STORE Campaign Technical Assistance “2-for-1” Webinar STAKE Act & TRL

1. STORE CampaignTechnical Assistance “2-for-1” WebinarSTAKE Act & TRL May 14, 2008

2. Webinar overview • Two calls in one!! • Learn the Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement (STAKE) Act’s new identity based on passage of Senate Bill (SB) 624 • Prepare those that are working on local licensing adoption for possible questions related to Assembly Bill (AB) 2344

3. Ground rules • Each component ~ 30 minutes • Lots of time for Q & A • We will take a few questions at the end of the STAKE Act portion • We will open the call up after the local licensing portion for questions on either issue • Call will be in “conference mode” • “Monkey business” • Don’t forget to tell us what you think via the Survey Monkey

4. Part I:What changes have recently occurred to the STAKE Act?

5. What is the STAKE Act? • Federal law (The Synar Amendment) requires states to pass and enforce laws that make it illegal to sell tobacco to minors. • The STAKE Act (Business and Professions [B&P] Code Sections 22950 – 22963) is California’s response to the Synar Amendment. • The STAKE Act: • prohibits the furnishing of tobacco products to minors. • authorizes the assessment of civil penalties for violations (against business owners).

6. Who enforces the STAKE Act? • The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) has primary enforcement responsibility • Historically, CDPH has been the only enforcer • The Food and Drug Branch (FDB): • conducts compliance checks using teenage operatives • assesses and collects penalties • serves legal notices on violators • administers penalty appeal hearings • manages a toll-free telephone number to report illegal tobacco sales • The Tobacco Control Program (TCP): • recruits teens • conducts a statewide youth tobacco purchase survey • files annual report with the state Alcohol and Drug Program

7. How is the STAKE Act funded? • The STAKE Act is funded by the Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, via a federal Center for Substance Abuse Prevention block grant. • Additionally, it is funded through the collection of fines and penalties.

8. What did SB 624 do to STAKE? • Provides authority for state & local law enforcement agencies to enforce the STAKE Act • Increases the first two fines • From $200-$300 to $400-$600 for 1st violation • From $400-$600 to $900-$1,000 for 2nd violation • Establishes a fine structure for not posting warning signs • $200 for 1st violation, $500 for 2nd and each subsequent violation • Eliminates the fine collection cap ($300,000) • All state agencies must deposit fines into the Sales of Tobacco to Minors Control Account • Fines collected by local law enforcement, stay local

9. What will help me determine if my jurisdiction should enforce STAKE? • SB 624 does not require local jurisdictions to enforce the STAKE Act • In choosing between STAKE, PC 308, and local licensing, there are several differences you will need to consider: • Gathering evidence • Proving that a violation took place • Penalty structure

10. Gathering the evidence: protocols for sting operations

11. Proving the violation occurred

12. Penalties for selling to minors

13. Penalties for not posting warning signs

14. Educational materials • Designed to provide overview of the changes to STAKE, answer critical questions and be shared with your local law enforcement partners • SB 624 Fact Sheet • SB 624 Frequently Asked Questions • Letter from Senator Padilla (SB 624 author) • Letter sent to LLAs • Basis for many questions to TALC

15. Coordination • If you are interested in enforcing STAKE, it is critical that you contact the FDB to let them know • “State and local enforcement agencies are encouraged, in order to avoid duplication, to share the results of inspections and coordinate with the FDB when enforcing the STAKE Act” (Business and Professions Code section 22957(b))

16. Contact information • Glen Lawrence, CDPH/FDB • 916-650-6600 • glen.lawrence@cdph.ca.gov • Mary Strode, STAKE Act Coordinator, CTCP • 916-449-5496 • mary.strode@cdph.ca.gov • Ian McLaughlin, TALC Staff Attorney • 510-444-8252 ext. 315 • imclaughlin@phlpnet.org

17. Questions?

18. Part II:What is AB 2344 and what does it have to do with local licensing?

19. A brief history… • Prior to 2002, most licensing policies lacked sufficient fees and meaningful penalties • The STORE Campaign emphasized stronger local licensing policies • TALC model policy • Center for Tobacco Policy and Organizing and CYAN technical assistance • Today, several dozen (and counting) strong local licensing policies • In spite of the State licensing law (passed in 2004) • Key → state law was anti-preemptive and only had a one-time fee

20. What does AB 2344 propose? • Would amend the current State licensing law • Would increase retailer fee to $185…and make it annual • Would raise ~ $7 million annually for Board of Equalization to administer state licensing program • Funds no longer taken from Prop 99 (~ $2 million annually) • It may make some retailers reconsider selling tobacco at all • But, a chilling effect on local licensing?

21. AB 2344’s status in Legislature • Passed Assembly Governmental Organization Committee on April 16 • Currently held on “Suspense file” in Assembly Appropriations Committee – No hearing date set

22. Why a chilling effect? • State licensing law does not currently have annual retailer fee • Retailer groups are growing tired of local licensing fees and (seemingly) lack understanding of their purpose • Likelihood of passage is good

23. Retailer issues/concerns • Annual fee is bad because: • The intent was that over time, tax evasion would be reduced along with need for enforcement, and the corresponding funds • Retailers are paying too many (high) fees • Confusion about: • What local fee is used for • Anti-preemption (locals can pass their own licensing ordinances)

24. Educational materials • Designed to answer critical questions regarding AB 2344, the state licensing law, and local tobacco retailer licensing • AB 2344 Questions & Answers • “Center” one-pager on success of local licensing

25. Remember! • You have the tools to deflect concerns that may be brought about by AB 2344 • AB 2344 is not the enemy, it proposes meaningful change to the state licensing law • Local message focus: • the state law only funds efforts to enforce tax evasion laws • local licensing funds enforcement of youth access to tobacco laws • local licensing is within the police powers of local government to assess a fee on retailers

26. For more assistance • Center for Tobacco Policy and Organizing • Vanessa Marvin • 916-554-5864 • vmarvin@alac.org • Technical Assistance Legal Center • Ian McLaughlin • 510-302-3315 • imclaughlin@phlpnet.org • California Youth Advocacy Network • Maureen Pacheco • 916-339-3424 Ext. 28 • maureen@cyanonline.org

27. Questions?

28. Thanks for participating, good luck, &keep up the great work!