Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-26-00 Public Services Committee MinutesMINUTES Dublin City Council PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE Thursday, October 26, 2000, 6:00 p.m. Dublin Justice Center Attending: Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher Mr. McCash Mrs. Boring Steven Smith, Jr., Law Director's Office Don Colby, Director, Court Services Chief Rob Geis, Police Division Officer Bruce McKenna, DARE Program Officer Marc Mattmiller, DARE Program Officer Bill Dunn, DARE Program Dana McDaniel, Department of Service Ken Richardson, Division of Engineering L TOBACCO LEGISLATION Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher called the meeting to order. She stated that the first agenda item is the proposed tobacco legislation prohibiting possession of tobacco by minors. She noted that this legislation was proposed by Dublin School students working with the City of Dublin's DARE officers. Several students are present tonight, and she would like to allow them to speak first. Following their presentations will be an opportunity for questions to students, then an opportunity for other speakers, and, finally, a comparison of the current and proposed law by the Law Director's office. STUDENT COMMENTS: Leslie Bender, 9012 Moors Place North, Dublin Coffman High School, stated that usually teens who smoke hang out with groups who are associated with trouble. Non-smoking teens find it safer to keep a distance from those groups. She believes that it is particularly important that the community find a way to limit the opportunity for young teens to begin smoking. Kyle Henning, 4914 Donegal Cliffs Drive, Dublin Coffman High School, stated that the only law that currently exists prohibits vendors from selling tobacco to anyone under age 18. This law does very little to restrict smoking for youth, since nearly everyone under age 18 can persuade someone older to buy the cigarettes for them. He thinks it would be more effective if the police could confiscate cigarettes from anyone under age 18. Nick Gamrath, 7725 Aldridge Place, stated that he views smoking as something that will eventually kill, so why start smoking? Most teens, however, are influenced by a friend or family member who is a smoker. He would like Council to take steps to enforce the law that vendors cannot sell tobacco to minors in order to prevent some of these minors from dying someday from atobacco-related disease. Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 2 Emilv Whittmann, 5049 Glenaire Drive, Dublin Middle School student, stated that she does not believe kids under 18 years old should be allowed to smoke or chew tobacco because it is harmful to them. Stopping young kids from being able to smoke so easily is the best way to save a lot of lives. Maleah O'Neal, 7766 Sawmill Road, Dublin Middle School student stated her siblings and most of her friends smoke. She is subjected to second-hand smoke, and there is just as much chance of dying from diseases related to second-hand smoke as from actually smoking. Legislation is needed because of the seriousness of the health risk. Alex Chrissis, 732 Woods Hollow Lane, Powell, St. Brigid School, stated that the current law seems pointless. Why restrict a minor from buying tobacco but have no prohibition about youth smoking? The message is that if they can persuade someone else to buy the cigarettes, it's fine to smoke them. And most teens do not find it difficult to convince someone older to make the purchase for them. The students here tonight are aware of a few areas that have enforced a possession law, and have drastically reduced the number of minors smoking. Dublin City Council should pass and enforce a similar law. Ali Ristis, 5398 Dunniker Park Drive, St. Brigid School, stated most kids understand that smoking can eventually hurt them, but that appears too far off in the future to influence them now. However, if they were penalized for possession at this stage of development, that would be an incentive for the present not to smoke. And, if they don't smoke now because of these consequences, there is a good chance that they won't want to start smoking when they are older. Karen Lombardo, 4735 Widner Court, St. Brigid School, stated that a couple of years ago she lost her uncle as a result of 30 years of smoking. She is concerned about the probability of losing some of her friends for the same reason. She doesn't understand the purpose of a law prohibiting purchase, when there's no law prohibiting possession. She believes that a second law prohibiting possession should be passed as quickly as possible. Preventing just one minor from becoming a smoker is worthwhile. Mrs. Boring thanked the students for all the thought and work they've put into this effort. It is good to see young people start a process of being involved in their community; it can start an important trend for their lives. She asked the students if they were concerned about repercussions from their classmates for their involvement with this effort. Kyle Henning responded that their peers who do smoke disagree with their efforts to prohibit possession of tobacco. Mrs. Boring agreed with the students' point that it does not make sense to limit purchase but not usage of a product by the students. However, perhaps it has been easier to limit the enforcement to vendors. How did the students envision the law against possession being enforced - - police officers writing citations for every minor caught smoking? Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 3 Leslie Bender stated that she believes it would be more effective to require a counseling program that would confront them with what they are doing to themselves and help them with stopping. CITIZEN COMMENTS: Christina Welter, 1950 Arlingate Lane, Columbus, stated that she is a community organizer for Tobacco -Free Ohio. She thanked the students for acknowledging that a serious problem exists in the schools with tobacco use. She recognized their courage in speaking out on the issue and for attending tonight's meeting with City Council. She also thanked the DARE officers for their work on this issue, for helping to create effective coalitions, and for their efforts to ensure that the students have a good experience with the process of attempting to effect a change in their community. Ms. Welter explained that Tobacco -Free Ohio is funded by a Robert Woods Johnson grant. It is also sponsored by the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association and American Lung Association. There are five community organizers across the state who work to create and maintain effective coalitions to achieve education, prevention, and policy change. She has a letter of support from Tobacco -Free Ohio that she would like to submit to Council. She is also speaking on behalf of the Tobacco -Free Collaborative; they also have a letter of support for Dublin City Council. This agency is composed of 26 organizations, including the Franklin County and Columbus City health departments. Ms. Welter stated that too many children in Ohio are buying and smoking cigarettes. Statistics confirm what the students tonight have said: • Smoking is the number #1 preventable cause of death and illness in this country, claiming more lives than alcohol, drug abuse, car accident, homicides, suicides, fires, and AIDS combined; • One out of every two long-term smokers dies from disease caused by smoking; • Approximately 80 percent of adult smokers started to smoke before the age of 18, and 70% of adolescent smokers wish they had not started smoking; • About 40 percent of Ohio youth smoke, higher than the national average, ranking as one of the worst states in the nation. At one point, Ohio had the highest youth smoking rate. It is currently third in the nation for highest prevalence of smoking in all ages, sexes and races. This is aten percent increase since 1983, so the problem is increasing. Every year, 65,000 Ohio kids become new daily smokers; • The Ohio law that prohibits the sale of tobacco to minors is not enforced. Compliance checks in various counties reveal a successful buy rate of 30-40% (percentage of successful attempts by minors to purchase cigarettes). According to the American Journal of Public Health, there are $21.6 million illegal sales of cigarettes annually to minors. The American Cancer Institute studies showed that, nationally, 88% of the time children were able to purchase cigarettes from vending machines and 67% of the time through over-the-counter sales. Recent Ohio data compiled from the amendment that requires states to do compliance checks showed that in some areas of Ohio children can purchase cigarettes 77% of the time. Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 4 Ms. Welter suggested that an effective way to enforce this legislation on a local level would be through vendor licensing. Examples of areas which are doing this are: (1) in Minnesota they are evidencing a significant drop in buy rate by minors, and (2) in Woodbridge, Illinois, a previous buy rate of 70% dropped to 5% in 1'/z years after implementation; (3) in California, a 71% buy rate dropped to 24%. Studies indicate that education has little effect on the behavior of the students - that something else had to be used in conjunction with it. Communities which have approved legislation to prohibit tobacco possession by youth have found that the legislation that fines or otherwise penalizes youth violators has only a minimal effect upon the number of youth smokers. Statistics show that a comprehensive policy that addresses the industry as well as possession by minors is more effective. Cresha Auck, American Heart Association, thanked the students and their parents for the community support. The AHA has a strong interest in tobacco use by minors. Of all the health issues, heart disease is the #1 cause of death. One in two people will be affected by heart disease. The number #1 preventable cause of heart disease is smoking. AHA has a goal to reduce the incidence of heart disease due to smoking by 25% by year 2010, using the CDC's numbers. They work with Tobacco -Free Ohio. Education doesn't work. Smoking even one cigarette is addicting, and to stop smoking once started is as difficult as breaking a heroin or cocaine habit. The AHA has found that vendor licensing is the most effective means of affecting the smoking rate. Depending on how the City's charter is written, the City should be able to exert this control. In Lakewood, 80-90% of those requesting a tobacco vendor's license already had a food license. Since the businesses have to be inspected in the food license program, it adds little burden to also inspect for the tobacco vendor license. Lakewood charges $50.00 per license to cover their costs. Their Health Department handles the program, both issuing the licenses and conducting the inspections. Businesses found in noncompliance are given an opportunity to correct the problem before their license is revoked. The Environmental Health sanitarian with whom she spoke indicated that they have never revoked a license, as the businesses have all responded with corrective measures. Compliance checks do not need to be done by the Health Department; the community can set up local compliance checks. Studies show that this program results in a significant reduction in sales and then in possession