03/10/2020 - City Council SpecialSPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY
MARCH 10, 2020
5:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS—EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER
AGENDA
I. ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD
III. TOBACCO AND ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE REGULATIONS
IV. RED PINE NOISE STUDY
V. OTHER BUSINESS
VI. ADJOURNMENT
Agenda Information Memo
March 10, 2020 Eagan Special City Council Meeting
III. TOBACCO AND ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE REGULATIONS
Direction For Consideration:
To provide direction regarding changes to tobacco and/or electronic cigarette regulations.
Facts:
At the Oct. 15 Listening Session, the City Council received a request to consider changes
to the City’s tobacco ordinance. Specifically, to increase the legal age to purchase
tobacco, to restrict the sale of flavored tobacco and electronic cigarette products, and
to require warning signs be posted at tobacco stores.
The City Council directed staff to research the status of current tobacco and electronic
cigarette regulations and legislation at the federal and state level and other cities’
tobacco and electronic cigarette regulations.
At the December 10, 2019 Special City Council meeting, the Council directed
preparation of an ordinance amendment to increase the legal age to purchase tobacco
and related products to 21 and to require tobacco license holders to have, and show
proof of, an educational program for its staff. Council further directed that the draft
ordinance amendment be placed on a future special Council meeting agenda for further
discussion.
As required by State Statute, the draft ordinance amendment has been mailed to
tobacco license holders. The communication with the license holders noted the Council
would be discussing the draft ordinance at the March 10 workshop.
Policy Issues:
Since the direction at the December Special City Council Meeting, the City has received
additional requests for consideration. In drafting the ordinance amendment, the City
Attorney’s Office has also identified policy issues for further Council consideration. The
additional policy considerations include:
1. Removal of penalties for illegal purchase, use or procurement (“PUP” penalties):
The draft ordinance amendment does not remove already existing language
establishing penalties for minors who illegally purchase, use or procure tobacco
and tobacco products. The City has received requests from several members of
the public to remove these penalties from the draft ordinance amendment. It
has been noted that the model ordinance provided by the League of Minnesota
Cities does not include PUP penalties.
2. Age of compliance check participants: The current ordinance requires
compliance checks once a year utilizing underage individuals who are between
15 and 17 years of age. The draft ordinance amendment increases the age of the
underage individuals to between 18 and 20 years of age, which is consistent with
the alcohol license compliance check ages. The City has received a request to
either (1) conduct two compliance checks, one utilizing persons 15 to 17 and one
utilizing persons 18 to 20, or (2) change the language so that individuals between
15 and 20 can be utilized for compliance checks.
3. Age of tobacco license holders and employees: The current ordinance requires
tobacco license holders to be at least 18 years of age. The draft ordinance
amendment increases the age to 21, consistent with the age requirement for
alcohol license holders. The draft ordinance amendment also prohibits anyone
under 21 from entering a tobacco store where customers have direct access to
product, except for employees who must be at least 18.
Attachments: (3)
III‐1 Draft ordinance amendment
III‐2 December 10, 2019 SPCC Meeting Materials
III‐3 Correspondence
ORDINANCE NO. ___ 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY
CODE CHAPTER SIX ENTITLED “OTHER BUSINESS REGULATION AND LICENSING”
BY AMENDING SECTION 6.34 REGARDING SALE OF TOBACCO AND ELECTRONIC
DELIVERY DEVICES & PRODUCTS; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY
CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 6.99.
The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain:
Section 1. Chapter 6 of the Eagan City Code is amended by revising Section 6.34 to read
as follows:
Sec. 6.34. – Tobacco.
Subd. 1. Purpose. The city recognizes that many persons under the age of 18 21
years purchase or otherwise obtain, possess and use tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco
related devices, and such sales, possession and use are violations of both state and federal laws.
Thus, the city intends to regulate the sale, possession and use of tobacco, tobacco products and
tobacco related devices for the purpose of enforcing and furthering existing laws, to prevent
and protect minors underage individuals against the illegal use of tobacco, tobacco products
and tobacco related devices, and to further the official public policy of the State of Minnesota,
as stated in Minn. Stat., § 144.391, in regard to preventing minorunderage individuals from
starting to smoke.
Subd 2. Definitions. The following terms, as used in this section, shall have the meanings
stated:
Compliance checks means the enforcement system the city uses to investigate and ensure that
those authorized to sell tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco related devices are following
and complying with the requirements of this section. Compliance checks shall involve the use
of minorunderage individuals as authorized by this section whereby the authorized
minorunderage individual attempts to purchase tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related
devices for the purpose of enforcement of this section, as well as educational, research and
training purposes as authorized by state and federal laws.
Electronic delivery device means any product, including any component part of a product
whether marketed or sold together or separately, containing or delivering nicotine, lobelia, or
any other substance intended for human consumption that can be used by a person to simulate
smoking in the delivery of nicotine or any other substance through inhalation of vapor from the
product. Electronic delivery device does not include any product that has been approved or
certified by the Unites States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco-cessation
product, as a tobacco-dependence product, or for other medical purposes, and is marketed and
sold for such an approved purpose.
Hearing officer means the city administrator or any other city employee duly appointed by the
city administrator.
2
Individually packaged means the practice of selling any tobacco or tobacco product wrapped
individually for sale. Individually wrapped tobacco and tobacco products shall include, but not
be limited to: single cigarette packs; single bags or cans of loose tobacco in any form; and
single cans or other packaging of snuff or chewing tobacco; cartons or other packaging
containing more than a single pack or other single container as described in this paragraph
shall not be considered individually packaged.
Loosies means the common term used to refer to a single or individually wrapped cigarette.
MinorUnderage individual means any person under the age of 1821 years.
Moveable place of business shall mean any form of business operated by which sales are made
by U.S. Mail or other courier service or online (internet) services or out of a truck, van,
automobile, or other type of vehicle or transportable shelter and not a fixed address store front
or other permanent type of structure authorized for sales transactions.
Nicotine and lobelia delivery product means any product containing or delivering nicotine or
lobelia intended for human consumption, or any part of such a product, that is not tobacco or
an electronic delivery device.
Retail establishment means any place of business where tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco
related devices are available for sale to the general public, including, but not be limited to:
grocery stores; convenience stores; liquor establishments; and restaurants.
Sale or sell means any transfer of goods for money, trade, barter, or other consideration.
Self-service merchandising means open displays of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco
related devices for sale in any manner which any person may have access to tobacco, tobacco
products or tobacco related devices without the assistance or intervention of the licensee or the
licensee's employee. Assistance or intervention for access shall require the actual physical
exchange of the tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco related device between the customer and
the license or employee. For purposes of this definition, self-service merchandising does not
include vending machines.
Smoking means inhaling or exhaling smoke from any lighted cigar, cigarette, pipe, or any other
lighted tobacco or plant product. Smoking also includes carrying a lighted cigar, cigarette,
pipe, or any other lighted tobacco or plant product intended for inhalation.
Tobacco or tobacco products shall mean any substance, item, or product containing, made or
derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption whether chewed, smoked,
absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed or ingested by any other means or any
component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product, including but not limited to: cigarettes;
cigars; pipe tobacco; snuff; fine cut or other chewing tobacco; cheroots; stogies; perique;
granulated, plug cut, crimp cut, ready-rubbed, and other smoking tobacco; snuff flowers;
cavendish; shorts; plug and twist tobacco; dipping tobacco; refuse scraps; clippings, cuttings,
and sweepings of tobacco; and other kinds and forms of tobacco. The term tobacco or tobacco
products exclude any tobacco product that has been approved by the United States Food and
Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product, as a tobacco dependence product,
or for other medical purposes, and is being marketed and sold solely for an approved purpose.
3
Tobacco related device means any product intentionally designed or intended to be used in
connection with chewing, sniffing, smoking or using tobacco or tobacco products, including a
pipe, rolling papers, tobacco or tobacco product carrying case or lighter.
Vending machine means any mechanical, electric or electronic, or other type of device which
dispenses tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related devices upon the insertion of money,
tokens or other form of payment directly into the device by the person seeking to purchase or
otherwise obtain the tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related device.
Subd. 3. License required. It is unlawful for any person to, directly or indirectly,
keep for retail sale, sell at retail, or otherwise dispose of any tobacco, tobacco product or
tobacco-related device without a license therefor from the city.
Subd. 4. License application . Application for a license to sell tobacco, tobacco
products or tobacco related devices hereunder shall be made on a form provided by the city.
The application shall contain the full name of the applicant, the applicant's residential address
and telephone number, the name of the business, the address and telephone number for which
the license is sought, and any additional information the city deems necessary. Upon receipt of
a complete application and license fee, the city clerk shall forward a copy to the police
department for completion of a background investigation. If the city clerk determines that an
application is incomplete, he or she shall return the application to the applicant with notice of
the information necessary to make the application complete.
Subd. 5. Action on license application . The city clerk may either approve or deny the
license, or may delay action for such reasonable period of time as necessary to complete any
investigation of the application or the applicant it deems necessary. If the city clerk approves
the license, a license shall be immediately issued to the applicant. If the city clerk denies the
license, notice of the denial shall be given to the applicant. The city clerk may deny a license
on the following grounds:
A. The applicant is under the age of 1821 years.
B. The applicant has been convicted within the past five years of any violation of a
federal, state or local law, ordinance provisions or other regulation relating to tobacco or
tobacco products or tobacco related devices.
C. The applicant has had a license to sell tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco
related devices revoked within the preceding 12 months of the date of application.
D. The applicant fails to provide information required on the application or provides
false or misleading information.
E. The applicant is prohibited by federal, state or other local law, ordinance or other
regulation from holding such a license.
Subd. 6. Conditions of license.
A. Separate licenses shall be issued for the sale of tobacco, tobacco product or
tobacco-related devices at each fixed place of business and no license shall be issued for a
moveable place of business.
4
B. The licensee shall comply with all provisions on this section.
C. Notwithstanding any exceptions for tobacco products shops as set forth in the
Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act, no licensee shall directly or indirectly permit smoking in the
licensed premises. All licensees under this section shall be responsible for the actions of their
employees and patrons in regard to any smoking in the licensed premises.
Subd. 7. Duration of license. All licenses issued under this section shall expire on
December 31st of each year.
Subd. 8. Suspension or revocation. Any license issued under this section may be
revoked or suspended for any violation of this section or for any violation of any federal, state
or other law, ordinance or regulation relating to tobacco products or tobacco related device as
follows:
A. A licensee's authority to sell cigarettes at the licensed location may be suspended
for a violation of this section.
B. In the case of suspension, there shall be no license refund.
C. License revocation may be instituted following a misdemeanor or petty
misdemeanor conviction under this section of any officer, director, manager, or other agent or
employee of any license.
Subd. 9. Termination of license. All licenses issued under this section shall be valid
only for the premises for which the license was issued and only for the person to whom the
license was issued. No license may be transferred to another location or person and any
transfer or change of ownership of the licensed premises shall terminate the license.
Subd. 10. Moveable place of business. No license shall be issued to a moveable place
of business.
Subd. 11. Display of license. All licenses shall be posted and displayed in plain view
of the general public on the licensed premises.
Subd. 12. Renewals. The renewal of a license issued under this section shall be made
in accordance with this section as the original application. The request for a renewal shall be
made at least 30 days, but no more than 60 days before the expiration of the current license. No
license shall be renewed in the absence of payment of the annual license fee.
Subd. 13. Investigation and License fees. No license shall be issued under this section
until the investigation fee and license fee is paid in full. The fees for an investigation and
license under this section shall be in an amount set forth by city council resolution.
Subd. 14. Unlawful Sales. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or offer to sell
any tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco related device:
A. To any person under the age of 1821 years;
B. By means of any type of vending machine;
5
C. By means of self-service merchandising, unless granted an exemption under the
licensee's license as provided herein;
D. Containing opium, morphine, jimpson [jimson] weed, belladonna, strychnos,
cocaine, marijuana, or other deleterious, hallucinogenic, toxic, or controlled substances except
nicotine and other substances found naturally in tobacco or added as part of an otherwise
lawful manufacturing process.
A licensee under this section may be exempt from the self-service merchandising prohibition
set forth above if:
(1) The licensee's establishment derives 90 percent or more of its total revenues from
tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco related device sales;
(2) The licensee prohibits any person under the age of 1821 from entering the
licensed premises at all times; and
(3) The licensee's license authorizes self-service merchandising and is subject to the
condition that no person under the age of 1821 shall be permitted within the licensed
premises at any time.
It is not unlawful for any person who has attained the age of 18 years to enter a licensed
premises for the purpose to perform work for the establishment, including the sale of tobacco,
tobacco products and tobacco related devises, unless otherwise prohibited by statute.
Subd. 15. Self-service sales. All tobacco, tobacco products, and tobacco related
devices shall either be stored behind a counter or other area, including a case or other storage
unit, which is not freely accessible and not left open or accessible by the general public. This
section shall not apply to any licensee that was granted an exemption under its license for self-
service merchandising.
Subd. 16. Responsibility. All licensees under this section shall be responsible for the
actions of their employees in regard to the sale of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related
devices on the licensed premises, and the sale of such an item by an employee shall be
considered a sale by the licensee. Nothing in this section shall be construed as prohibiting the
city from subjecting a licensee's employee to any penalties appropriate under this section, state
or federal law, or other applicable law or regulation.
Subd. 17. Compliance checks and inspections. All licensed premises shall be open to
inspection by the city during licensee's regular business hours. From time to time, but at least
once per calendar year, the city shall conduct unannounced compliance checks to ensure
compliance with the provisions of this section. Such compliance cheeks shall involve
minorunderage individuals who are over the age of 15 18 years, but less than 1821 years (with
the written consent of their parent or guardian), who shall enter the licensed premise and
purchase or attempt to purchase tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related devices.
