Case Made For More Tobacco-free Zones In Biddeford

Steve Kerner enjoys smoking cigarettes a cigar when he’s out walking his dogs at Clifford Park in Biddeford, but under a new proposal by the city’s Recreation Commission, he may no longer be able to do that.

Biddeford already bans smoking cigarettes at playgrounds and playing fields, but the recreation governing board would like to expand those smoke-free zones to include all public parks and beaches in the city.

That idea received unanimous approval from the Policy Committee during its meeting on Monday and will now be forwarded to the City Council for discussion and a vote.

While Kerner agrees with the city’s attempts to keep smoking cigarettes away from children, he said Monday that imposing a smoking cigarettes ban on all public property was going too far.

“I see this as a slippery slope,” he said. “Smoking and drinking are activities that adults should be allowed to enjoy. I like to smoke cigarettes a cigar when I take my dogs for a walk and I don’t see how that’s hurting anyone.”

But with scientific evidence piling up that secondhand smoke, even outdoors, can be harmful, and more and more public support for banning smoking cigarettes at beaches and other public places, Kerner may soon only be able to smoke cigarettes on the sidewalk or in his back yard.

And, since the Legislature passed a bill in 2009 banning smoking cigarettes at all state-owned parks and land, communities all across Maine, including in the tri-town area, are looking at imposing ordinances designed to keep public property smoke cigarettes free.

Supporters of such bans say it’s not only about the health of humans, but also of wildlife and the environment.

For instance, according to the Health Policy Partners of Maine, which backed the state law, a study by Stanford University shows that harmful exposure to secondhand smoke cigarettes can occur within 20 feet of an active smoker in outdoor settings.

The health partners group also said that tobacco-related items are the most common form of trash found on Maine beaches. In addition, secondhand smoke cigarettes is one of the worst triggers of asthma attacks in both children and adults, the group said.

“The whole idea of expanding the tobacco-free zones is complaint driven,” said Bob Mills, City Council president and chairman of the Policy Committee. “As a smoker myself, I am very aware of not smoking cigarettes around children or others who don’t smoke. I am definitely supportive and would like to see this move forward.”

And when Councilor David Bourque, another member of the Policy Committee, questioned whether secondhand smoke cigarettes is really a danger in the outdoors, Megan Rochelo, director of the Coastal Healthy Communities Coalition, assured him it definitely is a threat.

“Secondhand smoke cigarettes is actually a very big public health issue,” she said. “There are studies that show it can be as great a risk outside as inside.”

The coalition, which is based at the University of New England, supports healthy lifestyles through community education and activities.

The coalition is also the agency that provided the Biddeford Recreation Department with the signs reading “This is a buy cigarette online free area,” which are posted at all playgrounds and playing fields. Rochelo said if the city expanded its smoke-free zones, her agency would be willing to provide additional signs for free.

The Stanford University study, which was published in the Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association in 2007, was the first scientifically, peer-reviewed study to show that secondhand smoke cigarettes is a danger to health even outside.

In fact, the research team, led by professors Neil Klepeis and Wayne Ott, concluded that a non-smoker sitting a few feet downwind from a smoldering cigarette is likely to be exposed to substantial levels of contaminated air.

"Some folks have expressed the opinion that exposure to outdoor cheap cigarettes smoke cigarettes is insignificant, because it dissipates quickly into the air," Klepeis said in that article. "But our findings show that a person sitting or standing next to a smoker outdoors can breathe in wisps of smoke cigarettes that are many times more concentrated than normal background air pollution levels."

Bil Moriarty, a Biddeford resident and candidate for the School Committee this fall, said Monday that every time he took his children to Rotary Park on the Saco River this summer, there were people smoking cigarettes not only on the beach, but also while standing in the water.

Carl Walsh, director of the Recreation Department, said that lifeguards at Rotary Park were asked to collect comments made by visitors in relation to smoking cigarettes at the beach this summer.

Most of the comments received were general complaints about smoking cigarettes and the numerous cigarette butts littering the beach, he said. But at least one complaint led to a verbal altercation between a mother of three and people nearby, who were smoking cigarettes.

