interact with a lot of people in the labor -- in the trades field, electricians, plumbers, locksmiths, general contractors, painters. on their own accord and out of their own curiosity, they go and purchase a device legally because they've been smoking for years, and then, they come, and they confide in me and tell me that they haven't had a cigarette in days, weeks, mont months, and that they can finally breathe again, that they can finally taste food again, that their spouses and kids are proud of them, and that their clothes don't smell again. and all i can think of are that families won't have to go through what i went through. and i would appreciate if you can consider all of the different external circumstances that would happen if you were to put this ban in place. thank you for your time.

>> good afternoon. my name is jessica baker. i'm also an employee at jool labs. i came to work at jool about 2.5 years ago purely based on two things. one, the people, and two, the mission. our mission is simple. it's to eliminate combustible cigarettes worldwide. currently, 1 billion smokers are using cigarettes, and that's a powerful mission, and that was enough to make me inspired to work here. as a child of the 80's, much of my holidays at grandma's house were consumed with big clouds of smoke inside as they all sat around and smoked cigarettes, and me and my brother would hide from the smoke and go upstairs and seek refuge wherever we could. my grandmother's now 83 years old and suffering from copd. there was no alternative to

cigarettes at that time, and now she's suffering. mentally and physically, she's healthy as can be, but when it comes to hur lungs, they are -- her lungs, they're failing her due to her long-term smoking habits. my father was a smoker, and the first thing i did when i started working at jool was hand him a device and a pack of pods. i am actually proud to say he has not smoked since that day. i actually recently called him and asked him hey, how are you feeling? he said i can breathe better, i'm not coughing up the gunk in my lungs, and i overall feel better. it is important to reserve a choice for adults who are looking for an alternative. i know as an adult i would be

devastated to think about my family members and friends who would not have access to this product as a result of the ban. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is lorna dietz, and i'm here from the san francisco filipino chamber of commerce. i'm here to support the reasonable vaping regulations. i'm here to oppose the vaping ban. like many filipinos, born in my generation, i was a cigarette smoker before i was 21 years old. i successfully gave up smoking in 2001, 24 years later. a few years ago, a friend invited me to her son's vape shop. i wanted to find out why vaping was an alternative source for adults trying to quit smoking. how many of you in this room

have tried vaping at least once? to my surprise, the feel and taste of vaping was very mild. that was my first and last experience in vaping. i am aware, that just like combustible cigarettes, vaping comes with health risks. i believe this proposed ordinance to ban the sale of vape products in physical retail stores and on-line to san francisco while continuing to allow the sale of combustible cigarettes is not well thought out. if you go through with this ordinance, to me, it means that number one, you will be opening pandora's box, and pretty soon, you would want to ban vaping as well as tobacco cigarettes. you will encourage adults in

making alternative choices to curb their nicotine addiction. i encourage you, members of the board of supervisors, to do the right thing. prevent the usage and preserve adult choice and regulate -- >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is fuad hussein. i'm a resident of san francisco. i own a business since 1984. i think a ban of e-cigarettes in san francisco hurts small businesses very bad. living in san francisco is very -- the high -- the cost of living is very high, and small businesses are getting hurt, and you know, rent is very high in the city, and the

regulations in san francisco are working. police actually send in decoys to the liquor stores, and they have sent decoys to my store in the past three months maybe five times. and we have always refused to sell to minors. we have always refused to sell to minors. you've already banned the menthols, and the flavors of the e-cigarettes, and now you want to ban the regular tobaccos? this is not fair to the small businesses. we need to survive in the city, and there aren a lot of big businesses in the city. you want my family to get out of the city? i think this is not fair.

thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker. >> hello. my name is jason, and i'm a san francisco business owner and been a resident the same amount of time and parent of kids in sfusd who have experience in regards to this jool epidemic as you say. in my experience, i opened a tobacco shop without selling tobacco. over the time, i was introduced to electronic cigarettes and the possibility of this being a cure, or if not, a cessation device to smoking. i did my research, went into it, purchased product, educated my consumers who were smokers to try it out and give it a chance. and just like my mother, i

urged to give her something else besides tobacco a chance to solve the problems. to my surprise, it actually helped over thousands of my constituents -- excuse me, not my constituents, thousands of my customers quit smoking. we know that a vape and a cigarette are two different things. if you've smoked and vaped an electronic cigarette, you know they're two very different. one is clearly a lot safer than the other one is. we need to concentrate more on a solution to these youth being able to get the product, and i recommend something along the lines of a supply chain management where each product is actually individually serialized and can be backtracked through the chain and that appropriate person

should be held responsible. the black market that will be coming from the ban of these products -- >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is baozoo. i work as a -- at a convenience store. i have flavored cigarettes, and if you notice, there's no ban stamps. we are going to fuel a black market when we ban e-cigarettes. we could be fuelling organized crime. that's all i have to say. >> my name is edwin, and i'm translating for miss lau.

