Date: March 20, 2026
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Jim Schaad
Subject: Analysis of Chapter 9.10 of the Marysville Municipal Code (Code to regulate smoking and commercial Tobacco versus State Regulations At the City Council meeting held on March 17, 2026, the Mayor requested additional information and clarification regarding the relationship between state law and the City’s existing and proposed regulations governing smoking and commercial tobacco use.
The City of Marysville is considering amendments to Chapter 9.10 of the Municipal Code to modernize regulations governing smoking and commercial tobacco use. The existing ordinance was originally adopted in 1986 and reflects regulatory approaches that predate comprehensive statewide smoking restrictions.
Since that time, California has enacted a series of laws establishing uniform statewide prohibitions on smoking in enclosed workplaces and public environments, while expressly authorizing local jurisdictions to adopt additional restrictions in outdoor and shared-use areas.
This report provides:
• A summary of the evolution of applicable state law
• A comparison between current state law and the City’s existing ordinance • An analysis of how the proposed ordinance aligns with state law • Identification of remaining gaps and inconsistencies
• A summary matrix comparing state, current, and proposed regulations • Recommendations for adoption and refinement
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City’s existing ordinance was adopted in 1986 and reflects regulatory approaches that predate the State of California’s comprehensive smoking restrictions. Since 1994, California has established a uniform framework prohibiting smoking in enclosed workplaces, later expanding those restrictions to include bars, public transit areas, and, most recently, hotel and motel guest rooms. State law also establishes a 20-foot buffer at public building entrances and regulates cannabis smoking in public places.
As a result, several provisions in the City’s current ordinance are inconsistent with state law or reflect outdated regulatory approaches, including allowances for smoking in restaurants, bars, waiting areas, and certain indoor spaces. The current ordinance also does not address more recent regulatory areas such as cannabis use, entryway buffers, or outdoor smoking in public spaces.
The proposed ordinance represents a significant modernization of the City’s regulatory framework. It aligns with state law in key areas by prohibiting smoking in enclosed workplaces, incorporating cannabis and electronic smoking devices into the definition of smoking, and establishing buffer zones around certain areas. The proposal also introduces new local regulations addressing smoking in parks, public events, and City-funded activities, as well as provisions related to tobacco waste and compliance monitoring.
However, the proposed ordinance retains several provisions that remain inconsistent with state law, including allowances for smoking in restaurants, bars, hotel and motel rooms, enclosed smoking areas, and certain waiting areas. These provisions should be removed or revised to ensure full consistency with current law.
The proposed ordinance also includes a buffer distance of 25 feet, compared to the 20-foot standard established by state law. While more restrictive, the difference is minimal and may create confusion in enforcement; maintaining the state standard is recommended.
Overall, the proposed ordinance provides a foundation for a modern, enforceable regulatory framework. Targeted revisions address remaining inconsistencies and maintain clarity in key provisions.
The City of Marysville can adopt an ordinance that is consistent with state law while incorporating locally appropriate enhancements to protect public health and improve the usability of shared public spaces. Recommended enhancements are ultimately Council policy decisions.
3. HISTORY OF CALIFORNIA SMOKING REGULATION
• 1986 – Local Regulation Era - The City of Marysville adopted its current ordinance in 1986. At that time:
• There was no comprehensive statewide smoking prohibition • Regulations typically allowed:
o Designated smoking areas
o Partial restrictions (e.g., 50% nonsmoking seating)
o Ventilation-based approaches
o Exemptions for bars and certain facilities
• 1994 – Statewide Smoking Law Adopted - Smoke-Free Workplace Act (Labor Code § 6404.5) • 1995 – Implementation - Smoking prohibited in most indoor workplaces and restaurants • 1998 – Expansion to Bars - Smoking prohibited in bars and taverns • 2003–2004 – Entryway Restrictions - 20-foot buffer at public building entrances (Gov. Code § 7597)
• 2016 – Cannabis Regulation - Public smoking of cannabis prohibited (Prop 64) • 2024 – Hotel Smoking Ban - Smoking prohibited in hotel and motel guest rooms (SB 626) Summary - State law has evolved and now:
• Prohibits smoking in virtually all indoor workplaces
• Establishes limited outdoor restrictions
• Authorizes local regulation of outdoor and shared environments
4. COMPARISON OF CURRENT STATE LAW TO EXISTING CITY ORDINANCE The City of Marysville’s current ordinance (Chapter 9.10, adopted 1986, amended 1993) predates modern statewide smoking regulations. As a result, several provisions are inconsistent with, outdated relative to, or do not reflect current California law.