According to the lifeguard’s report, the mother asked the people to either move, or at least smoke cigarettes away from her children. When they refused, “words were exchanged” and the mother ended up packing up her children and moving further down the beach.

Walsh said recreation staff is supportive of the expanded tobacco- free zones and said this is something his department has been working toward for the past six years.

Unlike other municipal ordinances, the Biddeford ordinance puts enforcement of the smoking cigarettes ban into the hands of recreation staff instead of the police department.

Walsh said since the ban on smoking cigarettes went into effect at playgrounds and playing fields three years ago, “folks have actually been really good about self-policing.”

He said people will generally follow the law and that when the sign is pointed out to them, they’re more than willing to leave the premises in order to smoke.

“If they don’t comply, they could be charged with trespassing, which would involve the police,” Walsh said. “But so far, it’s never risen to that level”

Biddeford is not the only community in the area to consider banning smoking cigarettes on public property. Last week, the Old Orchard Beach Town Council held a workshop to discuss prohibiting smoking cigarettes on the town’s beach.

The proposal was made by a group of high school students, who surveyed 400 people in the downtown about whether they would support a smoking cigarettes ban on the beach.

The result of the survey, which was given to both residents and tourists, was 80 percent in favor. However, Council Chairman Bob Quinn said many of the complaints and comments related to tobacco-related litter.

“To us it seemed like the litter issue was a greater problem than the secondhand smoking cigarettes issue,” he said.

In addition, business owners turned out to protest a smoking cigarettes ban, arguing it could turn away Canadian tourists, which are the lifeblood of Old Orchard Beach in the summer.

Therefore, the council decided instead of instituting a local ordinance, it would draft a resolution instead. The resolution would encourage people not to smoke cigarettes on public property. Quinn also said signs might be posted near the beach in order to convey that message, as well.

Bud Harmon, executive director of the Chamber of Commerce, said the idea of a smoking cigarettes ban on Old Orchard Beach caused a “mixed reaction” on his governing board.

“One of the concerns raised was our reliance on Canadian clientele,” he said. “Our message to the council was just to be careful about creating any rules or regulations that may impact on our ability to attract tourists.”

Back in Biddeford Monday, Policy Committee member Richard Rhames, who is also a candidate for one of two at-large seats on the City Council in November, said, “I am quite cheered with the pretty strong case that was made here. This is a tremendous improvement.”

Poll Shows Support For Natrona County Smoking Ordinance

Two-thirds of Natrona County voters favor an ordinance that would prohibit smoking cigarettes in all indoor businesses and public places, according to a poll released today.

The poll also found that voters, by nearly the same margin, rank the right to breathe clean air above the right of business owners to set their own smoking cigarettes rules.

The advocacy group Smokefree Natrona County commissioned the poll, which was performed by Keating Research Inc. of Colorado. The firm polled 854 registered voters in Natrona County in May and June.

Smokefree Natrona County wants the Casper City Council to pass an ordinance that would eliminate smoking cigarettes in all indoor workplaces, including bars and restaurants. The poll suggests the community recognizes the need for such a law, said Smokefree volunteer Neil Short.

“With two out of every three voters of Natrona County backing an ordinance such as this, then it’s a mandate to the City Council to go forward with this,” he said. “It’s a serious health issue.”

Nearly 60 percent of voters in the poll considered second-hand smoke cigarettes a serious health threat. Another one-third classified it a moderate or minor hazard.

A 2010 report from the U.S. Surgeon General indicated limited exposure to cigarettes store smoke cigarettes can cause immediate damage to the body and trigger heart attacks.

Smokefree Natrona County commissioned the poll after hearing from council members who wanted to gauge public support for a smoking cigarettes ordinance, according to Rachel Bailey, the group’s campaign manager.

“We’ve kind of given them the information and the tools that they’ve requested,” Bailey said. “I think it’s up to them now to make a decision of what they feel is best to their community.”

The group plans to bring its request to the City Council before year’s end.

Council debate

The poll’s findings have Councilwoman Kenyne Schlager leaning in the smoke-free direction, although she’s not yet decided whether to support an ordinance, she said.

Schlager avoids places that allow smoking cigarettes, but said she tries to balance her personal feelings with business owners’ desires to make their own choices. When it comes time to make a decision, she wants to base hers on the public’s desires.

