Attn: Los angeles, ca

Status
Not open for further replies.

ImThatGuy

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 1, 2012
2,402
1,981
California
TIME TO ACT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Monday, February 24, the Arts, Parks, Health, Aging & River Committee is scheduled to vote on the e-cigarette ban. The Los Angeles City Council is expected to vote just a couple days later.

There is no way the ban on e-cigarettes will be stopped unless the Council hears from electronic cigarette users AND those who love them!

Any hope to defeat this legislation requires people like you passionately, but respectfully, telling the councilmembers why you oppose the ban on e-cigarettes. Unfortunately, many elected officials don’t understand e-cigarettes are different than tobacco and they also don’t understand how e-cigarettes are improving lives. That is why it is so important that they hear your voice!

It’s most important that you share your own unique and personal story of how e-cigarettes have improved your life and the lives of those who love you. Below are some things that elected officials need to understand before they vote to ban e-cigarettes. Please let your Council member, and the members of the Arts, Parks, Health, Aging & River Committee, know that –

• The Los Angeles smoking ban was based on science related to the negative health impacts of secondhand tobacco smoke on bystanders, but that there is no scientific health basis to justify a ban on e-cigarettes because, with e-cigarettes, there’s no second-hand tobacco smoke;
• E-Cigarettes contain no tobacco leaf, but rather deliver nicotine without burning tobacco;
• E-Cigarettes don’t normalize smoking, rather, they “de-normalize” it. E-cigarettes appeal to smokers precisely because they are NOT stinky, dangerous tobacco cigarettes.
• The convenience of using these products in places no one can smoke is a large incentive to use electronic cigarettes instead of smoking.
• No one should be forced to breath second-hand tobacco smoke, but this ordinance would do just that to electronic cigarette consumers.

If you live in Los Angeles, the most important thing you can do today is call your specific representative on the City Council, let them know you live in their district and explain why you would like them to do everything they can to oppose the e-cigarette ban. If you have time, go ahead and contact other members of the council so they also understand what is at stake for you when they cast their vote. While e-mails are easier, phone calls will have a larger impact, even if you are simply leaving a message after hours (see contact information for council below).

If you can get to City Hall, in person, your presence will have a great impact on the proceedings. Please consider attending with your whole family to show the councilmembers who they are hurting with this proposal. As you know, smoking didn’t just affect you, but it affected everyone around you. Be sure to ask the council staff at the door for a slip to sign up if you would also like to address the council as a citizen of the city affected by their decision. You can probably expect no more than 2 minutes to speak per person, but you can make a big impact by doing so in person! The hearing is set for 2:00 pm at City Hall on the 10th Floor (follow signs).

Please act today!
Council members highlighted in yellow are members of the Arts, Parks, Health, Aging & River Committee, who will be considering the ordinance on February 24th, 2014 before it goes to the full council for a vote. They should be considered a priority.

District 1 - Gil Cedillo, (213)473-7001, councilmember.cedillo@lacity.org
District 2 - Paul Krekorian, 213-473-7002, councilmember.krekorian@lacity.org
District 3 - Bob Blumenfield, 213-473-7003, councilmember.blumenfield@lacity.org
District 4 - Tom La....e, 213-473-7004, councilmember.La....e@lacity.org
District 5 - Paul Koretz, 213-473-7005, paul.koretz@lacity.org
District 6 - Nury Martinez, 213-473-7006, councilmember.martinez@lacity.org
District 7 - Felipe Fuentez, 213-473-7007, councilmember.fuentes@lacity.org
District 8 - Bernard Parks, 213-473-7008, councilmember.parks@lacity.org
District 9 - Curren Price Jr., 213-473-7009, councilmember.price@lacity.org
District 10 - Herb J. Wesson, 213-473-7010, councilmember.wesson@lacity.org
District 11 - Mike Bonin, 213-473-7011, councilmember.bonin@lacity.org
District 12 - Mitch Englander, 213-473-7012, councilmember.englander@lacity.org
District 13 - Mitch O’Farrell (SPONSOR), 213-473-7013, councilmember.ofarrell@lacity.org
District 14 - Jose Huizar, (213) 473-7014, councilmember.huizar@lacity.org
District 15 - Joe Buscaino, 213-473-7015, councildistrict15@lacity.org

Comma delimited email list FOR SENDING TO ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS
councilmember.cedillo@lacity.org, councilmember.krekorian@lacity.org,
councilmember.blumenfield@lacity.org, councilmember.la....e@lacity.org,paul.koretz@lacity.org,
councilmember.martinez@lacity.org, councilmember.fuentes@lacity.org,
councilmember.parks@lacity.org, councilmember.price@lacity.org,
councilmember.wesson@lacity.org,councilmember.bonin@lacity.org, councilmember.englander@lacity.org,
councilmember.ofarrell@lacity.org, councilmember.huizar@lacity.org, councildistrict15@lacity.org
 

