Tag Archives: Smoking Ban
Jesse Arreguin, the Councilman of Berkeley City, proposed to prohibit smoking in single-family homes. In her turn, Susan Wengraf, the Councilwoman, was appalled as she supports the proposal to prohibit smoking in multiunit homes.
The major aim is to protect people living in multiunit buildings from secondhand smoke that is considered to have negative effects on health. Residents consider the notion of a single-family-home ban scary. The proposal of Wengraf makes the multiunit ordinance seem reasonable.
Anthony Sanchez, the Arreguin adviser, says that the recommendation is really just a nonactionable subject of future consideration.
Berkeley already has prohibited smoking outdoors in such places as parks, commercial districts and bus stations, and now nonsmokers may walk without inhaling tobacco smoke. Does prohibiting smoking in the workplace, at restaurants and bars mean that work of nonsmoker-rights advocates is already done? No. The job is not done yet.
Therefore, the Berkeley proposal to prohibit smoking in multiunit dwellings is not the first one in Bay Area. Wengraf says that tobacco smoke can enter ventilation systems and spread through a building. But what if does not? What if in the building secondhand smoke does not spread and neighbors does not feel it? So in this case tobacco smoke does not bother others. However, if you smoke in an apartment, you are guilty.
Enter Arreguin, considers that the multiunit ordinance would fall unfairly on residents. Therefore, if the Berkeley City is going to tell what people can do in their own lodgings, it should adopt a ban in any dwelling including single ones.
Arreguin suggests that the ban to be applied if a minor lives in the home or a non-smoker older person. He names it most ambitious smoking ban at private spaces and says it does not matter if you permitted it everyone in the room. However, a man aged 63 cannot stay near a smoker. Cynthia Hallett, the representative of Nonsmokers, says that right now, the policy trend is really for multiunit housing.
Coast Community College District wants to introduce smoking ban at its three campuses and asks its students and college staff for theirr opinion on the subject. The smoking ban to be voted in spring 2014 and it would touch such colleges as Golden West in Huntington Beach, Orange Coast in Costa Mesa and Coastline, which has campuses in Fountain Valley and Newport Beach.
These days, smoking is banned in OCC and Coastline within 20 feet of a building entrance or window. Andreea Serban, vice chancellor of educational services and technology, said that in 2007 smoking was prohibited in Golden West in all zones of campus except parking lots, The smoking policy of the district would ban not only use of tobacco but also e-cigarettes.
Trustees received a warning from the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) and after that they began to review board procedures.
While district staff is working over a new smoking policy, trustees asked first to find out opinion of students. Trustee David Grant says that it is very important to know what students say about it and their opinion should be taken into consideration.
Andreea Serban, vice chancellor of educational services and technology, says that the board should delay making decisions, especially until they have decided how to implement the ban if it is approved. He thinks that if you place No-smoking signs at Orange Coast campus, people would accept it.
However, at the moment people smoke by buildings or may sit down next to you and smoke a cigarette. So it is very important to introduce smoking policy on campus.
Coast is not the first community college district in Orange County tp introduce a smoking ban. Different smoking policies do already exist at Orange’s Santiago Canyon College, Santa Ana College and Fullerton College.
However, smokers are against smoking ban at campus. They do understand that secondhand smoke is harmful for people therfore the ban must be comprehensive.
When a worker of Pasco County school, which was opened before July 1996, wants to smoke a cigarette, he must step outside in area specially designated for that. Health Advisory Committee of the district wants to stop that policy. Thus health care professionals of the community have called on the School Board to change such policy to permit older schools to avoid the tobacco-free designation that new campuses operate under.
The committee says about the necessity to provide a good example for young people and school workers must maintain positive adult role models for students. Besides this, it is necessary to protect students from secondhand smoke at any level.
These anti-smoking messages are not new. In August 2011 there was held a seminar on this subject. Also Students Working Against Tobacco explained their opinion in June current year. Student Andrew Gonzalez said the board that students want schools to be 100% free of tobacco and smokers should go off campus. Ideally, if a teacher smokes, the school must help him quit.
