The Belmont City Council on Tuesday night adopted a landmark ordinance regulating secondhand smoke in the city.

 

The ordinance passed on a 3-2 vote and will go into effect in 30 days, according to City Manager Jack Crist.

 

The ordinance was introduced by the City Council on Sept. 11, and then approved with a few wording changes at its Sept. 25 meeting.

 

Thought to be the first of its kind in California, the ordinance declares secondhand smoke a public nuisance and extends the city's current smoking ban to include multi-unit, multi-story residences.

 

Though Belmont and some other California cities already restrict smoking in multi-unit common areas, Belmont is the first city to extend secondhand smoke regulation to the inside of individual apartment units.

 

Smoking will still be allowed in single-family homes and their yards, and units and yards in apartment buildings, condominiums and townhouses that do not share any common floors or ceilings with other units.

 

The ban for multi-unit apartment buildings will not take effect for an additional 14 months after the ordinance is passed, so that one-year lease agreements will be unaffected.

 

Smoking will be permitted only in designated outdoor areas of multi-unit housing.

 

Additionally, smoking will not be allowed in indoor and outdoor workplaces, or in parks, stadiums, sports fields, trails and outdoor shopping areas.

 

Smoking on city streets and sidewalks will be permitted under the ordinance, except in the location of city-sponsored events or in close proximity to prohibited areas.

 

City officials have said that enforcement of the smoking ban will be complaint-driven.

 

The issue was first brought to the attention of the Belmont City Council last July, when residents at a senior housing complex complained of complications arising from secondhand smoke in their apartments.

 

Proposal Prompted Death Threats

 

City leaders were targets of strong opposition -- even death threats -- in what some suspected was a well-orchestrated campaign against the proposal.

 

NBC11 reporter Noelle Walker said three City Council members have received more e-mails about the proposed ban than any other issue ever. Belmont Mayor Coralin Feierbach told NBC11 her mailbox was filled with the hate-filled e-mails.

 

Upset citizens are comparing the proposed ban to Nazi rules.

 

"Following in the footsteps of Adolf Hitler with your no public smoking ordinance ?," writes one opponent of the ban.

 

Many of the letters are littered with expletives.

 

"If America is lucky, someone will cut all of your *** throats," one letter said.

 

Another letter threatens, "Your friends will get a 747 loaded with fuel?"

 

The same letter ends with "Have a nice day."

 

Feierbach believes the strong opposition is part of an organized effort from the pro-smoking site speakeasyforum.com.

 

Part of the group's mission, according to their Web site, is to provide a forum for smokers to express concerns about, "? discrimination against smokers in all of the many forms that it takes these days."

 

Feierbach said she also received e-mails supporting the ban.

http://www.nbc11.com/news/14307719/detail.html

Die smokahs die!

gotta love legislating taste...

That's straight BS, going way too far. Just because it's trendy to downgrade smokers to second class citizens these days doesn't give the government a right to reach too far.

So you think it's your right to smoke and make me cough or end up with cancer? Your rights end the minute they infringe upon others' rights.

So you think it's your right to smoke and make me cough or end up with cancer? Your rights end the minute they infringe upon others' rights.

 

Uhh, YES. You are more likely to end up with cancer by breathing the air in Miami than you are by breathing in occasional so-called second hand smoke. I'm so sick of hearing that myth and I'm even more disgusted by people that think it's cool to legally harass smokers in any way possible, because that's ALL this is.

So you think it's your right to smoke and make me cough or end up with cancer? Your rights end the minute they infringe upon others' rights.

 

Agreed.

So you think it's your right to smoke and make me cough or end up with cancer? Your rights end the minute they infringe upon others' rights.

 

Agreed.

Seconded.

 

I don't see what the real problem is though. This is one community, and they decided to pass this law. Something like that should be their choice.

 

I do think that within 15-20 years, smoking may cease to exist. That seems to be the way it's going. I'm glad I never got into the stuff.

So you think it's your right to smoke and make me cough or end up with cancer? Your rights end the minute they infringe upon others' rights.

 

Agreed.

Seconded.

 

I don't see what the real problem is though. This is one community, and they decided to pass this law. Something like that should be their choice.

 

I do think that within 15-20 years, smoking may cease to exist. That seems to be the way it's going. I'm glad I never got into the stuff.

 

You have to be careful with that viewpoint. A community's infrigment on an individual's rights isn't made ok because it is a small community. People made that argument when they defended communities that wanted to teach intelligent design. Imagine a small community that was oppressive towards gays.