The following identifies key areas where the current ordinance is in conflict with, outdated relative to, or missing requirements of state law, with references to applicable code sections.
A. Indoor Smoking – Restaurants, Bars, and Public Places City Code: Section 9.10.020(2) - Allows designated smoking areas, including up to 50% of seating capacity and exempts bars and taverns from smoking restrictions State Law: Labor Code § 6404.5 (adopted 1994; expanded 1998) Issue: The City’s ordinance permits smoking in indoor environments where state law now fully prohibits it. These provisions are inconsistent with state law.
B. Hotel and Motel Smoking
City Code: Section 9.10.040(3) - Allows smoking in hotel and motel guest rooms State Law: Labor Code § 6404.5(n) (as amended by SB 626, 2023) Issue: The City’s ordinance is inconsistent with current state law, which now prohibits smoking in hotel and motel guest rooms.
C. Smoking in Waiting Areas and Public Transit Facilities City Code: Section 9.10.020(4)(a)-(b) - Allows designated smoking areas in waiting areas State Law: Labor Code § 6404.5 and applicable transit regulations Issue: The City’s ordinance allows smoking in enclosed public environments where smoking is prohibited statewide. These provisions are inconsistent with state law.
D. Smoking-Only Rooms / Private Enclosed Smoking Areas
City Code: Section 9.10.040(7) - Allows “private enclosed place[s] occupied exclusively by smokers”
State Law: Labor Code § 6404.5
Issue: The City’s ordinance allows indoor smoking rooms that are broader than the limited exceptions recognized under state law. These provisions are inconsistent with current law.
E. Workplace Smoking Standards (50% Nonsmoking Model)
City Code: Section 9.10.030(e) - Requires partial nonsmoking areas State Law: Labor Code § 6404.5
Issue: The City’s ordinance relies on a partial accommodation model that has been replaced by a complete statewide prohibition. This provision is outdated and inconsistent with current law.
F. Public Building Entryway Restrictions
City Code: Not addressed
State Law: Government Code § 7597
Issue: The City’s ordinance does not include this standard and does not reflect current state law requirements.
G. Cannabis Smoking in Public Places
City Code: Not addressed
State Law: Health & Safety Code § 11362.3(a)
Issue: The City’s ordinance does not reflect current cannabis-related restrictions.
5. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE
The proposed amendment to Chapter 9.10 represents a substantial modernization of the City’s smoking and commercial tobacco use regulations. The following identifies where the proposed ordinance aligns with, remains inconsistent with, or expands beyond state law, with references to applicable provisions.
A. Alignment with State Law
1. Indoor Smoking Prohibition
• Proposed Code: Section 9.10.020(1)
• State Law: Labor Code § 6404.5
This provision aligns the City with the statewide prohibition on smoking in enclosed workplaces.
2. Inclusion of Cannabis and Electronic Smoking Devices • Proposed Code: Section 9.10.010(m)
• State Law: Health & Safety Code § 11362.3(a)
Ensures consistent regulation of tobacco, cannabis, and vaping.
3. Establishment of Buffer Zones
• Proposed Code: Section 9.10.040
• State Law: Government Code § 7597
Reflects state policy of limiting exposure near entrances.