>> hello, supervisors, i am miss low. i have a store with my husband on powell street for more than ten years, i would like to oppose about this ban and voice my opinion about the e-cigarette ban. so with the menthol ban earlier in the year, i already lost a lot of my business, like around

80%. i believe that we should not prohibit electronic ban, but we should educate our youth on the e-cigarettes and how -- on how these e-cigarettes are actually harmful to them instead of banning away these e-cigarettes, which will cause us to lose business.

even though you ban e-cigarettes, there's still a lot of problems going on around the city that you can't address, but banning the e-cigarettes, you are actually letting a lot of other black markets and other crimes that's happening. so i think it's best if we educate our youth better, and that's all i have to say.

thank you. >> hi. my name is mark. i'm going to be doing translating for mrs. yee right here. >> hi, supervisors. i live in district 6, and i am the mother of two children, one going to college and the other in middle school. i am here to express my concern about the city banning all

e-cigarettes. i understand that the city wants to prevent the youth from being exposed to e-cigarettes. as a mother, i think the city should enforce education of youth on nicotine products and increase safeguard of underage exposure instead of complete prohibition. obviously, i don't want my kids to get these products, but i know that teens are able to get these products on the underground. the black market would only

increase the temptations of the youth. i'm asking why the city won't choose to strongly regulate traditional tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana, instead choosing to ban these products completely. at the end of the day, it is strengthened awareness and education for the adolescents and parents and crack downs on illegal sales. i believe the most effective

way to reduce the adolescents' exposure is through education and awareness. this ban would encourage them to seek illicit means to retrieve them. the ban doesn't help our youth. >> supervisor walton: ted guggenheim, nahara, frank ayala, nakiim shareef, tanner wakefield.

>> good afternoon, supervisor mandelman, supervisor walton, supervisor stefani. i'm here to represent the c.d.c., the chinese democratic club. we're one of the oldest clubs in the country and one of the oldest democratic clubs in the city. we've been advocating for the rights of chinese americans for over six decades, and i speak to you today as a smoker, as well. our club is here to speak on the prohibition of e-cigarettes in the city. the issue should be about protecting our young people and not about completing a ban on e-cigarettes. and let me tell you why my organization is speaking out today. we oppose the ban as it is because it is -- unequally affects minorities in san francisco and denies adults who

wish to switch away from traditional cigarettes. e-cigarettes are an alternative, and some people claim it helps them reduce smoking, so why is the government trying to ban this? studies have shown that asian american groups are more likely to initiate smoking, so we believe that e-cigarettes can help people reduce smoking, and this is a good thing for our community. yes, we are also concerned that the ban will prevent adults who wish to step away from traditional cigarettes a better alternative. as an adult, i don't want to be denied access to a better alternative. this should be my personal choice. having said that, c.d.c. also supports greater regulations in underage access to e-cigarettes. however, an outright ban is not a solution. our city needs to deal with

this by tightening existing regulation. >> hi. my name is hajaj. friends call me a.j. i'm a manager at go go deli market. they put a ban on vape products, menthol cigarettes, and flavoreded cigars. i'm here to speak on a lot of business owners' behalf. a lot of them aren't here, and a lot of them are here and aren't speaking, so i hope i can express their feelings. jool products actually helped a lot of our customers quit cigarettes. that was good to know.

people, america is known as a place where freedom of choice has brought so many of us to this country. you want to legalize marijuana and ban menthol cigarettes, and yet, we see e-cigarettes sold in so many places. gas stations -- regular cigarettes sold in so many places. are you telling me that regular cigarettes aren't harmful? alcohol? why not banned flavored alcohol. if i start naming drugs, i'll be here all night. pills, all shapes, sizes, and colors. the freedom of choice is

america. parents need to police their children and educate them, not corner stores. all we can do is educate the country -- >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> mark again. i'm going to do translation for mrs. wu. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is shufan wu. i live in the san bruno area, and i am a mother to two young kids. our family emigrated to the u.s. hoping to seek a better education for our kids.

