For the Smoke-Free Environments Law Project home page, click here.
For the Smoke-Free Policies in Facilities Serving Older Persons home page, click here.
NEW: MISmokeFreeApartment web site & Campaign to Promote Smoke-Free Apartments
Visit SFELP's award-winning MISmokeFreeApartment web site, which has a wealth of information and resources for apartment owners and for tenants seeking smoke-free apartments. To access the site, click above. To access a press release describing the campaign, click here. To access a press release titled Smoke-Free Multi-Unit Housing Came of Age in 2007 which describes the dramatic progress made in the past year, click here.
NEW: DAILY FEATURE HIGHLIGHTS SMOKE-FREE MULTI-UNIT HOUSING Each day we will list a multi-unit residential property somewhere in Michigan that is smoke-free. To locate thousands more smoke-free Michigan residential properties, go to the MISmokeFreeApartment online listing site by clicking above.
7/25: Over 230 smoke-free properties in Ann Arbor: The RentLinx feature on our MISmokeFreeApartment online listing site shows that 234 properties are listed that are smoke-free in Ann Arbor. Some of these are single-family homes that are for rent and others are large apartment buildings that are totally smoke-free. Some units are market-rate, while others are affordable housing. Thus, there are hundreds of units of smoke-free housing available in the Ann Arbor area. In fact, about 20% of the RentLinx listings in the Ann Arbor area are smoke-free. To see what's available, click here.
News Updated July 30, 2008; 1 note posted today
No butts about it: St. John's enacts no-smoking housing rule
7/30: The following July 29th news report is from St. Johns, Newfoundland: The City of St. John's has adopted new non-smoking rules for its non-profit housing, but not after a debate about the city's role in enforcing lifestyle choices. The rules mean that tenants who sign leasing agreements with the city from now on will have to agree to not smoke indoors. The rules do not apply to current tenants, who may continue to smoke in their own homes. Coun. Gerry Colbert said he agrees with the restriction, but feels the city should do more. The city could consider "some form of education program [and] work with the government and the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corp. [with] an education program that helps people to move away from cigarette smoke, simply because of the health issues," Colbert told Monday evening's council meeting. That proposal didn't go down well with Coun. Shannie Duff, who said the city should not start policing residents' lifestyle choices. ... Tenants at the Riverhead Towers apartment complex put the item on council's agenda, after they complained about second-hand smoke. Duff said that all council is trying to do is to lessen the impact smoking has on people who live under the same roof. Click above to access the news story.China's love of cigarettes thwarts pledge of smoke-free Olympics
7/28: A smartly dressed man carried a lighted cigarette into the elevator of an upscale apartment building one recent morning, and something remarkable happened. A fellow passenger, a middle-aged matron with a pet Maltese tethered to her wrist, waved a hand in front of her face and produced a series of mannered coughs that had the desired effect: The man stepped on the cigarette and muttered an apology. In a country where one in four people smokes - and where doctors light up in hospital hallways and health ministers puff away during meetings - it was a telling sign that a decade of half-hearted public campaigns against tobacco may finally be gaining some traction. Last May, the municipal government imposed a series of measures banning cigarettes in schools, railway stations, office buildings and other public places. Chinese athletes are no longer permitted to accept sponsorships from tobacco companies, and cigarette advertising on billboards will be restricted during the Olympic Games. Prime Minister Wen Jiabao has declared that the Olympics will be "smoke free." Despite the new laws and proclamations, the impact might elude visitors who arrive in the capital next month. Most restaurants remain shrouded in smoke, the air in clubs and bars can be asphyxiating, and a year-old prohibition against lighting up in Beijing taxis has had little effect. "If I point to the no-smoking sign, the passenger will just laugh and keep smoking," said Hui Guo, a cab driver who does not smoke. Government officials say that 100,000 inspectors have been dispatched to ticket smoking scofflaws, but the $1.40 fine offers little deterrence - especially to the nouveau riche entrepreneurs who gleefully brandish gold-filtered Chunghua, which sell for $10 a pack. Click above for full article.NY prohibits smoking in addiction recovery centers
7/25: Many drug addicts, problem gamblers and alcoholics may find it harder to kick their habits in New York now that the state has become the first in the country to ban smoking at all recovery centers. Some addicts say losing the tobacco crutch could keep them from getting clean and sober, or from trying at all. New York's 13 state-run addiction treatment centers have been tobacco free for more than 10 years. New regulations that take effect Thursday will also apply to private treatment centers. Some are worried that people who need help for drugs and alcohol won't pursue it because they aren't ready to quit smoking. Bryan Lapsker, a 21-year-old PCP addict from Brooklyn who has been getting help for his addiction at a treatment center in Queens for nearly nine months, has been dreading the change every day. "Nicotine helps (addicts) get through the day," he said. "Now you take the nicotine away from us, it's almost impossible to get through the day ... addiction is addiction, I understand that, but nicotine is a legal substance." Legal or not, state officials behind the new rules believe banning tobacco is critical to successful treatment programs. "Often times smoking was given as a reward in the day-to-day treatment programs, and we need to make sure that we're changing the culture to really promote an overall recovery plan that involves health and wellness for the optimal chance for recovery," said Karen Carpenter-Palumbo, the commissioner of the New York Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services. About one in five New Yorkers smoke, compared to nine in 10 chemically dependent New Yorkers, she said. Click above for full news story. 7/25: Students and visitors to the College of Southern Idaho can't pack heat on campus, and come Aug. 25 they won't be able to smoke either. The CSI Board of Trustees unanimously decided Monday night that smoking won't be allowed anywhere on campus inside or out. If visitors want to smoke, they need to cross the street. Smoking won't be allowed even on the campus's perimeter sidewalks. A handful of students led the recent effort to make CSI smoke-free. They said smokers are good people with a bad habit and public health is their main concern. They also said they issued an online survey, which 960 people filled out: 67 percent of the respondents said campus smoking is problematic "A non-smoker has the right to breathe clean air," said CSI student Casey Warner. Students also told the board of trustees the college is emerging as a leader in health science education, and they stressed the new policy will promote that role. According to the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation, only Boise State University and Brigham Young University-Idaho have campus-wide smoke-free policies [in Idaho]. Click above for full report.Billionaires Back Antismoking Effort
7/24: The following is from a NY Times report: Bill Gates and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg announced on Wednesday [July 23rd] that they will spend $500 million to stop people around the world from smoking. The World Health Organization estimates that tobacco will kill up to a billion people in the 21st century, most of them in poor and middle-income countries. In an effort to cut that number, Mr. Bloomberg’s foundation plans to commit $250 million over four years on top of $125 million he announced two years ago. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is allocating $125 million over five years. That far outstrips current spending of about $20 million a year on antismoking campaigns in poor and middle-income countries, according to a recent W.H.O. report. The $500 million would be spent on a multipronged campaign -- nicknamed Mpower -- that Mr. Bloomberg and Dr. Margaret Chan, director of the health organization, outlined in February. It coordinates efforts by the Bloomberg Initiative to Reduce Tobacco Use, the health organization, the World Lung Foundation, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Foundation and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. The campaign will urge governments to sharply raise tobacco taxes, outlaw smoking in public places, outlaw advertising to children and free giveaways of cigarettes, start antismoking advertising campaigns and offer their citizens nicotine patches or other help quitting. Third world health officials, consumer groups, journalists, tax officers and others will be brought to the United States for workshops on topics like lobbying, public service advertising, catching cigarette smugglers and running telephone hot lines for smokers wanting to quit. A list of grants is at tobaccocontrolgrants.org. The campaign will concentrate on five countries where most of the world’s smokers live: China, India, Indonesia, Russia and Bangladesh. Click above for full article.Navajo Council To Consider Commercial Smoking Ban; Ban Would Exempt Ceremonies
7/23: According to a July 18th news report: The Navajo Nation Council is to consider a measure next week during its summer session that would prohibit the use of commercial tobacco in public buildings and shared public air spaces, such as fairs and rodeos. The measure would prohibit cigarettes and chewing tobacco, but not tobacco used in ceremonies for traditional or religious purposes. The Southwest Navajo Tobacco Education Prevention Project is pushing the passage of the law, backed by the tribe's Division of Health and the Hataalii Association Inc., a group of medicine men. "It's a healthy decision," said David Begay, a medicine man from Ganado, Ariz. "I would say the majority of Navajo people probably support it. What people do at the home as far as smoking is concerned ... that's their decision. We're talking about public places." The Navajo Nation Gaming Enterprise opposes the measure, saying it would put the tribe's first casino at a disadvantage against others in the area. For the full story, click above.The smoking gun is not smoking in Massachusetts
7/22: The rate of deaths from heart disease in Massachusetts has dropped at a level that appears to nearly parallel the number of people who have stopped smoking in order to adhere to the state's no-smoking initiative. Observers studied statistics between 1993 and 2003, the first 10 years after 1992 Massachusetts Tobacco Control Program. They found that deaths from heart disease dropped 31 percent, about the same time that the percentage of the smoking population dropped from 20.5 percent to 14.5 percent. That adds up to 425 fewer deaths from heart disease over the 10-year period, researchers said. Massachusetts modeled its stop smoking initiative after a successful program in California. "California was the first state to have a statewide program like the MTCP and they witnessed substantial declines," said Dr. Zubair Kabir, formerly of Harvard School of Public Health. "So it was not surprising that Massachusetts, the second state, would see such declines as well." Experts attribute part of the success to money from a cigarette tax in the state. The study appears in the August issue of the American Journal of Public Health. Click above to access the news story.Stringent smoking ban in Novato starts July 22nd
7/22: Novato smokers beware. The city imposes the county's toughest ordinance banning cigarette smoke on Tuesday [July 22nd]. In April, the city adopted the smoking ban, which declares cigarette smoke a public nuisance in areas where people live, including apartments, group homes and places such as skilled nursing facilities and hospitals. The move came on a 3-2 vote, with council members Jeanne MacLeamy and Carole Dillon-Knutson dissenting. The ban includes establishments selling food or drink and bus stops, parks and entertainment venues and near automated teller machines. ... "The brochures are a step in the right direction," Mayor Pat Eklund said. "It's going to take an education for all the residents and businesses what the rules are so we can ensure the people of Novato's health will be protected." The brochures advise residents and business owners how to create smoke-free environments and list areas where smoking is prohibited. They also advise that "no smoking" signs must be posted in conspicuous places. The city also offers free window decals. State laws already govern smoking around public buildings. Click above for full news report.Calgary proposes $1,000 litter fines for cigarette butts