B. Remaining Inconsistencies with State Law
1. Smoking Sections in Restaurants - Inconsistent with statewide prohibition.
2. Bar and Tavern Exemptions - Outdated and inconsistent.
3. Hotel and Motel Smoking - Inconsistent with SB 626.
4. Smoking-Only Enclosed Areas - Broader than allowed exceptions.
5. Smoking in Waiting Areas - Inconsistent with indoor workplace prohibition.
6. Buffer Distance Consistency - Minor difference (20 vs. 25 feet) C. Items Not Fully Addressed
1. Multi-Unit Housing Optional but not included
2. Outdoor Dining / Service Lines Commonly regulated elsewhere D. Enhancements Beyond State Law
1. Recreational Areas Proposed Code: Section 9.10.030(a)(1) The proposed ordinance prohibits smoking in parks and recreational areas, including playgrounds, athletic fields, trails, and similar facilities. These locations are typically high-use, family-oriented environments where exposure to secondhand smoke is more likely to affect children and other sensitive populations.
In addition to public health considerations, this provision addresses fire risk associated with discarded smoking materials, particularly in dry or vegetated areas, as well as ongoing maintenance and litter concerns related to cigarette waste.
This type of restriction is commonly adopted by California jurisdictions and represents a reasonable extension of state law into outdoor public spaces where local control is expressly authorized.
2. Public Events Proposed Code: Section 9.10.030(a)(2)
The proposed ordinance prohibits smoking in areas designated for public events. These events typically involve temporary but high-density gatherings, where individuals are in close proximity for extended periods and have limited ability to avoid exposure to secondhand smoke.
This provision provides a clear and enforceable standard for event areas, simplifying expectations for attendees and reducing ambiguity for event organizers. It also supports consistent application across different types of events, including festivals, markets, and community gatherings.
By establishing smoke-free event environments, the City promotes public health while improving the overall experience for attendees.
3. City-Funded Events Proposed Code: Section 9.10.030(a)(3) The proposed ordinance extends smoking restrictions to events that receive City funding, sponsorship, or in-kind support. This provision ensures that activities supported by public resources are consistent with the City’s public health objectives and regulatory framework.
It also provides a clear condition for event organizers receiving City support, allowing expectations to be communicated in advance through permits, agreements, or funding conditions. This reduces enforcement challenges and promotes voluntary compliance.
This approach is commonly used by jurisdictions to align public funding with policy objectives and establish consistent standards across supported activities.
4. Tobacco Waste Proposed Code: Section 9.10.050
The proposed ordinance includes provisions addressing the disposal of tobacco product waste and the placement of ash receptacles. Cigarette butts and related waste are a significant source of litter in public spaces and can contribute to stormwater pollution and environmental degradation.
By prohibiting disposal of tobacco waste in areas where smoking is restricted and limiting the placement of ash receptacles, the ordinance reinforces compliance with smoking restrictions while addressing secondary environmental impacts.
This provision supports the City’s broader maintenance, cleanliness, and environmental goals and is consistent with approaches adopted in other jurisdictions to reduce litter and associated cleanup costs.
5. Active Monitoring and Compliance Proposed Code: Section 9.10.060 The proposed ordinance establishes an active monitoring and compliance approach that relies on education, voluntary compliance, and site-level responsibility. This represents a shift from a purely complaint-driven model toward a more proactive enforcement framework.
The ordinance places responsibility on property owners, event organizers, and employers to manage compliance, while also authorizing City staff to monitor conditions and address violations in City-controlled spaces.
6. SUMMARY MATRIX
This matrix summarizes a comparison of state law to existing and the ordinance proposed on March 17, 2026.
Topic State Law Current Ordinance Proposed Ordinance
Indoor workplaces Prohibited Partial Prohibited
Restaurants/bars Prohibited Allowed Allowed (conflict)
Hotels Prohibited Allowed Allowed (conflict)
Entry buffer 20 ft Not addressed 25 ft
Cannabis Prohibited Not addressed Addressed
Parks/events Not required Not addressed Prohibited
Outdoor areas Not required Not addressed Regulated
Waste control Not addressed Not addressed Regulated
Enforcement General Minimal Expanded
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Ensure Compliance with State Law
Revise the proposed ordinance to remove or modify provisions that are inconsistent with current California law:
• Section 9.10.020(2) – Eliminate allowances for designated smoking areas or smoking rooms in restaurants
• Section 9.10.040(2) – Remove exemption allowing smoking in bars and taverns • Section 9.10.040(3) – Remove provision allowing smoking in hotel and motel guest rooms • Section 9.10.040(7) – Remove allowance for enclosed smoking areas or “smoking-only” rooms
• Section 9.10.020(4)(a)-(b) – Remove provisions allowing smoking in enclosed waiting areas These revisions will align the ordinance with Labor Code § 6404.5 and recent amendments to state law.
