SB 140
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 8, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
Adam Gray, Chair
SB 140 (Leno) – As Amended June 1, 2015
SENATE VOTE: 25-12
SUBJECT: Electronic cigarettes.
SUMMARY: This bill makes substantive changes to the regulation of electronic cigarettes (ecigarettes). Specifically, this bill:
1) Recasts and broadens the definition of “tobacco product” to include a product made or
derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for human consumption, whether
smoked, heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by
any other means, and includes electronic devices that deliver nicotine or other substances
to the person inhaling from the device, including, but not limited to, an electronic
cigarette, cigar, pipe, or hookah; and any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco
product, whether or not sold separately.
2) Prohibit the use of e-cigarettes in various places, including, but not limited to, school
campuses, public buildings, places of employment, apartment buildings, day care
facilities, retail food facilities, health facilities, and vehicles when minors are present, and
makes a violation of some of the prohibitions punishable as an infraction.
3) Requires retailers of e-cigarettes, which are not subject to a tobacco tax, to apply for a
license and pay a license fee, in an amount to be determined by BOE, beginning October
1, 2016.
EXISTING LAW:
1) Authorizes the California Department of Public Health (DPH), under the Stop Tobacco
Access to Kids Enforcement (STAKE) Act, to assess civil penalties ranging from $400 to
$6,000, depending on the number of infractions, against any person, firm, or corporation
that sells, gives, or in any way furnishes tobacco products to a person who is under the
age of 18.
2) Establishes “smoke-free laws,” which prohibit the smoking of tobacco products in
various places, including, but not limited to, school campuses, public buildings, places of
employment, apartment buildings, day care facilities, retail food facilities, health
facilities, and vehicles when minors are present, and makes a violation of some of the
prohibitions punishable as an infraction.
3) Defines “tobacco product” as any product containing tobacco leaf, including, but not
limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco,
bidis, or any other preparation of tobacco.
SB 140
Page 2
4) Defines “electronic cigarette” as a device that can provide an inhalable dose of nicotine
by delivering a vaporized solution. Prohibits a person from selling or otherwise
furnishing an electronic cigarette to a person under the age of 18.
5) Requires the Board of Equalization (BOE), under the Cigarette and Tobacco Products
Licensing Act, to administer a statewide program to license cigarette and tobacco
products manufacturers, importers, distributors, wholesalers, and retailers. Prohibits
selling tobacco products without a valid license, and makes violations punishable as a
misdemeanor.
6) Requires a retailer, for purposes of collecting a tobacco tax, to obtain a separate license
for each retail location that sells cigarettes and tobacco products and pay a one-time fee
of $100. Requires BOE to suspend or revoke a retailer’s license upon notification by
DPH of certain STAKE Act violations.
7) Prohibits, under the Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement Act (STAKE Act), any
person from distributing or selling tobacco products via the United States Postal Service
(USPS), or any other public or private postal or package delivery service, to any
purchaser who is a minor.
8) Bans, under the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act (PACT Act), the shipment of
tobacco products through the USPS.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
Purpose of the bill: According to the author, California has invested 25 years and $2.5 billion in
public health measures aimed at reducing tobacco use. However, that investment is now
threatened by a new tobacco product: electronic cigarettes. According to a DPH report,
electronic cigarette aerosol contains at least 10 chemicals that are on California’s Proposition 65
list of chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm. Despite
industry claims that electronic cigarettes do not present secondhand smoke concerns, studies
have found formaldehyde, benzene and tobacco‐specific nitrosamines (a carcinogen) coming
from the secondhand emissions of e‐cigarettes.
Despite these potentially serious risks to public health, electronic cigarette use is growing
nationwide. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that more than a
quarter of a million youth who had never smoked a cigarette used electronic cigarettes in 2013.
Electronic cigarettes come in enticing flavors such as gummy bear and mango. While California
currently bans the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors under the age of 18, many youth are still
able to access the product.
DPH states, "existing laws that currently protect minors and the general public from traditional
tobacco products should be extended to cover electronic cigarettes.” SB 140 will do exactly this
by including electronic cigarettes within the Smoke Free Act and the STAKE Act.
