Home » CTA

Category Archives: CTA

Advertisements

Call to Action: West Allis Indoor Vapor Ban

SUMMARY

On July 5, 2016, the West Allis Common Council voted to pass an ordinance that would significantly affect vaping and the sale of vapor products. Ordinance file number O-2016-0011 creates Section 9.36 of the West Allis Revised Municipal Code Relating to Electronic Smoking Device Sales 1) includes the use of vapor products in the City’s smoking ban; 2) requires a license for the sale of vapor products; 3) bans the sale of vapor products (including non-nicotine) to minors; and 4) prohibits vending machine and self-service sales.

It has come to our attention that this decision could be reversed IF one of the aldermen who voted for the ordinance requests a “reconsideration vote” at the upcoming Common Council meeting on August 2nd. We urge members to contact the aldermen who voted to pass this ordinance BEFORE TUESDAY, AUGUST 2nd, to urge them to consider the facts and request a reconsideration vote!



ADVOCACY SUGGESTIONS

1)  Email and call the members of the West Allis Common Council to explain why you oppose efforts to ban the use of vapor products where smoking is prohibited. (See Suggested Talking Points below.)

2) Contact local media (television station producers and newspaper editors) to tell your story and explain why this ordinance is bad for public health and actually encourages smokers to keep smoking.

3) Post comments on online news stories about this proposed ordinance telling your story and why you oppose the ordinance (see partial  list below.)

4) For social networking users, the  Twitter and Facebook accounts that could be found for the Committee have also been included with their contact information. Let them know how you feel!

5) Share this blog post on your social media (Facebook, Twitter, Google +)  and in any area vaping groups. Get your supportive family members and frioends to also share!

If you are on Facebook and want to get more involved, be sure to join the Wisconsin Smoke-free Alternatives Coalition group.

6) Contact all of your local vape shops and let them know that they need to fight this ordinance (no more vaping in their shop.) Retailers can contact their customers, make them aware of the proposed ordinance and get them to attend hearings.

 

As a sign of respect, we request that you refrain from vaping during any meetings with lawmakers and/or media (unless requested), avoid the use of “vape slang” (ie. “juice”) and foul language, and act in an otherwise respectful manner.


DOCUMENTATION AND LINK

Ordinance Full Text
https://westalliswi.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2560607&GUID=7E52D771-7191-4916-AC89-63DC79466745&Options=&Search=&FullText=1

Video of July 5, 2016 Common Council meeting (vaping discussion begins around 33:00)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOrNT_fsMEM&index=3&list=PL19D0DCED7F5352F4

News Coverage (Please leave a comment, even on the positive stories!):
West Allis bans e-cigarette smoking where tobacco smoking is banned

SUGGESTED TALKING POINTS

1. You are a West Allis-area or Wisconsin resident and you oppose banning vapor product use where smoking is prohibited. (If you are responding to this Call to Action and are not a state resident, please mention any connection you have to the area, for example, you travel to West Allis on vacation or have friends/family in the area.)

2. Tell your story on how switching to an vapor product has changed your life. (Avoid using slang terms such as “juice.”)

3. Clarify that:

a.  Smoking bans are ostensibly enacted to protect the public from the harm of secondhand smoke, but vapor products have not been found to pose a risk to bystanders. In fact, all evidence to date shows that the low health risks associated with vapor productss are comparable to other smokeless nicotine products.

b.  The very low risks of vapor products is supported by research done by Dr. Siegel of Boston University, Dr. Eissenberg of Virginia Commonwealth, Dr Maciej L Goniewicz of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Dr. Laugesen of Health New Zealand, Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University, Public Health England and by the fact that the FDA testing, in spite of its press statement, failed to find harmful levels of carcinogens or toxic levels of any chemical in the vapor.

c.  A comprehensive review conducted by Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University School of Public Health based on over 9,000 observations of vapor product liquid and vapor found “no apparent concern” for bystanders exposed to vapor, even under “worst case” assumptions about exposure.