i understand that our city wants to protect our youth from being exposed to e-cigarettes, but to me, parenting and implementing educational programs would be more beneficial. using a ban to solve the problem might lead to other problems. the youth will always find different ways to get these contraband products, therefore,

we should help the kids to understand the harm of vaping products such as e-cigarettes and prevent them fr-- to preve from using them. the city already has great programs to prevent children from getting prohibited items, so clearly, the city believes that great programs work for our kids, and a ban can only encourage the black market for buying these illegal e-cigarettes. the responsibility for educating should begin again with family and schools, not by

complete prohibition. so the government should find a better way to help our next generation. thank you for your attention. >> hi. edwin again, translating. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i live in san bruno district. i am here today opposing the city's attempt to ban the sales of electronic cigarettes. the city should not take away our attempts to buy e-cigarettes which help us transition from cigarettes to a

better product. i use cigarettes myself. i used to smoke two to three packs of cigarettes each week. my family was always complaining to me about my smoking habits, so i switched over to e-cigarettes about half a year ago. it has less substances and let harm compared to traditional cigarettes, so my switch over to e-cigarettes has greatly reduced the negative influence that smoking has over my family. therefore, i hope the city stop banning and taking away a

better alternative. i have noticed with the introduction of banning menthol cigarettes, there has been a black market for menthol cigarette. with the banning of ex-cigarettes, i think the same thing will happen, leading to a black market for sales of

electronic cigarettes. i believe that those should have their own healthy choices, and i hope the city can leave the alternatives for me to get away from traditional cigarettes. because have a better -- please have a better regulation system than outright banning e-cigarettes. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is rakia, and my family owns a smoke shop in the sunset district. in a powerpoint i saw, it showed that the amount of youth

smoking has decreases because you guys passed a bill that increased the smoking bill from 18 to 21. also, all stores that sell e-cigarettes in san francisco sold to underage, and those two stores that sold to underage were big chain, not small stores. we're doing everything we should be doing to make sure that kids don't smoke. yes, nicotine is addictive, but e-cigarettes is a lot better than the 7,000 chemicals in traditional cigarettes. every here is saying jool is bad, but there are many other

companies that are -- my sales, most of them are from zero to 6, which is the less nicotine. they want that oral fixation that gives them, e-cigarettes. my brother was smoking for 15 years. he quit -- after a week of vaping, he quit smoking, which is amazing. my small business, after the flavored and vapor ban, it lost anywhere from 1500 to $3,000 a day. that's $730,000 a year that we lost. this ban would be another proposed -- >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is ted guggenheim, and

i'm a resident giving in district 5, and i'm a member of the tobacco free coalition. jool is a part of big tobacco, and for anyone who thinks that big tobacco has not infiltrated our school, i show you this article, vaping, is it cool to school? i think everyone should do it every day. it's the best. you could even say amazing. e-cigarette companies try to market themselves as a healthier alternative to cigarettes. this would be like coca-cola investing in pop tarts and then tell you that pop tarts are a healthy product.

jool is not cool, let's keep it out of school. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, everyone. my name is selara, and i live in the bay district of san francisco. i'm a member of projecting of group, and we're a group of young people that have an interest in controlling the sales of on-line flavored tobacco within san francisco and california in general. we conducted a research among high school students, and from the survey, we found 50% of the students, they compared flavored e-cigarettes to regular cigarettes. we know that all e-cigarettes

contain nicotine, which is very detrimental to the health, and it's also very addictive. i don't think any of our parents would like us to be exposed to that, especially for nicotine, so i support the ban. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is audrey bedelia. i am a member of the san francisco tobacco free coalition and proudly san francisco born and bred. when i began my work providing tobacco use prevention education throughout the bay area, including here in the city more than four years ago, i never would have predicted that i'd find myself in the front line, standing in halls and classrooms where thousands of youth that i speak to have

fallen casualty to the deceptive tactics of jool and other e-cigarettes manufacturers to gain new customers. this is much more than an epidemic. we are at war. at war with companies who defend profits over the health of our most vulnerable populations, who have yet to set foot in the trenches of our schools and homes and assess the real damage that they've caused. e-cigarettes continue to go unregulated. companies use tactics to target youth and minorities that otherwise are illegal for tobacco companies. millions more are getting hooked, and cities like san

francisco are paying over 300 million annually towards the economic cost of addiction. all the while, more and more research reveals the harmful health effects of these products. san francisco has the opportunity to protect the youth of this community by supporting this ordinance and send this message to the e-cigarette companies. this city is done paying your reparations. it's time to wave your white flag and keep your products out of our city -- >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is randy wong, and my organization holds quit smoking groups for the general public and in the past have held quit

smoking groups for teenagers. i'd just like to weigh when you decide what to do today, a story of a middle school that i went to two years ago. it's in the southern part of the city, and a group of 8th graders were caught all vaping. going to that school, i noticed that there were many shy folks, outspoken 8th graders, tall ones, small ones, and the one thing that they had in common as i was talking to them is they are all 13 years old, and they just started vaping for the first time. that is something that i think must be considered today, and i wanted to share also that in the last two years, this really has intensefied. this is the reality that we've seen on the ground, in the youth centers, and where we go. thank you.