7/21: Chucking your lit cigarette butt on a Calgary sidewalk could soon set you back $1,000 - if a city committee trying to strengthen litter bylaws gets its way. The committee is also recommending a $750 fine for tossing trash out a car window, and $500 for "basic littering." Ald. Druh Farrell, who's spearheading the proposal to institute the hefty new fines, says bylaws act as a "last resort when education and common courtesy fail." Fines show people that behaviour such as littering is unacceptable, she said. "There's definitely been a shift in behaviour," Farrell said. "We're seeing more and more litter, especially in the core, and also on major corridors." However, Dermot Baldwin, head of the Calgary Drop-In Centre, called the fines unreasonably punitive, especially when it comes to the poor and homeless. Click above for full story. 7/18: On July 16, 2008, the Kingsford Housing Commission adopted a smoke-free policy for its 41 units of elderly/disabled housing at the Kingswood Apartment building and for a 2-unit duplex for families. The smoke-free policy will go into effect on January 1, 2009 for all current and new residents of the Kingswood Apartments, thus making the entire buildings smoke-free on January 1, 2009. The policy went into effect immediately for all new residents, all guests and staff at the duplex and, thus, it is now totally smoke-free. We're very pleased to have been able to work with Cindy Carlson, the Executive Director of the Kingsford Housing Commission on the adoption of this policy. Thanks also to Kelly Rumpf of the Dickinson-Iron District Health Department for her assistance in working with Cindy and the housing commission. Kingsford is located in Dickinson County in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, right on the Wisconsin border. The Upper Peninsula now has seven (7) housing commissions with smoke-free policies for some or all their buildings. Michigan now has 27 local housing commissions which have adopted smoke-free policies. The policies cover about 49 apartment buildings/developments, with over 3,506 apartment units. The 27 local Michigan housing commissions which have now adopted smoke-free policies, in order of adoption, are: Cadillac, Plymouth, East Jordan, Elk Rapids, Melvindale, Livonia, Allen Park, Alma, Sault Ste. Marie, Traverse City, Ishpeming, Belding, Marysville, Paw Paw, Bessemer, Bedford Township, Marquette, Bangor, Eastpointe, South Haven, Grand Rapids, Evart, Negaunee, Middleville, Escanaba, Rogers City, and Kingsford. These housing commissions are located in all regions of the state and range from small to large in the number of apartment units they manage. All 27 of these local Michigan housing commission smoke-free policies have been adopted since July, 2005. Michigan has 132 local housing commissions, and now 20% of them have adopted smoke-free policies. To the best of our knowledge, there are now at least 80 local housing authorities/commissions in the U.S. that have adopted smoke-free policies. About 66 of these have been adopted since January, 2005. States with such policies include Michigan (27), Maine (15), Minnesota (14), California (5 - 6), Nebraska (4), Washington (4), New Hampshire (3), Wisconsin, Oregon, Florida, Idaho, Montana, Indiana, New Jersey and Kentucky. These policies have been adopted because of the serious health threat posed by secondhand smoke that seeps into adjoining units and for fire safety reasons, as well as to reduce maintenance costs caused by cigarette smoke and burns. Like many private landlords, many housing commissions now view smoke-free policies as amenities which are a positive marketing tool. To access an up-to-date listing of all the housing commissions/authorities in the U.S. that have adopted smoke-free policies (to the best of our knowledge), click above.LISTING OF PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITIES/COMMISSIONS WHICH HAVE ADOPTED SMOKE-FREE POLICIES
7/17: We, at SFELP, maintain an up-dated listing of all the public housing authorities/commissions in the U.S. that we know of which have adopted smoke-free policies for one or more of their apartment buildings. The listing is done largely in the order in which the policies have been adopted. As of mid-July, 2008, at least 80 local housing authorities had adopted smoke-free policies for some or all of their apartment buildings, with about 66 being adopted since the beginning of January, 2005; an average of more than 1.5 per month. States with such policies include Michigan (27), Maine (15), Minnesota (14), California (5 - 6), Nebraska (4), Washington (4), New Hampshire (3), Wisconsin, Oregon, Florida, Idaho, Montana, Indiana, New Jersey and Kentucky. To access the listing, in pdf format, click above.Federal judge tosses Tennessee lawsuit over smoking law, tax
7/16: A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit challenging Tennessee's indoor smoking ban and a hike in the state's cigarette tax. U.S. District Judge Curtis L. Collier in Chattanooga found Monday [July 7th] that there was no basis for the lawsuit against Gov. Phil Bredesen and the Tennessee General Assembly. The state last year increased the cigarette tax on each pack of cigarettes from 20 cents to 62 cents and banned smoking in most indoor public places. Plaintiff James Burnette called the new laws a conspiracy to try to reduce smoking rates. But Collier found that to be a legitimate aim for a state government and that smokers are not unfairly targeted by the laws. Click above to access the news story.Efforts to ban smoking shift to outdoor sites
7/15: WITH SMOKING now banned in all indoor public spaces in New York state, some county officials in Ulster and Dutchess hope to join a growing number of municipalities to snuff out smoking in outdoor areas as well. The Ulster County Legislature last week set a public hearing for 6 p.m. Aug. 6 on a proposed local law that would ban smoking on all county-owned or county-controlled property. Members of the Dutchess County Legislature's Public Works Committee, meanwhile, are expected on Monday [July 14th] to discuss a proposal to ban the use of tobacco in county parks. In both counties, the measures were brought forth by Democrats and have supporters and opponents on both sides of the political aisle. ... OUTDOOR smoking bans are becoming increasingly prevalent across the nation, with cities and towns big and small banning smoking on municipal properties. In April, the city of Kingston banned smoking at city-owned playgrounds, park pavilions, gazebos and bleachers, as well as within 50 feet of the entrances to municipal buildings, including City Hall. AS PROPOSED, the Dutchess County law would prohibit smoking in all county-controlled parks and their parking lots. If approved, the law would take effect upon filing with the state Department of State. The proposed Dutchess County law carries a fine of up to $75 for a first offense and up to $500 for a third offense. ULSTER COUNTY'S law would prohibit smoking in all county-owned and county-controlled parks, as well as on all other properties owned or leased by the county. Click above for full article.Iowa smoking ban implementation begins
7/14: Iowa's Smokefree Air Act, designed to protect the health of employees by prohibiting smoking in most workplaces, took effect July 1. Since then, catching up on the requirements of the law and implementing the rules is gathering momentum. The legislation means all enclosed public places, including workplaces, restaurants, bars, private clubs and some outdoor areas, are off limits to smoking. Signs prohibiting smoking must be posted at every entrance to a public place and outdoor area where smoking is not allowed. "The law states that smoking can take place in public places that are wide open, like sidewalks," said Keokuk Police Chief Tom Crew. "But there is no smoking in city vehicles or on city property." Smoking also is banned at open air sports arenas, stadiums, amphitheaters, outdoor festivals or other designated seating areas where the public gathers for entertainment; outside restaurant seating and serving areas; public transportation stations, platforms and shelters; school grounds; and the grounds of public property. Additional enclosed areas of employment that must remain smoke free include work areas, private offices, conference and meeting rooms, classrooms, auditoriums, employee lounges and cafeterias, hallways, restrooms, elevators, stairways and stair wells, child care facilities (whether in a private home or not) and health care provider locations. The law does not specify the distance from an entrance of a restricted area where smoking is prohibited, but frowns on smoke drifting in or over to people in that area. Click above to access news story.Disparities in Secondhand Smoke Exposure -- United States, 1988-1994 and 1999-2004
7/11: The following is from a July 11th Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report article of the above title: No level of exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) is safe. Breathing SHS can cause heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults and increases the risk for sudden infant death syndrome, acute respiratory infections, middle-ear disease, and exacerbation of asthma in children. In the United States, exposure to SHS declined approximately 70% from the late 1980s through 2002, most likely reflecting widespread implementation of laws and policies prohibiting smoking in indoor workplaces and public places during this period. Although the major sources of SHS exposure for nonsmoking adults are the home and workplace, the primary source of SHS exposure for children is the home; therefore, eliminating smoking in workplaces and public places is less likely to reduce children's exposure to SHS. This report examines changes in the prevalence of self-reported SHS exposure at home and changes in any exposure, as measured by serum cotinine (a biologic indicator of SHS exposure), in nonsmoking children, adolescents, and adults. The analysis was conducted using data from the 1988--1994 and 1999--2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES). The results indicated that self-reported SHS exposure at home and SHS exposure as measured by serum cotinine declined significantly (i.e., by 51.2% and 44.7%, respectively) in the U.S. population from 1988--1994 to 1999--2004; however, the decline was smaller for persons aged 4--11 years and 12--19 years. These results underscore the need to continue surveillance of SHS exposure and to focus on strategies to reduce children's SHS exposure. ... Although the percentage decrease in home SHS exposure from 1988--1994 to 1999--2004 was seen for persons of all ages, it was smaller in children, especially those aged 4--11 years, compared with those aged >20 years. For SHS exposure in the home, the declines were 37.7%, 44.9%, and 59.8% among those aged 4--11 years, 12--19 years, and >20 years, respectively. During both periods, prevalence of SHS exposure in the home was highest among non-Hispanic blacks and for persons with lower incomes. For both periods, self-reported home SHS exposure was not significantly different in males than in females, but a higher percentage of males had detectable serum cotinine than did females. Click above to access the full report.Centennial mulls smoking ban; Castle Ridge fire raises safety concern at Aspen condo complex
7/9: The following is from the July 7th Aspen Times in Colorado: A smoking ban is being contemplated throughout all privately owned condominiums at Centennial after two recent cigarette-caused fires broke out there and at another Aspen affordable-housing complex. "We almost might be obliged to do something about it, and this could be ground-breaking," said Ed Cross, president of the Centennial condominium association. "It's a safety issue now." The ban, which will be discussed by the condominium association board Tuesday, comes in response to a fire that broke out at the Castle Ridge apartment complex on June 10. A smoldering cigarette left in potting soil on a balcony destroyed a building and left 17 people homeless. Less than two weeks later another smoldering cigarette was left in a flower box at Centennial, but firefighters were able to extinguish the fire before it caused any damage. "Now we have this situation ... in light of the Castle Ridge incident and our follow-up incident ... [in which] some people here want to ban smoking," said Cross, adding he is a supporter of a smoking ban in all 92 privately owned condos at Centennial. "I would prefer to attempt to ban smoking here because it's a safety issue." This isn't the first time a smoking ban at Centennial has been considered. Some residents complained that their neighbors were smoking excessively, and the condominium association last year recognized the dangers of smoking in its bylaws. The move followed a ruling by a judge in Golden, Colo. recognizing that smoking in multifamily units ruins the enjoyment of one's home for others. That ruling paves the way for the argument that a smoking ban could be warranted, Cross said. "I would rather implement a policy and let someone challenge it in court," he said. "If you think your neighbor might kill you by smoking, you might have a psychological effect and that can disrupt your quiet enjoyment of life." He added that he recognizes that banning smoking inside private homes raises civil liberty issues, but it's a necessary measure and should go beyond common areas at the complex, including decks. There are only a handful of smokers in the homeowner portion of Centennial, Cross said. If the board was to pass a smoking ban, it would have to be enforced on a complaint basis. Violators would likely be fined, Cross said. Aspen Fire Marshall Ed VanWalraven also supports a ban at Centennial, and other complexes, as well. He said cigarettes are the leading cause of home fire fatalities in United States, although not the primary cause of fires. Between 700 and 900 people are killed as a result of cigarette-caused fires, according to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). Click above for full article.Health Canada asks seniors how to kick the habit