MetalMaster75

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2014
193
350
Toluca Lake, CA
I am a Los Angeles resident. I did email and left messages to all the council members on the Arts, Parks, Health, Aging & River Committee, and to my district's council. So far I've received two email acknowledgements that my messages were received. This is going to be tough, as not many vapers I've talk to locally are aware of this proposed ban, or plainly don't care.
As a reminder, the time and place for the committee meeting:
SPECIAL - ARTS, PARKS, HEALTH, AGING AND RIVER COMMITTEE
Monday, February 24, 2014
John Ferraro Council Chamber - Room 340, City Hall - 1:30 PM
200 NORTH SPRING STREET, LOS ANGELES, CA 90012
Please plan on attending if possible.

PS. Apparently Fr. Jack Kearney will attend. (source: CASAA blog comment).
 
Last edited:

soba1

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
May 27, 2013
2,257
1,949
64
Van Nuys Ca., USA
I am a Los Angeles resident. I did email and left messages to all the council members on the Arts, Parks, Health, Aging & River Committee, and to my district's council. So far I've received two email acknowledgements that my messages were received. This is going to be tough, as not many vapers I've talk to locally are aware of this proposed ban, or plainly don't care.
As a reminder, the time and place for the committee meeting:
SPECIAL - ARTS, PARKS, HEALTH, AGING AND RIVER COMMITTEE
Monday, February 24, 2014
John Ferraro Council Chamber - Room 340, City Hall - 1:30 PM
200 NORTH SPRING STREET, LOS ANGELES, CA 90012
Please plan on attending if possible.

PS. Apparently Fr. Jack Kearney will attend. (source: CASAA blog comment).

I did hear an ad this morning on my way in on KNX1070 this moring.
I myself will be unable to attend this one. People will show count on it.
I will ne sending emails out for sure. Thanks
 

MetalMaster75

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2014
193
350
Toluca Lake, CA
Unfortunately... the proposal is going forward, expecting a full city council vote into ordinance, next week.
Vapers of Los Angeles: write or call your local district council-member to express your opinion and disapproval!
We vote them in - we can vote them out.

L.A. council panel backs limits on e-cigarettes - latimes.com
 

navigator2011

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 6, 2013
742
1,522
Fullerton, CA, USA
Unfortunately... the proposal is going forward, expecting a full city council vote into ordinance, next week.
Vapers of Los Angeles: write or call your local district council-member to express your opinion and disapproval!
We vote them in - we can vote them out.

L.A. council panel backs limits on e-cigarettes - latimes.com

Yeah, you just gotta love a closing statement like this:

"Even if it were determined later on that the emissions from e-cigarettes aren't dangerous to a bystander in an outside environment, the existence of devices like this … in public places does threaten to renormalize the behavior of smoking," ...

Appearances outweigh facts and substance.
 

soba1

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
May 27, 2013
2,257
1,949
64
Van Nuys Ca., USA
Unfortunately... the proposal is going forward, expecting a full city council vote into ordinance, next week.
Vapers of Los Angeles: write or call your local district council-member to express your opinion and disapproval!
We vote them in - we can vote them out.

L.A. council panel backs limits on e-cigarettes - latimes.com

District 1 - Gil Cedillo, (213)473-7001, councilmember.cedillo@lacity.org
District 2 - Paul Krekorian, 213-473-7002, councilmember.krekorian@lacity.org
District 3 - Bob Blumenfield, 213-473-7003, councilmember.blumenfield@lacity.org
District 4 - Tom La....e, 213-473-7004, councilmember.La....e@lacity.org
District 5 - Paul Koretz, 213-473-7005, paul.koretz@lacity.org
District 6 - Nury Martinez, 213-473-7006, councilmember.martinez@lacity.org
District 7 - Felipe Fuentez, 213-473-7007, councilmember.fuentes@lacity.org
District 8 - Bernard Parks, 213-473-7008, councilmember.parks@lacity.org
District 9 - Curren Price Jr., 213-473-7009, councilmember.price@lacity.org
District 10 - Herb J. Wesson, 213-473-7010, councilmember.wesson@lacity.org
District 11 - Mike Bonin, 213-473-7011, councilmember.bonin@lacity.org
District 12 - Mitch Englander, 213-473-7012, councilmember.englander@lacity.org
District 13 - Mitch O’Farrell (SPONSOR), 213-473-7013, councilmember.ofarrell@lacity.org
District 14 - Jose Huizar, (213) 473-7014, councilmember.huizar@lacity.org
District 15 - Joe Buscaino, 213-473-7015, councildistrict15@lacity.org
 

MetalMaster75

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2014
193
350
Toluca Lake, CA
Well, looks like this is a done deal. Unfortunately, I think it will be voted into ordinance.
The proposal is scheduled for the citywide council meeting on Tuesday, March 4, 2014.

