Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Study Session Agenda Packet 12-02-19
STUDY SESSION AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 7500 W. 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge CO December 2, 2019 6:30 p.m. Individuals with disabilities are encouraged to participate in all public meetings sponsored by the City of Wheat Ridge. Call Sara Spaulding, Public Information Officer 303-235-2877 at least one week in advance of a meeting if you are interested in participating and need inclusion assistance. Citizen Comment on Agenda Items 1. Refugee Resettlement in Wheat Ridge – Request for Consent 2. Regulation of Group Homes 3. Youth Vaping/Tobacco Use Policy Discussion 4. Staff Report(s) 5. Elected Officials’ Report(s) ADJOURNMENT Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Patrick Goff, City Manager DATE: November 24, 2019 (for December 2, 2019 Study Session) SUBJECT: Refugee Resettlement in Wheat Ridge – Request for Consent ISSUE: Representatives from the International Rescue Committee, on behalf of the Ethiopian Community Development Council’s African Community Center, Lutheran Family Services Rocky Mountain Refugee and Asylee Programs and the International Rescue Committee in Denver, have requested time with City Council to provide an update on a recent Executive Order issued by President Trump wherein state and local governments are given new authority regarding initial refugee resettlement. BACKGROUND: Please see attachments from the International Rescue Committee for more information. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memo from International Rescue Committee, dated November 21, 20192. Presidential Executive Order, dated September 26, 2019 3.Draft Resolution 4.Refugee Resettlement in Wheat Ridge and the State of Colorado Item No. 1 MEMO DATE: November 21, 2019 TO: Wheat Ridge City Council Members Valerie Nosler Beck, Leah Dozeman, Janeece Hoppe, Rachel Hultin, Judy Hutchinson, Korey Stites, Zachary Urban, and Amanda Weaver FROM: Ethiopian Community Development Council’s African Community Center (ACC), Lutheran Family Services Rocky Mountain Refugee and Asylee Programs (LFS) and the International Rescue Committee in Denver (IRC). SUBJECT: Refugee Resettlement in Wheat Ridge – Request for Consent On December 2, 2019, representatives from the International Rescue Committee, on behalf of the above-mentioned resettlement agencies (RAs), requests to apprise Wheat Ridge City Council of a recent Executive Order issued by President Trump wherein state and local governments are given new authority regarding initial refugee resettlement. Background • Executive Order (EO) 13888 (Attachment A), issued September 26, 2019, mandates a 90-day timeframe in which the U.S. Department of State must implement a new state and local consent process for refugee resettlement. • RAs will be required to obtain a letter of consent from each municipality, county, and state where they intend to initially place a refugee individual or family. o Written consent is required as part of each RA’s funding proposal to the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, and must be obtained no later than January 21, 2020. • Prior to EO 13888, RAs were required to engage in consultation with communities where 25 or more refugees were resettled annually. However, previously there was no requirement for each jurisdiction where a refugee individual or family could potentially be placed to provide explicit consent for initial resettlement. U.S. Refugee Admissions Programs • RAs partner with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) to provide services to refugees approved for resettlement through the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. • Since the passage of the Refugee Act of 1980, the United States has safely resettled over 3 million refugees. • The U.S. accepts a limited number of refugees each year. The President, in consultation with Congress, determines the authorized target for annual refugee admissions through a Presidential Determination. • Refugees referred for resettlement in the U.S. must satisfy the following criteria: o Meet the definition of a "refugee" as determined by U.S. government officials. o Be among those refugees determined by the President to be of special humanitarian concern to the U.S. o Be otherwise admissible under U.S. law. o Not be firmly resettled in any foreign country. Role of a resettlement agency (RA) In addition to partnering with PRM, the RAs also partner with the Colorado Refugee Services Program under the Colorado Department of Human Services to provide holistic services that promote refugees’ successful integration in Colorado communities. In Colorado, refugees can access RA services for up to five years after their arrival. RA services may include: General case management and community orientation; health education, navigation and case management; job readiness training and job placement services; ESL enrollment; cultural orientation; psychosocial support programs; youth services; financial literacy; digital literacy; family stabilization services; immigration legal services; school enrollment; community integration support; and more. Figure 1: Funding for resettlement agencies and service timeline ATTACHMENT 1 Refugees in Colorado and Wheat Ridge • Since the Refugee Act of 1980, Colorado has welcomed more than 60,000 refugees. Currently, immigrants, refugees and other refugee-eligible populations comprise roughly 10% of Colorado’s population. • Over the last two federal fiscal years 13 refugees were initially placed in the City of Wheat Ridge. Of these individuals, 62% were from the Democratic Republic of Congo and 38% were from Ukraine. • According to a report by the New American Economy, there are 84,251 (10.9%) immigrants living in Congressional District 7 with a spending power of $1.9 billion. • Immigrants make up 29.2% of the construction workforce and 16.6% of manufacturing workforce in District 7. What does consent mean? • Providing local consent means that the City of Wheat Ridge will continue to allow RAs to initially place newly-arrived refugee individuals and families within their jurisdiction. • Wheat Ridge City Council will pass a resolution consent to the initial resettlement of refugees within their jurisdiction (see Attachment B). A copy of the consent resolution will be shared with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration and submitted by the RAs with their proposals to the Department of State to continue resettling refugees through the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. Will refugees still be able to live in Wheat Ridge if consent is not provided? • Yes. The Executive Order will prevent RAs from initially placing refugees in your community and from providing them with services during their first 90 days in the U.S. However, refugees arrive in the U.S. with legal status and freedom of mobility and could decide to self-place in your city. Benefits of providing consent • Although a small number of refugees is initially placed in Wheat Ridge, many refugees