SB 140
Page 3
What are E-Cigarettes?: Electronic cigarettes are battery-operated inhalers that consist of a
rechargeable battery-operated heating element, a replaceable cartridge that may contain nicotine
or other chemicals, and an atomizer that, when heated, converts the contents of the cartridge into
a vapor, which the user can then inhale. Electronic cigarettes are often made to look like
cigarettes, cigars, pipes and sometimes like everyday items such as pens and USB memory
sticks.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), electronic nicotine delivery systems
(ENDS), of which electronic cigarettes are the most common prototype, are devices that do not
burn or use tobacco leaves but instead vaporize. The main components of the solution, in
addition to nicotine—when nicotine is present—are propylene glycol, with or without glycerol
and flavoring agents. ENDS solutions and emissions contain other chemicals, some of them
considered to be toxicants. There are more than 450 brands and more than 7,500 flavors on the
market, according to the policy report. There has been an average of 10 new brands entering the
market every month for the last two years, a recent Internet survey found.
Electronic cigarettes have been sold in the USA since 2007. The biggest markets are Europe and
North America. Sales are banned in 13 of the 59 countries that regulate the devices, the WHO
reported, but most of those 13 countries say they are still available because of illicit trade and
cross-border Internet sales.
According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), e-cigarettes have not been fully studied,
so consumers currently do not know: 1) the potential risks of e-cigarettes when used as intended,
2) how much nicotine or other potentially harmful chemicals are being inhaled during use, or 3)
whether there are any benefits associated with using these products. However, they do suggest
they are safer than some traditional tobacco products. Mitch Zeller, Director of the Center for
Tobacco Products, FDA, in an NPR interview on January 20, 2014, stated: "If a current smoker
completely substituted all of the combusting cigarettes that they smoked with an electronic
cigarette, that person would probably be significantly reducing their risk."
Electronic cigarette safety: There continues to be many studies being done on the efficacy and
safety of e-cigarettes, some of which are conflicting:
The California State Health Officer released a report in January 2015, “A Community Health
Threat,” about e-cigarettes that cites, among other things, the concern about the health risks of
the product, the growing number of users, and the unrestricted marketing tactics for e-cigarettes.
E-cigarette poisonings increased from seven in 2012 to 154 in 2014. By the end of 2014,
electronic cigarette poisonings to young children tripled in one year, making up more than 60
percent of all electronic cigarette-poisoning calls, according to the report. Furthermore, the state
health officer also noted that in California, use of electronic cigarettes among those between the
ages of 18 and 29 tripled in one year, from 2.3 percent to 7.6 percent. Nearly 20 percent of these
young adult electronic cigarette users had never smoked traditional cigarettes. However, it must
be note, as reported by the Department of Public Health (DPH); California has one of the lowest
teenage smoking rates in the nation. Through implementation of the STAKE Act, California also
has seen a steady decline in illegal sales to minors.
A July 2014 report by the WHO, “Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS),” stated that
existing evidence shows electronic cigarettes do not produce merely a water vapor but an aerosol
that poses serious threats to adolescents and fetuses. The aerosol inhaled by smokers contains
SB 140
Page 4
ultra-fine particulate matter that gets trapped in the small airways of the lungs. According to a
2013 study by The National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) entitled “Does
electronic cigarette consumption cause passive vaping?,” aerosol exhaled by electronic cigarettes
smokers contains nicotine, formaldehyde, and other chemicals, although at much lower levels
than emissions from conventional cigarettes, and nicotine metabolites were found in nonsmokers
exposed to the exhaled aerosol.
According to research paper published in “Tobacco Control” (an international peer review
journal covering the nature and consequences of tobacco use worldwide) on March 2013, titled:
“Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes,” e-cigarette
toxicant levels were 9–450 times lower than in cigarette smoke and were, in many cases,
comparable with trace amounts found in the reference product. The paper goes on to conclude:
“that substituting tobacco cigarettes with e-cigarettes may substantially reduce exposure to
selected tobacco-specific toxicants. E-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among smokers
unwilling to quit, warrants further study”.
Based on the lack of consensus on research comparing e-cigarettes to traditional tobacco
products, the committee may wish to consider whether it is premature to define e-cigarettes as
such.
Cessation Product: The FDA has approved a variety of smoking cessation products. These
include prescription medicines as well as over-the-counter products such as skin patches,
lozenges, and gum. Smoking cessation products are regulated through FDA’s Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, which ensures that the products are effective and that their benefits
outweigh any known associated risks. The FDA, citing the lack of concrete research, has not
approved, or denied, e-cigarettes as a cessation product. Additionally, much like studies done on
the safety of e-cigarettes, there are conflicting views on the viability of e-cigarettes as cessation
product.