7/8: According to a July 4th CBC News article: Health Canada is asking seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador how and why they stopped lighting up, in a bid to learn more about the older generation's smoking -- and quitting -- habits. The Seniors Resource Centre of Newfoundland and Labrador has been commissioned by Health Canada to work on the two-year project, which will collect information in order to develop anti-smoking services for Canadians over 50. Paula Lancaster, with the Seniors Resource Centre in St. John's, told CBC News that Health Canada intends to shift its target from young people to older people. "The 5O-plus crowd and seniors are a forgotten group," Lancaster said. "A lot of time and money and energy and promotion has been spent on young people and the government has determined that we really need to start looking at the 50-plus crowd. The more people who quit smoking a this stage … the less people we are going to see in the hospital." ... Lancaster is on a mission to find out successful and unsuccessful quitting strategies seniors have tried. Health Canada estimates the number of people in Canada who are 65 and older is expected to double by 2025. To access the full CBC article, click above. To access much more information about smoking cessation and older persons, including a focus group study commissioned by The Center for Social Gerontology, click here.Tobacco Policy in American Prisons, 2007
7/7: The following is from an abstract of an article of the above title in Tobacco Control journal: OBJECTIVE: To examine current tobacco policy in US prisons and explore changes in prison tobacco policies over time. DATA SOURCE: Telephone survey of the 52 US departments of correction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Current tobacco policy; distribution of free tobacco; availability of smoking cessation programming and cessation aids. PARTICIPANTS: Complete responses were received from 51 of 52 (98%) departments, while one provided partial information. RESULTS: The majority of correctional systems (60%) reported total tobacco bans on prison grounds, with most remaining facilities (27%) having an indoor ban on tobacco use. No prisons distributed free tobacco. No major violence was reported relating to the implementation of stricter tobacco policies, however many respondents noted that tobacco became a major contraband item following the implementation of a total ban. While most prison systems with an indoor tobacco ban (86%) reported having tobacco cessation programmes, few of those with total bans (39%) continued such programmes after the initial transition period. CONCLUSION: Total tobacco bans have often been accompanied by the termination of tobacco cessation programmes. Such actions undermine efforts to promote long-term cessation resulting in a missed public health opportunity. Click above to access the abstract.Ann Arbor's Main Street Area Association to discourage smokers' litter
7/7: According to a July 3rd Ann Arbor News report: The Main Street Area Association is asking smokers to clean up their butts. The organization recently received a $1,500 grant from Keep America Beautiful for a cigarette litter prevention program that will officially begin in September. Participating merchants can receive a limited number of free "Smoker's Outpost" cigarette disposal receptacles, and the MSAA will give away 1,000 pocket ashtrays. "If you look at our sidewalks, our planter beds, where we're really trying to create something beautiful, they're littered with cigarette butts," said MSAA event coordinator Maura Thomson. "We want people to think of, when you're throwing that cigarette butt on the ground, it's like you're throwing your McDonald's cup on the ground." All costs of the program are covered by the grant. The leftover money will be used to pay the worker who sweeps the streets to work a few extra hours, Thomson said. The grant is part of a national campaign that includes approximately 30 cities, including New Orleans, Manhattan, Cleveland, and New Haven, Conn. The Cigarette Litter Prevention Program was developed after Keep America Beautiful identified cigarette litter as the most common item found in cleanups around the country. According to Keep America Beautiful, only 10 percent of cigarette butts are properly disposed of in ash receptacles. A 2008 survey of more than 1,000 smokers found that 35 percent toss five or more cigarette butts per pack onto the ground. But more than 80 percent of smokers in a separate study said that they would properly dispose of their butts if suitable bins were available. Click above to access the full story.Smoking bans reduce heart attack admissions
7/3: According to a news note of the above title published on June 30th in the British Medical Journal: Bans on smoking substantially reduce hospital admissions for heart attacks, research has shown. On the first anniversary of the ban on public smoking in England, a report shows that smoke-free laws worldwide reduce admissions by almost one fifth (Preventive Medicine 2008 Jun 18; doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.06.007). This meta-analysis of published studies shows that the effects were immediate. "The fact that many studies from so many locations around the world provide consistent findings of a substantial drop in acute myocardial infarction associated with the implementation of smoke-free laws increases the confidence that . . . smoke-free policies have immediate and substantial benefits in terms of reducing acute myocardial infarctions," says the author, Stanton Glantz, professor of medicine at the University of California. The analysis is based on eight studies published since 2004, when the first report of such a drop was reported for the town of Helena, Montana. Click above to access the news note.Smoke ban for English mental health units
7/3: The smoking ban is being extended to the buildings and grounds of mental health hospitals in England. The sites were given an extra year to bring the smoking ban into effect to help patients quit the habit. The Department of Health says the law goes "towards ending an unacceptable health inequality". Mind, the mental health charity, says inpatients must be given more support and offered recreational services to replace the social aspect of smoking. Charities have been campaigning for more help and support to those patients who want to stop smoking. According to Mind, 70% of people in mental health inpatient units smoke. And 51% of people with bipolar disorder smoke 20 cigarettes a day, compared to just 8% of the general population smoking at this level, the charity adds. Sophie Corlett, Mind's Policy Director says that mental health inpatients are the only group not allowed to smoke in their own living quarters and many of them smoke to pass the time or to socialise. She said: "Hospitals need to provide people with alternative recreational facilities and opportunities to socialise once smoking is no longer an option." A spokesman for the Royal College of Nursing, Ian Hulatt, says that someone having a major psychotic episode would find it very difficult to quit smoking, but the ban is a move in the right direction. He said: "It's a difficult ban to implement but with help and cessation clinics, changes will happen. It will take time but it will be a positive outcome. "Mental health hospitals should not be excluded from the ban. It would be bad to perpetuate an unhealthy habit such as smoking." Earlier this year, three inpatients from the high security Rampton Hospital in Nottinghamshire lost their high court battle for the right to smoke. The patients argued that a ban on smoking "in the privacy of their own home" violated their human rights. The judges ruled any interference with their rights was justified. Lord Justice Pill said: "There is, in our view, powerful evidence that - in the interests of public health - strict limitations upon smoking and a complete ban in appropriate circumstances are justified." Click above for full news story.WHO urges countries to adopt smoking bans
7/1: Smoking bans are an effective way of preventing heart disease, getting cigarette users to quit and protecting children from second-hand smoke, a World Health Organization (WHO) report issued on Monday [June 30th] said. The report by scientists at the WHO's International Agency for Cancer Research urged more countries to adopt smoking bans in public and at the workplace, saying there was enough evidence to prove they work, without hurting businesses such as restaurants and bars. "Implementation of such policies can have a broader population effect of increasing smoke-free environments," the researchers wrote in the Lancet Oncology special report. "Not only do these policies achieve their aim of protecting the health of non-smokers by decreasing exposure to second-hand smoke, they also have many effects on smoking behavior, which compound the health benefits." Many local and national governments, mainly in Western nations, have enacted varying types of smoking bans in recent years to protect people from second-hand smoke. A separate report issued by Cancer Research UK on Monday found England's ban adopted a year ago has spurred more smokers than ever to kick the habit, and predicted the restrictions would prevent 40,000 deaths over the next 10 years. The researchers involved in the WHO report -- who included John Pierce of the University of California, San Diego, and Maria Leon at the International Agency for Cancer Research -- reviewed more than 900 studies and government reports looking at the impact of smoking bans across the world. They cited studies that suggest smoke-free workplaces have led to a 10 to 20 percent decrease in hospital admissions for heart disease a year after a smoking ban. The WHO says smoking kills about four million people each year, causing a quarter of deaths related to heart disease. Click above to access the news story. 7/1: A year ago, if you'd asked Professor Robert West to predict the effect that the smoking ban in England would have on smokers he would have reckoned on no change. Yet tomorrow, on the first anniversary of the legislation that banned smoking in public places, he will announce that an estimated 400,000 people have given up since it came into force. This represents a dramatic increase in the rate at which regular smokers are quitting. Smoking rates have gone down by five percentage points over nine months, an average increase of 0.6 per cent each month, compared with 0.2 per cent before the ban. This means that three times as many smokers are now quitting than in the nine months before the ban. "This is not as I expected and it's dramatic," says West, Cancer Research UK's director of tobacco studies. "Up to April this year, [smoking] prevalence is 4 per cent lower than it would otherwise have been, which we've never seen in this country before." West's figures are based on a monthly study of 1,700 smokers throughout England where an estimated 9.5 million people smoke, accounting for 20 per cent of the adult population. "Even at this rate we're talking about 70,000 deaths a year," says West. Already it is clear that, by reducing passive smoking, the ban is saving lives. There were 1,384 fewer heart attacks in England in the nine months after the ban. "The reason is that passive smoke is like bad pollution," West explains. "When people who've got dodgy cardiovascular systems inhale particulate matter at that concentration it can trigger a heart attack immediately. I would estimate that if we stick with what we've achieved, we will save around 40,000 lives over the next ten years from cancer, heart disease and chronic constructive pulmonary disease." To access the full article, click above.Casinos going green to save energy, money, but smoking can get in the way
6/30: Step inside the newly rebuilt Turtle Creek Casino & Hotel and you'll find the typical blackjack tables, slot machines and loosen-your-belt buffet. But your eyes -- and nose -- may detect unusual features. During daytime, half the casino's lighting comes from skylights. Drinks are served only in glasses: no cans or bottles. Some gamblers are smoking, but the air isn't thick with smoke. And, outside, the roof of Bourbons 72 restaurant sports day lilies, ferns and leafy hostas. Turtle Creek, near Traverse City [Michigan], bills itself a "green" casino, designed to make the lightest possible footprint on the landscape without sacrificing profitability. Its owners, the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, are among a growing number of casino builders and operators interested in environmental stewardship. Even in an industry closely identified with devil-may-care gluttony, going green makes business sense as consumers increasingly demand sustainable products and services, said Stephen Knowles, principal designer for Turtle Creek. His Minneapolis-based firm has worked with a number of tribes on casino projects with eco-friendly aspects. The trend is reaching even casinos in Las Vegas, long criticized by environmentalists for its extravagant use of natural resources. In April, the Palazzo Las Vegas resort became the world's largest building project to receive a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED, certificate from the U.S. Green Building Council. CityCenter, a resort complex under construction in Las Vegas, is among at least 10 casino-related projects nationwide seeking certification. The council has an extensive rating system for building design, construction and operation. No casinos have been certified thus far; the Palazzo's LEED certificate was just for its hotel. ... Going green boosted the price of developing Turtle Creek about 10 percent, but tribal leaders expect to save money in the long run. ... Casinos typically face a big obstacle to LEED certification: the need to satisfy customers who smoke. LEED requires separate smoking areas and systems to contain and remove smoke and monitor air quality, said Ashley Katz, spokeswoman for the green building council. At Turtle Creek, developers installed a purifying system. Outdoor air is pumped continuously into the gambling area through vents in the raised floor. Smoky air rises to the ceiling and is piped through filters, cleansed and sent back outside. "When you're standing next to someone who is smoking, you'll smell it a bit," said Steven Feringa, tribal architect. "But the majority of the smoke is going to shoot up and away from you." Click above for full article.Loma Linda, California enacts strong smoking ban; Includes apartment provisions
