First time hearing this story. This is certainly a violation of the 4th amendment: right of privacy. I am sure that this law will be overturned.
Belmont became the latest city to pass ground-breaking legislation that bans smoking in some personal residences and businesses.
The new law, which goes into affect 30 days from now, will prohibit smoking in apartments, townhouses and condominiums — regardless of ownership. The law also prohibits outdoor smoking at businesses and requires smokers to remain 20 feet from all business doors.
The law passed 3-2, with Mayor Coralin Feierbach, councilmen Dave Warden and Phil Mathewson voting in favor on the new law. Councilmen Bill Dickenson and Warren Lieberman voted against it.
Even a year after the ordinance was initially discussed, the hot topic was still a burning debate at last night’s Belmont City Council meeting. It pit council members against each others. It pit smokers against non-smokers and businesses against other businesses.
“We’ve heard from many, many people over the last year. People who have no option.
Their only option is to move, their option is to die, their option is to live in their car. I want to give them an option,” Warden said.
Dickenson and Lieberman felt the ordinance was to constrictive and complicated.
“This started out with a legit requested. It has manifested itself into a good direction and then, in my opinion, not a good direction,” Dickenson said.
The ordinance was first discussed last October when Bonnie Brae retirement community resident Ray Goodrich asked the council to consider making smoking a public nuisance. By declaring second hand smoke a public nuisance, the council would allow residents to take civil action against neighbors who don’t stop smoking.
It grew into a wider reaching law.
“Try something simpler. This is unnecessarily complicated,” Warren said.
The decision was applauded by members of California Clear Air, The American Lung Association and a large contingent of Bonnie Brae residents. It was opposed by the Realtors Association and the organization representing apartment owners.
“You’ve come to a really balanced, compromised resolution that is still paving new ground and helping the residents at Bonnie Brae,” said Becky Hussman, daughter of Ray Goodrich.
Yet businesses were disappointed in the decision.
“Your intentions were so good but it just snowballs into a horribly big thing that affects people very differently — both good and bad. The five of you are going to change a lot of people’s lives. I hate it I can’t stand it,” said Loring Demartini, owner of the Vans Restaurant.
Smokers at the Van’s will have to remain at least 20 feet from any doorway to the business. Two other businesses, St. James Gate and Marvin Gardens, may get a later reprieve from the law. The two businesses have enclosed back patios for smoking.
Under the law, smoking there would be prohibited.
At St. James Gate, that means people would file out the front door where the sidewalk is governed by Belmont and the street is governed by San Carlos. Patrons could stand in the street and smoke without breaking the law.
St. James Gate, however, could have another way around the law. Owner Doug Mottern sells cigars and the law allows tobacco shops to allow smoking.
Still, some brought up the upcoming election. Two of the three votes that passed the law last night — Warden and Mathewson — are not seeking re-election this November.
If at least one new council member opposes the ordinance, the council would have enough votes to repeal the law.
http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=80463
4 comments:
What's next the State will not allow home owners to smoke in their homes. Well big brother is watching you and anything goes. I'll be glad when they have a law that says who can own a car and who can't, who can shop and who can't.
Really smoking in your own home? I don't like smoke or being around it, but really? in their own home? Even non-smokers think this is ridiculous. If they want to ban something else, how about spitting in public, that is a really disgusting habit.
This non-smoker thinks it is ridiculous. Lots of town politicians get delusional at their own self-over-importance, until some judge slaps their ass with an "unconstitutional" or some such stamp of 'un-approval.'
I. too, am a non-smoker. This is certainly a taste of Orwellianism. First, smokimg and then drinking is next. What the nimrods don't understand is that the cigerette company are a billion dollar business and corporations invest in the Phillip Morrises and that profit is given back to the cities and states. If that city wants to ban smoking, then they need to ban companies to profit from the cigarette companies, ban all cigarettes and cigars to be sold in any store, and ban all cigarette companies for making cigarettes. Otherwise, a stupid law.
Post a Comment