have chosen to make Wheat Ridge their home—and some of them have family members they are hoping to be reunited with. If consent is provided and a family member of a Wheat Ridge resident is approved to come to the U.S., RAs would be able to place the newly-arrived individual in Wheat Ridge, where their family member is already residing. o If consent is not provided, RAs would not be able to place the reuniting family member in the same city where their loved one is currently residing. • Providing consent will allow RAs to serve refugees in your community and to provide vital services that allow newly-arrived refugees to learn about their community, find employment and become self-sufficient. o If consent is not provided, RAs will not be able to provide services to newly-arrived refugees in your community during the first 90 days they are in the U.S. This is a critical window of time that lays the foundation for longer-term success and community integration. • RAs regularly provide technical assistance to communities where refugees are resettled. Technical assistance ranges from providing training to police, fire and other first responders about working with refugee populations to providing support to school districts, health clinics and other providers as they work to provide trauma-informed, culturally and linguistically appropriate services. Additionally, RAs work very closely with faith organizations, civic groups and individuals to help them learn about their new neighbors and to engage them in an array of voluntary capacities that support the resettlement process. We respectfully request that Wheat Ridge City Council consider passing a resolution that would provide consent for Ethiopian Community Development Council’s African Community Center, Lutheran Family Services Rocky Mountain Refugee and Asylee Programs and the International Rescue Committee in Denver to initially place refugees within the city of Wheat Ridge’s jurisdiction. Thank you for your time and consideration. We are happy to answer questions and provide background information as needed to inform the City Council regarding local consent for refugee resettlement. Please also note that, although this communication has been initiated regarding implementation of EO 13888, communication about, or participation in, the implementation of the EO is not in any way an endorsement of the legality of the EO. Figure 2 Source: New American Economy, Immigrants and the Economy in: Colorado District 7 ATTACHMENT 2 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION 2019 ______ (number) CONSENTING TO CONTINUED INITIAL RESETTLEMENT of REFUGEES IN WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge has welcomed refugees facing religious, ethnic and political persecution in prior years; and, WHEREAS, the world is currently facing the worst refugee crisis in human history; and, WHEREAS, by definition, refugees are individuals who have been forced to flee their home country due to persecution based on their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or social group; and, WHEREAS, resettlement is the last resort for refugees who cannot return to their home country and cannot rebuild their lives where they first fled; and, WHEREAS, the United States government operates the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program and mandates extensive refugee vetting for every refugee resettled to the United States; and, WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is currently the home of resettled refugees who may be joined by family members from which they have been separated; and, WHEREAS, community members, families, local organizations and faith-based institutions have supported the arrival and integration of refugee families for many years; and, WHEREAS, refugees have a significant net positive effect on the local economy; and, WHEREAS, local employers depend refugee employees to help grow their businesses and refugee entrepreneurs provide jobs and generate economic activity that benefits the City of Wheat Ridge; and, WHEREAS, refugees contribute to the social and cultural richness of the City of Wheat Ridge; be it further ATTACHMENT 3 RESOLVED, that with regards to federal Executive Order 13888 “On Enhancing State and Local Involvement in Resettlement,” the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge consents to the initial resettlement of refugees and shall expressly confirm so in writing to the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration upon passing of this resolution. RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, urges the Governor of Colorado to consent to initial refugee resettlement as per the terms of Executive Order 13888. RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution will be transmitted to the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration. Refugee Resettlement in Wheat Ridge and the State of Colorado Colorado has a long and proud legacy of welcoming refugees who are fleeing war, violence and persecution. Since the Refugee Act of 1980, Colorado has welcomed more than 60,000 refugees. Refugee arrivals to Colorado • FY2016: 1,983 • FY2017: 1,512 • FY2018: 710 • FY2019: 845 FY189-FY19 refugee arrivals to Wheat Ridge • 13 individuals • Country of origin: 62% Democratic Republic of Congo; 38% Ukraine • 60% of placements in Wheat Ridge were a two parent family with children; 40% were minors reuniting with family or being welcomed by foster families How do resettlement agencies choose where refugees are initially placed? • Resettlement agencies (RAs) prioritize finding safe, decent and affordable housing for refugee families and individuals. • RAs prioritize finding housing that allows refugees to easily access public transportation and community services. • Many refugees coming to Colorado have family or friends (U.S. ties) already living in the state. RAs work to find housing near a refugees’ U.S. ties to promote family unity and enhance social supports. What services do Resettlement Agencies provide to refugees in Wheat Ridge? RAs provide many services, which may include: • Case management including housing assistance, school enrollment, and assistance navigating public benefits. • Health navigation, access to refugee health screenings and primary care, immunizations, medical case management, health education, and health insurance literacy. • Cultural orientation, ESL resources, job readiness training, job placement, and career counseling services. • Financial capabilities programming including financial literacy, coaching, credit building and auto loans. • Services for survivors of torture including access to legal, social, medical and mental health services. What do refugees contribute to Wheat Ridge and the State of Colorado? A 2017 economic and fiscal impact study commissioned by the Colorado Department of Human Services (CDHS) found that refugees contribute to our shared prosperity and growing economy. • For each refugee resettled in Colorado, four jobs are created. • Through every $1 in assistance received by a refugee, $1.68 is generated in