On Tuesday, March 29th, The Del Norte County Board of Supervisors and Crescent City Council met to discuss the proposal of a county-wide TRL (tobacco retail license) over a joint meeting. This TRL would authorize that any and all flavored vape products be controlled more heavily than what the current county policies state. This could mean anything from controlling which stores can sell them all the way to a complete ban.
This meeting arose following both the City Council and County Board of Supervisors’ separate meetings with the youth group STORM (Standing Together and Overcoming Addiction with a Radical Movement). STORM wanted to discuss implementing a TRL because of the growing number of youth who’ve begun to use these products solely due to their enticing flavors. The City Council and Board of Supervisors decided during these past meetings that it would be better if they collaborated on ways to apply the TRL and tackle the youth vaping issue, instead of approaching them as separate governmental organizations.
There was a long discussion during the March 29th meeting concerning the impact a TRL would have on our community. They considered whether or not it would be effective, whether it should be the government’s responsibility to keep its youth safe, if it would be worth the costs, etc. The only members who seemed to be in favor of the TRL were City Council member Blake Inscore and Board of Supervisor member Valerie Starkey.
“Well I’ll just say that I started as a probation officer with the county in 1986, and when I started there, they still allowed you to smoke at your desk. So we would be there, and then all the studies came in about how harmful secondhand smoke was, and so people took action and we stopped secondhand smoke in that confined area.[…] I feel it’s just our modern day debate on what we’re going to do to protect those around us. So for me, I understand it is a government overreach and I’m not for that. However, we have to look at what we’re going to do for our community, and that message that our community wants to send is that we value our youth, we protect our youth, and we are going to do everything that we can from this position to keep the vapes and the flavored tobacco and nicotine away from our youth. That’s the message that, personally, I want to be sending to our community. Are they going to get it? That’s another problem for another day. Does the school have to come up with some more enforcement? That’s another problem for another day. Here today we’re talking about: What can we do as the policy makers in this community to minimize it and limit it? And that’s why I’m supporting the tobacco retail license.” said Starkey, when explaining her support for the TRL.
Inscore, when talking about the meeting, said, “One of the interesting things to me is how often the concept of government overreach is tossed around and yet we’ve all lived through that and we live in that every day. Well, the bottom line is lots of us thought that with car seats or anything else. What are the going to do next? Are they going to tell us that we can’t take our kids with us in the car at all? And I just think that we need to have enough confidence in our local elected officials to not say: What’s next? I mean honestly, to imply that those of who are trying to represent this community that somehow we’re in this to try and make your lives worse, or that we want to regulate everything, or we want to take away all your rights, I find that personally very offensive. That that’s what people would think my goal is. My goal is to try and represent this community the best I can, keep people safe the best I can, and I’ve tried to do that during my tenure, and I think that this is an important issue. I’ll standby what I said before, I support a TRL, limited, and I support consistency between city and county. I think that is absolutely crucial. It needs to be the exact same ordinance. And I implore us, as policy makers to come to a place where we can find what we can do together as opposed to battling with whether or not we should do anything.”
All the other members were against the proposed TRL for several different reasons. Councilmember Beau Smith opposed the TRL, saying, ”Its nice to see that teenagers haven’t changed much since I was a teenager. We do dumb stuff, and then Valerie said something about what can we do right here right now, so I got into a conversation with my wife last night about our daughters, and what I can do right here right now is trust my daughters to make the right choice. Trust that the youth are going to make the right choice and not the wrong choices. I do think we need more education in the schools. As far as the Tobacco Retail License, I know kids are doing it everywhere and its going to happen and they’ll make dumb choices. I do think we’re stretching a bit on this, I don’t see an end to this. If we’re going to do this, it doesn’t stop. It just keeps going. I’m responsible for my daughter, your parents are responsible for you guys. Let me be responsible for my kid.”