d.  Electronic cigarette use is easy to distinguish from actual smoking. Although some vapor products resemble real cigarettes, many do not. It is easy to tell when someone lights a cigarette from the smell of smoke. Vapor is practically odorless, and generally any detectable odor is not unpleasant and smells nothing like smoke. Additionally, vapor product users can decide whether to release any vapor (“discreet vaping”).  With so little evidence of use, enforcing use bans on vapor products would be nearly impossible.

e.  The ability to use electronic cigarettes in public spaces will actually improve public health by inspiring other smokers to switch and reduce their health risks by an estimated 99%.

f. Many smokers first try vapor products because they can use them where they cannot smoke, however, they often become “accidental quitters.” This is a documented phenomenon unique to vapor products. It may take a few months or only a few days, but they inevitably stop smoking conventional cigarettes. This is why including vapor products in smoking bans could have serious unintended consequences!

h. By prohibiting vapor product use even outdoors, the City will also be sending a strong message to traditional smokers that vapor products are no safer than smoking. This will actually maintain the number of smokers in West Allis rather than help reduce smoking. This is a far more realistic risk to public health than any unfounded concerns about possible youth or non-smoker use uptake.

In fact, the most recent report by the CDC showed that the dramatic increase invapor product use over that past 3 years has not led to an increase in youth smoking. Youth smoking of traditional cigarttes continues to decline to record low levels.

i. The children of smoking parents are far more likely to become smokers than the children of non-smoking parents who see smoking behaviors in public. The children of smoking parents who quit aren’t any more likely to smoke than those of non-smoking parents. Prohibiting vapor products on County outdoor properties does little to protect the children of non-smoking parents from becoming smokers, but significantly increases the likelihood that many smoking parents won’t switch to vapor products. This only serves to keep the highest-risk children at risk.

j. Vapor product use does not promote the smoking of traditional cigarettes, nor does it threaten the gains of tobacco control over the past few decades. In fact, by normalizing vapor product use over traditional smoking, the efforts of tobacco control are being supported. If anything, vapor products use denormalizes conventional smoking by setting the example of smokers choosing a far less harmful alternative to traditional smoking. The CDC surveys clearly show that there has been no “gateway effect” causing non-smokers to start smoking. As vapor products have become more popular, all available evidence is showing that more and more smokers are quitting traditional cigarettes, including youth smokers.

k. This ordinance will send potential business to surrounding areas that allow businesses to choose for themselves wheter or not they want to cater to patrons who use the products. Additionally, businesses that allow the use of vapor products inside are less likely to have patrons causing a noise nuisence or litter outside of the establishment.

l. Encourage them to hold off on these drastic, excessive measures until they have the opportunity to see the new film “A Billion Lives,” which will expose the truth about these products and their efficacy.

m. Important Note: A typical and frequent lawmaker response to vapor product users who object to public use bans is “We aren’t banning all use or sales, just use where smoking is also prohibited.”

Don’t give them the opportunity to counter you in that way! Make it very clear that you understand that this is not a ban of vapor product sales or a ban of vapor product use where smoking is allowed, but that what IS proposed is still a step backward in public health, not a step forward. Forcing former smokers to use a smoke-free, tobacco-free harm reduction product while surrounded by others smoking combustible cigarettes only increases the odds that they will return to smoking themsleves!

