to see the creation of another illicit markets, though i guess deadly sales of combustible cigarettes would further the prohibition fee. policies to drive sales of deadly combustible products should not be the driver of this. we're told it's because of the health risks, yet open sewers are not a health risk? this policy is telling us that the city's priority is selling traditional items. i find it difficult to believe that residents of this once amazing city would agree to policy that would alienate tourism, destroy policy and also lead to premature death of

many of your residents. i encourage you to relook at some of these policies and take a look at where some of these policies belong, a trash can. >> clerk: thank you, next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is jaime, and i'm with the association of retail outlets. we strongly oppose this proposed ordinance. we oppose this proposal for the following reasons. it would effectively ban almost all vape harm reduction products in san francisco county, exacerbate the financial impact of local retailers, likely harm rather than benefit public health and do little or nothing to affect youth. it would only promote illicit sales to those under 21 in the city of san francisco. this proposal will not affect any sales to minor, and it will

only inconvenience adults over 21 by causing them to purchase on-line outside of san francisco or create an illicit market created by this proposed ban. national studies by the f.d.a. show that -- and not from traditional retailers that train employees to follow the law. enacting this proposal will promote illegal illicit markets for these products. perhaps we should ask ourselves who would be more likely to check i.d.s of a young people? a business with 16 locations in the city or something selling products out of a truck or the back of a car. this proposal rejects harm reduction and is contrary to the city's reduction of health

issues. in closing, we ask you to not appro approve proposal as is. thank you for your consideration. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> my name is -- [inaudible] >> i would like to oppose ban o of -- support ban of e-cigarette. the risk of e-cigarette and combustible cigarette are similar. that's why we cannot recommend the e-cigarette for harm reduction and cessation devices. so we just published scientific advanced student report. basically, it is associated with heart disease among all americans, so i want to submit this evidence for the record.

thank you. >> supervisor walton: thank you. dennis kelly, rashan murray, judy smith, ben minore, ronald shucart, chris rice, and tony alan. >> i'm dave fagan, california association of district merchants, past president of the business commission. there are many retailers that wanted to be here today, but they're busy working, trying to keep their business open. i and all of them oppose this ban. bans like this hurt small businesses and have no indication they do actually curb youth access. in fact, the california

department of public health says that the small businesses have the best rate of success in preventing youth access. small businesses are the answers to this problem, not the problem itself. at the end of the day, we're all working for the same goal of preventing youth access. however, this ban does affect our neighborhoods, which are struggling with vacant storefronts, and having vacant storefronts, you know, will affect the quality of life for the residents in your neighborhoods. when you do have a struggling business, the best way to turn that struggling business around is to try to increase your revenues and decrease your expenses. if you can do both of them at once, you're able to turn it around. however in san francisco, we have a challenge in that we're setup for failure. city government continues to focus on taxes, mandates, fees, and regulations that decrease

our revenues and increase our expenses. my question to everyone on the board of supervisors is which proposal, tax, mandate, fee, or regulation will be the next to close a business in your neighborhood and create a vacant storefront? thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is bob gordon, and i'm cochair of the san francisco tobacco free coalition. supervisors, how can we not be inspired by san francisco icon henny kelly speaking out. at the -- hearing the jool convention here in town, she asked, which convention should i go to? it's estimated by the journal

of american medical association pediatrics that just came out last week that nearly 90% of 1y ool -- jool's social media followers are under 21. please, parents, friends, neighbors, let's take this logical next step. thank you. [inaudible] >> -- they are the number one predator of our people. we want to applaud you, shaman,

supervisor shaman, because you're taking strong leadership. we know that jool has been taking the whole country, trying to use our african american people across the country because of their marketing to our children. when we talk about harm reduction, i was here in san francisco when we fought for needle exchange. needle exchange was not about sprinkling needles all over the city for anybody who might want to become an i.v. drug user, as what jool is doing all over the city. we weren't encouraging people to become i.v. drug users with aids in the day. we know that this product kills people, so what's the measurement of -- what's the