The agreements say, that a pre-1996 school can become 100% free of tobacco only with the unanimous vote of its workers. There is no record in the district of any requested votes in the 17 years since the rule came into action.
The employee relations director Betsy Kuhn said that the chance to change the smoking policy generally is good, because it really needs a change. Several districts have prohibited tobacco consumption among school workers.
Some districts, such as Pasco, have even tried to stop hiring people who smoke cigarettes. The concept was dropped in Pasco after finding it unworkable in its food and nutrition department.
Kuhn said that Pasco’s advisory committee provided a number of reasons to take into consideration when discussing a new direction for tobacco-free workplaces. These are not just public places. These are schools and they must go 100% tobacco-free in order to prevent students from using all kinds of tobacco.
This week authorities of Pleasant Hill city rejected a suggestion to extend smoking ban to shopping centers and downtown. Michael Harris, the mayor of Pleasant Hill, has pushed rules that ban smoking in public places in the city. It is him who suggested the new restrictions.
He got many complaints from citizens who were worried about secondhand smoke at restaurants with outdoor seating in the downtown. Today in Pleasant Hill city there are few places where smokers may light up a cigarette.
Before the meeting Harris said that it is a normal thing to ask authorities to examone if smoking ban in downtown is reasonable enough. However, the anti-smoking initiative failed on a 2 – 2 vote (Harris together with Councilman Tim Flaherty voted for the ban and councilmen Jack Weir and Ken Carlson voted against it). Councilman David Durant was absent from the meeting
In September Walnut Creek implemented an ordinance that bans smoking in all public places including leisure zones, multiunit housing and in downtown. Recently Concord extended no-smoking zone around Todos Santos Plaza. Jack Weir said that he respects citizen’s desire to stay away from secondhand smoke. Several speakers asked if there may be adopted a smoking ban in Pleasant Hill. Police Chief John Moore said that police have received numerous calls about individuals smoking in prohibited zones, but when officers they are already gone
In 2006 smoking was prohibited in and near city-owned facilities and in many places of work. In order to lower exposure to secondhand smoke, in 2010 the City Council introduced special rules that ban smoking at bus stations, ticket lines and at outdoor events on city property.
In the ordinance proposed by the Mayor, there was suggested that smoking ban to be applied to housing with most outdoor and indoor places to go smoke-free. Thus by 2016, owners must make 50% of existing apartment units smoke-free. Several years ago, Park District and the Pleasant Hill Recreation prohibited smoking in all parks, hiking trails, open spaces, parking areas. According to the law smoking is prohibited within 25 feet of a playground.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that secondhand smoke has negative effects on human;s health. Since 2009, many Contra Costa cities have introduced severe anti-smoking rules. Martinez is the first city in the county which prohibited smoking in most public places.
In the near future Nursing Home workers from Franklin County will not be permitted to smoke cigarettes on facility grounds because a new state law comes into action in less than two weeks, on October 29. The law prohibits smoking on the grounds of hospitals and health-care facilities within 15 feet of the entrance.
However, the new law does not prevent visitors and patients from smoking in designated zones as long as they are not within particular distances of the building or the entrance to the grounds. Since ’90s the nursing home had a non-smoking policy but the staff was not mentioned in it.
County Manager Thomas Leitz asked State Department of Health to explain the details of the law, especially he was interested to know if workers would be part of the new ban, but he was told that the final determination has not been made yet. Nursing Home Administrator Mary Palmer suggested that nursing home workers and hospital staff will be placed under the same rules.
Lawmakers asked the explanation of the new law since it states no smoking on the facility grounds. They were interested if smoking ban included the parking zone, for example, if a worker is allowed to smoke in his car. Legislator Sue Robideau raised concerns about safety of workers because smoking ban makes them leave the grounds and go to smoke along a busy highway, especially in winter time.