According to an article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA),
titled: “A Longitudinal Analysis of Electronic Cigarette Use and Smoking Cessation,” ecigarettes are aggressively promoted as smoking cessation aids, however, studies of their
effectiveness for cessation have been unconvincing. One randomized trial comparing ecigarettes with and without nicotine found no differences in 6-month quit rates. Populationbased, longitudinal studies have also not shown associations between e-cigarette use and
quitting. One study found, although 85% of smokers who used e-cigarettes reported using them
to quit, they did not quit more frequently than nonusers. Among those surveyed, e-cigarette users
were less likely to have quit at 7 months than nonusers.
According to a survey by the University College London (UCL) and published in Addiction
Journal, people attempting to quit smoking without professional help are approximately 60%
more likely to report succeeding if they use e-cigarettes than if they use willpower alone or overthe-counter nicotine replacement therapies such as patches or gum. The results were adjusted for
a wide range of factors that might influence success at quitting, including age, nicotine
dependence, previous quit attempts, and whether quitting was gradual or abrupt. The study
surveyed 5,863 smokers between 2009 and 2014 who had attempted to quit smoking without the
aid of prescription medication or professional support. 20% of people trying to quit with the aid
of e-cigarettes reported having stopped smoking conventional cigarettes at the time of the survey.
The research, chiefly funded by Cancer Research UK, suggests that e-cigarettes could play a
SB 140
Page 5
positive role in reducing smoking rates: “E-cigarettes could substantially improve public health
because of their widespread appeal and the huge health gains associated with stopping smoking,”
says Professor Robert West of UCL’s Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, senior
author of the study.
Based on the lack of consensus on research regarding the viability of e-cigarettes as a cessation
product, the committee may wish to consider whether it is premature to define e-cigarettes as a
“tobacco product”.
Federal Action: Federal law, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009
(Tobacco Control Act), provides the FDA authority to regulate cigarettes, cigarette tobacco, rollyour-own tobacco, smokeless tobacco, and any other tobacco products that the FDA by
regulation deems to be subject to the law. To date, the FDA has not officially acted on the
subject of e-cigarette regulation. However, according to the Federal Register in print Friday,
April 25, 2014, the FDA is considering proposed rules regarding, in part, deeming e-cigarettes as
a “tobacco product." Once a product is deemed a “tobacco product”, the FDA may put in place
restrictions on the sale and distribution of said product, including age-related access restrictions
and advertising and promotion restrictions, if FDA determines the restrictions are appropriate for
the protection of the public health.
The proposed rules have two purposes: (1) To deem products that meet the definition of
‘‘tobacco product’’ under the law except accessories of a proposed deemed tobacco product and
subject them to the tobacco control authorities in the Tobacco Control Act; and (2) to apply
specific provisions that are appropriate for the protection of the public health to deemed tobacco
products. These provisions include: (1) Enforcement action against products determined to be
adulterated and misbranded; (2) required submission of ingredient listing and reporting of
harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs) for all tobacco products; (3) required
registration and product listing for all tobacco products; (4) prohibition against use of modified
risk descriptors (e.g., ‘‘light,’’ ‘‘low,’’ and ‘‘mild’’ descriptors) and claims unless FDA issues an
order permitting their use; (5) prohibition on the distribution of free samples (same as for
cigarettes); and (6) premarket review requirements. The FDA has closed public comment and is
reviewing evidence prior to finalizing the proposed rules, specifically on the health risks and the
viability of e-cigarettes as a cessation product.
The committee may wish to consider whether it is premature to define e-cigarettes as a “tobacco
product” prior to the finalization of FDA’s regulations.
Local Action: According to the American Lung Association, 131 cities and counties in
California prohibit the use of e-cigarettes in some outdoor areas (dining areas, entryways, public
events, recreation areas, service areas, sidewalks, and worksites), some indoor areas (hallways,
city owned/ operated facility, hotels/motels, multi-unit housing, public transit, places of
employment, restaurants, and theaters/ convention centers), or both. These 131 municipalities
represent a diverse population of local governments—ranging from San Francisco to San
Bernardino—that have taken action on where e-cigarettes may be used. The ordinances differ in
each city/county. For example, the City of San Francisco prohibits the use of e-cigarettes in
public events, recreation areas, service areas, multi-unit housing, public transit, places of
employment, restaurants, and theaters/convention centers, while San Bernardino County
prohibits service areas, city owned/ operated facility, hotels/motels, public transit, and places of
employment.