MinorUnderage individuals used for the purpose of compliance cheeks shall be supervised by
designated law enforcement officers or other designated city personnel. MinorUnderage
individuals used for compliance checks shall not be in violation of any law prohibiting the
6
purchase or attempted purchase, or the unlawful possession of tobacco, tobacco products or
tobacco related devices by a minorunderage individual when such items are obtained as a part
of the compliance check. No minorunderage individual used in compliance checks shall
attempt to use a false identification misrepresenting the minorunderage individual's age, and
shall answer all questions about the minorunderage individual's age asked by the licensee or
licensee's employee and shall produce any identification, if any exists, for which he or she is
asked. Nothing in this section shall prohibit other or additional compliance checks authorized
by state or federal laws for educational, research, or training purposes required for the
enforcement of a particular state or federal law.
Subd. 18. Unlawful sale, purchase or possession. Unless otherwise provided, the
following acts shall be unlawful.
A. Illegal possession. It is unlawful for any person under the age of 1821 to have in
his or her possession any tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related device. This division
shall not apply to persons under the age of 18 21 lawfully involved in a compliance check or
fulfilling his or her duties as an employee of the licensee in making a retail sale.
B. Illegal purchase by minorunderage individual. It shall be unlawful for any person
under the age of 1821 to purchase or attempt to purchase or otherwise obtain any tobacco,
tobacco product or tobacco related device. It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of
1821 to purchase, attempt to purchase, or possess a product that contains or delivers nicotine or
lobelia and is intended for human consumption. This division shall not apply to minorunderage
individuals lawfully involved in a compliance check.
C. Illegal purchase or procurement for minorunderage individual. It shall be
unlawful for any person to purchase or otherwise obtain for or provide to any person under the
age of 18 21 any tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related device. It shall further be
unlawful for any person to coerce or attempt to coerce a person under the age of 18 21 to
illegally purchase or otherwise obtain or use any tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related
device. This division shall not apply to any person under the age of 18 21 lawfully involved in
a compliance check.
D. Use of false identification. It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of
1821 to attempt to disguise his or her true age by the use of a false form of identification,
whether the identification is that of another person or one on which the age of the person has
been modified or tampered with to represent an age older than the actual age of the person.
E. Illegal sale to person under the age of 1821. It shall be unlawful for any person to
sell, obtain for or otherwise provide to any person under the age of 1821 tobacco or a product
containing or delivering nicotine or lobelia intended for human consumption, or any part of
such product, that is not tobacco as defined in this chapter. This section shall not apply to a
parent or legal guardian of a person under the age of 1821 who obtained or provided to the
person under the age of 1821 such product if the product has been approved or otherwise
certified for legal sale by the United States Food and Drug Administration for tobacco use
cessation, harm reduction or for other medical purposes, and is being marketed and sold solely
for the approved purpose.
7
F. Child resistant packaging required. It is unlawful for a licensee hereunder to sell
or offer to sell any liquid, whether or not such liquid contains nicotine, which is intended for
human consumption and use in an electronic delivery device, that is not contained in "child-
resistant packaging" as the term is defined and as is required in Minn. Stat. §461.20.
Subd. 19. Administration procedures and penalty.
A. Notice. Upon discovery of a violation of this section, a citation that sets forth the
alleged violation and which shall inform the alleged violator of his/her right to be heard on the
accusations shall be issued and served upon the violator either personally or by mail.
B. Hearings. If a person accused of violating this section requests a hearing within
ten days of the issuance of the citation, a hearing shall be scheduled, of which the time and
place shall be published and provided to the accused violator, but in no event more than 14
days after the violator's request for a hearing.
C. Hearing officer. Such hearing shall be held before the hearing officer and shall be
open to the public.
D. Decision. Upon conclusion of the hearing, the hearing officer shall issue written
findings of fact and conclusions detailing whatever violation has occurred and whether the
alleged violator committed it. A copy of the hearing officer's written findings of fact and
conclusions shall be provided to the accused violator. If the hearing officer finds that no
violation occurred or finds grounds for not imposing any penalty, such findings shall be
recorded and a copy provided to the accused violator.
E. Appeals. The violator may appeal the decision made by the hearing officer to the
district court.
F. Misdemeanor prosecution. A violator of any provision of this section shall be
deemed a misdemeanor. If the violator is criminally charged, no administrative penalty shall be
imposed.
G. Continued violation. Each day which a violation occurs or continues shall
constitute a separate offense.
H. Penalties.
1. Licensees. Any licensee found to have violated this section, or whose employee
has violated this section, shall be charged an administrative fine of $75.00 for a first
violation of this section; $200.00 for a second violation at the same licensed premises
within a 24-month period; and $250.00 for a third or subsequent violation at the same
licensed premises within a 24-month period. In addition, upon the third violation, the
license shall be suspended for seven days. Upon the fourth or subsequent violation at
the same licensed premises that has occurred since the date on which the city issued its
initial license to the licensee under this section, the city council shall determine the
penalty to be imposed.
2. Other individuals. Individuals, other than minorunderage individuals regulated by
subparagraph H(3) herein, found to be in violation of this section shall be charged an
8
administrative fee of $50.00, unless the individual is charged with a criminal offense
arising out of the same violation.
3. MinorUnderage individuals. MinorUnderage individuals found in unlawful
possession of, or who unlawfully purchase or attempt to purchase, tobacco, tobacco
products or tobacco related devices shall be handled in the same manner as nay any
other adult person charged with a violation of the law or any other juvenile or minor
charged with a violation of the law, as the case may apply.
4. Suspension upon failure to pay administrative penalty. Any administrative fine
imposed hereunder shall be paid by the licensee within 30 days of the date of notice.
The licensee's failure to pay the administrative fine within 30 days of the date of notice
shall be grounds for suspension of the license and the license shall remain suspended
until the administrative fine is paid in full, plus any surcharge or interest imposed for
late payment.
Subd. 20. Exceptions and defenses.
A. Religious, spiritual or cultural ceremony. Nothing in this section shall prevent the
providing of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related devices to an underage person minor
as part of a lawfully recognized religious, spiritual or cultural ceremony, provided if the
underage person is under the age of 18, then with the consent of the minor's parent or legal
guardian is required.
B. Reliance of proof of age. It shall be an affirmative defense to the violation of this
section for a person to have reasonably relied on proof of age as described by state law.
Subd. 21 . Electronic delivery devices and nicotine and lobelia delivery products .
All of the license, sale, purchase, possession, use and enforcement provisions in this section
relating to tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related devices shall apply fully and to the
same extent to electronic delivery devices and nicotine and lobelia delivery products.
Subd. 22. Employee Training Program. Prior to the approval or issuance of an
initial license or renewal license under this Section, the applicant shall provide proof of an
employee training program to be implemented throughout the duration of the annual license. A
license holder seeking renewal of a license shall provide verification that an employee training
program that complies with standards as set forth herein was implemented during the
immediately preceding license year. An employee training program required hereunder shall be
presented to each employee within 3 days of hire/start date and to all employees once per year.
The program shall provide the information and tools necessary for employees to comply with
the federal and state laws, including regulations, and City regulations herein, governing the
sale and distribution, including youth access, and the advertising and promotion of cigarettes,
smokeless tobacco, and covered tobacco products. The program shall instruct employees that
the sale of tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco related devices to an underage individual is
illegal; what proof of age is legally acceptable, and that a sale to a an underage individual or
other violation of this Section can subject the license holder and their employee to criminal
penalties, civil fines or both.
9
Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
Applicable to the Entire City Code Including 'Penalty for Violation'" and Section 6.99, entitled
"Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though
repeated verbatim.
Section 3. Summary approved. The City Council hereby determines that the text of the
summary marked "Official Summary of Ordinance No. ___", a copy of which is attached
hereto, clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. The City Council
further determines that publication of the title and such summary will clearly inform the public
of the intent and effect of the ordinance.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and
publication according to law.
ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN
City Council
_____________________________ __________________________
By: Christina M. Scipioni By: Mike Maguire
Its: City Clerk Its: Mayor
Date Ordinance Adopted:
Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper:
10
The following is the official summary of Ordinance No. ___ as approved by the City Council of
the City of Eagan on _______________.
ORDINANCE NO. ___ SECOND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY
CODE CHAPTER SIX ENTITLED “OTHER BUSINESS REGULATION AND LICENSING”
BY AMENDING SECTION 6.34 REGARDING SALE OF TOBACCO AND ELECTRONIC
DELIVERY DEVICES & PRODUCTS; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN
CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 6.99.
Section 6.34, governing the City’s tobacco sales and licensing regulations, was amended
to change age 18 to age 21 for permissible sales and possession and to require licensees
to implement an employee training program.
A printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection by any person during regular
office hours at the office of the City Clerk at the Eagan Municipal Center, 3830 Pilot Knob
Road, Eagan, Minnesota 55122.
Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication.
Agenda Information Memo
December 10, 2019 Eagan Special City Council Meeting
V. TOBACCO AND ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE REGULATIONS
Direction For Consideration:
To provide direction regarding changes to tobacco and/or electronic cigarette regulations.
Facts:
At the Oct. 15 Listening Session, the City Council received a request to consider changes
to the City’s tobacco ordinance. Specifically, to increase the legal age to purchase
tobacco, to restrict the sale of flavored tobacco and electronic cigarette products, and
to require warning signs be posted at tobacco stores.
The City Council directed staff to research the status of current tobacco and electronic
cigarette regulations and legislation at the federal and state level and other cities’
tobacco and electronic cigarette regulations. The attached memo and chart detail staff’s
findings.
In addition, the attached memo outlines the following policy considerations.
1. Should the City increase the legal age to purchase tobacco and electronic cigarette
products to 21?
2. Should the City enact any regulations relative to flavored tobacco and/or electronic
cigarette products?
3. Should the City enact any setback or spacing requirements for tobacco and/or
electronic cigarette license locations?
4. Should the City require tobacco license holders to post warning signs at their stores?
5. Should the City enact any other tobacco and/or electronic cigarette regulations?
State Statute requires the City to provide tobacco license holders with a 30‐day written
notice before enacting changes to tobacco regulations. If the City Council wishes to
amend the tobacco ordinance, then license holders would be informed of the proposed
changes in advance of the ordinance amendment being placed on a City Council agenda
for consideration.
Attachments: (3)
V‐1 Ordinance Amendment Request
V‐2 Staff Memo
V‐3 Survey of City Regulations
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Tammy Lawrence <tamlawrence22@yahoo.com>
Sent:Thursday, October 10, 2019 5:04 PM
To:Christina Scipioni
Subject:E cigarette and vaping epidemic
Christina can you please pass along this email to the city council for me.
There is an alarming number of kids that are developing lung injuries from e‐cigarettes and vaping products. The
numbers this week were 1, 299 cases from 49 states, district of Columbia and 1 US territory. 26 deaths have been
confirmed in 21 states. Minnesota included.
The numbers last week of lung injuries were 1080. The week before that was 805 lung injuries . The numbers keep rising
every week.
We, the city of Eagan, need to rise above and help put a stop to the youth being targeted. I am asking for all flavors to
be banned. Raise the legal age to 21 and add a black box warning to the door of the vape shops.
I know you have many important issues to discuss and many maybe ahead of this one but, I ask you to put the issue to
the top and take care of this now before more kids are affected. Right now statistics show that 37% of lung injuries come
from male kids under 21! That is too many and something each one of you can do something about. You may not have a
child affected by this epidemic but i guarantee you will know someone that is. Please, help keep Eagan safe for all and
raise the age limit to 21, get the kids out of high school, take ban all flavors and make a black box warning be listed on
the door. Kids need to know there is harm being done with these products and that they do contain tobacco too!
Thank you for your time.
Tamara
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
Memo
To: Dianne Miller, Assistant City Administrator
From: Christina M. Scipioni, City Clerk/Administrative Coordinator
Date: December 6, 2019
Subject: Tobacco and Vaping Research
Background
At the Oct. 15 Listening Session, the City Council received a request from Tamara Lawrence to
consider changes to the City’s tobacco ordinance. Specifically, Ms. Lawrence requested the
legal age to purchase tobacco be raised to 21, that flavored tobacco and electronic cigarette
products be banned, and that stores be required to place warnings on their doors regarding the
dangers of electronic cigarettes.
The City Council directed staff to research the status of current tobacco and electronic cigarette
regulations and legislation at the federal and state level, and also review other cities’ tobacco
and electronic cigarette regulations.
Federal and State Regulations
At a federal level, electronic cigarettes have been regulated by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) since August 2016. At that time, it became illegal to sell electronic
cigarettes to those under 18 years of age. Identification must be checked for anyone who
appears to be younger than 27. In 2018, the FDA began requiring warning labels on electronic
cigarette products that contain nicotine or were derived from tobacco.
The FDA is currently considering rule changes that would ban flavored electronic cigarette
products and/or raise the legal age to purchase to 21. The FDA has not said when a
determination on the rule changes will be made.
At the state level, the legal age to purchase tobacco and electronic cigarettes is 18. During the
2019 legislative session, a bill was introduced in the House to increase the legal age to
purchase to 21. Similar legislation was not introduced in the Senate. The State does not ban
flavored tobacco products, nor does it require warning labels other than those required by the
FDA. State Statute allows municipalities to regulate the retail sale of tobacco and electronic
cigarette products and allows cities to enact regulations that are more restrictive than State
Statute. Cities are required to provide 30-day written notice to tobacco licensees before
enacting additional license regulations.
Page 2
Eagan’s Current Regulations
The City of Eagan’s tobacco regulations, which include electronic cigarette products, are
consistent with the regulations set forth in State Statute. Selling tobacco products within the City
requires a license. The legal age to purchase in Eagan is 18. Self-service of tobacco products is
allowed only in exclusive tobacco stores, where 90 percent or more of the sales consist of
tobacco or electronic cigarette products and those under 18 are not permitted to enter. City
Code does not include setback or spacing requirements for tobacco retailers. Tobacco sales are
considered a retail use and are allowed in zoning districts where retail stores are allowed.