4.  Direct them to the WSAC4WI.org and  CASAA.org websites, as well as the CASAA Research Library, for more information.


CONTACT LIST

Mayor Dan Devine
West Allis City Hall
7525 W. Greenfield Ave
West Allis, WI 53214
Phone: (414) 302-8290
Email: Email Mayor’s Office

Cathleen M. Probst (District 2)
1959 S 79 St
West Allis, WI 53219
Home: (414) 687-3129
Email: Email Ald. Probst

Rosalie L. Reinke (District 5)
2821 S 114 St
West Allis WI 53227
Home: (414) 543-0587
Email: Email Ald. Reinke

Vincent Vitale (District 1)
5758 W Kinnickinnic River Pkwy
West Allis, WI 53219
(414) 545-5659
Home: (414) 545-5659
Mobile: (414) 388-5059
Email: Email Ald. Vitale

Kevin Haass (District 5)
3420 S. 122 St
West Allis WI 53227
Cell: (414) 704-1164
Email: Email Ald. Haass

Thomas G. Lajsic (District 4)
2755 S 74 St
West Allis WI 53219
Home: (414) 327-2661
Email: Email Ald. Lajsic

Michael P. May (District 3)
837 S 113 St
West Allis WI 53214
Home: (414) 460-6442
Email: Email Ald. May

Advertisements

Call to Action: City of Janesville Vaping Ban

Call_to_Action_IconOn Monday, August 10th, a proposed ordinance that would amend the regulations related to smoking, including the use of electronic delivery devices in the City of Janesville, and expand the outdoor areas on City property where smoking and the use of electronic delivery devices is prohibited via ordinance to include all City premises, including, any premises containing a building, parking ramp or lot, or park or trail controlled by the City, was introduced. An exemption would be created to permit the use of electronic smoking devices in a retail establishment for which one of the primary purposes is the sale on the premises of electronic delivery devices and accessories.

The American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network advocates for smoke-free laws, including electronic delivery devices and supposed nicotine-free electronic delivery devices, in all workplaces to protect workers and the public form the harmful effects of secondhand exposure and states that preliminary studies indicate that nonusers can be exposed to the same potentially harmful chemicals as users, including nicotine, ultrafine particles and volatile organic compounds, which could be especially problematic for children, pregnant women, and people with heart disease.

A public hearing is scheduled for August 24th at 6:00 PM in the Council Chambers on floor four of City Hall, 18 N Jackson Street in downtown Janesville. There will be a public hearing on this topic so, during the meeting, the Council President will ask if anyone would like to speak. You can go to either podium, state your name and address and speak to this topic.

Please download, print and hand out the flyer below to fellow vapers and vape shops!

Janevile Flyer

Please check back frequently for updates and also join the Wisconsin Smoke-free Alternatives Coalition on Facebook!

The public is welcome (and strongly encouraged) to attend these meetings and address the lawmakers with their concerns and comments. Arrive early to sign up on the registration form to speak.


ADVOCACY SUGGESTIONS

1)  Email and call the mayor and other members of the City of Janesville City Council (listed below) to explain why you oppose efforts to ban e-cigarettes wherever smoking is prohibited, and (2) attend any meetings and offer testimony in opposition to efforts to define smoke-free e-cigarette use as smoking (see Suggested Talking Points listed below.)

2) Contact local media (television station producers and newspaper editors) to tell your story and explain why this ordinance is bad for public health and actually encourages smokers to keep smoking.

3) Post comments on online news stories about this proposed ordinance; telling your story and why you oppose the ordinance (see partial  list below.)

4) For social networking users, the Twitter and Facebook accounts for the City Council have also been included with their contact information. Let them know how you feel!

5) Share this blog post on your social media (Facebook, Twitter, Google +)  and in any area vaping groups. Get your supportive family members and frioends to also share!

If you are on Facebook and want to get more involved, be sure to join the Wisconsin Smoke-free Alternatives Coalition group.

6) Contact all of your local vape shops and let them know that they need to fight this ordinance (no more vaping in their shop.) Retailers can contact their customers, make them aware of the proposed ordinance and get them to attend hearings.

7) Even if you do not wish to speak publicly, be sure to attend meetings and rallies as an audience member to show a strong, united front and to make clear to the media and lawmakers that such actions are hurting real people.

(See Massachusetts town snuffs out tobacco ban after outcry as an example of what a strong show of opposition can do, but please always remain calm and respectful. What ultimately changed changed minds in this case was the sheer numbers of people showing up, not the disruption of the proceedings.)