Mayor Greenough, who also opposed the TRL, stated, “I understand that this is a big issue, and I care about our kids, and I don’t what them to smoke. I’m not a smoker but there are also other issues in our community and in our country that have to be taken into consideration, and it’s a very complex issue. It’s not a simple issue, and we’ve been talking about this for quite some time, and it seems we haven’t come to consensus. There are always more questions and that’s helping too. In order to fix a problem, you have to have clarity of what that problem is and hammer that down. Bringing it back to what we’re discussing with this TRL, I really don’t like the model. There’s already structure in place at the state and federal level. I really believe that we on the local level need to enforce federal and state law the best we can, in that sense I believe we really need to try to look at our business licensing and see where we can maybe enhance our authority in that. If a business decides that they’re not going to follow state or federal law, they shouldn’t be allowed to do business. I think there should be, both in the city and in the county, the ability to say, sorry If you’re not following state or federal law, you’re out. so I kinda want to go more in that direction instead of a Tobacco Retail License.”
One alternative that was brought up by some of the members was to require increased enforcement of state laws, rather than creating the same laws locally, such as having our local officers do a certain number of annual checkups on local businesses. Chief Griffin had some concerns on how that would be done, stating, “[…] Just keep us involved in the conversation for that because one enforcement operation, because if we’re doing it at the county, You’re talking 4 deputies. Where are you taking those deputies from right now when we’re having staffing issues that the active sheriff talks about not even doing our service because they’re down? You put that one extra 4 hour shift on somebody, now you shift their schedule, and they’re not getting enough sleep. That’s extra stress and everything. There is realities to that. We’re not opposed to by any means. At all. On our end we do have that grant position that is more focused to the schools, its going to be a reality, its going to also include tobacco enforcement. It’ll give an extra tool on our tool belt, once we can use it, when its reported. […] Our school resource officer spends, what, two hours a day dealing with the mental health subject at Crescent Elk. That takes them out for at least, minimum dealing with the call, an hour. Then you have to write the paperwork. Then you have to do a report. […] Please just keep that in mind, that’s all I’m asking you. We are tasked a lot with everything we’re doing already. Funding is one thing, but what are we going to do. I would encourage the city council look at a full time uniform code enforcement officer at this point, between the marijuana and between anything else, if your expectation is to go above and beyond what’s going on with enforcement because the reality is, I’ve got guys and girls that are 10,12 reports down, then I have to say, hey, go enforce the tobacco.”
Our elected officials weren’t the only ones with opinions and propositions about the proposed TRL. Community members also spoke up, including members of storm as well as leaders in local business and politics. During the public comment section of this meeting, one member of STORM, Sriya Joshi, brought her experiences up to the board and council, saying, “So I think an important point to make that has been brought up is that, students aren’t just vaping in schools, there has been some initiative taking place, and there’s been times I’ve went to the bathrooms and there’s sometimes hall monitors in there, so it has become less of a problem at the school, but the thing is that students are still vaping because it’s an addiction. […] They’re doing it in their cars, there doing it with their friends, they’re posting on social media. Like I said before, its an addiction, so stopping it at the school is not going to stop the problem. Another important point to make is how the education method isn’t working. Students know its bad for them but they don’t really care if they think ahead about how it’s going to impact their future. Teachers also don’t have the time or curriculum to properly educate students on vaping. They, quite frankly, have more important things to do, y’know they’re teachers. As youth we’re told all the time that things are bad for us. Cellphones are bad, sugar is bad, energy drinks are bad, all these things are bad yet everyone is still using them, and they’re advertised everywhere. Its been a problem for a long time and if simply educating youth on how bad it is was the answer, this wouldn’t be a problem anymore. More needs to be done. Why let students jeopardize their health and get addicted to these products by allowing them to stay on the market, especially when so many kids are vaping and starting to vape at younger ages. We’re asking you to help us. We think the most effective thing to do would be to get rid of flavors altogether. we hope that our voices and experiences can influence each of you to do what is right for us and the community.”
David Gearheart is the owner of High Tide Vapes in Crescent City, and he is willing to support an end to youth purchasing tobacco products. “Another thing, A Tobacco Retail License, I already have one. It is enforced by, I’m assuming grants have gone out to DNSO because they’ve been in my store several times. Sherriff Apperson congratulated my store at a public meeting, that we have passed every time they have sent someone in, they didn’t even make it as far as inside the door before they were asked for their ID. That’s how strong we believe. I agree with the Tobacco Free Del Norte, all the people like that, not one child should have nicotine, not one child should have a vape product. I’m in total agreement and I own a vape store. the reason I’m in agreement with that is because I started smoking when young, as a child, and I smoked for 41 years, so I don’t want kids having it either. I’ll tell you right now, we don’t sell to kids, we are adamant about it. I know every law related to vaping because I want to make sure that we are following the law. So anything I can do to help, I’m there for you guys.”