6/27: According to a June 24th Press-Enterprise article: The Loma Linda (California) City Council made it official Tuesday night [June 24th], passing the most restrictive smoking ordinance yet in the Inland area. After July 24, anyone caught smoking in parks, restaurants, theaters, at bus stops, City Hall or in most of the city's motel and apartment units faces a fine of up to $100. The council earlier agreed to allow adults to smoke if traveling in a car through the city. The approval came in a 4-1 vote, with Mayor Robert Christman casting the lone dissenting vote. "I personally think this is way too much government," he said, insisting that "common courtesy works" and that he believes the ordinance would be unenforceable. After weeks of hearing arguments that the ordinance would infringe on the rights of smokers, Councilman Floyd Petersen, a health researcher who proposed it, argued that "as long as tobacco is being smoked, somebody is going to lose freedom." He said the ordinance will protect nonsmokers' rights. Under the revisions made since the ordinance was first proposed, apartment owners have until 2012 to separate smoking units from nonsmoking units. At least 70 percent of units must be set aside for nonsmokers. Among the issues the council previously debated was one that would have barred disposal of tobacco products in public areas where smoking is banned. Council members realized that it would leave smokers in a quandary over where to put out cigarettes. They agreed to allow receptacles to be placed where smoking is banned but to require signs specifying that smoking is not permitted. Inland cities from Temecula to Yucaipa have imposed public smoking bans in areas from parks to apartment buildings. Click above to access the full article. For a copy of the ordinance, click here and go to Old Business and item 13 and click on Report.Holland to ban cigarette smoking in restaurants; But lighting up marijuana in coffee shops still OK
6/27: The following is from a June 25th news report: Starting July 1, the Netherlands will banish tobacco smoke from restaurants and all other public places. But patrons of certain coffee shops where marijuana is sold over the counter can still light up their joints. Possessing the weed is actually illegal in the Netherlands, but smoking it is tolerated. Shop owners say the tobacco ban -- a trend that is becoming increasingly widespread in Europe -- could be a threat to the specially licensed coffee houses, because patrons traditionally prefer their marijuana joints mixed with tobacco. "As this is a ban on tobacco smoke, most coffee shops will allow customers to smoke pure weed, but not tobacco, and this will be potentially really difficult to regulate," said Lorna Clay, manager of the Cannabis College in Amsterdam, a nonprofit organization that distributes information about marijuana usage. "Will the staff have to watch people make their joints to be sure no tobacco has been used?" she asked. Clay said some of Amsterdam's 226 coffee shops have invested in new kinds of pipes and vaporizers to encourage pure cannabis use. But she said other coffee house owners have no intention of stopping customers from smoking mixed joints. These owners argue that the city's renowned coffee shops are one of the main reasons why so many tourists visit. Click above for full story.Olmsted, Minnesota board vows to enforce outdoor smoking ban at fair
6/27: According to a June 26th news story: Olmsted County commissioners are not flinching at plans to publicize and enforce a smoking ban at the Olmsted County Fair in Rochester. This is the first year in which the entire fairgrounds will be off-limits to smoking. The county's Smoke-free Workplace ordinance took effect on Oct. 1 last year, after last year's fair. The local law prohibits smoking in parks and other recreation areas when they're being used by children. The fairgrounds is at Graham Park in south Rochester. The fair board leases the park for the fair and will comply with the ordinance and enforce the ban, fair board president Pat Hurley said. The fair board bars smoking in buildings at the fairgrounds. The only exception is inside camping vehicles, which are exempt as private residences. Click above for full news story.Thousand Oaks, California tightens outdoor smoking ban
6/27: According to a June 26th news report: Smokers can no longer light up in outdoor gathering places, such as areas around the Civic Arts Plaza, as well as playgrounds in Thousand Oaks. The City Council voted 5-0 in favor of an ordinance restricting outdoor smoking. Restaurants with outdoor patios can seek an exemption and tobacco shops are exempt from the law. The ordinance is designed to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke in outdoor settings. Click above for news report. 6/26: The following is from a June 24th American Legacy Foundation press release: Judge David Fais of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas today signed an order allowing $10 million of the frozen funds previously earmarked for tobacco prevention and cessation services in the state [of Ohio] to continue being spent throughout 2008 and 2009. This order comes as a result of a joint motion filed by the American Legacy Foundation and the Ohio Department of Health (ODH) as well as the other state defendants, asking that the funds be freed up to maintain basic tobacco control programs in Ohio. Four million dollars would be spent to satisfy obligations incurred through June 30 and $6 million would be spent for tobacco control in the fiscal year beginning on July 1. "ODH's decision to seek permission to spend these funds is a step in the right direction, as the agency recognizes the critical need for continued funding of these life-saving services," said Dr. Cheryl Healton, president and CEO of the American Legacy Foundation. "If we prevail in our legal claims, we will assure that far more funds are spent on life-saving tobacco control programs in Ohio." Ohio recently passed legislation seeking to eliminate the Ohio Tobacco Prevention Foundation (OTPF) and liquidate its endowment fund. As a result of a legal challenge brought by the OTPF, in which the American Legacy Foundation has intervened, the court has frozen the endowment funds. ODH sent notices to grant recipients about two weeks ago informing them that their grants would be cancelled as of July 1, 2008, claiming that it was taking this action because of the freeze. Legacy immediately notified ODH that Legacy had joined with OTPF in late April to successfully ask the court for permission to spend $5 million to satisfy outstanding obligations and would like to join now with ODH to seek permission to spend additional funds on tobacco control in Ohio. As soon as executives at the American Legacy Foundation learned that the state had notified grantees that their funding would cease effective June 30, Foundation representatives contacted the ODH to discuss a plan to present to the court to continue funding state tobacco control programs until a decision is made in the case. While the $6 million designated for the fiscal year beginning on July 1 is not nearly enough to continue these programs at their current level, $2 million is designated for grants for prevention and cessation services and another $2 million has been earmarked for the state telephone Quitline. The American Legacy Foundation intervened in this litigation to ask the court to declare valid the $190 million contract the Ohio Tobacco Prevention Foundation courageously entered into with Legacy to assure that the work of tobacco control in Ohio would continue. After three days of testimony on Legacy’s motion for a preliminary injunction, the court asked the parties to make written submissions by June 27, 2008. The court also ruled that the freeze currently in effect will continue until a ruling on the preliminary injunction. While Legacy did not ask for these funds, the Foundation is proud to fight to secure them in order to continue doing life saving work in the state. If this legal claim is successful, the Foundation has committed to use these funds in Ohio for the benefit of Ohioans. Click above for the full press release.Smoke-Free Apartments becoming common in Ann Arbor, Michigan area
6/25: Since the MISmokeFreeApartment Initiative began in 2004, tens of thousands of smoke-free apartment units have become available all across the state of Michigan. In 2004 it was almost impossible to locate an apartment building that prohibited smoking inside. Today, that has changed dramatically. In Ann Arbor, home to the Smoke-Free Environments Law Project which pioneered the MISmokeFreeApartment Initiative in Michigan, the RentLinx apartment locator shows that about 203 smoke-free rental properties are currently available, ranging from single family homes to large apartment buildings for families, seniors, disabled persons and students. Smoke-free market-rate and affordable housing is available. About 18% of the RentLinx listings in the Ann Arbor area are listed as smoke-free. To access the RentLinx list of smoke-free Ann Arbor properties, click above.Okotoks, Alberta holding forum on smoking in cars
6/25: Okotoks town council is looking to ban smoking in cars when children are present and it is holding a public forum to find out how people feel about the issue. One town councillor told CTV on Sunday [June 22nd], he wants a bylaw passed because it's the way of the future and they're certainly going to lobby the province to create this as a provinicial law. If the law passes, Okotoks would be the first place in Alberta to ban smoking in cars with children. Half the people living in Okotoks are under the age of 16. Click above to access news story.New York College Dorms May Become Smoke-Free
6/24: State lawmakers approved legislation Tuesday [June 17th] to ban smoking in all New York college residence halls, citing health and fire risks. The trustees of the State University of New York banned smoking in state college dorms last summer, but the new rule would apply to private universities and vocational schools as well. Advocates say the rate of smoking has increased dramatically among college students and they are hoping to curb the habit. The bill still needs the approval of Governor Paterson -- but if the law passes, it would take effect on August 15. Click above for news report.Columbus, Ohio Smoking Violations Upheld; Business owners who challenged fines will have to pay up
6/24: The Ohio Board of Health upheld violations against two businesses under the state's indoor smoking ban. The businesses are The Loyal Order of Moose on 1970 Schrock Road and Jack's Corner Pub on 2480 Summit Street. John Rickter, director of the Columbus Public Health Department's Smoke Free Indoor Air Program, tells 610 WTVN that the businesses are not the first places be fined, but rather the first to request an administrative hearing. The Moose Lodge was fined $100; and Jack's $500. The Board dismissed one of the violations against Jack's regarding a patron who was smoking inside the business. Rickter says the patron was asked to put out the cigarette and it was extinguished, so the violation was dropped. However, the Board upheld the violation of a sign violation. "We also noted that there was not correct signage posted," Rickter said. "So in that case the Ohio Board of Health found in our favor, that Jacks Corner Pub, did indeed violate the law by failing to have the adequate no smoking signage posted. In that case, since this was a second civil fine, the amount was $500." The owner of Jack's said in a letter that patrons continue to tear down the signs. To access the news story, click above.Michigan statewide smoke-free law may pass soon
6/23: According to a June 22nd news story: Some probably wouldn't expect the manager of a bar to support a smoking ban but Nyki Martin of TC Gators said she's all for it. "I think it's a good idea," Martin said of the efforts at the state level to put an end to smoking in workplaces. "I can see where it will be an inconvenience for smokers, but I think it's great for those who don't smoke." TC Gators, located at 42559 Ford Road, [Livonia] has a patio that could accommodate those who want to light up, Martin said. "I know smokers will feel like they're being punished, but nonsmokers are punished every day of their lives with (second-hand smoke)," she said. The state House and Senate have both passed bills that would ban smoking in bars and restaurants. However, the Senate bill goes farther, banning smoking in all public establishments. The House would like there to be some exceptions, especially for the Detroit casinos. According to Rep. Marc Corriveau, a Northville Democrat whose district includes part of Canton, there have been ongoing discussions between House and Senate leaders, and he expects a deal to be struck by as early as next week, before lawmakers take summer recess. He said he understands the casinos might be hurt, but if there is an exception made for them, then others will want exceptions, too. "As soon as you give an exception to the casinos, the horse tracks are at a disadvantage, and so on. Once you open the door, you open the door," said Corriveau, who noted he would support a complete ban. Click above for full story. 6/20: The following is from an abstract of a Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics article in the Summer, 2008 issue: The article is by O'Connor JC, Macneil A, Chriqui JF, Tynan M, Bates H, Eidson SK of the Center for Health Policy and Legislative Analysis at The MayaTech Corporation. The abstract states: Elimination of state laws that preempt local antismoking ordinances is a national health objective. However, the tobacco industry and its supporters have continued to pursue state level preemption of local tobacco control ordinances as part of an apparent strategy to avoid the difusion of grassroots antismoking initiatives. And, an increasing number of challenges to local ordinances by the tobacco industry and persons supported by the tobacco industry are being decided in state supreme courts and courts of appeals. The outcomes of seemingly similar cases about the validity of local smoke-free air ordinances vary significantly by state. This paper examines the common and unique aspects of the decisions and the potential implications of court rulings on preemption for future state tobacco control efforts and achievement of national health objectives around the elimination of preemption. Using a search strategy developed for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System, cases where a state or federal appellate level court made a finding on the validity of a local smoke-free air ordinance or regulation were identified in 19 states. In contrast to previous studies, we found that cases in approximately half of states were decided for local governments. We also found that across the states, courts were considering similar factors in their decisions including the extent to which: (1) the local government possessed the authority to pass the ordinance, (2) the ordinance conflicted with the state constitution, and (3) state statutes preempt the ordinance. Click above to access the abstract. 6/19: The January, 2007 issue of the University of Southern California Law Review contains an article of the above title by Jordan Raphael, J.D. which examines the Calabasas smoking ban ordinance. This comprehensive analysis also looks at legislative approaches to smoke-free policies in multi-unit dwellings. To access the full law review article, click above.Ontario passes ban on smoking in cars with kids under 16