Survey of Minnesota Cities
Staff surveyed the tobacco ordinances of 20 metro communities. Attached is a summary of the
findings with regards to the legal age to purchase, flavor restrictions, spacing or setback
requirements, and other regulations regarding the sale of tobacco. The cities surveyed did not
have additional requirements for signage as it relates to warning labels on the products or in the
stores.
Legal Age to Purchase
According to ClearWay Minnesota, 54 cities and counties in Minnesota have increased the legal
age to purchase tobacco to 21. In Dakota County, the cities of West St. Paul, Lilydale and
Mendota Heights have increased the purchase age to 21. Other comparable cities in the metro
that have increased the purchase age to 21 include Bloomington, Brooklyn Center, Eden
Prairie, Edina, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Minnetonka, Plymouth, Richfield, and St. Louis Park.
Flavor Restrictions
Of the 20 cities surveyed, five have restrictions regarding the sale of flavored products. Lilydale
and Mendota Heights ban all flavored products. St. Paul restricts the sale of flavored products to
exclusive tobacco stores, except that liquor stores may sell menthol, mint and wintergreen
flavors. Minneapolis restricts the sale of all flavors except menthol to exclusive tobacco stores.
St. Louis Park restricts all flavors except menthol, mint and wintergreen.
Spacing or Setback Restrictions
Of the 20 cities surveyed, five have restrictions on the locations of tobacco license locations. Of
those five cities, three cities regulate the location of tobacco stores in relation to other tobacco
stores and two cities require setbacks from schools.
Other Restrictions
In addition to the regulations requested by Ms. Lawrence, staff found several other common
tobacco license regulations:
Nine of the cities surveyed require tobacco license holders to have a training program for
their staff.
Four of the cities surveyed require stores to check the identification of anyone who
appears to be under 30 years old.
Four of the cities set a minimum sale price for the purchase of single cigars.
Two of the cities surveyed limit the size of tobacco stores to 2,000 square feet.
Three of the cities surveyed prohibit self-service sales in all licensed tobacco
establishments.
Page 3
Public Policy Questions
1. Should the City increase the legal age to purchase tobacco and electronic cigarette
products to 21?
2. Should the City enact any regulations relative to flavored tobacco and/or electronic
cigarette products?
3. Should the City enact any setback or spacing requirements for tobacco and/or electronic
cigarette license locations?
4. Should the City require tobacco license holders to post warning signs at their stores?
5. Should the City enact any other tobacco and/or electronic cigarette regulations?
Survey of Municipal Tobacco/Electronic Cigarette RegulationsDecember 2019CityLegal Purchase Age Flavor Restrictions Spacing RequirementsStaff Training Required Other RestrictionsApple Valley 18 none none NoBloomington 21 none none Yes Required to check ID of everyone under 30Brooklyn Center 21 none none YesIssues maximum of 15 licenses; electronic delivery devices and liquids may only be sold in exclusive liquor stores; no sale of cigars less than $2.10 eachBrooklyn Park 18 none500 feet from schools, if more than 40% of the store's floor area is dedicated to tobacco sales NoBurnsville 18 none0.75 miles from another tobacco shop Yes Tobacco shops are limited to 2,000 square feet in sizeEden Prairie 21 none none NoEdina 21 none none NoAge verification required for anyone who appears to be under 30 years of ageInver Grove Heights 18 none1,000 foot setback between the licensee's space and the occupied space of the school YesLakeville 18 none none NoLilydale 21 Flavored products are prohibited noneNoMaple Grove 18 none none NoMendota Heights 21 Flavored products are prohibited none NoMinneapolis 21Flavored tobacco, except menthol, may only be sold in exclusive tobacco storesUnless a grocery store, not allowed in neighborhood commercial; except in downtown zoning district, stores selling flavored tobacco products must be spaced at least 2,000 feet Yes No sale of or cigars less than $2.60 eachMinnetonka 21 none none YesAt least one representative from licensee must attend city‐mandated tobacco training; Plymouth 21 none none NoAge verification required for anyone who appears to be under 30 years of age; self‐service prohibited in all tobacco stores
Survey of Municipal Tobacco/Electronic Cigarette RegulationsDecember 2019CityLegal Purchase Age Flavor Restrictions Spacing RequirementsStaff Training Required Other RestrictionsRichfield 21 none none YesAge verification required for anyone who appears to be under 30 years of age; single cigars may only be sold for at least $2.60Rosemount 18 none none Yes Tobacco shops are limited to 2,000 square feetSt. Louis Park 21Flavors except menthol, mint and wintergreen are prohibited none No Self‐service prohibitedSt. Paul 21Flavored tobacco may only be sold in exclusive tobacco stores; liquor stores may sell menthol, mint and wintergreenExclusive tobacco stores must be spaced at least 2,640 feet; CUP required for exclusive tobacco stores larger than 2,500 square feet in business community and traditional neighborhood zoning districts No No sale or cigars less than $2.60 each; West St. Paul 21 none none YesLicensee must have digital age verification devices and security cameras; no self‐service
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Dan Klausner <klausnerdan@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, January 9, 2020 8:08 AM
To:City Council
Cc:Nancy Klausner
Subject:Tobacco and Vaping Prevention In Eagan
Dear Mayor Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council:
My name is Dan Klausner, and I am a 20 year resident of Eagan. I have two boys; ages 17 and 19 years old. Currently
the 17 year old is a senior at Eagan High School, and the 19 year is a sophomore at the University of
Minnesota. Recently we discovered that our 17 year old has been using vaping products that were introduced to him at
EHS. These products include nicotine and marijuana. My wife and I intervened as best we could; through educating our
son on the health risks of vaping and smoking, as well as random drug testing to insure that he stopped this behavior.
The bottom line is that there is no social benefit to smoking or vaping. These products cause ill health effects, leading to
several severe diseases and death. It can also be a gateway to abuse and addiction of other drugs. Its a burden to tax
payers in excess health care costs and lost productivity. Large tobacco and vape companies make huge profits at the
expense of the innocence and ignorance our youngest members of our community.
Approximately 95 percent of current adult smokers started before they were 21.
The tobacco industry heavily targets young people ages 18‐21 in order to recruit new tobacco users and
guarantee profits.
18‐20 year olds make up roughly 2‐4% of tobacco sales, but tobacco‐related illnesses kill 6,300 in Minnesota
each year and cost Minnesota more than $3 billion in excess health care costs and $4.3 billion in lost
productivity.
Many young people get tobacco products from their older high school peers.
Increasing the age gap between young people and those who can legally buy tobacco will reduce youth access to
tobacco.
No amount of nicotine is safe for youth.
Nicotine is addictive and is particularly harmful to the developing adolescent brain. Nicotine can harm brain
development as teens grow and can have a long‐term effect on cognitive development, mental health and
future addiction.
E‐cigarette products like the JUUL, the most popular e‐cigarette brand among teens, contain high levels of
addictive nicotine. Yet, teens incorrectly think that e‐cigarettes are safe.
Youth tobacco use has risen dramatically in Minnesota in the last three years due to vaping e‐cigarettes. Among
8th grade students, e‐cigarette use nearly doubled from 2016 to 2019 and one in four 11th graders now use e‐
cigarettes. Students in all grades surveyed now use e‐cigarettes and vapes at five times the rate of conventional
cigarettes. (2019 MN Student Survey results)
So I was happy to learn in December that the City of Eagan is considering raising the tobacco sales age to 21, especially
in light of the new federal Tobacco 21 law that went into effect a few weeks ago. However, I was very concerned by a
local news story a few days ago reporting that “several tobacco shops in Eagan” will disregard the new federal sales age
of 21 because the city’s ordinance only requires customers to be 18. They told the reporter, “They will keep doing so
until Eagan city leaders vote to raise the age requirement.” https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2020/01/06/some‐
businesses‐still‐selling‐tobacco‐products‐to‐those‐under‐21/
I implore the Eagan City Council to pass this law to protect our youth from these dangerous products and prevent
2
future generations from a lifetime of tobacco addiction and disease. Leaders at all levels of government including the
lawmakers in our city and state should continue to pass lifesaving tobacco prevention policies like this without delay.
Sincerely,
Dan Klausner
3754 Windtree Drive, Eagan Mn.
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Amelia Burgess <alburgessmilbank@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, January 9, 2020 10:01 AM
To:City Council
Subject:Please pass Tobacco 21 ordinance, and ban on flavored tobacco products
Dear Mayor Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council:
My name is Amelia Burgess. I am an Eagan resident, parent and physician. I practice pediatrics and addiction medicine
at Sage Prairie Clinic, 1440 Duckwood Drive.
In my practice, I see that nicotine addiction is the most difficult substance use disorder to treat. I also see that right
now, vaping nicotine is the ”gateway drug” that leads to vaping THC, then use of other drugs, such as alcohol,
benzodiazepines, and LSD. Kids as young as 10 or 11 are exposed to vaping in the schools. I see nicotine addiction in my
patients, and in the peers of my children, who recently attended Dakota Hills Middle School and Eagan High
School. They all report that vaping is normal and common in the schools. They also report a common belief that vaping
is safe, while cigarettes are dangerous.
Data support my experience. Youth tobacco use has risen dramatically in Minnesota in the last three years due to
vaping e‐cigarettes. Among 8th grade students, e‐cigarette use nearly doubled from 2016 to 2019 and one in four 11th
graders now use e‐cigarettes. Students in all grades surveyed now use e‐cigarettes and vapes at five times the rate of
conventional cigarettes. (2019 MN Student Survey results)
Most people don’t know that nicotine addiction remains the number 1 cause of death in the United States and
worldwide. This is followed by alcohol, sedentary behaviors, and poor nutrition. (Although the opioid epidemic is
forefront in the news, overdose causes fewer than 2/3 the deaths that alcohol does.) In addition, nicotine addiction
affects the next generation – smoking during pregnancy causes serious adverse effects to the developing fetus: reduced
oxygen delivery, retarded growth and development including low birth weight, double the chances of premature birth,
congenital heart defects, and an increased likelihood of learning disorders, low IQ and behavioral problems.
I was happy to learn in December that the City of Eagan is considering raising the tobacco sales age to 21, especially in
light of the new federal Tobacco 21 law that went into effect a few weeks ago.
However, a local news station reported this week that several tobacco shops in Eagan will disregard the new federal
sales age of 21 because the city’s ordinance only requires customers to be 18. They told the reporter that they will keep
doing so until Eagan city leaders vote to raise the age requirement. https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2020/01/06/some‐
businesses‐still‐selling‐tobacco‐products‐to‐those‐under‐21/
Leaders at all levels of government including the lawmakers in our city and state should continue to pass lifesaving
tobacco prevention policies without delay. I urge the Eagan City Council to pass a Tobacco 21 law, and to ban flavored
tobacco products. Tobacco‐related illnesses kill 6300 Minnesotans each year, and cost Minnesota more than $3 billion
in excess health care costs, and $4.3 billion in lost productivity.
Sincerely, Amelia Burgess, MD, MPH
776 Golden Meadow Road
Eagan, MN 55123
2
Sage Prairie Clinic
1440 Duckwood Drive
Eagan, MN 55122
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Sam Milbank <sammilbank101@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, January 10, 2020 6:29 PM
To:City Council
As a high school student who cares deeply about vaping prevention, I hope that the City of Eagan will raise the tobacco
sales age to 21 like many other Minnesota communities have done to reduce all types of youth tobacco use, including
vaping. The youth vaping epidemic is real. I’ve watched vaping escalate among my peers over the past few years, many
who now can’t stop as they are addicted to nicotine. I’ve watched kids vape and as they hit it [inhale] say “I wish I didn’t
have to do this.” I started vaping in 8th grade but soon it became not an option to stop. I had no idea back then how
hard stopping would actually be.
It didn’t start out this way for any of us. It was cool and fun. The fruit and candy flavors make it taste good, and vaping
doesn’t hurt your throat like regular cigarettes. Actually, I don’t know any kids my age who smoke cigarettes, but I know
plenty who vape. Vapes are really easy to get because older students can buy them and sell them at school to younger
kids.
I don’t want any other kids to struggle with this horrible addiction and deal with all of the negative consequences vaping
brought to my life. Raising the tobacco sales age to 21 in Eagan will help keep vapes and other tobacco products out of
our schools, prevent kids from starting to use them, and save lives.
Sam Milbank
American Heart Association I 2750 Blue Water Road I Suite 250 I Eagan I Minnesota I 55121
February 24, 2020
Dear Mayor Maguire and Eagan City Council Members:
I am writing on behalf of the American Heart Association to express our support for the
proposed ordinance that would raise the minimum sales age for tobacco products from 18 to
21, without penalizing youth, in Eagan.
Municipalities should continue to pass strong Tobacco 21 policies that provide clarity and
resources to maximize the health benefits of raising the sales age to 21. Preventing youth from
starting to smoke is essential to reducing smoking prevalence, considering that almost 95
percent of addicted adult smokers start before age 21.
I urge you to remove penalties for underage purchase, use and possession of tobacco products
(often called PUP). Increasing the tobacco sales age should not be about punishing our kids. It
should be about protecting them from a lifetime of addiction. As you continue to discuss
increasing the tobacco age in Eagan, please move forward with an ordinance that does not
include PUP penalties for people under 21. These penalties have not been proven to reduce
youth tobacco use and they open the door to selective enforcement against young persons of
color.
Over 60 communities in Minnesota have raised the minimum sale age for tobacco from 18 to
21, and nearly all decided against expanding PUP penalties beyond state law, concluding that it
was best for their community to support a responsible retail environment rather than penalize
youth.
Eagan has the opportunity to help prevent another generation from becoming lifelong tobacco
users. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Jess Nolan
Community Advocacy Director
952-278-7928
Jess.Nolan@heart.org
2395 University Avenue W, Suite 304, Saint Paul, MN 55114-1512
651-379-0196 | www.mntobaccofreealliance.org
February 24, 2020
The Honorable Mike Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council
Eagan Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Rd.