Karen Sanders, the leader of the Del Norte Republican Party made some outlandish claims, as she tried to turn a matter of youth safety into a partisan issue. “So first of all I just want everyone to know I’m 100% against tobacco. I grew up in a home where both my parents smoked and I had nothing to do with it, but this is a slippery slope. What’s next? This is government overreach. Did you know that right now the state is trying to ram through 9 bills that are legislating mandating the vaccine for public health. That is an overreach, that is authoritarianism. What’s next? Is this ordinance or license a form of mandated reverse, this is regulating business. In a sense I think this is, they’re being used in a sense because this law is actually for businesses and not for the high school. Why is this only about tobacco, why isn’t it about weed, or cannabis, or marijuana. Instead of putting this on the backs of business and using the long arm overreach of government, why not enforce what’s on the books. I know we had a lot of discussions on that. If the problem is at the high school, and by the way they’re all minors right, why not enforce what’s there at the school, or has authority been lost to enforce the rules. The school needs to enforce, and at home it needs to be enforced. If its about a funding issue, let there be additional funding at the school level. Why not instruct and educate our youth about the ramifications of tobacco and vaping. Why not teach them to think for themselves. There are natural consequences the more we stifle our children from learning how to be responsible for their own actions, and the more this country say county, city, will be turning into a socialist, communist state. This is not going to be the only moral issue in their life they’ll have to figure out what to do and not to do. As Jerry said, we have laws on the books that we adhere to, why would this be any different.”
Project director at Norcal 4 Health, Amber weir, responded to this comment the next day in a zoom meeting with the Del Norte high school principal, saying, “The head of the republican party, when we talked about these issues, came up and used political language, and they need to get out of that, right? let’s talk about what the issue is, right here and not like, we’re becoming socialist society and you’re using our children as pawns, or whatever she said. I want to avoid politics on it and actually talk about the issue.”
Another public comment came from Robert Butler, who shares some of the same concerns of the city leaders regarding how funding a TRL might be a financial burden. He stated, “First of all, this shouldn’t be a burden on taxpayers, it should be a burden on the tobacco companies. Measure R is in doubt. It will probably be repealed, leaving a big void in our funding. So going with a big expensive program to maybe fix this, I don’t think is right. I can’t go to Walmart without being carded to buy a can of spray paint. Why can’t we have something like that in place for vaping products? Have we tried to, or looked at, raising the tax on vaping products in the county to put them out of reach? Or maybe generating some income to fight this? I just wonder what else we could do, but I don’t think costly regulation is going to be the answer.
Jay Mcubbrey, the director of tobacco-free north coast, says there has been high success with the implementation of TRL’s in other counties, and is willing to provide the resources for our city and county. “Without local control we are really stuck in the waters without any way to enforce local or state laws. SB 793 was brought up, it provides no local money for enforcement, and the stake act, and other statewide laws are focused on other issues like tax evasion and reducing illegal sales, but with very little enforcement resources. Through my project, Tobacco Free North Coast, and the work I do in California’s tobacco control program, I’ve worked with Morin county, Alameda county, all these jurisdictions have passed Tobacco Retail Licenses laws with no negative impact on businesses. Some businesses in alameda county for example, over 1,000 tobacco retailers, 17 of them specifically relied on sales of flavored tobacco products, they switched over to clothing, jewelry and continued to sell unflavored tobacco products. None of them went out of business. So we can be assured that these kinds of policies are not going to hurt people and I think you’ll find that most retailers are supportive of them. The idea of fees was brought up, and I want you to know that Tobacco Free North Coast, we’re funded for another 2 years. I live and work in Humboldt county but I work with the TUPP program, over 20 years on and off, and we have resourced to provide educational materials, to work with county and city systems to develop enforcement protocols and procedures and we can do all the initial education and outreach to merchants that would be required if and when the city and county decided to adopt policies with the minimum TRL requirements, Tobacco Retail Licensing that would be, each business requires an annual, non-transferable license, but they ban the sale of flavored tobacco, and that the annual license fee is enough to continue ongoing administration and enforcement, and if that’s the kinda policy you guys wanna work with, just the base, that’s good enough for us and we’ll be there to back you up with no cost to the city or the county.”