SB 140
Page 6
In addition to the prohibitions on usage, 94 cities and counties now require a retailer to obtain a
license to sell e-cigarettes. Majority of the cities and counties have done this through special
language in the definition of tobacco product in their local tobacco retailer licensing ordinance.
Mail Delivery: Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act (PACT Act) is a federal law, amongst
other things, that prohibits the delivery of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco through the United
States Postal Service (USPS). This prohibition does not apply to other forms of shipment, such
as FedEx and UPS.
Some concerns have been raised by the opposition that SB 140, by defining e-cigarettes as a
“tobacco product,” will place e-cigarettes under the provisions of the PACT Act, specifically the
USPS prohibition. Opposition cites this as potentially damaging to the industry, since a large
portion of their sells are done online and delivered to the consumer.
According to an informal opinion by Legislative Counsel, SB 140 would not be subject to the
provision in question under the PACT Act. The provision states: “All cigarettes and smokeless
tobacco are non-mailable and shall not be deposited in or carried through the mails. The United
States Postal Service shall not accept for delivery or transmit through the mails any package that
it knows or has reasonable cause to believe contains any cigarettes or smokeless tobacco made
non-mailable by this paragraph." The language clearly states that only “cigarettes and
smokeless tobacco” are prohibited from being delivered by USPS. The PACT Act would have to
be amended at the federal level to include e-cigarettes for this provision to apply.
California law, under the STAKE Act, requires a specified distributor or seller to verify that a
purchaser of tobacco products is 18 years of age or older, and to telephone the purchaser after 5
p.m. to confirm the order prior to shipping the tobacco products. This provision in state law
currently does not apply to e-cigarettes.
A study by the Journal of the American Medical Association found that more than 96% of
minors aged 15 to 16 were able to find an Internet cigarette vendor and place an order in less
than 25 minutes, with most completing the order in seven minutes. As of 2012, more than 23%
of all high school students had used some kind of tobacco product in the past month and the use
of e-cigarettes has more than doubled among high school students.
The committee and author may wish to amend the bill to require age verification upon mail
delivery of e-cigarettes.
Vending Machines: The STAKE Act prohibits a cigarette or tobacco product from being sold,
offered for sale, or distributed from a vending machine or appliance, or any other coin or token
operated mechanical device designed or used for vending purposes, unless the machine or
appliance is located at least 15 feet away from the entrance of a premise that has been issued an
on-sale public premises license to sell alcoholic beverages, as specified.
According to the National Youth Tobacco Survey, in 2012, 1.78 million middle and high school
students nationwide had tried e-cigarettes. Although it is unknown how many students get ecigarettes from vending machines, it is reasonable to assume that restricting e-cigarette access
through this type point of sale could significantly lower the amount of minors who use ecigarettes.
SB 140
Page 7
The committee and author may wish to amend the bill to prohibit e-cigarettes from being sold,
offered for sale, or distributed from a vending machine.
Child Safe Packaging: As stated above, the State Health Officer has reported an increase in ecigarette poisonings. While this is mainly attributable to the increase in overall use of ecigarettes, it is reasonable to assume that some poisonings occur when a child ingests the liquid
solution in the cartridge. SB 438 (Hill), currently set for hearing in Assembly G.O. Committee,
would require all cartridges for electronic cigarettes and solutions for filling and refilling an
electronic cigarette to be in child-resistant packaging.
The committee and author may wish to amend the bill to require all cartridges for electronic
cigarettes and solutions for filling and refilling an electronic cigarette to be in child-resistant
packaging.
Not a Tax: If enacted, SB 140 would NOT add e-cigarettes into the current tobacco tax
framework, nor would it create a new tax. Currently, e-cigarettes do not have a specific tax other
than the standard state and local sales taxes collected at the point of sale. As stated above, the
FDA is in the process of finalizing regulations to treat e-cigarettes as tobacco products, in which
time a federal tobacco tax, ostensibly, could be applied. As for the State, a tax could be
implemented through the legislature, or ballot initiative. Currently, there are two pending ballot
initiatives with the Secretary of State, one of which would place an excise tax on e-cigarettes.