measurement of how that compares to combustible cigarettes? if jool kills one out of 10 and cigarettes kill 4 out of 10, does that mean we want it in our measure? the california department of public health is investing in our public population. there's revenues coming down because of the tobacco tax. this will be accompanied by more cessations for people, so this is part of our -- >> supervisor walton: stop the war on drugs, amos elberg. rudy acersion, rudy perez, lorne dike, wyatt, jessica

baker. next speaker. >> good afternoon, members of the board. my name is ben minore, and i'm a member of the filipino chamber of commerce. i had a wonderful speaker and then it dawned on me what happened in the 80's and the 70's. i'm an educator, and i was a gang specialist for the state of california. i also worked with your police department, what i realized is that we're going to be dealing with a commodity that could become your modern day contraband. i don't want the children to have access to it, but if you don't regulate it the way others have said it, then we will have more than just a health issue. we will have a crime issue, so i said to the officers and leaders in the 80's, get your head out of the sand because the horse is out of the barn, and if we don't take control of this as parents and educate our

parents to become parents, as front-line educators to protect children from abusing themselves, we won't be able to do it. so i hope you don't put this as a band-aid to serving the children of our community. thank you for your time. >> supervisor walton: next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is antonio lau. i remember the hispanic chambers of commerce in san francisco. we are a coalition of five chambers. my organization opposed to this ban because of two major reasons. number one, the ban will not solve the problem of health to our youth. second, it will create a bigger problem. number one, i believe good, healthy habits starts at home

and starts with a good education policy in our schools and at home. all we are doing with this ban is to push this tobacco products into the black market, and allow organized crime to make a profit out of this and increase on-line sales. the youth will still be at risk if we push these products into the black market. and number two, we're going to have a huge economic impact to our members. our economy's based on the small businesses. most of us are family owned, minority businesses, that they depend on the sales of these legal products, so please, think about what economic impact it will have on all these minority families before

you make a decision. and how are you going to compensate for their economic loss? because a lot of our jobs are going to be lost if this ban goes through. thank you. >> my name's chris rice. i'm a resident of soma, a resident of san francisco. i'm a jool employee, and i just decided to share with you the story of why i decided to work at jool. i was happy at my job and had a negative opinion as many of you do. as i learned more about the company and more about the mission to eliminate combustible cigarettes, i started to think about my own life. the very first memory i hearkened back to was the death of my grandfather from lung disease. if we think back, we probably

have lost all of our aunts and uncles, especially in the south, where smoking is prevalent, to combustible cigarettes. so i feel very fortunate to be a part of an organization that provides satisfying alternatives to people that can actually make the switch. you've heard from some of those people here today. so i just wanted to speak to that and bring a face to who we're talking about. oftentimes, we otherize and stigmatize these issues. i'd encourage you to look at other nations, other councils that have actually embraced harm reduction, especially around vape products and do a little bit of research, and i think you'll find some very

promising things for our future. thanks. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> hi. my name's judy smith. i taught school in san francisco for 35 years. i started smoking when i was 25, two packs a day until i was 37. i stopped when i was pregnant. my mom died of lung cancer. i was diagnosed can breast -- with breast cancer eight years ago. even with the diagnosis, i couldn't stop smoking. i have used these products cutting down from not just using huge amounts of pods, but putting my own juice into my pens, and i intend to completely stop at one point. the long hall. until i started vaping, i

couldn't switch away from cigarettes and combustion. i haven't touched one in almost six years. i have a daughter, i taught school, and the proposed policy ban is not a successful idea. bans work in our heads. they don't work in reality. they provoke children to find better ways of getting around them. forbidden fruit is always more exciting. why are we leaving alcohol on the shelf? in my mind, alcohol shouldn't be there. if you hide things from kids, they'll find ways to get it. parents should raise their kids to be educated, well educated, and they should also be well educated about vaping, harm reduction, and the opioid