output. • Through every dollar a refugee earns, over $25 is generated in output. • In Colorado, most refugees join the workforce less than 90 days after they arrive in the U.S. • According to a report by the New American Economy, there are 84,251(10.9%) immigrants living in Congressional District 7 with a spending power of $1.9 billion. • Immigrants currently make up 29.2% of the construction workforce and 16.6% of the manufacturing workforce in Congressional District 7. Refugee arrivals to Colorado by country of origin | FY2016 – FY2019 ATTACHMENT 4 Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Patrick Goff, City Manager FROM: Gerald Dahl, City Attorney Kenneth Johnstone, Director of Community Development DATE: November 22, 2019 (for December 2, 2019 Study Session) SUBJECT: Regulation of Group Homes ISSUE: The City’s current zoning regulations, in Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws (“Code”), treat groups of any number of unrelated handicapped individuals living together as a “family.” Group homes of any size for such individuals may therefore locate in the same zone districts in which a single-family dwelling is a permitted use without a formal review or application process. City staff believes the location of larger group homes, of any type, in residential districts without a review process could result in land use impacts that are incompatible with the surrounding properties. The City Attorney’s Office has advised it is permissible, but not required, under state and federal law, to regulate the zoning of group homes for the handicapped and disabled, including imposing a numeric limitation on the size of such homes. Staff therefore recommends the preparation of an ordinance to create zoning regulations for residential group homes for the handicapped and to make all residential group home zoning regulations generally consistent. PRIOR ACTION: City Council approved an ordinance placing a moratorium on the processing of all applications, permits and licenses for group homes in the City of Wheat Ridge on April 16, 2012. The moratorium expired on July 16, 2012. City Council was further briefed on the zoning issues related to group homes at a study session on June 4, 2012. An ordinance was prepared and introduced, but not adopted on second reading FINANCIAL IMPACT: Additional City staff time may be spent on the processing of group home applications required as a result of revision of the Code, but it is doubtful that work load would significantly increase. BACKGROUND: The City last updated its ordinances pertaining to group homes in 1996. Following is a summary of the existing regulations as adopted at that time. Item No. 2 • Residential group homes for up to 8 elderly persons were allowed in all residential districts as a permitted use. Residential group homes for 9 or more elderly were allowed in all residential districts as a special use. • Residential group homes for children were established as a special use in all residential districts, with a minimum lot area of 1,500 square feet per child in residence. • Residential group homes for any number of residents who would be defined as a handicapped person in the Fair Housing Amendments Act were considered to be a “family” and therefore allowed as a permitted use in all residential districts, with no restriction on the number of residents. The Federal definition of what constitutes a handicap person has expanded over time and includes groups such as the following: developmentally disabled persons, physically disabled persons, and persons in recovery from alcohol or drug addiction (but not currently using). Given that 23 years have passed since the adoption of these regulations, staff felt it was appropriate to consider modifications to the Code, including whether a limit should be placed on the number of handicapped persons that can reside in a group home as a permitted use in all residential districts. This proposed ordinance is designed to regulate all types of group homes in a similar manner, based on the associated land use impacts. It also cleans up certain inconsistencies in the zoning regulations by: 1) Adding a new definition of “Residential group home for handicapped/disabled” to include persons who are “handicapped or disabled,” as defined by state or federal law, and their caretakers. 2) Creating a regulatory scheme under which all residential group homes are regulated in the same manner. The use charts are updated to treat all residential group homes the same. 3) Amending the land use charts to distinguish between residential group homes of eight (8) or fewer persons, plus required staff, and homes of nine (9) or more persons, plus required staff, with the larger group homes requiring special or conditional use approval. 4) Amending the definition of “Family” to eliminate its current inclusion of handicapped and disabled group living situations and to eliminate what was likely an unintended exclusion of four (4) persons over the age of sixty (60) living together. The current “family” definition includes groups of three (3) and five (5) unrelated persons over the age of sixty (60) living together, but not four (4). 5) Deleting the restriction on the number of live-in caretakers in residential group homes for the elderly. Staff believes the economics of operating a group home will naturally dictate a small number of live-in caretakers. 6) Eliminating the current distinction between substance abuse clinics for the treatment of drug abuse and clinics for the treatment of alcohol abuse; eliminating the current distinction between outpatient and residential substance abuse clinics; and eliminating the requirement that such clinics dispense medication or other controlled substances as a part of their treatment programs. 7) Amending the Commercial and Industrial land use chart to eliminate confusing cross- references concerning clinics for counseling generally and substance abuse clinics. 8) Imposing the same off-street parking requirements on all residential group homes above a given occupancy level. The proposed changes are generally consistent with the regulations of other Front Range communities. The cities of Arvada, Aurora, Denver, Englewood, and Lakewood all allow group homes of eight or fewer residents as a permitted use in residential zone districts. In Westminster a conditional use permit is required. For larger group homes in residential zone districts, the regulations vary. Denver permits group homes for up to 20 residents, with supplemental regulations. Aurora allows larger group homes only for handicapped residents. Arvada requires a conditional use permit for nine to 12 residents, and Lakewood requires a special use permit for nine or more handicapped residents. For these four communities some level of neighborhood notification is required for these larger group homes. Group homes with nine or more residents are not permitted in residential zone districts in Englewood and Westminster. Most of these communities establish a variety of supplemental regulations for group homes, such as separation requirements; evidence of state or county licensure; compliance with applicable building, zoning, and fire codes; registration with the city; and a requirement that facilities be architecturally compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Additionally, several communities refer to the “reasonable accommodation” clause of the Fair Housing Act and enable a City Manager or Director to accept written applications for administrative relief from specific development standards, allowing the applicant to avoid a variance process. In the City of Wheat Ridge a variance of less than 50% is an administrative process. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council direct the City Attorney and Community Development Director to bring forward an ordinance on first reading revising the City’s group home regulations as described. Because the ordinance will amend Chapter 26, a Planning Commission recommendation is required. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission have the opportunity to make recommendations first in a study session context before the formal ordinance is introduced. Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Patrick Goff, City Manager FROM: Marianne Schilling, Assistant to the City Manager DATE: December 2, 2019 SUBJECT: Youth Vaping/Tobacco Use Policy Discussion ISSUE: Tobacco and youth vaping is on the rise in Wheat Ridge and the Jefferson County region. Based upon previous Council direction, staff is presenting options to be considered for a youth vaping and tobacco policy. PRIOR ACTION: At the August 19 study session, Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH) presented an overview of youth vaping and tobacco use in Wheat Ridge and the region. City Council provided consensus to return with policy options to include in potential future ordinance. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact at this time. BACKGROUND: In August, JCPH presented information with regards to increased tobacco and vaping usage by Jefferson County and Wheat Ridge youth, the effect of nicotine-related waste on the environment and the region’s current efforts to reduce vaping and tobacco use. Additionally, JCPH provided several supporting documents which detailed the impacts of licensing tobacco retailers as well as the impacts of raising the minimum sales age to 21. The last attachment to this memo demonstrates the reduction in youth sales rate in California for cities that have passed a tobacco retailer license ordinance. The August presentation and supporting attachments have been provided for Council review. Peer Review: The Center for Disease Control has found Colorado to be one of only 12 states that does not require retailers to have a license to sell tobacco. Additionally, youth in areas with strong Tobacco Retailer Licenses (TRLs) are 33% less likely to start smoking and are 26% less likely to start vaping. While there is no statewide regulation, the regulation of youth tobacco and vaping is becoming more prominent on a local level in both the Jefferson County region and the rest of Colorado. Almost every municipality that boarders Wheat Ridge regulates tobacco by requiring retailers to have a TRL. Item No. 3 Council Action Form - Youth Vaping/Tobacco Use Policy Discussion December 2, 2019 Studies in tobacco use have shown that raising the minimum legal sales age prevents youth use. Most of Wheat Ridge’s neighboring municipalities require the minimum sales age to be 21. Additionally, these cities require all tobacco products to behind the counter, prohibit mobile vending and are proactively enforcing regulations. The chart below shows both the regional and statewide cities which have implemented tobacco and youth sales regulations. Municipal Tobacco Policy Chart Source: Jefferson County Public Health Considerations: Council may consider each of the following items related to tobacco retail licensing as it may make sense for the city of Wheat Ridge. Additionally, the recommendations provided below are based upon best practices and are not prescriptive. There are options to adapt regulations to fit the specific needs for the community based upon Council feedback. Staff will be going through each topic one by one, and presenting all of the options for Council to consider. 1. Tobacco Retail License (TRL) Require license to sell tobacco This license would be separate from the business license, but could be rolled in to be streamlined with the annual business license process. The cost of the annual license could offset the cost of proactive enforcement. The average charge for TRLs in the Denver Metro area is $300. The initial cost of a business license in Wheat Ridge is $25, with $20 annual renewals after the first year. Council may consider: Council Action Form - Youth Vaping/Tobacco Use Policy Discussion December 2, 2019 1) If the City should require a Tobacco Retailer License, and if so, 2) If the license should be $300 2. Age Restrictions Raise minimum sales age to 21 The current regulation for the purchase of tobacco in Wheat Ridge is 18. Jefferson County Public Health recommends the legal sales age for any tobacco products to be 21. Council may consider changing the legal sales age or keeping the current sales age. Establish minimum clerk age The best practice for minimum clerk age is 21. This age is recommended to prevent selling tobacco products to underage peers. The current age to sell alcohol in Wheat Ridge is 18. There is no state minimum age for clerks to sell tobacco. Council may consider establishing a minimum clerk age or not establishing a minimum clerk age. 3. Additional Regulations Require all tobacco products to be behind counter This regulation would require clerk assistance in order to purchase any tobacco product. Council may consider requiring that all tobacco products be located behind the service counter (or somewhere similar) or not establishing a location requirement. No new tobacco retailer license issued within 1000 feet of a school A 1000 feet threshold from a school would mimic the current marijuana retailer regulations. Additionally, current retailers that are located within 1000 feet could be grandfathered in to allow for tobacco retailer licensing. Council may consider that tobacco retailers are located less than, more than or equal to 1000 feet from a school. Additionally, Council may consider the grandfathering in of current tobacco retailers that are within the decided upon distance threshold. Prohibit mobile vending This would require all tobacco retailers to be at fixed locations. Mobile vendors including any business that would deliver tobacco products would be prohibited from selling tobacco in Wheat Ridge. Best practices find that it is difficult to ensure that mobile vendors will not violate zoning provisions and almost impossible to conduct compliance checks if the location is unknown. Council may considering allowing or not allowing mobile vending. 