Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Vape Shops topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mineral Wells council reviews possible ban on standalone vape, smoke and head shops; staff to seek public input
Summary
City staff presented a proposed amendment to Appendix B of the Mineral Wells Code of Ordinances that would prohibit new standalone vape, smoke and head shops; Planning & Zoning was split and staff will hold public hearings and run a community survey before formal ordinance drafting.
City staff introduced a proposed zoning amendment to Appendix B of the Mineral Wells Code of Ordinances that would prohibit stand‑alone vape shops, smoke shops and head shops within the city limits while grandfathering existing businesses.
The proposal was described at the council meeting as originating from a Planning & Zoning workshop. "We have SROs in our schools," City staff said, noting "a large uptick in the number of vape shop pens being seized within the schools." Staff said other Texas cities have taken proactive steps and presented options including a citywide ban or more limited zoning that would push such businesses into light industrial areas.
The Planning & Zoning Commission, which met earlier, was split: two commissioners recommended limiting vape and smoke shops to light industrial zones while four favored an outright ban. Staff emphasized that a ban would typically grandfather existing businesses so they could continue operating but would block new standalone shops.
Councilmembers pressed staff for precise definitions. One councilmember said the current code lists "smoke/tobacco shop," and added, "We would have to create a new definition for a vape shop," noting the city would reference the state definition of e‑cigarette when drafting terms. Staff also said many jurisdictions use measures such as conditional‑use permits and distance requirements from schools.
Council debate focused on two strands: public‑health and public‑image arguments for stricter limits, and concerns that limitations would not fully block youth access because minors can obtain products online or at convenience stores. One councilmember argued restrictions could reduce the law‑enforcement burden by limiting locations to industrial areas; another cautioned that parental supervision and broader availability remain challenges.
Staff told the council it will run public notices and hearings at the Planning & Zoning level and the City Council level and said it can distribute a resident survey in advance of the hearings so PNZ and the council will have community input before drafting a final ordinance.
No ordinance was adopted tonight; councilmembers asked staff to return with clearer definitions, enforcement implications and public‑feedback results ahead of any formal vote.