epidemic. i just think curtailing my rights or other adults that are able to access legal products is an unfair action. >> good afternoon again. my name's starchild, outreach director for the libertarian party of san francisco, outreach s.f. we know that addiction to nicotine can be harmful and dangerous, but i want to talk about an addiction that is more harmful and dangerous, and that is indicated by behavior of the board of supervisors. it's starting to look like the board is addicted to banning things. fur, robots on the streets,

flame retardant couches. these are all the little things that are partially banned or de facto banned, like tiny houses, which in the midst of a housing crisis -- formula retail, that's a ban in many neighborhoods, disallowed. this is just a symptom of an even more fund gentleman tall and dangerous form of addiction in our community, which is the addiction to power. we know that there's a power addiction problem. that's why we have term limits. supervisors have limits on how many terms they can serve, otherwise, some of them would be in there forever. power is very addictive, and i'd like to encourage supervisors, fight this addiction. please stop banning things. leave people alone to live

their own lives as long as they are not initiating force or fraud against others. our bodies belong to us. what you put into your bodies should be your choice. members of the community, if you want to address this dangerous addiction to power, please help -- >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is amos elberg. i'm one of your constituents, and i'm here to speak against the banning of on-line vaping products. i smoked for many years until i switched to jool products, which were effective in getting me not to stop using nicotine, but in using tobacco products. from my own belief, i think that jool pods are less harmful than cigarettes, which is why i switched. much of what you've heard today

concerning youth activity and vaping occurred prior to the ban that went into effect in january. since then, it has become extraordinarily difficult to purchase vaping products in san francisco. today, the only time that i would smoke a cigarette is when it gets to the end of the month when the mail-order from jool hasn't arrived because it is that hard to buy them here. if you ban those on-line sales, i will have to go back to cigarettes or move. anybody, any child who has been obtaining those products via mail-order since january, it's inconceivable to me that a parent could learn their child obtained that product through the mail-order since january and would be concerned about the nicotine other than the mail fraud and identity fraud that would be involved in that purchase. i'd like to address briefly the science.

there is a lot of science back and forth. the f.d.a. has chosen to take a wait-and-see attitude. the u.k. encourages them. i would respectfully submit that that scientific dispute is one that this committee is not in a position to resolve. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is rudy asercion, and i'm with the national association of filipino americans. i oppose this on behalf of my members of my association. my members told me since they started using e-cigarettes and stopped using tobacco, their health is better, and they have a better outlook on life. they're afraid that taking away this choice from them will get them to start smoking tobacco again. so i encourage you to approach the legislation, and only

because i'm a big proponent of freedom of choice. we give everybody a freedom of choice. why are we going to restrict our residents of san francisco from that freedom of choice? it's -- the jury's still out whether e-cigarette is harmful or more harmful or more helpful, but we have testimonies here that e-cigarettes have been helping a lot of people who used to smoke, and their health is -- and they're feeling better because their health is improved, so i urge you to reject this legislation. thank you very much. >> good afternoon, committee members. my name is nicolle, and i'm a resident of district 5 in san francisco, and i'm here to speak in opposition of the proposed ban of e-cigarettes. i'm proud to say i've been

cigarette free for five years and was able to do so by crisping to nicotine vape -- switching to nicotine vaping products. as an adult over the age of 21, i should have access to these products and not not pub issue -- punished by my choice to use tobacco and not be forced to travel to other communities to obtain these products. if folks want it, they will find access through other channels that are not taxed and safety vetted. please consider other bans here, and thank you for your consideration. >> supervisor walton: shawn patterson, jason erington, juan

low, wilson chao, chow yu. -- yu. >> good afternoon, supervisors. full disclosure, i am a jool labs employee. in 2003, my grandfather passed away from emphysema and copd. it was a years long process, and the only reason he stopped was because he couldn't breathe anymore. years after my mother passed away, my mother confided to me that even on his death bed, he would have killed for a cigarette. in my function at jool labs, i 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.