Placerville council scraps proposed tobacco retail ordinance after wide public debate

Placerville City Council voted to discontinue work on a proposed local tobacco retail ordinance after extended public comment and council debate on March 25.

The motion, moved by Councilmember Noe and seconded for discussion by Vice Mayor Gottberg, instructed staff to no longer pursue the ordinance and passed 4-1. Councilmember Carter voted no; Councilmember Yarbrough, Vice Mayor Gottberg and Mayor Clerici voted in favor of dropping the proposal.

The measure under consideration would have created a local tobacco retail licensing program, limited retail density by population, restricted certain product package sizes and single-use electronic cigarettes, and tightened license-transfer rules. Staff said the draft ordinance would also have allowed the city to revoke local tobacco privileges for repeat violations of state or federal laws and aimed to reduce the overall number of retailers over time through attrition.

City attorney/staff described two transfer options in the draft: (A) transfer to an immediate family member in specified circumstances, or (B) a one-time transfer to another person or entity. Staff reported that the city had identified roughly 19 tobacco retailers and that the draft tightened revocation language to trigger after two or more violations rather than the four-violation threshold previously discussed.

Retailers and business owners filled the public comment period. Mark Strow, owner of the Arco AMPM in Placerville, said the city's plan would sharply reduce business value and tax revenue. "Changing ownership within a 30-day period would be impossible," Strow said, urging a longer transfer window and less punitive revocation thresholds. Matt Strow, a co-owner at the same Arco AMPM, asked the council to treat convenience stores and gas stations differently from smoke shops, noting that some jurisdictions allow different transfer rules depending on the share of revenue derived from tobacco sales.

Several other local retailers and representatives of convenience-store companies warned the council that a strict local licensing regime would lower business valuations, deter buyers and shift customers to outlets outside the city. Parmjit Khara, a local retailer since 2002, asked the city to keep option A (family transfer) so family-run businesses could preserve retirement value. Eldon Price of Stroud Companies described compliance efforts at his stores and said blanket rules would be harmful for long-standing, compliant operators.

Supporters of local licensing, including council members and others, said they wanted a local enforcement tool to address repeated underage sales and to remove bad actors more effectively than relying solely on state processes. Councilmember Yarbrough and staff noted that recent state law changes (SB 1230) increase penalties for selling to minors and provide local code-enforcement options, but also said state enforcement requires multi-agency steps that can be slow. "We can enforce existing state and federal laws," staff said, but argued the local licensing scheme would give the city additional, more-direct remedies for repeat offenders.

After deliberations and several proposed amendments to narrow the ordinance to a licensing-only approach, Councilmember Noe ultimately moved to stop pursuing the ordinance entirely. The council then called the roll: Carter — aye; Noe — no; Yarbrough — aye; Gottberg — aye; Mayor Clerici — aye. The motion passed 4-1.

The record shows strong, divided public sentiment: many small-business owners urged the council to avoid what they called onerous transfer and product restrictions; public-health advocates who supported local authority were present earlier in the process but did not dominate the March 25 public comment record. Councilmembers said they may revisit enforcement tools if a narrower, licensing-only approach is requested later, but no specific follow-up ordinance was directed at the March 25 meeting.

The councildecision does not change state or federal tobacco laws. Councilmembers emphasized that current state penalties for underage sales and recent state-level changes remain enforceable by state agencies and through local criminal or administrative channels.