January 5 2015 Complete Agenda

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR SESSION
Monday, January 5, 2015 – 6:00 PM

A closed session is scheduled from 5:00 – 6:00 p.m. to discuss legal and collective bargaining matters.

AGENDA

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. PRAYER AND PLEDGE

3. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION – Monday, January 5 – 5:00 – 6:00 p.m.

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Organizational Meeting dated November 6, 2014
B. Regular Session #22 dated December 15, 2014

5. ITEMS PRESENTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
A. Standing Committee Report ‐ Transportation Committee ‐ December 17, 2014
B. Standing Committee Draft Agendas

6. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Private Event Approval Request for OC Half Marathon – May 1‐2, 2015
B. Private Event Approval Request for Ride for the Feast – May 2, 2015

7. MISCELLEANEOUS REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS

9. ITEMS REFERRED TO AND PRESENTATIONS FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF
A. Smoking on the Beach and Boardwalk Policy Discussion presented by City Manager
B. 2014 Strategic Plan ‐ Action Agenda Update presented by City Manager

10. ITEMS REFERRED TO AND PRESENTATIONS FROM THE CITY SOLICITOR
A. First Reading – Ordinance to Amend Section 58, Entitled Offenses and Miscellaneous
Provisions (Trespass Enforcement Authorization Program signs purchased by the participant
will be placed by the participant not the city)

11. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Any person who may wish to speak on any matter at the Regular Session may be heard during
Comments from the Public for a period of five (5) minutes or such time as may be deemed appropriate
by the Council President. Anyone wishing to be heard shall state their name, address and the subject
on which he or she wishes to speak.

12. COMMENTS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
A. Review of tentative work session agenda for Tuesday, January 13, 2015

13. COMMENTS FROM THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

14. ADJOURN

REGULAR SESSION -MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
MONDAY, JANUARY 5, 2015
3 – Report on Closed Session – Monday, January 5, 2015

5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. - Legal and Collective Bargaining
Matters
NOTICE OF CLOSED SESSION OF MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL OF OCEAN CITY
DATE AND TIME: Monday, January 5, 2015 5:00 p.m.

PLACE: City Hall
SUBJECT: Legal and Collective Bargaining Matters
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
OTHER: FOR:
AGAINST:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
AUTHORITY: State Government Article: Section 10-508(a) Annotated Code of Maryland

PURPOSES:
1. To discuss:
(i) the appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline, demotion,
compensation, removal, resignation or performance evaluation of
appointees, employees or officials over whom it has jurisdiction; or
(ii) any other personnel matter that affects one or more specific individuals;
2. To protect the privacy or reputation of individuals with respect to a matter that is
not related to public business
3. To consider the acquisition of real property for the public purpose and matters
directly related thereto;
4. Consider a matter that concerns the proposal for a business or industrial
organization to locate, expand or locate in the state;
5. Consider the investment of public funds;
6. Consider the marketing of public securities;
X 7. Consult with counsel to obtain legal advice;
8. Consult with staff, consultants or other individuals about pending or potential
litigations;
9. Conduct collective bargaining negotiations or consider matters that relate to the
X
negotiations;
10. Discuss public security if the public body determines that public discussion
would constitute a risk to the public or public security, including;
a) the deployment of fire and police services and staff; and
b) the development and implementation of emergency plans
11. Prepare, administer or grade a scholastic, licensing or qualifying examination;
12. Conduct or discuss an investigative proceeding on actual or possible criminal
conduct;
13. Comply with a specific constitutional, statutory or judicially imposed
requirement that prevents public disclosures about a particular proceeding or
matter; or
14. Before a contract is awarded or bids are opened, discuss a matter directly related
to a negotiation strategy or the contents of a bid or proposal, if public discussion
or disclosure would adversely impact the ability of the public body to participate
in the competitive bidding or proposal process
REPORT OF CLOSED SESSION
OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF OCEAN CITY
Prior to this open session of the Mayor and City Council being held on Monday,
January 5, 2015, a closed session was held on Monday, January 5, 2015 at 5:00
p.m. The following is a report of the closed session.
1. A statement of the time, place, and purpose of the closed session is attached.
2. A record of the vote of each member as to closing the session is attached.
3. A citation of the authority under the law for closing the session is attached.
4. (a) Topics of Discussion: Legal and Collective Bargaining Matters
(b) Persons present:
Mayor Richard Meehan

City Manager David Recor
Council President Lloyd Martin
Council Secretary Mary Knight
Council Members Doug Cymek; Dennis Dare; Wayne Hartman; Matt James;
and Tony DeLuca
City Solicitor Guy Ayres
Miles and Stockbridge Counsel Marc Sloane
Management Advisory Group Vice President David Lookingbill
Human Resource Director Wayne Evans
Executive Office Associate Diana Chavis
Action(s) taken:
Motion to close meeting:
Time:
H:\Wpdoc\closedsess.wpd
4 – APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Organizational Meeting dated November 6, 2014

B. Regular Session #22 dated December 15, 2014
5 – ITEMS PRESENTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY

COUNCIL
A. Standing Committee Report – Transportation

Committee – December 17, 2014
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
MEEETING MINUTES
December 17, 2014
1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 10:12 am in the Public Works Administration
Conference Room. Present were Councilmember Mary Knight, Councilmember Tony DeLuca, City
Manager David Recor, Councilmember Dennis Dare, Mayor Rick Meehan, George Thornes, Jim Parsons,
Hal Adkins, Scott Harner, Kevin Kirstein, Gene Cofield, Zack Hoopes and Joanne Shriner

2. Review of Pedestrian Safety Campaign: Scott Harner gave a review of Pedestrian Safety Campaign
which was started in 2011.
 SHA had Wallace and Montgomery perform a study from 2008 – 2012
 Target area Convention Center Drive to 62nd Street
 Accidents since 2008 – 2012
 41 Total accidents
 11 bicycle accidents
 22 alcohol related accidents
 27 night time accidents
 1 Fatality since May 2012
 Results for 2013 100% reduction in fatalities and pedestrian accidents
 2014 – No statistically significant change – SHA has a zero death campaign which
we have achieved in 2013 and 2014
 Councilmember Tony DeLuca requested the number of bicycle accidents in 2013
and 2014; win/win scenario would be to improve pedestrian safety without
affecting traffic flow.

3. Near‐Term Improvement Recommendations from SHA 2012 Study: The following near‐term
recommended improvements have been implemented:
 Speed reduction to 35 mph – implemented November 1, 2014 from 40 mph to 35
mph
 Bus stop relocation – completed by Public Works staff, as feasible
 Sidewalk markings – completed – installation of pavement markings with crosswalk
warning. Addressing additional advanced crosswalk warning site at 101st St., near
Clarion
 Adjust Signal timing – completed. SHA has adjusted pedestrian recall on numerous
locations from 10 pm through 3 am.

4. Mid‐Term Improvement Recommendations from SHA 2012 Study: The following mid‐term
recommended improvements have not been implemented to date:
 Median Barrier – install an ornamental safety fence along the median – no
addressed to date.
 Pedestrian Actuated Signal – install three pedestrian actuated signals that are
warranted due to pedestrian volumes. Advanced crosswalk warnings have been
installed at 49th Street, 54th Street, and an additional location at 101st near Clarion
being addressed now. Light needs to be added to 49th street advanced crosswalk
warning like the one at 54th street for better visibility.
 Median Turn Downs – per Terry McGean all pedestrian median turn downs have
been removed; emergency vehicle median turn downs were not removed and will
not be removed

5. Long‐Term Improvement Recommendations from SHA 2012 Study: The following are the long‐term
recommended improvements that have not yet been implemented.
 Road Diet Options Discussed
 Option A ‐ remove outside travel lane in each direction leaving two travel
lanes, a bus lane/right turn lane, and a widened sidewalk in each direction.
 Option B – remove bus lane in each direction, leaving three travel lanes in
each direction with the bus using a travel lane
 ADA – Update facilities to ADA requirements

6. Transportation Committee Pros and Cons to Road Diet:
 Hal Adkins – current bus lane is 14 feet and 12 feet in some areas.
 Hal Adkins – to install a separate bicycle lane and have that lane (design) compliant,
the lane would need to be a minimum of 5 feet. This would make the bus lane
insufficient for the buses to use if the current 14 feet lanes were reduced by 5 feet.
 Would bus lane be a bus through lane or a right turn lane – Hal Adkins the bus lane
would have to be a right turn lane and not a through lane.
 Could funds be allocated from the 2.4 million allocated for Road Diet Design and
Engineering to complete mid‐term improvement not yet addressed.
 Implementing any option of the Road Diet has the potential of significantly
impacting traffic flow

7. Transportation Committee Recommendations:
 Put a hold on spending for design and engineering of Road Diet
 Design and build median barrier and address median lighting on all of Coastal
Highway not just the study area from Convention Center Drive to 62nd Street.
 Add a 3rd pedestrian signal if needed at 42nd Street

Councilmember Mary Knight made motion to accept recommendations. Motion was seconded by
Councilmember Tony DeLuca. These recommendations will be presented to Mayor and City Council for
approval. Kevin Kirstein is going to notify SHA of our intended recommendations at meeting with SHA
on Dec. 18, 2014, and let them know that the recommendations will be presented to Mayor and City
Council. The vote to accept the recommendations by Committee was unanimous. Amendment to
recommendation ‐ continue to look into comprehensive signal enhancements. Councilmember Mary
Knight motioned to accept amendment to recommendation; seconded by Councilmember Dennis Dare.

8. Other Business: Councilmember Knight – Coastal Highway is not very bicycle friendly.
 Campaign to address alternative bicycle routes (i.e., side streets and alleys)
 Mayor Meehan – get the GIS Dept. to map alternative bike routes using side street
and alleys and make readily available to public
 Increase knowledge of bike safety with foreign students
 Scott Harner informed the committee that the Walk Smart Campaign is going to
start focusing on bicycle safety as well as pedestrian safety. Wrong Way biking
signs will be installed on back side of no parking signs so when bicyclists are going
the wrong way they will see signs. Also implementing Bike Smart Campaign
focusing on obeying traffic lights when bicycling, riding the correct way on the road
and being able to hear; not wearing ear buds or headphones.

9. Adjournment: Councilmember Mary Knight made motion to adjourn meeting, seconded by
Councilmember Dennis Dare meeting adjourned at 11:56 am. The next meeting will be held on January
6, 2014 at 9:00 a.m. in Public Works Administration Conference Room.

5 – ITEMS PRESENTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY

COUNCIL
B. Standing Committee Draft Agendas
Note: There is no scheduled Police Commission open session in January.

OCEAN CITY, MARYLAND
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Public Works Conference Room ‐ 9:00 a.m.
Tuesday, January 6, 2015

DRAFT AGENDA

(1) Presentation by Nextbus on a ” Bus Arrival Prediction System” and associated iOS App
development

(2) Discussion on Facility Rehabilitation needs for both the West Ocean City Park N Ride
Transit Center and the North End Transit Center at 144th Street, both relative to funding
needs

(3) Review of December 18 meeting with United Work and Travel representatives

(4) Adjourn

Tourism Commission Meeting
Draft Agenda
Monday, January 12, 3 p.m.
Room 214, Convention Center

1) Approval of minutes: November 10, 2014
2) Booking accommodations direct on ococean
3) Proposal to expand charter bus permits from seasonal to year‐round
4) Organizational reports

Chamber of Commerce
Economic Development Committee
HMRA
OCDC
MD Tourism Development Board
Dept. of Tourism
Convention Center
Special Events

OCEAN CITY, MARYLAND
RECREATION & PARKS COMMITTEE
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
4:00 P.M.
Northside Park Community Room
DRAFT AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Presentation from Robert Holland on OC Beach Baseball
3. Update on Beach Play Equipment
4. Update on NSP SUP Rental Franchise
5. Private Event Application review
6. Other Business

7. Closed Session
8. Adjournment
Susan/Word/Rec & Parks ComPLWWHH Meeting Agenda 1/1/1

6. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Private Event Approval Request for OC Half Marathon

May 1-2, 2015
TOWN OF
The White Marlin Capital of the World
Agenda Item # 6A
Council Meeting January 5, 2015
TO: The Honorable Mayor, Council President and Members of Council

THRU: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager
FROM: Lisa A. Mitchell, Private Event Coordinator
RE: OC Half Marathon 2015
DATE: December 23, 2014
ISSUE(S): Chris Klebe for OC Tri-Running would like to hold the OC Half
Marathon, 5K, and Post-Race Party on Saturday, May 2 from 7:00
a.m. until 2:00 p.m.
SUMMARY: The Marathon begins on Assateague Island at 7:00 a.m., enters

Ocean City via the Route 50 bridge, bears right onto Philadelphia
Avenue and then right onto Baltimore Avenue, continuing into the
Inlet Lot, where the finish line is located.
The 5K begins in the Inlet Lot at 7:00 a.m. and heads south to the
Inlet toll gates, turns right onto South 2nd Street, and then right
onto Baltimore Avenue. Participants turn right onto Worcester
Street, then left onto the Boardwalk. Participants continue on the
Boardwalk to 14th Street, turn around and run south on the
Boardwalk, then onto the concrete lane at 4th Street, continuing
around the pier to the finish line in the Inlet Lot.
The Post-Race party and awards ceremony takes place within the
Springfest entertainment tent from 9:30 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. It
will also be used for registration/packet pickup on Friday, May 1,
2015. A portion of the food tent is being used as a medical area.
Public Works will provide a completed entertainment and food tent,

judge’s stand, large bleachers, race route set-up, 50 barricades,
cones, open bathrooms, remove flex posts and open gate at booth
#4. OC Police Department will create a special order, detailing
officers to this event.
The applicant is aware of and agrees to the new fee structure.
FISCAL IMPACT: Potential positive economic impact from lodging, food and
beverage, recreation and other incidental expenditures related to
this event.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the event as presented.

1st Class Resort and Tourist Destination
ALTERNATIVES: No staff alternatives suggested.

RESPONSIBLE STAFF: Lisa Mitchell, Private Event Coordinator
COORDINATED WITH: All appropriate departmental staff has reviewed and the event has
been coordinated with Public Works and the OCPD.
ATTACHMENT(S): 1) May 2015 Calendar

2) Cover Sheet
3) Private Event Application
4) Event Layout
P.O. BOX 158 ● OCEAN CITY, MARYLAND ● 21843-0158 City Hall – (410) 289-8221 ● FAX – (410) 289-8703
May
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2
PE – Showell Walk - PE – Knights of Columbus
TENTATIVE Procession
PE – ½ Marathon –
TENTATIVE
PE – KGBA TENTATIVE
PE - Ride for the Feast -
TENTATIVE
PE - Crab Soup Cook-off –
TENTATIVE
TENTATIVE
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
PE – Showell Walk Rain SE - Springfest SE - Springfest SE - Springfest
Date - TENTATIVE
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
SE - Springfest PE - Cruisin OC PE - Cruisin OC PE - Cruisin OC
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
PE - Cruisin OC PE – KGBA - TENTATIVE
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
PE - Ravens’ Parade
31
2015
Ocean City Special Events – Private Events
Name of Event: OC Half Marathon Running Festival New Event: No
Date of Event: May 1-2, 2015
Date Application Received: September 3, 2014 Application Fee Paid: Yes
Date Returned from All Departments: November 17, 2014 Private Event Fees: $600.00
Town Asset & Support Fee: $3,054.80
Tent Rental: $2,500.00
Total Fees to Be Paid to Town: $6,154.80
Things to Note:
 This event consists of two (2) events. The largest is the half marathon. The second run is a 5K on the
Boardwalk.
 The applicant requests to have the post-race party in the Inlet Lot, utilizing the entertainment tent for
Springfest.
 The applicant requests to use a portion of the food tent as a medical area for the runners.
 Applicant shall have local DJs along the course, playing music.
 Applicant shall have live entertainment, food and drinks at the post-race party and awards ceremony, under
the tent.
 Applicant requests to set-up in the entertainment tent Thursday, April 30 for registration, packet pickup and
the Sports Expo.
 Applicant requests set-up the finish line area and post-race party Friday, May 1 and Saturday, May 2.
Supplies include chairs, tables, bike racks, sound system and finish chute.
 Applicant requests assistance from Department of Public Works and the OCPD for course design and
control.
 Applicant requests the following from the Department of Public Works: band stand, 200 bike racks, 50
barricades and bleachers.
 Applicant requests 30 Inlet Lot parking passes for event volunteers.
 Applicant requests bathrooms in the Inlet Lot vicinity be open by 5 am.
 A portion of the proceeds shall go to Worcester Youth and Family of Berlin.
 There shall be a cash prize for 1st, 2nd and 3rd place male/female. There shall also be age group awards
given for the half marathon and 5K. Every runner in the half marathon shall receive a finisher medal.
 Applicant requests to serve beer only at the post-race party in the Inlet Lot.
 Expected number of participants is 4,500-5,000.
 Expected number of spectators is 6,500.
Comments from Department Representatives:

 OCPD – Shall create a special order detailing officers to the 2015 event. 2014 was the first year of the
“reversed course” and we experienced notable traffic delays at Philadelphia Avenue and North Division
Street, and also at Baltimore Avenue and North Division Street. Propose a new plan to get participants into
town and into the Inlet Lot by having the participants go south upon exiting the bridge and enter the Inlet
via Philadelphia Avenue, although this will increase manpower needs by Police. This would also mean
vehicles would not be able to enter the Inlet Lot after the start of the race as participants near Ocean City.
This “reverse course” can be done, but requires some adjustments from 2014.
 PUBLIC WORKS – Entertainment tent shall be completed by April 30; Food tent shall be completed by
May 1; Deliver, set-up and remove the Judges’ Stand and large bleachers; Provide 200 pieces of special
event fencing; Set-up and remove race route from Route 50 bridge to Inlet Lot; Provide 50 barricades;
Provide cones for race route; Open bathrooms at Worcester St. comfort station by 5 am; Remove flex posts
and open gate at booth #4; Provide 30 parking passes. This has been an ongoing event with the Town for
many years and the Department has no issues granting approval.
 RISK MANAGEMENT –Insurance Certificate to be provided prior to the event. Hold harmless clause
signed. Most races have the participants sign a waiver as well.
 FIRE MARSHAL – A meeting was held with the applicant to discuss first aid and medical needs. It is
understood that placement of the first aid station will be located at the finish line, in proximity of or within
the food tent. It is extremely important that the applicant also provide sufficient staff to maintain crowd
control at the finish line and that the staff is instructed to keep the runners moving after they cross the finish
line. The movement of the runners will permit access to those in need of medical treatment, should the
occasion arise and allow the runners who are capable to clearly make it to the first aid station. The
applicant is responsible for obtaining approved medical resources that are capable of transporting victims to
the local medical facilities. The EMS services must be approved by the State of Maryland. The applicant
must contact Chief Barton 30 days and again 14 days prior to the event, providing the amount of
participants in the race. A site map must be provided of the Inlet Lot.
 REC. & PARKS, EMERGENCY SERVICES, TRANSPORTATION, OCCC, OCBP and TOURISM – No
comments, concerns or costs.
Date on Council Agenda: January 5, 2015

Event Approved or Denied:
Other:
6. CONSENT AGENDA
B. Private Event Approval Request for Ride for the Feast –

May 2, 2015
TOWN OF
Agenda Item # 6B

FROM: Lisa A. Mitchell, Private Event Coordinator
RE: Ride for the Feast 2015
ISSUE(S): Samantha Flottemesch for Moveable Feast would like to hold the
event, Ride for the Feast, on the Boardwalk, 3rd Street,
Philadelphia Avenue and Route 50 on Saturday, May 10, 2015 from
7:00 a.m. until 7:45 a.m.
SUMMARY: Beginning at 7:30 a.m. on the Boardwalk at 3rd Street,

approximately 250 cyclists will ride onto 3rd Street, turn left onto
Philadelphia Avenue, turn right onto Route 50, and then left onto
Route 611. All participants shall obey all traffic and cycling laws.
Public Works shall provide parking spaces for three (3) 24-foot
trucks, one (1) 14-foot truck and four (4) cars. Ocean City Police
shall provide a police escort beginning at 3rd Street and continuing
until the cyclists turn onto Route 611.
The applicant is aware of and agrees to the new fee structure.
FISCAL IMPACT: Potential positive economic impact from lodging, food and
beverage, recreation and other incidental expenditures related to
this event.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the event as presented.

