Smoking Ban in Menlo Park’s Public Places

Next week it would be very difficult for smoking citizens of Menlo Park to light up in public places and in the common areas of apartment and condominium complexes.

Thus Menlo Park will become the latest Peninsula city banning smoking.

The city council is going to reconsider a proposed ordinance that will prohibit smoking in parks, athletic fields, transit stops and other public places on the meeting. Also the ordinance will ban smoking in the common areas of apartment and condominium buildings including stairways, lobbies, laundry rooms, swimming pools and associated parking areas.

This law would not restrict smoking on streets and sidewalks, except when they are being used for some city-sponsored events as for example parades and fairs and at uncovered parking lots.

Despite the fact that smoking would be outlawed inside restaurants and bars, the ordinance would permit it on their outside patios. Smoking also would be allowed inside tobacco shops.

When the city council reconsidered the ordinance in March, it demanded various changes, such as eliminating liability for landowners deemed to be in compliance with the law and setting apart existing tobacco retailers, namely Knickerbockers Cigars.

The latest variant of the ordinance would widen the exemption that the council members demanded for the popular Santa Cruz Avenue tobacco retailer and to any tobacco shop currently open or that would come in the future.

“I am surprised that Menlo Park will consider permitting outdoor smoking areas when other cities and countries are implementing restrictions on them,” Karen Licavoli from Breathe California, non-profit organization aimed at lung health promotion stated at the conference.

“The majority is closing, that is where the trend is going. This happens due to the increasing number of researches and investigations on the impacts of secondhand smoke on outdoor areas as well,” Licavoli stated.

Licavoli cited a 2007 Stanford study which showed that a non-smoker a few feet downwind from a lit cigarette is likely to be exposed to considerable levels of toxic tobacco fumes.

Peninsula cities that have adopted severe smoking bans are: San Mateo, San Carlos and Belmont. At present South San Francisco’s council is examining an anti-smoking ordinance.

Barbara Franklin the citizen of Menlo Park is the initiator behind the city’s suggested smoking ordinance. She started this fight about two years ago after a man who smoked moved into the condominium below hers. But the newest law cannot stop the man from smoking as the residential unit’s excepting balcony or patio is not considered a common area.

“I am pleased with the suggested ordinance. It requires more time to protect people,” she concluded.

Shocking smoking rates in Russia

More than 60 percent of adult male pollution smokes, as well as 40 percent of women!

Leonid Lazebnik, Head of Moscow Department of Health, warned the state officials that the number of severe health complications triggered by smoking is growing very fast and could result in a “national epidemic”, since the adolescent smoking rates keep growing as well.

Dr. Lazebnik stated the picture is rather notorious, as the major part of male population admitted to light up at least several times in their lives, while some twenty years ago smokers accounted for 40 percent of men and only 5 percent of women in Russia.

In addition, the head of Moscow Health Department cited the 2009 data, showing that 25 percent of all residents of the capital smoke, with more than 70 percent of teenagers admitted to try cigarettes at least once, what is a catastrophe, according to the scientist.

Though Dr. Lazebnik did not have at his disposal the information about the spread of illnesses caused by smoking, Moscow and Federal officials, attending the meeting pledged to consider the legislation, which would restrict tobacco sales, increase tobacco taxes and limit smoking in public venues.

Yulia Grimalskaya, vice chairwoman of the Department of Family and Youth declared that they would lose the battle against smoking if they don’t have rigorous anti-smoking laws.

She added they have to prohibit cigarette sales in kiosks and introduce hefty fines for selling cigarettes to minors and smoking in banned places.

Nikolai Gerasimenko, chairman of State Duma Committee on Health, said they would lobby for the hike on excise tobacco taxes, what would help to crack down the illicit market of counterfeit smokes, and make the tobacco products less affordable for adolescents.

Russian Federation is home to the lowest tobacco taxes across Europe, and that leaves a plenty of room for the officials to consider an increase.

Besides the traditional measures, such as tax increases, Russian Health officials as well propose banning tobacco advertisements on TV, print media, and public places, and create smoke-free zones in commercial centers and restaurants, which will attract more tourists to Moscow.