As a sign of respect, we request that you refrain from vaping during any meetings with lawmakers and/or media (unless requested), avoid the use of “vape slang” (ie. “juice”) and foul language, and act in an otherwise respectful manner.


DOCUMENTATION AND LINKS


SUGGESTED TALKING POINTS

1. You are a Janesvile-area or Wisconsin resident and you oppose banning e-cigarette use where smoking is prohibited. (If you are responding to this Call to Action and are not a state resident, please mention any connection you have to the area, for example, you travel to Madison on vacation or have friends/family in the area.)

2. Tell your story on how switching to an e-cigarette has changed your life. (Avoid using slang terms such as “juice.”)

3. Clarify that:

a.  Smoking bans are ostensibly enacted to protect the public from the harm of secondhand smoke, but e-cigarettes have not been found to pose a risk to bystanders. In fact, all evidence to date shows that the low health risks associated with e-cigarettes are comparable to other smokeless nicotine products.

b.  The low risks of e-cigarettes is supported by research done by Dr. Siegel of Boston University, Dr. Eissenberg of Virginia Commonwealth, Dr Maciej L Goniewicz of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Dr. Laugesen of Health New Zealand, Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University, and by the fact that the FDA testing, in spite of its press statement, failed to find harmful levels of carcinogens or toxic levels of any chemical in the vapor.

c.  A comprehensive review conducted by Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University School of Public Health based on over 9,000 observations of e-cigarette liquid and vapor found “no apparent concern” for bystanders exposed to e-cigarette vapor, even under “worst case” assumptions about exposure. All other studies finding “toxins” have been greatly exaggerated.

d.  Electronic cigarette use is easy to distinguish from actual smoking. Although some e-cigarettes resemble real cigarettes, many do not. It is easy to tell when someone lights a cigarette from the smell of smoke. E-cigarette vapor is practically odorless, and generally any detectable odor is not unpleasant and smells nothing like smoke. Additionally, e-cigarette users can decide whether to release any vapor (“discreet vaping”).  With so little evidence of use, enforcing use bans on electronic cigarettes would be nearly impossible.

e.  The ability to use electronic cigarettes in public spaces will actually improve public health by inspiring other smokers to switch and reduce their health risks by an estimated 99%.

f. Losing the ability to test e-liquids before purchasing will have a significant and negative impact on your ability to purchase/sell e-liquids.

g. Many smokers first try e-cigarettes because they can use them where they cannot smoke, however, they often become “accidental quitters.” This is a documented phenomenon unique to e-cigarettes. It may take a few months or only a few days, but they inevitably stop smoking conventional cigarettes. This is why including e-cigarettes in smoking bans could have serious unintended consequences!

h. By making e-cigarette users go outdoors, the City will also be sending a strong message to traditional smokers that e-cigarettes are no safer than smoking. This will actually maintain the number of smokers in Janesville,  rather than help reduce smoking. This is a far more realistic risk to public health than any unfounded concerns about possible youth or non-smoker use uptake.

In fact, the most recent report by the CDC showed that the dramatic increase in e-cigarette use over that past 3 years has not led to an increase in youth smoking. Youth smoking of traditional cigarttes continues to decline to record low levels.

i. The children of smoking parents are far more likely to become smokers than the children of non-smoking parents who see smoking behaviors in public. The children of smoking parents who quit aren’t any more likely to smoke than those of non-smoking parents. Prohibiting vapor products in public does little to protect the children of non-smoking parents from becoming smokers, but significantly increases the likelihood that many smoking parents won’t switch to e-cigarettes. This only serves to keep the highest-risk children at risk.

j. E-cigarette use does not promote the smoking of traditional cigarettes, nor does it threaten the gains of tobacco control over the past few decades. In fact, by normalizing e-cigarette use over traditional smoking, the efforts of tobacco control are being supported. If anything, e-cigarette usedenormalizes conventional smoking by setting the example of smokers choosing a far less harmful alternative to traditional smoking. The CDC surveys clearly show that there has been no “gateway effect” causing non-smokers to start smoking. As e-cigarettes have become more popular, all available evidence is showing that more and more smokers are quitting traditional cigarettes, including youth smokers.

k. IMPORTANT NOTE: A typical and frequent lawmaker response to e-cigarette users who object to public use bans is “We aren’t banning all use or sales, just use where smoking is also prohibited.”