6/18: Ontario became the latest Canadian province to ban smoking in a vehicle with a child present Monday [June 16th] after a government-backed private member's bill passed in the legislature with the support of all three parties. Smoking in Ontario workplaces and public areas, such as bars and restaurants, is already illegal in Ontario, but the new ban will provide an additional level of protection to children under the age of 16 , said Health Promotion Minister Margarett Best. "This is about protection of our most vulnerable citizens -- children who do not have a voice," Best told the legislature. Drivers and passengers in Ontario who don't butt out in cars carrying children won't be fined more than $250 for each offence, a much lighter fine than originally envisioned by Liberal backbencher David Orazietti's bill, which set penalties up to $1,000. Nova Scotia and British Columbia have already outlawed the practice, which critics liken to child abuse. Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick are also considering a similar ban. Click above for full article. 6/18: Tenants of Cunat Inc. apartments can do anything they like in their units, as long as it is legal and does not affect other tenants, said Christopher Zock, Cunat's vice president of operations. But when an apartment building goes up in flames as a result of careless smoking, as residents witnessed earlier this month at the Cunat-owned Northfield Court Apartments in Harvard [Illinois], the question of what tenants should be allowed to do in their own homes becomes less clear-cut. "With things like pets and smoking, and even the way that people use their kitchens, we attempt to allow people to operate as if it was their own home, and we get involved when it begins to have an impact on their neighbors," Zock said. "When an event like [the June 3 fire] happens, there's obviously a massive impact. ... It definitely gives us cause to do research." The Northfield Court apartment fire was the second major apartment fire in McHenry County since 2007 that was caused by a cigarette. On May 29, 2007, more than 40 people lost their homes when an apartment building at 720 St. Johns Road in Woodstock burned down after a tenant dropped a lit cigarette and then fell asleep, fire officials said. And just last month, an elderly woman was killed in a fire at 2311 Paulson Road near Harvard that also is believed to be smoking-related, according to an investigation by the McHenry County Sheriff's Office. ... But some landlords are taking the initiative and making their own properties smoke-free. Jenna Maicke, who handles operations and tenant complaints for Woodstock-based property management company Advantage Plus Inc., said making most of the company's rental units smoke-free had not hurt business. "If [tenants] smoke, they can do it outside, away from the building," she said. "Most of the time, they don't smoke." Advantage Plus began prohibiting new tenants from smoking inside their homes around the time that the Illinois smoking ban went into effect and after receiving several complaints about secondhand smoke from other residents, Maicke said. Fire safety also was a consideration, she said. Click above for the full article.Rendell signs Pennsylvania smoking-ban law
6/17: Gov. Ed Rendell traveled [on Friday, June 13th] to Montgomery County, home of the two legislators who were the strongest advocates of a ban on smoking in public places, to sign the state's new Clean Indoor Air Act. Mr. Rendell went to Ambler, just north of Philadelphia, a town in the legislative districts of Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, a Republican, and Rep. Michael Gerber, a Democrat. They'd pushed strongly for enactment of the law that will ban smoking in 95 percent of Pennsylvania workplaces and public places. "All Pennsylvanians will benefit from the persistence of advocates and legislators who refused to quit working until we had joined dozens of other states in banning smoking in most public places,'' Mr. Rendell said. He said the new law will "protect Pennsylvanians from the deadly health effects of secondhand smoke.'' Mr. Greenleaf has been trying to get the Clean Indoor Air Act enacted since 1993, but he couldn't even get it out of a Senate committee until last year. Mr. Gerber is only in his second term in the House but was a prime sponsor of a tough anti-smoking bill that the House passed last summer. The Senate, last summer, opted for a bill that had more exceptions (places where smoking would be permitted) than the House bill, so a House-Senate conference committee had to be created. It worked for months to come up with a compromise that finally passed both chambers this month. The bill, Senate Bill 246, will take effect in 90 days, meaning Sept. 11. The state Health Department will have the main responsibility of enforcing compliance with the law. The Philadelphia Health Department will continue to enforce that city's separate smoke-free law, which is two years old. Click above to access the article.Loma Linda considers tougher smoking ordinances, including sidewalks and other outdoor areas
6/16: If Loma Linda approves a far-reaching smoking ban later this month, it will join a growing number of cities in California that are tackling an issue that pits people's health against personal freedom. Leaders in cities such as Calabasas and El Cajon, which have passed similar no-smoking laws in the last 2 1?2 years, said Loma Linda can expect complaints from a few people but thank-yous from many more. Most people comply, so enforcement costs are low, they said. And so far, they added, no one has sued the cities over the restrictions. Loma Linda would join at least seven California cities that have outlawed smoking in most public places, including sidewalks, according to The Center for Tobacco Policy & Organizing, an American Lung Association project funded by the state. In Loma Linda, smoking would not be allowed on streets, sidewalks and just about any public space. At least a dozen other Inland cities have prohibited smoking in limited outdoor areas, such as in parks or near buildings. At least one, Palm Desert, will consider adopting restrictions similar to Loma Linda's later this month. Elected officials in Calabasas and El Cajon say the laws help protect people from secondhand cigarette smoke, which scientific evidence shows can lead to respiratory problems and other ailments. Click above for full article.Smoke-Free Apartments becoming common in Grand Rapids, Michigan
6/13: Since the MISmokeFreeApartment Initiative began in 2004, tens of thousands of smoke-free apartment units have become available all across the state of Michigan. In 2004 it was almost impossible to locate an apartment building that prohibited smoking inside. Today, that has changed dramatically. In Grand Rapids, the RentLinx apartment locator shows that about 93 smoke-free apartment properties are currently available, ranging from single family homes to large apartment buildings for families, seniors and disabled persons. Smoke-free market-rate and affordable housing are available, as is smoke-free public housing through the Grand Rapids housing Commission. To access the RentLinx list of smoke-free Grand Rapids properties, click above.Hawaii Smoke-Free Homes web site
6/12: The Coalition for a Tobacco Free Hawaii has a web site devoted specifically to encouraging and assisting multi-unit property owners to adopt smoke-free policies, and to assist tenants to assert their rights to smoke-free apartments and condos. The site, called Hawaii Smoke-Free Homes is loaded with information. To access the site, click above.Larry Tisch (no longer) sells cancer sticks
6/12: A page 1 story in the June 11th New York Times is titled "Profits in Hand, Wealthy Family Cuts Tobacco Tie", and it reports that the Tisch family, after 40 years of making obscene profits from Newport and other cigarettes made and marketed by Lorillard, has gotten rid of the investment. In the second paragraph, the article mentions one of tobacco control's early pranks to de-normalize tobacco and to publicly demonstrate that cigarette company executives were social misfits. The article recalls an action taken by STAT (Stop Teenage Addiction to Tobacco) in 1993, with funding aid from Andy Tobias. The article reads as follows: Forty years ago, the New York business magnates Laurence A. Tisch and Preston Robert Tisch capitalized on growing public health concerns over smoking by buying a cigarette company at a bargain price. It proved a good investment -- even if the Tisch name has sometimes been linked to smoking's health hazards, as when an airplane once trailed a banner over Long Island beaches reading "Larry Tisch sells cancer sticks." [The article concludes with the following comments.] The airplane banner incident occurred in 1993 after a Newport advertising plane repeatedly flew over Long Island beaches, including the Fire Island home of the financial writer Andrew Tobias, a supporter of antismoking causes. Mr. Tobias recently recalled that he had hired another plane to tail it, towing the banner reading "Larry Tisch sells cancer sticks." "There haven’t been any planes on those beaches since," Mr. Tobias said. To access the full article, click above.Pennsylvania smoking ban clears last hurdle to becoming law
6/11: After months of debate, the Pennsylvania state Senate approved a bill shortly after 5 p.m. [on Tuesday, June 10th] to ban smoking in public places, clearing the last major hurdle for the legislation to finally become law. The bill, which also allows Philadelphia to keep its two-year-old ban on the books, will now be sent to Gov. Rendell, who has said through a spokesman that he intends to sign it. The bill effectively calls for banning smoking in all public places, but it contains a lengthy list of exemptions for certain workplaces and entertainment venues. They include bars that have 20 percent or less in annual sales of food, as well as cigar bars, tobacco shops and private clubs whose officers agree to it. Casinos would be permitted to allow smoking in up to 50 percent of their gaming halls - though Philadelphia's law prohibits its two casinos from allowing any smoking, and the legislation passed today will not change that. Also excluded under the proposed statewide ban: private homes and other residences and vehicles - unless they are being used for child-care services - and long-term care facilities, as well as residential facilities used for drug and alcohol rehabilitation and mental-health services. Hotels would be permitted to allow smoking in up to 25 percent of their rooms. Smoking would also be allowed in designated outdoor smoking areas at sports or recreation facilities, theaters, and other performance establishments. If the bill is signed by Rendell, Pennsylvania will join almost three dozen other states with smoking bans, including New Jersey, Delaware and New York. Click above to access the news story.UAW files unfair labor practice against Caterpillar over smoking ban
6/10: The following is from a May 30th Peoria Journal Star article: Caterpillar Inc.’s decision to ban smoking on all of its U.S. properties beginning Sunday, including on its manufacturing campuses, goes against guarantees in the company’s contract with the United Auto Workers, the union says. The union, through Local 974 in East Peoria, has filed an unfair labor practice charge against the company, contending the ban should be subjected to collective bargaining. Smoking at Caterpillar, the union said, has been a contractual privilege for 60 years. ... It was late last fall that Caterpillar first said it would ban smoking on its campuses, after the Smoke-Free Illinois Act that prohibits smoking in public places and workplaces was approved by the state legislature. That act took effect Jan. 1. But it wasn’t until May 9, Scott said, that the company set a date for the ban to take effect. "The verbiage used in previous communications said the company was committed to 'work toward a campuswide smoke free environment by June 1.' That led us to believe the company was prepared to bargain with us about it. Then on May 9 it said that 'beginning June 1, Caterpillar will go completely smoke free,'" Scott said. "That was the first time a date was set in stone, and that’s why we didn’t file the unfair labor practice charge until May 15." The charge is still in the investigation stage by the National Labor Relations Board, he added. "This is not a smoking issue for the union. It's a contract issue, an issue of the employer refusing to bargain in good faith. That is why we filed the charge," Scott said. The contract issue is clause 16.9 in the central bargaining agreement between Caterpillar and the UAW that covers Caterpillar hourly workers nationwide. In place since the first contract was reached between the two in 1948, it says, "Employees shall be allowed on-the-job smoking privileges except in designated restricted areas, which areas will be plainly marked." The union, Scott said, has no issue with the statewide ban on smoking inside the factories because that is state law. Its members, he said, have complied with it by smoking outside and at least 15 feet from doors, as dictated by the law. Scott said the union did not know how many of its active members are smokers, but he added that the company, based on its own health coverage surveys, estimated that 10 percent to 20 percent of its hourly workers smoke. Click above for full article.For Actors and Audiences, Smoking Can Be a Drag; Shows Set in Earlier Eras Test Ban on Lighting Up
6/6: The following is from a May 31st Associated Press article: In the first scene of "The Country Girl" at Broadway's Bernard B. Jacobs Theatre, actor Peter Gallagher stabs a cigarette in the air to make a point or two. Lucas Caleb Rooney, who plays a theater manager, puffs nervously on a cigarette and listens. Chip Zien, who portrays a calculating theater producer, draws slowly on a cigar as he watches Gallagher's impassioned speech. Soon they are joined by Remy Auberjonois's earnest, young writer, who trails his own cigarette across stage. Within minutes, they collectively send a sweet-smelling pillow of smoke wafting into the audience at the revival of the Clifford Odets 1950s classic about a washed-up actor trying for a comeback. The show's star, Morgan Freeman, said from the first rehearsal that he didn't want to smoke. "That's okay," said stage manager Barclay Stiff. "His part doesn't specifically call for smoking. There's plenty of smoke to go around as it is." "The Country Girl" is not alone in setting the mood with cigarettes this season: It's light-up time on and off-Broadway. Ever since 2003 when New York City banned smoking in enclosed public spaces, theater directors have been walking a thin line between artistic freedom and legal necessity. Under a special exemption for the arts, theaters are allowed to use tobacco-free cigarettes -- usually sweet-smelling herbal cigarettes. ... How does secondhand smoke in theaters affect audience members? Some aren't bothered at all. Vincent Cali, a Texan who recently saw "The Country Girl," is forgiving, noting that the smell cleared quickly after the initial blast. "It goes with the '50s," he said with the shrug. But while herbal smoke generally doesn't linger on the audience as much as the tobacco equivalent, theater staff admit that some audience members see it as an intrusion from a less socially aware time. "In a small theater, or where the audience surrounds the stage, the audience is always out of control as soon as a cigarette is pulled out," says Stiff. "Some people really do get worked up," reports Bartlett Sher, the director of the Tony-nominated "South Pacific." "You will hear people coughing their lungs out on purpose as soon as an actor lights a single cigarette." Click above for full article.Pennsylvania smoking ban gets on fast track
6/5: A hard-fought ban on indoor smoking in most public places is suddenly on a fast track in the Pennsylvania General Assembly. The bill, which received the blessing of a Senate-House conference committee Tuesday on a 5-1 vote, was scheduled to get a final vote in the Senate today [June 4th]. The state House of Representatives could follow later in the day, though a vote might wait until next week because of scheduling issues. Both chambers are expected to approve the bill. A spokesman for Gov. Ed Rendell said Rendell would sign it into law as soon as possible. The law would take effect 90 days after that. Smoking would be barred in restaurants, most offices and government buildings. The measure would allow smoking in casinos -- except the two in Philadelphia -- bars, hotel rooms and private clubs. None of the groups involved got all that they had sought in the bill, but in the end, most say they support the end product. The American Cancer Society and the American Heart Association are on record as supporting the bill. Bill Godshall, executive director of SmokeFree Pennsylvania, called it a "huge first step" for a state with one of the weakest indoor smoking laws in the nation. "At least this bill protects 95 percent of the workers from secondhand smoke at the workplace. We'd like that to be 100 percent, but we're not going to let the perfect interfere with the good." To access the full article, click above.Former Ohio Attorney General Dann threatened anti-smoking unit, its chief says
6/5: According to a June 4th Toledo Blade news report: Former Attorney General Marc Dann threatened the Ohio Tobacco Prevention Foundation that if it didn't rescind its contract giving away $190 million of its funds, it would be dissolved, the now defunct organization's executive director testified yesterday. A few weeks later, the General Assembly and Gov. Ted Strickland passed a law killing the foundation created by lawmakers eight years earlier with funds from the state's multibillion-dollar settlement with tobacco companies. Mike Renner, who lost his job as executive director when the foundation was shut down, said some trustees were led to believe by the Attorney General's Office that they could be personally held liable for their decisions. "Absent a dismissal of the lawsuit and an assurance that the American Legacy Foundation would not pursue any interest, preparations were being made to terminate the foundation," Mr. Renner said Mr. Dann told him in a telephone call. The Democratic governor and Republican legislative leaders announced on April 2 that they planned to take $230 million from the foundation's $270 million endowment to help pay for $1.57 billion in targeted investments to jump-start the state's weak economy. The foundation's board, in response, voted to give its anti-tobacco counterpart at the national level $190 million of its funds, preserving that much for the continuation of its mission to help smokers kick the habit and encourage youths not to start. Franklin County Common Pleas Judge David Fais will hear a third day of testimony today as he considers whether to make permanent his temporary restraining order preventing either side from touching the money. To access the full article, click above. For a related news report, click here.Ohio Supreme Court declines to hear appeal for smoking ban exemptions
6/5: According to a June 4th Toledo Blade news report: Most private clubs like Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion, and Elks must remain off-limits to smokers because of a decision Wednesday by the Ohio Supreme Court. The high court refused to hear the Ohio Department of Health’s appeal of last year’s lower court ruling that struck down the department's attempt to write an exemption for some clubs into the statewide voter-approved ban on indoor public smoking in workplaces and other indoor public places. Confusion was created at the polls when a summary of the ballot language generally listed private clubs among the handful of exemptions to the ban. However, the language in the legally binding Smoke Free Workplace Act was far narrower than that. The department was charged under the law with writing the rules on how the ban would operate. With Gov. Ted Strickland's blessing, it tried to work an exemption for private clubs into the rules by re-defining "employee" to exclude club members, even if they are paid. For the full article, click above.Michigan House Speaker Expects Smoking Ban
6/2: According to a May 29th WXYZ-TV report: Michigan House Speaker Andy Dillion tells Channel 7's Stephen Clark that he expects a smoking ban bill - with exemptions for casinos and some bars - will become law by the end of June. "I don't want to put our Detroit casinos at a disadvantage and also a cigar-martini bar, I don't want to put them out of business so I support those exemptions," Dillon, a Democrat from Redford Township told Clark during a break in the Mackinac Policy Conference. The state House again passed a bill recently, by a 65-39 vote, that bans workplace smoking except at casinos, bingo halls and a few other places. It's at odds with a Senate-approved version that bans smoking inside all workplaces. There can't be a new smoking ban law until the Democrat-led House and Republican-led Senate come to agreement on what it covers. Casinos have been the key sticking point. Detroit casinos don't want a smoking ban to include them because they feel it would put them at a competitive disadvantage compared to tribal or out-of-state casinos not covered by the ban. Click above to access the news report.California Senate OKs flawed measure to allow landlords to ban smoking in apartments
6/2: According to a Los Angeles Times article: Already barred from lighting up in restaurants, theaters and the office, Californians may also be banned from smoking in their apartments under a proposal passed by the state Senate on Thursday [May 29th]. The measure would allow landlords to prohibit smoking in apartment buildings they own to protect nonsmoking tenants from secondhand smoke. The legislation is among a slew of worker protection and consumer protection bills that advanced this week in the state Legislature. ... Senate bills now go to the Assembly for consideration, and vice versa. ... "While we have championed the efforts to protect adults in the workplace and bars, we have done very little in this state to protect children and their families in their own homes," Padilla told his colleagues. He said his bill would "increase the availability of smoke-free housing in California." The measure was opposed by Republican lawmakers, including Sen. Dick Ackerman of Irvine, who saw it as unnecessary meddling, and said it was against the wishes of the public. "The vast majority of all renters, including . . . nonsmokers, are opposed to it," Ackerman said, citing a recent survey by Apartments.com. The proposal, similar to a measure in Utah, is supported by the California Apartment Assn., which represents about 50,000 property owners, said Monica Williamson, vice president of the group. "Current law is silent with respect to a landlords' ability to impose a smoking ban," she said. Padilla agreed to exempt rent-controlled units and require landlords to provide 12 months' notice of a smoking restriction on an apartment. The bill is opposed by the Apartment Assn., California Southern Cities. The group said there is nothing in existing law preventing landlords from barring smoking in apartments. Although the measure must still pass the Assembly, the Senate was considered a significant hurdle. [SFELP comment: it is reported that the bill as passed would allow current smokers in apartments to continue to do so for as long as they live there. If this is correct, it is a major flaw in the bill.] To access the news story, click above.Nebraska State Supreme Court rejects exceptions to Omaha smoking ban
6/2: The Nebraska Supreme Court ruled Friday [May 30th] that the exceptions to Omaha's smoking ban for keno parlors and some bars are unconstitutional. The court agreed with Marylebone Tavern co-owner Michelle Hug that the exceptions to the ban created an unfair benefit for the exempt businesses. Most businesses have already complied with the Omaha ban, but the City Council allowed a five-year grace period for bars that don’t serve food, for keno parlors and for Horsemen’s Park, a horse track. The Supreme Court's ruling will likely end the exceptions to the city ban even before a new statewide smoking ban takes effect in June 2009. The only workplace exemptions to the statewide ban are for retail tobacco shops and places where smoking research is done. The Supreme Court ruled that Omaha failed to offer evidence to support the exceptions to its smoking ban, which was adopted to protect public health and recognize the right of everyone to breathe smoke-free air. "Nothing in the ordinance's stated purpose would explain why employees of the exempted facilities or members of the public who wish to patronize those establishments are not entitled to breathe smoke-free air or to have their health and welfare protected," the court said. Hug's attorney, K.C. Engdahl, said his client will be pleased with the ruling because it will force all Omaha businesses to comply with the same rules. "It's exactly what we asked for," Engdahl said. "Smoking should be banned universally throughout the city." ... The city had argued there were enough differences between the businesses where smoking is banned and the businesses exempt from the ban to justify the exemptions. ... The case will be sent back to Douglas County District Court, and a final order eliminating the smoking ban exceptions will likely be issued sometime next month. Then the City Council will decide how to respond to the ruling. Mumgaard said the council could try to pass new exceptions to the ban, leave the ban standing with no exceptions or repeal the city ban and wait for the new statewide smoking ban to take effect in June 2009. Click above to access the news report. To access the Court's opinion, click here. It is Hug v Omaha.Hayward City Council Approves Outdoor Smoking Ban Covering Sidewalks, Parks, etc.
