Californian city extends smoking ban to include apartments

Published time: July 13, 2012 19:28
Edited time: July 13, 2012 23:29
AFP Photo/Marcus Brandt

The ability to light up a cigarette in Santa Monica is about to go up in smoke for many residents of the coastal town outside of Los Angeles. The city’s board voted this week to soon impose a ban inside the homes of local tenants.

If you rent or lease your residence in Santa Monica, things could soon be very different. Tuesday’s 4-2 vote means that a smoking prohibition across the city will be extended to include all newly condos and apartments for new tenants. Additionally, the legislation includes a provision that will force property owners to designate their homes as either smoking or non-, letting them decide if even their current residents — even those who have spent their life in certain properties — can continue to smoke.

“Under the proposed law, current occupants of apartments and condominiums would be able to choose either smoking or non-smoking status for their dwelling unit,” city officials explain. “If a unit is designated non-smoking, then smoking would thereafter be prohibited in that unit. If a unit is vacated (including a smoking unit), the unit’s designation would be non-smoking for the next occupant and thereafter.”

Santa Monica resident Jennifer Jones tells NBC News, “I really don't think they should be telling people what to do if they are paying for the place they're living in.” Even though she says she can smell her neighbor’s cigarette smoke through the walls that separate their apartments, she says “it's a little too much control.”

Others, such as property owners, see problems too. “What do I do if I’m a landlord?” council member Pam O’Connor says, dissenting from the majority. “I start to think of creative ways to encourage that person to move. I’ve spent my whole time on the city council trying to make sure that renters in this town don’t get encouraged to move for one reason or another.”

City officials say that this is exactly what is needed, though, to keep the rest of Santa Monica attractive to others.

“The primary purposes of the requirements would be to provide information to those making decisions about where to live, and to decrease exposure to second-hand smoke in residential properties,” the city offers in a statement.

“People have come to testify to city council about asthma problems, people who had no prior health problems who developed health problems because their neighbors smoke,” Adam Radinksy of the Consumer Protection Unit in Santa Monica says.He predicts that in just a few months of the act being put on the books, there will be a “great improvement in public health.”

Comments (25)

jonik (unregistered) 21.07.2012 23:18

Doesn't anyone see problems in banning this and that use of so-called "tobacco" products, while not a word is said about banning the contamination of typical cigarettes with some of the worst of the worst industrial toxins and carcinogens?  That's about severe imbalance..."imbal ance" being a synonym for insanity.
 NOT banned are residues of any of 450 or so registered tobacco pesticides, carcinogenic radiation from PO-210-contaminated phosphate tobacco fertilizers, burn accelerants and other fire causing techniques, kid-attracting sweets and flavors galore, dioxin-creating chlorine pesticide residues and chlorine-bleached paper, addiction-enhancing additives, fake tobacco "helper" made from non-organic industrial waste cellulose, or any of the 1400 or so untested, non-tobacco additives that manufacturers select from to concoct their secret recipes.

  None of that's banned. But the unwitting, unprotected, secretly-poisoned, sickened, defrauded and even killed victims are blamed and prosecuted.  The injustice is significant....wheth er or not one smokes or likes the smell of tobacco or cigarettes or not.
  Check out   http://fauxbacco.blo gspot.com  for ample references to use to become informed on this topic.

By the way, a REAL "nanny" would protect "her" children from those non-tobacco cigarette toxins and carcinogens and the rest.   This govt is no more a "nanny", by blaming the victims of big time corporate crime, than the man in the moon.

0

Undo

blasphemousvoice 17.07.2012 14:33

This is ridiculous, and at the end of the day the US wants to say that the soviet union was evil! Even the soviet union wouldnt tell people that they couldnt smoke a cigarette in their own home.

0

Undo

Freedom Fighter (unregistered) 17.07.2012 09:30

I'm not a smoker nor do I enjoy the smell of stinky cigarettes but... Kalifornia commies will keep taking your freedoms until you stand up for your neighbor, whom you may not like or agree with, because you recognize they have the RIGHT to do so (Live how they choose to live and die how they choose to die.) under the CONSTITUTION.  If you want to ban something, ban socialist legislation!

+2

Undo

View all comments (25)
Add comment

By posting your comment, you agree to abide by our Posting rules

Log in to comment in full, or comment anonymously under character-limit restriction.

100 Text

– required fields

Register or

Name

Password

Show password

Register

or Register

Request a new password

Send

or Register

To complete a registration check
your Email:

or Register

A password has been sent to your email address

Edit profile

Name

New password

Retype new password

Current password

Save

Cancel

Follow us