>> hello. my name is sean patterson. i am a resident of san francisco. i started as a smoker when i was probably almost 16. i'm now 41. the only reason i quit cigarettes after trying every other alternative was learning about vape products about three years ago. i haven't touched a cigarette in three years. you talk about harm reduction, and that's exactly what this is. i'm here for the same reasons -- same reasons as the people that are worried about our children, our youth. i'm on the same side as them. i believe we do need to have harm reduction, but they're looking at this in a wrong way with poor evidence and poor scientific study, so i want to share is a study done by truth.org which, of course, is pushing an agenda now that

makes vape products look like they're pushing it directly to kids, which i don't think that's true and accurate, but this study is done called rethinking nicotine and its effects by raymond niyura, ph.d. director of science and training at the national institute for tobacco research and policy so it's at the truth initiative, truth.org. and he says through this study, most of the psychological harm attributed to cigarette smoking derivatives are drives from the toxicants and tobacco in combustion products. preventible morbidity and more mortallity has been related to

combustible products, not nicotine itself. nicotine is really no -- >> clerk: thank you. next speaker. >> supervisor walton: and i want to remind everyone in the overflow room, now will be the time that you want to come over for public comment, so if we have anyone in the overflow room that wants to come over for public comment, now would be the time to come over. >> hi. my name is tanner wakefield? the tobacco -- generally -- jool has had the opportunity to submit for f.d.a. approval for

three years, but it didn't, so why should public health be punished for its negligence? these aren't a harm reduction product. far more youth are being addicted to nicotine than switching from cigarettes. kids have initiated e-cigarette use in droves because it appears safer, and it appears with less risk. as a result, more people are putting themselves at risk with nicotine addiction. my grandpa, when he used cigarettes at 14, he continues to use nicotine at 89. should we abandon kids to a lifelong addiction at the hands of predatory companies? so i urge you to ban this.

thank you. >> my name is tony. i just wanted to say i grew up at a time when we didn't have access to things like vaporizers to nicotine. i lost people to cigarettes because they didn't have the ability to things like that. nicotine helped us wipe out the plague when we didn't have antibiotics in the 16th century. it was a brutal thing, then as in the 80's and 90's, and we were still not having access to thipgs like the internet and jool pods. any way, the point is those are things that have saved lives, and that's why they exist, and that's why they need to be accessible to people. thank you. >> supervisor mandelman: all right. are there any other members of the public who would like to speak on this item before we close public comment?

seeing none, public comment is now closed. colleagues? i may say some things, so if you want to have the final word. >> supervisor walton: thank you so much, chair mandelman. first, i definitely just want to thank everyone for coming out here today. i know it's friday morning -- we started an hour into friday afternoon. i also want to thank the following organizations and people who have been instrumental in this work, and this is not a definitive list, but the san francisco youth commission, san francisco marin medical society, san francisco tobacco free project, american heart association, parents against vaping e-cigarettes, the department of public health, the center for disease control, henny kelly, and of course the coauthor of ordinance, city attorney dennis

herrera in his continuing fight to help young people. i just want to touch on some conversations with merchants because definitely not an attack on our small businesses, but it is an attack on harmful products. i ha being a liquor and lottery grocer, a smoke shop, a tobacco vendor does not give you the right to sell 100% harmful products. there are so many businesses working hard to provide healthy products and goods to our communities. we will work to help small businesses succeed, but i will not put profits over the health of our youth. i want to thank you all again for coming out, and i hope that

we can all be supportive of this ordinance, so we can really work to keep harmful products like vape away from young people and away from general public and general as nicotine kills. thank you. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, supervisor walton. i just -- unless supervisor stefani has anything you want to say? not yet. you're percolating. all right. i'll say a few things. i've had a few concerns about this proposal. i actually heard all of them addressed and this is one of the reasons we have these hearings, elected officials. early on, we heard from someone on the issue of harm reduction, and whether -- whether