4. Enforcement Local proactive enforcement Best practices recommend proactive enforcement twice a year, and JCPH finds that enforcement is a key component to a successful regulation implementation. Council may also discuss the amount of proactive enforcement desired. Additionally, the cost of enforcement could be either covered fully or partially by the TRL fees. Violation can result in suspension and revocation for continued violations A violation of any regulation would count toward the penalty structure listed below. Council may also consider permanent license revocation or a different structure than what is provided below. Council Action Form - Youth Vaping/Tobacco Use Policy Discussion December 2, 2019 Best practice for violations are as follows: 1. First violation within a three-year period: TRL suspended for seven days 2. Second violation within a three-year period: TRL suspended for thirty days 3. Third violation within a three-year period: TRL suspended for one year 4. Fourth violation within a three-year period: TRL revoked, and the Licensee will be deemed ineligible to apply for a TRL for two years RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends moving forward with an ordinance based upon the regional best practices. ATTACHMENTS: 1. JCPH Presentation from August 19, 2019 2. Wheat Ridge Tobacco Use Fact Sheet 3. STEPP Licensing Fact Sheet 4. STEPP T21 Infographic 5. California Compliance Rates Youth Vaping/Tobacco Use Study Session August 19, 2019ATTACHMENT 1 Agenda •Youth tobacco use data and trends •Why youth vaping is a problem •Steps to reduce youth tobacco use •What is being done in the county and state? •What are options for Wheat Ridge? •How effective are these options? Youth Vaping: A Public Health Crisis August 21, 2018 •Jefferson County Board of Health declares youth vaping a public health crisis. Youth Vaping: A Public Health Crisis •As of 2017, Colorado has the highest rate of youth vaping in the country –with a rate that is over twice the national average. •Jefferson County’s rate is higher than the state average. •This is largely because these products are easily accessible by youth and highly visible in the community. 0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35% Percentage of Youth Who Report Vaping “Regularly” (2017) JeffCo CO U.S. Discreet. Accessible. Tasty. The Appeal of Vaping Tobacco and the Environment •Cigarette butts are the most littered item •Cigarettes and ESDs are fire hazards •Hazardous substances in these products may end up in water and soil •ESDs are both e-waste and hazardous waste (lithium batteries and nicotine), not to mention plastic waste A New Generation Addicted to Nicotine One JUUL pod contains as much nicotine as an entire pack of cigarettes. Youth Turning to Combustible Cigarettes •Youth who vape regularly are 4x more likely to be smoking combustible cigarettes a year later. Co-Occurrence of Other Risk Factors Students who currently vape are... 9.5x as likely to currently use marijuana 8.8x as likely to currently binge drink 8.6x as likely to currently abuse prescription drugs Carcinogen Exposure and Pulmonary Risk •All Jefferson County youth deserve the opportunity to reach their full potential and live a healthy life free from addiction. Current Efforts to Reduce Youth Tobacco Use Youth Education/Prevention •Tobacco-Free Schools Policy •Statewide Social Justice Youth Movement (UpRISE) •Workshops for school staff utilizing a “train the trainer” model Community Education •Vaping prevention trainings to educate parents and other trusted adults •State/county-wide mass and targeted media education campaigns •Community events Municipal Policies & Youth Access Policies Edgewater Golden Lakewood Arvada Youth Access to Tobacco in the Retail Setting •Two out of three Colorado youth, under the age of 18, who attempted to buy tobacco products at a retail establishment were successful. •Over half (55%) of Colorado high school students under the age of 18 reported that it is easy or very easy to get tobacco products. •A UC Denver study reported a sales to minor violation rate of 25.3%. •Teenage store clerks are a major source of tobacco products for high school age smokers. Municipal Policy Options to Address Youth Vaping/Tobacco Use Gaps in the FDA and State Laws •Existing federal and state law, including the final deeming regulations from the FDA, do not require: •Tobacco retailers to have a license to sell tobacco •Suspension or revocation of ability to sell tobacco by retailers that repeatedly break tobacco-related laws •Prohibition of self-service displays of cigars and e-cigarettes •Prohibition of flavors for smokeless tobacco, cigars and e-cigarettes •Prohibition of tobacco sales near schools This information is for educational purposes only and is not to be construed to support or oppose any tax ballot initiative. Tobacco Retailer Licensing (TRL) •Why Retailer Licensing? •Prevents illegal sales to minors •Reduces accessibility and visibility •Reduces youth access to tobacco products •Small annual fee for retailer. No other financial burden. •Allows for local enforcement and meaningfulpenalties for violations. Tobacco Retailer Licensing (TRL) •Like alcohol or marijuana, a retailer who sells to a minor could have their license suspended or revoked under the local licensing program. •Twelve Colorado communities have tobacco retail licensing laws: Edgewater, Lakewood, Golden, Aspen, Avon, Basalt, Fountain, La Junta, Manitou Springs, Pueblo, Rocky Ford, and Steamboat Springs. Many others are currently considering licensing. •~ 900 communities nationwide have adopted local tobacco retail licensing policies. Effectiveness of TRL Policies Communities with strong TRL ordinances had lower odds of youth initiation and current use of both cigarettes and e-cigarettes than communities that did not (JAMA Pediatrics, 2019) Wheat Ridge Resident Survey •77% think that retailers are already required to have a license to sell tobacco, when in fact this is not the case •41% think it is illegal for youth under 18 to sell tobacco products when working in a retail store, when in fact this is not the case •72% support requiring retailers to have a license to sell tobacco products, and more support other TRL provisions Results from 2018 National Research Center Household Survey conducted in Wheat Ridge, CO Age of Sale –Tobacco21 •Why raise the age of sale? •Reduces the social source for high school students •95% of all tobacco users start before the age of 21 •Minimal financial impact for retailers.18-20 year-olds only make up 2% of all tobacco sales revenue •Adolescents and young adults are more vulnerable to nicotine addiction because the brain is still going through critical periods of development. Age of Sale –Tobacco21 •18 states & 490+ municipalities have raised the minimum legal sale age of tobacco to 21. •6 communities in CO have passed T21, and many are currently considering, including Denver. •A 2015 report from the Institute of Medicine concluded that increasing the minimum legal sale age to purchase tobacco made a significant impact on decreasing tobacco initiation, especially among 15-to-17-year-olds. Effectiveness of T21 Policies •Chicago reported a 36% decrease in cigarette and e-cigarette use rates among 18 -20 year-olds, from 