HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP PCHSW 007 2023/12/05 (2022-2024)REPORT OF THE POLICY
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH,
SAFETY, AND WELL-BEING
DATE: December 5, 2023
PLACE: Council Chambers
Hilo, Hawai'i
TIME: 4:27 p.m.
Council Chair and Members
Hawaii County Council
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Re: Comm. No. 593/Bill No. 102
Your Policy Committee on Health, Safety, and Well-being, to which was referred Bill No. 102, reports
as follows:
Bill No. 102, transmitted by Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Council Member for District 3, via Comm. No. 593,
from Susan Lee Loy, Council Member for District 3, amends Chapter 14 of the Hawai'i County Code
1983 (2016 edition, as amended), by adding a new article relating to the prohibition of flavored tobacco
products.
This measure prohibits retailers from selling, offering to sell, marketing, displaying, or advertising for
sale any product made of or derived from tobacco or nicotine that imparts a taste or smell other than the
taste or smell of tobacco. It includes a prospective effective date of 42 days after the day that State law
governing the sale of tobacco products is either repealed or suspended.
Ms. Lee Loy began by thanking those involved and mentioning that all present had heard extensive
compelling testimony and strong data to support this bill. Highlights of this proposed bill is that it
mirrors what the City and County of Honolulu has just passed. She clarified that this is a preemptive
law and, nothing will happen to any businesses if this is approved, but it allows us to be ready when the
State takes action for this bill to go into effect within 45 days.
Committee Member Holeka Inaba stated that he is in support, but had a question regarding the
definition of the language "distinguishable by an ordinary consumer," what does this mean and is it
necessary?
Ms. Lee Loy said that yes, it is necessary. She clarified that as all had heard how tobacco is being
flavored in appealing ways, like ube or POG (Passion, Orange, Guava) and this means that ordinary
consumers can distinguish it as such.
Mr. Inaba said that he was questioning the definition of ordinary consumers, who is ordinary and who
is not. He also mentioned that he would suggest, similar to the non -mineral sunscreen ban, in the
prohibition subsection, if a retailer is found to be in possession of a prohibited item as listed in the bill,
and HPD is tasked to enforce, shouldn't HPD confiscate those items rather than expecting the retailer to
destroy the items?
PCHSW Report No. 7
PCHSW-7 Page 2 December 5, 2023
Committee Member Cindy Evans said that she appreciated the presentation and testimony and her
comment was directed at regular tobacco versus flavored tobacco and how it's important to make that
distinction. The flavoring is targeting young people, not adults. Turning it into candy is what makes it
appealing. She is glad this bill is coming forward but offered a concern about menthol being included,
as it might be going a bit too far, since menthol is something that has been around forever and some
may not be in support of this.
One of the presenters, Jennifer Valera, shared their organization's concern that if menthol is not
included in the bill then Big Tobacco can make the flavors "cool strawberry" or "pink mint" and
because it has the menthol in it then they can include mint or menthol to make it an additional
appealing item.
Ms. Evans says menthol additives with additional flavors maybe should be banned, but most adults
who would otherwise support this might have concerns regarding banning menthol cigarettes because
they have been around for so long.
Committee Member Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder questioned the maker, if this is for ANY and ALL
cigarettes that are flavored, including vaping.
Another presenter, Shani Kai Carvalho, responded yes and reiterated that if they don't include ALL
flavored items then Big Tobacco will find that loophole to get around the ban. She highlighted that as a
Native Hawaiian, it is important to highlight that it is 31 percent of Native Hawaiian population.
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder says that he completely understands this concern for the youth and agrees
with the intent. He said he asked his daughter how many kids are smoking/vaping at her school and she
said 75 percent.
Committee Member Rebecca Villegas thanked the youth for being present and told them that they are
our future. She admitted that smoking is something that she has chosen to take up as an adult and
appreciates that it was something that she was kept safe from as a kid. Ms. Villegas said that recently
she tried to buy menthol cigarettes in California and was unable to buy them there. She said if
California can pass a ban like this then so can we. She said she will be supporting it to have it lined up
and being prepared for home rule.
