.
Feedback

City Passes Tough New Rules on Smoking

Bans smoking inside all multi-unit dwellings, bus stops, theater lines and outdoor dining areas

 

The city on Monday approved tough new restrictions on where Petaluma residents can smoke, including bus stops, hotels and even people’s own homes, if they live in an apartment, townhouse or condominium.

The changes go into effect August 1, 2013 for new multi-unit dwellings and January 1, 2014 for existing apartment complexes.

It means that residents living next to smokers in any dwelling with shared walls will now have the law on their side when they complain to neighbors or management. If management fails to crack down on smokers, it will give the city’s code enforcement officer recourse to cite the property owner.

Proponents of the ordinance include the local chapter of the American Lung Association and the Petaluma Coalition on Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drugs, which have spent years advocating for tougher anti-smoking laws.

“We support it because it will continue to change the social norm and it is our hope that the next generation of youth will not smoke at all,” said Bob Curry, co-chair of the coalition. “We have made significant progress in the last 20 plus years in changing the social norm, with saving lives, improving the health of residents and savings…in healthcare costs.”

Pam Granger, a spokeswoman for the American Lung Association, said the change will result in not only health benefits for residents, but savings for property owners, who have to pay an average of $500 more to clean a unit occupied by a smoker.

“It’s a double whammy, in terms of savings and in public health,” she said.

The council also agreed to make all Petaluma hotels and motels 100 percent smoke-free, although it’s not clear whether hotels would have separate smoking sections.

Councilman Chris Albertson was concerned about the ordinance infringing on smokers’ rights inside their homes, but Granger pointed out that smokers were considered a consumer class and not protected in a similar way that a race or religion is.

“Whenever you have a shared wall, it means an opportunity for smoke to drift in,” she said.

Councilman Mike Healy agreed that steps needed to be taken to eliminate second-hand smoke, which he called a “scourge” but pointed out that ordinance did nothing to protect residents from the danger of second-hand marijuana smoke.

What do you think of the changes? And will you be impacted?

Liz Carrasco December 4, 2012 at 02:51 pm
Does anybody know where I can find details of this ordinance? Does apply to smoking outside on the property of multi-unit dwellings. I spent an entire summer with a newborn, with no a/c and no fresh air, because of our neighbors who smoked outside under our balcony.
"[The] ordinance did nothing to protect residents from the danger of second-hand marijuana smoke." -- Shouldn't the fact that marijuana possession is still illegal protect us from the dangers of second-hand marijuana smoke?
Karina Ioffee (Editor) December 4, 2012 at 03:05 pm
Hi Liz. You can see all the details here:
http://petaluma.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=1412&meta_id=259633 But to answer your question, yes, it also applies to smoking outside. Apartment complexes may put in designated smoking areas, but these would be away from the units or places like the playground or pool. Also, this is a law and laws are frequently broken or not enforced, but it gives you the right to take the issue to management and if nothing is done to contact the city. Re: marijuana, possession for medical reasons is legal.
Jacqueline Harmon Butler December 4, 2012 at 03:05 pm
This is wonderful news! I have smokers living below me in my apartment complex and they smoke on their balcony, which is against the house rules. Their smoke comes right up and into my apartment.
John Comeau December 4, 2012 at 03:29 pm
not a smoker, but any loss of civil liberties is disturbing, this particularly with the implied authorization for law enforcement to be peeking and breaking into homes.
Lisa Ohman December 4, 2012 at 03:42 pm
Yeah! WTG!...Thank you!!!
Liz Carrasco December 4, 2012 at 06:14 pm
Thank you. But not everybody who possesses marijuana has a medical reason to use it. I'm not interested in a debate, so I'll just leave it at that.
Pam Granger December 4, 2012 at 11:37 pm
Actually Liz, possession of marijuana for medical reasons may be legal depending on whether one follows California or Federal law, but this updated policy regulates marijuana, medical or not, in every place that tobacco is. In definitions DD - “Smoking” means engaging in an act that generates smoke, including but not limited to lighting or possession of a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, or hookah water pipe, an operating e-cigarette or a lighted smoke inhalation device of any king that generates smoke of any kind, from tobacco or any other weed or plant
P A Channel December 5, 2012 at 03:15 am
Agreed... with regard to the loss of civil liberties. As for the e-cigarette debate, I'd like to see that one challenged in a higher court. Since there is no tobacco, no paper, and therefore nothing to burn, there are no cargenogens - only vapor. About the only complaint a person might have is that they're offended by the very act of what 'appears' to be smoking (but isn't).
As for apartment dwellers with children; be it toddlers running in an upstairs unit, or a crying baby that keeps a neighbor up all night, be prepared...
Bradford A Morris December 6, 2012 at 03:18 pm
Thank God - Good Job City memebers for you vote. I still say outlaw smoking anywhere unless it is 50 feet away from any structure or people and or confine smoking to smoke shops that have filteres and catch the smoke and not allow it to become airborn. Let there be smoke shops like gas stations set up all around the city that you have to pay to go into in order to smoke. I would think more people will stop smoking.
Frankie2011 December 18, 2012 at 10:17 am
Thanks John. You are correct. Thanks!

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Petaluma Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Betty Harrison June 18, 2013 at 11:56 am
We have failed our kids who are now in their 20s. The jobs they should have are not there and no oneRead More seems to care. What you are seeing is the underground economy, which is how they survive. No, it's not good, but it is how they are surviving. Talk to your Congressional representatives! They want real jobs and real lives!
You are fun!
Drew Himmelstein (Editor) June 12, 2013 at 06:32 pm
Looks like some fun kids AND a fun dad!
FREE Family Fun in the Theatre District
Bookworm June 7, 2013 at 08:46 am
I think that showing The Hunger Games in this venue is a mistake. These outdoor family film showingsRead More do attract families, and frequently families with younger children. It would be close to child abuse to permit a younger child to watch this movie. Not so sure it would be a good idea for teens either. I believe that this choice was not well thought out. I hope it can be changed to something that would be beneficial for all ages to see. For example, I recommend a film called "Like Stars on Earth" directed by Aamir Khan. A very moving and thoughtful film.