15.2% in 2016 to 9.7% in 2017 •In California, statewide retailer violation rates to under 18 year-olds decreased from 10.3% to 5.9% since implementation of T21 •Needham, MA, showed a drop in high school smoking rates from 13% to 7% after policy implementation, a drop three times that of neighboring communities Summary of Tobacco Policy Strategy •Local policy is one of the strongest, most effective ways to reduce youth tobacco use •Tobacco Retailer Licensing •Require all retailers to obtain a license to sell tobacco products •Require all tobacco products be behind the counter •Require clerks handling and selling tobacco products to be the minimum legal sale age •No tobacco retailers within 1000 feet of schools •Raise the minimum legal sale age to 21 •Use licensing fees to fund local enforcement with meaningful penalties for violations Questions? Contact us Khanh H. Nguyen, MPH, MSW Tobacco Policy Specialist Jefferson County Public Health 645 Parfet Street Lakewood, CO 80215 O: 303-275-7558 knguyen@jeffco.us Reducing Youth Access to and Use of Tobacco in Wheat Ridge, Colorado Youth Tobacco Use •Almost 90% of all regular smokers begin smoking at or before age 18. 1 •The 2017 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey indicated that among high school students in Colorado: 27% use e-cigarettes, 7.2% smoke cigarettes, 5.9% smoke cigars/cigarillos/little cigars, and 3.1% use chew. 2 •E-cigarettes are now the most commonly used tobacco product among youth. 3 •Current e-cigarette use among high school students nearly doubled from 2017-2018. 3 Youth Access to Tobacco in the Retail Setting •Two out of three Colorado youth, under the age of 18, who attempted to buy tobacco products at a retail establishment were successful. 2 •Over half (55%) of Colorado high school students under the age of 18 reported that it is easy or very easy to get tobacco products. 2 •A study conducted by UC Denver in Colorado reported a sales to minor violation rate of 25.3%. 4 •Teenage store clerks are a major source of tobacco products for high school age smokers. 5 How the Tobacco Industry Uses the Retail Environment •Pervasive retail tobacco promotional practices, including product and advertising placement and pricing tactics, known to influence youth towards using tobacco products, contribute to increased initiation, experimentation and regular smoking. 6 •Big Tobacco now spends more than 95 percent of its $9 billion marketing budget to advertise and promote their products in convenience stores, gas stations and other retail outlets. 7 o Note: Two-thirds of middle school students visit a convenience store, small grocery, or liquor store at least once a week, and weekly or more frequent exposure to retail tobacco marketing has been associated with a 50% increase in the odds of ever smoking. 8 •Tobacco products are advertised most heavily in stores where adolescents shop. 8 •The tobacco industry continues to market and sell products that are appealing to youth in sweet flavors at cheap prices. Gaps in the FDA and State Laws •Existing federal and state law, including the final deeming regulations from the FDA, do not require: o tobacco retailers to have a license to sell tobacco. o suspension or revocation of ability to sell tobacco by retailers that repeatedly break tobacco-related laws o prohibition of self-service displays of cigars and e-cigarettes. o prohibition of flavors for smokeless tobacco, cigars and e-cigarettes. More Information www.TobaccoFreeJeffco.com/Youth | email: tobaccofree@jeffco.us | phone: 303-275-7558 ATTACHMENT 2 Best Practices and Proposed Solutions •Requiring a license to sell tobacco is essential to youth tobacco prevention: o Licensing is a proven approach to increasing and enforcing restrictions on illegal sales and other known youth-targeted promotional, product placement and pricing tactics. 9 o Licensing is a common-sense approach to ensure that retailers operate legally, ethically and responsibly when it comes to preventing illegal tobacco sales to kids. 10 o Local tobacco retail licensing programs that include retailer fees high enough to pay for enforcement have been shown to be the most effective policy at reducing illegal sales by merchants. 11 o Licensing empowers communities to better respond at a local level to the changing landscape of tobacco issues. o Licensing creates a level playing field for all members of the business community by ensuring they are following the law and being held to the same standards. •Minimum recommended provisions in a tobacco retail license include: o Language that states that a violation of any federal, state or local tobacco law is a violation of the retail license o Increase clerk age to sell tobacco to 18 o Prohibit self-service of all tobacco/nicotine products and paraphernalia o No admittance under 18 in tobacco business o Limit location and number of tobacco retailers (near schools, for example) •Cutting edge tobacco retail policy options: o Raise minimum age to purchase tobacco to 21 o Set minimum package size o Increase the price of tobacco products and/or set minimum price thresholds o Prohibit retailers from redeeming tobacco coupons and offering discounts o Prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products o Include other paraphernalia, such as pipes and rolling papers, to be covered by law Communities with Tobacco Retail Licensing Laws •Twelve Colorado communities have tobacco retail licensing laws: Aspen, Basalt, Avon, Edgewater, Fountain, Golden, La Junta, Lakewood, Manitou Springs, Pueblo, Rocky Ford, and Steamboat Springs. •~ 900 communities nationwide have adopted local tobacco retail licensing policies. 12 Residents Support It Among Wheat Ridge* Residents… •89% believe that youth e-cig/vapes use is a health concern •83% believe that tobacco companies market their products to youth. •76% believe that where tobacco is displayed/sold inside a retail store can encourage youth tobacco use. •77% believe that tobacco advertising in retail stores can encourage youth tobacco use. •73% believe that cheaper / lower priced tobacco products can encourage youth tobacco use. Wheat Ridge residents mistakenly think… Wheat Ridge residents support… 77% 41% think that retailers are already required to have a license to sell tobacco, when in fact this is not the case. think that it is illegal for youth under 18 to sell tobacco products when working in a retail store, when in fact this is not the case. 72% 83% support requiring retailers to have a license to sell tobacco products. support requiring that a retail clerk who is selling tobacco be 18 years of age or older. *Results based on 2018 National Research Center Household Survey conducted in Wheat Ridge, Colorado. References: 1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking: 50 Years of Progress. A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2014. Printed with corrections, January 2014. 2. The Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, 2015-2017. 3. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2018 National Youth Tobacco Survey Finds Cause for Concern. November, 2018.https://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/PublicHealthEducation/ProtectingKidsfromTobacco/ucm405173 .htm 4. Brief Report: Arnold H. Levinson and Jennifer L. Patnaik, A Practical Way to Estimate Retail Tobacco Sales Violation Rates More Accurately Nicotine Tob Res (2013) 15 (11): 1952-1955 first published online July 1, 2013 doi:10.1093/ntr/ntt084 5. DiFranza JR, Coleman M. Sources of Tobacco for Youths in Communities with Strong Enforcement of Youth Access Laws. Tobacco Control, 10:323-328, 2001. 6. Trends In Tobacco Industry Marketing – Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0156.pdf 7. U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Cigarette Report for 2014/Smokeless Tobacco Report for 2014 8. Henriksen, L, et al., “Association of retail tobacco marketing with adolescent smoking,” American Journal of Public Health, 94(12):2081-3, 2004. 9. McLaughlin I. License to Kill?: Tobacco Retailer Licensing as an Effective Enforcement Tool. Tobacco Control Legal Consortium, 2010. 10. STORE: Strategic Tobacco Retail Effort. Talking Points: Retailer Licensing. 11. The Center for Tobacco Policy and Organizing: Tobacco Retail Licensing Reduces Tobacco Sales to Minors: Six Arguments for Enforcement. February 2005. 12. ANR Foundation U.S. Tobacco Control Laws Database©, 3/22/16, Copyright 1998 - 2016 American Nonsmokers’ Rights Foundation. Updated 6-10-19 LICENSING TOBACCO RETAILERS IS RIGHT FOR OUR COMMUNITIES Colorado youth are using tobacco products at alarming rates, threatening the health of our kids, our communities and the state as a whole. 1 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey. (2015). Retrieved July 2016 from http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/PublicHealth/community/CEPEG/UnifYouth/Pages/Healthy-KidsSurvey.aspx 2 Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2016, from http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/preventing-youth-tobacco-use/factsheet.html 3 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2012. Colorado research shows that more than 68% of youth under the age of 18 who attempt to buy tobacco products can complete the transaction. This is significant because nearly 90% of adult cigarette smokers first tried tobacco before the age of 18. Require tobacco retailers to have a license to sell tobacco. Suspend or revoke the ability of individual retailers to sell tobacco if they repeatedly break tobacco sales laws. Require cigars and e-cigarettes to be behind the counter. Prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco including menthol cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, cigars and e-cigarettes. Retail licensing reduces youth access to tobacco through friends and family, sometimes called “social sources.” 2 3 1 THEGROCERY Retailers are selling tobacco to kids, even though it is against the law. Certied Signure LICENSE TO SELL Certied Signure LICENSE TO SELL Gaps in federal and state law open the door to illegal sales to minors. Passing local law to include the following provisions would reduce underage sales of tobacco products: ATTACHMENT 3 4 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation system. (2018). https://chronicdata.cdc.gov/Legislation/STATE-System-Licensure-Fact-Sheet/uey9-5sp9 5 Astor RL, Urman R, Barrington-Trimis JL, et al. Tobacco Retail Licensing and Youth Product Use. Pediatrics. 2019;143(2):e20173536 https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/143/2/e20173536 6 American Lung Association. The Center for Tobacco Policy and Organizing. Retrieved at https://center4tobaccopolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Tobacco-Retailer-Licensing-is-Effective-September-2013.pdf. June 2019. 7 Institute of Medicine. (2015). Public health implications of raising the minimum age of legal access to tobacco products. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://www.nap.edu/read/18997/chapter/1 Colorado is one of only 12 states that does not require retailers to have a license to sell tobacco. In Colorado, local licenses are required to sell goods and services ranging from marijuana and alcohol to ice and Christmas trees. However, there is no statewide license required to sell tobacco, the deadliest consumer product. In one study, youth who live in places that had a strong tobacco retailer license were 33% less likely to start smoking and 26% less likely to start vaping. For more information, visit www.TobaccoFreeCO.org/RetailerLicensing Requiring a license is a common-sense approach that ensures tobacco retailers operate legally, ethically and responsibly and reduces youth tobacco use. Retailer Licensing is the first step towards countering tobacco industry tactics targeting youth. Raising the minimum legal sale age and prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco are additional ways to strengthen the policy. 4 5 Additional studies show robust enforcement of a local ordinance can lower rates of cigarette and e-cigarette use among youth and young adults. 5,6 Penalizing youth for purchase, use, and/or possession of tobacco is not an effective strategy to reduce youth tobacco use. 7 33% LESS LIKELY TO START SMOKING 26% LESS LIKELY TO START VAPING One in three Colorado high school students use tobacco. Vaping’s rising popularity among youth threatens to completely erase decades of progress to reduce nicotine and tobacco addiction. 1 RAISE THE AGE OF TOBACCO SALES TO 21 1 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey. (2017). Retrieved July 2018 from https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/hkcs 2 Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2016, from http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/reports/preventing-youth-tobacco-use/factsheet.html 3 Calculated based on data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)’s public online data analysis system (PDAS), National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2016, https://pdas.samh-sa.gov/#/survey/NSDUH-2016-DS0001 4 Healthy Kids Colorado Survey. (2017). Retrieved July 2018 from https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/hkcs 5 Kessel Schneider S, Buka SL, Dash K, et al “Community reductions in youth smoking after raising the minimum tobacco sales age to 21 Tobacco Control” 2016;25:355-359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocon-trol-2014-052207 Nearly 90% of adult cigarette smokers first tried tobacco before the age of 18 and nearly 95% by the age of 21. WHEN PAIRED WITH A STRONG RETAILER LICENSING ORDINANCE, RAISING THE MINIMUM LEGAL SALE AGE TO 21 WILL HELP SAVE LIVES. 18 YEARS OLD SALE There is evidence that raising the minimum legal sale age prevents youth use: The rate of youth smoking decreased by nearly 50% in Needham, MA within five years of raising the age to 21. 