Smoking
Ordinance Gains Steam |
By Anita Varghese
Staff Writer
December 12 -- The City Council directed City attorneys
Tuesday to draft language for an amendment that would hold restaurants
and bars liable for patrons who smoke on outdoor dining areas and
patios.
“We have evidence that there are some local restaurants and other businesses
with outdoor patios that are just choosing to ignore the law, do nothing and
say nothing when their patrons smoke,” said Adam Radinsky, head of the
City Attorney’s Office Consumer Protection Unit.
“Other restaurants and businesses are quite diligent and have easily
managed to enforce the law,” he said.
Among a series of local anti-smoking efforts made in recent years, a comprehensive
outdoor smoking ordinance that prohibits smoking in all outdoor dining areas
and patios was approved in November 2006.
Between January and August of this year, Santa Monica Police issued 19 citations
to restaurant patrons caught smoking outdoors, which Radinsky said is evidence
restaurant and bar owners are not enforcing the ordinance.
City staff has also received more than 24 complaints about violations of the
no smoking outdoors rule.
Many people who spoke to the City Council Tuesday said they conducted visual
surveys for their own information or on behalf of anti-smoking nonprofits and
were disappointed after they perceived that last year’s ordinance is not
being enforced.
Establishing a liability for restaurant and bar owners and managers who “knowingly
or intentionally” allow their patrons to smoke illegally would enhance
the ordinance, because some business owners told staff current law does not
require them to enforce the no smoking outdoors rule, Radinsky said.
“This is not going off in some new direction,” said Council member
Kevin McKeown, of an amendment to the existing ordinance.
“We already passed an ordinance, but we need to make it safe for people
to eat at restaurants with outdoor dining areas,” he said.
Scientific studies have concluded that inhaling secondhand smoke is nearly
as harmful as actual smoking.
Fines for violating Santa Monica’s no smoking outdoors rule could range
between $250 and $920. The former is a basic fine that other cities levy and
the latter includes fees added by courts.
The amendment would be enforced by giving undercover City inspectors the authority
to issue tickets to business owners and managers. Police officers could be involved
in some situations.
City attorneys told the council that holding businesses liable for patrons
who smoke outdoors is the best route the City could take for three reasons.
Since restaurants and bars easily have more control over immediate surroundings,
an overall compliance with smoking ordinances would increase and undercover
inspectors would not have to deal with the possibility of confronting patrons.
Business liability provides economic justice because no restaurant or bar has
the chance to cater to a clientele of smokers while other restaurants and bars
follow the law.
Creating a business liability would let Santa Monica follow in the public health
policy footsteps of cities such as Beverly Hills, Burbank and Calabasas that
have banned outdoor smoking and imposed fines on business owners and managers.
“The chamber was very supportive of the ban on smoking in outdoor dining
areas when it was discussed and approved last year,” said Tom Larmore,
chair of the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce board of directors.
“We are not objecting to the idea of holding accountable businesses that
habitually permit violations of the law; this cannot be ignored,” he said.
“Our major concern is the lack of education on an illegal activity when
education and a marketing effort are important.”
Council members directed City attorneys to write an amendment that creates
an effective enforcement plan, schedule of fines and system of tracking repeat
offenders as well as work with other staff to establish an attractive education
and marketing campaign with uniform signage for all businesses.
Mayor Pro Tempore Richard Bloom asked City attorneys to return with research
on a provision banning smoking on all library premises, how Burbank implements
its tobacco retailer license program, a statewide public service campaign dissuading
pharmacies from selling tobacco products and how other cities implement anti-smoking
regulations in multi-unit housing.
The Santa Monica Public Library system last week approved a formal rule of
conduct prohibiting smoking on library grounds, including parking areas and
public gathering places more than 50 feet away from entrances.
The American Lung Association is encouraging cities throughout California to
adopt nonbinding resolutions asking pharmacies not to carry tobacco products.
“More than 80 percent of adult smokers in the United States would love
to quit, in fact have tried to quit and involuntarily relapsed because of outdoor
secondhand smoke,” said William McCarthy, a UCLA associate professor of
public health and a representative from the American Cancer Society.
“Quitting is challenging under the best of circumstances, but staying
off of cigarettes is nearly impossible for recent quitters when they are involuntarily
exposed to other people’s smoke,” he said.
“Smokers in California are more successful at quitting their habit for
good than is the case in other states largely in part because of
California’s leadership in assuring smoke-free environments.”
|