6/2: For the first time in the history of Hayward [California], smoking is not allowed on streets or sidewalks, and most residents are breathing a healthy sigh of relief, assistant city manager Fran David said Thursday. The city council voted 5-2 Tuesday [May 27th] to pass an ordinance that prohibits smoking cigarettes in all public places owned, controlled or leased by the city of Hayward, according to David. Those places include public parks and recreation areas, such as the plaza in front of City Hall, David said. "So far we've had an overwhelming display of support from both our businesses and our residences," David said. The city reportedly has been receiving calls and e-mails since the ordinance passed from residents who appreciate the ban. The ordinance goes into effect 30 days from the council's vote, David said. Click above to access news report.GVSU study: Smoking ban won't hurt business, could actually help
5/30: The following is from a May 29th Business Review article: As state lawmakers try to work out varying versions of legislation to ban smoking in the workplace, Grand Valley State University professors say the interests of non-smokers should take the lead. Marketing professors Frederic Kraft and Suzeanne Benet say their research shows that consumers prefer non-smoking bars and restaurants. Their conclusion is based on the reactions of both smokers and non-smokers to smoke-free establishments and those that allow smoking. "For years, service businesses have dreaded going smoke-free in the fear of losing smokers' business," Kraft said. "According to our research, those losses won't happen." Quite the contrary, actually, he said. Non-smokers are "more likely to take their business elsewhere if smoking is not effectively regulated, if not banned altogether," Kraft said. The state House on Wednesday voted 65-39 to pass a bill that would ban smoking in the workplace except at casinos, bingo halls, tobacco stores and horse tracks. An earlier Senate-approved version would ban smoking in all workplaces, and lawmakers now have to reconcile the differences. GVSU's Benet said their study shows that a ban "makes a much greater difference to non-smokers than to smokers, and the impact of non-smokers should be the prime concern of hospitality industry decision-makers." Click above to access the article. 5/30: The following is from an article in the May 28th Times of London, England: Before Lord Justice Pill and Mr Justice Silber Judgment May 20, 2008. Preventing detained mental patients from smoking was not a breach of article 8, right to respect for private and family life, or article 14, prohibiting discrimination, of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Queen's Bench Divisional Court so held when dismissing claims for judicial review by the claimants, G and B, against the Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust and by N against the Secretary of State for Health, by which they applied to quash regulation 10(3) of the Smoke-free (Exemption and Vehicles) Regulations (SI 2007 No 765) as being incompatible with their rights under the Convention. ... Lord Justice Pill, giving the judgment of the court, said that the claimants either were, or had been detained at Rampton Hospital, a high security psychiatric hospital managed by the Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust. Section 1 of the 2006 Act made provision for the prohibition of smoking in certain premises, places and vehicles. Some exemptions were granted by Part 2 of the 2007 Regulations. Regulation 10 provided for temporary exemption for mental health units and regulation 10(3) provided that the exemption would cease to have effect on July 1, 2008. ... Preventing a person smoking did not generally involve such adverse effect upon his physical or moral integrity as would amount to an interference with the right to respect for private or home life within the meaning of article 8. There was not an absolute right, subject to article 8.2 to smoke wherever one was living. ... Mental illness did not itself confer a status, and a narrower definition of the status as a mental patient detained in hospital presented further problems of definition. That status was not a personal characteristic contemplated by article 14. Click above to access the full report. 5/29: According to a report in the Detroit News: The Michigan House voted again this afternoon [May 28th] to ban smoking in workplaces including bars and restaurants -- but carved out an exception for Detroit's three casinos. Other exemptions, under the House-passed bill, were granted to tobacco shops, cigar bars, Bingo halls and horse tracks. There was no debate before House members voted 65-39 in favor of the bill. It continues a stalemate between the House and the Senate, which this month approved a broader smoking ban that extended to all workplaces, including casinos. Senate leaders said the House action was guilty of "political gamesmanship" that doesn't move the state any closer to smoke-free work environment. Gov. Jennifer Granholm has repeatedly said she is eager to sign smoke-free legislation. But that won't happen unless the two chambers can agree to the same set of restrictions. If Michigan enacts a smoking ban, a topic of heated debate for the last decade, it would join more than 30 states that have limited public smoking. ... Matt Marsden, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, said his boss was at a loss to explain the House vote. "We're not sure what the House is trying to accomplish here," Marsden said. "Allowing smoking islands for special interest parties that Democrats want to court favor with does not constitute a smoking ban." Bishop, who personally opposes a smoking ban, said if one is enacted it should be applied across the board, so everyone is treated equally. He plans to sit down in the coming days with his fellow Senate Republicans to see how they want to proceed. [According to a Detroit Free Press article: But a total smoking ban appeared likely if the Senate doesn't accept the House plan. Previously, the Senate eliminated all exemptions from an earlier House bill. That bill remained in the House today, and some Detroit representatives said they’d vote for it -- including a ban in casinos -- if the Senate fails to exempt them.] Click above for the full Detroit News article. To access the full Detroit Free Press article, click here. 5/29: The following is from a May 28th Grand Rapids Press report: Days after a West Side Grand Rapids man died from a cigarette-ignited fire, a local legislator is pushing a law to mandate fire-safe cigarettes in Michigan. "There's technology in place presently that can dramatically reduce these types of tragedies from occurring, and we want to ensure that these types of cigarettes are distributed in the state of Michigan," said state Rep. Michael Sak. On Saturday, 84-year-old Rufus Parker died in an apartment fire caused by a cigarette. Fire-safe cigarettes are equipped with two or three bands of less-porous paper, otherwise known as "speed bumps," which slow down a burning cigarette. A cigarette left unattended will extinguish when the embers reaches a speed bump. "It doesn't have any impact on the quality of the product, but that's completely secondary," said Sak, D-Grand Rapids. "This is completely based on the safety of consumers across the state." Michigan is far from being the first state to consider the idea. Manufacturers already produce fire-safe smokes for 10 states. Twenty-five other states have passed laws that will take effect in coming years, according to the Coalition for Fire-Safe Cigarettes. Plainfield Township Fire Chief David Peterson said he has responded to several cigarette fires over his career. "Smoking is the most prevalent cause of fatalities in structure fires," he said. To access the full news story, click above. See related news note directly below. 5/29: A resident of Grandview Apartments in Grand Rapids was found dead after a fire broke out Saturday afternoon [May 24th] on the 193-unit building's sixth floor. He was identified as 84-year-old Rufus Parker. Four other residents and one firefighter were taken to area hospitals with minor injuries, while another firefighter was treated at the scene, The Grand Rapids Press reported. A preliminary investigation showed the fire was likely caused by "careless smoking the living room" of Parker's apartment, fire investigator Pablo Martinez said. Firefighters evacuated residents of the building's four uppermost floors after the fire broke out, according to WZZM-TV, WOOD-TV and The Press. Residents of the 80 units were to spend Saturday night in local hotels or an emergency shelter, said Caroline Clunk, a spokeswoman for the Red Cross of Greater Grand Rapids. [This fire could probably have been prevented if there had been a smoke-free policy in place in the apartment building.] To access the news story, click above. 5/28: On May 15th, the Rogers City Housing Commission adopted a smoke-free policy for its Hilltop Manor apartments. The policy covers all areas of the 38-unit apartment building, including the apartments. Smoking is only allowed outside the building, and far enough away that secondhand smoke will not filter back into the apartments. The smoke-free policy went into effect immediately upon adoption for all residents, guests and staff. Michigan now has 26 local housing commissions which have adopted smoke-free policies for some or all their buildings, covering 47 apartment buildings/developments, with about 3,463 apartment units. Nationwide at least 77 local housing authorities have adopted smoke-free policies. We at SFELP are pleased to have been able to assist the Rogers City Housing Commission in adopting their policy. For more information on how to adopt smoke-free policies in public housing, click above. 5/28: The following is from a May 27th news report from Lunenberg, Massachusetts: A fatal fire here earlier this month has a state lawmaker considering legislation that would require all elderly housing facilities to have automatic sprinklers and ban residents from smoking inside. State Rep. James Eldridge, D-Lunenburg, believes the legislation could have a prevented a fire at the Pearl Brook Housing Complex that killed a 53-year-old man and displaced residents in eight apartments on White Street. Eldridge said he will likely draft a bill requiring all elderly-housing facilities to have automatic sprinkler systems, regardless of the year they were built. Eldridge also said he may consider a bill that bans smoking in elderly-housing facilities. "I have not made up my mind on that yet," Eldridge said. "I'm going to reach out to the local housing authorities." Jeffrey G. Phillips, 53, died in a fire at the Pearl Brook Housing Complex on May 10. Fire officials said the fire started when Phillips was smoking a cigarette while taking oxygen for a pulmonary disorder. The facility does not have a sprinkler system because it was built prior to the passage of a law requiring sprinklers in any housing complex with more than four units, Eldridge said. "The cause of a lot of fires in elderly housing facilities is people smoking and falling asleep or if they are on oxygen, like the situation in Lunenburg," Eldridge said. "I have constituents who have called me about doing something to ban smoking inside these facilities. It's something I'm seriously considering." The Pearl Brook Housing Complex is managed by the Leominster Housing Authority. Executive Director Eugene Capoccia said he is favor of both of Eldridge's proposals. Click above for full news story.St. John's, Newfoundland, Council Defers Decision on Building Smoking Ban
5/28: According to a May 27th news report from Newfoundland: St.John's council has deferred a decision on banning smoking in a city owned apartment building. Councillor Sandy Hickman had brought forth a motion to ban smoking in Riverhead Towers and a 48 name resident's petition supported the measure. However, most of council felt more information is needed, including a legal opinion. Hickman believes the smoking ban, with the support of most residents, would be a good thing.The issue has been referred to staff for further study. Click above to access the news report. 5/27: The following is from the May 23rd Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report from the CDC: Secondhand smoke (SHS) contains more than 50 carcinogens and causes heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults (1). Eliminating smoking in indoor spaces is the only way to fully protect nonsmokers from SHS exposure (1). Smoking restrictions limit smoking to certain areas within a venue; smoke-free policies prohibit smoking within the entire venue. A Healthy People 2010 objective (27-13) calls for establishing laws in all 50 states and the District of Columbia (DC) that make indoor public places and worksites completely smoke-free. To assess progress toward meeting this objective, CDC reviewed the status of state laws restricting smoking in effect as of December 31, 2007, updating a 2005 study that reported on such laws as of December 31, 2004. This report summarizes the changes in state smoking restrictions for private-sector worksites, restaurants, and bars that occurred from 2004 to 2007. The findings indicated a substantial increase in the number and restrictiveness of state laws regulating smoking in these three settings, providing nonsmokers with increased protection from the health risks posed by SHS. If current trends continue, achieving the national health objective by 2010 might be possible. This report focuses on smoking restrictions in indoor areas in private-sector worksites, restaurants, and bars. These three settings were selected because worksites are a major source of SHS exposure for nonsmokers and because workers in restaurants and bars are especially likely to be exposed to SHS, often at high concentrations. ... During December 31, 2004--December 31, 2007, based on the effective date of state laws (i.e., the date that these laws actually took effect, not the date they were enacted) and the STATE System coding scheme, the level of smoking restrictions became more protective for private-sector worksites in 18 states, for restaurants in 18 states, and for bars in 12 states. No states relaxed their smoking restrictions in any of these three settings during the study period. In addition, the number of states requiring private-sector worksites to be smoke-free increased from five to 22. As of December 31, 2004, Delaware, Florida, Massachusetts, New York, and South Dakota had banned smoking in private-sector worksites. As of December 31, 2007, an additional 17 states (Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, DC, Hawaii, Louisiana, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington) had done so. During the study period, the number of states with no smoking restrictions in place for private-sector worksites decreased from 24 to 13. During the 3 years ending December 31, 2007, the number of states requiring restaurants to be smoke-free increased from seven to 21. By the end of 2004, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, and Utah had banned smoking in restaurants. As of December 31, 2007, 14 additional states (Arizona, Colorado, DC, Hawaii, Louisiana, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Washington) had done so. During this same period, the number of states with no smoking restrictions for restaurants decreased from 19 to nine. During the same 3-year period, the number of states requiring bars to be smoke-free increased from four to 13. By the end of 2004, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, and New York had banned smoking in bars. As of December 31, 2007, an additional nine states (Arizona, Colorado, DC, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Washington) had done so. During the 3 years of this study, the number of states with no smoking restrictions for bars decreased from 43 to 31. From December 31, 2004 to December 31, 2007, the number of states requiring all three venues included in this study to be smoke-free increased from three to 12. By the end of 2004, Delaware, Massachusetts, and New York had banned smoking in all three settings. As of December 31, 2007, Arizona, Colorado, DC, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Washington also had implemented such comprehensive laws. During the study period, the number of states with smoke-free provisions in place in at least one of the three settings included in this study increased from eight to 25. During this same period, the number of states without any smoking restrictions in place for any of these settings decreased from 16 to eight. Click above to access the CDC report.Forum: Smoke-free workplaces are safer
