Contemplated Ban Could be Political Smoke Screen, Downtown Officials Contend

By Jorge Casuso
Staff Writer

May 26 - Concerned the City Council could pass an ordinance addressing a problem that doesn't exist, Downtown officials want evidence that second-hand smoke is a health hazard on the Third Street Promenade.

The Bayside Board voted 7 to 1 Thursday not to recommend any form of smoking ban unless the City conducts a study to justify such a measure. The board also recommended that neither the Promenade, nor any other area of Santa Monica, be targeted.

"I'm always surprised when I smell cigarette smoking on the Promenade," said Bayside Board member Patricia Hoffman. "It's like, wow, I haven't smelled that in years."

"There are not many smokers on the Promenade, and most of those are kids who are already breaking the law," said Board member John Warfel, who suggested that the City conduct a survey of visitors to the popular strip to determine if second-hand smoke is a problem.

The board's recommendations come as the City Attorney's office is studying a list of options that -- if approved by the council -- would impose what could be one of the strictest smoking bans in the State, if not the nation, Bayside officials said.

Three of the options would ban smoking citywide in outdoor dining patios, within a 20-foot radius of any doorway or entrance and in theater and ATM lines. A fourth option would target the Promenade for an all-out smoking ban.

"This appears to be a more restrictive ordinance than in any of the other cities" that have banned smoking, said Board Chair Bill Tucker, who owns property on the Promenade.

Expanding the citywide smoking ban -- which prohibits smoking inside public places, bars, restaurants, the beach, parks, most of the pier and within 80 feet of the entrances to public buildings -- was spurred by a recent California Air Resources Board (CARB) report that identified second-hand smoke as a toxic air contaminant.

But Bayside officials weren't buying the contention that second-hand smoke "poses a potential hazard to human health," the argument used by Council member Richard Bloom to request staff to look into the issue.

"There is no evidence that this is a health issue. There is no evidence whatsoever," Hoffman said. "They say their opinion is based on facts. I don't know where they get those facts."

"The CARB report is being used as a justification," Warfel said. "There is no evidence. If you're going to use that excuse, you'd better be right."

The only dissenting vote was cast by Board member Jennifer Ann Hranilovich, whose motion to ban smoking in outdoor dining patios found no support.

"I don't smoke, and it really makes me angry to smell other people's second-hand smoke, and I'd like it to go away," Hranilovich said. "I like dining outside.

"As for a total ban on the Promenade, I don't really view it as an issue," she said. "It doesn't happen much, and I can walk away."