Don’t give them the opportunity to counter you in that way! Make it very clear that you understand that this is not a ban of e-cigarette sales or a ban of e-cigarette use where smoking is allowed, but that what IS proposed is still a step backward in public health, not a step forward.

4.  Direct them to the CASAA.org and WSAC4WI.org
websites, as well as the CASAA Research Library, for more information.


CONTACT LIST

You can click send an email to the entire City Council at citycouncil@ci.janesville.wi.us or mail to: 

City Council
City Hall
Post Office Box 5005
Janesville, WI, 53547-5005

Or contact each member directly (best)

Doug Marklein, Council President
608-373-6016 voicemail
608-752-8734 cell
markleind@ci.janesville.wi.us

Doug Marklein, Council President
608-373-6016 voicemail
608-752-8734 cell
markleind@ci.janesville.wi.us

Mark Bobzien
608-373-6011 voicmail
608-359-6678 cell
bobzienm@ci.janesville.wi.us

Kay Deupree
608-373-6013 voiceail
deupreek@ci.janesville.wi.us

Jim Farrell
608-373-6012 voicemail
608-289-9407 cell
farrellj@ci.janesville.wi.us

Rich Gruber
608-373-6014 voicemail
608-921-1483 cell
gruberr@ci.janesville.wi.us

Sam Liebert
608-373-6015 voicemail
608-359-1956 cell
lieberts@ci.janesville.wi.us

Call to Action: St Croix County Vaping Ban

Call_to_Action_IconSt. Croix County’s proposed amendments to “Resolution 34” redefines vaping as “smoking” and bans use on County property, including parks and fair grounds. While the County may have an argument for the right to prohibit vaping inside its own workplaces, banning the use of vapor products at public outdoor spaces, such as parks and fair grounds, is completely unreasonable and groundless.

This issue will be discused at the next St Croix Health and Human Sevices Board meeting on Tuesday, April 14, 2015, 5:30 p.m. at the County Board Room, 1101 Carmichael Road, Hudson, Wisconsin. If the Board agrees with this amendment, it will recommend to the Administration Committee the inclusion of E-Cigarettes to an updated policy or ordinance.

As it’s almost a guarantee that the Health and Human Servies Board will push this to the Administration Committee, we are recommending members focus on contacting the members of the Administration Committee. The next Committee meeting is scheduled for April 15th, but this proposal is not on the agenda.  It may be on the agenda for the following meeting on May 5th. Please contact the committee members (see below) as soon as possible!

 


ADVOCACY SUGGESTIONS

1)  Email and call the members of the St. Croix Administraton Committee to explain why you oppose efforts to ban the use of vapor products on outdoor County property, and (2) attend any meetings and offer testimony in opposition to efforts to define smoke-free e-cigarette use as smoking (see Suggested Talking Points listed below.)

2) Contact local media (television station producers and newspaper editors) to tell your story and explain why this ordinance is bad for public health and actually encourages smokers to keep smoking.

3) Post comments on online news stories about this proposed ordinance telling your story and why you oppose the ordinance (see partial  list below.)

4) For social networking users, the  Twitter and Facebook accounts that could be found for the Committee have also been included with their contact information. Let them know how you feel!

5) Share this blog post on your social media (Facebook, Twitter, Google +)  and in any area vaping groups. Get your supportive family members and frioends to also share!