1st Class Resort & Tourist Destination
ALTERNATIVES: No staff alternatives suggested.
RESPONSIBLE STAFF: Lisa Mitchell, Private Event Coordinator
COORDINATED WITH: All appropriate departmental staff has reviewed and the event has
been coordinated with Public Works and the OCPD.
ATTACHMENT(S): 1) May 2015 Calendar

2) Cover Sheet
3) Private Event Application
4) Event Layout
May
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2
PE – Showell Walk - PE – Knights of Columbus
TENTATIVE Procession
PE – ½ Marathon –
TENTATIVE
PE – KGBA TENTATIVE
TENTATIVE
PE - Crab Soup Cook-off –
TENTATIVE
TENTATIVE
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
PE – Showell Walk Rain SE - Springfest SE - Springfest SE - Springfest
Date - TENTATIVE
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
SE - Springfest PE - Cruisin OC PE - Cruisin OC PE - Cruisin OC
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
PE - Cruisin OC PE – KGBA - TENTATIVE
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
PE - Ravens’ Parade
31
2015
Ocean City Private Events
Name of Event: Ride for the Feast New Event: No
Date of Event: Saturday, May 2, 2015
Date Application Received: October 20, 2014 Application Fee Paid: Yes
Date Returned from All Departments: November 17, 2014 Total Cost to Town: No foreseeable costs
Total Fees Paid to Town: $275.00
Things to Note:
 This event is a two (2) day, 140-mile bike ride from Ocean City, MD to Baltimore City to benefit Moveable Feast.
The event begins on Saturday, May 10, 2014 at 7:00 am at 3rd Street and the Boardwalk. At 7:30 am, from the
Boardwalk, the cyclists ride onto 3rd Street, turn left onto Philadelphia Avenue, turn right onto Route 50, and then turn
left onto Route 611.
 Cyclists obey all traffic and cycling laws.
 All loading and unloading takes place at the Atlantic United Methodist Church.
 Applicant requests parking for three (3) 24-foot trucks, one (1) 14-foot truck and four (4) mid-size cars. Request this
parking at a municipal lot or the West Ocean City Park ‘n Ride.
 Applicant requests a police escort for the ride, beginning at 3rd Street and the Boardwalk and continuing until cyclists
turn onto Route 611.
 Expected number of riders is 250, with 100 volunteers.
 Sponsors of the event are Johns Hopkins Medicine, Race Pace Bicycles, Joe’s Bike Show, Ober Kaler, HMS
Insurance and Silberstein Insurance Group.
Comments from Department Representatives:

 PUBLIC WORKS – Will provide parking spaces for three (3) 24-foot trucks, one (1) 14-foot truck and four (4) cars.
The 4th Street Lot is an option, and can post if the organizer wants. If not, the Park ‘n Ride is open with no issues.
 TRANSPORTATION – Special event parking permits are required for overnight parking of all oversized vehicles at
the West Ocean City Park ‘n Ride location.
 OCPD – Assign officers to assist with traffic control and facilitate the event as it exits Ocean City. This can be
accomplished from shift level, with no officers being brought in for overtime.
 RISK MANAGEMENT – Insurance Certificate to be obtained and submitted prior to the event. Hold harmless
agreement signed.
 TOURISM, RECREATION & PARKS, OCBP, FIRE MARSHAL, and EMERGENCY SERVICES, OCCC – No
comments, concerns or costs.
Date on Council Agenda: January 5, 2015

Event Approved or Denied:
Other:
9– ITEMS REFERRED TO AND PRESENTATIONS FROM

THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF
A. Smoking on the Beach and Boardwalk Policy Discussion

presented by City Manager
02516 TOWN OF

Agenda Item # 9A

FROM: Blaine Smith, Assistant Director & Robert Nelson, Planner, Planning & Community
Development
RE: Smoking on the Beach and Boardwalk Policy Discussion
ISSUE(S): To consider restricting smoking to designated areas on the beach

and adjacent to the Boardwalk.
SUMMARY: Recognized as a Top Priority in the 2014 Strategic Plan Policy

Agenda, the Mayor and City Council initially discussed this issue on
the April 29, 2014, Work Session agenda. At that time, the Mayor
and City Council voted 5-2 to restrict smoking on the beach and
Boardwalk effective May 1, 2015. The Mayor and Council directed
staff to prepare an Implementation Plan and prepare for further
discussion prior to September 2014.
After forming an internal Smoking Policy Committee comprised of

a number of departments following the April 2014 Mayor and
Council discussion, staff facilitated further discussion regarding
beach and Boardwalk smoking restrictions on the August 26 Mayor
and City Council Work Session agenda. At that time, the Mayor
and City Council voted 4-3 to restrict smoking to designated areas
on the beach and adjacent to the Boardwalk effective May 1, 2015.
The Mayor and Council requested that staff prepare a map of
designated smoking areas for further review and discussion.
FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated expenses approximately $40,000 (materials and

supplies). * Confirmation received that the Maryland Cancer Fund
has awarded the Town a one-time Grant in the amount of $18,762
for materials. Staff will continue to pursue additional Grant funds
and opportunities.
RECOMMENDATION: Restrict smoking, including the use of ESDs, to designated

smoking areas on the beach and adjacent to the Boardwalk as
proposed and reflected by the Attachments presented by staff
subject to Ordinance review by City Solicitor.
1st Class Resort and Tourist Destination
ALTERNATIVES: Complete smoking ban on beach and Boardwalk or status quo
Cover Memorandum - Smoking on the Beach and Boardwalk Policy Discussion
Page 2
RESPONSIBLE STAFF: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager

Blaine Smith, Asst. Director, Planning & Community Development
Robert Nelson, Planner
COORDINATED WITH: Ross Buzzuro, Chief of Police

Scott Harner, Lieutenant, OCPD
Butch Arbin, Captain, Beach Patrol
Ward Kovacs, 2nd Lieutenant, Beach Patrol
Hal Adkins, Public Works Director
Wayne Pryor, Grants Coordinator
Donna Abbott, Tourism Director
Jessica Waters, Communications Manager
John Van Fossen, Public Works Deputy Director
Terry Steimer, Public Works
Karen Zera, GIS Coordinator
Lindsay Richard, OCPD PIO
Marty Pusey, Director of Prevention Services, Worcester County
Health Department
ATTACHMENT(S): 1) Minutes – April 29, 2014, Work Session

2) Minutes – August 26, 2014, Work Session
3) Memorandum from Planner
4) Research and information on Electronic Smoking Devices
(ESDs)
5) Ordinance 2011-7 – Prohibiting Smoking in Public Places
6) Draft Ordinance – Restrict Smoking on the Beach and
Adjacent to the Boardwalk to Designated Smoking Areas
7) Visitor’s Bureau survey
8) HMRA survey
9) OCDC recommendation
10) Slide presentation
11) Estimated Costs – Designated Smoking Areas
WORK SESSION AUGUST 26, 2014
TOWN OF OCEAN CITY, 301 N. BALTIMORE AVENUE, OCEAN CITY, MD 21842
ATTENDANCE
Mayor Rick Meehan, Council President Lloyd Martin, Council Secretary Mary Knight, Council Members Doug
Cymek, Brent Ashley, Dennis Dare, Margaret Pillas and Joe Mitrecic, City Solicitor Guy Ayres, City Manager David
Recor, Tourism Director Donna Abbott, Zoning Administrator Blaine Smith, City Planner Bob Nelson, Construction
Superintendent Dean Dashiell, Public Works Deputy Director John VanFossen, Zoning Administrator Blaine Smith,
City Clerk Kelly Allmond, Members of the Press and Interested Parties.
CALL TO ORDER
Council President Lloyd Martin called the meeting to order at 12: 00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall
located at 301 North Baltimore Avenue in Ocean City, Maryland; then Council Member Joe Mitrecic moved to
convene into closed session to: f11 consult with counsel to obtain leeal advice: and, f21 discuss a matter
directly related to a negotiation strategy or the contents of a bid or proposal before the contract is
awarded or bids are opened if public disclosure would be detrimental to the competitive bidding process•
seconded by Council Secretary Knight. The vote was unanimous.
REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2014 - 12: 00 - 1: 00 P. M.
Council President Lloyd Martin reopened the meeting at 1: 00 p.m., and reported that legal and contractual
matters were discussed in the closed session. Persons present were: Mayor Rick Meehan, Council President
Lloyd Martin, Council Secretary Mary Knight, Council Members Doug Cymek, Brent Ashley, Dennis Dare, Margaret
Pillas and Joe Mitrecic, City Solicitor Guy Ayres, City Manager David Recor, City Engineer Terry McGean and
Executive Office Associate Diana Chavis. The vote to close the meeting was unanimous.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND RECOGNITIONS

A. Mayor Rick Meehan, accompanied by Public Works Deputy Director John VanFossen, acknowledged retiring
Public Works Maintenance Employee Charles Bunting's thirty years of service. Mayor Meehan presented him
with a Key to the City.
B. [ Postponed] Recognition of Retirement for Frank Marshall, Public Works Construction
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Herb Pawlukewicz said the Town needs to install more handicap accessible sidewalks.
Vicky Barrett of the Downtown Association invited the Town' s Boardwalk Employees to the Employee
Boardwalk Party on Monday, September 1, 2014.
A. Bid Openings - Annual Concrete Sidewalk Maintenance Contract
Council Secretary Mary Knight read two bids into the record:
1. Goody Hill Groundwork: $ 67, 500. 00
2. Worth Construction: $ 64,300.00
Council Member Joe Mitrecic moved to acknowledge the apparent lowest bid from Worth Construction
with remand to staff for review: seconded by Council Secretary Knight. The vote was unanimous.
August 26, 2014 Work Session
B. Discussion of Chamber Visitor Guide Agreement Renewal presented by Tourism Director (see Attachment A)
Council Member Joe Mitrecic moved to approve the agreement as Presented: seconded by Council
Secretary Knight. The vote was unanimous.
C. 2015 No Smoking Proposal presented by Planning /Community Development Assistant Director and Planner
Council Member Joe Mitrecic moved to instruct staff to implement restricted smoking areas on the
beach and boardwalk effective May 1 2015 and requested that staff prepare a map of designated
smoking areas for further review and discussion• seconded by Council Member Dare The vote was 4-
3 with Council Members Pillas. Ashley and Knight in opposition.
D. Request for Approval to Transfer Stormwater and Critical Area Mitigation Funds for Stormwater, Habitat and
Pervious Pavement Projects presented by Environmental Engineer 11 Council Member Dennis Dare moved
to approve the transfer of $35. 000 from the Critical Area account. and $35. 000 storm water account
for storm water, habitat and pervious pavement projects- seconded by Council Secretary Knight The
vote was 6 -1 with Council Member Joe Mitrecic opposed.
ADJOURN
council Member Joe Mitrecic moved to adjourn at 2. 50 p m • seconded by Council Member Pillas The vote
was unanimous.
Lt
m
TO: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager
FROM: Bob Nelson, Planner
RE: Smoking on the Beach and Boardwalk Policy Discussion
Ocean City Smoking Policy for 2015
The Smoking Committee was formed following a request by the Mayor and City Council to
formulate a policy on regulating smoking on the Ocean City beach and boardwalk. The committee
is comprised of staff from these departments: Planning & Community Development, Public Works,
Police, Beach Patrol, City Manager’s Office, (Public Information Officer & Grants Coordinator),
Public Affairs, Tourism
Objective
Either outright banning of tobacco use in public places or its restriction to designated areas is
happening all over the world. In Ocean City, to retain our family-oriented environment, the City
Council sought a limit on smoking for 2015 as a first step to a future smoking ban. Our committee
met several times to debate the best methods to educate the public and how to pay for our ideas.
The Town of Ocean City is proposing that the use of tobacco products (including electronic devices
simulating the sensation of smoking used in “vaping”, otherwise known as an ESD, ENDS
(electronic nicotine delivery system), ENDD (electronic nicotine delivery device) be restricted to
designated areas on the beach and adjacent to the boardwalk. More evidence is emerging
showing the aerosol produced by electronic smoking devices contains heavy metals and
carcinogens that are dangerous to users and those close enough to inhale the aerosol emitted,
resembling tobacco smoke. As for the beach, smokers will be required to be within 15 feet of
orange metal receptacles placed on the beach and labeled as such. There will be no posted signage
near the metal receptacles.
To assist with keeping smokers from entering onto the boardwalk, at the ends of streets
intersecting with the boardwalk, there shall be two small “Smoking/Vaping Prohibited” signs
indicating that smoking is prohibited on the boardwalk.
Designated Smoking Areas – Beach
To restrict smoking, we will provide orange 22-gallon metal ash cans at 200-300 foot intervals near
beach entry points the entire length of the beach, one can for each street. Each can will have a
sticker affixed to it indicating it is a designated smoking site and smokers must smoke within 15
feet.
Signs both at the head of each street ending at the dune and on all lifeguard chairs will be updated
to instruct smokers to use the designated ash can locations. Lifeguard stands shall have smoking
restrictions added to their existing signs with a phone number to call to report violations. The
phone number shall connect the caller with the Ocean City Communications staff.
The use of tobacco products on the beach shall be restricted to designated receptacle sites found
50 feet east of the dune and 50 feet to either side of a beach access point; preferably, at mid
block, north of the entrance. The cans will not be anchored. It is expected that we will find some
cans relocated and a few lost due to tides, storms, theft, or vandalism.
Designated Smoking Areas – Boardwalk
If we choose to restrict smoking on the boardwalk, smokers will be directed to (15) designated
smoking locations adjacent to the boardwalk and clearly marked as such. These specific sites are
just a few steps away from the boardwalk and were chosen for their distance from the bulk of
boardwalk visitors. Many of the locations are on the beach entrance platforms east of the sea wall
while southern boardwalk locations are near landscaping or concrete pads several yards off the
boardwalk.
A total ban of smoking would require signage in the same locations and absent the ash
receptacles. With nearby towns banning smoking on their boardwalks, this option should be
considered a priority.
Enforcement
The smoking ban on the boardwalk is meant to be self-enforcing. In the event that an unusual
occurrence happens, resulting in a complaint or call for assistance, the OCPD shall respond when
their schedule allows them to do so. Enforcement of the smoking ban is not a priority for the OCPD
and it shall not supersede their regular duties; unless, the complaint results in a physical
confrontation or other potentially-volatile situation. In no way shall our Beach Patrol staff be
involved in enforcement. They may participate in life-saving activities that may result from a
confrontation as they are trained in such skills.
This being the first discussion about smoking restrictions before a new Council, we realize that we
might decide to go the extra step and ban smoking on the boardwalk and beach at this meeting.
We are prepared to accept this option as we move forward with a probable federal grant of up to
$20,000 and our newly-designed signage that can be customized for a smoking ban. Promotional
materials to be printed for hotels, the police, and for public use, would be customized for either
smoking restrictions or a total ban. We have estimated that the cost of implementing this program
will be $36,000 to $39,000.
The projected cost of implementing a smoking ban is $23,000 - $28,000. In order to make Ocean
City a safe, family environment, a ban on smoking on the beach and boardwalk should be
considered.
Projected Cost of Implementation
We have been in contact with the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, together
with the Worcester County, Maryland Health Department, who are trying to obtain a grant to
cover the costs for signage and cigarette butt receptacles. Marty Pusey, Director of Prevention
Services for the Worcester County Health Department in Snow Hill, Maryland, has been assisting
us with acquiring this grant.
The grant application was submitted by the Worcester County Health Department to the Maryland
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene on October 3, 2014 for between $18,000 and $20,000.
Any costs not covered by grants would be the responsibility of the Town. The Smoking Committee
has included a proposed budget with this project outlining the costs we anticipate.
Public Notice, Outreach and Education
During the summer season, beginning in 2015, smoking restrictions shall be on every existing
street sign (presently wooden signs 4 feet by 4 feet in size that will be replaced), specially-
designed boardwalk signs, at designated smoking locations, and signs attached to lifeguard stands.
Outreach may also include using the Springfest and Sunfest as events to promote the program.
Special messages can be placed on our website, public access channels, social media sites, our FM
radio station, on variable message signs, within eNews, on hotel flyers and rack cards, and on
business cards for the police and beach patrol to hand out.
Electronic Smoking Devices (ESDs)
and Smokefree Laws
www.no-smoke.org/ecigs.html
What are Electronic Electronic Smoking Device

Smoking Devices? Aerosol is Not Water Vapor
Electronic smoking devices, often called e-cigarettes, Supporters claim that electronic smoking devices release
heat and vaporize a solution that typically contains “nothing but water vapor.” However, water is not an
nicotine, and are often designed to mimic the look and ingredient in electronic smoking devices.
feel of a real cigarette, while others resemble pens or
other innocuous objects. The “smoke” you see is NOT a “vapor”: it is an aerosol
containing toxins like those listed in the infographic
The devices are metal or plastic tubes that contain a (below) from the Chicago Department of Public Health.
cartridge filled with a liquid that is vaporized by a battery
-powered heating element. The aerosol is inhaled by the
user when they draw on the device, as they would a
regular cigarette. The user then exhales a cloud of
secondhand aerosol which includes toxins and other
pollutants.
Electronic smoking devices are currently unregulated

products. Most electronic smoking devices contain nico-
tine, and some companies claim to sell nicotine-free car-
tridges. They come in a wide variety of designs, flavors,
and nicotine levels. These are not one uniform product
but hundreds of different products.
Sample of Electronic Smoking Devices:

The aerosol (incorrectly called vapor) contains
nicotine, hazardous ultrafine particles that lodge
deeply in the lungs of nonsmokers, and toxins known
to cause cancer. This is why it is not appropriate to
use these products in smokefree environments, such
as workplaces.
Electronic smoking devices are unregulated products

that have no requirements for ingredient disclosure,
accurate labeling or quality control.
Electronic smoking devices are called:

◊ Electronic cigarette ◊ Hookah pen
◊ E-cigarette ◊ Personal vaporizer
◊ E-hookah ◊ Vape Pen/Vapor pen
◊ E-vapor device ◊ Vapor cigarette
◊ And more!
Electronic Smoking Devices: The Facts
Electronic Smoking Devices Tempting a New Generation into
Are Not Emission-Free Nicotine Addiction
The first peer-reviewed study to look at exposure to aer- ESDs are not a proven smoking cessation device; they are
osol from electronic smoking devices (ESDs) in real-use an alternative nicotine delivery device that will maintain
conditions found that non-smokers who were exposed to or restore the habit, and can hook a new generation
conventional cigarette smoke and ESD aerosol absorbed addicted to nicotine. ESD proponents are deceptively
similar levels of nicotine. marketing the products to the public—especially to
young adults via online media—as a “safe” alternative
"Cigarettes vs. e-cigarettes: Passive exposure at home to smoking and an easy way to quit smoking tobacco
measured by means of airborne marker and biomarkers." cigarettes.
Environmental Research, Volume 135, November 2014.
There are 7,764 unique flavors

of ESD liquid.
Source: www.smokelessdelite.com
Offermann, Bud. “The Hazards of E-Cigarettes.” ASHRAE
Journal, June 2014. ESDs come in an impossibly long list of enticing flavors
that historically have appealed to youth, from Gummy
Bear to Bubble Gum to Vanilla Cupcake to Lemon
Chiffon Pie. Rechargeable ESDs allow users to mix their
“If you are around somebody who is using
own “e-juice” to create their own flavor combinations
e-cigarettes, you are breathing an aerosol of and potentially create higher nicotine levels.
exhaled nicotine, ultra-fine particles, volatile
organic compounds, and other toxins.” A June 2014 study found that some chemicals used as
flavorings in ESD liquid are approved by the FDA for food
— Dr. Stanton Glantz, Director for the Center for use (ingestion), but they are not approved for inhalation,
Tobacco Control Research and Education, UCSF and are, in fact, associated with respiratory disease when
inhaled. Remember: ESD’s are not regulated by the FDA.
 Half of middle and high school students (13.1 million) were aware of e-cigarettes, 6.8% (1.8 million) had ever
used e-cigarettes, and 2.1% (550,000) reported having used e-cigarettes in the past thirty days.
 One in three students perceived e-cigarettes as being less harmful than conventional cigarettes and these
students were more likely to have used e-cigarettes.
Source: http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/ProtectingKidsfromTobacco/ucm405173.htm
2
Cities are Including Electronic How Can My Community
Smoking Devices in Smokefree Laws Ensure Smokefree Workplaces
As of October 1, 225 U.S. municipalities and three states Stay that Way?
include electronic smoking devices (ESDs) as products
that are prohibited from use in smokefree environments. It’s very simple. If your community has a 100% smoke-
See the full list at www.no-smoke.org/pdf/ecigslaws.pdf. free air law, the law can be amended by adding a
definition of “electronic smoking device” and amending
From New York City to Indianapolis, and Chicago to the definition of “smoking” to include electronic smoking
Los Angeles, communities are choosing to expand their devices (ESDs).
smokefree air laws to not allow the use of ESDs in all
smokefree environments (indoors and outdoors) so that If your community is protected by a strong statewide
workers & the public don’t have to breathe the toxic smokefree law, then you can adopt a law to prohibit the
aerosol that they emit. use of ESDs wherever the state law prohibits smoking.
This is also an opportunity to close any gaps that may
Other examples of cities addressing ESDs in smokefree exist in your state smokefree law.
workplace laws including Bessemer, AL; Madison, KY;
Prentiss, MS; and Waxahachie, TX. If your community is not yet protected by a 100% smoke-
free air law for all workplaces and public places, now is a
Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights and our public health
great opportunity to consider adopting a law that
partners encourage municipalities and states to prohibit
addresses both tobacco smoking and ESD use in those
the use of ESDs in all smokefree venues, where people
spaces.
may be exposed to the secondhand aerosol they emit.
It is the right and responsibility of our elected officials to You can find definitions in ANR’s model law for smoke-
take action to protect public health and safety. free workplaces and public places at
www.no-smoke.org/pdf/modelordinance.pdf
Number of Smokefree ESD Laws by Year
Sign for Chicago’s smokefree law, which includes ESD use.
What is the FDA doing about Electronic Smoking Devices?