I receive no answers to any of my emails, nor any call back to the numerous voice-mails left.
If this passes (and it will), we are allowing low rank local so-called politicians to re-write and interpret words as they see fit.
As per Mike Feuer (Los Angeles City Attorney), the e-cigarette is an "Electronic Smoking Device", despite the fact that smoke, per se, is a result of combustion, and the fact that the word "e-cigarette" was already defined.

(c/p from dictionary):
e-cig·a·rette
[ee-sig-uh-ret]
noun
a device used to simulate the experience of smoking, having a cartridge with a heater that vaporizes liquid nicotine instead of burning tobacco.
Also called electronic cigarette.

Origin:
2005–10; e-2 (electronic) + cigarette


With all due respect to Mr. Feuer and the Los Angeles City Council, words and meanings are NOT to be re-defined based on personal vendetta and corruption!

It seems that the proposal will be amended, per request to the city attorney, as to include parallel exemptions for the use of electronic smoking devices at the B&M vaping stores/lounges and for theatrical production sites. These are similar to the exemptions existing for the smoking of tobacco.

The study in the following link was submitted to the city, however, mostly ignored.
The study was put together by American Council on Science and Health in 2013. A very good read.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/195347257/Nicotine-and-Health
 
Last edited:

Coelli

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 5, 2014
1,389
3,077
Los Angeles, CA
Wrote this email to Fuentes today:

Dear Mr. Fuentes,

I am a member of your district. I live in Sunland-Tujunga and voted for you. I have written to you once before on this topic with no response, not even automated. Please read this email, don't just ignore it!

I have been voting a straight blue ticket, but I am dismayed that the Democratic party at all levels of government are the ones introducing and supporting legislation that's not backed by science. This is one of the first times I find myself breaking with the party on a very fundamental level and it will influence my vote going forward if this trend continues. 480,000 deaths every year from tobacco vs. NONE from e-cigarettes. How is this even a question? Why are we proposing such strict limits on something that is saving people's lives?

I IMPLORE you to vote against the current e-cig ban proposal in Los Angeles. Vaporizers have helped thousands upon thousands of people quit smoking, sometimes overnight after several decades of smoking cigarettes. As just one example I point you to a thread on electronic-cigarette-forum.com where someone asks if anyone has quit smoking through the use of vaporizers and the responses pour in. It will only take a moment of your time: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...1-does-e-cig-really-help-get-rid-smoking.html.

My 80 year old mother has smoked for 65 years and has now taken up vaping as an alternative. I am ecstatic that her life might be extended by just a few years, since our time together is running short.

The current reasoning that e-cigarette use is on the rise with children and therefore must be banned looks great on paper but falls down when the data is actually looked at. Smoking rates have been declining overall in children over the past several years, not rising, yet vaping is becoming more and more common. If vaping is a gateway to smoking, why aren't the smoking rates rising proportionally with e-cigarette use?

Here are two more recent peer-reviewed studies about the risks and benefits of vaporizers:
Article: New study finds no health concerns in e-cig vapor | American Council on Science and Health (ACSH)
Study: http://publichealth.drexel.edu/~/media/Files/publichealth/ms08.pdf

Article:"Nicotine absorption from electronic cigarettes": Smoking Cessation Community - Support Group
Study: http://www.escardio.org/about/press...nts/presentations/konstantinos-farsalinos.pdf

Please don't make "vapers" stand outside with the smokers, having to breathe second-hand smoke (that now seems noxious) and smell like smoke for hours afterward - some of the very reasons they quit smoking in the first place. Don't drive them back to tobacco. There is no evidence from any reputable studies done in the past few years that can show any danger from vaping or from "secondhand vapor." Most "evidence" is based on a 5-year old FDA study that used Chinese equipment that's no longer in production. We've come a long way since then, and even our former Surgeon General Richard Carmona is now backing e-cigarettes. While I (and most vapers) can understand restaurants not wanting to allow vaping indoors, why are bars and nightclubs being included? Why are outdoor areas being included? Vaporizers are not smoking! There's no smoke!

E-liquids only have 4 ingredients. Propylene glycol (FDA approved and GRAS)), vegetable glycerin (FDA approved and GRAS), nicotine, and flavorings (FDA approved and GRAS). The fear-mongering in the media is astonishing. Tobacco companies are panicking as their revenue drops.

Please vote against this proposal. It is far too broad and sweeping and is based on fear, not science. That shouldn't be how our laws work.

Thank you for your consideration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread