A proposal to ban most flavored tobacco products in Denver is just the latest high-stakes faceoff between businesses that make and sell the products and those who aim to rein them. And the decision, set to be made in the coming days, may have implications statewide and beyond.
The ban is set for a public hearing, and potentially a decisive Denver City Council vote, on Monday, Dec. 16. And the fight has already gone far beyond City Hall, including an election-style blitz of social media and newspaper ads, texts directly to city residents and mailers.
It’s the latest battle in a years-long war over the addictive products. In recent years, efforts to regulate nicotine have bounced back and forth between the city and state governments.
Back in 2021, then-mayor Michael Hancock vetoed a similar proposal to ban the flavored products in Denver. And in 2022, a plan to ban them statewide failed in the legislature — with Gov. Jared Polis saying that local governments should figure it out instead.
A ban in Denver would give reformers one of their biggest victories in the mid-continental states, beyond the coasts where they’ve notched key wins.
“Denver's influential to Colorado,” said Jodi Radke, the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids’ regional director. “It's also important to the nation because it really does create momentum and inspiration for others who liken themselves to Denver to work on similar policy changes.”
Seven smaller Colorado cities have passed measures to prohibit or restrict flavored tobacco products: Aspen, Boulder, Carbondale, Edgewater, Glenwood Springs, Golden and Snowmass Village. Nationally, the list includes nearly 400 municipalities and five states, according to the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, a non-profit based in Washington, D.C.
Colorado once had the nation’s highest rate of vaping among young people. It dropped sharply in recent years after a multifaceted push that included raising the purchase age to 21. But many who get hooked on vapor products struggle to stop and often turn to cigarettes.
Ban supporters point to state health department data that young people who vape are four times more likely to smoke cigarettes a year later.
A key battle in a national, even global, fight
The chief opponents of the ban are tobacco or nicotine manufacturers and sellers. Critics argue that the proposal will hurt businesses and simply force consumers to go elsewhere
Denver’s flavor ban will deprive stores of customers and the city of much needed tax revenue, they say.
“Tobacco in the nicotine category is the single most dominant product category in gas stations and convenience stores in the city,” said Grier Bailey, executive director of the Colorado Wyoming Petroleum Marketers Association. It represents some 2,200 retailers, including convenience stores.
Once a customer is lost, Bailey said, “they're just going to go to a surrounding jurisdiction.”
He added that it’s unlikely state lawmakers will follow Denver’s lead, especially because the state’s budget situation is already tight.
Bailey said the Denver process has been rushed and suggested the city follow the lead of Boulder, which barred only flavored e-cigarette products, but not others like menthol cigarettes or flavored nicotine pouches. He offered a similar proposal to sponsors, but to no avail so far.
“We submitted our idea that will eliminate products that target kids and have been summarily ignored,” Bailey said via email. “But hey, what do legitimate businesses know about our own market?”
Phil Guerin, who owns the vape shop Myxed Up Creations on Colfax Ave., estimated 150 nicotine retailers generate about $13 million in city tax revenues per year, based on data from distributors, with flavors representing more than 90 percent of these sales.
Guerin insists his customer base is not kids, but adults trying to quit smoking.
“It's a big industry and we are all proud of the work that we've done to get people off of combustible cigarettes.”
The flavor ban would be especially impactful to vape shops and specialty retailers, who tend to focus on the products. Big tobacco companies, meanwhile, will be less affected because they dominate the unflavored vape market, he said.
Denverite reached out to tobacco multinational corporation Philip Morris International (PMI). Spokesman Travis Parman said the proposal is particularly “disappointing” because the company is building a $600 million plant in Aurora, which he said will support 500 jobs, to make Zyn nicotine pouches.
Councilmember Watson said sponsors were taking suggestions from all sides. But thus far, the only major change has been to make an exemption so that flavored hookah tobacco, also known as shisha, can still be sold.
Both sides are going hard
The fight is being waged through an election-style campaign that includes texts, social media posts, mailers and advertorials. Sometimes it’s clear who is paying for it, sometimes it’s not. It’s unknown how much is being spent; more details will be revealed in lobbying reports next month.
Some Denver residents have gotten a text message that reads: "ALARM! Denver’s set to BAN ALL flavored nicotine products and we’re about to LOSE reduced-risk options for adults who smoke."
The message includes a link to Smoke-Free Choice, the Coalition for Health, Opportunity, Innovation and Consumer Education. It’s a nonpartisan, non-profit, tax-exempt 501(c)(4) organization funded by Philip Morris International.
A spokesman said PMI is spending money on advertising on the proposal, but wouldn’t provide details.
Other ads are funded by convenience stores.
“Protect Pre-K Funding for Denver Families. STOP THE FLAVOR BAN” reads a recent Facebook ad. Tobacco tax money helps fund the state’s pre-K program.
Bailey declined to say how much his group was spending.