5/22: The following is from a May 20th Traverse City Record-Eagle column by Ken Sikkema: The facts have been studied. The studies have been studied. The results are clear. There is no way to protect workers from secondhand smoke other than to create smoke-free work sites and doing so will not have a negative economic impact on bars and restaurants. Public Sector Consultants recently completed a study of what is arguably one of the most-researched policy issues in the past 10 years -- smoke-free laws. We were hired to analyze the potential impact of House Bill 4163 as the legislation creates smoke-free work sites in Michigan, including bars and restaurants. One of the most important things we tell our clients when they hire us is that we never go into an issue with a preconceived outcome in mind. We follow the facts, wherever they may lead. Having fully analyzed and explored this issue, we arrived at a number of conclusions. First, there is compelling scientific evidence to support eliminating exposure to secondhand smoke. Second, HB 4163 will have no net economic effect on the Michigan restaurant and bar industry. Third, public support, measured by opinion polls and adoption of smoke-free laws in other states, is increasing. And, finally, a smoke-free workplace law that includes restaurants and bars does not constitute unwarranted government regulation of business. When I was Senate majority leader, I made the decision to hold this legislation in my committee rather than act upon it. I now wish I had available to me the type of study my colleagues and I at PSC have just conducted. Then, I would have seen the evidence from dozens of studies all pointing to the same thing. I would have seen all the facts compiled in one place. I would have seen the negative effects of secondhand smoke addressed without a negative economic impact on job providers. I would have seen things differently. Michigan Senators passed HB 4163 earlier this month, now it is up to the House of Representatives and Speaker Andy Dillon to make Michigan a safe place to work. Dillon has supported smoke-free air in the past, and a quick concurrence vote to send the legislation to the governor is all this battle needs to take a giant step forward in the fight for smoke-free air. Click above for the full column.Turkey, Smoking Nation, Tries Out Ban
5/21: The smoking-ban juggernaut that has invaded befogged places from Paris to Babbitt, Minn., and beyond faces its toughest challenge yet: Turkey. According to Gallup's count, no nation comes "remotely close" to Turkey in the prevalence of tobacco use. Two out of three men there light up, as do one in three woman; a majority of Turks between the ages of 15 and 49 told polltakers that they had smoked on the day before the survey. Overall, about half the total population was counted as smokers, about 10 percentage points more than in the runners-up: Lebanon (41 percent), Greece and Cuba (40 each), according to the poll. In other words, the saying "to smoke like a Turk" was well-earned. (Another easy verbal connection was not, though. Despite the irresistible headline in the local papers – "Turkey readies to go cold turkey" -- the somewhat obscure origins of that expression appear to lie elsewhere.) Starting today [May 19th], Turks have far fewer places to indulge legally. Smoking was banned in almost all enclosed public areas, though the most painful blow -- against cafes, restaurants and bars – won't take effect until July. Individual lawbreakers could face a fine of $40, and businesses between $400 and $4,000. As numerous as they are, Turkey's smokers aren't putting up much of a fight over the new rules. Indeed, according to a poll cited by the Turkish Daily News, four-fifths of them support the ban, and at least half see it as an opportunity to quit or cut back their deadly habit. Click above for full article. 5/21: The patients should not endanger their own and others' health by smoking at Rampton hospital in Nottinghamshire, the judges ruled. Three patients had argued a ban on them smoking "in the privacy of their own home" violated their human rights. But the judges ruled any interference with their rights was justified. Lord Justice Pill said: "There is very strong evidence that smoking causes disease and endangers the health of the smokers themselves and other people who live and work in their vicinity. "There is, in our view, powerful evidence that, in the interests of public health, strict limitations upon smoking, and a complete ban in appropriate circumstances, are justified." The judge added the smoking ban was also justified by security difficulties posed by allowing inmates - many of whom have "dangerous, violent or criminal propensities" - to smoke outside in Rampton's grounds. "Rampton is operated as a hospital by National Health Service staff and distinction between it and prisons and other accommodation is justified," he said. "Like other hospitals, it is smoke-free. Both health and security considerations justify the ban even though smoking in the grounds, which may be possible at other hospitals, is not feasible at Rampton," Lord Justice Pill said in a decision made along with Mr Justice Silber. ... Lawyers for the patients had argued the smoking ban meant they would be the only group of people in the country banned from smoking "in the privacy of their own home". Click above to access the full article. 5/20: The following is from a May 14th Detroit Free Press column by Brian Dickerson: When voters hear the words "bipartisan cooperation," they envision lawmakers reaching across party lines to make things happen. But in Michigan's divided state Legislature, the object of bipartisan cooperation is often to make sure that nothing happens, and that neither party gets the blame when a popular initiative goes down in flames. If you want to see the bipartisan butt-covering process in action, just keep your eye on the indoor-smoking ban that House Democrats and Senate Republicans are supposedly determined to impose on Michigan restaurants. Smoking opponents were cheered last week when state Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, unexpectedly allowed a bill that would ban indoor smoking in all public establishments to come to a floor vote. The bill passed by a 25-12 vote, and with the Democratic House already on record in support of a similar measure, the ban seemed destined for the desk of Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who has promised to sign it. The Senate's poison pill But of course, it's not that simple. State Rep. Bert Johnson, D-Detroit, who chairs the House Detroit caucus, joined with most of his Democratic colleagues in supporting the House's smoking ban, which -- unlike the Senate version -- exempted Detroit's casinos. Now Johnson is worried that Detroit's casinos will lay off workers if the Senate's broader bill prevails. He says he'll withdraw his support for a smoking ban unless the exemption for his city's casinos is restored. Problem is, the Senate's GOP leaders insist they have no plans to revisit the issue if House members fail to adopt the Senate's bill as is. "If you want a smoking ban in Michigan, you're going to have a smoking ban in Michigan," Senate GOP spokesman Matt Marsden told the MIRS news service this week. "You're not going to have special carve-out islands that benefit the Democratic Party." A win for the status quo? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out where this is headed if enough of Johnson's caucus members follow his lead. First, the Democratic House will amend the Senate smoking ban to reinstate exemptions for the casinos. See? House members will say. We're so eager to do something about secondhand smoke that we banned indoor smoking twice. Then Bishop, who never wanted an indoor-smoking ban in the first place, will refuse to bring the amended bill to a second vote in the Senate. See? Republicans' majority leader will say. House Democrats talk a big game, but when push comes to shove, they're more interested in protecting the gaming industry than the public's health. And restaurant owners, who pumped more than a quarter-million dollars into legislators' campaign coffers during the last election cycle, will go home happy. If I'm wrong about this -- and I hope I am -- I'll be happy to buy Bishop and Democratic House Speaker Andy Dillon drinks at the smoke-free restaurant of their choice. Click above to access the column.Which lobbying strategy is up in smoke?
5/20: The following is from a May 13th column by Peter Luke on the mlive site: When is it not unreasonable to consider 650 or so against 12 or so a fair fight? Try Tuesday at Michigan's center of democracy otherwise known as the Capitol. That was some surprise last Thursday when the Senate, 25-12, approved a total ban on workplace smoking including bars, restaurants and commercial casinos. So on Tuesday, the first legislative day since, many expected a throwdown. On one side: hundreds of purple T-shirt-clad cancer survivors, care givers and volunteers from around Michigan gathered at the Capitol for the American Cancer Society's annual lobby day. On the other side: a much smaller cadre of business-suited multi-client lobbyists for whom every day is lobby day. There was an expectation that the House, which passed the smoking ban with a couple of exceptions back in December, would quickly ratify the Senate version and send it to Gov. Jennifer Granholm for her signature. Problem was, the House didn't have the bill, actual sheets of parchment, in its possession because the parchment was still in the Senate. So the House couldn't vote Tuesday, but may on Wednesday. Conspiracy theories were offered to explain the unusual, four-day delay in transmission from one chamber to the other. ... Supporters of the ban Tuesday felt pretty good about their chances given that nine Senate Republicans voted for the ban last week. More than a few House Republicans could reverse course and support the ban this time around. Working to the advantage of health advocates is the enormous press coverage Thursday's Senate vote received. And the heightened expectation for a smoking ban in bars and restaurants from a Michigan public polls show broadly supports it. Judy Stewart, lobbyist for the Great Lakes division of the American Cancer Society, said Tuesday the battle would continue until a ban is signed into law. "We're not going to give up calling, e-mailing and visiting lawmakers," she said. Casino lobbyists were arguing that business has picked up at Detroit's gaming palaces since Ontario banned indoor workplace smoking, including at Casino Windsor, nearly two years ago. If Detroit casinos are forced to go smokefree, gamblers for whom smoking goes together expecially well with slot machines, could be tempted back to Canada. Casino lobbyists also contend their clients would lose business to their closest geographical competitor in Michigan, Soaring Eagle Casino and Resort in Mount Pleasant. Tribal casinos on sovereign Native American lands would be exempt from the smoking ban. The Senate-passed version contains no effective date. That means any ban would take effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns for the year on Dec. 31. That would allow ample time for the casinos, cigar bars and Detroit Metropolitan Airport to seek exemptions before a ban would kick in. No one is predicting, however, that lawmakers would soon be eager to revisit the issue. Click above for full column.Michigan smoking ban nears for bars, restaurants; Law seeks to clear air in bars and restaurants
5/16: The following is from a May 12th Port Huron Times Herald report: A potential ban on smoking in all workplaces, including restaurants and bars, is causing some to celebrate and others to grumble. Last week the Michigan Senate voted 25-12 to enact the ban. The House passed the bill in December. Unlike the House version, the Senate version doesn't make exceptions for casinos and bingo halls. The bill is back to the House to see if exemptions will be demanded, or if it will be accepted as-is. Gov. Jennifer Granholm has said she'll sign a smoking ban. If the bill is approved, it would add to smoking regulations established in St. Clair County last year. The county ban doesn't allow smoking in public and private work sites, as well as public places. It doesn't affect bars and restaurants. The county health department proposed the regulations, citing second-hand smoke as a significant cause of death and disease in the county. Restaurants and bars were excluded because they can only be regulated by the state, county officials said previously. Click above for full article.