While the FDA can and should regulate electronic smoking devices as tobacco products, they do not have the
authority to address where the products may be used. Cities and states can and are enacting laws that regulate
when and where ESDs can be used, as well as laws that regulate sales to minors and where the product can be
sold. In other words, city and state lawmakers should not wait for the FDA to address these products.
3
Myths & Facts about ESDs What to Expect
from the Opposition
Myth: Electronic smoking devices (ESDs) are harmless! Electronic smoking device (ESD) manufacturers and
They only emit water vapor. proponents seek to enable use of these products in
otherwise smokefree spaces in order to maximize profits.
Fact: The aerosol emitted by ESDs is not water vapor. The
They are actively engaged in efforts to prevent regulation
aerosol contains many substances, including nicotine,
of where the products can be used. This is especially true
ultrafine particles, volatile organic compounds and toxins
now that the big U.S. tobacco companies and their
known to cause cancer. There is enough peer-reviewed,
retailer networks are fully engaged in the ESD industry.
published scientific evidence to determine that second-
hand aerosol is not harmless. It’s a new source of air Tobacco Company Cigarette Brands ESD Brands
pollution that should not be permitted in smokefree Altria Marlboro, Virginia Slims MarkTen
environments. Reynolds American Camel, Kool Vuse
Lorillard Newport Blu
Myth: I quit smoking by using an ESD! Do you want to
prevent people from quitting tobacco? Communities should expect to hear from local ESD users
Fact: ESDs are not proven cessation devices. While some (“vapers”) and vape shop owners, but also from out-of-
individuals have quit smoking tobacco by using ESDs, state opposition groups, such as Consumer Advocates for
studies indicate that ESDs may not be helpful at the pop- Smoke-free Alternatives Association (CASAA) and Vaping
ulation level. Many people become “stable dual-users” Militia. These groups have generated email blasts and
who use both cigarettes and ESDs. Including ESDs in Twitter bombing to City Councils from ESD supporters
smokefree laws does not prohibit people from using located around the U.S., who are not local constituents.
these unregulated products, rather they simply must Opponents to including ESDs in smokefree laws have
step outside to use them, just like people do to smoke taken a page directly from the tobacco industry’s play-
cigarettes. book. They will claim that ESDs are harmless, that they
contain only water vapor, that using them indoors is
Myth: Nicotine is no more harmful than caffeine! necessary to help people quit smoking, and other
Fact: Not true! Nicotine is an addictive and very poison- arguments that aim to create doubt and confusion.
ous drug in even small amounts. Nicotine For instance, Los Angeles radio stations aired ads by Blu,
exposure can negatively impact developing fetuses as owned by Lorillard Tobacco Company, and Vuse, owned
well as teenage brain development. Nicotine also reacts by Reynold American, asking people to attend a City
with other chemicals to create tobacco-specific carcino- Council hearing to oppose a proposed ordinance to not
gens. The potential hazards to non-users in a shared air allow ESD use in smokefree spaces. Thankfully, the City
space are due to more than just nicotine. Council resisted the industry pressure and voted unani-
mously to include ESDs in the city’s smokefree air law.
Myth: I own a vape shop. I’m a small business owner that
creates jobs and pays taxes in our community. If you in-
cluded ESDs, I’ll lose money and so will the city.
Fact: Thus far this has not been proven to be true. The
tobacco industry has historically used “small business”
arguments and threats, but smokefree laws have not
been found to be damaging to business. If the shop is in
a strip mall and shares the air with other businesses,
these workplaces should not be exposed to unwanted
secondhand aerosol.
Tobacco vs ESD Ads. Source: http://tobacco.stanford.edu
This publication was produced in partnership with the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation
(ANRF), an educational nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization, which educates people about the benefits
of smokefree air, and the right to breathe smokefree air. ANRF provides educational resources for
www.no-smoke.org/ecigs.html schools, health departments, medical organizations, and others interested in the issues
510.841.3032 surrounding smoking and secondhand smoke and the benefits of smokefree environments.
4
Defending your right to breathe smokefree air since 1976
Electronic Smoking Devices and Secondhand Aerosol
Electronic smoking devices (or ESDs), which are often called e-cigarettes, heat and vaporize a
solution that typically contains nicotine. The devices are metal or plastic tubes that contain a cartridge
filled with a liquid that is vaporized by a battery-powered heating element. The aerosol is inhaled by the
user when they draw on the device, as they would a regular tobacco cigarette, and the user exhales the
aerosol into the environment.
“If you are around somebody who is using e-cigarettes, you are breathing an aerosol of exhaled
nicotine, ultra-fine particles, volatile organic compounds, and other toxins.” Dr. Stanton Glantz, Director
for the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California, San
Francisco.
Current Legislative Landscape
 As of October 1, 2014, 225 municipalities and three states include electronic smoking
devices as products that are prohibited from use in smokefree environments.
Constituents of Secondhand Aerosol
Electronic smoking devices (ESDs) do not just emit “harmless water vapor.” Secondhand aerosol
(incorrectly called vapor by the industry) from ESDs contains nicotine, ultrafine particles and
low levels of toxins that are known to cause cancer.
 ESD aerosol is made up of a high concentration of ultrafine particles, and the particle
concentration is higher than in conventional tobacco cigarette smoke.1
 Exposure to fine and ultrafine particles may exacerbate respiratory ailments like asthma, and
constrict arteries which could trigger a heart attack.2
 At least 10 chemicals identified in ESD aerosol are on California’s Proposition 65 list of

carcinogens and reproductive toxins, also known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic
Enforcement Act of 1986. The compounds that have already been identified in mainstream (MS)
or secondhand (SS) ESD aerosol include: Acetaldehyde (MS), Benzene (SS), Cadmium (MS),
Formaldehyde (MS,SS), Isoprene (SS), Lead (MS), Nickel (MS), Nicotine (MS, SS), N-
Nitrosonornicotine (MS, SS), Toluene (MS, SS).3,4
 ESDs contain and emit propylene glycol, a chemical that is used as a base in ESD solution
and is one of the primary components in the aerosol emitted by ESDs.
o Short term exposure causes eye, throat, and airway irritation.5
o Long term inhalation exposure can result in children developing asthma.6
 Even though propylene glycol is FDA approved for use in some products, the inhalation of
vaporized nicotine in propylene glycol is not. Some studies show that heating propylene glycol
changes its chemical composition, producing small amounts of propylene oxide, a known
carcinogen.7
2530 San Pablo Avenue, Suite J ● Berkeley, California 94702 ● (510) 841-3032 / FAX (510) 841-3071
www.no-smoke.org ● anr@no-smoke.org
 There are metals in ESD aerosol, including chromium, nickel, and tin nanoparticles.8
 FDA scientists found detectable levels of carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines in ESD

aerosol.9
 People exposed to ESD aerosol absorb nicotine (measured as cotinine), with one study showing
levels comparable to passive smokers.10
 Diethylene Glycol, a poisonous organic compound, was also detected in ESD aerosol.11
 Exhaled ESD aerosol contained propylene glycol, glycerol, flavorings, and nicotine, along
with acetone, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, propanal, diacetin, and triacitine.12
 Many of the elements identified in the aerosol are known to cause respiratory distress and
disease. The aerosol contained particles >1 µm comprised of tin, silver, iron, nickel, aluminum,
and silicate and nanoparticles (<100 nm) of tin, chromium and nickel. The concentrations of nine
of eleven elements in ESD aerosol were higher than or equal to the corresponding
concentrations in conventional cigarette smoke.13
 ESDs cause exposure to different chemicals than found in conventional cigarettes and there is a
need for risk evaluation for both primary and passive exposure to the aerosol in smokers and
nonsmokers.14
 Short term use of ESD has been shown to increase respiratory resistance and impair lung
function, which may result in difficulty breathing.15
 The first study to look at exposure to aerosol from ESDs in real-use conditions found that non-
smokers who were exposed to conventional cigarette smoke and ESD aerosol absorbed similar
levels of nicotine.16
 The “E-cigarettes do not produce a vapor (gas), but rather a dense visible aerosol of liquid sub-
micron droplets consisting of glycols, nicotine, and other chemicals, some of which are
carcinogenic (e.g., formaldehyde, metals like cadmium, lead, & nickel, and nitrosamines).”
ASHRAE concluded that ESDs emit harmful chemicals into the air and need to be regulated in
the same manner as tobacco smoking.17
 Some chemicals used as flavorings in ESD liquid, which are approved by the FDA for food use
(ingestion), are not approved for inhalation and are associated with respiratory disease when
inhaled.18
 There is a risk of thirdhand exposure to nicotine released from ESD aerosol that deposits on
indoor surfaces.19
 Overall, ESDs are a new source of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and ultrafine/fine
particles in the indoor environment, thus resulting in “passive vaping.”20
 The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that ESDs not be used indoors, especially
in smokefree environments, in order to minimize the risk to bystanders of breathing in the
aerosol emitted by the devices and to avoid undermining the enforcement of smokefree laws.21
 The American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) also recommends that ESDs be included in
smokefree laws: “Because e-cigarettes are a potential source of pollutants (such as
airborne nicotine, flavorings, and thermal degradation products), their use in the indoor
2
environment should be restricted, consistent with current smoking bans, until and unless
research documents that they will not significantly increase the risk of adverse health
effects to room occupants.”22
ESD aerosol is a new source of pollution and toxins being emitted into the environment. We do not
know the long-term health effects of ESD use and although the industry marketing of the product
implies that these products are harmless, the aerosol that ESD emit is not purely water vapor.
May be reprinted with appropriate attribution to Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, © 2014
1402 [FS-39]
REFERENCES
1
Fuoco, F.C.; Buonanno, G.; Stabile, L.; Vigo, P., "Influential parameters on particle concentration and size distribution in
the mainstream of e-cigarettes," Environmental Pollution 184: 523-529, January 2014.
2
Grana, R; Benowitz, N; Glantz, S. “Background Paper on E-cigarettes,” Center for Tobacco Control Research and
Education, University of California, San Francisco and WHO Collaborating Center on Tobacco Control. December 2013.
3
Goniewicz, M.L.; Knysak, J.; Gawron, M.; Kosmider, L.; Sobczak, A.; Kurek, J.; Prokopowicz, A.; Jablonska-Czapla, M.; Rosik-
Dulewska, C.; Havel, C.; Jacob, P.; Benowitz, N., "Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic
cigarettes," Tobacco Control [Epub ahead of print], March 6, 2013.
4
Williams, M.; Villarreal, A.; Bozhilov, K.; Lin, S.; Talbot, P., “Metal and silicate particles including nanoparticles are present
in electronic cigarette cartomizer fluid and aerosol,” PLoS ONE 8(3): e57987, March 20, 2013.
5
Wieslander, G; Norbäck, D; Lindgren, T. "Experimental exposure to propylene glycol mist in aviation emergency training:
acute ocular and respiratory effects." Occupational and Environmental Medicine 58:10 649-655, 2001.
6
Choi, H; Schmidbauer,N; Spengler,J; Bornehag, C., “Sources of Propylene Glycol and Glycol Ethers in Air at Home,”
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 7(12): 4213–4237, December 2010.
7
Henderson, TR; Clark, CR; Marshall, TC; Hanson, RL; & Hobbs, CH. “Heat degradation studies of solar heat transfer fluids,”
Solar Energy, 27, 121-128. 1981.
8
Williams, M.; Villarreal, A.; Bozhilov, K.; Lin, S.; Talbot, P., “Metal and silicate particles including nanoparticles are present
in electronic cigarette cartomizer fluid and aerosol,” PLoS ONE 8(3): e57987, March 20, 2013.
9
Westenberger, B.J., “Evaluation of e-cigarettes,” St. Louis, MO: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS),
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis, May 4,
2009.
10
Flouris, A.D.; Chorti, M.S.; Poulianiti, K.P.; Jamurtas, A.Z.; Kostikas, K.; Tzatzarakis, M.N.; Wallace, H.A.; Tsatsaki, A.M.;
Koutedakis, Y., "Acute impact of active and passive electronic cigarette smoking on serum cotinine and lung function,"
Inhalation Toxicology 25(2): 91-101, February 2013.
11
Westenberger, B.J., “Evaluation of e-cigarettes,” St. Louis, MO: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS),
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis, May 4,
2009.
12
Schripp, T.; Markewitz, D.; Uhde, E.; Salthammer, T., "Does e-cigarette consumption cause passive vaping?," Indoor Air
23(1): 25-31, February 2013.
13
Williams, M.; Villarreal, A.; Bozhilov, K.; Lin, S.; Talbot, P., "Metal and silicate particles including nanoparticles are present
in electronic cigarette cartomizer fluid and aerosol," PLoS ONE 8(3): e57987, March 20, 2013.
14
Pellegrino, R.M.; Tinghino, B.; Mangiaracina, G.; Marani, A.; Vitali, M.; Protano, C.; Osborn, J.F.; Cattaruzza, M.S.,
"Electronic cigarettes: an evaluation of exposure to chemicals and fine particulate matter (PM)," Annali Di Igiene 24(4):279-
88, July-August 2012.
15
Vardavas, C.I.; Anagnostopoulos, N.; Kougias, M.; Evangelopoulou, V.; Connolly, G.N.; Behrakis, P.K., "Short-term
pulmonary effects of using an electronic cigarette: impact on respiratory flow resistance, impedance, and exhaled nitric
oxide," Chest 141(6): 1400-1406, June 2012.
3
16
"Cigarettes vs. e-cigarettes: Passive exposure at home measured by means of airborne marker and biomarkers."
Environmental Research, Volume 135, November 2014.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935114003089
17
Offermann, Bud. “The Hazards of E-Cigarettes.” ASHRAE Journal, June 2014.
http://bookstore.ashrae.biz/journal/download.php?file=2014June_038-047_IAQ_Offerman_rev.pdf
18
Konstantinos E. Farsalinos, KE; Kistler, KA; Gilman, G; Voudris, V. “Evaluation of Electronic Cigarette Liquids and Aerosol
for the Presence of Selected Inhalation Toxins.” Nicotine and Tobacco Research [Epub ahead of print], September 1, 2014.
19
Goniewicz, M.L.; Lee, L., "Electronic cigarettes are a source of thirdhand exposure to nicotine," Nicotine and Tobacco
Research [Epub ahead of print], August 30, 2014.
http://ntr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/08/28/ntr.ntu152.abstract
20
Schripp, T.; Markewitz, D.; Uhde, E.; Salthammer, T., "Does e-cigarette consumption cause passive vaping?," Indoor Air
23(1): 25-31, February 2013.
21
World Health Organization (WHO), "Electronic nicotine delivery systems," World Health Organization (WHO), 2014.
http://apps.who.int/gb/fctc/PDF/cop6/FCTC_COP6_10-en.pdf
22
White Paper: Electronic Cigarettes in the Indoor Environment, American Industrial Hygiene Association, October 19, 2014.
https://www.aiha.org/government-affairs/Documents/Electronc%20Cig%20Document_Final.pdf
4
Overview
Electronic Smoking Devices