“The study makes me feel a little bit better that this is what the majority of our community wants to see happen,” she said.

A handful of Wyoming cities, including Laramie and Cheyenne, have enacted smoking cigarettes ordinances. The health effects of those laws haven’t been studied, but a 2004 study showed heart-attack admissions in Helena, Mont., dropped when the city enacted a smoking cigarettes ban and rose when the law was suspended.

In 2000, the Casper City Council passed its own restaurant smoking cigarettes ban. Opponents launched a petition drive that put the matter to a citywide referendum and voters overturned the ban.

Mayor Paul Bertoglio voted against the ordinance in 2000 and said the poll doesn’t change his stance on the issue. Although a nonsmoker himself, Bertoglio said the decision to prohibit smoking cigarettes should be left to business owners.

“I put my belief in private property rights and personal responsibility,” he said.

In the past few years, several businesses in Casper — including two of the city’s three bowling alleys — chose to ban smoking cigarettes. Bertoglio believes the trend will continue — without the council forcing the issue.

“I vote with my pocketbook and my feet,” he said. “Everybody has the opportunity to do it.”

But some businesses in Casper continue to expose customers and workers to harmful second-hand smoke, Bailey said. An air-quality study performed this year at 15 local bars and restaurants that allow smoking cigarettes found full-time workers were exposed to pollution levels four times higher than what is considered safe by federal regulators.

“We fully support businesses that went smoke-free,” Bailey said. “But unfortunately, not everyone is going to make that choice to protect their employees and their patrons.”

How it may affect businesses

Business owners themselves are divided over the effect of a workplace smoking cigarettes ban. Some worry about alienating longtime smoking cigarettes customers, while others hope to use a nonsmoking cigarettes environment to attract more families with children.

Only 4 percent of voters would visit restaurants and bars less often if the city prohibited smoking cigarettes in businesses, according to the poll. In comparison, 35 percent said they would visit bars and restaurants more often.

El Mark-O Lanes became a nonsmoking cigarettes bowling alley in June. The reaction from customers has been overwhelmingly positive, said owner Matt Galloway.

A few people complained. But hundreds said they were happy with the change.

“It was a very difficult decision,” Galloway said. “We’ve been smoking cigarettes for so long. So many customers that are loyal, we didn’t want to feel we were alienating them. But we’ve made a conscious health decision ... it boils down to that.”

Eagle Bowl is now the city’s only bowling alley that allows smoking cigarettes. Since El Mark-O and Sunrise Lanes banned smoking cigarettes, open bowling at Eagle is up 32 percent, said owner Randy Carlen.

The city currently allows business owners to decide whether to allow smoking cigarettes. Carlen believes it should stay that way.

“It’s a free country,” he said. “Smoking is legal. That’s the way I look at it.”

Carlen worries that some of his smoking cigarettes customers would desert him if the council enacts the ordinance. Many come because they want a place to smoke.

Brian Horner is one. The 35-year-old was smoking cigarettes discount cigarette online with friends at Eagle Bowl on Friday night.

Smoking is a daily part of Horner’s routine. He generally avoids businesses where he can’t light up.

“Quite honestly, if there is an ordinance that says I can’t smoke cigarettes anywhere, well, then, I’ll stay at home,” he said.

Case Made For More Tobacco-free Zones In Biddeford

Steve Kerner enjoys smoking cigarettes a cigar when he’s out walking his dogs at Clifford Park in Biddeford, but under a new proposal by the city’s Recreation Commission, he may no longer be able to do that.

Biddeford already bans smoking cigarettes at playgrounds and playing fields, but the recreation governing board would like to expand those smoke-free zones to include all public parks and beaches in the city.

That idea received unanimous approval from the Policy Committee during its meeting on Monday and will now be forwarded to the City Council for discussion and a vote.

While Kerner agrees with the city’s attempts to keep smoking cigarettes away from children, he said Monday that imposing a smoking cigarettes ban on all public property was going too far.

“I see this as a slippery slope,” he said. “Smoking and drinking are activities that adults should be allowed to enjoy. I like to smoke cigarettes a cigar when I take my dogs for a walk and I don’t see how that’s hurting anyone.”