4 5 32 Current laws aren’t enough. The legal age to purchase tobacco in most Colorado communities is 18 years old, but 56% of high school students think it’s easy to get cigarettes and 58% think it’s easy to get e-cigarettes. Certied Signure LICENSE TO SELL Certied Signure TOBACCO 21 ATTACHMENT 4 More than a dozen states and 475+ cities have raised the legal sale age for tobacco to 21. Service members between 18 and 21 deserve the same protections as their civilian counterparts from tobacco addiction. Of current smokers in the military, 38% report they began after joining the service.6 As of June 2019, Colorado city and town councils in Aspen, Basalt, Edgewater and Snowmass Village have added a provision raising the minimum legal sales age to 21 to their tobacco retail licensing law. Certied Signure LICENSE TO SELL Certied Signure TOBACCO 21 18-21 475+ cities Raising the minimum legal sales age should be done in conjunction with retailer licensing in order to provide enforcement and have the greatest impact on reducing youth access to tobacco. 1 Secretary of Defense Ash Carter April 2016 Policy Memorandum 16-001. Department of Defense Tobacco Policy. Available at http://www.med.navy.mil/sites/nmcphc/Documents/health-promotion-wellness/ tobacco-free-living/INCOMING-CARTER-Tobacco-Policy-Memo.pdf; accessed December 20, 2016. www.tobaccofreeco.org/tobacco21 Tobacco Retailer Licensing Is Effective @ 2013 California Department of Public Health The Center for Tobacco Policy & Organizing | American Lung Association in California 1531 I Street, Suite 201, Sacramento, CA 95814 | Phone: (916) 554.5864 | Fax: (916) 442.8585 ©2018. California Department of Public Health. Funded under contract #14-10013. CENTER4TOBACCOPOLICY.ORG LUNG.ORG/CALIFORNIA In California, 144 communities have adopted strong local tobacco retailer licensing ordinances in an effort to reduce illegal sales of tobacco products to minors. That includes the following four components: • License that all retailers must obtain in order to sell tobacco products and that must be renewed annually. • A fee set high enough to sufficiently fund an effective program including administration of the program and enforcement efforts. An enforcement plan, that includes compliance checks, should be clearly stated. • Coordination of tobacco regulations so that a violation of any existing local, state or federal tobacco regulation violates the license. • A financial deterrent through fines and penalties including the suspension and revocation of the license. Fines and penalties should be outlined in the ordinance. The table below lists illegal sales rates to minors before and after a strong licensing law was enacted. These sales rates were determined by youth tobacco purchase surveys administered by local agencies. It is important to note that results from the youth tobacco purchase surveys have a number of different factors that influence change. Results from these surveys are somewhat dependent on certain factors that differ in each community, such as the age of the youth and the number of stores surveyed. Furthermore, other factors that could impact these rates include statewide laws, other city policies, or statewide or national media campaigns. The data below shows that these decreases occur after a tobacco retailer license has been established. The results overwhelmingly demonstrate that local tobacco retailer licensing ordinances with strong enforcement provisions are effective. Rates of illegal tobacco sales to minors have decreased, often significantly, in all municipalities with a strong tobacco retailer licensing ordinance where there is before and after youth sales rate data available. However, a licensing ordinance by itself will not automatically decrease sales rates; proper education and enforcement about the local ordinance and state youth access laws are always needed. Before and after youth sales rate data is available for the following 41 California communities with strong licensing ordinances- Banning, Baldwin Park, Beaumont, Berkeley, Burbank, Calabasas, Carpentaria, Coachella, Contra Costa County, Corona, Davis, Delano, Desert Hot Springs, El Cajon, Elk Grove, Goleta, Grass Valley, Grover Beach, Kern County, La Canada Flintridge, Los Angeles County, Morgan Hill, Murrieta, Norco, Oroville, Pasadena, Riverside, Rosemead, Sacramento, Sacramento County, San Fernando, San Francisco, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, Santa Barbara County, Sonoma County, Tehachapi, Vista, Winters, Woodland, and Yolo County. For more resources on these ordinances, including the Matrix of Strong Local Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinances with policy and enforcement details for every strong ordinance in the state, visit: www.Center4TobaccoPolicy.org For model tobacco retailer licensing ordinance language, visit ChangeLab Solutions at changelabsolutions.org SEPTEMBER 2018 ATTACHMENT 5 THE CENTER FOR TOBACCO POLICY & ORGANIZING Page 2 of 2 The Center for Tobacco Policy & Organizing | American Lung Association in California 1531 I Street, Suite 201, Sacramento, CA 95814 | Phone: (916) 554.5864 | Fax: (916) 442.8585 ©2018. California Department of Public Health. Funded under contract #14-10013. CENTER4TOBACCOPOLICY.ORG LUNG.ORG/CALIFORNIA Table of youth sales rates before and after the adoption of a strong tobacco retailer licensing ordinance City/County Date Passed Annual Fee Youth Sales RateBefore Ordinance Most RecentYouth Sales Rate Banning August 2006 $350 77%21% Baldwin Park October 2008 $342 34%9% Beaumont December 2006 $350 63%20% Berkeley December 2002 $427*38%4.2% Burbank February 2007 $235 26.7%5% Calabasas June 2009 $0*30.8%5% Carpentaria April 2012 $379 26%7% Coachella July 2009 $350 69%11% Contra Costa County January 2003 $160*37%13% Corona October 2005 $350 50%17% Davis August 2007 $377 30.5%12% Delano June 2008 $165 23%5.6% Desert Hot Springs August 2007 $350 48%4% El Cajon June 2004 $698 40%1% Elk Grove September 2004 $270 17%16.7% Goleta May 2014 $534 21%7% Grass Valley November 2009 $100 27%0% Grover Beach September 2005 $244 46%17% Kern County November 2006 $165 34%13.3% La Canada Flintridge June 2009 $50*47.1%0% Los Angeles County December 2007 $235 30.6%8% Morgan Hill April 2014 $125 15%0% Murrieta May 2006 $350 31%7% Norco March 2006 $350 40%6% Oroville March 2013 $30 22.6%0% Pasadena January 2004 $225 29%0% Riverside May 2006 $350 65%31% Rosemead July 2017 $235 32%22% Sacramento March 2004 $324 27%15.1% Sacramento County May 2004 $287 21%7.1% San Fernando October 2008 $250 38.5%3% San Francisco November 2003 $175*22.3%13.4% San Luis Obispo August 2003 $255 17%13% San Luis Obispo County October 2008 $342 33.3%5% Santa Barbara County November 2010 $235 21%3% Sonoma County April 2016 $350 18.4%1.3% Tehachapi February 2007 $165 8%16.7% Vista May 2005 $250 39%1.9% Winters January 2016 $377 47%19% Woodland June 2015 $377 32%8% Yolo County May 2006 $377 28%7.8% *City or County fee does not fully cover administration and enforcement of the tobacco-retailer license. Rather, the fee is supplemental with another stable source of funds, such as the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) funds or general funds. See the Center’s Matrix of Strong Local Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinances for full details about the administration and enforcement of these ordinances.