Some area bar owners are still upset about the upcoming smoking ban, but talk of a loophole in the law has made many bar owners all ears.

“Why do people go to a bar? They go to a bar so they can enjoy company, drink, and smoke,” My Place tavern owner Larry Kubinski said.

The owner of My Place in Neenah just put up about $30,000 into a new outdoor smoking patio, but according to how the smoking ban law is written, he might not need the patio.

“I was totally unaware of it,” Grand Chute building inspector Cary Nate admits. “I thought it was considered an indoor smoking ban like everybody is talking about it — but it’s not an indoor smoking ban, it’s an enclosed-area smoking ban.”

The law, which takes effect in July, bans smoking in nearly every public, enclosed space.

But the law defines an enclosed space as having a roof and two walls which have “an opening that may be used to allow air in from the outside that is less than 25 percent of the wall’s surface area.”

What that basically means is, any room that has two walls and at least 25-percent window coverage that opens to the outside air, you bypass the smoking ban.

The Grand Chute building inspector says a few bar owners have discussed opening up their bars but none has filed for a building permit yet.

“What I feel uneasy about is this going to change by July 5th and the work people have done and the money spent on projects be for vain,” Nate said.

Kubinski says if he would’ve known about this loophole, he wouldn’t have bought the patio, he would have invested in windows.

“If I would have been able to put windows in, $10,000, I would have saved money.”

The Wisconsin Department of Commerce is looking at closing this loophole. It’s holding a hearing about that in April.

The My Place owner says if the language in the law stays the same, he will be buying some more windows.

“I’ll definitely put in the windows so they will be here and they can smoke inside,” Kubinski said.

By Chris Hrapsky

NORTH BEND — Alan Pape doesn’t like going into smokers’ apartments. But as the maintenance mechanic for the North Bend City/Coos-Curry Housing Authorities, it’s part of the job.

“When you have to stand in them for two or three hours at times and breathe in second-hand smoke — I know it’s not good for me,” Pape said.

By March, Pape won’t have to worry about nicotine-stained walls or smelling like an ash tray at the end of the day.

The two boards of commissioners for the housing authorities adopted a no-indoor-smoking policy for the apartments and buildings they own. The Woodland Apartments Preservation Inc. and Powers Housing Development Inc. — apartments managed by the housing authorities — also passed the same policy. The agencies provide section 8 and low-income housing North Bend, Coos Bay, Myrtle Point, Coquille and Port Orford. Woodland and Powers have units in Empire and Powers. Ned Beman, the executive director of the Housing Authorities, said the policy will likely impact 475 residents. He estimated that about 21 percent smoke.

The policy bans smokers from lighting up inside units or other buildings owned by the agencies. Those who smoke will be allowed to — but outside at least 10 feet from a neighbor’s door. It goes into effect on March 1.

Beman said the new policy is the right step for the agencies.

“I think it’s a good thing for staff. I think it’s a good thing for the agencies and I think it’s a good thing for the children in the units because they aren’t breathing in second-hand smoke,” Beman said.

Debra Norton, a resident at the North Bend City Housing Authority’s Airport Heights apartments, doesn’t think the new policy makes sense. She said she and her daughter — who share the apartment with two grandchildren — smoke cigarettes only in their bedrooms.

“I think it sucks because we’re not affecting anyone with it,” Norton said on Tuesday. “I think going outside would affect people more who don’t smoke than being in our own rooms.”

The idea of smoking outside isn’t a pleasant one for Norton, either.

“It gets cold in the winter,” she said.

The housing authority boards have been mulling the possibility for a few years, but began seriously discussing it in September, after receiving a notice from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that urged housing authorities to adopt such policies.

Beman said the boards unanimously passed the policy because they felt doing so would protect employees’ health, reduce costs of preparing vacant units for rent and even the playing field for Section 8 residents who already abide by similar policies. The boards took public comment for 30 days. Those who wrote in convinced the boards to drop a proposed 25-foot smoking distance to 10 feet, but otherwise there were few complaints and some positive comments, the director said.

