|
Directories Int'l Realty US Realty
|
 |
California Bars Bar Smokers Stuart Lieberman, Esq., Most people think of environmental regulation as applying to outdoor objects: landfills, dirty water, wetlands, etc. But indoor environmental issues also exist and the most popular indoor environmental initiative concerns indoor air quality. Usually, when politicians talk about indoor air quality, they are really talking about the effects of second hand smoke. The federal government had proposed major, comprehensive indoor air pollution regulations about two years ago. But the Clinton Administration backed down after intense tobacco industry pressure. But while the feds failed, California has defined the enemy as all smokers and they are now officially persona non grata. Effective January 1, 1998, Californian smokers are precluded from smoking almost anywhere in public. Under the 1995 Work Place Smoking Act, smoking became illegal in most businesses, offices and other public locations. The only reason that smokers were able to smoke in bars until 1998 was because a California Assemblyman, who happened to smoke, sponsored Assembly Bill 3037, which exempted bars from the law until 1998. But now the temporary reprieve has been lifted: in California there can no longer be a smoke filled bar. The local California press was filled with quotes from restaurant owners and customers threatening civil disobedience. While fines can be his high as $7,000, many question how this new law will actually be enforced. The new law requires that local officials designate police departments, environmental officers, or health officers to enforce its strict no smoking requirements. But will they expend the resources required to patrol every neighborhood bar? Some have opened outdoor patio areas to accommodate smoking patrons. Restaurants and bar owners are permitted to allow smoking in such ventilated areas. But many fear that business will drop because of the new law. California has long been known as a health conscious, tofu and herb ingesting State. It is no wonder that its efforts to combat smokers appear to have progressed further than those in any other State. Recently, San Francisco, San Jose, Los Angeles and 13 Counties sued cigarette companies alleging that deceptive advertisements have been improperly aimed at children. The suit also alleges nicotine level manipulation and suppression of efforts to develop safer cigarettes. In July 1996 a Los Angeles resident even sued his downstairs neighbor for threatening his life because that neighbor smokes. The claim is that the smoke is forcing the plaintiff to endure a constant smoke stream. And California officials agree: a California EPA report analyzing the effects of second hand smoke on nonsmokers concluded that asthma and respiratory levels in children are exacerbated by prolonged exposure. Clearly, many public studies have indicated that second hand smoke is dangerous and does threaten non-smokers. Nationwide regulations have done much to protect the innocent. The question is this: don't cigarette smokers have any rights? And isn't there a less restrictive way to protect non-smokers from those who wish to smoke without throwing them out into the rain?
All public health initiative require a balance. Effective January 1, 1998, California
smokers will have to balance loneliness with the desire to smoke, since they will only be able to
smoke outdoors, by themselves. Let there be no mistake about it, smoking is very bad and is a
public health menace. But if smokers are the enemy, California legislators must remember to
"love thy enemy!" The information provided in this column is written by Stuart Lieberman,a practicing environmental attorney, and is for general information purposes only. It is not legal advice and should not be used in place of legal advice.
|