But with scientific evidence piling up that secondhand smoke, even outdoors, can be harmful, and more and more public support for banning smoking cigarettes at beaches and other public places, Kerner may soon only be able to smoke cigarettes on the sidewalk or in his back yard.

And, since the Legislature passed a bill in 2009 banning smoking cigarettes at all state-owned parks and land, communities all across Maine, including in the tri-town area, are looking at imposing ordinances designed to keep public property smoke cigarettes free.

Supporters of such bans say it’s not only about the health of humans, but also of wildlife and the environment.

For instance, according to the Health Policy Partners of Maine, which backed the state law, a study by Stanford University shows that harmful exposure to secondhand smoke cigarettes can occur within 20 feet of an active smoker in outdoor settings.

The health partners group also said that tobacco-related items are the most common form of trash found on Maine beaches. In addition, secondhand smoke cigarettes is one of the worst triggers of asthma attacks in both children and adults, the group said.

“The whole idea of expanding the tobacco-free zones is complaint driven,” said Bob Mills, City Council president and chairman of the Policy Committee. “As a smoker myself, I am very aware of not smoking cigarettes around children or others who don’t smoke. I am definitely supportive and would like to see this move forward.”

And when Councilor David Bourque, another member of the Policy Committee, questioned whether secondhand smoke cigarettes is really a danger in the outdoors, Megan Rochelo, director of the Coastal Healthy Communities Coalition, assured him it definitely is a threat.

“Secondhand smoke cigarettes is actually a very big public health issue,” she said. “There are studies that show it can be as great a risk outside as inside.”

The coalition, which is based at the University of New England, supports healthy lifestyles through community education and activities.

The coalition is also the agency that provided the Biddeford Recreation Department with the signs reading “This is a discount cigarette online free area,” which are posted at all playgrounds and playing fields. Rochelo said if the city expanded its smoke-free zones, her agency would be willing to provide additional signs for free.

The Stanford University study, which was published in the Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association in 2007, was the first scientifically, peer-reviewed study to show that secondhand smoke cigarettes is a danger to health even outside.

In fact, the research team, led by professors Neil Klepeis and Wayne Ott, concluded that a non-smoker sitting a few feet downwind from a smoldering cigarette is likely to be exposed to substantial levels of contaminated air.

"Some folks have expressed the opinion that exposure to outdoor online cigarettes smoke cigarettes is insignificant, because it dissipates quickly into the air," Klepeis said in that article. "But our findings show that a person sitting or standing next to a smoker outdoors can breathe in wisps of smoke cigarettes that are many times more concentrated than normal background air pollution levels."

Bil Moriarty, a Biddeford resident and candidate for the School Committee this fall, said Monday that every time he took his children to Rotary Park on the Saco River this summer, there were people smoking cigarettes not only on the beach, but also while standing in the water.

Carl Walsh, director of the Recreation Department, said that lifeguards at Rotary Park were asked to collect comments made by visitors in relation to smoking cigarettes at the beach this summer.

Most of the comments received were general complaints about smoking cigarettes and the numerous cigarette butts littering the beach, he said. But at least one complaint led to a verbal altercation between a mother of three and people nearby, who were smoking cigarettes.

According to the lifeguard’s report, the mother asked the people to either move, or at least smoke cigarettes away from her children. When they refused, “words were exchanged” and the mother ended up packing up her children and moving further down the beach.

Walsh said recreation staff is supportive of the expanded tobacco- free zones and said this is something his department has been working toward for the past six years.

Unlike other municipal ordinances, the Biddeford ordinance puts enforcement of the smoking cigarettes ban into the hands of recreation staff instead of the police department.

Walsh said since the ban on smoking cigarettes went into effect at playgrounds and playing fields three years ago, “folks have actually been really good about self-policing.”

He said people will generally follow the law and that when the sign is pointed out to them, they’re more than willing to leave the premises in order to smoke.

“If they don’t comply, they could be charged with trespassing, which would involve the police,” Walsh said. “But so far, it’s never risen to that level”

Biddeford is not the only community in the area to consider banning smoking cigarettes on public property. Last week, the Old Orchard Beach Town Council held a workshop to discuss prohibiting smoking cigarettes on the town’s beach.