I. Introduction
Commonly referred to as electronic cigarettes or “e-cigs,” Electronic Smoking Devices (“ESDs”) are battery-powered nicotine delivery
devices. Designed to look and feel like traditional tobacco products (such as cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos and pipes), ESDs deliver
nicotine to the bloodstream through vapor, rather than smoke. Often, the devices are enhanced with candy, fruit or alcohol flavorings.
1
ESD use is on the rise. Sale revenues eclipsed $1 billion worldwide in 2013 and are projected to surpass cigarette sales by 2047.
Likewise, ESD use has increased among youth; according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”), between 2011
2
and 2012, electronic cigarette use doubled among teens. In 2012, more than 10 percent of high school students reported trying
3
ESDs, up from 4.7% in 2011.
Despite this increase in popularity, at present, the health risks associated with ESD use have not been sufficiently studied, their
ingredients are largely unknown, and they remain unregulated at the federal level. However, state and local governments may
regulate the distribution and use of ESDs, and commercial and residential property owners may restrict the use of ESDs on their
property.
The following sections provide an overview of the health effects and regulatory status of ESDs. Specifically, Part II discusses the
health risks of ESDs, their contents, and their use as smoking cessation aids. Part III describes the status of federal regulations.
Finally, Part IV outlines existing state regulations as well as property owners’ legal ability to restrict ESD use.
II. Health Effects
The health effects of ESDs are still not very well understood, as there are few comprehensive studies on the subject. However, the
information that is available reveals some troubling aspects of these devices. For instance, ESDs have been shown to cause an
4
immediate increase in airway resistance after only 10 minutes of use. Additionally, in 2009, the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”)
evaluated a small sample of electronic cigarette cartridges and determined that they contained detectable levels of carcinogens and
5 6
toxins. ESD vapors have also been found to contain toxins (although the detected levels were lower than in cigarette smoke).
Perhaps most notably, ESDs contain nicotine—a highly addictive substance that can lead to other addiction disorders, particularly in
youth. Studies have shown that compared to high school students who had never smoked, high school students who were nicotine-
7
dependent smokers were almost 18 times as likely to have an alcohol or other drug use disorder.
While it is known that ESDs contain nicotine and toxic substances, there is still a lack of adequate data to properly determine the
8
health risks of ESDs—both for the users and bystanders. Long-term studies, for example, still need to be conducted. Additionally, the
9
“quality control” system for ESD manufacturing is “questionable.” ESD companies are not subject to any manufacturing standards, so
10
ingredients and their concentrations (like nicotine levels) vary for each brand.
Finally, despite popular belief that ESDs can be used to help people quit smoking, the effectiveness of these products as smoking
cessation aids has not been conclusively proven. In one recent study, e-cigarettes were found to be “modestly effective” in helping
11
smokers quit, with the efficacy level “similar” to that of nicotine patches. However, the study also noted the continued
“uncertainty…about the place of e-cigarettes in tobacco control,” and emphasized that “more research is urgently needed to clearly
12
establish their overall benefits and harms at both individual and population levels.”
Therefore, until more comprehensive studies and data are available, the public health community largely advocates the use of the
13
“precautionary principle”—implementing regulations now while the health risks of ESDs are more effectively determined.
III. Federal Regulation
Currently, there is no federal regulation of ESDs. While traditional cigarettes are subject to several federal restrictions, including
14
flavoring and advertising regulations, ESD manufacturers have none of these constraints. Therefore, ESDs are available in a variety
15
of youth-appealing flavors that can be advertised on a variety of platforms, including television and social media.
The Food and Drug Administration initially tried to regulate ESDs as “drug/device” combination products under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”). However, in Sottera, Inc. v. Food & Drug Admin., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
ruled that the FDA could not regulate ESDs as “drug/device” combination products unless the products were being marketed as
16
therapeutic devices (i.e., smoking-cessation tools). However, the court did rule that the FDA could regulate ESDs as “tobacco
17
products” under the broad language of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (“FSPTCA”). The FSPTCA provides
18
the FDA regulatory power over “tobacco products,” and this specifically includes products “derived from tobacco.” According to the
court, since the nicotine in the ESDs was “derived from” tobacco, the FDA could exert its regulatory authority over the ESDs as
19
“tobacco products.”
On April 24, 2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") issued its long-awaited Proposed Rule which would deem
electronic cigarettes and other "tobacco products" (i.e., cigars, hookah, dissolvable tobacco, and pipe tobacco) subject to the FDA's
regulatory authority under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (as amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco
Control Act). Under this Proposed Rule, electronic cigarettes would be subject to several requirements already in place for cigarettes,
roll-your-own tobacco and smokeless tobacco, such as a minimum age of purchase, mandatory ingredient disclosures and health
warning requirements. While the proposed regulations do not address flavorings, advertising, or marketing restrictions, the FDA is
seeking comment from the public on these and other areas which may be addressed in future regulations. The public has until July 9,
20
2014 to submit comments to the FDA about its current proposed regulations. The FDA must review all of these comments and draft
its Final Rule, which will then be published in the Federal Register; however, these final regulations may not have an implementation
21
date until years after publication.
IV. State, Local, and Private Property Regulation
Absent federal regulation, state and local authorities have begun to regulate the sale and distribution of ESDs. For example, 24 states,
22
including Maryland, currently prohibit the sale of ESDs to minors. In order to further curb youth access, Indiana, North Carolina and
23
South Carolina also regulate the sale of ESDs through vending machines.
Other approaches to ESD regulation include treating ESDs as “tobacco products” for tax purposes—Minnesota, for example, already
24
applies its tobacco products tax to ESDs. Other states, including Massachusetts, Delaware and Maine, have attempted to do the
25
same.
While at least 30 states have comprehensive clean indoor air laws restricting the use of lighted tobacco products in indoor public
places such as bars, restaurants and office buildings, only a few have extended these provisions to include the use of ESDs. For
example, New Jersey, North Dakota, and Utah have specifically amended their clean indoor air laws to prohibit the use of electronic
26
cigarettes in public places and workplaces. However, the language of most states’ existing clean indoor air laws (including
27
Maryland’s) does not restrict the use of ESDs because ESDs do not “burn” as defined in these statutes.
State officials, however, do recognize the risks of ESDs and the need for government oversight. In September 2013, the National
Association of Attorneys General sent a letter to the FDA urging the FDA to issue proposed regulations on electronic cigarette
28
advertising, ingredients, and sales to minors; 41 Attorneys General signed the letter. Additionally, the Attorneys General of California
and Oregon sued a leading electronic cigarette manufacturer in separate lawsuits, alleging that the manufacturers were making false
health claims and targeting their products to minors. Both states were successful: In California, the manufacturer agreed to follow
29
certain marketing and sales restrictions, and in Oregon, the manufacturer was permanently banned from doing business in the state.
Despite the lack of federal and comprehensive state regulation on ESD use, public housing authorities and private property owners do
have the ability to restrict the use of ESDs on their property. While smoking is a legal activity, courts have repeatedly held that there is
no constitutional or fundamental right to smoke, and that the act of smoking is subject to only a minimal level of protection under the
30
Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, local housing authorities and private property owners have the legal
ability to restrict smoking (including ESD use), on their properties, just as they may restrict several other legal activities (e.g.,
prohibiting pets on the premises). Any private property owner can implement these restrictions, including those who own businesses,
restaurants/bars, and other private property open to the public.
However, if housing authorities and private property owners wish to restrict the use of ESDs, they should explicitly include ESDs in
their smoke-free policies and also provide a clear definition of ESDs. Specifically including and defining these devices in smoke-free
policies is the best way to regulate their use, given the current ambiguous and rather fluid nature of state and federal regulation (e.g.,
the definition of “tobacco products”).
When drafting or amending smoke-free policies, the Legal Resource Center recommends the following ESD definition: “Electronic
Smoking Device” means any device that heats a liquid, gel, or other substance to produce a vapor that is intended to be
inhaled by the user. Such devices include, but are not limited to, e-cigarettes, e-cigars, and e-pipes.
V. Conclusion
While ESDs continue to gain popularity, not enough is currently known about their short-term and long-term health risks, their
effectiveness as smoking cessation tools, or even their contents. However, the scant information that is available suggests the need
for comprehensive regulation. In the absence of federal regulations, states and local authorities can continue to take the lead in
restricting the availability and appeal of ESDs to minors. Property owners can also restrict the use of ESDs on their premises. Such
regulations can help protect the public from the unknown, potentially harmful effects of these new devices.
If you have any questions or are interested in further information regarding ESDs, including assistance in drafting ESD policies,
ordinances, or similar materials, please feel free to contact the Legal Resource Center through email at tobacco@law.umaryland.edu,
or by phone at 410-706-0842.
This document was developed by the Legal Resource Center for Public Health Policy at the University of Maryland Francis
King Carey School of Law, with funding and support provided in part by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The
Legal Resource Center for Public Health Policy provides information and technical assistance on issues related to public
health in Maryland. The legal information and assistance does not constitute legal advice or legal representation. For legal
advice, please consult specific legal counsel.
1
Natalie Robehmed, E-cigarette Sales Surpass $1 Billion As Big Tobacco Moves In, Forbes (Sept. 17, 2013),
http://www.forbes.com/sites/natalierobehmed/2013/09/17/e-cigarette-sales-surpass-1-billion-as-big-tobacco-moves-in/
2
CDC, Notes from the Field: Electronic Cigarette Use Among Middle and High School Students — United States, 2011–2012, Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report (Sept. 6, 2013), http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6235a6.htm?s_cid=mm6235a6_w
3
Id.
4
Experts warn that e-cigarettes can damage the lungs, European Respiratory Society (Sept. 2, 2012),
http://www.erscongress2012.org/mediacenter/news-release/item/428-experts-warn-that-e-cigarettes-can-damage-the-lungs.html
5
FDA, Summary of Results: Laboratory Analysis of Electronic Cigarettes Conducted By FDA (July 22, 2009),
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm173146.htm
6
Maciej Goniewicz, et al., Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes. TOB. CONTROL (March 6, 2013),
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2013/03/05/tobaccocontrol-2012-050859.abstract
7
National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Adolescent Substance Use: America’s #1 Public Health Problem (June 2011),
http://www.casacolumbia.org/upload/2011/20110629adolescentsubstanceuse.pdf
8
Experts warn that e-cigarettes can damage the lungs, European Respiratory Society (Sept. 2, 2012),
http://www.erscongress2012.org/mediacenter/news-release/item/428-experts-warn-that-e-cigarettes-can-damage-the-lungs.html
9
Neal L Benowitz and Maciej Goniewicz, The Regulatory Challenge of Electronic Cigarettes, J. OF AM. MED. ASSOC. (March 2013),
http://www.tobacco.ucsf.edu/sites/default/files/u795/Benowitz_Gona%20E-cig%20JAMA%202013.pdf
10
Tobacco Control Legal Consortium, Regulating E-Cigarettes: Tips and Tools (May 2011),
http://publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/tclc-guide-regecigs-2011.pdf
11
Christopher Bullen, et al., Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation: a randomised controlled trial , The Lancet (Sept. 7, 2013),
http://download.thelancet.com/flatcontentassets/pdfs/S0140673613618425.pdf
12
Id.
13
See, e.g., Tobacco Control Legal Consortium, Regulating E-Cigarettes: Tips and Tools (May 2011)
http://publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/tclc-guide-regecigs-2011.pdf ; National Association of Attorneys General, Letter to
FDA Urging Regulation of E-Cigarettes ( Sept. 24, 2013),
http://www.naag.org/assets/files/pdf/E%20Cigarette%20Final%20Letter%20%285%29%281%29.pdf
14
See Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (“FSPTCA”), P.L. 111-31 (2009), http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-
111publ31/pdf/PLAW-111publ31.pdf
15
See, e.g., Jolie Lee, E-cigarette ads model big tobacco ads of old, USA Today (Nov. 11, 2013),
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/11/e-cigarettes-kids-advertising/3467475/
16
627 F.3d 891 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
17
Id.
18
FSPTCA § 101, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ31/pdf/PLAW-111publ31.pdf
19
Sottera, 627 F.3d at 897-99.
20
U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products To Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as
Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act; Regulations on the Sale and Distribution of Tobacco Products and Required
Warning Statements for Tobacco Products (April 24, 2014), http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2014-N-0189-0001
21
Tobacco Control Legal Consortium, A Deeming Regulation: What is Possible Under the Law (2014),
http://publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/tclc-fs-deeming-reg-what-is-possible-2014.pdf
22
Legal Resource Center, Laws Restricting Electronic Smoking Device Sales to Minors (2014),
http://www.law.umaryland.edu/programs/publichealth/documents/LRC_ESD_Legislation.pdf
23
24
Minnesota Dept. of Revenue, Revenue Notice #12-10: Tobacco Products Tax—Taxability—E-Cigarettes, (Oct. 22, 2012),
http://www.revenue.state.mn.us/law_policy/revenue_notices/RN_12-10.pdf
25
26
27
See, for example, MD Health-Gen. § 24-501(g) (defining “smoking” as the “burning of a lighted…matter or substance that contains tobacco”).
28
National Association of Attorneys General, Letter to FDA Urging Regulation of E-Cigarettes (September 24, 2013),
http://www.naag.org/assets/files/pdf/E%20Cigarette%20Final%20Letter%20%285%29%281%29.pdf
29
State of California Dept. of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, Electronic Cigarette Maker Agrees to Stop Marketing to Minors (Oct. 29,
2010), http://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/electronic-cigarette-maker-agrees-stop-marketing-minors ; Oregon Dept. of Justice, Office of the
Attorney General, Oregon Attorney General Ousts Electronic Cigarette Company from State (Aug. 9, 2010),
http://www.doj.state.or.us/releases/pages/2010/rel080910.aspx
30
Brashear v. Simms, 138 F. Supp. 2d 693 (D. Md. 2001) ; McGinnis v. Royster, 410 U.S. 263 (1973).
Legal Resource Center for Public Health Policy

University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
www.law.umaryland.edu/publichealth
Phone: (410) 706-0842
publichealth@law.umaryland.edu
Conference of the Parties to the
WHO Framework Convention
on Tobacco Control
Sixth session FCTC/COP/6/10

Moscow, Russian Federation,13–18 October 2014 21 July 2014
Provisional agenda item 4.4.2
Electronic nicotine delivery systems

Report by WHO
INTRODUCTION
1. This document was prepared in response to the request made by the Conference of the Parties
(COP) at its fifth session (Seoul, Republic of Korea, 12–17 November 2012) to the Convention
Secretariat to invite WHO to examine emerging evidence on the health impacts of electronic nicotine
delivery systems (ENDS) use and to identify options for their prevention and control, for
consideration at the sixth session of the COP. 1 This report incorporates the December 2013
deliberations and scientific recommendations on ENDS by the WHO Study Group on Tobacco
Product Regulation (TobReg), and analysis from a recent WHO survey on tobacco products.2
2. ENDS are the subject of a public health dispute among bona fide tobacco-control advocates that
has become more divisive as their use has increased. Whereas some experts welcome ENDS as a
pathway to the reduction of tobacco smoking, others characterize them as products that could
undermine efforts to denormalize tobacco use. ENDS, therefore, represent an evolving frontier, filled
1
See decision FCTC/COP5(10).
2
The WHO tobacco products survey on smokeless, electronic nicotine delivery systems, reduced ignition
propensity cigarettes, and novel tobacco products was sent to all WHO Member States. A total of 90 WHO
Member States, including 86 Parties to the WHO FCTC, had responded to the survey as at 9 April 2014. These
countries are: Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia
(Plurinational State of), Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia,
Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Czech Republic, Djibouti, Dominica, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France,
Gabon, Georgia, Ghana, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of),
Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania,
Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua,
Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Republic of Korea,
Russian Federation, Slovakia, South Sudan, Spain, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand,
Tonga, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, United Arab Emirates, United States of America, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Viet
Nam, and Zambia.
FCTC/COP/6/10
with promise and threat for tobacco control. Whether ENDS fulfil the promise or the threat depends
on a complex and dynamic interplay among the industries marketing ENDS (independent makers and
tobacco companies), consumers, regulators, policy-makers, practitioners, scientists, and advocates.
The evidence and recommendations presented in this report are therefore subject to rapid change.
PRODUCT DESIGN AND CONTENTS
3. ENDS, of which electronic cigarettes are the most common prototype, deliver an aerosol by
heating a solution that users inhale. The main constituents of the solution by volume, in addition to
nicotine when nicotine is present, are propylene glycol, with or without glycerol and flavouring agents.
4. Although some ENDS are shaped to look like their conventional tobacco counterparts (e.g.
cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos, pipes, or hookahs), they also take the form of everyday items such as
pens, USB memory sticks, and larger cylindrical or rectangular devices.
5. Battery voltage and unit circuitry differences can result in considerable variability in the
products’ ability to heat the solution to an aerosol and, consequently, may affect delivery of nicotine
and other constituents, and may contribute to the formation of toxicants in the emissions.
6. User behaviour may affect nicotine absorption – length of puffs, depth of inhalation and
frequency of use may be factors. However, while a faster, deeper puff increases nicotine delivery
from a conventional cigarette, it might diminish it from ENDS due to cooling of the heating element.
7. In addition to manufacturer differences, some users modify products at home to alter delivery
of nicotine and/or other drugs. Products vary widely in the ease with which they can be modified and
the ease with which they can be filled with substances other than nicotine solutions.
THE ENDS MARKET
8. The use of ENDS is apparently booming. It is estimated that in 2014 there were 466 brands 1
and that in 2013 US$ 3 billion was spent on ENDS globally. Sales are forecasted to increase by a
factor of 17 by 2030. 2 Despite this projection, transnational tobacco companies are divided about the
prospects of the growth of ENDS sales and some companies have reported a slowdown in sales in
some markets. 3 , 4 , 5 There are no data on ENDS use at the global level and for many countries.
However, data mainly from North America, the European Union (EU) and Republic of Korea indicate
that ENDS use at least doubled among both adults and adolescents from 2008 to 2012. 6 In 2012, 7%
of EU citizens aged 15 years and over had tried electronic cigarettes. However, only 1% of the total
population used them regularly. 7 In 2013, 47% of smokers and ex-smokers in the United States of
1
Zhu S-H, Sun JY, Bonnevie E, Cummins SE, Gamst A, Yin L, Lee M. Four hundred and sixty brands of e-
cigarettes and counting: implications for product regulation. Tobacco Control. 2014;23:iii3–iii9.
doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2014-051670.
2
The tobacco industry at a crossroads: cigarettes growth falters as focus falls on alternatives. Euromonitor
international. July 2013
3
Evans P. E-cigarettes are the future? Not so fast, says BAT’s boss. Wall Street Journal. 30 July 2014
(http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2014/07/30/e-cigs-are-the-future-not-so-fast-says-bats-boss/)
4
Prior A. Lorillard profit down as e-cigarette sales drop: electronic cigarette sales tumble 35%, offsetting slight
increase in traditional cigarettes. Wall Street Journal. 30 July 2014 (http://online.wsj.com/articles/lorillard-
profit-down-as-e-cigarette-sales-drop-1406720447).
5
Wile R. Citi e-cigarettes: the e-cigarette boom is over. Business Insider. 15 May 2014
(http://www.businessinsider.com/citi-ecigarette-growth-slows-2014-5).
6
Grana R, Benowitz N, Glantz SA. E-cigarettes: a scientific review. Circulation. 2014;129: e490–e492.
doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.008545.
7
Attitudes of Europeans towards tobacco (Special Eurobarometer 385). European Commission, May 2012.
2
FCTC/COP/6/10
America had tried e-cigarettes, but prevalence of established use was 4% in this group. 1 Users report
that the main reasons for using ENDS are to reduce or stop smoking and because they can be used in
smoke-free places. 2
9. According to the recent WHO survey, ENDS availability is widespread. Slightly over half of
the world’s population live in 62 countries that report the availability of ENDS in their jurisdictions,
4% live in countries reporting that ENDS are not available, while the rest live in countries that did not
respond concerning the availability of ENDS.
10. Recently, the transnational tobacco companies have entered the ENDS market. Some of them
are aggressively competing with the independent companies to gain market share. Given the
economic power of the tobacco industry, recent moves to sue other companies alleging patent
infringement may be an indicator of how difficult it will be for ENDS to remain a business niche
dominated by independent companies.
QUESTIONS RELATED THE USE OF ENDS
11. Questions have been articulated in three groups:
(a) health risks to users and non-users;

(b) efficacy in helping smokers to quit smoking and ultimately nicotine dependence; and
(c) interference with existing tobacco-control efforts and implementation of the
WHO FCTC.
Health risks to users and non-users
12. Most ENDS products have not been tested by independent scientists but the limited testing has
revealed wide variations in the nature of the toxicity of contents and emissions.
13. Health risks from nicotine inhalation are affected by several factors.
(a) The capacity of ENDS to deliver nicotine to the user varies widely, ranging from very
low to levels similar to that of cigarettes, depending on product characteristics, user puffing
behaviour and nicotine solution concentration.
(b) Nicotine is the addictive component of tobacco. It can have adverse effects during
pregnancy and may contribute to cardiovascular disease. Although nicotine itself is not a
carcinogen, it may function as a “tumour promoter”. 3 Nicotine seems involved in fundamental
aspects of the biology of malignant diseases, as well as of neurodegeneration.
1
Giovenco DP, Lewis MJ, Delnevo CD. Factors associated with e-cigarette use. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine. Published online, 27 May 2014. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2014.04.009.
2
3
Nicotine alters essential biological processes like regulation of cell proliferation, apoptosis, migration, invasion,
angiogenesis, inflammation and cell-mediated immunity in a wide variety of cells including fetal, embryonic
and adult stem cells, adult tissues as well as cancer cells.
3
FCTC/COP/6/10
(c) The evidence is sufficient to caution children and adolescents, pregnant women, and
women of reproductive age about ENDS use because of the potential for fetal and adolescent
nicotine exposure to have long-term consequences for brain development. 1
14. The main health risk from nicotine exposure other than through inhalation is nicotine overdose
by ingestion or through dermal contact. Since most countries do not monitor these incidents the
information is very scarce. Reports from the United States and the United Kingdom nonetheless
indicate that the number of reported incidents involving nicotine poisoning has risen substantially as
the use of ENDS has increased. The actual number of cases is probably much higher than those
reported.
15. Evidence concerning the health risks resulting from chronic inhalation of toxicants in aerosol to
ENDS users are described below.
(a) Short-term effects of ENDS use include eye and respiratory irritation caused by exposure
to propylene glycol. Serious short-term health problems may occur but are very rare.
(b) Given the relatively recent entry of ENDS into the market and the lengthy lag time for
onset of many diseases of interest, 2 such as cancer, conclusive evidence about the association of
ENDS use with such diseases will not be available for years or even decades.
(c) However, evidence based on the assessment of the chemical compounds in the liquids
used in and aerosol produced by ENDS indicate:
(i) potential cytotoxicity of some solutions that have raised concerns about pregnant
women who use ENDS or are exposed to second-hand ENDS aerosol. 3 Cytotoxicity
was related to the concentration and number of flavourings used in the e-liquid;
(ii) the aerosol usually contains some carcinogenic compounds and other toxicants found
in tobacco smoke at average levels of 1–2 orders of magnitude lower than in tobacco
smoke, but higher than in a nicotine inhaler. For some brands, the level of some of
these cancer causing agents, such as formaldehyde and other toxicants like acrolein
have been found to be as high as in the smoke produced by some cigarettes; 4
(iii) the range of size of particles delivered by ENDS is similar to that of conventional
cigarettes, with most particles in the ultrafine range (modes around 100–200 nm)
compared to the bigger size found in cigarette smoke. However, ENDS generate
lower level of particles than cigarettes. 5
(d) Therefore, it is very likely that average ENDS use produces lower exposures to toxicants
that combustible products.
16. Evidence concerning the health risks resulting from inhalation of second-hand ENDS aerosol
by non-users are described below.
1
The health consequences of smoking – 50 years of progress. A report of the Surgeon General. Rockville (MD);
US Department of Health and Human Services: 2014 (p.126).
2
Including the lack of agreed early biomarker changes to assess potential harms.
3
Bahl V, Lin S, Xu N, Davis B, Wang Y. Comparison of electronic cigarette refill fluid cytotoxicity using
embryonic and adult models. Reproductive Toxicology. 2012;34:529–37.
4
Goniewicz ML, Knysak J, Gawron M, Kosmider L, Sobczak A, Kurek J et al. Levels of selected carcinogens
and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes. Tobacco Control. 2014;23(2):133–139.
5
Schripp T., D. Markewitz, E. Uhde, and T. Salthammer. Does e-cigarette consumption cause passive vaping?
Indoor Air. 2013;23(1):25–31.
4
FCTC/COP/6/10
(a) Bystanders are exposed to the aerosol exhaled by ENDS users, which increases the
background level of some toxicants, 1,2 nicotine 3 as well as fine and ultrafine particles in the air.
Nevertheless the level of toxicants, nicotine and particles emitted from one ENDS is lower than
that of conventional cigarette emissions. 4 It is not clear if these lower levels in exhaled aerosol
translate into lower exposure, as demonstrated in the case of nicotine. Despite having a lower
levels of nicotine than in second-hand smoke, the exhaled ENDS aerosol results in similar
uptake as shown by similar serum cotinine levels. 5
(b) It is unknown if the increased exposure to toxicants and particles in exhaled aerosol will
lead to an increased risk of disease and death among bystanders as does the exposure to tobacco
smoke. However, epidemiological evidence from environmental studies shows adverse effects
of particulate matter from any source following both short-term and long-term exposures. The
low end of the range of concentrations at which adverse health effects has been demonstrated is
not greatly above the background concentration, which for particles smaller than 2.5 μm has
been estimated to be 3–5 μg/m3 and increases with dose, which means that there is no threshold
for harm and that public health measures should aim at achieving the lowest concentrations
possible. 6
17. In summary, the existing evidence shows that ENDS aerosol is not merely “water vapour” as is
often claimed in the marketing for these products. ENDS use poses serious threats to adolescents and
fetuses. In addition, it increases exposure of non-smokers and bystanders to nicotine and a number of
toxicants. Nevertheless, the reduced exposure to toxicants of well-regulated ENDS used by
established adult smokers as a complete substitution for cigarettes is likely to be less toxic for the
smoker than conventional cigarettes or other combusted tobacco products. The amount of risk
reduction, however, is presently unknown. The 2014 Surgeon General’s Report concluded that non-
combustible products such as ENDS are much more likely to provide public health benefits only in an
environment where the appeal, accessibility, promotion, and use of cigarettes and other combusted
tobacco products are being rapidly reduced. 7
Efficacy in helping smokers to quit smoking and ultimately nicotine dependence
18. Although anecdotal reports indicate that an undetermined proportion of ENDS users have quit
smoking using these products their efficacy has not been systematically evaluated yet. Only a few
studies have examined whether the use of ENDS is an effective method for quitting tobacco smoking.
1
Under near real-use conditions, e-cigarettes increased indoor air levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons,
1,2-propanediol, 1,2,3-propanetriol, glycerine, and aluminium.
2
Schober W, Szendrei K, Matzen W, Osiander-Fuchs H, Heitmann D, Schettgen T et al. Use of electronic
cigarettes (e-cigarettes) impairs indoor air quality and increases FeNO levels of e-cigarette consumers.
International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health. 2014;217(6):628–37.
doi:10.1016/j.ijheh.2013.11.003.
3
Czogala J1, Goniewicz ML, Fidelus B, Zielinska-Danch W, Travers MJ, Sobczak A. Secondhand exposure to
vapors from electronic cigarettes. Nicotine and Tobacco Research. 2014;16(6):655–62. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntt203.
4
McAuley TR, Hopke PK, Zhao J, Babaian S. Comparison of the effects of e-cigarette vapor and cigarette
smoke on indoor air quality. Inhalation Toxicology. 2012;24(12):850-7.
5
Flouris AD, Chorti MS, Poulianiti KP, Jamurtas AZ, Kostikas K, Tzatzarakis MN et al. Acute impact of active
and passive electronic cigarette smoking on serum cotinine and lung function. Inhalation Toxicology.
2013;25(2):91–101. doi: 10.3109/08958378.2012.758197.
6
WHO air quality guidelines for particulate matter, ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide: summary of risk
assessment. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2006.
7
The health consequences of smoking – 50 years of progress: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA):
US Department of Health and Human Services; 2014 (p. 874).
5
FCTC/COP/6/10
19. The evidence for the effectiveness of ENDS as a method for quitting tobacco smoking is
limited and does not allow conclusions to be reached. However, the results of the only randomized
control trial that compared use of ENDS, with or without nicotine, to use of nicotine patches without
medical assistance in the general population, showed similar, although low, efficacy for quitting
smoking. 1 A recent study also shows some, although limited, effectiveness in real-world conditions. 2
20. At this level of efficacy, the use of ENDS is likely to help some smokers to switch completely
from cigarettes to ENDS. However, for a sizeable number of smokers ENDS use will result in the
reduction of cigarette use rather than in quitting. This will lead to dual use of ENDS and cigarettes.
Given the likely greater importance of duration of smoking (number of years smoking) over intensity
(number of cigarettes smoked per day) in generating negative health consequences, dual use will have
much smaller beneficial effects on overall survival compared with quitting smoking completely. 3
21. No ENDS product has yet been evaluated and approved for smoking cessation by a
governmental agency, although the United Kingdom’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory
Agency is in the process of reviewing some of these products.
22. In considering ENDS as a potential cessation aid, smokers should first be encouraged to quit
smoking and nicotine addiction using a combination of already approved treatments. However, at the
individual level, experts suggest that in some smokers who have failed treatment, have been intolerant
to it or who refuse to use conventional smoking cessation medication, the use of appropriately-
regulated ENDS may have a role to play in supporting attempts to quit. 4,5
Impact on existing tobacco-control efforts
23. Although ENDS present a range of potential benefits to smokers, there is an extensive and often
heated debate about whether ENDS will prove to have a positive or negative impact on population
health and particularly tobacco control. Areas of legitimate concern include avoiding nicotine
initiation among non-smokers and particularly youth while maximizing potential benefits for smokers.
Such concerns are referred to as the gateway and renormalization effects.
24. Gateway and renormalization concerns.
(a) The gateway effect refers to two potential circumstances:

(i) the possibility that children (and generally non-smokers) will initiate nicotine use
with ENDS at a rate greater than expected if ENDS did not exist; 6 and
(ii) the possibility that once addicted to nicotine through ENDS children will switch to
cigarette smoking.
1
Bullen CB, Howe C, Laugesen M, McRobbie H, Parag V, Williman J et al. Electronic cigarettes for smoking
cessation: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2013;382(9905):1629–37.
2
Brown J, Beard E, Kotz D, Michie S, West R. Real-world effectiveness of e-cigarettes when used to aid
smoking cessation: a cross-sectional population study. Addiction. Published online, 20 May 2014.
doi:10.1111/add.12623.
3
The health consequences of smoking – 50 years of progress: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA):
US Department of Health and Human Services; 2014.
4
Fiore MC, Schroeder SA, Baker TB. Smoke, the chief killer – strategies for targeting combustible tobacco use.
New England Journal of Medicine. 2014;370(4):297–9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1314942.
5
6
this This does not mean that use of ENDS by children in not a concern in itself.
6
FCTC/COP/6/10
(b) The renormalization effect refers to the possibility that everything that makes ENDS
attractive to smokers may enhance the attractiveness of smoking itself and perpetuate the
smoking epidemic. ENDS mimic the personal experience and public performance of smoking
and their market growth requires marketing that is challenging commercial communication
barriers erected to prevent the promotion of tobacco products.
(c) The likelihood and significance of these two effects occurring will be the result of a
complex interplay of individual, market and regulatory factors and is difficult to predict. They
can only be assessed with empirical data, which at present are virtually non-existent.
(d) The limited existing survey data from a handful of countries show that experimentation
with ENDS is increasing rapidly among adolescents and that in itself is of great concern even if
most of the young ENDS users also smoke. In fact, except in one case, the surveys show that
there are few exclusive ENDS users who have never smoked (mostly around 1% of the
population). 1,2,3 These data do not allow the conclusions to be drawn as to whether this is a sign
of adolescent smokers switching to ENDS, an established pattern of dual use, or a temporary
experimentation fashion. Therefore, in the absence of longitudinal data, existing evidence does
not allow an affirmation or rejection of the role of ENDS in increasing nicotine addiction
among adolescents above existing uptake rates, much less as to whether ENDS lead to smoking
in these countries. Among adults the pattern of dual use seems also the predominant one,
resulting in a reduction of smoked cigarettes and with few never smokers starting to use ENDS
(below 1% of the population). 4,5
(e) There are also very limited data from very few countries about the evolution of the
smoking epidemic in the presence of the ENDS boom. In one country (United Kingdom),
where tobacco-control measures are very strong and ENDS use is popular and growing, it
seems that smoking prevalence, cigarette consumption as well as overall nicotine use continues
to decrease gradually. 6 Whether these contrasting trends are causally related cannot be
concluded from these data. At least for the United Kingdom, renormalization as measured by
prevalence of smoking is not occurring currently. Whether this would be the case for other
countries cannot be generalized from the existing data and needs to be proven empirically.
25. More specific public health questions related to the interaction between ENDS and tobacco-
control efforts are discussed below.
26. Positioning the tobacco-control message: The entry of ENDS in the market has created
challenges to the core message of tobacco control, which until now has been that tobacco use should
1
Calculations based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported data from the United States
National Youth Tobacco Survey, contained in: Corey C, Wang B, Johnson SE, Apelberg B, Husten C, King BA
et al. Notes from the field: electronic cigarette use among middle and high school students – United States,
2011–2012. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report;62(35):729–30.
2
Lee S, Grana RA, Glantz SA, Electronic cigarette use among Korean adolescents: a cross-sectional study of
market penetration, dual use, and relationship to quit attempts and former smoking. Journal of Adolescent
Health. Published online, 22 November 2013. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.11.003.
3
Lukasz Goniewicz M, Zielinska-Danch W. Electronic cigarette use among teenagers and young adults in
Poland. Pediatrics. Published online, 17 September 2012. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-3448.
4
Sutfina EL, McCoy TP, Morrell HER, Hoeppner BB, Wolfson M. Electronic cigarette use by college students.
Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2013;131(3):214–221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.05.001.
5
ASH UK fact sheet. Use of electronic cigarettes in Great Britain. April 2014. Available from:
http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_891.pdf.
6
West R, Brown J, Beard E. Smoking toolkit study. Trends in electronic cigarette use in England. Updated 4th
April 2014. Available from: http://www.smokinginengland.info/latest-statistics/.
7
FCTC/COP/6/10
not be started and if started it should be stopped. 1 The promotion of ENDS comes with at least one of
the following messages or a combination of them: (a) try to quit smoking and if everything fails use
ENDS as the last resort; (b) you do not need to quit nicotine addiction, just smoking; and (c) you do
not need to quit smoking, use ENDS where you cannot smoke. Some of these messages are difficult to
harmonize with the core tobacco-control message and others are simply incompatible.
27. The role of the tobacco industry: The future role of ENDS is strongly determined by the
commercial interests of the industry that manufactures and sells ENDS. While there are “independent”
ENDS companies that have reported no interest in perpetuating tobacco use, the tobacco industry
involved in the production and sale of ENDS certainly is.
(a) The ENDS market, initially dominated by companies with no links to the tobacco
industry, is increasingly owned by the tobacco industry. All main transnational tobacco
companies sell ENDS and one of them is launching legal proceedings over patents against its
rivals as they become increasingly aggressive in the battle for the fast-growing e-cigarette
market. The increasing concentration of the ENDS market in the hands of the transnational
tobacco companies is of grave concern in light of the history of the corporations that dominate
that industry.
(b) It is unclear yet what this means for the ENDS market. However, if prior interest of the
tobacco industry in reduced-risk products serves as a precedent, their interest lies in
maintaining the status quo in favour of cigarettes for as long as possible, while simultaneously
providing a longer-term source of profit should the cigarette model prove unsustainable. In
addition, selling these products is intended to bring reputational benefits to these companies, as
they can pretend to be part of the solution to the smoking epidemic. 2 ENDS may follow the
trend of smokeless tobacco wherein the industry’s historic interest in smokeless tobacco
products outside some Nordic countries was both because they could be used in smoke-free
environments and because they could be promoted to young, non-tobacco users to create a new
form of tobacco use. 3
28. Potential interference with smoke-free policies.
(a) Smoke-free policies are designed not only to protect non-smokers from second-hand
smoke, but also to provide incentives to quit smoking and to denormalize smoking as
adolescents are particularly vulnerable to visual cues and social norms. 4
(b) The use of ENDS in places where smoking is not allowed
(i) increases the exposure to exhaled aerosol toxicants of potential harm to bystanders,
(ii) reduces quitting incentives, and
(iii) may conflict with the smoking denormalizing effect.
(c) Many ENDS look like smoking products and even if they do not resemble them, the
exhaled vapour looks like tobacco smoke. ENDS are marketed to be used where smoking is
1
de Andrade M, Hastings G, Angus K, Dixon D, Purves R. The marketing of electronic cigarettes in the UK.
London: Cancer Research UK; November 2013.
2
Peeters S, Gilmore AB. Understanding the emergence of the tobacco industry’s use of the term tobacco harm
reduction in order to inform public health policy. Tobacco Control. Published online, 22 January 2014.
3
Mejia AB, Ling PM. Tobacco industry consumer research on smokeless tobacco users and product
development. American Journal of Public Health. 2010;100(1):78–87. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2008.152603.
4
Preventing tobacco use among youth and young adults. A report of the Surgeon General. Rockville (MD); US
Department of Health and Human Services: 2012.
8
FCTC/COP/6/10
prohibited and given the resemblance to tobacco products it is likely that their use where
smoking is banned will make enforcing smoke-free policies more difficult.
(d) The fact that ENDS exhaled aerosol contains on average lower levels of toxicants than
the emissions from combusted tobacco does not mean that these levels are acceptable to
involuntarily exposed bystanders. In fact, exhaled aerosol is likely to increase above
background levels the risk of disease to bystanders, especially in the case of some ENDS that
produce toxicant levels in the range of that produced by some cigarettes.
29. The role of ENDS marketing (which falls into two categories: consumer marketing aimed at the
general public, and stakeholder marketing aimed at policy-makers and public health bodies):
(a) ENDS are being marketed to consumers in many media and forms, including television
commercials, sports and cultural sponsorship, celebrity endorsement, social networking, online
advertising, point-of-sale displays, pricing strategies, and product innovation. Some marketing
clearly emulates the very successful tobacco advertising asserting an independent identity and a
lifestyle choice, aligning oneself with celebrities, fashionable and youthful places and activities.
Some ENDS are marketed not only as socially acceptable but as socially superior.
Unsubstantiated or overstated claims of safety and cessation are frequent marketing themes
aimed at smokers. Some ENDS marketing also promotes long-term use as a permanent
alternative to tobacco, and a temporary one in public places where smoking is banned. ENDS
marketing activities have the potential to glamorize smoking and attracting children and non-
smokers even if those are unintentional results. However, no empirical studies have been
conducted to show whether the negative prospects of ENDS marketing are actually directly
associated with attitudinal and behavioural changes among children and non-smokers consistent
with the realization of such potential. Concerns have also been raised over the use of flavours in
the marketing of ENDS. One recent study indicates that ENDS are marketed in 7764 unique
flavours.3 Although the role of ENDS flavours potential attractiveness has not been studied yet,
expert opinion indicates that candy-like flavours could entice youths to experiment with ENDS
and could also facilitate the development of tobacco dependence by enhancing the sensory
rewards of ENDS use. 1 The tobacco industry’s internal documents suggest that flavouring
agents have played an important role in the industry’s targeting of children and youth, and there
is a concern that they could play the same role in the uptake of ENDS in these age groups.
(b) The marketing message to tobacco-control stakeholders is one of alignment of industry

and public health interests based on the harm reduction potential of ENDS. This leads to a
proposal of partnership between government and industry because industry claims a meaningful
seat at the table in the so-called harm reduction debate.
CURRENT REGULATION AND POLICY: RESULTS OF THE WHO SURVEY
30. Table 1 reflects the results of the 2014 WHO survey, showing the distribution of countries
according to the regulatory approach taken to ENDS.
Type of ENDS regulated as Not regulated

ENDS consumer therapeutic tobacco other total or unknown
product product product
With nicotine 14 (27%)* 12 (6%) 22 (10%) 11 (6%) 59 (49%) 135 (51%)
Without nicotine 23 (35%) 0 (0%) 18 (7%) 12 (2%) 53 (44%) 141 (56%)
1
The scientific basis of tobacco product regulation: a WHO Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation report.
Candy-flavoured tobacco products: research needs and regulatory recommendations. Geneva; World Health
Organization: 2007 (WHO Technical Report Series 945).
9
FCTC/COP/6/10
* The figure in parentheses after the number of countries indicates the percentage of the world
population living in these countries.
31. The sale of ENDS with nicotine is banned in 13 of the 59 countries that regulate them.
However, the majority of these 13 countries report that ENDS are available to the public, probably
through illicit trade and cross-border Internet sales.
32. The survey also shows that:
(a) comprehensive advertising, promotion and sponsorship bans on ENDS are in place in 39
countries (in which 31% of the world’s population live);
(b) use of ENDS in enclosed public places is banned in 30 countries (35%);
(c) premarket review is required by 19 countries (5%);
(d) vendor licences are required by nine countries (4%);
(e) policies on ENDS sales to minors were confirmed by 29 countries (8%). Where
specified, minimum required age for purchase ranged from 18 to 21 years.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
33. Smokers will obtain the maximum health benefit if they completely quit both tobacco and
nicotine use. In fact, Article 5.2(b) of the Convention commits Parties not only to preventing and
reducing tobacco consumption and exposure to tobacco smoke but also to preventing and reducing
nicotine addiction independently from its source. Therefore, while medicinal use of nicotine is a
public health option under the treaty, recreational use is not.
34. The rapid growth of ENDS use globally can neither be dismissed nor accepted without efforts
to appropriately regulate these products, so as to minimize consequences that may contribute to the
tobacco epidemic and to optimize the potential benefits to public health. Thus it is important to
identify public health concerns and to consider these concerns when undertaking regulation and
surveillance.
35. Regulation of ENDS is a necessary precondition for establishing a scientific basis on which to
judge the effects of their use, and for ensuring that adequate research is conducted, that the public has
current, reliable information as to the potential risks and benefits of ENDS, and that the health of the
public is protected. Public health authorities need to prioritize research and invest adequately to
elucidate evidentiary uncertainties as soon as possible. However, the greater responsibility to prove
claims about ENDS scientifically should remain with the industry.
36. When designing a regulatory strategy for ENDS, governments should bear in mind the
following general regulatory objectives:
(a) impede ENDS promotion to and uptake by non-smokers, pregnant women and youth;
(b) minimize potential health risks to ENDS users and non-users;
(c) prohibit unproven health claims from being made about ENDS; and
(d) protect existing tobacco-control efforts from commercial and other vested interests of the
tobacco industry.
37. Because the product, the market and the associated scientific evidence surrounding ENDS are
all evolving rapidly, all legislation and regulations related to ENDS should be adaptable in response to
10
FCTC/COP/6/10
new scientific evidence, including evaluation of different models for ENDS regulation, as evidence
accumulates.
38. Governments should consider that if their country has already achieved a very low prevalence
of smoking and that prevalence continues to decrease steadily, use of ENDS will not significantly
decrease smoking-attributable disease and mortality even if the full theoretical risk reduction potential
of ENDS were to be realized.
SPECIFIC REGULATORY OPTIONS
39. In order to achieve the general regulatory objectives mentioned above, Parties that have not
banned the sale of ENDS could consider the following non-exhaustive list of regulatory options, on
the understanding that the advisability and feasibility at country level of each of these options will
depend on a complex set of country-specific factors, including the existing regulatory frameworks and
the legal exigencies of the regulatory process.
40. Health claims. Prohibit manufacturers and third parties from making health claims for ENDS,
including that ENDS are smoking cessation aids, until manufacturers provide convincing supporting
scientific evidence and obtain regulatory approval. The regulatory standard for cessation claims and
approval as cessation aids should remain an appropriate body of evidence, based on well-controlled
clinical trials. For ENDS products to be approved for smoking cessation by the suitable regulatory
agency, the appropriate balance should be reached between providing accurate scientific information
to the public about the risks of ENDS use and its potential benefits as compared with smoking. This
balance can only be determined through scientifically tested audience messaging.
41. Use of ENDS in public places. Since the reasonable expectation of bystanders is not a
diminished risk in comparison to exposure to second-hand smoke but no risk increase from any
product in the air they breathe, ENDS users should be legally requested not to use ENDS indoors,
especially where smoking is banned until exhaled vapour is proven to be not harmful to bystanders
and reasonable evidence exists that smoke-free policy enforcement is not undermined. If smoke-free
legislation is not fully developed according to Article 8 of the WHO FCTC and the guidelines for its
implementation, this should be done as soon as possible.
42. Advertising, promotion and sponsorship. Given that the same promotional elements that
make ENDS attractive to adult smokers could also make them attractive to children and non-smokers,
Parties should contemplate putting in place an effective restriction on ENDS advertising, promotion
and sponsorship. Some forms of ENDS promotion, however, may be considered acceptable by Parties
if empirical evidence shows that ENDS might play a role in helping some smokers to quit without
leading to increased ENDS use by minors and non-smokers who otherwise would not have used
nicotine.
43. Any form of ENDS advertising, promotion and sponsorship must be regulated by an
appropriate governmental body. If this is not possible, an outright ban on ENDS advertising,
promotion and sponsorship is preferable to the implementation of voluntary codes on ENDS
marketing, given the overwhelming evidence that similar codes for tobacco and alcohol products have
failed to protect young people from such advertising.
44. Advertising, promotion and sponsorship of ENDS with or without nicotine, must, at a minimum:
(a) state clearly whether the product contains nicotine or may be used with nicotine solutions;
(b) not make them appealing to or target, either explicitly or implicitly, non-smokers or non-
nicotine users, and must therefore indicate that ENDS are not suitable for use by people who do
not currently consume tobacco products;
11
FCTC/COP/6/10
(c) not make them appealing to or target, either explicitly or implicitly, minors, including
through the selection of media, location or the context in which they appear or through imagery
that promotes sexual or sporting prowess;
(d) never promote ENDS for non-smokers, and their use should not be portrayed as a
desirable activity in its own right;
(e) encourage smoking cessation and provide a quitline number if one exists;
(f) contain nothing that could reasonably be expected to promote the use of tobacco products,
such as:
(i) the appearance or/and use of tobacco products;
(ii) the use of any brand name, design, colour, emblem, trademark, logo or trade insignia
or any other distinctive feature that might be associated by the audience with a
tobacco product;
(iii) the use of the words e-cigarette, electronic cigarette, or any other descriptor that
might reasonably be expected to create confusion with the promotion of cigarettes
and other combustible tobacco products;
(iv) showing ENDS products in ways that could reasonably be expected to promote
tobacco products, including images of tobacco-like products;
(g) not contain health or medicinal claims, unless the product is licensed for those purposes
by the appropriate regulatory agency. Electronic cigarettes and other nicotine-containing
products should be presented only as an alternative to tobacco, and should include warnings
that dual use will not substantially reduce the dangers of smoking;
(h) not undermine any tobacco-control measure, including by not promoting the use of
ENDS in places where smoking is banned;
(i) include factual information about product ingredients other than nicotine and in a way
that does not distort evidence of risks;
(j) not link these products with gambling, alcohol, illicit drugs or with activities or locations
in which using them would be unsafe or unwise.
45. Advertising, promotion and sponsorship of ENDS that contain nicotine or may be used with
nicotine solutions must:
(a) clearly state the addictive nature of nicotine and that these products are intended to
deliver nicotine;
(b) Prohibit suggestions that ENDS have positive qualities as a consequence of the addictive
nature of the product.
46. All authorized forms of ENDS advertising, promotion and sponsorship must be cleared by the
appropriate authority prior to publication/transmission in order to proactively prevent inappropriate
marketing, and then be monitored to assess compliance.
47. Protection from vested commercial interests. Transparency should be required from ENDS
and tobacco companies advocating for and against legislation and regulation, both directly and
through third parties. No matter what role the tobacco industry plays in the production, distribution
and sale of ENDS, this industry, its allies and front-groups can never be considered to be a legitimate
public health partner or stakeholder while it continues to profit from tobacco and its products or
represents the interests of the industry. Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC should be respected when
developing and implementing ENDS legislation and regulations.
12
FCTC/COP/6/10
48. Product design and information. ENDS should be regulated to:

(a) minimize content and emissions of toxicants;
(b) ensure use of nicotine of pharmacological quality, when nicotine use is intended;
(c) standardize nicotine delivery at levels known to the consumers;
(d) minimize acute nicotine toxicity;
(e) impede product alteration to use of other drugs;
(f) ban ENDS solutions with fruit, candy-like and alcohol-drinks flavours until empirical
evidence shows that they are not attractive to minors;
(g) require manufacturers and importers to disclose to governmental authorities information
about the contents and emissions of ENDS; and
(h) require registration of manufacturers and importers with governmental authorities.
49. Health warnings. ENDS health warnings should be commensurate with proven health risks. In
this regard, the following risk warnings could be considered: potential nicotine addiction; potential
respiratory, eyes, nose and throat irritant effect; potential adverse effect on pregnancy (due to nicotine
exposure).
50. Surveillance and monitoring. Governments are recommended to use or strengthen their
existing tobacco surveillance and monitoring systems to assess developments in ENDS and nicotine
use by sex and age.
51. Sale to minors. Retailers should be prohibited from selling ENDS products to minors, and
vending machines should be eliminated in almost all locations.
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
52. In order to implement the suggested general regulatory objectives as well as the specific
regulatory options, Parties will need to consider the available national regulatory frameworks that
could best provide solid regulatory grounds. Nevertheless, it is likely that a two-pronged regulatory
strategy – regulating ENDS as both a tobacco product, in accordance with the provisions of the WHO
FCTC, and as a medical product – would be necessary.
53. The applicability of many of the WHO FCTC provisions to the regulation of ENDS was
reviewed in a report by the Convention Secretariat on this topic1 presented at the fifth session of the
COP.
ACTION BY THE CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES
54. The COP is invited to note this report and to provide further guidance.
1
Document FCTC/COP/5/13 (available at www.who.int/fctc/publications).
13
First Reading
Second Reading lt
ORDINANCE 2011 1
-
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 30, ENTITLED ENVIRONMENT,
OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF OCEAN CITY, MARYLAND
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED AND ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND

CITY COUNCIL OF OCEAN CITY THAT CHAPTER 30,ENTITLED ENVIRONMENT, OF
THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF OCEAN CITY, MARYLAND BE, AND THE SAME IS
HEREBY AMENDED BY ADDING ARTICLE VIII,AS FOLLOWS:
ARTICLE VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE
Sec. 30 601.
- Definitions.
Environmental tobacco smoke" means the complex mixture formed from

escaping smoke of a burning tobacco product or smoke exhaled by the smoker.
Smoking"means the burning of a lighted cigarette, cigar, pipe, or any other

matter or substance that contains tobacco.
Sec. 30 602.
- Legislative Intent.
It is the intent of the Mayor and City Council of Ocean City to protect the public
and its employees from involuntary exposure to environmental tobacco smoke in certain areas
open to the public.
Sec. 30 603.
- Violations.
Smoking is unlawful in the following public parks:
a)Ocean Bowl Skate Park

b)Ocean City Tennis Center at 61"Street & Coastal Highway
c)Playgrounds at Bayside Park (aka Downtown Recreation Complex)
d)Playgrounds at Robin Park
e)Playgrounds at Little Salisbury Park
f)Playgrounds at Northside Park
LAW OFFICES g)Playgrounds at Gorman Park
AYRES, JENKINS,
h)Playgrounds at North
h Surf Park y,
GORDY & ALMAND, PA
SUITE 200 Sec. 30 604.

- Penalties.
6200 COASTAL HIGHWAY
OCEAN CITY, MD 21842
Anyperson who violates Sec. 30 603- hereof shall be subject to ejection from the
public park and be subject to a municipal infraction of up to $500.00,which can be issued by an
employee of the Department of Recreation and Parks in addition to those enforcers listed in
Section 1 -8 of this Code.
INTRODUCED at a meeting of the City Council of Ocean City,Maryland held on March

7,2011.
110
Amr
as
ADOPTED AND PASSED by the required vote of the elected membership of the City
Council and approved by the Mayor at its meetind on March 21, 2011.
ATTEST:
KATHLEEN A.P. MATHIAS, Clerk CHARD W. MEEH N,Mayor
Approved as to Form: LC
J ES S. HALL,President
j
GUY AYRES III,City Solicitor tX V `•I
Lt6YD MXATIN, Secretary
ORDINANCE # __ draft
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 30, ARTICLE VIII, ENVIRONMENTAL

TOBACCO SMOKE, OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF OCEAN CITY, MARYLAND
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED AND ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COUNCIL OF OCEAN CITY THAT CHAPTER 30, ARTICLE VIII, ENTITLED
ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE, OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF OCEAN
CITY BE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY AMENDED TO
REGULATE OUTDOOR SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACES
WHEREAS, The Mayor and City Council of the Town of Ocean City have deemed it
desirable for established public health and sanitation reasons to regulate smoking on the beach
and the boardwalk; and
WHEREAS, there recently has been considerable public interest in extending the
regulation of smoking to other public areas of the town; and
WHEREAS, The Mayor and City Council find it in the public interest to include
additional public areas where smoking should be regulated. As referenced in Ordinance 2011-7
which states, “It is the intent of the Mayor and City Council to protect the public and its
employees from voluntary exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (”the complex mixture
from…a burning tobacco product”) in certain areas open to the public.”
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Mayor and City Council of the Town
of Ocean City, Maryland, in session met, in the manner following to wit:
Section 30-601 – Definitions – 1) add the definition for a “Dune” as found in Chapter 30 –
Environment, Article II, Beach District Regulations, “Dune” means any naturally occurring or
manmade accumulations of sand in ridges or mounds landward of the beach; and 2) add the term
“Boardwalk” which means the manmade wooden structure west of and bordering the beach
where people walk, bike, run, and drive north and south from South 2nd Street to 27th Street. The
Boardwalk does not include the concrete protrusions east of the boardwalk found from
Wicomico Street to 4th Street; (3) add “beach” which is “beach (erosion control district) or the
area of land bordered on the north by the boundary line between Maryland and Delaware,
bordered on the east by the Atlantic Ocean, bordered on the south by the Ocean City inlet, and
bordered on the west by the State-Ocean City building limit line”, (COMAR 08.09.02.01); (4)
add “beach erosion control district” which is the area of land bordered on the north by the
boundary line between Maryland and Delaware, bordered on the east by the Atlantic Ocean,
bordered on the south by the Ocean City inlet, and bordered on the west by the State-Ocean City
building limit line (COMAR); (5) add the definition of “electronic smoking devices”, a.k.a.
ESD (electronic smoking devices), ENDS (electronic nicotine delivery system), ENDD
(electronic nicotine delivery device), e-cigarettes, or e-vapor devices which allow the action of
“vaping” are battery-powered disposable or rechargeable nicotine delivery systems using
flavored liquids and various levels of nicotine that are atomized by a heating element and is
absorbed into the lungs as an aerosol, resembling a vapor. “Vaping” is a term to describe the
process of inhaling the flavored aerosol and exhaling it.
Section 30-603-Violations, the list of affected areas under the regulated smoking areas in place:
Add: (i) ‘The Beach” and (j) “The Boardwalk” from Ordinance 2011-7, 03/21/2011.
Section 30-604 – Penalties: add that “citations can be issued to violators of the smoking
regulations at the discretion of the enforcement officer following a verbal or written warning for
the violator to cease the use of tobacco products; unless, said tobacco user is within a marked
designated smoking area.” The Mayor and City Council encourage voluntary use of the
receptacles provided in these designated smoking areas.”
The smoking regulations in outdoor public areas will include electronic smoking devices,
also known as “e-cigarettes” and “ESD”.
The sites on the beach where the town designates as smoking areas will have clearly-marked
cigarette/cigar butt receptacles that are orange cans located about 50 feet from the base of the
eastern side of the dune and about 50 feet from the beach entranceway from the dune. Lifeguard
chair signs and street signs will indicate there are designated receptacles. The beach area
regulated is also known as the beach erosion control district and has strictly-defined boundaries.
The sites on the boardwalk that the town designates as smoking areas will have clearly marked
cigarette/cigar butt receptacles. Enforcement of this ordinance shall come under the Ocean City
Police Department. Citations may be issued to violators of the regulations at the discretion of the
enforcement officer on scene. Citation amounts shall be from $25.00 to $1,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED AND ORDAINED, by the Mayor and City Council
of the Town of Ocean City, Maryland, in session met, as follows:
__________________________________ ______________________________
KELLY ALLMOND, City Clerk RICHARD W. MEEHAN, Mayor
Approved as to form: ______________________________
_________________________________ LLOYD MARTIN, President
GUY R. AYRES, III, City Solicitor ______________________________
MARY KNIGHT, Secretary

SURVEY PERFORMED BY THE VISITOR’S BUREAU
1) I am fully in favor of the ban. Too many times I have had my kid digging out cigarette butts from his
sand castles and handing them to me. We fought as a community to protect our beaches from the
beach driven vehicles during off season surf fishing due to concerns about oil and litter. It is working
for our neighbors in Delaware and I think it would work for us. Yes it is a touchy subject and many will
say that we are imposing on their personal freedom to choose to smoke but why should people be
subjected to second hand smoke and litter because others think it's their right? Ballparks, casinos,
hotels, restaurants, and some companies have banned smoking due to health concerns. We ban
alcohol, dogs, bikes, loud music, frisbees footballs, laser pointers, digging holes in the sand deeper
than knee during the summer...why should this be any different? Just because it is a habit that so
many choose even though it is harming them? If Ocean City is truly one of America's finest FAMILY
resorts then let’s lead by example. We have RAAM, play it safe, air show, free fireworks etc. all in the
name of families. Take the next step. It's 2014-it's time. Full disclosure I am married to a smoker as
well.
2) As for smoking ban on the beach, I think it is a good thing. Trying to sell Ocean City as a family
resort is kind of hard when parents see someone sitting next to them on the beach blowing smoke in
their kid's face. Also, smokers leave their cigarette butts all over the beach.
3) Although I do not know how they will ever enforce the ban, I do think it is a positive step in making
our beaches cleaner and more family friendly. Therefore, I would be in favor of the ban.
4) I would support smoking on the beach but believe a harsh fine should be in place for those who do
no not dispose of cig butts properly and leave on the beach (sand).
5) I believe a smoking ban is a great for the town. Putting aside the health hazard, putting a smoking
ban on the beach into effect will help keep our beaches and waters cleaner. In my opinion, it also
compliments the profanity ban and furthers the agenda of cleaning up the beach and the boardwalk to
make it a more family friendly environment.
6) I am for banning smoking on the beach. Our beach space is crammed during peak summer
months. I watch parents with young children hulling everything to the beach; toys, towels,coolers,
chairs, umbrellas, the list is endless. They get set up and then "wham", someone lights up next to
them. What is a family to do? Not like they can just pick up and move to open space, their isn't any. I
would not want a toddler napping under an umbrella next to someone smoking or the family having
their lunch with smoke floating across. A smoker can go to a designated area, the family cannot.
We are a family resort. Since smoking is not a necessity, it can easily be restricted to well-marked
areas.Rehoboth is never afraid to tackle these issues.
Sorry, but I am not compassionate to smokers. It stinks, it is offensive, and they drop cigarette
butts all over littering our town. My sincere apologies for being so strong minded on this topic.
7) In support of ban mainly to help keep the beach clear of the liter that comes from smoking on the
beach.
8) We do believe that we may be adversely effected at the hotel and restaurant. Currently we do not
allow people to smoke on the balconies. On the restaurant deck, we only allow customers to smoke at
the bar. We feel if smoking is not permitted on the beach and boardwalk, our customers will be forced
to stand in the hotel parking lot. Restaurant customers would all crowd around the bar unless we
started to permit smoking on the deck. We don't want to become a destination for smokers looking for
someplace to have a cigarette. Ultimately we're afraid that some of our repeat hotel guests may want
to stay at a location which is less of a hassle. I was told 20% of the population are smokers. We feel
this does not accurately reflect our hotel guests. We believe the percentage is higher.
Thanks,
9) Against, we regulate too much on People already, I have talked to a lot of customers about
this and all of them say they rarely have a problem with the people that do smoke. We
should be more worried about the pants below the waist on people. Children do not need to
see someone's underwear. I think they should be designated smoking spots on the boards
and also in July and August u could have smoking receptacles on the beach. I smoke I am
very curious and aware of the ppl around me I move or walk towards the back to smoke ,
however In The off seasons when there is barely anyone on beach I enjoy sitting there and if
no one's around me smoking. I understand what everyone is saying. This could never really
be policed, what if they just changed the campaign around something on the lines of we
want everyone to enjoy the rest and relaxation, be kind to ur surrounding with examples the
smoking the clothing the language the volume of noise promote, a friendly environment!! Isn't
ocean City about how everyone is a friend, we could be the cleanest kindest city in America.
Ok sorry went on a soap box. Lol enjoy ur day!
10) As a smoker I support being able to smoke on the beach. It's unfortunate that some people do not
pick up after themselves and are not courteous to those around them. I certainly don't light up if there
are small children around, but it is outside and as a tax payer I think it should be my option. I have
certainly seen people do worse on the beach. Thanks and have a great day!
11) I don't smoke, have never smoked, but feel things such as banning smoking on the beach is going
just a bit too far. I want to know where all the enforcement officers are coming from to enforce the
increasing number of laws being passed, like no smoking on the beach. We receive numerous
complaints every summer from good customers telling us they are not enforcing the current ones,
such as drinking, dogs, littering, etc., etc. Some of them have written letters of complaints to the
Mayor & Council. In my opinion there are far more serious things that need to be enforced.
May 13, 2014
The Department of Planning and Community Development contacted the Ocean

City Hotel-Motel-Restaurant Association on April 15, 2014 to request the group
conduct its own survey of members as part of the preparation for discussing
whether to regulate or ban smoking on the Ocean City beach and boardwalk.
The Hotel-Motel-Restaurant Association held a survey of 25 members to

determine who supports a smoking ban on the beach and boardwalk. The survey
was completed May 13, 2014.
Of the 25 participants, 15 of them, or 60%, were in favor of banning smoking on

the boardwalk and beach.
Contact person was Susan Jones

1 Ii
P
I
Board ofDirectors August 18, 2014 I
Robert Givarz
President To the Mayor and City Council:
Igor Conev
Vice- President The Ocean City Development Corporation and its Boardwalk Committee wish to
offer our recommendation to the Mayor and City Council in their efforts to
Reid Tingle introduce smoking restrictions on the Beach and Boardwalk for next season. We
Secretary
support a ban on smoking for these two important areas of Ocean City.
Wayne Hartman
Treasurer
Smoking areas can be provided at the street ends on adjacent side streets to the
Boardwalk but should not be located on either the Boardwalk or beach. Cigarette
Todd Ferrante
Past- President receptacles need to be provided at these side street areas, west of the Boardwalk,
and signage to explain the policy. Due to their proximity and connection to each
Charles Barrett other, the Boardwalk and beach should be treated the same way.
Bryon Davis
Beachgoers do not want to expose themselves or their children to the effects of
second hand smoke on the beach or boardwalk. Our main goal is to offer a safe,
C. Te xou g t
clean beach and atmosphere for our residents, visitors, and employees.
Jesse C. Houston
Patricia llczuk-Lavanceau The OCDC and its Boardwalk Committee discussed other alternatives, but believe a
ban on smoking is the best way to go for Ocean City' s Boardwalk and beach. It is a
Jay c.r en much needed response for our residents, employees, and visitors. Other nearby
John C. Lewis beach communities, such as Fenwick Island, Bethany Beach, and Rehoboth Beach
have instituted smoking bans on their beaches and we believe Ocean City should do
Geoffrey Robbins likewise. Rehoboth Beach and Bethany Beach have banned smoking along its
Bill
boardwalks, too.
Sieg
Chris Trimper
The OCDC and its Boardwalk Committee offers our support in future discussions
on this issue.
Executive Director
Glenn Irwin Thank you for your consideration of this recommendation.
Fx-O cio Members:
Economic Development Committee

Sincerely,
Ocean City Chamber of Commerce
Ocean City Downtown Association

Robert Giv , President Vicki Barrett, airperson
Ocean City Hotel Motel Restaurant
Association, t. Ocean Ci evelopment Corporation OCDC Boardwalk Committee
Town of Ocean City
Worcester County cc: David Recor, City Manager

OCEAN CITY DEVELOPMENT COPORATION
108 Dorchester Street— Ocean City, Maryland 2] 842
Telephone: 410- 289- 7739 Faa: 410- 289- 7742 Website: w w. ocdc. org
Town of Ocean City, Maryland
Designated Smoking Area

Policy Discussion
Regular Meeting
Mayor and City Council
January 5, 2015
Smoking Policy Committee
Representation from Planning & Community

Development, Police, Tourism, Department of
Public Works, Communications Manager, Public
Information Officer, Grants, Beach Patrol & County
Health Department
Present options to the Mayor & Council
Provide recommendations for implementation of

options based on experience and research
Proposed Ordinance
 Restricting smoking on the beach and Boardwalk to Designated

Smoking Areas located on the beach and adjacent to the Boardwalk.
 Include Electronic Smoking Devices (ESDs)
 Effective May 1, 2015

Designated Smoking Areas
Beach – 22 Gallon metal receptacles with lids - east of & 50 feet north
of the sea wall entranceway or from a dune entranceway
Restricted Smoking Logo displayed on every receptacle
One receptacle per Street on the beach - no metal signs to be used on

the beach itself – smoke within 15 feet of the receptacle – orange in
color to be visible
Receptacles will be located on beach from

May 1st to October 31st
Maintenance as needed. Expect losses.

$100 each, including paint
Sold by 100-count:up to $10,000
Typical Layout of Signs and Receptacles Past the Boardwalk
Existing design-to be replaced
Each yellow dot is a 4’x4’ sign

4th Street
Segment One – 7 Designated Sites
12th Street
Segment Two – 5 Designated Sites
Segment Three – 3 Designated Sites
One yellow dot represents two 6”x12” smoking restriction signs
The Inlet to 28th Street

Designated Smoking Area Locations
Segment One
South 2nd Street to 4th Street

#1 - South of #801 South Atlantic Avenue; southwest of South 1st Street
#2 – On concrete pad on South Division Street, west of the boardwalk
#3 – Adjacent to Inlet lot, south of
709 S. Atlantic Avenue
#4 - Between Wicomico Street & Somerset Street –
on the concrete portion
Ignore this
#5 - Caroline Street – east of The Purple Moose 1 of 2

Caroline Street
Designated Smoking Site #5
On concrete or platform placed east of concrete
2 of 2
#6 - North 1st Street – on the concrete
portion by the beach
#7 – on 4th Street on the concrete portion near the beach
Segment Two
5th Street to 16th Street

#8 - 6th Street on the beach entranceway platform
#9 - 8th Street on the beach entranceway platform
#10 - on10th Street on the beach
entranceway platform
#11 - on12th or 13th Street on the beach
entranceway platform
#12 – on 16th Street on the beach entranceway platform
Segment Three

#13 – on 19th Street on the beach entranceway platform
#14 – on 23rd Street on the beach entranceway platform
East of sea wall
#15 – on 27th Street – end of boardwalk

27th Street
#15 receptacle would be on a small platform

One yellow dot represents two 6”x12” smoking restriction signs

Designated Smoking Area Locations
Yellow dots at non-street beach entrances indicate small signs at private entranceways
One yellow dot represents two 6”x12” smoking restriction signs when on street
82nd Street to 146th Street

Implementation
No receptacles will be placed on any part of the wooden Boardwalk;
only on concrete portions & sea wall access platforms - 15
designated sites from Inlet to 27th Street
6”x12” sign (“Smoking is PROHIBITED”) will be placed on both sides

of each street intersecting with the Boardwalk;
Heavy stone-faced smoking receptacles (15) to be located only at

designated smoking areas adjacent to the Boardwalk
Additional Signage
(15) Designated smoking locations
12”x18” signs @ $40.00 each: $600.00
smoking receptacle here
Sign will be 30”x36”
Designated smoking location on sea wall access platform

30”x36” sign costs $100.00 each, 70 signs: $7,000
Each street end would have two small Smoking Prohibited signs
6”x12” sign
6”x12” sign on north side of street Poles included in
$37.50 a piece or $75.00 per street: $2,700
Inlet to 27th Street
the cost
Plus (25) north end locations at private beach entrances
86th St. – 120th St.: $937.50
Total: $3,637.50 for 6”x12” signs
Enforcement
Self Police
Regulations shall be enforceable through an ordinance by the OCPD
Verbal “reminders”
Self-education
Voluntary compliance
Citations can be issued beginning at $25.00 – not expected
Beach Patrol personnel will not enforce smoking restrictions
Lifeguard stands have signs with a phone number to call to

report violations & indicate the smoking prohibition
Communication & Education Strategies
Government Tools:
 Website (oceancitymd.gov & ococean.com)

 TV Access Channels (4 & 15)
 Social Media Sites
 FM Radio Station – 99.5
 VMS Boardwalk Signs
 eNews Updates
 Mayor’s Summer 2015 Spring Media Tour
1 of 3
Printed Tools:
 Newsletter & Community Calendar (37,000)

 Report to Citizens & Fall Newsletter (37,000)
 Chamber Visitor’s Guide
 Rack Cards (50,000) 4”x9” 1 side:$2,050, 2 sided:$2,350
 Business Cards (For Police Officers & Beach
Patrol) (10,000) 3.5”x2” 1 side: $735, 2 sided: $795
 Hotel Flyers (10,000)
 Add ESDs to materials?
Community Partnerships:
Work with Chamber of Commerce, Worcester

County Health Department/State Dep’t. of
Health & Mental Hygiene (grant), Ocean City
Development Corporation, Hotel Motel
Restaurant Association and additional
community partners to inform and education
residents and visitors about the new ordinance.
Clean Beach - Fresh Air
Fresh Air - Clean Beach

The curved top is eliminated
Existing ¾”-wide, 16sf, wooden street end signs

There are 160 of these in place.
Option: Rent the back side of each sign per season?