NJOY vs. FDA: In March of 2009, FDA directed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to
reject the entry of e-cigarettes into the United States. Shortly after, Smoking Everywhere, Inc.
(SE) filed a lawsuit against FDA, to "stop FDA from improperly exceeding its delegated
authority by attempting to regulate electronic cigarettes" to the extent that FDA declared such
products to be a new drug and/or new drug device combination. Additionally, SE claimed that
Electronic Cigarettes are a "tobacco product", therefore were not currently under regulatory
authority of the FDA. The proponents of SB 140 have pointed to this argument as an admission
by the industry that e-cigarettes are “tobacco products." Soon to follow, NJOY, Inc. filed a
motion to intervene in the case which was granted.
On January 14, 2010, nearly 10 months after this litigation was first filed, the Honorable Judge
Leon issued a ruling, granting SE and NJOY a Preliminary Injunction against the FDA to stop
the embargo against SE and NJOY’s products coming into the United States. The FDA
immediately appealed the decision. In December 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals in
Washington ruled that the FDA can only regulate e-cigarettes as a tobacco product, unless
therapeutic claims are made.
Support: According to the co-sponsor, Cancer Action Network (CAN), E-cigarette use is
exploding amongst youth. According to the Centers for Disease Control, use among youth has
tripled nationally in the last two years. There were roughly 600,000 high school students
nationwide who used e-cigarettes in 2013. That number climbed to around two million in 2014.
In California, the Department of Public Health says that among 18-29 year olds, use has tripled
in the last year. In 2014, teen use of e-cigarettes surpassed the use of traditional cigarettes for the
first time. More than twice as many 8th and 10th graders reported using e-cigarettes than
traditional cigarettes.
SB 140
Page 8
Defining e-cigarettes as a tobacco product in the STAKE Act tackles the issue of minors
accessing e-cigarettes by ensuring those products are held to the same standards as traditional
cigarettes. Among the ways, that the STAKE Act prevents youth from purchasing tobacco
products is to implement an enforcement program to reduce the illegal sale of tobacco products
to minors and to conduct sting operations using 15 and 16 year old minors granted immunity.
The STAKE Act also ensures that clerks check the identification of youthful-appearing persons
prior to a sale. Applying this standard to e-cigarettes will be critical in preventing youth access.
Opposition: According to the Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association (SFATA), they
support a prohibition on selling to minors and are willing to engage in discussions regarding
reasonable licensure requirements. They state, however, SB 140 does not provide a reasonable
framework for engaging in conversations on these points, because the bill equates vapor products
to tobacco. Classification of vapor products as tobacco is grossly inappropriate given that the
products clearly do not contain tobacco. SFATA must strongly oppose any legislation that seeks
to define e-cigs and vapor products as tobacco, in light of the fact that such a definition is simply
scientifically inaccurate, appears to be part of a broader and misleading campaign to equate
vapor products with tobacco, and has potentially unfair and unwarranted tobacco tax-related
implications.
Policy Considerations: While the FDA finalizes its proposed rules regarding e-cigarettes, the
committee may wish to further the core intent of the bill, which is to provide more consumer
protection, public health and prevent under age use of e-cigarettes.
1. Strike definition of e-cigarettes as a “tobacco product” from the bill. Add existing
definition of e-cigarettes in Health and Safety Code (Section 119405(b)) for the purposes
of licensure and smoke free laws.
2. Require age verification upon mail delivery of e-cigarettes.
3. Prohibit e-cigarettes from being sold, offered for sale, or distributed from a vending
machine.
4. Require child resistant packaging for e-cigarettes. Provision is also in SB 438 (Hill)
which is set for hearing in Assembly G.O. Committee.
Related legislation: SB 151 (Hernández) of 2015. Increases the minimum legal age to purchase
or consume tobacco from 18 to 21 and makes additional conforming changes to restrictions and
enforcement mechanisms in current law. (Pending in Assembly G.O. Committee)
AB 216 (Garcia) of 2015. Prohibits the sale of any device intended to deliver a non-nicotine
product in a vapor state, to be directly inhaled by the user, to a person under 18 years of age.
(Pending in Senate Appropriations)
SB 24 (Hill) of 2015. Extends STAKE Act requirements to the sale of electronic cigarettes (ecigs), distinct from the definition of tobacco products, and requires enforcement, as specified, to
begin July 1, 2016; extends current smoke-free laws and penalties to e-cigs; requires e-cig
cartridges to be in childproof packaging, as defined; broadens the current definition of e-cigs, as
specified; and requires all retailers of e-cigs to apply for licensure to sell e-cigs, as specified.
