Rancho Cucamonga prepares to tighten outdoor smoking restrictions
Ask any adult over 30 who likes to travel, and chances are you'll hear a similar story about airplanes.
Pillows were complimentary, peanuts were abundant and if the mood should strike, smokers lit up.
The notion that airlines would even allow travelers to puff away as late as 1999 or that a separate no-smoking section on planes wasn't required until 1973 is now laughable.
More recently, municipalities, particularly in California, are tightening smoking restrictions with the hopes that some day, the notion of smoking on the sidewalk will be just as laughable as smoking on an airplane.
Pillows were complimentary, peanuts were abundant and if the mood should strike, smokers lit up.
The notion that airlines would even allow travelers to puff away as late as 1999 or that a separate no-smoking section on planes wasn't required until 1973 is now laughable.
More recently, municipalities, particularly in California, are tightening smoking restrictions with the hopes that some day, the notion of smoking on the sidewalk will be just as laughable as smoking on an airplane.
As the smoking rate continues to decline, public opinion in favor of
bans is gaining greater acceptance. But when these restrictions creep
into large areas like public sidewalks or private properties like
apartment buildings, some are wondering whether lawmakers have
overextended their reach.
The topic will be debated in Rancho Cucamonga as it prepares to host two public workshops on Thursday and May 27 on proposed policies that might tighten restrictions in outdoor dining patios, Victoria Gardens, apartment buildings and other areas where people congregate.
The current smoking ordinance, passed in February 2008, prohibits smoking in city-owned properties such as City Hall, Central Park and the courtyard of the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center. But the City Council thinks the time to expand the ban has come.
Rancho Cucamonga joins a growing group of municipalities wanting to curtail smoking.
According to the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation, there are 3,010 municipalities with laws in effect that restrict smoking. Calabasas, Burbank, Yucaipa and Redlands are just a scattering.
In Loma Linda, an ordinance prohibits smoking on public property such as streets and sidewalks. A ban in apartment complexes is being phased in.
"This is the direction that the nation is going in terms of public health," said Loma Linda Councilman Floyd Petersen. "I want freedom to breathe pure air without tobacco smoke. And as long as tobacco is allowed to be smoked, somebody will have to lose their freedom."
Petersen, who teaches at the Loma Linda University School of Public Health, said he remembers traveling on an airplane once with his 6-month-old daughter and having to sit in the smoking section because that was also where the children's section was.
"It took rules and laws to change public opinion," Petersen said.
This year, officials marked the 20th anniversary of Proposition 99, the state initiative that raised the cost of tobacco products by 25 cents.
The smoking rate has steadily decreased since. In California, 14 percent of adults now smoke; 17 percent in San Bernardino County, according to latest figures from the county Public Health Department. In 1998, 23 percent of adults in the state smoked.
Fewer smokers may mean less resistance to an extended ban in Rancho Cucamonga. The council is interested in prohibiting smoking in outdoor dining areas and lines to movie theaters and ATMs. It also wants to establish designated smoking areas at Victoria Gardens and transit stops. The upcoming workshops and a city-sponsored survey will help determine what the public thinks about those proposals.
This summer, city staff members are expected to present a draft ordinance.
Rancho Cucamonga Mayor Don Kurth, the strongest proponent of the smoking ban, believes some day there will be no tobacco.
"Every year, the government pays a larger portion of health care," said Kurth, a former smoker who is also a physician specializing in addiction medicine. "With Medicare, Medi-Cal ... the government is responsible for these bills and the government is going to have a say in how people lead their lives.
"And as cigarette smoking decreases ..., at some point it will become too expensive for cigarette manufacturers to produce cigarettes for such a small group purchasing them."
Kurth describes himself as a Republican with a Libertarian bent. He has said in the past he believes in small government, a stance quite contrary to this push to curb smoking. But in this area, Kurth believes there needs to be public policy to shield residents from secondhand smoke.
"I see it more as protection," Kurth said. "I think residents want their children to be protected from secondhand smoke. How are kids going to protect themselves?"
In 2007, Stanford University researchers measured air-pollution levels at outdoor places such as dining areas and parks and found that levels of exposure to secondhand smoke outdoors were comparable to exposure indoors.
Michele Jacknik, program manager for the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health, said these local bans are effective not just because they reduce secondhand smoke.
"These bans reduce the modeling for children to see smoking everywhere. It makes it less normal to think that everybody smokes," Jacknik said.
Opponents do not see this issue as something in which the government should meddle.
Among the most outspoken against widening the ban in Rancho Cucamonga is Jim Moffatt, owner of Red Hill Coffee Shop. Moffatt, a daily cigar smoker, banned indoor smoking in his restaurant in 1983, 11 years before the state enacted a ban. But Moffatt believes it should be up to the restaurant owner to decide whether smoking should be allowed on patios.