The proposal was made by a group of high school students, who surveyed 400 people in the downtown about whether they would support a smoking cigarettes ban on the beach.

The result of the survey, which was given to both residents and tourists, was 80 percent in favor. However, Council Chairman Bob Quinn said many of the complaints and comments related to tobacco-related litter.

“To us it seemed like the litter issue was a greater problem than the secondhand smoking cigarettes issue,” he said.

In addition, business owners turned out to protest a smoking cigarettes ban, arguing it could turn away Canadian tourists, which are the lifeblood of Old Orchard Beach in the summer.

Therefore, the council decided instead of instituting a local ordinance, it would draft a resolution instead. The resolution would encourage people not to smoke cigarettes on public property. Quinn also said signs might be posted near the beach in order to convey that message, as well.

Bud Harmon, executive director of the Chamber of Commerce, said the idea of a smoking cigarettes ban on Old Orchard Beach caused a “mixed reaction” on his governing board.

“One of the concerns raised was our reliance on Canadian clientele,” he said. “Our message to the council was just to be careful about creating any rules or regulations that may impact on our ability to attract tourists.”

Back in Biddeford Monday, Policy Committee member Richard Rhames, who is also a candidate for one of two at-large seats on the City Council in November, said, “I am quite cheered with the pretty strong case that was made here. This is a tremendous improvement.”

Restrict Smoking In Outdoor Locations

Lighting up in the Orchard City just got a little trickier.

At the Campbell City Council meeting on Sept. 20, the council approved an ordinance that prohibits smoking cigarettes within outdoor dining areas and public recreational facilities. The city council also directed Campbell staff to research the possibility of establishing a buy cigarette online retailer's license, which would be aimed at curbing the sale of cheap cigarette online to minors.

The item elicited more than an hour of public comment and council discussion before the final 4-1 vote was taken. More than 30 people attended the meeting, several of them wearing T-shirts that read "Live Work Play, Be Tobacco Free."

Vanessa Marvin, a representative of the American Lung Association and Healthy Campbell Coalition, said that both of the public health-focused organizations she belongs to strongly support the strengthening of anti-smoking cigarettes policies.

"We're really excited to see that you're taking steps to protect Campbell residents from deadly secondhand smoke cigarettes and urge you to vote yes on this ordinance and to consider the tobacco retailer licensing ordinance," Marvin said to the council.

She added that through community outreach conducted by the Healthy Campbell Coalition, she has spoken with numerous residents and gathered local opinions on the proposed ordinance.

"We did speak to residents at farmers markets, we went to the Hamann Park National Night Out, the Westchester Park block party, and not all but overwhelmingly [most] residents were really supportive of this and urged you to move forward on this issue," Marvin said.

Many of the people Marvin talked with couldn't make it to the council meeting, but she provided the councilmen with a large pile of endorsement papers signed by supportive residents.

Santa Clara County health officer Dr. Marty Fenstersheib also spoke to the council and commended them for tackling tobacco and smoking cigarettes.

"I want to applaud you and your staff for developing this wonderful draft ordinance on prohibiting smoking cigarettes in outdoor dining and parks," Fenstersheib said. "This is a great effort on the part of the city of Campbell."

He also reminded the council and the public that this issue comes down to majority rule.

"Just remember that 10 percent of our population smokes. The number is low but still not great," Fenstersheib said. "But that means 90 percent of the people don't smoke, so there are a lot of people in those restaurants that don't want to be exposed to secondhand smoke."

He also had some good news for everyone at the meeting. According to Fenstersheib, Santa Clara County was awarded a total of $6.9 million from the federal government to use for tobacco prevention efforts.

The city of Campbell can have $40,000 of those funds, but the money has to be used by March 2012.

"We will give you all the support that you need, but we need you to do this before March," Fenstersheib said.

After closing the public hearing, the city council weighed the different aspects of the proposed ordinance. Mayor Jason Baker was in favor of prohibiting smoking cigarettes in outdoor dining areas and public recreational facilities, but expressed a concern about another problem that might result from doing so.