Rob Haynes, engineer at the State Department of Transportation office in Malone, provided a 2010 statistics. It shows that every day almost 3,400 vehicles pass by the nursing home. Workers get lunches and are not permitted to leave the nursing home grounds during their 8-hour working day. It means that they cannot go off grounds to smoke while on duty.
Legislator Marc “Tim” Lashomb said he is opposed to smoking. In past he smoked but generally for people it is hard to quit, Smokers have their rights and normally their rigts should be respected. While waiting for clarification fro the state, lawmakers decided that Nursing Home workers will not be permitted to smoke on facility grounds or parking zones after October 29.
Lower house of parliament in Russia on Tuesday, October 15, approved the final reading of a bill which tightens anti-smoking legislation in the country by introducing fines for smoking in public places. The initiators of the bill say that it would help to prevent teens and kids from smoking.
The bill is part of a large anti-smoking legislation that came into action in June current year. It establishes fines of around 3,000 rubles ($93) for smoking in public places that have “no smoking” signs. The highest fine is established for smoking in playgrounds. The bill comes into action on November 15 and it also prohibits advertising tobacco products.
Public places where smoking is prohibited include government buildings, cultural places, healthcare and educational facilities, stadiums and public transport. Ban on smoking in trains, restaurants and hotels comes into action the next year.
The law also puts restrictions on display of tobacco products in stores. Sales from retail kiosks will prohibited from June 2014, and there will be established minimum cigarettes prices. These days Russia has cheapest cigarettes in the world and some of them cost 40 rubles ($1.24) a pack.
In April Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that smoking ban in public places could save up to 200,000 lives every year in the country. Today Russia has the highest rates of smoking in the world.
The marketing of cigarette brands has successfully reached children most of all in low- and middle-income countries.
Study made in 1991 revealed that 91 percent of 6-year-old children surveyed were able to precisely identify Old Joe, the cartoon character representing Camel cigarettes. The figure is equal to the number of children who precisely identified Mickey Mouse and the Disney Channel logo.
Recent study found that efforts of tobacco manufacturers to reach young kids in low- and middle-income countries turned to be effective The results of the study were published online in Pediatrics, Thus the study found that 68% of 2,400 kids aged 5 and 6 from India, Brazil, China, Russia, Nigeria, Pakistan identified correctly at least one cigarette brand logo when playing a matching game created specially for the purpose to see children’s familiarity between logos and objects.
The authors of the study are Joanna Cohen and Dina Borzekowski from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore. They say that studies made in past years have demonstrated that children with high exposure to and awareness levels of tobacco marketing are more likely to smoke cigarettes in their adult age.
The authors say that it is necessary to impose stronger regulations of tobacco products in order to better protect kids from cigarettes. They suggest to remove logos from cigarettes packs, change the quantity, location and types of tobacco retailers, and establish minimum distances between the retailers and places which visit young kids. Besides this, the authors suggest changing how onscreen smoking images reach children and alerting parents and guardians to this “mature content” in programming.
Despite a petition from the Midland County Tobacco Reduction Coalition, the City of Midland will continue to permit people to smoke cigarettes near kids in local playgrounds and beaches.
On Monday, the Midland City Council received the petition demanding smoking ban in these areas. The Council decided not to ban smoking saying it would be difficult to apply the ordinance because there is need for time and money.
Midland County Tobacco Reduction Coalition along with Susan Dusseau, Midland resident, presented to the council a petition signed by 110 people against smoking. Susan says that among the population kids are most vulnerable to tobacco smoke and it is necessary to protect them. She adds that the issue is dear to her heart and she believes that kids are most important customers in the service area.
It would be perfect to ban smoking in every city park, however, the petition asks only to ban smoking in playground areas and beaches. Amy Hovey, Coleman resident which makes part of Great Start Parent Coalition, says that secondhand smoke affects negatively people’s health. Therefore it is important to have a smoke-free environment for children,
Smoking ban will help kids and their parents with asthma and other conditions. The group is encouraging parents to approach to smoking people on the playground and ask them not to smoke.
