| Practice Type: |
Promising |
| Program Name: |
Tobacco Retailer Licensing Ordinance |
| Organization: |
Tobacco Retailer Licensing |
| Web site: |
http://www.rivcoph.org/healthed/license.htm |
| Overview: |
GOALS: Keep minors from purchasing tobacco. Create a blanket of identical local ordinances that license tobacco retailers through fees that cover the costs of inspections and enforcement. OBJECTIVES: Find tobacco retailers once an ordinance is passed. Educate merchants on all the laws. Conduct announced inspections for ALL tobacco laws (12+). Conduct enforcement operations for youth tobacco sales. Our primary focus is driving youth access rates down. Our cities have rates varying from 40%-90% preordinance. Established programs statewide have decreased rates by 70% over baseline. Our program has had similar success through regular youth decoy operations. Secondary focus is educating and enforcing compliance with all other tobacco laws. This is accomplished through announced inspections. |
| Year Submitted: |
2008 |
| Responsiveness and Innovation: |
We decided we had to get into the enforcement of the tobacco laws and overall licensing regulation because of a variety of factors. In 2003 we became concerned that youth sales rates were 44% average in about 5 cities that we had rates for. These rates were primarily from the state STAKE program enforcement which
only covers 3% of the merchants each year. Only one local police department was doing regular tobacco enforcement operations. Rates had not responded to 10 years of face-to-face merchant education by our programs at the County Health Department such as Operation Storefront which was done statewide.
We are in continual contact with other counties and cities that conduct tobacco retailer licensing programs.
Our ordinance called for fees high enough to provide enforcement. At the time, ours was the highest in California. No other programs have it all in-house, from billing, inspections, youth decoy operations, and revocations.
Southwest Utah Public Health Department has more of an educational approach. It uses Master Settlement Agreement funding to pay for their youth decoy operations of existing state law and classes for the clerks. If clerks take the classes the fine can be reduced. Our program is different because we go beyond state law and have written new local laws. Our resources are fees paid by the merchants. Our program will fine AND revoke a license for violations where SW Utah just worked with the fine structure of their state law. Our program additionally inspects for all other tobacco laws in announced inspections (12+ laws). |
| Agency and Community Roles: |
The LHD involved CBOs and stakeholders in the planning phase and showing support to the city councils. Once the ordinance is passed the LHD does all the functions of billing, licensing, and inspections. Some police assistance is needed for youth decoy operations or confiscation of tobacco product. Multi-agency collaboration has been fostered by referring suspicious circumstances to other agencies. This led to the LHD hosting a meeting for all agencies involved with enforcement of alcohol, tobacco, or food. We had State Tobacco Licensing Program, county environmental health, State Alcoholic Beverage Control, county business licenses, local police departments, and the State Health Department's Tobacco Program. This has lead to the creation of an interagency form that can be used to refer violations to the appropriate programs. |
| Costs and Expenditures: |
Our county health department budget gave a loan for startup, and 3 staff were initially hired. We started with 200 merchants in the unincorporated county areas, but grew to 500 in year one and to 1000 in year two as 12 cities have passed identical ordinances and handed the responsibility over to the County Health Department. All costs are paid by merchants, through the license fee. Where STAKE (state of CA) investigators only visit 3% of stores each year, we visited the majority with youth decoy operations.
$350 license fee paid by each of approximately1000 merchants in 12 cities plus unincorporated county. Other revenue through fines paid for violations. |
| Implementation: |
We decided we had to get into the enforcement of the tobacco laws and overall licensing regulation because of a variety of factors. In 2003 we became concerned that youth sales rates were 44% average in about 5 cities that we had rates for. These rates were primarily from the state STAKE program enforcement which
only covers 3% of the merchants each year. Only one local police department was doing regular tobacco enforcement operations. Rates had not responded to 10 years of face-to-face merchant education by our programs at the County Health Department such as Operation Storefront which was done statewide.
We are in continual contact with other counties and cities that conduct tobacco retailer licensing programs.
Our ordinance called for fees high enough to provide enforcement. At the time, ours was the highest in California. No other programs have it all in-house, from billing, inspections, youth decoy operations, and revocations.
Southwest Utah Public Health Department has more of an educational approach. It uses Master Settlement Agreement funding to pay for their youth decoy operations of existing state law and classes for the clerks. If clerks take the classes the fine can be reduced. Our program is different because we go beyond state law and have written new local laws. Our resources are fees paid by the merchants. Our program will fine AND revoke a license for violations where SW Utah just worked with the fine structure of their state law. Our program additionally inspects for all other tobacco laws in announced inspections (12+ laws). |
| Sustainability: |
The program is fully sustainable because merchant fees and fines pay for the operations. No grants are required. |
| Lessons Learned: |
|