If you are on Facebook and want to get more involved, be sure to join the Wisconsin Smoke-free Alternatives Coalition group.

6) Contact all of your local vape shops and let them know that they need to fight this ordinance (no more vaping in their shop.) Retailers can contact their customers, make them aware of the proposed ordinance and get them to attend hearings.

7) Even if you do not wish to speak publicly, be sure to attend meetings and rallies as an audience member to show a strong, united front and to make clear to the media and lawmakers that such actions are hurting real people.

(See Massachusetts town snuffs out tobacco ban after outcry as an example of what a strong show of opposition can do, but please always remain calm and respectful. What ultimately changed changed minds in this case was the sheer numbers of people showing up, not the disruption of the proceedings.)

As a sign of respect, we request that you refrain from vaping during any meetings with lawmakers and/or media (unless requested), avoid the use of “vape slang” (ie. “juice”) and foul language, and act in an otherwise respectful manner.


DOCUMENTATION AND LINK

St. Croix County Health and Human Services Board Meeting Agenda (pg 49): http://stcroixcountywi.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=1649&Inline=True

News Coverage (Please leave a comment, even on the positive stories!):
N/A

SUGGESTED TALKING POINTS

1. You are a St. Croix-area or Wisconsin resident and you oppose banning e-cigarette use where smoking is prohibited on County properties, specifically outdoor spaces such as parks and fair grounds. (If you are responding to this Call to Action and are not a state resident, please mention any connection you have to the area, for example, you travel to St. Croix on vacation or have friends/family in the area.)

2. Tell your story on how switching to an e-cigarette has changed your life. (Avoid using slang terms such as “juice.”)

3. Clarify that:

a.  Smoking bans are ostensibly enacted to protect the public from the harm of secondhand smoke, but e-cigarettes have not been found to pose a risk to bystanders. In fact, all evidence to date shows that the low health risks associated with e-cigarettes are comparable to other smokeless nicotine products.

b.  The low risks of e-cigarettes is supported by research done by Dr. Siegel of Boston University, Dr. Eissenberg of Virginia Commonwealth, Dr Maciej L Goniewicz of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Dr. Laugesen of Health New Zealand, Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University, and by the fact that the FDA testing, in spite of its press statement, failed to find harmful levels of carcinogens or toxic levels of any chemical in the vapor.

c.  A comprehensive review conducted by Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University School of Public Health based on over 9,000 observations of e-cigarette liquid and vapor found “no apparent concern” for bystanders exposed to e-cigarette vapor, even under “worst case” assumptions about exposure.

d.  Electronic cigarette use is easy to distinguish from actual smoking. Although some e-cigarettes resemble real cigarettes, many do not. It is easy to tell when someone lights a cigarette from the smell of smoke. E-cigarette vapor is practically odorless, and generally any detectable odor is not unpleasant and smells nothing like smoke. Additionally, e-cigarette users can decide whether to release any vapor (“discreet vaping”).  With so little evidence of use, enforcing use bans on electronic cigarettes would be nearly impossible.

e.  The ability to use electronic cigarettes in public spaces will actually improve public health by inspiring other smokers to switch and reduce their health risks by an estimated 99%.

f. Many smokers first try e-cigarettes because they can use them where they cannot smoke, however, they often become “accidental quitters.” This is a documented phenomenon unique to e-cigarettes. It may take a few months or only a few days, but they inevitably stop smoking conventional cigarettes. This is why including e-cigarettes in smoking bans could have serious unintended consequences!

h. By prohibiting vapor product use even outdoors, the County will also be sending a strong message to traditional smokers that e-cigarettes are no safer than smoking. This will actually maintain the number of smokers in St. Croix rather than help reduce smoking. This is a far more realistic risk to public health than any unfounded concerns about possible youth or non-smoker use uptake.