Conclusion
Necessity
It is time for Ocean City to create a healthier environment for the users
of our beach and Boardwalk; neighboring beaches have similar
programs in effect
Implementation
The Town will inform and educate smokers about the importance of
abiding by our new program using outreach and new designated
smoking sites with pleasant messages to gain their compliance
Enforcement
Verbal reminders to abide by new smoking restrictions are preferable.

Written warnings and citations are possible, when necessary. OCPD
shall be responsible for enforcement. OCBP shall not enforce the
smoking program’s requirements but focus on normal safety issues.
Projected Budget – Designated Smoking Areas
Boardwalk - $15,362.50
 15- cast aggregate ash containers @ $275 each = $4,125 (range: $226-290)
 signs – 30” x 36”- for beach access points - $100 each = $7,000
 15 – 12” x 18” Designated Smoking Location signs - $40 each = $600
 36 streets (72 signs/72 posts: Inlet to 27th Street @$37.50 each sign/post= $2,700 + 25
more of them at beach access points between 86th St. & 120th St.= $937.50
= $3,637.50 for all 12”x6” small signs
Beach - $19,600
 200 – Beach ash barrels (22 gallons) painted orange @ $50 each = $10,000
the sticker is included in the price; in-house painting
 240 – 12”x18” signs to be placed on the back of existing “Leave only your footprints” signs
@ $40 each = $9,600
Printed Materials - $3,145
 50,000 Rack Cards (4”x9”) color, double sided = $2,350
 10,000 Business Cards (3 ½”x2”) color, double sided to be used by the Police Department =
$795
Total: $38,107.50 - $18,762 (approved grant) = $19,345.50 balance
Additional: If a ground-level platform is used as a designated smoking area on 27th Street and Caroline Street, as
has been discussed, the following details apply:
8x8 boardwalk style platforms, lying flat on the beach. 12 pcs-2x6x16 treated deck boards. Include 5 lbs of 3”
deck screws.
Material costs-$180
Labor costs- $150
Total costs- $330 for each platform or $660 total for two of them.
Adjusted budget total: $38,767.50

9 – ITEMS REFERRED TO AND PRESENTATIONS FROM

THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF
B. 2014 Strategic Plan – Action Agenda Update presented

by City Manager
TOWN OF
Agenda Item # 9B
TO: The Honorable Mayor, Council President and Members of City Council
FROM: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager
RE: 2014 Strategic Plan – Action Agenda Update
ISSUE(S): To update the Mayor and City Council on the status of tasks
included on the 2014 Strategic Plan Action Agenda.
SUMMARY: The Action Agenda for the 2014 Strategic Plan contains specific
tasks assigned to various departments in the organization. Each
task is linked to a 5-year Goal and has been identified as a
Priority by the Mayor and City Council. The Action Agenda
describes milestones/activities necessary for completion along
with a timeline (FY QTR).
The attached report lists the status of every item included on the
Action Agenda as of December 31, 2014.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: No action required.
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
RESPONSIBLE STAFF: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager
COORDINATED WITH: Department Heads and Staff
ATTACHMENT(S): 2014 Action Agenda Update

2014 Strategic Plan – Action Agenda Update
Thru December 31, 2014 (2nd Quarter)

Mayor and City Council Strategic Plan

POLICY AGENDA MANAGEMENT AGENDA
POLICY AGENDA 2014 2014
Top Priority Top Priority
High Priority High Priority
Moderate Priority Moderate Priority

Management in Progress (Issues and Activities)
Major Projects
Action Agenda Updated Annually (3rd Q FY)
Status as of December 31, 2014
FY 15 annual priorities established and approved by the Mayor and City Council in March 2014:
POLICY AGENDA – TOP PRIORITY
ACTION GOAL RESPONSIBILITY MILESTONES/ACTIVITIES QTR STATUS
Tourism Strategic Goal #1 – 1st Tourism 1) Council Decision: Scope and 4th Q 14 Completed. Evaluated 8 Respondents to initial
Plan: Development Class Resort and Direction RFP. Mayor and City Council authorized
Tourist proceeding with Lyle J. Sumek & Associates as
Destination consultant/facilitator.
2) Finalize Strategic Planning 4th Q 14 Completed. By Tourism Commission Chair, City
process Manager, Tourism Director and
consultant/facilitator.
3) Conduct background 4th Q 14 Completed. By consultant/facilitator prior to
interviews initial Workshop with Tourism Commission.
4) Develop Visitor Profile 2nd Q 15 Completed. Survey of more than 1,000 visitors
conducted over summer as part of the Tourism
Strategic Plan process.
5) Conduct Planning Workshop 2nd Q 15 Completed.
for Tourism
6) Prepare Draft Plan 2nd Q 15 Completed. Feedback from Tourism
Commission received at second Workshop in
November 2014.
7) Present Plan 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 3rd Q 15
8) Council Decision: Adoption 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 3rd Q 15
Bayside Park Goal #1 – 1st Recreation and 1) Negotiate Lease or Transfer 4th Q 14 Completed. As part of the Mystic Harbor
Development Class Resort and Parks of property with Worcester Effluent Spray Irrigation Agreement with
Tourist County Worcester County.
Destination 2) Review and update Park 1st Q 15 In Progress. Proposal received from Slater and
Plan to include St. Louis Company for park redesign ($$$). Coordinating
Avenue and 3rd Street discussion both internally and externally.
modifications, mooring and Funding decision necessary for both design
docking opportunities, fees and improvement costs. Recent
fitness area, etc. Recreation and Parks Commission discussion
may suggest community meeting(s).
Comprehensive discussion regarding Town‐
owned downtown properties also warranted.
Change timeline to 4th Q 15.
3) Assess design/build option 1st Q 15 To Be Completed. 4th Q 15
for Skate Park and review
2 Status as of December 31, 2014
and update plan
4) Determine timing, cost and 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 1st Q 16
funding
5) Council Decision: Direction 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 1st Q 16
and Funding
Tax Differential: Goal #2 – City Manager 1) Complete updated City 3rd Q 15 Completed. Prepared by Municipal Financial
Resolution Financially Sound Report Group in February 2013.
Town 2) County staff and City staff to 1st Q 15 Completed. Mayor and City Manager met with
Government jointly address issues, County Officials to discuss issue, options and
options and methodology alternatives.
3) Council Report: Update 2nd Q 15 Completed. Letter to County requesting
Summary official discussion for FY 16 prepared first week
of December 2014.
4) Discussion with County 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
Commission
Smoking on the Goal #1 – 1st Planning and 1) Council Decision: Direction 4th Q 15 Completed. Information presented to Mayor
Beach/Boardwalk Class Resort and Community and Council. Follow‐up presentation scheduled
Tourist Development on January 5, 2015, Mayor and Council agenda.
Destination
Working Relationship Goal #4 – City Manager / 1) Meeting with Commission 4th Q 14 Completed. As noted above.
with Worcester Excellent Service Mayor and City Chair and County
County Through a High Council Administrator
Performing 2) City Manager/County 2nd Q 15 In Progress.
Organization Manager – to schedule
regular meetings to discuss
topics of mutual interest
3) Council Decision Joint 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 4th Q 15
Meeting – Format/Schedule
4) Council/ Commission – Joint 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed. 4th Q 15
Meeting
Dualization of Route Goal #5 – Engineering 1) Draft new letter to County 1st Q 15 Completed.
90: Advocacy Revitalized Ocean requesting inclusion in SHA
City: master plan
Development 2) Council Decision: Letter 1st Q 15 Completed. Project included in County’s
and Approval priority funding request list for SHA
Redevelopment Consolidated Transportation Program.

POLICY AGENDA – HIGH PRIORITY
ACTION GOAL RESPONSIBILITY MILESTONES/ACTIVITIES TIME STATUS
School After Labor Goal #1 – 1st Tourism 1) Support State Task Force FY 15 Completed. The Statewide Task Force
Day: Advocacy Class Resort and recommended that the Maryland General
Tourist Assembly pass a law requiring public schools to
Destination begin the school year after Labor Day.
Legislation is expected to be introduced during
the 2015 State Legislative Session.
2) Lobby FY 15 Ongoing. The Tourism Director, along with
representatives from local business
organizations, has participated in a statewide
work group monitoring and offering assistance
in the process to have this legislation enacted.
The Tourism Department continues to monitor
as the 2015 Legislative Session begins in
January.
Citywide Goal #2 – Human 1) Council Decision: RFP Bid 3rd Q 14 Completed.
Compensation and Financially Sound Resources 2) Council Decision: Award 4th Q 14 Completed.
Benefit Study and Town Bid
Policy Government 3) Complete market analysis 2nd Q 15 In Progress. On task and schedule.
and classification study
4) Complete report with 2nd Q 15 In Progress. On task and schedule.
recommendations
5) Council Presentation and 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
Decision: Direction,
Funding
Pedestrian/Bike Safety Goal #3 – More Engineering / A. Project
Master Plan: Action Livable Planning and 1) Continue to work with Ongoing In Progress. Continue to work with SHA on
Plan Community for Community the Maryland State improvements to Coastal Highway.
Residents Development Highway
Administration on
implementation of
Pedestrian Safety
initiatives including
signal timing
adjustments, median
barriers, and “road
diet”
B. Master Plan
1) Evaluate City owned 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
collector and arterial
streets for possible
pedestrian and bicycle
safety improvements
2) Council Presentation: 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
Master Plan/Report
Beach Playground Goal #3 – More Recreation and 1) Research safety compliant 4th Q 14 Completed. Coordinated internally with
Equipment Livable Parks play structures, meet Engineering and Public Works.
Replacement Community for weight requirement for
Residents removal during storms and
off season
2) Assess installation: 4th Q 14 Completed.
methodology and safety
3) Assess safety and liability, 4th Q 14 Completed.
including heat,
construction, use,
installation, hiding location
4) Assess equipment use and 4th Q 14 Completed. Public Works responsible for daily
maintenance requirements maintenance and seasonal storage. Recreation
(including sanitation and Parks responsible for site inspections and
requirements); safety major maintenance expenses.
inspection
5) Determine location(s) 4th Q 14 Completed. Initial structure located on beach
at 3rd Street and the Boardwalk.
6) Prepare comprehensive 4th Q 14 Completed. Initial installation completed.
report with funding options Discussion regarding fund raising for additional
beach structures on‐going.
7) Council Presentation and 1st Q 15 Completed. For initial beach structure.
Decision: Direction,
Funding
November Town Goal #4 – City Clerk / City 1) Council Decision: Re‐ 4th Q 14 Completed.
Election Excellent Service Solicitor Appointment Election
Through a High 2) Evaluate viability voting 4th Q 14 Completed.
Performing machines
Organization 3) Prepare voting machine 4th Q 14 Completed.
and options/costs
4) Council Decision: Voting 4th Q 14 Completed.
Machines, Funding
5) Implement direction 1st Q 15 Completed.
6) November 2014 Election 2nd Q 15 Completed.
Ocean Plaza Mall Goal #5 – Planning and 1) Meeting with current mall 1st Q 15 Completed. Redevelopment strategies
Strategy Revitalized Community owners discussed.
Ocean City: Development 2) Receive a Plan on Direction 2nd Q 15 In Progress. Conceptual Redevelopment Plan
Development and Actions: Intention presented for internal review.
and 3) Council Presentation: 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
Redevelopment Status Update –
Conceptual Plan, Direction
Downtown ‘Model Goal #5 – Planning and 1) Complete Land Swap 1st Q 15 Completed.
Block” Development Revitalized Community (MOU) with (OCDC)
Ocean City: Development / 2) Consolidate parcels 1st Q 15 In Progress. Pending demolition and additional
Development OCDC acquisitions.
and 3) Complete land acquisition TBD In Progress.
Redevelopment (OCDC)
Ambulance/EMS/Fire Goal #2 – Fire Chief 1) Complete Cost of Service 4th Q 14 Completed.
Response (West Financially Sound Analysis
Ocean City): Analysis Town 2) Prepare Report with 4th Q 14 Completed.
Government Recommendations
3) Council Decision: Overall 1st Q 15 Completed.
Direction
4) (Negotiate with Worcester TBD TBD.
County, if necessary)

POLICY AGENDA – MODERATE PRIORITY
Sunset Park Master Goal #1 – 1st Recreation and 1) Evaluate shared use 2nd Q 15 In Progress. Change timeline to 4th Q 15.
Plan and Uses Class Resort and Parks / options
Tourist Engineering 2) Evaluate park usage and 2nd Q 15 Ongoing. Evaluation completed annually. New
Destination assess additional events, hardscape improvements to be completed in
programs, etc. 3rd Q 15. Special Events Department will begin
to play a larger role in existing Added Value
events as it assumes more programming
responsibility during transition from OCDC’s
Sunset Party Nights productions. Change
timeline to 4th Q 15.
3) Work with OCDC to plan 2nd Q 15 In Progress. OCDC’s prefers providing financial
additional activities and support versus coordination of events. Further
uses discussion scheduled in January. Change
timeline to 4th Q 15.
4) Evaluate potential pier 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 3rd Q 15. Defer to City
extension Engineer.
5) Assess dredging 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 3rd Q 15. Defer to City
possibilities Engineer.
6) Review Sunset Park Plan 3rd Q 15 Completed. Plan has been reviewed and park
will be modified in 3rd Q 15. Additional
improvements may result from further
discussion.
7) Council Decision: Direction 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed. 2nd Q 16.
Northside Park Goal #3 – More Recreation and 1) Prepare Report Reviewing 1st Q 15 Completed. Outline of needs and cost
Building Livable Parks Condition and Building estimates prepared and will be submitted to
Improvements Community for Maintenance Needs, Costs City Manager for review and consideration
Residents and Funding during FY16 budget process.
2) Council Decision: Direction, 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 4th Q 15.
Funding

MANAGEMENT AGENDA – TOP PRIORITY
Planning and Zoning Goal #4 – Planning and 1) Identify Problems, Develop 4th Q 14 Completed. May 2014.
Evaluation Excellent Service Community Plan, Recommendations
Through a High Development 2) Presentation: Assessment
Performing Report with Action 4th Q 14 Completed. May 2014.
Organization Plan/Time Frame to City
Manager
3) Council Briefing: Report,
Action Steps 4th Q 14 Completed. May 2014.

800 MHz Radio Goal #2 – Emergency 1) Project review and update 2nd Q 15 Completed.
System Replacement Financially Sound Services 2) Research and analysis 4th Q 15 In Progress. Internal Work Group formed.
$ Town period Currently testing radio hardware used on the
Government State of Maryland 700 MHz system.
3) Project report w/options 4th Q 15 To Be Completed. 2nd Q 16
and recommendations
4) Council Decision: Direction 1st Q 16 To Be Completed. 3rd Q 16.
5) Council Decision: Funding 3rd Q 17 To Be Completed.
6) Project Implementation 2nd Q 18 To Be Completed.
Sports Destination Goal #1 – 1st Tourism 1) Support Wicomico in 4th Q 14/ Completed. Ocean City and Wicomico County
Marketing Program: Class Resort and pursuit of Ongoing hosted the USSSA Girls Softball Eastern World
Expansion Tourist Events/Tournaments Series over a three‐week period in July with
Destination nearly 400 teams participating representing 13
states and Canada.
2) Announcement/Agreement 4th Q 14 Completed. The Town entered into an
with Wicomico County agreement with Wicomico County in February
2014 establishing the Mid‐Atlantic Amateur
Sports Alliance (MAASA) to link and leverage
combined assets to attract, retain and build
sports events, with a focus on amateur
athletics, to grow the region’s economy and
reputation as a premiere destination. * An
amended agreement is being drafted to include
Worcester County participation in MAASA in
2015.
3) Council Decision: Support 4th Q 14 Completed.
expansion of Showell Park
4) Report on Budget: FY 15 Completed. Information presented to Tourism
Events/Tournaments Commission and reported to Mayor and
Council following USSSA Girls Softball World
Series event.
911 Primary Goal #4 – Emergency A. 9‐1‐1
Answering Point and Excellent Service Services 1) Discuss with Worcester 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed. Further discussion with
311 Non‐Emergency Through a High County Mayor and Council necessary. May require
Government Performing B. 3‐1‐1 legislative action.
Information Center Organization 1) Project Report: 2nd Q 15 In Progress.
Preparation
2) Research and Analysis 3rd Q 15 In Progress. Grant funding awarded for the
Period purchase of software provided and supported
by our existing CAD vendor (OSSI) which will be
available to the public as both a smart phone
application and via the Town’s website to
report non‐emergency concerns or requests for
assistance. Communications/Dispatch to
administer system.
3) Project Report: 4th Q 15 To Be Completed.
Options and
Recommendations
4) Council Decision: 4th Q 15 To Be Completed.
Direction
5) Council Decision: 2nd Q 16 To Be Completed.
Funding
6) Project Implementation 2nd Q 16 To Be Completed.
Information Goal #4 – Information 1) Prepare Comprehensive 2nd Q 15 In Progress. To be completed 3rd Q 15.
Technology Upgrade Excellent Service Technology Report with Priorities, Cost
Plan Through a High Analysis (Short Term/Long
Performing Term) Funding and
Organization Recommendations
2) Council Decision: Direction, 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 3rd Q 15
Funding

MANAGEMENT AGENDA – HIGH PRIORITY
Caroline Outdoor Goal #1 – 1st Class Special Events / 1) Work with Engineering on 4th Q 14 Completed.
Stage: Upgrade Resort and Engineering Front of Housing – fixed
Tourist overhead lighting (FOH)
Destination lighting concept/cost
2) Determine final FOH 4th Q 14 Completed.
lighting configuration and
timeline
3) Execute FOH install for 4th Q 14 Completed.
Summer Season
4) Purchase other misc. needs 4th Q 14 Completed.
(tables, mirrors, chairs,
hooks, etc.)
5) SCHEDULED FIRST USE 1st Q 15 Completed. Activated first use of stage on
July 4, 2014.
City Facilities Security Goal #2 – Engineering 1) Evaluate facility security 1st Q 15 Completed.
Plan Financially Sound and identify potential
Town problems
Government 2) Evaluate options and ‘best 2nd Q 15 Completed.
practices’
3) Develop overall plan 3rd Q 15 In Progress.
4) Council Review: Security 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
Plan
5) Council Decision: Direction 4th Q 15 To Be Completed.
and Funding
License Plate Goal #3 – More Chief of Police 1) Obtain device on loan from 4th Q 14 Completed.
Recognition Program Livable State of Maryland
for Route 90 Community for 2) Install 2nd Camera 4th Q 14 In Progress. Installation scheduled for 3rd Q
Residents 15.
3) Prepare “End of Season” 2nd Q 15 Completed. Report prepared and submitted
report to City Manager on December 19, 2014.
4) Police Commission Report 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed.
and Recommendations
5) Council Decision: Direction, 2nd Q 15 Completed. Funding procured through Police
Funding Department’s asset forfeiture funds
(if needed)

