco products, hookah, and
line 20 hookah smoking accessories.
line 21 (7) “Labeling” means written, printed, pictorial, or graphic
line 22 matter upon a tobacco product or any of its packaging.
line 23 (8) “Packaging” means a pack, box, carton, or container of any
line 24 kind, or, if no other container, any wrapping, including cellophane,
line 25 in which a tobacco product is sold or offered for sale to a consumer.
line 26 (9) “Retail location” means both of the following:
line 27 (A) A building from which tobacco products are sold at retail.
line 28 (B) A vending machine.
line 29 (10) “Sale” or “sold” means a sale as that term is defined in
line 30 Section 30006 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
line 31 (11) “Shisha tobacco product” means a tobacco product smoked
line 32 or intended to be smoked in a hookah. “Shisha tobacco product”
line 33 includes, and may be referred to as, hookah tobacco, waterpipe
line 34 tobacco, maassel, narghile, and argileh. “Shisha tobacco product”
line 35 does not include any electronic devices, such as an electronic
line 36 hookah, electronic cigarette, or electronic tobacco product.
line 37 (12) “Tobacco product” means a tobacco product as defined in
line 38 paragraph (8) of subdivision (a) of Section 104495, as that
line 39 provision may be amended from time to time.
96
SB 793 — 3 — C-3
line 1 (13) “Tobacco product flavor enhancer” means a product
line 2 designed, manufactured, produced, marketed, or sold to produce
line 3 a characterizing flavor when added to a tobacco product.
line 4 (14) “Tobacco retailer” means a person who engages in this
line 5 state in the sale of tobacco products directly to the public from a
line 6 retail location. “Tobacco retailer” includes a person who operates
line 7 vending machines from which tobacco products are sold in this
line 8 state.
line 9 (b) (1) A tobacco retailer, or any of the tobacco retailer’s agents
line 10 or employees, shall not sell, offer for sale, or possess with the
line 11 intent to sell or offer for sale, a flavored tobacco product or a
line 12 tobacco product flavor enhancer.
line 13 (2) There shall be a rebuttable presumption that a tobacco
line 14 product is a flavored tobacco product if a manufacturer or any of
line 15 the manufacturer’s agents or employees, in the course of their
line 16 agency or employment, has made a statement or claim directed to
line 17 consumers or to the public that the tobacco product has or produces
line 18 a characterizing flavor, including, but not limited to, text, color,
line 19 images, or all, on the product’s labeling or packaging that are used
line 20 to explicitly or implicitly communicate that the tobacco product
line 21 has a characterizing flavor.
line 22 (c) Subdivision (b) shall not apply to the sale of flavored shisha
line 23 tobacco products by a hookah tobacco retailer if all of the following
line 24 conditions are met:
line 25 (1) The hookah tobacco retailer has a valid license to sell
line 26 tobacco products issued pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with
line 27 Section 22971.7) of Division 8.6 of the Business and Professions
line 28 Code.
line 29 (2) The hookah tobacco retailer does not permit any person
line 30 under 21 years of age to be present or enter the premises at any
line 31 time.
line 32 (3) The hookah tobacco retailer shall operate in accordance with
line 33 all relevant state and local laws relating to the sale of tobacco
line 34 products.
line 35 (4) If consumption of tobacco products is allowed on the
line 36 premises of the hookah tobacco retailer, the hookah tobacco retailer
line 37 shall operate in accordance with all state and local laws relating
line 38 to the consumption of tobacco products on the premises of a
line 39 tobacco retailer, including, but not limited to, Section 6404.5 of
line 40 the Labor Code.
96
— 4 — SB 793 C-4
line 1 (d) A tobacco retailer, or agent or employee of a tobacco retailer,
line 2 who violates this section is guilty of an infraction and shall be
line 3 punished by a fine of two hundred fifty dollars ($250) for each
line 4 violation of this section.
line 5 (e) This section does not preempt or otherwise prohibit the
line 6 adoption of a local standard that imposes greater restrictions on
line 7 the access to tobacco products than the restrictions imposed by
line 8 this section. To the extent that there is an inconsistency between
line 9 this section and a local standard that imposes greater restrictions
line 10 on the access to tobacco products, the greater restriction on the
line 11 access to tobacco products in the local standard shall prevail.
line 12 SEC. 2. The provisions of this act are severable. If any
line 13 provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity
line 14 shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given
line 15 effect without the invalid provision or application.
line 16 SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
line 17 Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because
line 18 the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
line 19 district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or
line 20 infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty
line 21 for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of
line 22 the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within
line 23 the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California
line 24 Constitution.
O
96
SB 793 — 5 — C-5
Follow Steps 1-5 below to
select the categories to be
displayed on the charts.
Step 1:
Choose District or State
Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified
Step 2:
Choose Domain
Substance Use and Mental Health
Step 3:
Choose Measure
Current electronic cigarette use
Step 4:
Choose Student Characteristic
All Students
Afterschool Participation
English Language Proficiency
Free/Reduced-price Meal Eligi..
Gender
Gender Identity
Living Situation
Parent/Guardian Military Stat..
Parental Education
Race/Ethnicity
Sexual Orientation
Step 5:
Select the Most Recent view or
the Trends Over Time view by
clicking on the corresponding
tab in the upper left corner of
the dashboard.
'14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
All Students
2%1%1%2%
'14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
9%9%
6%
11%
'14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
22%
15%
23%
14%
'14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
50%
Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified | Trends Over Time
Current electronic cigarette use | One or more days in the past 30 days
Results based on: All Students
Grade 7 Grade 9 Grade 11 Non. Trad.
D-1