HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05192009 - SD.4RECOMMENDATION(S):
DIRECT Tobacco Prevention Project staff, with County Counsel, to draft an amendment to
the County Secondhand Smoke Protections Ordinance that holds businesses covered under
this ordinance responsible for smoking violations in the same way that businesses are
currently responsible under state law for smoking violations in restaurants and other
workplaces; prohibits ash receptacles in no-smoking areas of businesses; and requires
landlords to disclose to prospective tenants the location of smoking and non-smoking units
and how smoking complaints are handled.
DIRECT staff to develop recommendations for further protecting residents of multi-unit
housing from secondhand smoke exposure and to report these recommendations to the
Family and Human Services Committee for consideration within six (6) months.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Minimal fiscal impact. A portion of the Prop 99 funding Contra Costa Health Services
receives for its Tobacco Prevention Project could be allocated to implementation.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 05/19/2009 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I
Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Susan A. Bonilla, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Wendel Brunner,
313-6712
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: May 19, 2009
David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: , Deputy
cc: Tasha Scott, Barbara Borbon, Denice Denis
SD. 4
To:Board of Supervisors
From:William Walker, M.D., Health Services Director
Date:May 19, 2009
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Strengthening Second Hand Smoke Protections Ordinance
BACKGROUND:
Secondhand Smoke is designated a Class A, known human carcinogen by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. The California Environmental Protection Agency
released a study in October 2005 containing new, stronger evidence linking second-hand
tobacco smoke to a wide variety of adverse health effects, including increased incidences of
cancer, heart disease and respiratory ailments. This report led to the designation of
secondhand smoke as a toxic air contaminant by the California Air Resources Board on
January 26, 2006. In June of 2006, the US Surgeon General declared that there was no safe
level of exposure to secondhand smoke.
The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to adopt the Secondhand Smoke Protections
Ordinance on October 17, 2006. This ordinance expanded secondhand smoke protections
by restricting smoking in the following areas: within 20 feet of the doors, operable
windows, air ducts and ventilation systems of enclosed worksites or enclosed places open to
the public; outdoor dining areas; on public trails and in public parks; in service areas,
(including ATM and ticket lines, bus stops and taxi stands); in public event venues (such as
farmers markets and fairs); in common indoor and outdoor areas of multi-unit housing
residences; within 20 feet of doors, windows, airducts and ventilation systems of multi-unit
housing residences, except while walking from one destination to another; and in any indoor
workplace or indoor area open to the public, including tobacco shops, owner or volunteer
operated businesses and hotel lobbies.
On August 25, 2008, the Family and Human Services Committee of the Board of
Supervisors heard an update on the Public Health Outreach and Education Plan for the
Secondhand Smoke Protections Ordinance from staff. The report highlighted progress made
on implementation of the ordinance, technical assistance provided to other cities, and
challenges to the ordinance as written.
Challenges to protecting residents from secondhand smoke under the County’s current
ordinance include:
1) bringing outdoor dining establishments and other businesses covered under the ordinance
into compliance, as the law currently exempts business owners from liability for ordinance
violations if they post the required no-smoking signs, so they have no requirement to
maintain a smoke free business; and
2) an increasing number of complaints from residents about drifting smoke between units in
multi-family housing residences.
The recommendations above are intended to address these challenges through:
• Holding businesses accountable for smoking violations on property that is under their
control, in the same way that they are held accountable for smoking violations in enclosed
locations such as restaurants and other workplaces. This will be accomplished through
eliminating the provision of the current code that exempts business owners from liability for
ordinance violations if they post non-smoking signs; and
• Prohibiting ash receptacles in designated smoke free areas to deter smoking violations in
those areas; and
• Requiring landlords to disclose to prospective tenants the location of smoking and
non-smoking units and how drifting smoke complaints are handled; and
• The development of recommendations for further protecting residents of multi-unit
housing from secondhand smoke exposure.
These recommendations have been reviewed by County Counsel, and have been found not
to be in conflict with state law.
As recommended by the Family and Human Service Committee, 4/20/09.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
The following people spoke in favor of the proposed ordinance: Paul (___), co-chair of the
Tobacco Prevention Committee and representing the Building Trades Counsel; and Serena
Liem of the American Lung Association.
Supervisor Glover said it is important to include the consideration of youth in the proposed
actions.
Supervisor Gioia added that youth can be valuable advocates.
Supervisor Piepho requested including the Restaurant Association at the table for
discussions.