Whiteside Facility Goal #2 – Public Works / 1) Complete use analysis and 1st Q 15 Completed. Internal review and discussion of
Replacement Financially Sound Engineering needs facility function(s), equipment (storage) and
Town staffing.
Government 2) Review operational 2nd Q 15 Completed. Internal discussion continues.
logistics to determine site
specifics – Downtown area
3) Develop report: site 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
options and challenges (link
land)
4) Council Decision: Direction 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
on site
5) Develop 35% Design and 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
cost estimate
6) Council Decision: Funding 4th Q 15 To Be Completed.
Mechansim for FY 16
Tall Ship Capacity Goal #1 – 1st Class Special Events / A. 4th Street
Resort and Engineering 1) Continue work with 4th Q 14 Ongoing.
Tourist Engineering on
Destination dredging
2) Work with Engineering 4th Q 14 Indefinite Hold. Installation intended to
on cleats accommodate second ship (Nao Victoria and
Pride of Baltimore II).
3) Determine other 4th 4th Q 14 In Progress. Further input to be provided
Street site needs during Bayside Park Master Plan revisions.
4) Council Decision: 4th Q 14 Indefinite Hold.
Contract Approval
5) Council Report: 4th 2nd Q 15 Indefinite Hold.
Street usage
B. Sunset Park
1) Review pros and cons 1st Q 15 Completed. Ongoing consideration of
for Sunset Park Pier potential uses.
and Mooring
2) Determine costs to 2nd Q 15 In Progress.
modify Sunset Park for
attracting vessels
3) Council Report: Sunset 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 3rd Q 15. Budget discussion
Park Modification topic.
Evaluation
4) Council Decision: 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
Direction
Network Backbone Goal #4 – Information A. Phase I – Initiation and 2nd Q 15 In Progress. Various tasks complete. Project
Replacement Excellent Service Technology Planning funding linked to availability of financial
$$ Through a High 1) Decision: Project resources and Budget.
Performing Direction, Funding
Organization 2) Assemble a Planning
Committee
3) Survey conditions of
current system
4) Identify current Point‐
to‐Point and Point‐to‐
Multipoint topology
5) Determine backhaul
bandwidth
requirements
6) Develop backhaul
requirements design
7) Develop a scalability
plan for the backhaul
B. Phase 2 – Design 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed.
Development
1) Determine bandwidth
requirements for the
remaining twelve
satellite sites
2) Develop a scalability
plan for our satellite
sites
3) Evaluate different
design and technology
options as a
Committee
4) Review design
development
deliverables
5) Submit final design
requirements and
scalability plan
C. Phase 3 – Procurement 4th Q 15 To Be Completed.
1) Conduct bid process
for construction and
installation
2) Submit proposals to
Mayor and Council for
final approval
3) Award Contract
D. Phase 4 – Construction and 1st Q 16 To Be Completed.
Installation
1) Begin installation of
chosen design and
technology
2) Test, label, and
terminate new cabling
3) Remove obsolete
infrastructure
4) Cut over voice services
as appropriate
5) Cut over data services
to new technology
solution
E. Phase 5 – Project Closeout 2nd Q 16 To Be Completed.
1) Close out
administrative tasks
2) Conduct project
reviews
3) Formally sign off on
the project
Land Goal #5 – City Manager / 1) Complete an Inventory of 4th Q 14 Completed. Inclusive of function, equipment
Acquisition/Disposal Revitalized Ocean Public Works Town Owned Land and and staffing.
Strategy City: their Current/Potential
Development and Uses/Need
Redevelopment 2) Identify Critical 4th Q 14 In Progress. Internal discussion continues.
Opportunities for Possible
Land Acquisition by the
Town and their Potential
Use or Community Benefit
3) Prepare Comprehensive 4th Q 14 To Be Completed. 4th Q 15
Report with Recommended
Policy, Guidelines and
Strategy
4) Council Decision: Direction 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed.
MANAGEMENT AGENDA – MODERATE PRIORITY
June Behavior Action Goal #1 – 1st Class Chief of Police 1) Develop Recommended 4th Q 14 Completed.
Plan Resort and Plan with Options
Tourist 2) Police Commission Review 4th Q 14 Completed.
Destination and Recommendations
3) Council Decision: Direction 4th Q 14 Completed.
4) Prepare post report 1st Q 15 Completed.
5) Police Commission Review 1st Q 15 Completed.
Post Report
6) Council Presentation: Post 1st Q 15 Completed.
Report
Beach Goal #1 – 1st Class Special Events / 1) Review of related private 4th Q 14 Completed. Regular review.
Events/Tournaments Resort and Tourism beach events: inventory,
Expansion Tourist analysis impact and time
Destination frame
2) Evaluate report with 1st Q 15 Completed.
options
3) Incorporate into Tourism 2nd Q 15 Completed. November 2014 Tourism
Strategic Planning Commission Workshop.
4) Develop Action Plan for 3rd Q 15 To Be completed.
Beach Events/Tournaments
Seasonal Police Goal #4 – Chief of Police 1) Prepare a Report with 2nd Q 15 In Progress. Comprehensive evaluation
Comprehensive Excellent Service Recommendations for currently underway to include recruitment,
Evaluation Through a High Potential Reductions testing, training and associated costs. Work
Performing Load Analysis Report submitted on December
Organization 8, 2014.
2) Police Commission Review: 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed.
Report
3) Council Presentation: 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed.
Report
Avaya Phone System Goal #4 – Information 1) Establish Internal Phone 4th Q 14 Completed. First meeting held June 25, 2014.
Replacement Excellent Service Technology Committee
S Through a High 2) Review current phone 1st Q 15 Completed.
Performing system features & needs
Organization 3) Setup phone system 1st Q 15 Completed. Demos conducted on October 22,
vendor demos 2014 by Cisco, October 29 by Shortel,
November 5 by Comcast and November 12 by
BIG/Toshiba.
4) Council Decision: Direction, 1st Q 15 To Be Completed. 4th Q 15.
CIP Funding
5) Write up RFP & Submit RFP 2nd Q 15 In Progress. 3rd Q 15.
6) Review RPF proposals 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 3rd Q 15.
7) Final Vendor Demo & Site 2nd Q 15 To Be Completed. 3rd Q 15.
visit
8) Council Decision: Award 3rd Q 15 To Be Completed. 4th Q 15.
RFP
9) Implementation Plan for 4th Q 15 To Be Completed.
new phone system
Town of Ocean City Goal #1 – 1st Class Special Events 1) Revise Guidelines to reflect 4th Q 14 Completed.
Equipment and Labor Resort and FEMA cost structure
Guidelines Tourist 2) Complete 2nd DRAFT of 4th Q 14 Completed.
Destination guidelines
3) Present to Recreation and 4th Q 14 Completed.
Park Commission and Legal
Council
4) Council Presentation – First 4th Q 14 Completed. Approved by Mayor and City
Effort Council.
5) Council Presentation – 4th Q 14 Completed. Approved by Mayor and City
Second Effort Council.
6) Council Decision: Approval 4th Q 14 Completed. Final approval by Mayor and City
of Guidelines Council on August 22, 2014.
7) Implementation of 1st Q 15 Completed. Effective January 1, 2015.
Guidelines/Pricing

FY 15 Management in Progress Issues and Activities:

Management in Progress

TIME RESPONSIBILITY STATUS

Goal 1 – 1st Class Resort and Tourist Destination

Tourism Website Redesign 4th Q 14 Tourism Completed. May 2014.
Tourism Mobile App Development 4th Q 14 Tourism Completed. May 2014.
Advertising Agency: Contract 1st Q 15 Tourism Completed. Mayor and City Council approved three‐year
contract renewal with MGH in June 2014.
Visitor Profile 2nd Q 15 Tourism Completed. Survey of more than 1,000 visitors conducted
over summer as part of the Tourism Strategic Plan process.
ROI for Private Events 4th Q 14 Special Events Completed. Ongoing review by Special Events Director and
Private Events Coordinator.
New Banner Program 4th Q 14 Special Events Completed. A new and extended banner program was
approved by the Mayor and City Council on July 29, 2014.
New Annual Event – “Halloween in Ocean City” 2nd Q 15 Special Events Completed. Continue to build on the successful 2014
collaboration to expand offerings and attractions.
Winterfest Pavilion: Facility Evaluation and 4th Q 15 Special Events In Progress. Three‐Year Improvement Plan to be discussed
Refurbishment during FY 16 Budget review.
Bus Locator App: Development 2nd Q 15 Transportation In Progress. Scheduled for further discussion by the
Transportation Commission.

Goal 2 – Financially Sound Town Government

P Card Program: Implementation 4th Q 14 Purchasing Completed. Purchasing still testing. Live by January 2015.
Pension Report (Annual) 1st Q 15 Finance Completed. Presented to Mayor and Council on August 8,
2014.
Government Accounting Standards 67 Financial 1st Q 15 Finance Completed. Implemented in CAFR for year ended June 30,
Reporting for Pensions 2014. Presented to Mayor and Council on November 3,
2014.
Capital Improvement Budget for FY15 1st Q 15 Engineering Completed. Presented to Mayor and Council on August 12,
2014.
Document Archiving System: Imaging and Training 1st Q 15 Information Technology Completed. On‐site training conducted with Human
(Human Resource / Public Access) Resources Department in October 2014.
Water/Wastewater Rates: Review/Adjustment 1st Q 15 Finance / Public Works In Progress. Tentatively scheduled for presentation to
Resolution Mayor and Council in February 2015.
Management in Progress Cont.


Purchasing Policy and Procedure: Update 2nd Q 15 Purchasing Completed. Approved by the Mayor and Council on
September 9, 2014.
Online Payment by Phone (Bus/Parking) 2nd Q 15 Finance In Progress. Under review by Public Works/Maintenance.
Online Bill Payments: Utilities 3rd Q 15 Finance To Be Completed. On schedule. Coordinating with
Information Technology.
Building Fee Structure: Evaluation, Direction 3rd Q 15 Building To Be Completed.

Goal 3 – More Livable Community for Residents

Manual on Environmental Permitting 1st Q 15 Engineering Completed. Manual available in hard copy and online.
Automated calculation feature available online.
Special Enforcement Unit: Report 2nd Q 15 Chief of Police In Progress. A comprehensive report on the SEU will be
submitted in 3rd Q 15 providing insight into the unit’s
mission, objectives and performance to date and vision for
the future.
FEMA Maps: Ordinance 3rd Q 15 Planning and Zoning In Progress. Appeals process concluding.
TMDL: Assign Load Ongoing Engineering In Progress. Continue to coordinate with MDE on affected
projects and activities.
Eagle’s Landing Golf Course Irrigation TBD Recreation and Parks In Progress. Responses to RFP for design and consulting
services due January 5.
Joint Use of School Facilities Ongoing Recreation and Parks In Progress. Have had several discussions with new OC
Elementary School administration. Discussion to continue
although administration reluctant to expand joint use at
this time.
Comprehensive Emergency Operations Recovery FY 16 Emergency Services In Progress. Internal Work Group formed. Project outline
Plan to be developed and distributed. Discussion with Mayor
and City Council.
Drug Action Plan FY 16 Human Resources Completed.



Goal 4 – Excellent Service Through a High
Performing Town Organization

Web‐based Building Permits and Business Licenses 4th Q 14 Building / Information Completed.
Technology
Laser Fiche Web Portal/We blink 4th Q 14 Information Technology Completed.
Strategic Planning: Annual Update 4th Q 14 City Manager Completed. Institutionalizing annual schedule and
reporting format.
City Properties Insurance Review 4th Q 14 Risk Management Completed. In addition to annual review, properties,
facilities additions/deletions and coverage limits monitored
regularly.
Town Policy and Procedure Manual: Completion 4th Q 14 City Clerk In Progress.
Emergency Management/Town Facilities 1st Q 15 Risk Management / Fire Completed. City Hall Evacuation Plan and Training
Evacuation Plan and Training complete. Additional training planned for Recreation and
Parks and Convention Center.
Health and Safety Manual/Training/Policy Review 2nd Q 15 Risk Management In Progress. Being reviewed and updated to meet current
OSSHA requirements. 4th Q 15.
Fire Operating Standard Guidelines 3rd Q 15 Fire Chief Completed. Internal review. Distribution scheduled
January 2015.
Council Chambers Audio Video Upgrade 3rd Q 15 Engineering In Progress. Draft RFP complete. Legislative Management
software approved by Mayor and Council on December 15,
2014.
Electronic Record/Laser Fiche: Strategic Planning 4th Q 15 Information Technology To Be Completed.
Water Quality Administrative Consent Decree 4th Q 15 Public Works In Progress. On track to comply with February 2015
deadline.
Parks: Evaluation and Direction TBD Recreation and Parks In Progress. Internal discussion. Improvements subject to
available funding. 4th Q 17.
Safety Hazard Training Program FY 15 Risk Management In Progress. Coordinating needs, activities and schedules
with various departments.



Goal 5 – Revitalized Ocean City: Development and
Redevelopment

Road Resurfacing Plan: Review/Funding (Annual) 4th Q 14 Public Works Completed. Street selection/schedule complete for FY 15
thru FY 18.

FY 15 Major Projects:

Major Projects


Goal 1 – 1st Class Resort and Tourist Destination

Beach Replenishment 4th Q 14 Engineering Completed.
Airport Improvement: Environmental Assessment, 1st Q 15 Public Works In Progress. Scope of Services currently under review by
Tree Removal FAA. Grant awarded and received from MAA. Tree
Removal nearly complete (January 2015).
Boardwalk Security Cameras: Phase II 1st Q 15 Engineering / Information Completed. Implementation of new City Watch program
Technology launched in Summer 2014.
Performing Arts Center Project 2nd Q 15 Engineering / Convention Completed. Construction commenced October 20, 2013.
Center First performance held December 13, 2014.

Goal 2 – Financially Sound Town Government


Water Disinfection Byproducts Pilot Study 4th Q 14 Public Works In Progress. Full scale testing currently underway with one
filter converted to GAC media.
Downtown Water Storage Tank 1st Q 15 Public Works In Progress. Site design/layout 90% complete. Tank
currently under design.

Major Projects Cont.

Goal 3 – More Livable Community for Residents

Northside Park: Pier re‐decking. 4th Q 14 Recreation and Parks Completed. Internally by Public Works Department.
Tennis Center Fence Replacement 4th Q 14 Recreation and Parks Completed.
New Kayak Rental Concession 4th Q 14 Recreation and Parks Completed. RFP and selection process completed. Vendor
and Town pleased to report a very successful first season.
Skate Park Sunshade Canopy 4th Q 14 Recreation and Parks Completed. Grant funded project.
Performing Arts Center Project 2nd Q 15 Engineering / Convention Completed. Construction commenced October 20, 2013.
Center First performance held December 13, 2014.
Canal Dredging Project: Phase I 3rd Q 15 Engineering In Progress. Canal at Trimper/Hitchens completed. 52nd
Street in progress. Wight Bay, 25th Street, East and West
side of Tern Drive all funded along with outfall dredging at
Seaweed, Tunnel, Sinepuxent, Jamaica and Jacqueline
Avenue storm drain outfalls expected to be completed by
Summer 2015.
New Beach Patrol Headquarters building 4th Q 15 Engineering In Progress. Project under construction. Expected June
2015 completion date.
Eagle’s Landing Golf Course: Clubhouse 4th Q 15 Recreation and Parks To Be Completed. Improvements subject to available
Improvements funding.
Public Boat Ramp at 64th Street 1st Q 16 Engineering In Progress. Land acquisition complete. Design and
permitting underway.

Goal 4 – Excellent Service Through a High
Performing Town Organization


Fire Station 4 1st Q 15 Engineering Completed.
Fire Headquarters Building 4th Q 15 Engineering In Progress. Finalizing design. Anticipate start of
construction in April 2015.

Major Projects Cont.


Goal 5 – Revitalized Ocean City: Development and
Redevelopment

St. Louis Avenue – Phase II 4th Q 14 Public Works Completed.
St. Louis Avenue – Phase III 4th Q 15 Public Works In Progress. Underground upgrades/improvements
complete from 4th Street to 1st Street. Commencing efforts
between 1st Street and Division Street in January. On
schedule for completion in 4th Q 15.
Boardwalk Fiber Optic Backbone 1st Q 15 Engineering / Information Completed.
Technology

10 – ITEMS REFERRED TO AND PRESENTATIONS FROM

THE CITY SOLICITOR
A. First Reading – Ordinance to Amend Section 58, Entitled

Offenses and Miscellaneous Provisions (Trespass
Enforcement Authorization Program sign purchased by the
participant will be placed by the participant not the city)
TOWN OF
Agenda Item # 10A

Council Meeting December 15, 2014

FROM: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager
RE: Ordinance to Chapter 58, Article II Offenses Against Public Peace and Order
ISSUE(S): First reading of ordinance amending trespass enforcement

authorization program code.
SUMMARY: Current code notes that Trespass Enforcement Authorization

Program signs are to be placed on participating properties by the
city. This amendment changes the responsibility of sign
placement to the participant.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable
RECOMMENDATION: Pass ordinance for second reading.

Excellent Service through a
More Livable Community for
High Performing Town
Residents
Organization
ALTERNATIVES: None suggested.
RESPONSIBLE STAFF: Not applicable
COORDINATED WITH: Police Commission
ATTACHMENT(S): Ordinance
11 – COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Any person who may wish to speak on any matter at the Regular Session may
be heard during Comments from the Public for a period of five( 5) minutes or
such time as may be deemed appropriate by the Council President. Anyone
wishing to be heard shall state their name, address and the subject on which he
or she wishes to speak.
12 – COMMENTS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
A. Review of tentative work session agenda for Tuesday,

January 13, 2015
13 – COMMENTS FROM MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

January 5 2015 Complete Agenda

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

January 5 2015 Complete Agenda

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

3 – Report on Closed Session – Monday, January 5, 2015

DATE AND TIME: Monday, January 5, 2015 5:00 p.m.

AUTHORITY: State Government Article: Section 10-508(a) Annotated Code of Maryland

p.m. The following is a report of the closed session.

2. A record of the vote of each member as to closing the session is attached.

4. (a) Topics of Discussion: Legal and Collective Bargaining Matters

(b) Persons present:

Mayor Richard Meehan

Motion to close meeting:

A. Organizational Meeting dated November 6, 2014

5 – ITEMS PRESENTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY

A. Standing Committee Report – Transportation

5 – ITEMS PRESENTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY

B. Standing Committee Draft Agendas

Note: There is no scheduled Police Commission open session in January.

2. Presentation from Robert Holland on OC Beach Baseball

3. Update on Beach Play Equipment

4. Update on NSP SUP Rental Franchise

5. Private Event Application review

Susan/Word/Rec & Parks ComPLWWHH Meeting Agenda 1/1/1

A. Private Event Approval Request for OC Half Marathon

The White Marlin Capital of the World

TO: The Honorable Mayor, Council President and Members of Council

SUMMARY: The Marathon begins on Assateague Island at 7:00 a.m., enters

Public Works will provide a completed entertainment and food tent,

The applicant is aware of and agrees to the new fee structure.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve the event as presented.

ALTERNATIVES: No staff alternatives suggested.

ATTACHMENT(S): 1) May 2015 Calendar

Comments from Department Representatives:

Date on Council Agenda: January 5, 2015

B. Private Event Approval Request for Ride for the Feast –

The White Marlin Capital of the World

TO: The Honorable Mayor, Council President and Members of Council

SUMMARY: Beginning at 7:30 a.m. on the Boardwalk at 3rd Street,

The applicant is aware of and agrees to the new fee structure.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve the event as presented.

ALTERNATIVES: No staff alternatives suggested.

RESPONSIBLE STAFF: Lisa Mitchell, Private Event Coordinator

ATTACHMENT(S): 1) May 2015 Calendar

Comments from Department Representatives:

Date on Council Agenda: January 5, 2015

9– ITEMS REFERRED TO AND PRESENTATIONS FROM

A. Smoking on the Beach and Boardwalk Policy Discussion

The White Marlin Capital of the World

TO: The Honorable Mayor, Council President and Members of Council

ISSUE(S): To consider restricting smoking to designated areas on the beach

SUMMARY: Recognized as a Top Priority in the 2014 Strategic Plan Policy

After forming an internal Smoking Policy Committee comprised of

FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated expenses approximately $40,000 (materials and

RECOMMENDATION: Restrict smoking, including the use of ESDs, to designated

1st Class Resort and Tourist Destination

ALTERNATIVES: Complete smoking ban on beach and Boardwalk or status quo

RESPONSIBLE STAFF: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager

COORDINATED WITH: Ross Buzzuro, Chief of Police

ATTACHMENT(S): 1) Minutes – April 29, 2014, Work Session

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION - TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2014 - 12: 00 - 1: 00 P. M.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND RECOGNITIONS

B. [ Postponed] Recognition of Retirement for Frank Marshall, Public Works Construction

COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

A. Bid Openings - Annual Concrete Sidewalk Maintenance Contract

3 with Council Members Pillas. Ashley and Knight in opposition.

Ocean City Smoking Policy for 2015

Susan/Word/Rec & Parks ComPLWWHH Meeting Agenda 1/1/1