During this 3 hour meeting, the City Council and Board agreed that they must work together if they decide to continue to pursue the TRL and tackle the issue of youth vaping. But with the very little support the license had from the city council and county board of supervisors by the end of the meeting, it seems that hope is lost for those looking for a TRL.
When asked about her opinions on the meeting, Storm member Sinai Pena said, “It was very unproductive. The members of the board were unable to compromise with our several options for the tobacco retail license and it’s frustrating. We spent a lot of time researching and educating, so for them to not listen and switch the conversation towards different topics was also disappointing. Honestly, I think instead of spending their time looking at what was wrong with the license, they should’ve tried to accommodate it to what they deemed the best. This problem won’t be solved unless there’s something done, and relying on parenting alone hasn’t worked, and won’t ever work. It’s not government overreach. It is just a license that would help our youth and our community in general.”
On March 30th, the day following the joint meeting about the TRL, the Del Norte High School principal, Alison Eckhart, held a Zoom roundtable to discuss what policies the high school currently has in place and what could potentially be introduced in order to combat students’ vaping. Despite the invitation being sent out to all parents, very few people attended.
Eckart shared some of the policies the high school already has in place, including heavy monitoring of common vape locations. “We’ve heard that there’s vaping, and that kids won’t go to the bathroom because its so disgusting and they can’t breath. My trickle down effect is that students are now harming their body because they can’t go to a bathroom, or there’s 20 kids in the bathroom. Like, that’s real. What we try to do is randomly lock bathrooms during class periods and we don’t tell kids which one is open, and then we look for the group of kids that meet 10 after 10 in B hall, and we look and we try to do some searches, to be honest with you. That’s the other thing, we are searching kids. We have that ability, administrators, we have that right to search children because they’re here, and if we have reasonable suspicion, we have different legal abilities than officers do because we’re talking about the safety of children as opposed to looking for people breaking the law, we’re looking to protect kids. We need to do something, and again if you get caught, you throw it away, what then? That’s not the answer but its certainly a good start.”
Eckart also brought up some other ideas the high school is looking into as a possible solution. “What we could do is ask for support […] say, can we get grade level appropriate tobacco and anti-vaping lesson plans. Y’know we do it with a lot of other things, so why not? And that might be a really good push for this side of the house, here is the lesson planning and we definitely used to do it in the after school program. I know Amber and I kinda go way back there, with years of the after school programs, where a lot of that was dropped into, and if we can say as a community, its so much of an issue that we’re going to spend a week on it in our English, or Science, or Math, things like that. If we can say that’s what we want.
She also expressed her support for the TRL, and told her attendees how hard it’s been to tackle vaping at the high school. “The more we talk about it, y’know I’m very much behind amber and crystal’s, the TRL, the smoke free multi-housing that are happening in the county and the city, it feels a little more dire, I think here, because its a safety concern. The other thing we are talking about, and saying at my school, is saying, we don’t know the long term effects of vaping because its just so new, so these kids really don’t know the long term effects.”
After this, people in the meeting began to present ideas about what they think could be done about youth vaping as well as their personal experiences with it. One parent talked about how their own child had been a frequent vaper without them knowing. Amber Weir then shared how many parents deny that their child vapes, but in reality, it was just happening without their knowledge. “I have to say, I’ve had so many parents speak out and say their kid doesn’t do this and when I ask the kids [Storm members], does that kid do it? They’re like, Yeah. They do. Parents don’t know. Good parents don’t know. All parents. its coming together as a community to raise our kids. We need help to do this.”
When asked about whether or not STORM would continue to try to get a version of the TRL passed, Crystal Yang said that they would be pursuing a TRL. but they’ll take a step back for now and try to come up with another strategy as well as focus on educating the community.