Olmsted County commissioners back away from flavored tobacco ban

Apr. 24—ROCHESTER — Olmsted County commissioners have reversed their plans to discuss a

potential ban on flavored tobacco

.

"When public health initially came to us and asked us to vote 'yes' or 'no' on opening a discussion on a ban of flavored tobacco, it appeared initially to be simple to me," Commissioner Laurel Podulke-Smith said. "It's obvious to me that protecting kids and youth from candy- and fruit-flavored vape would be a good thing."

However, she said the question is about more than just protecting youth from the dangers of smoking, and the outcome of a ban could have racial and class implications.

"It doesn't sit well with me to essentially criminalize menthol cigarettes; grandpa's favorite pipe tobacco; hookah, which is mostly smoked by Middle Easterners, although that's a pretty broad statement; and flavored cigars," she said, pointing to reports of flavored cigars and menthol tobacco being preferred in African-American communities.

"It's kind of targeting or criminalizing a specific demographic that might not be the case here in the Midwest, but it certainly is the case in other large cities," Podulke-Smith said.

Commissioner Sheila Kiscaden acknowledged the murkiness of the issue but said the primary goal behind the public health proposal is the reduction of smoking among all county residents, since smoking is proven to lead to negative health consequences that can be costly to the county and its residents.

"From a public health perspective, making it difficult to get tobacco products is a strategy, particularly with ones that create a high level of addiction," she said.

When it comes to specific preferences among demographic populations, she pointed out there are also unique health risks in some groups, which can lead to further problems.

"The Black population has higher incidents of certain kinds of diseases, and they are often targeted for marketing," Kiscaden said. "While it might be a freedom to choose a menthol cigarette, it also leaves people to be manipulated by certain kinds of marketing."

When it comes to marketing, especially of flavored tobacco, Commissioner Michelle Rossman said a local ban is unlikely to change anything, since such campaigns are often broadcast on a wide market.

"They are still going to be exposed to all that pressure," she said of youth who would see advertisements through a variety of sources.

Other commissioners said the discussion leaves questions about where such an effort would end.

"If we are going to save the world, why don't we just ban all tobacco products in Olmsted County?" Commissioner Mark Thein said.

County Board Chairman Gregg Wright said health arguments could also be made regarding alcohol and sugar.

"Can you just focus on one product and leave the rest alone?" he said.

With the majority of the commissioners questioning the approach, Deputy County Administrator Travis Gransee said the issue will be removed from a planned discussion regarding changes to the county's tobacco license ordinance.

The county must make some changes to match state standards, including increasing fines for retailers found selling to youth.

Gransee said state law banning the sale of tobacco products to anyone younger than 21 is why the county's public health staff didn't propose a ban focusing on the youth market, even though fruit- and candy-flavored products are often appealing to younger age groups.

"Tobacco is illegal for people under the age of 21 in the state of Minnesota, so it's really hard to tease it apart from there," he said.

With that, the commissioners will still be asked to determine whether Olmsted County tobacco retailers should face a stiffer penalty on their fourth time caught selling to someone younger than 21 in a three-year period.

A license revocation with the fourth offense was recommended, but Gransee said the option appeared to lack commissioner support.

He said commissioners will likely be offered two options to consider: Either keep the ordinance as it is or establish an increased fine for a fourth offense.

The current ordinance and state rules are vague on the outcome of a fourth offense, but changes to meet state standards will mean a third retailer violation in a three-year period will result in a seven-day license suspension and $1,000 fine.

Gransee said fourth violations are rare, but a retailer was recently caught selling to someone underage for a third time in a two-year period, so it could be an issue in the future.

"We can address it, so we have a plan in place if it does happen," he said.

He said Olmsted County Public Health staff are still working on the potential ordinance changes.

Once the proposed changes are finalized, a 30-day comment period will be established, which will include a public hearing before Olmsted County commissioners make a decision on the potential changes.