“It's a lot,” he said in an interview.
The County Sheriffs of Colorado sent a letter to the mayor and city council stating the ban would simply move the products out of regulated stores onto the streets, generating a “sizable new black market” and that “illicit actors” will exploit the change to smuggle and traffic flavored tobacco products from surrounding counties into Denver.
Both sides have run full-page ads in The Denver Post ahead of city council votes on the proposal.
The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids sent out a mailer to city residents. It showed images of multiple ads from opponents, warning that the tobacco industry was trying to “ Keep Profiting From Addicting Our Kids.”
Radke said she wasn’t sure how much was spent on the mail campaign. Financial disclosures for the spending are due mid-January.
The issue is also drawing intense lobbying attention.
Some of the city’s most prominent firms have been hired by both sides to represent various key players, according to the city’s lobbying dashboard.
Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund hired CRL Associates, Inc., a lobbying powerhouse, to support the ban. Radke, with the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, is also listed as lobbying for the fund.
On the other side, global tobacco company Altria has hired The Pachner Company, one of the city’s most high profile lobbying firms. Ted Trimpa, an influential Democratic strategist, represents PMI Global Services and Affiliates, Philip Morris International, one of the world’s biggest tobacco companies. Former Democratic state representative Joe Miklosi is lobbying for a Colorado vaping industry group.
Other lobbying has been funded by convenience stores and nicotine companies like ITG Brands, the maker of Winston and the menthol brand Kool cigarettes, and Juul Labs, the California-based company that helped drive a national surge in teen vaping. (It agreed to a $32 million settlement with the state of Colorado and several others over its marketing to teens.)
“Lobbying is just an essential tool when you're trying to communicate your message effectively to government because they are professionals and small business people like me have no idea how to navigate the system,” said Guerin, of the vape shop Myxed Up Creations.
“I think it's directly impactful,” said Radke, of the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids.
But she makes a distinction between those working for business interests versus public ones. “We don't profit off the continuation of the sale of these products. I think that's the biggest differentiator,” she said.
Big money is at play
The nicotine industry is fighting the ban, in part, because it sees “smokeless” products as its future. Smoking is declining, though still a major source of sales, and the industry wants to pivot to sell more vaporizers and smokeless sticks and pouches.
Adult smoking rates around the world have declined from more than 30 percent in 2000 to only about 20 percent in recent years. About 1 in 5 adults globally consumed tobacco in 2022, compared to 1 in 3 in 2000, according to the World Health Organization.
E-cigarettes are by far the most popular tobacco product among young Americans, according to a national youth survey.
On its website, Altria describes “Moving Beyond Smoking” and a vision to “responsibly lead the transition of adult smokers to a smoke-free future.”
And the industry has extraordinarily deep pockets to fight proposals like the Denver ban. For example, Altria is worth about $94 billion, and for Philip Morris the figure is $200 billion. The industry spends more than $125 million a year in Colorado on marketing, more than 6 times what the state spends on tobacco control efforts, according to Tobacco Free Colorado.
On the other side, the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids has money from supporters like Michael Bloomberg and Bloomberg Philanthropies, which last year announced a commitment of $420 million to a global initiative to reduce tobacco use.
Bloomberg is a major supporter of Denver Mayor Johnston, giving a $500,000 contribution for his recent election campaign, according to the city’s elections website. Bloomberg has supported candidates he says have strong positions on gun safety, the environment, education and other issues, regardless of political party.
The national outlook
Even if Denver’s city council passes the measure, changes at the national level could alter the tobacco and vaping landscape.
The Supreme Court this month heard a case involving the regulation of vaping and e-cigarettes by the Food and Drug Administration
After vaping took off among young people more than a decade ago, the FDA made it harder to sell flavored products. The agency has given approval to less than three dozen such products. The industry sued the FDA for not allowing many more products on the market.
How the court rules could dramatically change the regulations governing Denver’s tobacco retail market.
President-elect Donald Trump and his administration are expected to be more sympathetic to the vaping and tobacco industry. In September, he vowed to protect it after a private meeting with a top industry lobbyist, according to the Washington Post. He posted on social media he had “saved Flavored Vaping in 2019” and would again.
Looking to head off a ban on menthol cigarettes, a subsidiary of tobacco giant Reynolds American was one of the largest corporate donors to the main pro-Trump super PAC, the Post reported.
When Guerin was asked at his vape shop what impact the Trump administration would have, he let out a hearty laugh.
“I think that for our industry, it will be a good thing.”
Meanwhile, tobacco reformers are uneasy.
“I think the public health community has incredible concern around what will or won't happen with the incoming administration, given what they've at least said is they've been campaigning,” said Radke.
Bill sponsor Watson said he was focused on the present.
“What we know today, right now before us, is a bill that really can save lives,” he said. “We intend to lead on that. Whatever happens tomorrow, we'll face that.”