Dusseau says that in parks already there exist rules prohibiting littering, intoxication and making noise. Smoking ban will be similar. She believes that the majority of people will respect it, including smokers. Generally speaking, smokers are very respectful and they do not want to hurt other people.
Major aim of the smoking ban is to prevent people from smoking-related diseases and also prevent the next generation from becoming smokers. Dusseau said permitting smoking in playgrounds doesn’t strenghten the message that children shouldn’t smoke. Other cities that already prohibited smoking in playgrounds are Bad Axe, Traverse City, Marie, Sault Ste. Dusseau said that they are ready to pay for any signs needed.
In his turn, Jon Lynch, Midland City Manager said when the council considers a ban on a legal private activity, it has to take into account if the ban should be done, and if so, the way it should be done. Here the main question is whether the well-being of kids outweighs an adult’s right to perform a legal activity in a public place.
Since the smoking ban was introduced in Ireland, individuals who are unemployed do smoke much less. However, among the employed people the situation did not change at all.
Recently there was published an ESRI working paper by Michael Savage. It reveals how smoking ban affected people who smoke cigarettes. To note that the numbers were based on National Tobacco Control Board figures up to middle of 2008. The major conclusion that was made in the course of the paper is that the smoking ban had little or no effects on reducing smoking among employed individuals.
In 2004 the ban of smoking gave employed smokers an additional motivation to quit their habit and the major goal of the present report is to find out the way such measure workes for people.
Thus the report reveals that employed smokers were not touched by the ban.
The workplace smoking ban did not induce a greater reduction in smoking prevalence compared to any of the control groups in the analysis. In fact, the evidence suggests a significantly larger decrease in smoking prevalence among the non-workers relative to the employed.
Back in 2002, 22.9% of employees smoked, however, by 2007 the number was raisen and constitued almost 24.8%. As to unemployed people, 46.4% smoked before the ban, but 0.5% stopped after introduction of the ban.
The report says that by the middle of 2007 the National Tobacco Control Board was reporting a 95% compliance level with the smoking ban. They claim that the smoking ban achieved success in cutting passive smoking which was its initial goal. In spite of additional motivation for smoking people to quit smoking, unemployed people showed better results in quitting their habit.
This week the Powell City Council headed by Mayor Don Hillman was listening arguments of people who are against propsed smoing ban in the city. There were more than 40 people in the council room and all but one of the 12 speakers on the issue asked the council to refuse from smoking ban.
The council proposed smoking ban two months ago. However, bar owners and customers do oppose the initiative. After hearing from the speakers, the council said he needs more information and temporary blocked the initiative.
Hillman said there is self-imposed smoking ban in Powell and in his opinion it is important to let people choose by themselves what they want and what they like. Hillman together with his wife are former smokers and when they went to a restaurant or bar they choose places where smoking cigarettes is prohibited. It is a matter of choice and it goes for business owners, too. Today everyone who wants may run a business and this is their business. This affirmation elicited applause from the audience.
La Vina Package Liquors general manager James Andrews was the first person to speak against smoking ban. He said he spent two weeks on reading 37 studies on second-hand smoking effects and none of them provides a proven evidence that second-hand smoke is hazardous for people.
The owner of The Peaks, Meldon McCullough, said that most of people he speaks with are against smoking ban because it violates their freedom. He added that those who support the ban do not come to the bar.
Gene Olmsted, a non-smoker who lives in Park County for a long time, asked how can be prohibited a substance that is legal? They begin with one things to ban then continue woth other. His affirmations faced loud applause.
There were four people to speak against smoking but only one of them did it. His name is John Vipperman and he is a physician’s assistant from the Big Horn Basin Regional Cancer Center, Vipperman said it is important to create more smoke-free places in order to reduce number od smoking-related diseases.