Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vape Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears public input on proposed ordinance to limit vapor specialty shops
Summary
At a public hearing, staff outlined a draft ordinance to cap vapor 'specialty' stores and impose distance, inspection and licensing rules; vape‑shop owner Fred Richmond and staff clashed over grandfathering and enforcement, and staff said the draft is designed to reduce future openings rather than close compliant existing businesses.
Clinton councilors heard public comment and a staff presentation Tuesday night on Ordinance 704, a proposed amendment to Title 9 that would regulate vapor specialty shops.
Matt (city staff) told the hearing the ordinance would cap specialty vapor locations at 3 per 10,000 people (the city currently has eight), add a distance requirement from schools, require annual inspections and licensing fees, and include a provision that prevents voluntarily closed shops from reopening as a way to limit the total number of stores over time. "It's in a review phase right now," Matt said, adding the change is intended to reduce accessibility to younger populations over time rather than immediately close stores.
During public comment, Fred Richmond, who identified himself as the owner of a local vape business, urged the council to consider grandfathering existing compliant shops. "I am a vape shop. I don't sell any THC. I try and get people off cigarettes," Richmond said, describing his business as focused on adult tobacco‑harm reduction and strict ID checks. He said inconsistent enforcement by some convenience stores and bad actors, not compliant specialty shops, was the main problem. "I'm in the only business in this city that's trying to run myself out of business," he added.
Council members asked whether the ordinance would force currently compliant shops to close. Matt replied the intent is not to close existing stores that follow state law and regulations; rather, the measure would prevent reissuing licenses if owners voluntarily close. The council also discussed how to define a "specialty" shop; staff said the ordinance ties that definition to a percentage of floor space devoted to the business type.
Shayla (staff) addressed product legality and enforcement, saying products containing less than 0.3% delta‑9 THC are allowed under current rules but that state law changes would prohibit certain cannabinoids (THC‑A, THC‑P) and synthetic cannabinoids beginning Jan. 1, 2026; she also said kratom had recently been banned by the state. "Our goal is to have owners who are following and obeying state statutes and making sure that folks don't enter that are under the age of 21," Shayla said.
Supporters of stricter limits argued the cap and distance requirements would reduce youth access, while opponents warned of unintended consequences for longtime, compliant business owners. Council members and staff noted the policy change would be gradual and that reaching the proposed cap would take time as closures or relocations occur.
The public hearing concluded after questions and follow‑up discussion; council later postponed the second/final readings of ordinances 703 and 704 to a future meeting.