B. Maintain 20-Foot Buffer
Revise Section 9.10.040 to maintain a 20-foot buffer from entrances, exits, and operable windows of public buildings, consistent with Government Code § 7597.
The proposed 25-foot buffer provides minimal additional benefit and may create confusion in enforcement and public understanding. Maintaining the state standard ensures clarity and consistency.
C. Adopt Local Enhancements
Retain and clearly implement provisions that extend beyond state law and provide local benefit, including:
• Section 9.10.030(a)(1) – Prohibit smoking and commercial tobacco use in all recreational areas
• Section 9.10.030(a)(2) – Prohibit smoking and commercial tobacco use at public events • Section 9.10.030(a)(3) – Prohibit smoking and commercial tobacco use at City-funded or City-sponsored events
• Section 9.10.050 – Prohibit tobacco waste disposal and ash receptacles in smoke-free areas These provisions are within the City’s authority and support public health, safety, and environmental objectives.
D. Refine Monitoring and Enforcement Language
Revise Section 9.10.060 to clearly define roles, responsibilities, and the discretionary nature of enforcement, including:
• Clarification that implementation and enforcement activities shall occur at the City’s option and under the direction of City leadership, based on available resources and operational priorities
• Identification of City departments that may participate in monitoring (e.g., Code Enforcement, Parks, Police), with the understanding that:
o Non-enforcement staff are not expected to take enforcement action, but may provide education, post signage, and remind individuals of applicable restrictions • Clarification that City staff may:
o Inform individuals of the requirements
o Request voluntary compliance
• Clarification that, if noncompliance continues, staff may:
o Request assistance from law enforcement, which will retain full discretion to determine whether and how to enforce based on the situation, available resources, and other priorities
• Clarification that property owners, employers, and event organizers remain responsible for managing compliance within areas under their control.
These refinements ensure the ordinance establishes a clear compliance framework while maintaining appropriate discretion for City staff and avoiding unintended enforcement obligations for non-enforcement personnel. Language may be as follows:
“Section 9.10.060 (Enforcement and Compliance)
(X) Enforcement Discretion and Staff Roles.
Implementation and enforcement of this Chapter shall be carried out at the direction of the City and subject to available resources and operational priorities. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to require any City officer or employee to take enforcement action.
City employees who are not designated enforcement personnel may provide education regarding the requirements of this Chapter and request voluntary compliance but shall not be required to issue citations or otherwise enforce this Chapter.
Any request for law enforcement assistance shall be subject to the discretion of the responding agency, which may determine whether and how to take enforcement action based on the circumstances, available resources, and other priorities.
Property owners, employers, and event organizers shall remain responsible for informing persons of the requirements of this Chapter and for managing compliance within areas under their control.”
8. FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
The City of Marysville may consider additional amendments in the future to address:
• Multi-unit housing common areas, including balconies, shared outdoor spaces, and entryways • Outdoor dining areas, where patrons are in close proximity for extended periods • Service lines and queuing areas, such as entrances to events or businesses These areas are not required under state law but are commonly regulated by other jurisdictions and may further reduce secondhand smoke exposure.
9. STATE LAW REFERENCES
• California Labor Code § 6404.5
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=LAB§ionNum =6404.5
• California Government Code § 7597
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV§ionNu m=7597
• California Labor Code § 6404.5(n) (Hotel and Motel Smoking Ban - Senate Bill 626 2023–2024) https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB626 California Health and Safety Code § 11362.3(a) (Cannabis Public Use Restrictions -Proposition 64) https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=HSC&division=10.&chapter=
6.