Mr. Gerasimenko admitted that international tobacco corporations are investing millions to boost smoking rates, without any care about health complications their race to profits causes.

Gerasimenko complained that foreign tobacco makers were making money at Russia’s expense. “They receive their incomes, whereas the state spending on their treating smoking-related diseases increases,” he added.

Yulia Grimalskaya as well admitted both the teenagers and adults have to be educated about the risks of tobacco by means of anti-smoking campaigns. The Department Mrs. Grimalskaya chairs has elaborated several campaigns, featuring TV ads and billboards showing smokers with dirty sponges in their hands, symbolizing dirty lungs of smokers. The campaign including these billboards was initiated in Moscow this winter.

In conformity with a survey, a similar anti-smoking campaign carried out in 2009, resulted in a 7 percent decline in adult smoking rates, though the data about teenage rates remained unclear.

Australian smokers are fuming over the ban on cigarette breaks

Smokers feel frustrated and offended by the recently approved federal ban on having cigarette breaks for Public Health Department personnel. And even officials admit the ban is too hard and impossible to enforce.
Beginning with February 1, smoking employees are prohibited from having cigarette breaks throughout work hours, in conformity with a directive distributed among employees on New Year’s Eve. The corresponding ordinance was introduced by Jane Halton, head of Australian Department of Public Health.

Under the memo, personnel will be allowed to light up only during lunch break, and within at least 50 feet from the entrance of the building. The authors of the ordinance claim their major objective is keeping the professional efficiency and reputation of the Ministry and improving employees’ health.

Anti-smoking advocates admit they believe such move will serve as a gateway for implementing a comprehensive ban on having smoking breaks among public employees.

However, public lawyers were not so optimistic about the ordinance. The vice head of National Council of Civil Liberties, Sam Stosur, named the memo heavy handed and draconian, while Peter Hill, president of TressCox Lawyers which deals with employment laws violations said the directive could be legally overturned in the nearest future.

The spokesperson for Jane Halton said the ordinance was drafted in compliance with Australian Labor Code and the offenders would be subjected to penalties in conformity with APS code of conduct. The directive has an additional provision, according to which employees that are willing to give up smoking voluntarily will be provided with all necessary support.

Before the new directive, New South Wales (NSW) employees of Public Health Department were permitted to have short-time smoking breaks, admitted Victoria Carrey, communications manager of the Public Service Association NSW. However, everyone knows that smoking is dangerous even for those who don’t smoke, so if one considers this measure excessive, he would better begin receiving help for treating his dependence instead of violating the ordinance, she added.

Action on Smoking and Health Australia executive director, Anne Jones admitted that this policy is very reasonable, but difficult to enforce. However, she believes that many smokers would follow it, being afraid of effect the violation of the ordinance could have on their careers.

At the same time, head of the Community and Public Sector Union, Jade Blake admitted that the ordinance has good objective, but the means of enforcing it are not fair. As an example, she cited a similar ban on cigarette breaks imposed last year at the federal Department of Innovation has resulted in intimidations by disciplinary action for those smokers who refused to quit their nasty habit on their own.

Smoking in bars banned in tobacco state

As more and more eating and drinking venues prohibited smoking inside at their own will, the latest Virginia Anti-smoking policy would not trigger much opposition in the state which is home to the most ancient traces of tobacco consumption originated in the Jamestown settlement more than four centuries ago.

Thus, beginning from December 1, Virginia became the 27th state to outlaw lighting up in restaurants and bars. The only exemptions make up those places where smoking sections are physically separated from non-smoking areas and having specialized ventilation system.

The ban is especially landmark for tobacco-loving Virginia, where tobacco plant is the most spread crop on source of huge revenue for the state coffins. The primary role of tobacco crop can be vividly demonstrated by seeing the roof of Virginia State Capitol located in Richmond, which is decorated by frescoes with golden tobacco leaves.

Moreover, the Capitol building is situated several blocks away from the largest manufacturing plant of Philip Morris USA, the maker of legendary Marlboros.

However, the proximity to cigarette industry did not stop City Councils of Richmond and North Carolina’s Raleigh, where leading tobacco companies, Philip Morris and Reynolds American reside, from implementing their own citywide bans on smoking in eateries.