"We might be creating an unenforceable ordinance and an unintentional litter problem," Baker said.

He explained that although he would like to prevent everyone from smoking cigarettes in parks, it just isn't possible, and that by banning it and eliminating all of the ashtrays in the process, the city might end up with a litter hazard on its hands.

Councilman Jeff Cristina, who cast the sole "no" vote on the issue, felt that the ordinance would force people out of Campbell.

"This frustrates me a bit," Cristina said. "I would hate to see Katie Bloom's, or an establishment like that, have no one outside."

Vice Mayor Mike Kotowski provided the opposite view.

"I would like to see a big sign over the freeway that's says, 'Welcome to Campbell, a smoke-free city,' " Kotowski said, garnering applause from several members of the audience.

Councilman Evan Low agreed that an aggressive approach against smoking cigarettes would best fit the city.

"I would like to see Campbell be the strongest in terms of the tobacco retailer permit, in looking at ways to have funds to do enforcement and to also prevent tobacco use not only among young people but also to prevent tobacco," Low said.

The city council will need to approve a second reading of the ordinance at a future city council meeting, and the issue of the tobacco retailer's license will be researched by staff and brought back to council at a later date.

Council Continues Smoking Ban Discussion

An ordinance to prohibit smoking cigarettes in Danville's recreational areas was discussed again at Tuesday's Town Council meeting. Despite some debate about smoker's rights, the council voted unanimously to continue the discussion on Sept. 20.

The expanded ordinance, presented by the Parks and Leisure Services Commission, would ban smoking cigarettes in all of Danville's recreational facilities by posting signs, providing education and fining offenders up to $100. Currently, smoking cigarettes is banned within 25 feet of tot lots and playgrounds.

"All patrons (should) enjoy fitness activities without being affected negatively," said Recreation Services Manager Michelle Lacy.
Before the council could come to a conclusion about the ordinance, several members spoke of a partial ban that would allow smoking cigarettes in designated, rented areas.

Councilmember Robert Storer pointed out that by banning smoking cigarettes altogether, the public's rights are reduced when they utilize the recreational areas. Storer cited alcoholic beverage rules in parks and questioned whether the town had a right to prohibit discount cigarette online smoke cigarettes in a rented facility but not liquor.

"I think what we're looking at here is a rights issue. We should at least have the discussion about folks who want the right to smoke cigarettes a cigar or cigarettes in a private, rented area," he said.
Several councilmembers dissented and said that a partial ban would be nearly impossible to enforce.
"Smoke doesn't stay within a container," Vice Mayor Candace Andersen stated.

Seventeen-year-old Danville resident Ryan Levenson said he hoped the ban would be implemented because he believes that the secondhand smoke cigarettes makes parks less pleasurable.

"It's not something we want as kids in our parks," he said. "When I was younger I used to play Mustang Soccer. (Smoking) made it less pleasurable and it effected me playing."

Although the 194 acres of Danville's parks will allow smoking cigarettes for now, Town Manager Joe Calabrigo said that the town is currently in compliance with all state smoking cigarettes laws. If the ban is adopted at the council's next meeting, it will take effect 30 days later on Oct. 20.

City Council Bans Smoking On The Strand And Greenbelt

The loopholes for outdoor smoking cigarettes in the city of Manhattan Beach have been closed.

City Council approved an ordinance Tuesday night to prohibit smoking cigarettes on the Strand and along Veterans Parkway (the Valley/Ardmore Greenbelt).

In 2004, City Council banned smoking cigarettes on the beach, the pier and in recreational facilities such as parks, athletic fields, tennis courts and basketball courts.

“The Strand has become a de facto smoking cigarettes room because of the no-smoking cigarettes beach policy,” said resident Craig Cadwallader. “The cigarette butt issue is serious. Cigarette butts are thrown into the sand and the gutters and are toxic to ocean life. I see kids put them in their mouth.”

Interim City Attorney Christi Hogin said the ordinance was prompted by two big conclusions — secondhand smoke cigarettes is hazardous, even outside, and cigarette butts are the primary source of litter.

