San Francisco, California, Proposition E, Ban on the Sale of Flavored Tobacco (June 2018)
| Proposition E: San Francisco Ban on the Sale of Flavored Tobacco |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| June 5, 2018 |
| Status: |
 Approved
|
| Topic: |
| Local tobacco |
| Related articles |
| Local tobacco on the ballot June 5, 2018 ballot measures in California San Francisco County, California ballot measures Local business regulation on the ballot |
| See also |
| San Francisco, California |
A measure to ban the sale of flavored tobacco was on the ballot for San Francisco voters in San Francisco County, California, on June 5, 2018. It was approved.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of prohibiting local tobacco retailers from selling flavored tobacco products. |
| A no vote was a vote against prohibiting local tobacco retailers from selling flavored tobacco products. |
Election results
|
San Francisco Proposition E |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
164,844 | 68.39% | ||
| No | 76,193 | 31.61% | ||
-
- Results are officially certified.
- Source
Measure design
Proposition E defined a flavored tobacco product as any product that a manufacturer or a related entity has stated "has or produces a Characterizing Flavor, including, but not limited to: text, color, and/or images on the product's Labeling or Packaging that are used to explicitly or implicitly communicate that the Tobacco Product has a Characterizing Flavor."[1] Proposition E was designed to amend the health code to ban the sale and distribution of such products.
Under Proposition E, violations of the ban would result in the suspension of tobacco sales permits, a notice of correction, or a notice of determination.
According to the San Francisco Health Code, a tobacco sales permit suspension may last up to 90 days for a first violation, up to six months for a second violation, or up to a year for a third violation.[2]
A notice of correction "shall state that the Department has determined that a violation may have occurred and that reasonable grounds exist to support this determination. The notice may require corrective action immediately or upon a schedule required by the Director. The Director may require the Permittee to post the notice of correction at the location where the Department alleges that violations have occurred."[2]
According to the health code, a notice of initial determination "may require that all tobacco sales cease."[3]
Text of measure
Ballot question
The ballot question was as follows:[1]
| “ |
Ordinance amending the Health Code to prohibit tobacco retailers from selling flavored tobacco products, including menthol cigarettes.[4] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The following impartial analysis of the measure was prepared by the office of the San Francisco Controller:
| “ |
Should the proposed referendum be approved by the voters, in my opinion, it would have an unknown impact on the cost of government. In 2017 the Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the Health Code to ban the sale of flavored tobacco products in the City. If the referendum is approved, that ban will take effect in 2018. A ban on flavored tobacco products in the City can be expected to reduce somewhat the use of tobacco in San Francisco, cause some users to switch to tobacco products not affected by the ban, and cause some users to buy tobacco products at other retailers outside the City. Because of these effects, the City may experience a loss of sales tax revenue from tobacco retailers. At the same time, the City may experience long-term and short-term decreases in the cost of public health, litter control and other public services affected by smoking and by uses of flavored tobacco products. [4] |
” |
| —San Francisco Controller[5] | ||
Full text
The full text of the measure is available here.