Cleaning up a smoker’s apartment — depending on the extent of the smoke damage — can cost up to an extra $1,000 in primer coating, paint and man hour, Beman said. And often, those units still don’t smell good.

“Because no matter what you do, you can’t get the smoke out,” he explained.

It makes it hard to rent to someone who is sensitive to smoke, he said.

In most apartments, Pape said he typically has to just touch up the paint job, but in those rented by smokers, he usually can look forward to two days of work.

Beman noted that the cost of the cleanup gets passed back to the renter, which can be hard on someone who is already low income.

“They’re hurting themselves by damaging the unit above wear and tear,” Beman said.

Brandon Edlund sees the change in policy as a loss of rights. He said he and his wife smoke inside but near their doorway when their children are out.

“There’s already enough hoops we have to jump through to live in these apartments,” Edlund said, “so I just think it’s a bit more of an invasion of privacy to take our smoking away from us.”

Beman said the policy won’t change until March because Coos County Mental Health representatives asked for time to involve mutual clients in non-smoking programs. It also gives the housing authorities time to have all residents agree and sign the new rules. The agencies are attempting to work with community partners to assist in smoking cessation training.

By Jessica Musicar,
November 04, 2009 Theworldlink

Background: This paper presents an analysis of airborne nicotine measurements collected in 49 low-income, multi-family residences across the Greater Boston Area.

Methods: Nicotine concentrations were determined using passive monitors placed in homes over one-week sampling periods and air exchange rates (AER) were sampled using the perflurocarbon tracer technique. Residents were administered a questionnaire about smoking behavior and a visual inspection was conducted to collect information on housing characteristics contributing to secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure. Using a mass balance model to account for the air exchange rate, home volume, and sorption and re-emission of nicotine from indoor surfaces, the effective smoking rate (SReff) was determined for each residence.

Results: Nicotine levels ranged from the limit of detection to 26.92 µg/m3, with a mean of 2.20 µg/m3 and median of 0.13 µg/m3. Nicotine measurements were significantly associated with the number of household smokers and the number of cigarettes smoked in the home. The results of this study suggest that questionnaire reports can provide a valid estimate of residential exposure to tobacco smoke. This study found evidence that tobacco smoke contamination in low-income housing developments is not limited to homes with smokers (either residing in the home or visiting). The frequent report of tobacco smoke odor coming from other apartments or hallways resulted in increased nicotine concentrations and SReff in nonsmoking homes, suggestive of SHS infiltration from neighboring units.

Conclusion: These findings have important implications for smoking regulations in multi-family homes and highlight the need to reduce involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke among low-income housing residents.


Copyright © 2009 Tobaccocontrol

The Santa Louis County seat of Clayton has become the third city in the region to ban tobacco in public places.

The smoking ban approved Tuesday becomes effective in July. It will prohibit indoors smoking, but not outside.

The smoking ban was approved despite strong opposition from some businesses, especially bars and restaurants. There will be a few exceptions where smoking is allowed, such as 20 percent of hotel rooms and tobacco shops.

Macao Special Administrative Region (SAR) will amend its smoking-control law, banning indoor smoking in all public places, said Lei Chin Ion, director of the SAR’s Health Bureau, on Sunday.

Aside from the banning of indoor smoking, new measures such as fixed penalty and image of warning posted on cigarette package will be adopted in the new law, said Lei, on the sideline of local “World No Tobacco Day” campaign.

The SAR has increased the duty on cigarettes from 0.05 pataca (0.006 U.S. dollar) to 0.2 pataca (0.025 dollar) per stick, which is an increment of 300 percent. Statistics from the Bureau indicated that 17 percent of the local population are smokers.

Instead of targeting the local smokers, the new measures are aimed at creating an environment which is beneficiary to both the smokers and non-smokers, said Lei.
Copyright © 2009 Xinhuanet