In fact, the most recent report by the CDC showed that the dramatic increase in e-cigarette use over that past 3 years has not led to an increase in youth smoking. Youth smoking of traditional cigarttes continues to decline to record low levels.

i. The children of smoking parents are far more likely to become smokers than the children of non-smoking parents who see smoking behaviors in public. The children of smoking parents who quit aren’t any more likely to smoke than those of non-smoking parents. Prohibiting vapor products on County outdoor properties does little to protect the children of non-smoking parents from becoming smokers, but significantly increases the likelihood that many smoking parents won’t switch to e-cigarettes. This only serves to keep the highest-risk children at risk.

j. E-cigarette use does not promote the smoking of traditional cigarettes, nor does it threaten the gains of tobacco control over the past few decades. In fact, by normalizing e-cigarette use over traditional smoking, the efforts of tobacco control are being supported. If anything, e-cigarette usedenormalizes conventional smoking by setting the example of smokers choosing a far less harmful alternative to traditional smoking. The CDC surveys clearly show that there has been no “gateway effect” causing non-smokers to start smoking. As e-cigarettes have become more popular, all available evidence is showing that more and more smokers are quitting traditional cigarettes, including youth smokers.

k. Important Note: A typical and frequent lawmaker response to e-cigarette users who object to public use bans is “We aren’t banning all use or sales, just use where smoking is also prohibited.”

Don’t give them the opportunity to counter you in that way! Make it very clear that you understand that this is not a ban of e-cigarette sales or a ban of e-cigarette use where smoking is allowed, but that what IS proposed is still a step backward in public health, not a step forward.

4.  Direct them to the WSAC4WI.org and  CASAA.org websites, as well as the CASAA Research Library, for more information.


CONTACT LIST

Travis Schachtner St. Croix County Chair
Phone: 715.381.4311
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TravisSchachtnerForDistrict1
T
witter: https://twitter.com/TjSchachtner
Email: district1@co.saint-croix.wi.us
1101 Carmichael Road
Hudson, WI 54016

Roy Sjoberg St. Croix County Supervisor
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Roysjobergforcountysupervisor
Twitter: N/A
Email: district5@co.saint-croix.wi.us

Jill Ann Berke St. Croix County Supervisor
Facebook: N/A
Twitter: N/A
Email: District9@co.saint-croix.wi.us

Ron Kiesler St. Croix County Vice Chair
Facebook: N/A
Twitter: https://twitter.com/sccdistrict13
Email: district13@co.saint-croix.wi.us

Judy Achterhof St. Croix County Supervisor
Facebook: N/A
Twitter: N/A
Email: District17@co.saint-croix.wi.us

Dave Ostness St. Croix County Supervisor
Facebook: N/A
Twitter: N/A
Email: district10@co.saint-croix.wi.us

Roger Larson St. Croix County Supervisor
Facebook: N/A
Twitter: N/A
Email: district11@co.saint-croix.wi.us

Comma Delimited list: district1@co.saint-croix.wi.us, district5@co.saint-croix.wi.us, District9@co.saint-croix.wi.us, district13@co.saint-croix.wi.us, District17@co.saint-croix.wi.us, district10@co.saint-croix.wi.us, district11@co.saint-croix.wi.us

 

Support Vapor Product Bill LRB 1116/5

Stop The Bans High ResAcross the country, and even in the state of Wisconsin, local governments are enacting ordinances that are based purely on public health hysteria and junk science reported by the media. These knee-jerk laws seek to protect bystanders from minimal exposure to relatively harmless vapor products (electronic cigarettes), while almost guaranteeing that thousands of smokers will continue to be exposed to the proven health risks that come from smoking. There is absolutely no risk of death from occasional exposure to vapor products, so if just one smoker continues to smoke and dies from a smoking-related disease because a law has restricted where they can use vapor products, lawmakers will have failed miserably in their goal to protect the public. Public use bans, advertising restrictions and high taxes are used as a way to disuade smokers from smoking. To use these same tactics on vapor consumers will have the unintended consequence keeping smokers smoking!