Support
Supporters
San Francisco Kids vs. Big Tobacco led the campaign in favor of Proposition E. The group described itself on its website as "a coalition of doctors, parents, and community groups protecting youth from flavored tobacco products and addiction, sponsored by nonprofit health organizations." The group made the following statement on its website:[6]
| “ |
In June 2017, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors made a trailblazing, unanimous, decision to ban the sale of candy-flavored tobacco products in the city. Many local, statewide and national organizations supported this legislation, but the tobacco industry, fearing a loss of economic profit is trying to overthrow our power to decide what’s right for our community. Don’t let Big Tobacco reverse a landmark and unanimous vote by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Vote YES on Prop E on the upcoming June 2018 ballot.[4] |
” |
| —San Francisco Kids vs. Big Tobacco | ||
The San Francisco Chronicle Editorial Board published an editorial in favor of Proposition E on April 6, 2018. The board made the following statement in the editorial about the flavored tobacco products targeted under Proposition E:[7]
| “ |
Most of the targeted products serve mainly to increase the appeal, particularly among young people and minorities, of a highly addictive substance delivered in a dangerous way.[4] |
” |
| —San Francisco Chronicle Editorial Board | ||
Campaign finance
San Francisco Kids vs. Big Tobacco reported $2,253,809 in contributions and $1,880,755 in expenditures for its campaign as of June 4, 2018. The committee noted that it was sponsored by nonprofit health organizations.[8]
Yes on Proposition E Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund reported $1,976,490 in contributions and $1,976,490 in expenditures for its campaign in favor of the proposition.[8]
Opposition
Opponents
No on Prop E – Stop the Prohibition Proposition led the campaign in opposition to Proposition E. The group described itself on its website as "a coalition of concerned citizens supporting freedom of choice, adult consumers, harm reduction advocates, community leaders, and neighborhood small businesses."[9]
The group stated the following on its website:[9]
| “ |
We OPPOSE Proposition E, City Hall’s ban on the sale on menthol cigarettes, hookah tobacco, most vaping liquids and all other tobacco products they deem to contain a characterizing flavor. Because…Let’s Be Real! Bans and prohibitions just don’t work! Not during Prohibition, not during the failed War on Drugs, and NOT today. We all want to keep tobacco out of the hands of kids! However, there are more effective solutions than passing “feel good” legislation that sounds good on a press release, but is riddled with problems.[4] |
” |
| —No on Prop E | ||
Campaign finance
No on Prop E - Stop the Prohibition Proposition reported $11,591,231 in contributions and $10,703,194 in expenditures for its campaign as of June 4, 2018. The committee noted that major funding had come from the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company.[8]
Path to the ballot
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance to ban the sale of flavored tobacco on June 27, 2017. The ordinance was scheduled to become effective in April 2018. The group Let’s Be Real San Francisco launched a petition campaign with the sponsorship of the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company to block the ordinance. The petitioners needed to gather 19,040 valid signatures—equal to 10 percent of the votes cast in the preceding mayoral election—to suspend the effective date of the ordinance and to place it on the ballot as a referendum. On August 4, 2017, the department of elections verified that Let’s Be Real San Francisco had collected at least 19,040 valid signatures, placing the referendum on the ballot for June 5, 2018. The board of supervisors' ordinance banning the sale of flavored tobacco could only become effective with the approval of Proposition E.[10][11][1]
See also
|
External links
- Search Google News for this topic
- San Francisco County Elections Office website
- San Francisco Kids vs. Big Tobacco website
- No on Prop E – Stop the Prohibition Proposition website
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 City and County of San Francisco, "Legal Text," accessed May 5, 2018 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "Text" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ 2.0 2.1 American Legal Publishing Corporation, "San Francisco Health Code, Sec. 19H.19," accessed May 5, 2018 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "Code" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ American Legal Publishing Corporation, "San Francisco Health Code, Sec. 19H.22," accessed May 5, 2018
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ San Francisco City and County, "Controller Analysis," accessed March 22, 2018
- ↑ Yes on Prop E - San Francisco Kids vs. Big Tobacco, "Home," accessed April 10, 2018
- ↑ San Francisco Chronicle, "Editorial: Yes on Prop. E to uphold SF tobacco ban," April 6, 2018
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 SFethics.org, "Campaign Finance Dashboards – June 5, 2018 and November 6, 2018 Elections," accessed May 16, 2018 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "finance" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "finance" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ 9.0 9.1 No on Prop E, "About," accesed April 10, 2018
- ↑ San Francisco Elections, "Prohibiting Tobacco Retailers from Selling Flavored Tobacco Products," accessed May 21, 2018
- ↑ Winston-Salem Journal, "Referendum will target San Francisco ban on flavored tobacco products," September 6, 2017
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2026 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