 

That said, I do agree that your rights end at my door and smokers aren't being picked on because the legislature wants to infringe on the bodies of others. They are being picked on because they can be annoying as hell.

 

On the other hand, if your rights end at my door, shouldn't a smoker be able to smoke in his own home since it is within his own door? We have to be extremely careful when we start legislating activity within the home. If the legislature can tell someone that they can't smoke because of their family members, can they then tell them that they can't engage in homosexual activities within their own home because of others within the home? I don't like that direction.

So you think it's your right to smoke and make me cough or end up with cancer? Your rights end the minute they infringe upon others' rights.

Did you read the article? This is talking about inside an individual apartment. Not a common area nor a public area.

I wasn't talking specifically about the article, but rather the comments of the posters before me.

...who were responding to the article.

FWIW, I can always smell when the people next door are smoking pot. Or maybe it's people even further down the hall. It seeps in through the vents and everything stinks. So, I'm sure whatever chemicals are in cigarette smoke can pass from room to room in the same way. I don't know whether this occurs in highly carcinogenic amounts. Hell, I don't even know any real good data on how carcinogenic secondhand smoke is. I'm sure I can find studies that go either way. My point is, I kind of understand where this legislation is going. I do wonder if there are other examples of state legislation that makes legal activities illegal inside one's own private apartment or home. If there's a precedent for this kind of thing, it's a lot more supportable. If not, it's possibly headed for a challenge in the courts.

 

But, on the flip side, this law is almost completely unenforceable. If someone wants to smoke in their own apartment, there's probably not a damn thing that anyone can do about it.

I lived in an apartment when I went to college in Texas and people there consider nicotine a food group and I never had a problem with smoke while I was inside.

 

Obviously not the rule as is displayed by the two posts above, but its another side of it.

Just curious if any of you that put out the hilarious comments that second hand smoke kills every actually decided to take a look at the actual study done or just figured the government said it, it must be true. The actual stats behind it are absolutely faulty and any statistician not employed by the government would have been fired if he had handed that in.

 

http://www.math.utk.edu/~kbonee/115/corrupt.html

 

Of course, that won't matter because you're told at a young age second hand smoking kills hence it shall forever be accepted as so.

 

Free country, my ass

what kills more people, second hand smoke, or aliens

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

question

what kills more people, second hand smoke, or aliens

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

question

hahahah, and sadly relevant. Although to answer the question, Aliens. Their were suicides reported to Orson Welles "war of the worlds" broadcast so those few deaths therefore make aliens more dangerous than second hand smoke.

 

I detest smoking but faulty science is not an excuse to legislate away personal rights.

California.

 

Sucks.

 

The End.

So you think it's your right to smoke and make me cough or end up with cancer? Your rights end the minute they infringe upon others' rights.

 

Agreed.

Seconded.

 

I don't see what the real problem is though. This is one community, and they decided to pass this law. Something like that should be their choice.

 

I do think that within 15-20 years, smoking may cease to exist. That seems to be the way it's going. I'm glad I never got into the stuff.

man has been smoking different materials since the dawn of thought...it will never cease to exist....

^ A token of information from an expert in the field. ^

^ A token of information from an expert in the field. ^

damn straight!

Yes, it's not just about whether second hand smoke causes cancer, but whether it can annoy the sh*t out of people. You get fined for playing music loud enough that your neighbors can hear it. Why would this be any different?

Yep, nuisance law.

Yes, it's not just about whether second hand smoke causes cancer, but whether it can annoy the sh*t out of people. You get fined for playing music loud enough that your neighbors can hear it. Why would this be any different?

Since when is a privately owned bar a public place? I laugh at the complete disrespect for private property rights

So you think it's your right to smoke and make me cough or end up with cancer? Your rights end the minute they infringe upon others' rights.

 

Uhh, YES. You are more likely to end up with cancer by breathing the air in Miami than you are by breathing in occasional so-called second hand smoke. I'm so sick of hearing that myth and I'm even more disgusted by people that think it's cool to legally harass smokers in any way possible, because that's ALL this is.

 

I can't stay at my dad's house anymore as long as he smokes inside because I get sick from it. Everytime I stay at his house. Because he smokes inside. Harmless, imaginary smoke.

 

For the record, I hate smoking (though I will smoke the occasional cigarrette if I'm drunk, say once a month) but this is as unconstitutional as laws go. The supreme court said a few years ago (in regards to sodomy in the home) that they can't legislate in people's homes, didn't they?