CC WORKSESSION PACKET 04132021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

11 that distributors would not take back the flavored product supply, 34% did not know which products they were allowed to sell, and 30% reported not having enough time to sell down their supply.43 Between 2015 and 2017, several other Massachusetts communities implemented flavored tobacco product restrictions allowing researchers to evaluate additional jurisdictions. The researchers found 6 months to 1 year post- implementation that 21 of the 38 communities with a restriction achieved 100% compliance. While 11 of the communities had non-compliant retailers,§§ only 12% of retailers in those communities were not in compliance. Among those not in compliance, retailers cited uncertainty as to whether particular products, particularly concept flavors, were on the Guidance List.52 In order to reduce youth access to flavored tobacco products, Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota restricted the sale of flavored tobacco to adult-only tobacco product shops in 2016. Their policies applied to all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, and exempted menthol. An observational study was conducted pre- and post- policy implementation at retail stores. In both cities, significantly fewer stores sold flavored tobacco after the policy went into effect; in Minneapolis the number of stores selling flavored tobacco dropped from 85% to 39% and in St. Paul from 97% to 8%.53 While the sample sizes were small, these data were similar to those found in Boston and other Massachusetts communities. In 2017, Minneapolis City Council closed their menthol flavored tobacco product exemption but allowed the products to be sold in adult-only tobacco product shops and liquor stores. At the time the ordinance was passed, there were 342 §§ The remaining 6 communities did not have data collected. *** Existing shops with licenses to sell exclusively tobacco products were grandfathered in. ††† It may also increase the direct cost (i.e., purchase price of cigarettes) and indirect cost (i.e., travel costs and opportunity cost of time not doing other things) by 10% for menthol smokers and 9% for African American menthol smokers thereby reducing access to menthol tobacco products.56 outlets selling menthol tobacco (317 convenience stores, gas stations, and liquor stores and 25 tobacco product shops) and the shops were given a year before the policy was implemented. In anticipation of fewer sales or because of them, 24 convenience store owners applied for licenses to establish new adult-only tobacco product shops. Some store owners split their existing stores into two stores: an adult- only tobacco product shop and a convenience store. Other owners simply converted their store into adult-only tobacco product shops. Many additional owners had inquired about applying for these licenses before the city passed a moratorium on the establishment of new tobacco product shops in August 2018 in order to study the issue.54,55 In July 2019, to combat the licensure loophole, the city passed a requirement that there must be 2000 feet between any two adult-only tobacco product shops.*** The requirement is theorized to work, in part, by minimizing the number of new and existing retailers who can apply for licenses.††† As of August 2019, there were 52 exclusive tobacco product shops in Minneapolis, up from 25 shops in 2017 (108% increase). Assuming the buffer zone provision is effective, this trend should slow or reverse with time. Beyond these 24 convenience store owners, the policy has been relatively effective at reducing the total number of retailers authorized to sell menthol flavored tobacco products, with the number decreasing by 76% since 2017.54 Finally, a research team examined compliance with a menthol cigarette restriction in Chicago, Illinois, which banned menthol cigarette sales within 500 feet of schools starting in 2016. Compliance of relevant retailers was 57%, with gas stations complying less with the ban as compared to larger/chain stores. The authors concluded that a partial menthol ban (i.e. near schools) results in poor compliance.20