To halt the flood of proposed ordinances, Representative Joel Kleefisch (District 38), along with the Tavern League of Wisconsin and with the support of WSAC, has authored a state bill (LRB 1116/5) to exempt the use of vapor products from local smoking ordinances. Unfortunately, groups such as the American Lung Association and American Cancer Society have sent a letter filled with misinformation and baseless conjecture about vapor products to the entire legislature to oppose this bill. This petition urges your lawmakers to cosponsor and otherwise support LRB 1116/5 and stop the misguided attempts by local municipalities to restrict the use of vapor products in a way that will only result in less smokers quitting.

The deadline for this bill is Thursday, March 26th. Please click the link below and help us protect the future of vapor consumers and the lives of smokers who need incentives to switch. Be sure to also comment and tell your story about how vapor products have impacted your life and the lives of others!

CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE PETITION (more…)

(UPDATED) Call to Action: Madison attempting to further restrict vapor businesses

 

Updated! Call_to_Action_Icon

UPDATE 4/6/20115: Consideration of this new zoning ordinance has been pushed back to the May 4th. See video (at 00:31:30): Watch Video

Under this proposed zoning, a new vape shop that sells smoke-free products would be unreasonably and unjustifiably prohibited from opening within 500 feet of a gas station, convenience store or tobacco shop that sells combustible tobacco products. This zoning essentially protects the sale of harmful products while restricting the greater availability of and easier access to safer alternatives! This action could easily have statewide consequences, so ALL Wisconsin vapers and vape shops who support smoke-free alternatives should take action NOW!

Please keep sending emails and calling the Commissioners (see contact info below) and expressing your opposition to this ordinance!

UPDATE 3/25/15: After several vapers and shops spoke at the March 23rd meeting, this ordinance was recessed until April 6th. (See video of March 23rd meeting here, starting at 01:38:00) NOTE: It was made clear that this ordinance would NOT impact existing businesses in their current location.

Two Commissioners, Eric Sunderquist and Melissa Berger, requested further information on exactly how the zoning would impact the ability for new vapor shops to open, as well as to hear from the Mayor’s office as to the merits or rationale of singling out vapor shops for this type of zoning. They semed open to opposing this zoning. Alderman Steve King, who is apparently no fan of vapor products, quickly attempted to change the dialog, insisting that the next public hearing stay closed, to avoid any more discussion on the health debate. He insisted that was all settled during the indoor ban hearings and any new discussion should be limited to land use issues.

In that light, it is imperative that vapers and store owners attempt to meet with and write the Commissioners (see contact list below) to express their opposition and insist that the City provide clear evidence supporting why e-cigarette sales should be treated in the same way as traditional cigarette sales AND why stand-alone shops selling vapor products should be treated differently than other retail stores and gas stations that sell vapor products.

Madison Zoning Map

Areas in red show where new stores could open under the new zoning. The largest area would allow 2, maybe 3 shops at most. Others are only large enough for 1 shop.

 


 

3/23/2015: Madison is attempting to amend its tobacco zoning and licensing rules to include e-cigarette retailers. This was introduced by Mayor Soglin to the Common Council on March 3rd without debate and was referred to the Plan Commission. Based on a Google Maps search, this ordinance would severely limit new vape shops opening or expanding to new locations, based on their proximities to parks, churches, healthcare facilities, schools, playgrounds, daycare facilities, youth centers and other stores of any kind that sell tobacco! It would also impact the state’s wholesale companies, if other municipalities follow suit. (Note that existing shops ARE grandfathered and can remain open under these new zoning restrictions.)


It is imperative that ALL Madison and Wisconsin e-cigarette shops, wholesalers and consumers oppose this ordinance, as this will set a precedent that will be used in other cities around the state! 

This matter is on on the Plan Commission agenda for April 6 at 5:30 PM at 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, Room 201 (City-County Building)

(more…)