Committee Member Ashley Kierkiewicz said that she will be supporting the bill, as she has an 11 and
6 year old that have already been exposed to people at that young age that vape. Her kids will look at
public record and know that mom did the right thing. She said with excellent testimony and
presentations, evidence is clear that this is necessary to protect our youth. She quoted some of the
alarming statistics that were presented earlier and said that it is something that we must take action on.
This bill will put pressure on the State to see our Counties taking proactive measures. Ms. Kierkiewicz
wants to model best behavior for her kids, and is training for a marathon, and cutting out alcohol and
cigarettes, to show them that we don't have to resort to drugs and alcohol to deal with pressure and
stress. This bill will send a powerful message that we will prioritize the health and well-being of our
community over profit.
Committee Member Michelle Galimba said that she missed some of the discussion on preemption and
legal reasoning and asked Judge Strance to come up and provide some background.
PCHSW Report No. 7
PCHSW-7 Page 3 December 5, 2023
Corporation Counsel Judge Elizabeth Strance said that the principle of law states that if a State or
Federal Government has legislated in an area, then County cannot legislate in the same area.
Because the State has legislated there, it is not allowable for the County to legislate until the
State allows them to do so. Because the Counties cannot act in this area, there is a hope that State
law will repeal certain areas of the law that prohibit action. This bill signals to the State that there
is County interest to legislate in this area and can be seen as a formal request to let the County
act in that area if the State chooses not to act in that area. Often the County will pass resolutions
to encourage the State to act in a certain area, and this bill goes a step further encouraging action.
Ms. Galimba wanted to know why the State made laws in this area prohibiting County action and
what the history is around that.
Ms. Strance says that they can investigate that before the next reading.
Ms. Valera said that before the preemption legislation was snuck into a mostly unrelated bill, the
counties paved the way for the state to make laws that would protect us regarding tobacco usage. If
preemption was removed we could keep paving the way. Preemption is stopping advocates in our
County from continuing to pass stricter tobacco legislation.
Ms. Galimba said that she had a family member die early due to tobacco, but said she is on the fence
from a logical point of view, in that maybe this bill does not go far enough. She questioned that maybe
we need to go further and get rid of cigarettes entirely. Also she mentioned the fact that youth aren't
supposed to have them at all under age 21, so maybe it an enforcement issue?
Council Chair Heather Kimball responded that the justification for preemption may have been tied to
the State wanting to have consistency in tobacco legislation across all counties. She would be
supporting it but has similar concerns about the language Mr. Inaba mentioned regarding ordinary
consumers.
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder said that he is going to vote yes on this bill, but believes that there will be
some kick back on this at future Council meetings.
Committee Chair Jenn Kagiwada stated that she is in strong support of this bill and is happy to Chair
this Committee, especially with her background of youth education.
Ms. Lee Loy then brought forth her amendment contained in Communication 496.39 to add in the word
"numbing" in that section to round out the cool and mint flavors, which is consistent with the
discussion already had. All present supported the amendment, with Ms. Evans excused.
When they moved back to the main motion- Ms. Lee Loy finished by thanking her colleagues and
testifiers and said how glad she was that our youth were here to speak up for themselves. She said she
would bet on the kids every single day.
Mr. Inaba added that in the enforcement section that the word "generally" could be removed.
Ms. Lee Loy said that she got it.
PCHSW Report No. 7
PCHSW-7 Page 4 December 5, 2023
Your Policy Committee on Health, Safety, and Well-being, is in accord with the purpose and intent of
Bill 102, and recommends its passage on first reading.
sm
Respectfully submitted,
POLICY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH,
SAFETY, AND WELL-BEING
JRKNMAG, CHAIR
PCHSW REPORT NO.: 7
ADOPTED: DEC 2 0 2623
AYES NOES ABS EX
EVANS
X
GALIMBA
X
INABA
X
KAGIWADA
X
KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER
X
KIERKIEWICZ
X
KIMBALL
X
LEE LOY
X
VILLEGAS
X
Respectfully submitted,
POLICY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH,
SAFETY, AND WELL-BEING
JRKNMAG, CHAIR
PCHSW REPORT NO.: 7
ADOPTED: DEC 2 0 2623