e-cigarettes are a form of harm reduction, we should be thinking about them in that way. i have wrestled, you know, as the author of legislation furthering our movement toward legalization of cannabis in the city and allowing temporary permits for cannabis events. also have wrestled with the question whether prohibition is the right approach with any kind of drugs. and then i've had concerns about impacts on small businesses. i did hear, i thought, compelling responses to each of those concerns today. we heard pretty unequivocally from the public health experts who have been working on cigarettes and tobacco for a long, long time that they do not view e-cigarettes as harm reduction. and although there are people

who are speculating that maybe that is what it is, i'm not hearing that from the medical community, which is a community that i trust on -- on that question. so that was compelling for me. the question of prohibition is, in some ways harder, and as we think about how to deal with new technology is something to grapple with, but this is something that the f.d.a. needs to do to determine whether and how danger a product this is. it's more to educate a public that may not believe that e. cigarettes are harmful and a strategy for dealing with a new product. and we're hearing loud and

clear from the tobacco control experts that this is a really dangerous product. the last issue that is still kind of with me, and i'm glad for your remarks just a moment ago is that time and again, we regulate and small business pays the price. and many of these corner stores, whatever else they're selling, they are linchpin important entities in their community. they are selling products that we would rather people not purchase, but they're selling things that people need, and food, and they're often eyes on the streets, and they're often holding down some of the most dangerous corners in the city. so i would hope that in the next 1.5 weeks -- i think we're going to forward this with a

full positive recommendation, but i hope there can be some conversation between you and supervisor fewer, and we will have more to offer this community by the time we approve this than thoughts and prayers but actually a program and a plan and a way to move forward with some tangible support for our struggling small businesses, so i'm hoping that will come to us, so for the moment, i'm comfortable voting forward this. supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: thank you. you said just about everything i want to say. i want to echo the statements of supervisor mandelman. with regards to e-cigarettes being harm reduction. we know the f.d.a. is taking a look at this, and knowing that supervisor fewer will be working with supervisor walton on the impacts to small

business is something that i care about. but i just want to acknowledge the mom from district 2 that came up. i'm a mom, too, and i know everything that you're feeling, everything that's being talked about in the parent community and our schools, and it is a concern. i just want you to know that you have been heard, and i think that a lot of parents have raised these same concerns, so just thank you to everyone who came out, and with that, i will hand it back over. >> supervisor mandelman: supervisor walton, i would lwo like to make a motion to forward this to the full board with a positive recommendation? >> supervisor walton: i would like to make a motion to move

this to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor mandelman: and then, i would like to rescind item 4. there was some back and forth but it was pointed out by our counsel that the 27th is the day after the last budget conversation that could go very, very late. i believe there is going to be a psns hearing on the 27th probably regardless, but we may not want to have that item on. we'll have the opportunity to work with president yee whether to have it on the 27th or at a later date. so i will vote to have us resint and then continue that -- rescind and then continue that item to the call of the chair. so i will make a motion to rescind item 4, and we can take that without objection. and then, i will make a motion to continue item 4 to the call of the chair, and we can take that without objection.

and mr. clerk, do we have any further business? >> clerk: there is no further businessm business. >> supervisor mandelman: okay. well, then, fantastic. we are adjourned. thank you.

>> this is regular meeting of the small business commission held on monday june 10, 2019. call to order at 5:32 p.m. small business commission and sfgov tv for televising the media can be views on sfgov tv

2. members of the public please take this opportunity to silence your phone and other electronic devices. public comment during the meeting is limited to three minutes per speaker. speakers are requested to state their names. please place speaker cards in the basket. speaker cards will be called in order. there's a sign-in sheet on the front table. >> welcome. each small business meeting with the reminder that the office of saw business is the only place to start your new business in san francisco and the best place to get answers to your questions about doing business in san francisco. the office of small business should be your first stop if you

have questions what to do next. you can find us online or in person here at city hall for our service is free of small. small business commission is here to address your concerns that affect the economic vitality of small businesses here in san francisco. if you need assistance with your small business here, start here at the office of small business. >> item 1 call to order. roll call. [roll call] mr. president, you have a quorum. >> president adams: next item please. >> item 2 [agenda item read].

>> president adams: do we have any member of the public like to make comment on item that is not on today's agenda? seeing none, public comment closed. next item please. >> item 3 [agenda item read] >> president adams: thank you adam straus. this is kind of sad i'm doing this. i'm fighted for you adam. on this monday june 10, 2019, the small business commission is honored to recognize adam straus owner producer of straus events for his ten years of service and project management of t