One of the nation's toughest sets of laws regulating the sale and advertisement of tobacco

products will go to the Buffalo Common Council for review this week, and a majority of

lawmakers look favorably on new rules that would crack down on vendors irresponsibly marketing

tobacco products.

Anti-smoking advocates claim the dozens of restrictions on marketing tactics and retailing

activities could make Buffalo a catalyst for spurring other communities to adopt their own

laws.

"We think that would be something to be proud of," said Hillary Clarke, the American Cancer

Society's local director of advocacy, who has been lobbying city lawmakers in support of the

plan. "Becoming a leader in the tobacco-control movement is a good thing."

Document: Summary of proposed Responsible Tobacco Retailing Act Complete version of proposal

Under the legislation, tobacco companies would have to pay a user fee for every brand of

cigarette they distribute in the city, with the money going toward hiring new inspectors to

enforce tougher laws. A draft of the bill requires manufacturers to pay $1,000 a year for

every brand or sub-brand.

For example, if there are 10 different varieties of one brand of cigarette, a company would

have to pay $10,000 annually.

"Big tobacco should pay for enforcement," said Masten Council Member Demone A. Smith,

sponsor of the legislation. "Why should taxpayers or local business people be saddled with

these costs?"

The plan also would create a new city license for all stores or outlets selling tobacco

products. While the fee would be nominal — possibly even $1 a year — it would make

it easier for the city to shut down irresponsible retailers, sponsors say. The city also would

limit the number of licenses available to new tobacco-selling businesses in hopes of gradually

reducing the number of cigarette vendors.

Other provisions include:

Banning some new businesses from selling tobacco products, including pharmacies,

restaurants, bars, businesses that primarily serve minors, or businesses that are within 1,000

feet of schools.

Beginning in 2014, no tobacco products could be sold at any drugstores, bars,

restaurants, game rooms, or on school or college properties.

Advertising for tobacco products would be strictly regulated. For example, no large

outdoor tobacco product ads could be displayed at retail outlets near schools. In-store ads

would have to displayed in black and white, and no images or cartoons could be used in large

display ads. Warning signs would have to be posted where tobacco products are sold. And the

amount of space that tobacco ads occupy could not exceed the square footage of ads for all

other products.

"We want to clean up some of the outrageous advertising," said K. Michael Cummings,

chairman of the department of health behavior at Roswell Park Cancer Institute.

"Right now, some stores are just littered with tobacco advertising," he continued, adding

that some of the most pervasive ads are in Buffalo's most impoverished neighborhoods.

Violators could face fines of up to $500 for the first offense, and up to $2,000 for second

citations. The city could yank licenses if a third offense occurs over a two-year span.

The president of the New York Association of Convenience Stores criticized the plan,

accusing sponsors of trying to "leap frog" over the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. James

Calvin said the FDA is already working on new regulations involving tobacco retailing.

"I don't understand the rush to pre-empt the FDA," Calvin said. "The whole idea is to have

strong, consistent, uniform regulations of tobacco sales across the country."

Calvin also contended that most local smokers buy cigarettes on Indian reservations, where

vendors don't have to follow municipal laws. He questioned the fairness of burdening retailers

with "additional layers of regulations" when "tax-free competitors" wouldn't have to follow

them.

Calvin also branded some provisions in Smith's bill as "redundant." For example, he noted

that tobacco retailers already must obtain state licenses and face an array of marketing and

sales restrictions.

Does the law stand a chance of winning passage in City Hall?

The Buffalo News interviewed six of nine lawmakers, and all said they would seriously

consider imposing new regulations to crack down on vendors that irresponsibly market tobacco

products. The review, though, may bring some cherry picking and revisions of the dozens of new

regulations in the proposed law.

"I definitely think there's interest and support on the Council to look at something like

this," South Council Member Michael P. Kearns said. "Smoking is habit-forming, and once young

people start smoking, it's very difficult for them to quit."

While lawmakers won't see the proposed ordinance until Monday or Tuesday, most said they

would likely favor at least some of the new regulations. But Majority Leader Richard A.

Fontana and Niagara Council Member David A. Rivera said whatever law is passed must be fair to

vendors.

"We can't put restrictions on businesses that are overly onerous," Fontana said.

Cummings denied that the effort is anti-business.

"We don't want to chase retailers out of Buffalo," he said. "We want responsible retailers

to be here."

Mayor Byron W. Brown recently assured bill supporters during a private meeting that he

backs the law, Cummings and Smith said.

The mayor's communications director confirmed that the mayor "supports the concepts"

embraced in the plan. Still, mayoral spokesman Peter K. Cutler said there are logistical

questions about some provisions that must be addressed.

"The mayor wants to have an opportunity to review details of the proposal with staff,"

Cutler said.

One concern, said Smith, is making sure that all regulations could withstand what some

believe will be a likely legal challenge by tobacco companies.

"We are looking at trying to get local and outside groups that will band together to help

defend communities as they are confronted by big tobacco's deep pockets and their lawyers,"

Cummings said.

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., one of the nation's largest cigarette manufacturers, did not

return calls for comment.

Tougher restrictions on cigarette advertising are something that merit serious

consideration, said North Council Member Joseph Golombek Jr. Still, he said there are existing

regulations that, if enforced, would dramatically improve the outside appearances of many

businesses that display signs in ways that violate city codes.

Smith agreed, but he said the city inspections unit doesn't have the staff to aggressively

enforce provisions. The new law could generate as much as $300,000 a year from tobacco

companies, said Smith, adding that the money would be used to hire inspectors who would focus

exclusively on enforcing tobacco retailing rules.

"You can have millions of laws, but if there isn't an enforcement piece, they're

ineffective," Smith said.