"You can't say, 'Oh, you can eat here but go to Upland to smoke,' " Moffatt said. "With the economy the way it is, it would drive people out of the city."
Brian Berman of Cigar Rights of America said that when indoor smoking was banned in restaurants, owners built outdoor patios to accommodate smoking customers. Now it seems new bans could push smokers right back into their homes. Some renters might not have any place to go.
"It's almost like musical chairs," Berman said. "Our point is this -- it should be the restaurant owner's decision. If you're legislating restaurants, it's overstepping into the realm of a nanny government."
David Harsanyi, a Denver Post columnist and author of "Nanny State," thinks the country has become such a nanny state that it's now useless to fight it.
"If I own a restaurant and I want to allow smoking in it, what business is it of some city council member? It is a voluntary choice between the owner and the person who steps inside," Harsanyi said.
"But now that a precedent of ignoring these basic rights has been set, what does that mean for our future? These people are so proud of themselves but what they're doing is killing freedom in bits and pieces."
In 1994, when smoking was banned indoors at all California restaurants, many feared a dramatic drop in business. But what actually happened, said Katie Hansen, director of local government affairs for the California Restaurant Association, is that restaurants saw an increase in business because diners enjoyed the smoke-free environment.
Hansen said it's too early to tell whether a smoking ban in outdoor patios will be positive or negative. What she's worried about is putting waiters in an awkward position of policing.
"Sometimes in outdoor bans, there's a fine associated," Hansen said. "Well, how are you going to monitor that?"
The current bans in Rancho Cucamonga and Loma Linda are self-enforced. The idea is to erect enough no-smoking signs and conduct public outreach to discourage smokers from lighting up. In other cities like Burbank, violation of the smoking laws is an infraction or a misdemeanor and business owners are asked to help enforce the law.
The difficulty in enforcing smoking laws is one reason Rancho Cucamonga Councilman Rex Gutierrez is hesitant to expand the ban too much. Gutierrez wants landlords to offer no-smoking units, but he does not support restrictions in restaurant patios.
"I just think it's impractical to ban smoking everywhere unless we're willing to enforce it,"
Gutierrez said. "If we're having a hard time getting them to enforce parking violations, how are we going to enforce smoking violations?
"I do feel we need to be realistic and understand that smokers who have not yet kicked the habit, they have rights also."
wendy.leung@inlandnewspapers.com
The topic will be debated in Rancho Cucamonga as it prepares to host two public workshops on Thursday and May 27 on proposed policies that might tighten restrictions in outdoor dining patios, Victoria Gardens, apartment buildings and other areas where people congregate.
The current smoking ordinance, passed in February 2008, prohibits smoking in city-owned properties such as City Hall, Central Park and the courtyard of the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center. But the City Council thinks the time to expand the ban has come.
Rancho Cucamonga joins a growing group of municipalities wanting to curtail smoking.
According to the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation, there are 3,010 municipalities with laws in effect that restrict smoking. Calabasas, Burbank, Yucaipa and Redlands are just a scattering.
In Loma Linda, an ordinance prohibits smoking on public property such as streets and sidewalks. A ban in apartment complexes is being phased in.
"This is the direction that the nation is going in terms of public health," said Loma Linda Councilman Floyd Petersen. "I want freedom to breathe pure air without tobacco smoke. And as long as tobacco is allowed to be smoked, somebody will have to lose their freedom."
Petersen, who teaches at the Loma Linda University School of Public Health, said he remembers traveling on an airplane once with his 6-month-old daughter and having to sit in the smoking section because that was also where the children's section was.
"It took rules and laws to change public opinion," Petersen said.
This year, officials marked the 20th anniversary of Proposition 99, the state initiative that raised the cost of tobacco products by 25 cents.
The smoking rate has steadily decreased since. In California, 14 percent of adults now smoke; 17 percent in San Bernardino County, according to latest figures from the county Public Health Department. In 1998, 23 percent of adults in the state smoked.
Fewer smokers may mean less resistance to an extended ban in Rancho Cucamonga. The council is interested in prohibiting smoking in outdoor dining areas and lines to movie theaters and ATMs. It also wants to establish designated smoking areas at Victoria Gardens and transit stops. The upcoming workshops and a city-sponsored survey will help determine what the public thinks about those proposals.
This summer, city staff members are expected to present a draft ordinance.
Rancho Cucamonga Mayor Don Kurth, the strongest proponent of the smoking ban, believes some day there will be no tobacco.
"Every year, the government pays a larger portion of health care," said Kurth, a former smoker who is also a physician specializing in addiction medicine. "With Medicare, Medi-Cal ... the government is responsible for these bills and the government is going to have a say in how people lead their lives.
"And as cigarette smoking decreases ..., at some point it will become too expensive for cigarette manufacturers to produce cigarettes for such a small group purchasing them."
Kurth describes himself as a Republican with a Libertarian bent. He has said in the past he believes in small government, a stance quite contrary to this push to curb smoking. But in this area, Kurth believes there needs to be public policy to shield residents from secondhand smoke.
"I see it more as protection," Kurth said. "I think residents want their children to be protected from secondhand smoke. How are kids going to protect themselves?"
In 2007, Stanford University researchers measured air-pollution levels at outdoor places such as dining areas and parks and found that levels of exposure to secondhand smoke outdoors were comparable to exposure indoors.
Michele Jacknik, program manager for the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health, said these local bans are effective not just because they reduce secondhand smoke.
"These bans reduce the modeling for children to see smoking everywhere. It makes it less normal to think that everybody smokes," Jacknik said.
Opponents do not see this issue as something in which the government should meddle.
Among the most outspoken against widening the ban in Rancho Cucamonga is Jim Moffatt, owner of Red Hill Coffee Shop. Moffatt, a daily cigar smoker, banned indoor smoking in his restaurant in 1983, 11 years before the state enacted a ban. But Moffatt believes it should be up to the restaurant owner to decide whether smoking should be allowed on patios.
"You can't say, 'Oh, you can eat here but go to Upland to smoke,' " Moffatt said. "With the economy the way it is, it would drive people out of the city."
Brian Berman of Cigar Rights of America said that when indoor smoking was banned in restaurants, owners built outdoor patios to accommodate smoking customers. Now it seems new bans could push smokers right back into their homes. Some renters might not have any place to go.
"It's almost like musical chairs," Berman said. "Our point is this -- it should be the restaurant owner's decision. If you're legislating restaurants, it's overstepping into the realm of a nanny government."
David Harsanyi, a Denver Post columnist and author of "Nanny State," thinks the country has become such a nanny state that it's now useless to fight it.
"If I own a restaurant and I want to allow smoking in it, what business is it of some city council member? It is a voluntary choice between the owner and the person who steps inside," Harsanyi said.
"But now that a precedent of ignoring these basic rights has been set, what does that mean for our future? These people are so proud of themselves but what they're doing is killing freedom in bits and pieces."
In 1994, when smoking was banned indoors at all California restaurants, many feared a dramatic drop in business. But what actually happened, said Katie Hansen, director of local government affairs for the California Restaurant Association, is that restaurants saw an increase in business because diners enjoyed the smoke-free environment.
Hansen said it's too early to tell whether a smoking ban in outdoor patios will be positive or negative. What she's worried about is putting waiters in an awkward position of policing.
"Sometimes in outdoor bans, there's a fine associated," Hansen said. "Well, how are you going to monitor that?"
The current bans in Rancho Cucamonga and Loma Linda are self-enforced. The idea is to erect enough no-smoking signs and conduct public outreach to discourage smokers from lighting up. In other cities like Burbank, violation of the smoking laws is an infraction or a misdemeanor and business owners are asked to help enforce the law.
The difficulty in enforcing smoking laws is one reason Rancho Cucamonga Councilman Rex Gutierrez is hesitant to expand the ban too much. Gutierrez wants landlords to offer no-smoking units, but he does not support restrictions in restaurant patios.
"I just think it's impractical to ban smoking everywhere unless we're willing to enforce it,"
Gutierrez said. "If we're having a hard time getting them to enforce parking violations, how are we going to enforce smoking violations?
"I do feel we need to be realistic and understand that smokers who have not yet kicked the habit, they have rights also."
wendy.leung@inlandnewspapers.com
I thought all the extra taxes we pay on cigarettes were for the health care of people who smoke????
said Loma Linda Councilman Floyd Petersen. "I want freedom to breathe pure air without tobacco smoke. And as long as tobacco is allowed to be smoked, somebody will have to lose their freedom."
So let's take away other's personal freedoms!?! Let's all change the world to suit Mr. Petersen's vision of a Utopia. We will call it Petersenland; a wonderful place where no one is allowed to make adult choices for themselves, unless it suits Dictator for Life Petersen. I am glad I don’t live in Loma Linda.
Let the business owners decide if they want to ban smoking and let the consumers decide with their wallets if they want to support that business.
Brian Berman for Governor, as he has it right. This state has become such a nanny state, that next the government will tell me what kind of toilet paper I can use to wipe my ***.