of tobacco by minors. Rob Crane, M.D.. 5600 Dublin Road, Dublin, stated that he is a professor at The Ohio State University College of Medicine. His personal mission is control of tobacco usage by minors. On his daughter's 8"' birthday, her grandfather died of lung cancer. The impact of that event has energized his goal to protect children from this killer. Since then, he has helped form "Tobacco 21", a coalition to raise the age limit for usage of tobacco from 18 to 21. They now have two bills which have been introduced to the state legislature. The last three decades showed a trend for reduction in smoking, but that trend has reversed. Currently, 41% of high school students smoke. In 1968, smoking rose to 48% of the country; in 1995, it was down to 24%. In 1991, however, tobacco companies changed the way they did business, and began to target kids. Now, "Joe Camel" is more recognizable than Mickey Mouse. In the 18 — 24 age group, Ohio leads the nation for smoking. Recently, a lawsuit against a tobacco company has settled, which has provided funds for their program. Recent studies now reveal that nicotine changes the brain of a young individual. When they smoke a cigarette, they Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 5 receive a huge boost of interarterial nicotine in the brain, much higher than would be received from an intravenous injection. That spike changes the receptor system in the brain. There is a nicotinic receptor in the brain that does several things, and the brain craves a return to the status of having nicotine. That is the reason nicotine is the most addictive drug on the face of the earth, in terms of both the number of addicts and also in terms of the recessivity of those who stop using tobacco. People who use nicotine early use larger amounts and have much more difficulty quitting. Someone who begins to smoke at age 16 is much less likely to quit smoking than someone who doesn't start smoking until they are 20. So medical science indicates that there is a critical need to keep kids away from nicotine. What is the State doing? Senate Bill 218 imposes penalties for youth possession or attempting to purchase. The bill has passed the State Senate and is expected to pass the House. It imposes both fines and education for the perpetrator. It did include protective language for the retailers, but that has been largely removed. He stated that while it has not been appropriate to have laws for the retailers and not for the kids who are using the tobacco, the reality is that the retailers are not at risk. In the last five years, there has not been a single retailer in Franklin and Delaware counties who has been fined or sanctioned in any way for selling cigarettes to minors; however, it is known that thousands of packs of cigarettes are sold daily to kids in a ten -block radius. This can be changed by working on both the demand and the supply. It is impossible to diminish youth smoking unless retail access is reduced to a less than five percent sale rate. Right now in the city, the rate is 25-30% with no attempt at compliance. That rate is inaccurate, however, compliance is often easily met by statements that are too easily accepted, such as: they are 18 years old, or the cigarettes are for their parent who is in the car, and similar statements. Cities across the nation which have passed local legislation requiring vendor licensing for sale of tobacco, which is then enforced by the local health department or police, indicate that is more effective. Dublin has an opportunity to lead the way with similar legislation. Dr. Crane stated that a Tobacco Use Prevention Board is forming. He, along with 18 others, presently constitutes the Board with one person yet to be appointed. They have requested the Speaker of the House to appoint a teenager to that position. He encouraged any youth present tonight who is interested in serving on that Board to make application to the Speaker of the House. This Board will have a budget of $50 — 60 million annually for tobacco control and will be looking for places to run pilot programs. If they find areas that are reducing tobacco sales through tobacco retailer licensing and compliance checks, they will be interested in funding a model project in that area. Mrs. Boring inquired for clarification on the specific provisions of Senate Bill 218. Dr. Crane responded that Senate Bill 218 states that youth may not possess, attempt to purchase, or use tobacco products. There is already a law that prohibits sale to a person under age. Sandv Miller, 6977 Tralee Drive. American Cancer Society, stated that she has been a resident of Dublin for 15 years. She was formerly a school nurse with Dublin City Schools. She now works with a program called State Tobacco -Free Athlete Mentoring Program. Through the Cancer Society, tobacco -free athletes are trained to present tobacco prevention programs in the middle Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 6 schools. She has been investigating what makes a successful school-based tobacco prevention program. Two of the most important components are parents and community. Parents are the strongest component, and their influence can be stronger than any outside influence. The community is second in significance. It defeats the purpose to have strong programs in the school if that message is not supported and reinforced by the community laws and businesses. She encouraged Council to realize the importance of the community role and take appropriate action to strengthen its role. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked Officer McKenna to introduce the other DARE officers and describe the DARE program's role in this effort. Officer McKenna introduced Officers Dunn and Mattmiller, and noted that Officer K.C. Jones is on another assignment this evening. Officer McKenna stated that the DARE officers were asked by middle school students why students could smoke cigarettes but not buy them. They also asked why the police officers could not do anything about the groups of youth hanging about in public places to smoke. Officer McKenna stated that if the community is going to address this serious problem with youth, the police officer on patrol needs legislation to empower them to deal with it. They are aware that the State will be passing legislation regarding youth possession, but it would be better for the youth in this community if the City of Dublin adopted legislation and maintained local control. It would avoid handcuffing youth offenders and taking them down to Franklin County Juvenile Court. It is uncertain how Franklin County will deal with the violations. Dublin could address the problem in its own community with an emphasis on treatment. The primary expectation of this legislation is the authority to remove tobacco from the students whenever possible. The next step would be a diversion program, which would offer a tobacco education program, such as HABIT, to both the child and his/her parent. They would prefer to handle this violation in the same manner as curfew violations. Dr. Crane noted a need to coordinate language in the proposed ordinance and Senate Bill 218. In the current draft, a minor caught in a compliance check would be guilty of a misdemeanor, and the person who accompanied him would be guilty of a felony. Officer McKenna responded that they have been made aware of this, and the intent is to amend that section. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the discussion on this subject would continue; however, the Committee does not expect to make a decision tonight. She added that, if any students have homework or other commitments, they are free to go. If not, they are welcome to remain for the continuing discussion. She thanked them for their concern for their peers and their own health which prompted this attempt to influence the current laws. The City would not have considered this at this particular time if the students had not petitioned Council. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked Chief Geis why the current law regarding sale of tobacco to minors is not enforced. Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 7 Chief Geis responded that enforcement regarding sale of tobacco products is in response to complaints, similar to what is done for sales of alcohol. The Police Division is not proactive in enforcement of those two laws, as they are with other types of crime that endanger the community. They have run one or two surveillance operations targeting various retail establishments to observe possible violations of both tobacco and alcohol sales. They have not performed compliance checks. They have become more aware of this need in the last few months, and as time and resources allow, the Police Division has the ability to be more proactive with violations regarding illegal tobacco sales. Current policy, however, does dictate response to any complaints received regarding illegal sale of these substances to minors. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher inquired what the difference is between the licensing in place for tobacco retailers and the one being discussed tonight. Ms. Auck responded that the current licensure is for retail tax purposes. The one proposed is similar to that in place for liquor sales, which stipulates that if the vendor sells to a minor, he loses his license to sell alcohol. Without that type of incentive, there isn't much a community can do to motivate the seller. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher inquired about the current penalty if the police were to implicate a vendor in an illegal sale of cigarettes to a minor. Chief Geis responded that it is a criminal citation, which is not necessarily issued to the vendor, but to the cashier or individual responsible for consummating the sale. The case would be heard in Mayor's Court. Mr. McCash inquired about the penalty process for a violation under the proposed vendor licensing law. If the vendor loses his license because of conviction of this violation, can the municipality actually prevent the vendor from selling tobacco within a municipality? Mr. Smith said that although it is a State law area, some local control is permitted. He will check into that. Ms. Auck stated that it defers to home rule. Since the State does permit the municipality to assume responsibility and control on this issue, Dublin would be able to revoke the license. Mr. McCash stated that he is concerned about the City becoming involved in sales issues which are actually commerce issues. It is better to avoid constitutional challenges from the commerce perspective. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked Mr. Smith to research this question and give the Committee available information regarding: (1) the vendor licensing; (2) municipal control; (3) whether both laws regarding possession and vendor licensing are necessary for the community to have any impact on this problem. Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 8 Ms. Welter stated that the students have emphasized how easy it is to buy cigarettes. They are pushing for compliance checks to be mandated on a regular basis. This could be achieved through vendor licensing, and the fees would provide the money to run the program. Either the Health Department or Police Department or a combination of the two could run the program. Currently, CDC funds the Ohio Department of Health to do compliance checks on a random basis in 33 counties only. The last two years, Franklin County was not selected, so that means that there will be no compliance checks for two years. She added that this in no way harms a business. If found in noncompliance, the business is first given the opportunity to amend their procedures. In Lakewood and other cities that have adopted this law, they have experienced no problem with this. And the buy rates for minors have decreased from a high of 75 percent to as low as 5 percent. Mr. McCash stated that several members of his family have died from lung cancer, and he supports this type of legislation. However, he suggested care be taken in developing the legislation to avoid having a hollow, meaningless law. Dr. Crane stated that Dublin would not be inventing a process. There are several other home - rule cities doing this. Officer Dunn stated that he understands the need for a law which is more effective in restricting the sales. However, a law is also needed that will directly impact the youth. There are many citizens, young and old, that obey laws just because there is a penalty they want to avoid. Just as people will speed if there is no penalty for speeding, these youth will continue to persuade older people to buy their cigarettes and will smoke, if there is no penalty for possession. While a certain number will restrict their smoking to private residences where they will not be detected, a certain number will not develop the smoking habit at all, because there will be a penalty if they are caught in possession of tobacco. Mr. McCash stated that, obviously, a combination of the two laws is needed. If the community is going to be supportive in this effort, the police would be effective in controlling public smoking for minors. But they need a law to empower them. Usually, minors do not have unlimited funds. If the police confiscate a few packs of cigarettes from a student, it becomes too costly for them to continue. This would be more effective if Worthington, Westerville, and Hilliard would adopt a similar law. Dr. Crane agreed that this could be part of the effort. However, Council's study needs to be data -driven. The data indicates no difference in youth usage of tobacco in the states that have youth possession laws from those that do not have possession laws. The only way to address youth smoking is in youth demand, and this can be addressed by educational, motivational efforts in the schools, and by controlling the retailers. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher inquired why the smoking rate for minors in Ohio is so high at 40 percent. Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 9 Ms. Welter responded that one of the main reasons is that the tobacco companies specifically market to the kids. Many documents have been made public in court hearings that reveal this. When Joe Camel was first introduced in 1985, there was a large increase in youth smoking. There are promotions offered by the tobacco companies offering freebies that appeal to the youth market, such as a trip to racing school. The second reason is access. Mrs. Boring inquired why programs to counteract it have been ineffective. Cheif Geis stated that one hour of classroom time does not offset several hours of media blitz and peer pressure. Dr. Crane commented that the highly paid, professional marketing companies have been very effective. There is one slogan which has not been heard on television for the last 35 years, yet the marketing then was so effective that everyone is familiar with it today. Along with the great marketing has been no regulation, so sales have escalated. Chief Geis stated that the data on pre and post compliance checks after the initiation of a vendor licensing programs indicates that a proactive community isn't enough. The students will then go to another community or county to buy cigarettes. Ms. Auck stated that their combined efforts are targeting six or seven neighboring communities. Worthington is also considering legislation. Chief Geis stated that in consideration of these laws, it is necessary to realize that there are many logistic and budget issues that will be part of the implementation package. Mr. McCash stated that there is no local health department to handle the vendor licensing, so this part of the law would be more appropriate at the county level. The City could then enforce a law regarding possession. Dr. Crane responded that they do not want to target the kids and not their suppliers. If the intent is to pick up a kid and then go after his supplier, that could be effective. However, if the process is limited to picking up the kid, confiscating his cigarettes and calling his parents who then plea bargain on his behalf, that would not be effective. Nor is it right to penalize the victim of someone else's greed. Mrs. Boring stated that she favors a two-step process: implement the possession law now, and following additional review and study of the vendor licensing process, also pass a law requiring tobacco vendor licensing. Mr. Smith stated that it would be best to observe how Senate Bill 218 would affect the law as proposed by the DARE officers. Since S.B. 218 maybe approved in the next two or three months, it would be wise to make certain the proposed legislation conforms to the proposed State law. Since it has already passed the House, most of the major changes have probably already been made at that level. Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 10 Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher agreed that the substantive changes have already been made, as the vendor section was taken out. Only tweaking of the language would probably occur now. Discussion of the final impact of the program needs to be discussed with the Finance Director, and a report provided for Council. She does not want to approve legislation without understanding the financial implications to the City. Chief Geis stated that the Police Department budget has funds set aside in the "Covert Operations" line item for a variety of operations, so they are already prepared. His only concern is if enforcement should increase significantly and the Diversion Program becomes overburdened. Mr. McCash agreed that it is important to study all financial aspects of these programs. Dr. Crane stated that Tobacco Free Ohio is a private foundation, and the money for pilot programs is already in the bank, $270 million. The Committee will hold its first meeting after the first of the year. The Committee will be accepting RFP's for pilot programs in July. He encouraged Dublin to apply for permission to run a pilot program. Officer Mattmiller, stated that he is in favor of both the possession and licensing laws, and he encourages Dublin to be proactive and not wait for State action. If this law makes it difficult for a certain percentage of the students to become youth smokers, it will be worthwhile. On a smaller note, it will help resolve the problems that are occurring in public areas where the kids congregate to smoke. Although the master plan may involve both laws, he encouraged Council to enact the possession law now. Mrs. Boring asked if the costs for the diversion program are usually passed along to the offender. Mr. Colby responded that does not apply to the juvenile diversion program. He also noted thal the diversion program is a voluntary program. If someone is recommended for diversion, they could opt instead to go downtown to Juvenile Court where that court may simply dismiss the case. Mrs. Boring stated that just the prospect of having the cigarettes confiscated and receiving a citation which their parents would be aware of may be incentive for some kids to avoid the conflict. Mr. Colby stated that the Dublin Mayor's Court would do what they can with a diversion program. The only difficulty is if Franklin County does dismiss those cases at that level, the youth will eventually become aware of that, and refuse the diversion program. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher agreed that Franklin County has hundreds of kids who are felony level offenders, and Franklin County will not likely take these cases seriously. Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 11 Mr. McCash stated that if the State passes a law, it would give more weight to Dublin's law. However, if Dublin passes the law a year earlier, it will give Dublin's students a pride of ownership. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher agreed, but stated that Council has a responsibility to make certain any laws approved are good for the community. She acknowledged Mr. Colby's concern that Council could be passing a law with little impact. She worked in Juvenile Corrections for 22 years, and her view is that this law will have impact on a very small number. Access to tobacco must also be addressed. She supports moving forward with the possession law although, initially, it may have little effect. Mr. McCash agreed that what is needed is the compounding effect of the State law passing and vendor licensing being instituted. The effort will gradually develop more "teeth." Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked Mr. Smith to make certain that the proposed legislation is in compliance with Senate Bill 218, notwithstanding that passage of the State law may not be imminent; also, research all aspects of the vendor licensing issue, so Council can give serious consideration to that legislation. She requested that the information be provided in two weeks. Mr. McCash inquired if there would be any benefit to passing a resolution recommending that other communities adopt similar legislation. Officer McKenna stated that all the surrounding communities have been in contact with the DARE program and Tobacco Free Ohio. Those communities may be influenced by Dublin's action. Ms. Auck noted that although the other communities were considering legislation regarding youth possession, after researching the vendor licensing legislation, they are no longer considering the tobacco possession legislation. Dublin is now the only community considering this. Mrs. Boring stated that she is interested in passing legislation, even if imperfect, to deal with the problem. Should the process reveal a need for refinement after it is in operation, the legislation can be amended. Ms. Welter stated that she would like to offer a list of proactive activities for student and community involvement. A good example of these programs is the Truth campaign. When this was recently used in Florida, it had a significant impact. The smoking rate has dropped 15% since the initiation of the program. Once the teens became aware of how intense the marketing to youth is, they took steps to counteract that marketing. The teens produced their own anti - tobacco commercials, which were very powerful. One of those was televised nationwide during the Olympics. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if these programs could be implemented in the Dublin schools. Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 12 Ms. Welter responded that they could, and the Coalition is working on that. Mr. McCash suggested that they could potentially be incorporated into the DARE program. Officer Mattmiller asked Ms. Welter to send them this information. Officer McKenna stated that a mother of one of the students was present earlier tonight. She works with the Habit program. She shared with him that within that program there are 20 — 30 activities that they have in place in Franklin County schools, at a minimal cost of $2.00/student. The Dublin DARE program will also look into the possibilities of using that program for Dublin schools. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher inquired if Officer McKenna would provide the Clerk of Council's office with names and addresses of those students who spoke tonight. The Clerk's office will send a letter of appreciation to the students who shared their concerns with the Committee. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher concluded the discussion, stating that the Law Director's office will provide a revised ordinance and a legal review of tobacco vendor licensing in two weeks to Council members. When that information is available, another committee meeting will be scheduled. II. NO OUTLET SIGNAGE Mr. McDaniel stated that this project was introduced by Mrs. Boring several weeks ago, and Council asked staff to look into the practicality of using "no outlet" designations on street signs in Dublin. Staff's study showed that two cities use this designation -- Sarasota, Florida and Atlanta, Georgia. Sarasota uses them at key intersections; Atlanta uses them less extensively, on an as -needed basis as determined by their Engineering Department. Staff has constructed a model, which is on display tonight. The Engineering Division, Mr. McDaniel and Mr. Johnson have studied the potential impact of this signage. Their opinion is that there could be some benefits of the additional signage. At this point, their judgment is that it would be unnecessary to do a total sign replacement. They recommend introducing the signage only at key or problem intersections, as identified by City staff. The City has many cul de sacs, and full replacements would mean approximately 700 signs. For example, River Forest, Brandon, Bristol Commons and Donegal Cliffs would require 60 signs in that district alone. In the early 90's, Dublin completed a four-year street sign replacement program. Since the life cycle of a sign is approximately eight years, many of those will soon need replacement. The City uses a meter which measures the reflectivity of a sign, which when diminished would indicate a need for replacement. The new signage could be gradually phased in. Mr. McDaniel stated that the options were: (1) not use the signage; (2) do a wholesale sign replacement of all 700 signs at this type of intersection; (3) phase in the new signage at those 700 locations as the signs became due for replacement; (4) use the signage on a case-by-case basis in problem areas, as identified by City staff. Some targeted streets would be: Ashbaugh Road off of Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 13 Brand Road; Zachary Court, where there is a significant amount of turn -around; and Trails End and Glencree Court. Mrs. Boring stated that there is a particularly long court over in Waterford, where the City identified the need for and installed a "no outlet" sign despite the objections of one very unhappy property owner in whose yard the sign was placed. There are many similar streets, where the "no outlet" signage can't be seen until the driver turns on that street. This signage at the entrance would settle the problem. Mr. McCash inquired if staffs recommendation is to use these on a case-by-case basis, or to adopt the signage as the new standard at key intersections and problem areas and replace those signs as they become due for replacement. Mr. McDaniel suggested that the City install these signs on several streets for a trial period of one or two years, and gauge the effectiveness. Mrs. Boring inquired who is responsible for paying for signage on new, recently constructed streets. Mr. McDaniel responded that the developer pays for signage on new streets. Mrs. Boring stated that most courts do not need any particular signage, as the public generally recognizes that courts are dead-end streets. Following discussion, Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher asked if the Committee's recommendation tc Council would be to implement a 24 -month trial period, replacing the signs for designated, problematic streets. This would include long courts and secondary streets. Mr. McCash asked about Brighton Park subdivision, and if this signage would be used at the entry with Rings Road? Mr. McDaniel stated that it would fit the appropriate street designation for this project, as would Jenmar Court. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher suggested that in the areas where the street signs are to be replaced immediately, that a letter be sent to the homeowners association notifying them of the change. They can inform their residents and also request those residents to provide feedback to City Council on the signage, perhaps by E-mail. Mrs. Boring asked for clarification of where the sign replacements would occur. Mr. McDaniel responded that implementation would occur immediately: (1) in identified problem areas, and (2) at the intersection of secondary or through streets where there is new development, and would be phased in: (3) at other appropriate intersections as they come due for signage replacement. Public Services Committee October 26, 2000 Page 14 Mrs. Boring stated that the replacement criteria would seem to be appropriateness and life cycle. Mr. McDaniel stated that he would develop a memo outlining the recommendation for Council's consideration at an upcoming meeting. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Assistant Clerk of Council