Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tobacco Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ceres council adopts smoke‑shop restrictions, adding buffers and security requirements
Summary
The Ceres City Council voted 3–1 on Aug. 25 to adopt an ordinance adding local restrictions on tobacco and smoke shops, including 1,000‑foot buffers from schools, parks and other shops and new security and surveillance requirements intended to curb youth exposure and illegal product sales.
The Ceres City Council on Aug. 25 approved an ordinance adding Chapter 10 (tobacco and smoke‑shop restrictions) to Title 6 (health and sanitation) of the municipal code, establishing spacing and security rules for retailers that sell tobacco and related products.
The vote was 3–1. Vice Mayor Martinez moved to adopt the ordinance and the motion carried with Council Member Vieira and Mayor Lopez joining him; Council Member Casey voted no. The ordinance includes a requirement that each smoke shop submit a security plan consistent with California law on age‑restricted sales, video surveillance of entrances, exits and points of sale with police access, and discretionary measures such as reduced hours or on‑site security if a business’s operations demonstrably create harm or nuisance.
Chief of Police (presentation) told the council the ordinance also prohibits smoke shops within 1,000 feet of public or private schools, public parks or another smoke shop and that, accounting for zoning and the new spacing rules, the city is already near the maximum number of allowable shops.
Public commenters were sharply divided. Mike Warner urged the council to treat many smoke shops as criminal operations that sell untested THC, mushrooms and even run gambling activity; he urged the city to require live security, a product list in the application and immediate revocation for illegal sales. David Cisneros of the California Health Collaborative and several young speakers, including Central Valley High senior Ava Verado, supported the ordinance’s density and proximity restrictions as proven strategies to reduce youth access to vaping and tobacco products. A health‑group representative noted the fee structure in the ordinance is intended to fund compliance checks and enforcement.
Council discussion focused on protecting youth and ensuring enforcement tools are adequate. Several members said they expect police and code‑enforcement compliance checks funded by license fees to be the primary mechanism to detect and remove illegal products; others supported adding stronger upfront security requirements. Council Member Casey voted against the ordinance as written, saying he would prefer mandatory on‑site security and a required product list in the ordinance rather than waiting for violations to accrue.
The ordinance will become part of the municipal code; staff and the police department said they will implement application procedures and compliance checks consistent with the new rules.