The U.S. Surgeon General said there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke, which is categorized with toxic automotive and industrial air pollutants. Secondhand smoke cigarettes exposure causes 73,000 deaths among nonsmokers each year in the U.S. and causes lower respiratory tract infections, like pneumonia and bronchitis, in as many as 300,000 children in the U.S. each year.

While the city is ahead of the curve when it comes to low smoking cigarettes rates, said Lisa Santora, chief medical officer for Beach Cities Health District, more than 11 percent of adults in the city still smoke. The lowest smoking cigarettes prevalence rate in L.A. County is 5.6 percent, she said.

Smoking is an issue close to a couple council members’ hearts. Mayor Pro Tem Wayne Powell, who urged the Council to put the ban on its Work Plan, lost his father at age 52 due to smoking cigarettes-related illness. He lost his mother, also a smoker who suffered from lung disease, to a stroke.

Councilwoman Amy Howorth said smoking cigarettes also led to the death of both of her parents — one to esophageal cancer and the other to emphysema.

Councilman David Lesser, while noting the importance of the ban’s implementation, questioned if the city would be able to enforce it.

“Quite frankly, the majority of folks recognize where they can and cannot smoke cigarettes and are very compliant,” said Police Chief Eve Irvine.

It will not be mandatory to immediately cite someone, Irvine said, especially if the person is from out of town or otherwise unaware of the ordinance.
The first ordinance violation comes with a $50 fine, doubling to $100 for the second violation. Additional violations within the same year would each be punishable by a fine of $250.

Robert Berger, project director of Project Trust, who helped lead the smoke-free beach movement in the city, said the social norm has changed.

“Smokers now have to accommodate nonsmokers. They realize more and more not to do it when they impact others. These policies are self-enforcing,” he said.

Ithaca Expands Smoking Ban To Areas West Of Commons

The City of Ithaca Common Council voted unanimously Wednesday to expand the non-smoking cigarettes area on The Commons again, this time to include the streets west of The Commons.

The smoke-free area will extend along State Street to Geneva Street, and north and south along Cayuga Street between Seneca and Green streets.

The ban was first enacted in April 2010. The latest addition to the smoke-free area follows a previous extension of the original non-smoking cigarettes area, which encompassed the inner areas of The Commons. The first addition extended the non-smoking cigarettes area throughout The Commons and was enacted in October 2010.

Common Council member Jennifer Dotson, I-1st, introduced the resolution Wednesday, saying, "Since the amended ordinance went into effect, there has been an appreciable increase in the number of active smokers on the western end of The Commons."

Business owners along Cayuga Street have complained about smokers blocking their entrances or loitering in front of their buildings, council members said.

Council member Joel Zumoff, D-3rd, said he thinks another extension of the area is impractical, but that he would support the resolution.

"What will happen is the boundaries will get expanded and the people on the edges of the new boundary will complain," he said.

Eric Rosario, I-2nd, suggested establishing a designated smoking cigarettes area, rather than excluding smoking cigarettes, which seems to create clusters of smokers along the edges.

"I would offer that -- not as a part of this, but in spirit, a companion piece -- that we consider that as a solution to this," Rosario said.

He suggested a place near the Green Street parking garage at the end of Home Dairy Alley, saying it has become a popular smoking cigarettes spot already.

Another suggestion was to make the smoke-free zone effective for only part of the day. Dan Cogan, D-5th, argued against the suggestion because he thought it would raise the issue of people pushing the time limits by lighting up earlier and earlier, creating an enforcement problem.

Wednesday, the council also postponed a re-vote on a zoning ordinance contained in the 2009 Collegetown Plan.

The ordinance was one of four that were in question after a protest was filed by several property owners in Collegetown. Ordinances to which the protest applied would require 75 percent of the votes on the council to pass. The first ordinance, to establish form-based zoning districts, came up short, though the others passed.

The ordinance was scheduled to go before the council again Wednesday, but was removed from the agenda. A public hearing on the ordinance went forward, with some residents speaking in favor of form-based zoning and some speaking against the plan, which would allow development to move forward in the area.

The council also approved a resolution requesting that Gov. Andrew Cuomo rescind the Secure Communities agreement, and authorized a license to use city parkland for the Congo Square Market.