(Failed passage on the Senate Floor and is pending reconsideration)
SB 140
Page 9
SB 438 (Hill) of 2015. Requires all cartridges for electronic cigarettes and solutions for filling
and refilling an electronic cigarette to be in child-resistant packaging. (Pending in Assembly
G.O. Committee)
SB 591 (Pan) of 2015. Imposes an additional excise tax of $2.00 per package of 20 cigarettes.
This bill also (1) imposes an equivalent one-time “floor stock tax” on the cigarettes held or
stored by dealers and wholesalers, and (2) indirectly increases the tobacco products tax. (Ordered
to inactive file on Senate Floor)
Prior legislation: AB 1500 (Dickinson) of 2014. Would have prohibited a delivery seller, as
defined, from selling or delivering an electronic cigarette to a person under 18 years of age.
(Failed passage in the Assembly Appropriations Committee)
SB 648 (Corbett) of 2013. Would have restricted electronic cigarettes from being sold in
vending machines. (Failed passage in the Assembly Appropriations Committee)
SB 568 (Steinberg) Chapter 336, Statues of 2013. Prohibits an operator of an Internet Web site,
online service, online application, or mobile application, as specified, from marketing or
advertising electronic cigarettes to a minor.
SB 882 (Corbett), Chapter 312, Statutes of 2010. Made it unlawful, to the extent not preempted
by federal law, for a person to sell or otherwise furnish an electronic cigarette to a person less
than 18 years of age.
SJR8 (Corbett) of 2009. Would have requested that the US Food and Drug Administration
prohibit sale of electronic cigarettes until they are deemed safe. (Failed passage in the
Assembly)
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Alameda County Board of Supervisors
Alameda County Tobacco Control Coalition
American Academy of Pediatrics, California
American Cancer Society-Cancer Action Network (co-sponsor)
American Heart Association/American Stroke Association (co-sponsor)
American Lung Association in California (co-sponsor)
Association of Northern California Oncologists (ANCO)
Breathe California
California Academy of Family Physicians
California Academy of Preventive Medicine
California Alliance for Retired Americans
California Chapter of the American College of Cardiology
California Chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians
California Chronic Care Coalition
California College and University Police Chiefs Association
California League of Cities
California Medical Association
SB 140
Page 10
California Narcotic Officers Association
California Peace Officers’ Association (CPOA)
California Pharmacists Association
California Police Chiefs Association
California Public Health Association - North
California School Employees Association (CSEA)
California Society of Addiction Medicine (CSAM) (co-sponsor)
California State Association of Counties
California State PTA
California Teachers Association
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids
City and County of San Francisco
City of Camarillo
City of Los Angeles
City of Oakland
City of Oceanside
City of Palo Alto
City of San Francisco
City of San Marcos
City of Walnut Creek
Coalition Engaged in A Smoke-free Effort (CEASE)
Coalition for a Tobacco-Free Sonoma County
Common Sense Kids Action
Community Action Partnership of Madera County (CAPMC)
Community Health Involvement Partners (CHIP)
County Health Executives Association of California (CHEAC)
County of Alameda
County of San Diego
County of San Francisco
First 5 Association of California
Fresno County Tobacco-Free Coalition
Health Access California
Health Officers Association of California (HOAC)
Kaiser Permanente
League of California Cities
Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer
Los Medanos Community Healthcare District Board of Directors
Medical Oncology Association of Southern California (MOASC)
Monterey County Collaborates
Oceanside city Council
Orange County Tobacco Education Coalition
San Benito County Board of Supervisors
San Francisco Medical Society
San Luis Obispo County Tobacco Control Coalition
San Mateo County Tobacco Education Coalition
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
Service Employees International Union
Service Employees International Union – United Health Workers
Solano County Tobacco Education Coalition
SB 140
Page 11
State Board of Equalization
Tobacco Education and Research Oversight Committee
Tobacco Education Network
Tobacco Free Coalition of Santa Clara County
Yolo County Tobacco Prevention Coalition
Yuba County Tobacco Coalition
Opposition
Cal NORML
California Association for Alcohol/Drug Educators
NJOY
Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association (SFATA)
Analysis Prepared by: Kenton Stanhope / G.O. / (916) 319-2531