When Palo Alto officials recently began contemplating a fine for minors who vape in public, Councilman Greg Tanaka called it a cutting-edge approach necessitated by the growth of youth vaping — a phenomenon public health officials are calling an epidemic.
Palo Alto would not be the first city to impose a fine for underage possession of tobacco products, which include e-cigarettes and regular cigarettes. But the approach is unusual and comes at a time when officials at virtually all levels of government are grappling with how to get teen vaping under control.
About 5.4 million high school and middle school students vaped regularly in 2019 — a sharp rise from 3.6 million in 2018 — and e-cigarettes are by far the most common tobacco product among teens, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The rise in teen vaping drove Congress in December to raise the legal age to buy tobacco from 18 to 21 years old (it has been 21 in California since 2016) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration this month to ban the sale of many sweet and fruit-flavored e-cigarettes. More than two dozen California cities have in the last few years outlawed the sale of flavored e-cigarettes, a major driver of youth vaping, with San Francisco, Livermore, Richmond and Palo Alto going even further by suspending the sale of all e-cigarettes, regardless of flavor.
The Palo Alto City Council is exploring a fine as part of other measures to curb youth vaping, and in December asked city staff to research the topic and compile a report this year. The council may review the report as early as next month, Tanaka said.
Since 2015, at least four California cities and Park Ridge, a suburb of Chicago, have passed or have begun weighing laws imposing fines for minors in possession of tobacco products. Most of the new laws, which call for noncriminal administrative fines ranging from $100 to $500, allow teens to attend a tobacco educational or diversion program instead of paying the fine. Some California cities began passing their measures after the state in 2016 repealed part of the state penal code that allowed police officers to cite minors in possession of tobacco. This was repealed as part of the 2016 California law that raised the legal age to buy tobacco from 18 to 21.
The Santa Clara City Council passed an ordinance last year prohibiting those under 21 from possessing tobacco products. Under the ordinance, people 18 to 21 may be issued an administrative citation and a $100 penalty. Those 17 or younger may be referred to an education and diversion program but would not receive a citation. The Santa Clara Police Department has yet to issue any citations since the measure went into effect last year, said Wahid Kazem, the department’s public information officer.
“It really is about education and hopefully convince them that not using these products is better for them,” he said. “There really is no significant hammer behind it. They meet with someone here that educates them on the impact of using tobacco products.”
Anti-tobacco advocates are generally critical of policies penalizing minors for vaping, saying the responsibility to keep the addictive products out of kids’ hands should fall on sellers. Community groups are also concerned that such ordinances could be used to stop or detain youths, especially people of color.
“We think policies that would re-criminalize the possession of tobacco for minors are a mistake,” said Tim Gibbs of the Cancer Action Network, the lobbying arm of the American Cancer Society. “We think the accountability needs to be with companies ... whose products essentially caused this e-cigarette epidemic among youths. Accountability should be with retailers and shouldn’t be placed at the foot of children.”
In the few cities that have passed such laws, though, virtually no fines have been paid by the youths who were cited.
In Park Ridge, which passed an ordinance in 2017 allowing for a $500 fine for underage vapers, officers issued 56 citations from September 2017 to November 2018. Of the 56 citations, 35 youths took an educational course, 16 cases were open, and five cases involved youths who did not take the course and were charged the fine. All five were unpaid as of late 2018, the Chicago Tribune reported, citing a Police Department report. The department did not provide more recent data.
Pleasanton adopted an ordinance in 2015 prohibiting underage possession of tobacco and a $100 fine for the first offense because young people over 18 were buying tobacco products and giving them to their underage friends in the parking lots of local stores, and police officers wanted a way to confiscate the products, said Pleasanton City Attorney Larissa Seto. But the city has yet to issue any citations or fines. Because the ordinance went into effect before the state raised the age to buy tobacco to 21, the city is now considering amending the ordinance to reflect the new legal age.
Last year, Auburn (Placer County) passed an ordinance that went into effect Jan. 1, prohibiting underage possession of tobacco. Youths who are cited can go to an educational program to waive the $100 fine. It also allows law enforcement to confiscate tobacco products and devices from youths.
“We didn’t map this as a punitive goal,” said Auburn Police Chief Ryan Kinnan. “There’s no other intention than if we can stop these kids’ behaviors when they’re young and impressionable, we have a better chance of having a positive impact in their life.”
Catherine Ho is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: cho@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @Cat_Ho
"fine" - Google News
January 04, 2020 at 07:00PM
https://ift.tt/35pSUKM
A fine on kids who vape? Some California cities want it - San Francisco Chronicle
"fine" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2NyjnPq
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
No comments:
Post a Comment