Iowa City looks to finalize tobacco zoning code changes

IOWA CITY — The Iowa City Council is expected to finalize a tobacco zoning code change next month that would set limits on the number of tobacco retailers that can operate in one area.

The proposed changes to Iowa City’s zoning code as it relates to tobacco retailers are modeled after the city’s alcohol zoning policy.

Venues selling alcohol for on-premises consumption — bars or restaurants — must have a 500-foot separation from each other. Businesses selling alcohol for consumption off premises must be separated by 1,000 feet.

Under the proposed changes, tobacco and vape shops would not be allowed within 500 feet of a school or university/college property. Additionally, a 500-foot separation would be required between retailers selling tobacco.

Any retailer with an existing permit would be allowed to continue operating in its current location even if it violates the new zoning code. Retailers with grandfather rights would be allowed a 60-day permit lapse, meaning if they renewed their license within 60 days of its expiration, they could retain grandfather rights.

City staff have noted that a 500-foot separation between retailers would likely bar any new tobacco retailers in the downtown area.

The ordinance has passed unanimously at its first two readings, the final reading will take place at city council’s next meeting Dec. 10.

The ordinance is part of city council’s efforts to curb the increased presence of tobacco retailers in the city, specifically the downtown area. The city imposed a moratorium on new tobacco permits in May. The moratorium is set to expire at the end of the calendar year.

City council goes back and forth on permit lapse allowance

While the council has unanimously been in favor of parts of the ordinance, the length of time grandfather rights should be protected in the event tobacco sales cease at a location has been up for debate.

The original ordinance calls for grandfather rights to be revoked 90 days after tobacco sales cease.

“This situation most often comes up when a business closes its doors but does not relinquish their tobacco permit,” City Manager Geoff Fruin said in an email. “For example, a gas station or retailer with an active permit may close their business, but not take the required steps to formally terminate their permit. In this situation, they would have an active permit but sales would be ceased when the business closes.”

At their Oct. 1 meeting, some city council members said they didn’t think 90 days was long enough and voted to change the permit lapse allowance to one year. The vote passed 3-2 with council members Laura Bergus and Andrew Dunn absent.

Later, at a meeting on Oct. 15, the council decided in a 5-2 vote to change the permit lapse allowance back to 90 days.

Kratom ban, tobacco permit cap also considered by council

In addition to the tobacco zoning code, the council had considered setting a cap on the number of tobacco permits allowed in the city. It also considered banning kratom, an herbal substance commonly found in pill form that can produce stimulant or sedative effects depending on its dosage.

The council decided to not move forward with the tobacco permit cap before officially voting on it, as there were concerns about a cap’s efficacy and the logistics of enforcing it.

The debate over whether to ban kratom divided council for weeks. The ban passed two readings before the council decided to indefinitely defer a vote on the proposed ban, instead opting to add kratom regulation to a list of state legislative priorities.

Mayor Bruce Teague, who voted in favor of the ban, proposed deferring the third reading of the ordinance. He said council members for and against the ban made relevant points for their position, and that made it difficult to decide whether or not to support a ban.

Under proposed amendments, it would be unlawful to sell any kratom product in Iowa City. The ordinance also would ban the advertising or distribution of any kratom product either directly or indirectly. Violating the ordinance would be considered a simple misdemeanor or a municipal infraction, with a civil penalty of $750 for a first offense, and $1,000 for additional offenses.

It still would be legal to possess and consume kratom within city limits.

Comments: megan.woolard@thegazette.com