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mayor Maguire and Council Members:
I am writing on behalf of Tobacco-Free Alliance to thank the City of Eagan for considering an ordinance to increase the
tobacco sales age to 21. Tobacco-Free Alliance is a nonprofit organization working to reduce the harms of tobacco by
engaging all segments of the community, particularly youth, through assessment, education and advocacy.
We noticed that Eagan’s proposed ordinance contains penalties against 18-20-year-olds for attempted purchase, use, and
possession of tobacco products (“PUP penalties”). We hope the Eagan City Council will consider removing PUP
penalties. This is a licensing ordinance, and the goal should be holding retailers accountable, not young people. Evidence
suggests that PUP laws against youth could actually detract from more effective enforcement measures and tobacco
control efforts. PUP laws could shift the blame away from tobacco industry marketing and irresponsible retailer sales and
unfairly punish youth and young adults. The vast majority of Minnesota’s 60+ Tobacco 21 communities removed
PUP penalties while the Eagan draft ordinance actually increases them. Further, the recent federal Tobacco 21 law
focused on retailers and did not penalize kids.
The federal Tobacco 21 law is a huge step. However, every level of government should update their regulations as
enforcement of tobacco age laws happens at the federal, state and local levels.
The popularity of vaping among youth has grown astronomically in the past few years. Younger teens get vapes easily
from their older high school peers, who often sell them at school. Keeping these dangerous nicotine devices out of high
schools will reduce the number of teens who become addicted to these dangerous tobacco products.
Again, thank you for considering raising the tobacco sales age to 21. We respectfully ask that the City of Eagan remove
PUP penalties against young people so as not to detract from the positive benefits that this ordinance will provide for our
community.
Sincerely,
Elyse Levine Less
Executive Director
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Amelia Burgess <DrAmeliaBurgess@calmcourage.org>
Sent:Wednesday, February 26, 2020 5:20 PM
To:Christina Scipioni; City Council
Subject:Tobacco 21 legislation
The Honorable Mike Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council
Eagan Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Rd.
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mayor Maguire and Eagan City Council Members:
I write to you as an Eagan resident, parent, and pediatrician, in support of increasing the tobacco sales age in Eagan to
21. However, I am concerned that the proposed ordinance increases penalties against young people for attempted “illegal
purchase or procurement” referred to as “PUP” penalties, instead of removing them like most other Tobacco 21 cities in
Minnesota have done.
I am glad the city is considering this important public health policy to raise the tobacco sales age to 21. In addition to the
countless long-term negative health effects of tobacco, nicotine is particularly harmful to the development of the
adolescent brain. Research suggests that nicotine interferes with brain maturation and can have long-term effects on
development and mental health.
Addiction affects the whole family. When we hear this word “addiction” we often think of heroin, methamphetamines,
opioids, and alcohol. But tobacco is one of the most heavily used addictive products in the U.S. Nearly all smokers begin
using before age 21. The younger that someone is when they start using tobacco, the more likely they will become
addicted. This is even more disturbing in light of the dramatic tobacco use increase among teens due to vaping/e-cigarette
use. The 2019 Minnesota Student Survey results showed that among 8th grade students, e-cigarette use nearly doubled
from 2016 to 2019, and one in four 11th graders now use e-cigarettes. An Institute of Medicine report found that by
increasing the legal age to purchase tobacco to 21, smoking initiation among 15-17-year-olds would be reduced by 25
percent. Nicotine is also, at present, a “gateway drug” that precedes use of alcohol, marijuana, benzodiazepine and other
pills.
I do not support increasing penalties against youth in the city’s tobacco ordinance. These punitive measures have not been
proven to reduce youth tobacco use. The tobacco industry has targeted youth for decades, seeking to create generations
addicted to its products. Instead of holding industry and retailers accountable, PUP penalties shift responsibility to their
victims - young consumers.
Public policy is a key aspect of preventing young people from starting down the path of addiction. Adopting this
regulation will minimize the accessibility of tobacco to youth and help to prevent a lifetime of addiction. But please
consider removing PUP penalties against young people and keep the focus on retailer responsibility. Thank you for your
leadership on this important issue.
Sincerely,
Amelia Burgess, MD, MPH
776 Golden Meadow Road
Eagan, MN 55123
‐‐
Amelia (Amy) Burgess, MD, MPH
(She/Her)
February 26, 2020
Eagan Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Rd.
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mayor Maguire and Members of the Eagan City Council:
I am pleased to provide this letter of support on behalf of the Minnesota Medical Association
(MMA) for efforts by the City of Eagan to raise the minimum legal sale age for tobacco products
to 21. The MMA is deeply appreciative of your leadership and efforts to protect the health of
the youth in your community.
The MMA represents more than 10,000 physicians, medical residents, and medical students
throughout Minnesota. In our efforts to help make Minnesotans the healthiest in the nation,
preventing death and disease caused by tobacco and secondhand smoke has long been an
MMA goal. The MMA proudly and actively supported passage of the Freedom to Breathe Act in
2007, and strongly supports restricting the sale of tobacco products to individuals under the
age of 21.
On December 20, 20191, President Trump signed legislation to amend the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act, and raise the federal minimum age of sale of tobacco products from 18 to 21
years, effective immediately. Prior to this going into effect, there were nineteen states –
Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and
Washington – who had raised the tobacco age to 21, along with Washington, DC and at least
540 localities. In Minnesota, a total of 49 cities and 11 counties, are now counted in the
growing list of localities that have taken action to protect our youth from the harms of tobacco,
and it is our hope that the City of Eagan and the rest of Minnesota will follow suit.
Cigarette smoking remains the leading preventable cause of death in the United States2, and
while there are many strategies already in place to reduce the use of tobacco, a strategy is
needed to ensure that adolescents and young adults to do not start to smoke. Raising the
minimum legal sale age for tobacco products will delay initiation rates of tobacco use by
1 Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, States and Localities that Have Raised the Minimum Legal Sale Age for Tobacco
Products to 21, available at:
https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/content/what_we_do/state_local_issues/sales_21/states_localities_MLSA_21.pdf
2 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Health Effects of Smoking, available at:
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/effects_cig_smoking/
adolescents and lower prevalence in the overall population.3 In addition, the downstream
effects of smoking – tobacco-related disease – will also decrease in proportion to the reduction
in tobacco use.
On behalf of the MMA, I urge you to acknowledge the long-term effects of tobacco use on the
adolescent brain and adopt an ordinance to protect this community’s children.
Sincerely,
Keith Stelter, MD
MMA President
3 National Academy of Medicine, Public Health Implications of Raising the Minimum Age of Legal Acc ess to Tobacco
Products, March 2015, available at:
http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2015/TobaccoMinimumAgeReport.aspx
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Swetha Nayak <swetha@ansrmn.org>
Sent:Wednesday, February 26, 2020 10:23 AM
To:City Council
Subject:Support for Tobacco 21 Eagan
Dear Mayor Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council:
As both an Eagan resident and parent, tobacco prevention is incredibly important to me. Not only do I work in
substance abuse prevention, but I have two very young children who I’d like to keep safe from the tobacco
industry, and other dangerous entities. I have witnessed first-hand the damage that tobacco does to individuals.
Approximately 95 percent of current adult smokers started before they were 21. My grandfather started smoking
when he was 14 and, sadly, suffered the consequences.
I am happy to learn that the City of Eagan is considering raising the tobacco sales age to 21, especially in light of the
new federal Tobacco 21 law that went into effect a few weeks ago. I hope that the Eagan City Council will pass this
law to protect our youth from these dangerous products and prevent future generations from a lifetime of tobacco
addiction and disease. Leaders at all levels of government including the lawmakers in our city and state should
continue to pass lifesaving tobacco prevention policies like this without delay.
Thank you,
Swetha Nayak
651 Lexie Court
----------------------------
Swetha Nayak, MPH
Project Director
Minnesota Prevention Resource Center
www.mnprc.org
Find us on Facebook I Follow us @MNPrevention
Association for Nonsmokers - Minnesota
2395 University Avenue West, Suite 310
Saint Paul, MN 55114
Office: (651) 646-3005
Fax: (651) 646-0142
www.ansrmn.org
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Renat Zhdanov <alija95@hotmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, February 26, 2020 8:45 AM
To:City Council; Dave Osberg; Christina Scipioni
Subject:Support of the ordinance changing the tobacco sale age to 21
Dear Eagan City Council,
I’m writing in support of changing the sale age of tobacco to 21 years in the City of Eagan. This, along with
other strong policies, is another way to effectively address the serious issue of nicotine addiction in youth.
I fully support passage of this ordinance as long as it does not include possession, use and purchase (PUP)
penalties in it. The federal government no longer includes PUP penalties in their tobacco age laws and national
best practices established by leading organizations such as the American Cancer Society and Heart
Association support T21 laws being passed without them. Moreover, the vast majority of the dozens of T21
ordinances passed by cities and counties in Minnesota do not include them either.
Thank you for your consideration and for your dedication to the City of Eagan.
Regards,
Gouzel Zhdanov
1260 Berry Ridge Road
Eagan, MN 55123
February 27, 2020
The Honorable Mike Maguire and Members of the Eagan City Council
3830 Pilot Knob Rd
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mayor Maguire and Council Members,
Minnesotans for a Smoke-Free Generation is a coalition of more than 60 organizations working to
reduce youth tobacco use. With that goal in mind, we urge you to pass a local Tobacco 21 ordinance in
Eagan without punishing kids.
The federal Tobacco 21 bill was a huge step – but we must adopt Tobacco 21 here in Minnesota. A local
Tobacco 21 ordinance will provide much-needed clarity for tobacco retailers and local law enforcement.
For decades, the tobacco industry has aggressively marketed to youth and young adults to recruit
replacement smokers and guarantee profits. In Minnesota alone, tobacco companies spend more than
$100 million a year marketing their deadly products. That figure does not even include prolific e-
cigarette marketing.
To counteract these industry tactics, we ask you to pass a strong Tobacco 21 policy that does not punish
our kids. Specifically, please remove penalties for underage purchase, use and possession of tobacco
products (often called PUP) that are included in the draft policy. Our coalition opposes Tobacco 21
policies that include these penalties because they are ineffective and divert focus from addressing
irresponsible retailers and the tobacco industry. Raising the tobacco age is about protecting our youth,
not punishing them. There is clear consensus among our members and leading national health
organizations that Tobacco 21 policies should eliminate penalties on people under 21. We hope you’ll
join the many other Tobacco 21 communities in Minnesota and nationally that have decided to stand up
for young people and decided not to expand PUP penalties.
Immediate action is needed to prevent tobacco addiction among youth. For the first time in nearly two
decades, youth tobacco use has increased in Minnesota. The 2019 Minnesota Student Survey found one
in four 11th-graders regularly uses e-cigarettes, and the rate of 8th-grade vaping has nearly doubled
since 2016. The U.S. Surgeon General calls youth nicotine addiction a national epidemic and has urged
lawmakers at all levels to protect kids.
The vast majority of addicted smokers start at very young ages. About 95 percent of adult smokers begin
before age 21. That means everything possible should be done to stop young people from smoking
before they reach 21.
As a coalition, our goal is to pass Tobacco 21 at the state level, and we are making progress. However,
we cannot wait for action in St. Paul when our youth are at risk. Eagan can send a message and protect
kids by joining the growing number of leading communities putting young people above tobacco
industry profits. Together, we can build momentum for statewide action.
On behalf of Minnesotans for a Smoke-Free Generation, thank you for your leadership and we hope we
can count on your support for a Tobacco 21 policy that does not punish our kids.
Sincerely,
Molly Moilanen Janelle Waldock
Co-Chair, Minnesotans for a Co-Chair, Minnesotans for a
Smoke-Free Generation Smoke-Free Generation
Vice President, ClearWay MinnesotaSM Senior Director of Policy, Blue Cross and Blue
Shield of Minnesota
About Minnesotans for a Smoke-Free Generation
Minnesotans for a Smoke-Free Generation is a coalition of more than 60 organizations that share a
common goal of saving Minnesota youth from a lifetime of addiction to tobacco. The coalition supports
policies that reduce youth smoking and nicotine addiction, including increasing tobacco prices, raising
the tobacco sale age to 21, limiting access to candy-, fruit- and menthol-flavored tobacco, and funding
tobacco prevention and cessation programs.
Partners include: The African American Leadership Forum, Allina Health, Allina Health | Aetna, American
Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Heart Association, American Lung Association in
Minnesota, Apple Tree Dental, Association for Nonsmokers – Minnesota, Aurora/St. Anthony
Neighborhood Development Corporation, Becker County Energized, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of
Minnesota, A Breath of Hope Lung Foundation, Cancer Legal Care, CentraCare, Children’s Defense Fund-
MN, Children’s Minnesota, ClearWay MinnesotaSM, Comunidades Latinas Unidas En Servicio –
CLUES, Dodge County Public Health, Education Minnesota, Essentia Health, Gillette Children's Specialty
Healthcare, A Healthier Southwest, HealthPartners, Hennepin Healthcare, Horizon Public
Health, Indigenous Peoples Task Force, ISAIAH, JustUs Health, LAAMPP Alumni, Lake Region
Healthcare, Local Public Health Association of Minnesota, LPCFC – Lincoln Park Children and Families
Collaborative, March of Dimes, Mayo Clinic, Medica, Meeker McLeod Sibley Community Health Services,
Minnesota Academy of Family Physicians, Minnesota Association of Community Health Centers,
Minnesota Cancer Alliance, Minnesota Council of Health Plans, MHA – Minnesota Hospital Association,
Minnesota Medical Association, Minnesota Nurses Association, Minnesota Oral Health Coalition,
Minnesota Public Health Association, MNAAP – Minnesota Chapter of the American Academy of
Pediatrics, ModelCities, NAMI Minnesota, North Memorial Health, NorthPoint Health & Wellness,
Olmsted Medical Center, Open Cities Health Center, PartnerSHIP 4 Health, Perham Health & Living,
Preventing Tobacco Addiction Foundation, SEIU Healthcare Minnesota, ShiftMN, St. Paul Area Chamber
of Commerce, Steele County Public Health, Tobacco-Free Alliance, Twin Cities Medical Society, UCare,
Vision In Living Life – Change is Possible, WellShare International and Zumbro Valley Medical Society.
Find out more at: smokefreegenmn.org.
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Mallory Dresow <mallorydresow@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, February 28, 2020 9:08 AM
To:City Council
Subject:Message From an Eagan Resident
Dear Mayor Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council:
As Eagan residents and parents of Luke and Collin, raising our kids in a supportive, healthy community is one of our top
priorities.
I was speaking with a student from the University of Minnesota who is leaving Minneapolis and driving to Eagan to buy
tobacco products. I was surprised to hear this from a 20 year old and wondered what I could do to prevent my children
from this terrible tobacco addiction.
We were happy to see that Eagan is considering raising the tobacco sales age to 21, especially in light of the new federal
Tobacco 21 law that went into effect. We saw a news story reporting that “several tobacco shops in Eagan” are planning
to ignore the federal sales age of 21 because Eagan’s ordinance still only requires customers to be 18. They told the
reporter, “They will keep doing so until Eagan city leaders vote to raise the age requirement.” If you haven’t had a
chance to see it here is the link: https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2020/01/06/some‐businesses‐still‐selling‐tobacco‐
products‐to‐ those‐under‐21/ The most effective way to tackle the ongoing burden of tobacco‐related disease on our
community is to prevent kids from getting addicted to nicotine in the first place. By increasing the gap between high
schoolers and those who can legally purchase tobacco, we are limiting the chances that they can easily access tobacco
products through their friend group.
We ask that the city of Eagan this lifesaving tobacco policy without penalties for underage purchase, use and possession
(PUP). We need to focus on protecting them instead. PUP penalties are not proven to reduce youth tobacco use. This is
to protect not just my kids, but all kids from the dangers of tobacco and prevent future generations from a lifetime of
tobacco addiction and disease.
Sincerely,
Mallory & Jason Dresow
4945 Sycamore Drive
Eagan MN 55123
Sent from my iPhone
February 28, 2020
The Honorable Mike Maguire and Members of City Council
City of Eagan
Eagan Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Rd.
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mayor Maguire and Council Members:
I am writing to urge you to support the proposed ordinance to raise the minimum sale age of tobacco
products, including e-cigarettes, from 18 to 21. As a resident of Eagan, this matter directly affects me and my
family.
As the largest health plan in Minnesota, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota is committed to improving
the health of all Minnesotans, which is why we strongly support local policy change to keep youth away from
the harms of tobacco. Additionally, as one of Eagan’s largest employers, Blue Cross is particularly concerned
with supporting the health of our community.
We know that almost 95 percent of addicted smokers started smoking by the age of 21. The tobacco industry
also knows this and heavily targets 18-to-21-year-olds. By using tactics like candy and menthol flavoring,
magazine advertisements and event sponsorships to attract young people, the tobacco industry aggressively
markets to youth and young adults to recruit replacement smokers and guarantee profits. Raising the age to 21
would result in a 25 percent reduction in initiation by 15-to-17-year-olds. Increasing the tobacco age will
prevent 30,000 Minnesota kids from becoming smokers over the next 15 years.
An epidemic of e-cigarette use has disrupted a downward trend in youth tobacco use overall. One out of every
four Minnesota 11th-graders now report using e-cigarettes – a 54 percent increase since 2016. This policy will
have a direct impact on reducing youth access to these products.
I also strongly urge you to remove purchase, use and possession (PUP) penalties from your ordinance. PUP
penalty language only serves to divert focus from addressing irresponsible retailers and the tobacco industry
and, instead, punishes our kids.
In 2017, Blue Cross released a study showing that each year, smoking claims over 6,000 Minnesota lives and
costs our state $7.5 billion in health care costs and lost productivity. The staggering costs of tobacco in both
health care costs and loss of life cannot be compared to the loss of profits for those who want to continue to
sell these lethal products.
I hope you will take this positive step toward making a smoke-free generation for Eagan youth.
Sincerely,
Director, Health Equity Advocacy
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Andrea Mowery <andrea.mowery@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 2, 2020 1:59 PM
To:City Council
Cc:Christina Scipioni; Dave Osberg
Subject:March 10 meeting about the T21 Ordinance
*Please include this e‐mail in the City Council’s packet for their work session on March 10, 2020.
Dear Eagan City Council,
I’m writing in support of changing the sale age of tobacco to 21 years in the City of Eagan. This, along with other strong
policies, is another way to effectively address the serious issue of nicotine addiction among youth. I fully support
passage of this ordinance without possession, use and purchase (PUP) penalties in it. The federal government no longer
includes PUP penalties in their tobacco age laws and national best practices established by leading organizations such as
the American Cancer Society and Heart Association support T21 laws being passed without them. Moreover, the vast
majority of the dozens of T21 ordinances passed by cities and counties in Minnesota do not include them either. Please
focus enforcement on retailers and sellers, not punishing kids.
If you take public comments during the work session on March 10, I would like to briefly speak to these issues.
Thank you for your consideration and for your dedication to the City of Eagan.
Best Regards,
Andrea Mowery
845 Govern Circle
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Angie Scanlon <angiescan@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 2, 2020 10:51 PM
To:City Council
Cc:Dave Osberg; Christina Scipioni; Angie Scanlon
Subject:T21 Legislation
Dear Eagan City Council,
I’m pleased to be writing you in support of the Tobacco 21 ordinance you are considering. Raising the sale age of
tobacco and strong enforcement of the ordinance among retailers is another way to prevent and stop kids from using
harmful, addictive products such as e‐cigarettes, cigarettes and flavored little cigars. Please pass this ordinance without
penalties for minors (possession, use and purchase). After discussing the ineffectiveness of youth penalties, the vast
majority of T21 communities in Minnesota do not penalize minors. We should be holding Big Tobacco accountable for
addicting youth, not blaming youth for the problem.
Thank you for your attention to this pressing issue.
Angie Scanlon
angiescan@gmail.com
The Honorable Mike Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council
Eagan Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Rd.
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mayor Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council:
I am writing on behalf of Pediatric and Young Adult Medicine to express our strong support for raising
the tobacco sales age from 18 to 21 in Eagan. As the medical director of our Eagan clinic, and as an
Eagan resident and parent, this issue affects me both professionally and personally and I am glad to see
that Eagan is considering this important step to protect our community’s youth. We also hope that you
will remove purchase, use, and possession (PUP) penalties against young people in the proposed Tobacco
21 ordinance.
Pediatric and Young Adult Medicine has proudly served East Metro communities for over 65 years,
providing the highest quality comprehensive medical care to children and young adults from birth to age
21. As physicians, we have been on the front line caring for children that have become addicted to
nicotine products and their resulting damage to lungs and general health.
We know the most effective way to tackle the ongoing burden of tobacco-related disease in our
community is to prevent kids from getting addicted to nicotine in the first place. The goal of Tobacco 21
is just that: to limit kids’ access to all tobacco products because we know that 75% of high schoolers in
Minnesota get them from someone they know. By increasing the gap between high schoolers and those
who can legally purchase tobacco we are limiting the chances that they can easily access tobacco products
through their peers. Delaying exposure to and use of these products has a significant impact on our
children’s ability to develop healthy habits and make better choices as young adults.
The newer vaping devices that we are most concerned about our kids being exposed to, are the very
tobacco products that have become very popular among our youth. They are especially concerning
because they expose kids to higher nicotine content than other types of e-cigarettes and deliver that
nicotine without the harshness of conventional cigarettes, due to the enormous array of candy and fruity
nicotine flavors. These devices put youth at an even greater risk for developmental issues and attention
deficits while increasing the likelihood they go on to become addicted to cigarettes and other substances
later in life.
We also strongly urge you to remove PUP penalties from your ordinance. PUP penalty language only
serves to divert focus from addressing irresponsible retailers and the tobacco industry and, instead,
punishes our kids. Please pass a law that is clear and inclusive, protects all young people, and holds
retailers accountable so as not to detract from the positive benefits that this ordinance will provide. Thank
you for your leadership.
Sincerely,
Thomas D. Siefferman MD FAAP, President of Pediatric and Young Adult Medicine
1
Christina Scipioni
From:John Kingsbury <jhkingsbury@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 4, 2020 11:40 AM
To:City Council
Subject:T21
I am writing to express support for implementing a Tobacco 21 policy in Eagan. I have been a resident of Eagan for a year
and a half. My wife and I built a house here because we enjoy the city and see it as a terrific community in which to raise
a family. Implementing a T21 policy will further strengthen our brief that Eagan is a community well‐suited for raising a
family. Taking this step will help ensure that my son (3 years old) and future daughter (expected in two weeks) are
protected from nicotine addiction.
Thank you,
John
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Cheryl Stevenson on behalf of City Council
Sent:Tuesday, February 4, 2020 9:11 AM
To:Cyndee Fields; Gary Hansen; Meg Tilley; Mike Maguire; Paul Bakken
Subject:Tobacco 21 Support
Cheryl Stevenson, MCMC
Executive Assistant/Deputy City Clerk
3830 Pilot Knob Rd | Eagan, MN 55122
Office: 651-675-5005
https://www.cityofeagan.com
From: Heidi Larson <heidibrettlarson@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, February 3, 2020 3:13 PM
To: City Council <CityCouncil@cityofeagan.com>
Subject: Tobacco 21 Support
Dear Mayor Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council,
As an Eagan resident and parent I wanted to write to you and express my strong support for your efforts to increase the
tobacco sale age to 21 in Eagan. In light of the new federal Tobacco 21 law that went into effect in December, I was
happy to hear that the City of Eagan is considering raising the tobacco sales age to 21.
Nicotine is addictive and is particularly harmful to the developing adolescent brain. Nicotine can have a long‐term effect
on cognitive development, mental health and future addiction.
I do hope that the proposed ordinance to raise the minimum sale age of tobacco products from 18 to 21 removes
purchase, use and possession (PUP) penalties as well. PUP penalty language only diverts focus from addressing
irresponsible retailers and the tobacco industry and, instead, punishes our kids. Tobacco 21, which has been successfully
passed in 60 Minnesota cities and counties, is meant to prevent youth tobacco use and addiction and save lives.
I am glad to see the City of Eagan puts the health of our kids first and desires to prevent future generations, like my
daughter's, from a lifelong addiction to tobacco. Leaders at all levels of government, including the lawmakers in Eagan
and in Minnesota, should continue to pass lifesaving tobacco prevention policies like this without delay.
Sincerely,
Heidi Larson
1175 Duckwood Trail, Unit E
Eagan, MN 55123
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Elyse Less <elyse@mntobaccofreealliance.org>
Sent:Wednesday, March 4, 2020 10:35 AM
To:Christina Scipioni
Cc:andrea.mowery@gmail.com; Jess Nolan
Attachments:Survey Results Tobacco 21_2020-02-21.pdf
Hi Christine,
I just wanted to let you know that both the cities of Hastings and Lakeville passed Tobacco 21 on Monday night 3/2/20
bringing the total Tobacco 21 ordinances to 67 in Minnesota. Both cities fully removed all PUP penalties. I’ve also
attached a fact sheet illustrating the recent poll support among all Minnesotans for Tobacco 21 for the 3/10 council
packet.
Sincerely,
Elyse Less
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Elyse Levine Less, JD, MPH
Executive Director
Tobacco‐Free Alliance MN
www.mntobaccofreealliance.org
Office: 651‐379‐0196 Cell: 651‐592‐6061
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
A recent statewide Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota scientific survey found overwhelming
support for public health policies aimed at reducing tobacco’s harm and creating a smoke -free
generation in Minnesota.
Tobacco 21
Seventy-four percent of Minnesotans support raising Minnesota’s tobacco age to 21. Of those
supporters, 49 percent strongly support Tobacco 21. Raising the tobacco age has support across
political parties, geographic locations and ethnicities.
Between October 2017 and
January 2020, raising the
tobacco age to 21 saw a 20
percentage point increase
in public support.
Methodology Information
The study contains the results of a Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota survey administered to 800 randomly selected adult residents in
Minnesota by Morris Leatherman Company. Professional interviewers conducted the survey via landline and cell phone calls between January
20 and February 7, 2020. The typical respondents took twenty-four minutes to complete the questionnaire. Cellphone only households with
42% of the sample, landline only households with 10% of the sample; with the remaining 48% having both cellphones and landlines. The results
are projectable to all adult residents in Minnesota to within ±3.5% in 95 out of 100 cases. Comparative data uses previous Blue Cross and Blue
Shield of Minnesota surveys conducted by Morris Leatherman Company.
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota is an independent licensee of the Blue Cross and Shield Association.
Change in Support For Tobacco Policies
MSFG-Senate
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Elyse Less <elyse@mntobaccofreealliance.org>
Sent:Wednesday, February 26, 2020 1:16 PM
To:Christina Scipioni
Cc:Jess Nolan; andrea.mowery@gmail.com; Melissa Mady
Subject:Eagan Tobacco 21 draft ordinance
Dear Christine,
Thank you for sending us a copy of the draft Tobacco 21 ordinance. I’m hopeful that the city council will discuss the PUP
penalty issue and ultimately remove PUP penalties against young people at the city council work session on 3/10.
I wanted to point out an error I noticed in the proposed draft that the city may also want to address.
The draft ordinance adds language that puts it out of compliance with state law. See Subd. 17 ‐ Compliance and
Inspections. The draft language deleted age "15" and replaced it with "18." Subd. 17 should read instead:
“Such compliance cheeks shall involve underage individuals who are over the age of 15 years , but less than 21 years”
PHLC suggests two options for best practice compliance check language for Tobacco 21:
Option 1: “In accordance with state law, the city will conduct [ at least one compliance check that involves the
participation of two persons: one person between the ages of 15 and 17 and one person between the ages of 18 and 20 ]
Option 2: [ at least one compliance check that involves the participation of a person between the ages of 15 and 17 and at
least one compliance check that involves the participation of a person between the ages of 18 and 20 ]
(See PHLC model, p. 18)
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Elyse Less
February 3rd, 2020
Eagan Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN, 55122
Dear Mayor Maguire and Members of the Eagan City Council,
I am writing on behalf of Twin Cities Medical Society in support of raising the legal age for tobacco sales
from 18 to 21 in Eagan. Twin Cities Medical Society (TCMS) is an organization that represents
approximately 4,500 physicians and medical students living and working in the seven-county Twin Cities
metropolitan area. Our physician members share all too often that tobacco is still a problem for their
patients. In fact, tobacco use remains the #1 cause of preventable disease and death in Minnesota.
The recent 2019 Minnesota Student Survey revealed that youth vaping in our state has now increased to
more than 1 in 4 students. In fact, 26.4% of 11th-graders in Minnesota report vaping. Tobacco 21 is an
important and effective prevention policy to help protect our youth and community at large from the
harms of tobacco and addiction.
Adolescence is a critical time in brain development, and teenagers’ brains are particul arly vulnerable to
nicotine addiction. Exposure to nicotine during this time can cause life-long problems in learning,
memory and attention, and can make teens’ brains more susceptible to other addictions. Both e-
cigarettes and combustible tobacco products also contain dangerous and cancer-causing chemicals
including volatile organic compounds, formaldehyde, and heavy metals like lead.
TCMS also supports the removal of purchase, use, and possession penalties (PUP) that are currently
included in the proposed ordinance. PUP penalties are concerning because 18-20 year olds who have
legally purchased tobacco in a different city or state would unknowingly be committing a crime by
simply asking to purchase tobacco in Eagan. Increasing the tobacco sales age is not about punishing our
kids. It's about protecting them from a lifetime of addiction. By having a strong Tobacco 21 policy that
removes PUP penalties and clearly defines e-cigarettes, you will have a major impact on the health of
the young people in our communities.
Thank you for your work and thoughtful consideration of this important policy.
Sincerely,
Ryan Greiner, MD
President of the Twin Cities Medical Society
1
Christina Scipioni
From:Laura Conway <larjcway@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, March 4, 2020 8:54 PM
To:City Council
Cc:Christina Scipioni
Subject:Eagan T21
Dear Mayor Maguire and members of the Eagan City Council,
I am a 20 year resident of Eagan, a mother of 4, and a nurse. I am passionate about the youth of this community.
I was happy to learn that the city of Eagan is considering raising the tobacco age to 21, especially in light of the new
federal Tobacco 21 Law that went into effect in January.
As a parent, I've been incredibly concerned about vaping and am distressed to learn that youth tobacco use has risen
dramatically in Minnesota in the last 3 years. In fact, the 2019 Minnesota Student Survey results showed that among
8th grade students, e‐cig use nearly doubled from 2016‐2019 , and one in four 11th graders now use e‐cigs. I'm also very
concerned about nicotine harms to the adolescent brain. Nicotine can harm brain development as teens grow and can
have a long term effect on cognitive development, mental health and future addiction.
I recently learned that part of updating local laws to raise the tobacco sales age to 21, is removal of Purchase, Use, and
Possession (PUP) penalties against youth. I hope that the city council considers removing these PUP penalties and
focuses on holding retailers accountable to sell these products only to those 21 and older.
My hope is that the Eagan City Council will pass this law to protect our youth from these dangerous products and
prevent future generations from a lifetime of tobacco addiction and disease.
Please include this letter in the city council packet.
Sincerely,
Laura Conway
4680 Parkridge Drive
Eagan, 55123
1
Information about removing PUP penalties in a Tobacco 21 ordinance
Why is it important to remove penalties for underage purchase, use and possession (PUP
penalties) in a Tobacco 21 ordinance?
Tobacco licensing ordinances are meant to regulate the behavior of the licensees.
The tobacco industry has targeted youth for decades, seeking to create generations
addicted to its products. Instead of holding industry and retailers accountable, PUP laws
shift responsibility to their victims- young consumers.
PUP penalties have not been proven to reduce youth tobacco use.i
Data show that PUP penalties open the door to selective enforcement against youth of
certain racial and ethnic groups and of low socioeconomic status. Historically, there is
evidence that these laws were lobbied for by the tobacco industry to punish youth users
while the industry simultaneously targeted, and continues to target, youth (and especially
youth of color, poor youth, and young LGBTQIA) to maintain profits (replacing their dying
consumer base).ii
PUP penalties stigmatize youth who smoke/vape. Stigma is not an effective public health
intervention, and it may keep kids from seeking cessation treatment or education.iii
National organizations like Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, the American Cancer Society,
the American Heart Association, and the state-wide Minnesotans for a Smoke-Free
Generation coalition, agree that Tobacco 21 policies should eliminate PUP penalties.
57 MN cities have Tobacco 21 ordinances (as of 01/10/20). Almost all cities that had PUP
penalties, removed them completely, following best practices suggested by the League of
MN Cities and the Public Health Law Center model language. pages 34-35 League of MN
Cities handbook
The three Dakota County cities that raised the tobacco sales age to 21 removed all PUP
penalties (Mendota Heights, West St. Paul, and Lilydale).
For more information please contact Elyse Levine Less at:
Elyse@mntobaccofreealliance.org
i Wakefield M, Giovino G. Teen penalties for tobacco possession, use, and purchase: evidence and issues. Tob Control. 2003;12 Suppl 1:i6‐13.
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/tobaccocontrol/12/suppl_1/i6.full.pdf; TobaccoFreeKids PUP Fact Sheet
ii Forster JL, Komro KA, Wolfson M. Survey of city ordinances and local enforcement regarding commercial availability of tobacco to minors in Minnesota, United
States. TobaccoControl. 1996;5(1):46‐51.
iii Wakefield M, Giovino G. Teen penalties for tobacco possession, use, and purchase: evidence and issues. TobaccoControl. 2003;12(suppl 1):i6‐i13.
Agenda Memo
March 10, Special City Council Meeting
IV. RED PINE NOISE STUDY
DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To provide direction on the Red Pine site.
FACTS:
➢ The Shooting Range Protection Act became effective on May 28, 2005. The Act
requires noise mitigation on any property or any portion of property within 750
feet of the property line of a shooting range when development or a change in
land use is proposed. The distance from the south property line of the Red Pine
property to Red Pine Lane ranges from approximately 750 to 850 feet.
➢ At the September 3, 2019 regular meeting, the City Council approved a contract
with ESI Engineering for the Red Pine Noise Study.
➢ The noise study was completed on October 7, 2019. Noise study findings that
are relevant to land use are:
o Residential development on the Red Pine site will require substantial
noise mitigation including berms and barriers. With certain assumptions
regarding potential residential development, the consultant estimates
that noise barriers of 17 to 26 feet would be required. Actual noise
mitigation will depend on site grading, elevations, and style of residential
development (i.e., walkout, 1- or 2-stories, rear deck).
o Without noise mitigation, homes would need to be located
approximately 4,200 feet from the shooting pads to meet noise
requirements for residential zones. The Red Pine property line is 900 feet
from the shooting pads.
o Industrial uses would require no noise mitigation. If industrial buildings
were developed on the south end of the property, the buildings would
serve as partial or full noise barriers to any residential uses on the north
side of the site.
➢ The City Attorney has provided a memorandum that addresses the noise
standards for residential homes near a gun club. Should the City Council take
action at a future meeting to approve a comprehensive guide amendment and
allow residential uses within 750 feet of the Gun Club, it can condition such
residential uses upon the applicant attaining certain noise attenuation standards
similar to what have been imposed in the airport noise zones. The City required
a noise study and appropriate mitigation as a condition of approval for the
Manley Gun Club project.
➢ Michael Clements, representative of the property owner, will attend the March
10, 2020 workshop.
POLICY ISSUES:
1. Does the City Council have any further question regarding the Red Pine noise
study?
2. The Red Pine site is currently guided RC, Retail Commercial. At the April 2, 2019
regular meeting, the City Council concluded that a retail commercial
development was not realistic. What land use does the City Council want to
consider further?
Attachments: (3)
SPCCIV-1 Location Map
SPCCIV-2 Noise Study – ESI Engineering, October 7, 2019
SPCCIV-3 Memorandum from Robert Bauer, April 29, 2019
SPCCIV-4 Staff Presentation
MARSH COURT MANORDR(SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL)WATERVIEWCOVE
SHELERUD DR
120TH ST SYCAMORE DRIVE(CHICAGO,MILWAUKEE,ST.PAUL&PACIFICRAILROAD)7BISCAYNE AVEREDPINELANE
SYCAMORE DRWESTON H IL LS P L
CAYLIN C T
PARKSI DE
COURTMCFADDENS TRAIL BRISTOLBLVDSTRATFORDLANESPRUCE CIRTWINS CTNAUVOO LANE
ALLAN LANE
WHITE PINE WAY
FARM ROAD
REDPIN
ECTPINE LANEMIDDLE LANE
R ED PINE LN
D
OD
DROADREDPOLL CTISABELLECTTODD AVE
P INECONETRLSTATETRUNKHWY.NO.3WESTON HILLS DRIVEWHITEPINE WAYDODDROADSWEET ST
SOO LINE RRSYCAMORE CTRED PINELNPINECONECIR
WESTONHILLSDRGUN CLUB ROAD
BROOKLY N CT WESTONHILLSDRIVEMCFADDENSTRA I L
PARKSID
ECIR
C
L
ETAMIEAVEWESTONH I LLS CT
DODDROADROSA CT
SPRUCE STREET
BROOKLY N A V EWest End Gun Club
HiddenCornerPark
HistoricHolz FarmPark
Lebanon HillsRegional Park
HolzFarmPark Noise StudyLocation
0 1,000500Feet
´
§¨¦35E
§¨¦494
Cliff Rd
Diffley Rd
Yankee Doodle Rd
Lone Oak Rd
Map Area Extent
Subject Site
14985 Glazier Avenue, Suite 525
Apple Valley, MN 55124
(952) 953-8847 Direct
(962) 432-3136 Office
(952) 432-3780 Fax
rbauer@dmshb.com Email
MEMORANDUM
To: Dave Osberg, City Administrator
From: Robert B. Bauer, City Attorney
Date: April 29, 2019
Re: Noise Standards/Residential Homes Near a Gun Club
______________________________________________________________________________
This is by way of follow-up to the Council discussion concerning the Minnesota Rules governing
noise control. At the last Council meeting, there was a concern about whether the City could
initiate a land use change if the proposed use would possibly violate the noise standards as
defined under the Minnesota Rules. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states:
Any municipality having authority to regulate land use shall take all reasonable
measures within its jurisdiction to prevent the establishment of land use activities
listed in noise area classification (NAC) 1, 2 or 3 in any location where the
standards establish . . . will be violated immediately upon the establishment of the
land use.
Minnesota Rule 7030.0030
The statutory limits for a residential Location are L10 = 65 dBA and L50 = 60 dBA during the
daytime (7:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m.) and L10 = 55 dBA and L50 = 50 dBA during the nighttime
(10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m.) (Minn. R. 7030.0040). This means that during the one-hour period of
monitoring, daytime noise levels cannot exceed 65 dBA for more than 10 percent of the time (6
minutes) or 60 dBA more than 50 percent of the time (30 minutes).
In order to determine whether a proposed land use would violate the standards set forth above, a
comprehensive noise study would need to be done.
However, under Minn. Stat. § 116.07, subd. 2a, gun clubs are exempt from the noise above
standards adopted by the MPCA. Noteably, under the Gun Club Protection Act, the Department
of Natural Resources has been given the responsibility to formally adopt shooting range
performance standards rather than the MPCA. The noise standards for a gun club are as follows:
Sec. 5. [87A.05] [NOISE STANDARDS.] Allowable noise levels for the
operation of a shooting range are the levels determined by replacing the steady
state noise L10 and L50 state standards for each period of time within each noise
area's classification with a single Leq(h) standard for impulsive noise that is two
dBA lower than that of the L10 level for steady state noise. The noise level shall
Dave Osberg, City Administrator
April 29, 2019
Page 2 of 2
be measured outside of the range property at the location of the receiver's activity
according to Minnesota Rules, parts 7030.0010 to 7030.0080, as in effect on the
effective date of this act. For purposes of this section, "Leq(h)" means the energy
level that is equivalent to a steady state level that contains the same amount of
sound energy as the time varying sound level for a 60-minute time period. [This
has been interpreted by the DNR to be a steady stream of noise at 63 DBL.]
Note, the City has allowed residential uses within 750 feet of the Gun Club and have conditioned
the approval of such uses upon the applicant undertaking certain noise attenuation standards for
the interior of the home. In this instance, if the City were to approve a comprehensive guide
change and allow residential uses within 750 feet of the Gun Club, it can condition such
residential uses upon the applicant attaining certain noise attenuation standards similar to what
we have imposed in the airport noise zones.
Should you require anything further, please let me know.
October 7, 2019
Ms. Jill Hutmacher
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
Subject: Summary Report for
Trap Club Noise Monitoring
Eagan, Minnesota
Dear Ms. Hutmacher:
We understand that the City of Eagan is considering rezoning land to the north of the West End
Trap Club in Eagan, Minnesota. As shown in Figure 1, the land is located approximately 900’
north of the gun shooting areas, bounded on the east by Biscayne Avenue, on the south by the
old Gun Club Road, on the west by S. Robert Trail and on the north by Red Pine Lane.
The City of Eagan is concerned about gun noise from the trap club and requested that a noise
study be performed at the nearest property line to evaluate impacts the gun club noise will have
on the land if it is zoned as residential or industrial, and to recommend general mitigation
options to attenuate levels on the property to be consistent with state statutes. ESI performed
monitoring over an 8-hour period while the trap club was operating (measurement location
shown in Figure 1 below). This letter is a summary of the results.
Ms. Jill Hutmacher October 7, 2019
Trap Club Noise Monitoring Page 2
Figure 1 – Aerial view of the West End Trap Club and the land to be rezoned to the north.
Noise Code Requirements
The State of Minnesota passed the Shooting Range Protection Act in May 2005, which is
currently in Minnesota Statues, Chapter 87A Shooting Ranges. The intent of the act is “to
provide shooting ranges with the ability to maintain their operating capacity, if local opposition
to an existing shooting range facility arises.” Section 87A.05 Noise Standards describes the
allowable noise levels for the operation of a shooting range. It states that “allowable noise
levels for the operation of a shooting range are the levels determined by replacing the steady
state noise L101 and L502 state standards for each period of time within each noise area’s
classification with a single Leq(h) standard for impulsive noise that is two dBA lower than that of
the L10 level for steady state noise. The noise level shall be measured outside of the range
property at the location of the receiver’s activity according to Minnesot a Rules, parts 7030.0010
to 7030.0080…Leq(h) means the energy level that is equivalent to a steady state level that
contains the same amount of sound energy as the time varying sound level for a 60-minute time
period.”
1 L10 is the sound level that is exceeded 10% of the time during a measurement period.
2 L50 is the sound level that is exceeded 50% of the time during a measurement period.
Ms. Jill Hutmacher October 7, 2019
Trap Club Noise Monitoring Page 3
Section 87A.04 Mitigation Area describes “a change in use, new development, or construction
of a structure subject to this section may be approved if the person seeking the approval or, at
the discretion of the governing body, the approving authority agrees to provide any mitigation
required to keep the range in compliance with this chapter. The person requesting an approval
subject to this section is responsible for the mitigation if the failure to provide the documentation
or required mitigation is the sole basis for the range being out o f compliance with the shooting
range performance standards…With the permission of the range operator, any mitigation
required under this section may be provided on the range property.”
To explain what the above language means, we have included references and explanations
below. First, Minnesota Rule 7030: Noise Pollution, prepared by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA), has requirements for maximum allowable sound levels by receiving land use
evaluated at the point of the nearest receiver. Table 1 shows the Rule 7030 L10 and L50 noise
limits per noise area classification (NAC). NAC 1 is residential and recreational land use, NAC 2
is commercial, and NAC 3 is industrial.
Table 1 – MPCA Code Requirements
Leq(h) is the hourly Leq3 level, which shall be used for comparison to the residential and industrial
requirements, which in the protection act says that instead of using the L10 and L50 from the
MPCA rules, the L10 level minus 2 dBA shall be used for the requirement(s). In the case of this
project, the shooting range is only operating during the daytime hours, which has an MPCA
requirement of 65 dBA at the nearest residential property receiver and 80 dBA at the nearest
industrial property receiver. Therefore, the requirement is 63 dBA for residential and 78 dBA
for industrial.
If it is determined that any hourly level during the noise monitoring (while the trap club is in
use) exceeds the requirements, mitigation needs to be provided. Mitigation options include
physical barriers (like berms, walls, fences, or buildings to block line of sight and reduce noise)
and increased distance from the noise source.
3 Leq is the preferred method to describe sound levels that vary over time, resulting in a single decibel value which takes into
account the total sound energy over the period of time of interest.
L10 L50 L10 L50
1 Residential 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA 50 dBA
2 Commercial 70 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA 65 dBA
3 Industrial 80 dBA 75 dBA 80 dBA 75 dBA
Noise Area
Classification
Receiver
Type
Daytime (7AM - 10PM)Nighttime (10PM - 7AM)
Ms. Jill Hutmacher October 7, 2019
Trap Club Noise Monitoring Page 4
Outdoor Noise Monitoring Results
The monitoring location was approximately 900’ north of the shooting areas, inward from the
old Gun Club Road (shown in Figure 1). This measurement location was chosen due to access
and that it was on the property line of the land to be rezoned, making it a worst-case scenario
for gun noise on this land.
The monitoring period started Sunday, September 22nd, 2019 at approximately 9 AM and ended
at approximately 5:30 PM. The monitoring was performed approximately 900’ from the middle
of the 4 shooting areas. Figure 2 shows a picture of the monitoring system looking south
towards the West End Trap Club. The system collected sound data continuously for over
8 hours. Approximately two hours (from 9 AM to 10 AM and 4 PM to 5 PM) were used to
determine the ambient (background) noise level without the trap club operating, and six hours
from 10 AM to 4 PM were used to evaluate the trap club noise. The sound measurement data
is provided in Attachment A.
Traffic noise (from S. Robert Trail to the west and Red Pine Lane to the north) contributed to
the ambient level. However, in our opinion, traffic did not significantly affect levels when the
trap club was in use. There was some light precipitation and some moderate wind speed during
the monitoring period, although these did not negatively affect the measurement.
Figure 2 – Photo looking south showing the monitoring equipment.
Ms. Jill Hutmacher October 7, 2019
Trap Club Noise Monitoring Page 5
Table 2 summarizes the hourly Leq(h) measurement results, the noise level requirement, and the
weather data for the monitoring period. The loudest hourly level measured (from 10 AM to
11 AM, the first hour the range was open) represents the worst-case level at the land to be
rezoned, which was an Leq(h) of 76 dBA. This is 13 dBA above the protection act limit for
residential zones and therefore mitigation is needed if the land is zoned as residential. However,
the worst-case level is 2 dBA below the protection act limit for industrial zones, and mitigation
would not be required if the land was rezoned as industrial.
Table 2 – Hourly Monitoring Levels Compared to Code Limit
Mitigation Recommendations
Based on measurement results, mitigation would only be required if the land is zoned as
residential and if the houses are put on the southern edge of the property. In our opinion, the
most effective mitigation option at this site is a barrier between the noise source (guns) and the
receivers (location of nearest outdoor residential activity). Trees or other vegetation are not
an effective option as they do not provide significant attenuation unless it is an extremely deep
and thick forest.
We understand that most of the homes in the immediate vicinity around the trap club are multi-
level and a majority have decks. Because of this, we determined the worst-case residential
outdoor receiver may be someone on their deck while the gun range is open. The next worst -
case receiver could be someone in their front or backyard. We understand that the shooting
pads are at an elevation of approximately 933’ and we are assuming for our calculations that
the land to be rezoned will be graded to an elevation of 945’. Figure 3 illustrates the site in
elevation, with the source, receiver, and important elevations noted.
Calculations were performed to determine the minimum barrier wall height needed to reduce
the loudest measured hourly noise level (76 dBA) to the protection act requirement of 63 dBA
for residential receivers. We assumed a deck height of 10’ and a receiver height of 6’ (total of
28’ above the shooting area elevation for the deck receiver, or 18’ above the shooting area
elevation for the backyard receiver). The calculations are included at the end of this report in
Attachment B.
Measurement
Results, dBA
Protection Act
Limit
Leq(h)L10 - 2 dBA Temp Wind Precip
9:00 AM 49.0 Ambient (no guns)65 °F 10 mph N/A
10:00 AM 76.0 64 °F 9 mph N/A
11:00 AM 73.0 64 °F 8 mph N/A
12:00 PM 61.0 66 °F 6 mph N/A
1:00 PM 65.0 68 °F 14 mph N/A
2:00 PM 66.0 65 °F 13 mph N/A
3:00 PM 66.0 62 °F 7 mph Light Rain
4:00 PM 51.0 Ambient (no guns)62 °F 8 mph Light Rain
63.0 (Residential)
78.0 (Industrial)
Weather Conditions
Date
Sunday,
September 22,
2019
Hour
Trap Club
Conditions
Trap Club In Use
Ms. Jill Hutmacher October 7, 2019
Trap Club Noise Monitoring Page 6
For a potential deck receiver, the calculations determined that a barrier wall needs to be
constructed with a height of 26’ above the backyard elevation (for a total of 38’ above the
shooting area elevation), which is very tall. The elevation of someone on their deck is the main
factor for this barrier wall height. We recognize that a 26’ tall fence is not practical.
For outdoor receivers in front or backyards during trap club operating hours (if the houses
would not have decks), our calculations determined that the barrier wall along the south
property line should have a height of 17’. This barrier can consist of a berm with a fence or wall
along the top of the berm. For instance, there could be a 9’ tall berm along the north property
line, and then a 8’ wall on top of that. If a 17’ tall barrier (berm and fence) is constructed, we
calculate the hourly noise level to be around 59.9 dBA if measured in a potential residential
front or backyard. This is a reduction of about 16 dB in the noise level from the range, which
includes a safety margin of about 3 dB.
Just for reference, if no mitigation is installed (e.g. a noise barrier) a residential property to the
north of the gun club would need to be approximately 4200 feet away from the shooting pads
to meet the requirements for residential zones. In this case, the distance (air absorption, noise
levels decrease by 6 dB with every doubling of distance) provides mitigation of the noise.
If the City of Eagan decides to rezone this area as residential, we could perform calculations
with actual residential property locations and elevations (height of backyard above the shooting
pads, heights of decks, etc.) which would then help inform a more specific barrier wall or deck
screen height.
Barrier walls need to be solid and must be one continuous barrier, with no holes, gaps or
openings. For example, a wood fence with non-airtight gaps between boards and a gap at the
bottom of the fence would not be effective as noise will leak through all the openings.
Some material options for a deck barrier and property line barrier are wood (as long as all
boards are tight and flush with one another; no air gaps), metals (e.g. steel, aluminum, stainless
steel), masonry blocks (CMU), concrete, or stucco finished fence. The minimum thickness of
material used depends on the mass and weight of the material. If wood is used, the minimum
material thickness should be at least ¾” plywood/OSB, or the equivalent weight of 2.35 pounds
per square foot (psf). Any thinner or lighter, then there could be a noise transmission issue
through the barrier itself and the noise requirement may not be met at the outdoor receivers.
Ms. Jill Hutmacher October 7, 2019
Trap Club Noise Monitoring Page 7
Figure 3 – Elevation view looking west showing the source, receivers, noise paths, and important elevations assumed in the
barrier wall calculations.
Ms. Jill Hutmacher October 7, 2019
Trap Club Noise Monitoring Page 8
If a property line barrier is constructed, it should run from the west edge of the land to be
rezoned to the east edge, or wherever there would be residential properties (as shown in
Figure 4 below).
Figure 4 – Aerial view showing the location of the recommended barrier wall.
We can update our calculations to include actual elevations of the land to be rezoned if the
grading elevations are known at a later date. For instance, if the land is graded to be lower than
945’ or decks are known to be lower than what we assumed in our calculations, shorter barrier
walls could be used to meet the residential noise requirement.
Ms. Jill Hutmacher October 7, 2019
Trap Club Noise Monitoring Page 9
Conclusions
ESI was asked by the City of Eagan to perform noise monitoring at the land to be rezoned north
of the West End Trap Club in Eagan, Minnesota, to determine if the Shooting Range Protection
Act requirements will be exceeded if the land is rezoned as residential or industrial.
At a distance of approximately 900’ from the shooting areas, the measurement results showed
that outdoor trap club noise levels exceeded the Shooting Range Protection Act requirement of
63 dBA for residential a majority of the time the club was operating on Sunday, September 22,
2019. However, the noise levels were under the requirement of 78 dBA for industrial. The
loudest hour was the 10 AM hour, which had an hourly Leq of 76 dBA, which was 13 dBA above
the residential requirement, but 2 dBA below the industrial requirement.
If residential zones are established on the southern edge of the property, very tall noise barriers
are needed to reduce the level to 63 dBA or below at potential homes (assuming a site grading
of 945’).
Our calculations can be updated if the City of Eagan decides to zone the area as residential, and
grading or house elevations are known. For instance, if the land to be rezoned is graded to an
elevation below 945’, the barrier walls may be shorter than stated in the sections above.
We appreciate the opportunity to work with the City of Eagan on this project and remain
available to assist in the resolution of these and any other matters. Please let us know if you
have any questions or need more information.
Sincerely,
Andrew A.J. Schmitt Anthony J. Baxter, P.E.
Consulting Engineer Principal
ESI Engineering, Inc. ESI Engineering, Inc.