For instance, North Carolina, the second largest tobacco state behind Virginia, also banned indoor smoking on January 2, 2010. The NC legislation permits smoking in cigar clubs, tobacco shops and patios, similar to Virginia law. However, in contrast to Virginian ban, NC legislation would not exempt any eatery, no matter whether it provides smoking section or not.

Thomas Hoselton, spokesman for Virginia Restaurateurs Coalition said that uniform legislation with no exemptions would be more beneficial for restaurant owners, because they would not have to spend thousands dollars on designating a smokers’ section.

Owners of several venues like Richmond-based Jazz Café opted for making his place smoke-free long before the statewide ordinance entered into effect. However, for other like Hisham Arazi the smoking ban appears to be an unfair jeopardy for his small hookah lounge in Richmond. The Palestinian immigrant has to spend huge sums of money to build a separate section and install expensive ventilation system there in order to allow his customers smoke hookah a traditional Arabian after lunch pastime that became very popular across the nation recently.

Arazi said that even upon making required changes he would not be sure his business would survive, as anti-smoking advocates are eager to convince the legislature to cancel all exemptions.

The American Heart Foundation reported that 27 states and the District of Columbia have already adopted legislations to prohibit smoking in restaurants, and few of them provided exemptions for hookah bars.

Economists state that a partial ban on smoking like that in Virginia is not good for restaurant industry as it provides competitive disadvantages for small venues that are not able to build separate sections and have to become completely smoke-free, while their larger rivals would establish such smoker-friendly sections and attract more customers. They admit that comprehensive ban on smoking in restaurants would be more fair.

Flavored Tobacco Products outlawed in the New York City

The New York City Council almost unanimously approved an amendment to federal ban on flavored cigarettes in order to expand it prohibiting all tobacco products with flavorings.

In conformity with the ordinance, such flavored items as cigarillos, cigars or chewing tobacco are now prohibited. The NYC public health department’s spokesman said that the legislation would prevent tobacco companies from making use of the loopholes in the federal ban that still allows flavorings in all tobacco products, other than cigarettes. Neither the federal ban, nor that of NYC includes menthol, wintergreen or mint flavors.

The neighboring state of New Jersey also prohibited exotic flavors in cigars.

Michael R Bloomberg, the NYC Mayor already expressed his support to the ordinance that would be passed to his office this week. After the legal approval, any tobacco store across the City caught on selling banned products would have to pay a $2,000 fine for the first violation whereas further violations could even lead to the cancellation of the retailer license. If adopted, the ordinance could become valid in four months.

The New York City Council member, Christine Quinn said that the tobacco industry used the flavorings to hide the hazardous effects of tobacco consumption and encourage minors to start smoking; however, the ordinance adopted by the council would put an end to that shameless practice and prevent the adolescents from becoming attracted by the colorful packs and tasty flavors and then getting addicted to tobacco use.

According to a survey carried out among students of local high schools, the rate of cigarillos and cigar-lovers grew threefold in comparison with 2001 percentage. A typical cigar contains three-five times more tobacco than an average cigarette. However, there are also small cigars, nearly of the same strength as cigarettes, but dramatically cheaper. Public health groups state that the introduction of flavorings was intended at minors, attracting them colorful images and teenage-oriented slogans.

Joel Rivera, the author of the ordinance stated that the flavorings are the latest interpretation of Joe Camel, a controversial symbol of Camel cigarettes that was prohibited in the 90’s.

Lewis Fidler, the lone opponent of the bill in the council confessed that he had switched to his favorite cherry cigars from good-old Marlboros. He added that there has been not enough reliable scientific evidence proving that adults and particularly, adolescents start smoking because of flavors.

He also said that though the sales of all kinds of tobacco products had been prohibited, the most efficient strategy in reducing teenage smoking rates is to increase prices, making tobacco products completely unaffordable to younger New Yorkers.

The National Association of Tobacco Outlets sent several letters to the Mayor asking him to veto the bill, since it would hurt sales dramatically, but the Mayor wasn’t available to respond.

Another smokers’ rights organization – Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment – declared that adult smokers are hurt by ridiculous restrictions on tobacco products in the sake of minors.