Attachments
File: P2591 City of Eagan - Summary Report for West End Trap Club Noise Monitoring, Oct 7, 2019 ver 1
Attachment A
8-Hour Outdoor Noise Monitoring Data
Trap Club Noise Monitoring – October 7, 2019
Calibration Frequency: 1 kHz
Initial Calibration: 94.0 dB
Final Calibration: 93.8 dB
Last Cal. Check: 9/22/19 @ 5:35 PM
Location:
Measurements:
Meteorology:
Preamplifier:
Location:
Project:
Engineer:
Microphone:
Last Calibrated:
Analyzer:
Calibrator:
Start Time:
End Time:
Run Time:
City of Eagan - Gun Club Noise Monitoring
P2591
Eagan, Minnesota
R.L. Skoug
Project No:
Date:
Calibration Check:
Acoustic Test Results
Minneapolis, Minnesota | o: 952.831.4646 | esi-engineering.com
Figure A1
Larson Davis PRM831 s/n 029391
Larson Davis 377B20 s/n 137686
Bruel & Kjaer 4231 s/n 3009047
February 20, 2018
Larson Davis 831 s/n 3553
9:10:07 AM
30218.0 seconds
5:33:45 PM
9/22/2019
One Second and Hourly Ambient Noise Levels
A-Weighted Results - Sunday, September 22nd, 2019
Property Line North of Gun Club
9:00:00 AM 10:00:00 AM 11:00:00 AM 12:00:00 PM 1:00:00 PM 2:00:00 PM 3:00:00 PM 4:00:00 PM 5:00:00 PM 6:00:00 PM
Time, h.m.s AM/PM
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
dB
Sound Pressure Level, dB re. 20 µPaMonitor.001 - LAF
Monitor.001 - Leq
5:33:45 PM
53.2 dBA
51.5 dBA
Noise Monitoring
Measured Hourly Leq Data
Time Leq Time Leq Time Leq
9:10:07 AM
10:00:00 AM
11:00:00 AM
12:00:00 PM
1:00:00 PM
2:00:00 PM
3:00:00 PM
4:00:00 PM
5:00:00 PM
49 dBA
76 dBA
73 dBA
61 dBA
65 dBA
66 dBA
66 dBA
51 dBA
51 dBA
Temperature: 61 - 68 °F
Wind Speed / Dir.: 6 - 14 MPH / N - W
Humidity: 61 - 78%
Attachment B
Noise Barrier Calculations
Trap Club Noise Monitoring – October 7, 2019
Client: City of Eagan
Project: Gun Club Noise Control
Project No.: P2591
October 7, 2019
Prepared By: AAJS
Checked By: AJB__________________________________________________________________________________________
Barrier Affect Calculation
References:
1. Architectural Acoustics: Principles and Design,
Madan Mehta, James Johnson and Jorge Rocafort, Prentice Hall, 1998
2. Acoustics
Leo L. Beranek, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1954
3. Sound and Vibration Design and Analysis,
National Environmental Balancing Bureau (NEBB), 1994
4. Noise Control: From Concept to Application,
Colin Hansen, Taylor & Francis, 2005
5. Handbook of HVAC Applications,
American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers, 2011
Noise Control Constants:
dBA Scale Corrections Octave Bands Used Wavelengths
≔dBA
−26.2
−16.1
−8.2
−3.2
0
1.2
1.0
−1.1
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
≔OctBnd
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
≔f
63
125
250
500
1000
2000
4000
8000
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
≔λ
i
―――1100 ft
f
i
=λ
17
9
4
2
1
1
0
0
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
ft
Octave Band Sound-Pressure Levels Defining Noise Criterion (NC) Curves
≔NC
47 51 54 57 60 64 67 71 74 77 80 83
36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 67 71 75 79
29 33 37 41 45 50 54 58 62 67 71 75
22 26 31 35 40 45 49 54 58 63 68 73
17 22 27 31 36 41 45 51 56 61 66 71
14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69
12 17 22 28 33 38 43 48 53 58 63 68
11 16 21 27 32 37 42 47 52 57 62 67
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
Specific NC-Levels
≔NC15i
NC
,i 1
≔NC20i
NC
,i 2
≔NC25i
NC
,i 3
≔NC30i
NC
,i 4
≔NC35i
NC
,i 5
≔NC40i
NC
,i 6
≔NC45i
NC
,i 7
≔NC50i
NC
,i 8
≔NC55i
NC
,i 9
≔NC60i
NC
,i 10
≔NC65i
NC
,i 11
≔NC70i
NC
,i 12
Page B -1
Client: City of Eagan
Project: Gun Club Noise Control
Project No.: P2591
October 7, 2019
Prepared By: AAJS
Checked By: AJB__________________________________________________________________________________________
Loudest Hour Sound Data:
Leq 1/1 Octave Data:Safety Factor :≔SF 0
Check dBA Level :
≔Lp.Leq +
67.9
64.4
67.7
74.6
73.0
67.7
60.1
49.6
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
SF ≔Lp.Leq.dBA =+Lp.Leq dBA
42
48
60
71
73
69
61
49
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
≔LdBA.Leq ⋅10 log
⎛
⎜
⎜
⎜⎝
∑
=i 1
8
10
―――
Lp.Leq.dBAi
10
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎟⎠
=LdBA.Leq 76.4 dBA
=============
20' distance correction. Measurement was taken approximately 900 ft from middle of 4
shooting pads. Assuming worst-case scenario that the southern edges of potential
residential property lines are all approximately 900 ft from each shooting pad, but a person
on a deck or in a front/backyard is set back approximately an additional 20':
≔Q 2 ≔d 900 ft
≔Lw.Leq =+−+Lp.Leq ⋅20 log
⎛
⎜
⎝
―d
ft
⎞
⎟
⎠
⋅10 log
⎛⎝Q⎞⎠0.7
125
121
124
131
130
124
117
106
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
≔LwA.a ⋅10 log
⎛
⎜
⎜
⎜⎝
∑
=i 1
8
10
―――――
+Lw.Leqi
dBA
i
10
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎟⎠
=LwA.a 133 dBA
===========
≔r 920 ft ≔Q 4 for instance of house reflections (safety factor of 3 dBA)
≔Lp.REC =−+−Lw.Leq ⋅20 log
⎛
⎜
⎝
―r
ft
⎞
⎟
⎠
⋅10 log
⎛⎝Q⎞⎠0.7
71
67
71
77
76
71
63
52
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
≔Lp.REC.dBA =+Lp.REC dBA
45
51
62
74
76
72
64
51
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
≔LdBA.REC ⋅10 log
⎛
⎜
⎜
⎜⎝
∑
=i 1
8
10
―――
Lp.REC.dBAi
10
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎟⎠
=LdBA.REC 79.2 dBA
=============
Page B -2
Client: City of Eagan
Project: Gun Club Noise Control
Project No.: P2591
October 7, 2019
Prepared By: AAJS
Checked By: AJB__________________________________________________________________________________________
Barrier Wall Attenuation -Gun Club Noise to Residential Outdoor Receiver (Person on Deck, no
barrier/screen):
≔a 900 ft distance between source and barrier
≔hs 6 ft height of source above ground
≔b ⋅20 ft distance between receiver and barrier ≔hby ⋅12 ft height of backyard
above shooting area
≔hr =+hby 16 ft 28 ft height of receiver above ground
≔hb +⋅a tan
⎛
⎜
⎜⎝
tanh
⎛
⎜
⎜⎝
―――
⎛⎝−hr hs⎞⎠
⎛⎝+a b
⎞⎠
⎞
⎟
⎟⎠
⎞
⎟
⎟⎠
hs =hb 27.5 ft minimum barrier height to cut off line of sight
≔H ⋅38 ft =H 38 ft barrier height
built barrier height≔A
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
+a 2 ⎛⎝−H hs⎞⎠
2
=A 901 ft
≔Hb =−H hby 26 ft
≔B
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
+b 2 ⎛⎝−H hr⎞⎠
2
=B 22 ft
≔D
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
+⎛⎝+a b
⎞⎠
2 ⎛⎝−hr hs⎞⎠
2
distance between source and receiver =D 920 ft
≔δ if
⎛
⎜
⎜⎝
,,≥H hb ―――−+A B D
ft
――――−⎛⎝−+A B D
⎞⎠
ft
⎞
⎟
⎟⎠
difference between the defracted path and the direct path
=δ 2.67
≔N ―――⋅⋅2 δ ft
λ
Fressnel Number =TN 0 1 1 2 5 10 19 39
⎡⎣⎤⎦
≔IL
i
if
⎛
⎜
⎜
⎜⎝
,,<N
i
−0.2 0 +⋅20 log
⎛
⎜
⎜
⎜⎝
――――――
‾‾‾‾‾‾⋅⋅2 π N
i
tanh ⎛
⎜⎝
‾‾‾‾‾‾⋅⋅2 π N
i
⎞
⎟⎠
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎟⎠
5
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎟⎠
=TIL 9 11 14 17 20 23 26 29
⎡⎣⎤⎦
≔Abi
if ⎛
⎜⎝,,≥IL
i
24 24 IL
i
⎞
⎟⎠=Ab
9
11
14
17
20
23
24
24
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
Page B -3
Client: City of Eagan
Project: Gun Club Noise Control
Project No.: P2591
October 7, 2019
Prepared By: AAJS
Checked By: AJB__________________________________________________________________________________________
Calculated Sound Level After Barrier Wall Attenuation:
≔Lp.REC.mit =−Lp.REC.dBA Ab
36
40
48
57
56
49
40
27
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
≔LdBA.mit ⋅10 log
⎛
⎜
⎜
⎜⎝
∑
=i 1
8
10
―――
Lp.REC.miti
10
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎟⎠
=LdBA.mit 60.5 dBA
=============
This meets the Shooting Range
Protection Act Leq(h) requirement of 63
dBA, but includes a safety factor of ~3
dB for house reflections or increased
shooters/gun shots.
≔LdBA.mit −LdBA.mit 3
=LdBA.mit 57.5 dBA
=============
Without the safety factor, this is below the
Shooting Range Protection Act Leq(h)
requirement of 63 dBA.
Barrier Wall Attenuation Gun Club Noise to Residential Outdoor Receiver (Person in Front or
Page B -4
Client: City of Eagan
Project: Gun Club Noise Control
Project No.: P2591
October 7, 2019
Prepared By: AAJS
Checked By: AJB__________________________________________________________________________________________
Barrier Wall Attenuation - Gun Club Noise to Residential Outdoor Receiver (Person in Front or
Backyard (no decks), shorter barrier wall):
≔a 900 ft distance between source and barrier
≔hs 6 ft height of source above ground
≔b ⋅20 ft distance between receiver and barrier ≔hby ⋅12 ft height of backyard
above shooting area
≔hr =+hby 6 ft 18 ft height of receiver above ground
≔hb +⋅a tan
⎛
⎜
⎜⎝
tanh
⎛
⎜
⎜⎝
―――
⎛⎝−hr hs⎞⎠
⎛⎝+a b
⎞⎠
⎞
⎟
⎟⎠
⎞
⎟
⎟⎠
hs =hb 17.7 ft minimum barrier height to cut off line of sight
≔H ⋅29 ft =H 29 ft barrier height
built barrier height≔A
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
+a 2 ⎛⎝−H hs⎞⎠
2
=A 900 ft
≔Hb =−H hby 17 ft
≔B
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
+b 2 ⎛⎝−H hr⎞⎠
2
=B 23 ft
≔D
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
+⎛⎝+a b
⎞⎠
2 ⎛⎝−hr hs⎞⎠
2
distance between source and receiver =D 920 ft
≔δ if
⎛
⎜
⎜⎝
,,≥H hb ―――−+A B D
ft
――――−⎛⎝−+A B D
⎞⎠
ft
⎞
⎟
⎟⎠
difference between the defracted path and the direct path
=δ 3.04
≔N ―――⋅⋅2 δ ft
λ
Fressnel Number =TN 0 1 1 3 6 11 22 44
⎡⎣⎤⎦
≔IL
i
if
⎛
⎜
⎜
⎜⎝
,,<N
i
−0.2 0 +⋅20 log
⎛
⎜
⎜
⎜⎝
――――――
‾‾‾‾‾‾⋅⋅2 π N
i
tanh ⎛
⎜⎝
‾‾‾‾‾‾⋅⋅2 π N
i
⎞
⎟⎠
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎟⎠
5
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎟⎠
=TIL 9 12 14 17 20 23 26 29
⎡⎣⎤⎦
≔Abi
if ⎛
⎜⎝,,≥IL
i
24 24 IL
i
⎞
⎟⎠=Ab
9
12
14
17
20
23
24
24
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
Page B -5
Client: City of Eagan
Project: Gun Club Noise Control
Project No.: P2591
October 7, 2019
Prepared By: AAJS
Checked By: AJB__________________________________________________________________________________________
Calculated Sound Level After Barrier Wall Attenuation:
≔Lp.REC.mit =−Lp.REC.dBA Ab
35
39
48
57
55
48
40
27
⎡
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢
⎢⎣
⎤
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥
⎥⎦
≔LdBA.mit ⋅10 log
⎛
⎜
⎜
⎜⎝
∑
=i 1
8
10
―――
Lp.REC.miti
10
⎞
⎟
⎟
⎟⎠
=LdBA.mit 59.9 dBA
=============
This meets the Shooting Range
Protection Act Leq(h) requirement of 63
dBA, but includes a safety factor of ~3
dB for house reflections or increased
shooters/gun shots.
≔LdBA.mit −LdBA.mit 3
=LdBA.mit 56.9 dBA
=============
Without the safety factor, this is below the
Shooting Range Protection Act Leq(h)
requirement of 63 dBA.
Barrier Wall Attenuation Gun Club Noise to Residential Outdoor Receiver (Person in Front or
Page B -6
City Council Workshop
Red Pine Noise Study
March 10, 2020
Background
➢Minnesota Shooting Range Protection Act became effective on May 28,
2005.
•Noise mitigation required on any property within 750 feet of a shooting
range when development or a change in land use is proposed.
•The distance from the south property line of the Red Pine property to
Red Pine Lane ranges from approximately 750 to 850 feet.
➢At the September 3,2019 regular meeting,the City Council approved a
contract with ESI Engineering for the Red Pine Noise Study.
Findings
➢The noise study was completed on October 7,2019.Noise study
findings that are relevant to land use are:
o Residential development on the Red Pine site will require substantial
noise mitigation including berms and barriers.With certain
assumptions regarding potential residential development,the
consultant estimates that noise barriers of 17 to 26 feet would be
required.
o Actual noise mitigation will depend on site grading,elevations,and
style of residential development (i.e.,walkout,1-or 2-stories,rear
deck).
Findings
17’-26’ Mitigation Walls
Findings
o Without noise mitigation,homes would need to be located
approximately 4,200 feet from the shooting pads to meet noise
requirements for residential uses.(The Red Pine property is
approximately 900 feet from shooting pads).
o Industrial uses would require no noise mitigation.If industrial
buildings were developed on the south end of the property,the
buildings would serve as partial or full noise barriers to any
residential uses on the north side of the site.
Policy Issues:
1.Does the City Council have any further question regarding the Red
Pine noise study?
2.The Red Pine site is currently guided RC,Retail Commercial.At the
April 2,2019 regular meeting,the City Council concluded that a retail
commercial development was not realistic.What land use does the
City Council want to consider further?