Posts

City poised to ban lighting up in public parks

By: Gary J. Remal
Boston is poised to fine anyone who smokes in its parks, including those who light up cigarettes or joints or who puff on e-cigarettes.
City councilors yesterday approved the ban, which also would apply to other property controlled by the Parks and Recreation Commission, and includes a $250 fine for each violation.
“It passed unanimously on a voice vote,” City Councilor Bill Linehan told the Herald.
Mayor Thomas M. Menino must sign the ordinance, and it must be adopted by the city Parks and Recreation Commission before it takes effect, said Nick Martin, spokesman for the Boston Health Commission.
That likely won’t be a problem, as the ban was put forward by Menino, and Martin said the ordinance was crafted by his agency, the parks commission and police officials.
“For the purposes of this subsection, the term smoking shall include inhaling, exhaling, burning or carrying any lighted cigar, cigarette, pipe, or other lighted or vaporized substance in any manner or form, including marijuana used for medical or any other purpose,” the new ordinance reads.
Linehan said he had introduced his own legislation to stop marijuana use in city parks.
“I put one in against pot smoking, but then the administration came in with a complete ban so I supported that,” he said. “It has the same set of criteria and enforcement, so I quickly decided to back that.”
The city has had limited bans on outdoor smoking in toddler playgrounds and in outdoor eating areas associated with restaurants, Martin said. But this is the first widespread ban on outside smoking.
“Those were just an education and awareness effort,” he said. “We posted signs that said no smoking, but there was not any enforcement. This is the first time there has been an 
enforcement effort outside.”
The ordinance says, “There is no known safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke, and secondhand smoke exposure in certain outdoor areas has been found to pose a significant health risk,” noting that “cigarette butts are a leading source of litter in Boston’s parks and pose a nuisance as well as choking hazard for children.”
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/11/city_poised_to_ban_lighting_up_in_public_parks

Tobacco Is No Longer Tolerated at Valley City Parks

On the heels of a state wide smoking ban in public places, a North Dakota city is taking it one step further. Tobacco use is now against the law in city parks and several other city-owned areas in Valley City. Valley News team’s Eric Crest clears the air on where smoking is, and is not, allowed in the city.
It wasn’t long ago that the state of North Dakota decided it was time to embrace a new smoking ordinance.
“I loved it, I absolutely loved it,” says, Heather Hildebrant of Bismarck.
The state wide ordinance kept cigarettes out of businesses and the approach to their entrances.
“I can bring my son outside and go anywhere and not worry about people smoking outside of buildings or inside of them anymore,” adds Hildebrant.
Recently Valley City took it one step further. A handful of city property will be tobacco free now too.
“They can’t smoke in any park owned property, any activity arenas outside, in any of our buildings,” explains Dick Gulmon the President of the Park and Recreation Board for Valley City.
That includes playgrounds, spectator areas, athletic fields, concession areas, and even parking lots on nearly all of the cities property.
“It’s our responsibility in managing the parks and recreation programming to set an example of a healthy lifestyle,” says Gulmon.
“It drives me insane. They’re not only affecting their body, they’re taking the choice away from everyone else around them that don’t want it in their system,” adds Hildebrant.
The Tobacco Prevention Coordinator in Valley City says by eliminating all tobacco use in public parks in town, they’re not just reversing the normalization of tobacco use, but they’re also impacting generations to come.
“I think it’s the effect on the youth. I think promoting that healthy lifestyle and not seeing cigarette butts in the parks, and (not to mention) what that can do to the environment. But promoting that for the youth and setting that example,” says Gulmon.
Because as the state and cities alike continue taking steps like these, it’s the youth, that will reap the benefits.
“It’s their choice I guess. What they want to do with their body. But it just bugs me when they do it around other people cause then we’re stuck with the consequence of their choices,” says Hildebrant.
Not all public parks in Valley City are tobacco free just yet. The local Tourist Park Campground and Bjornson’s Public Golf Course did not end up on the list. The park board mentioned that out of concern for a loss of business to neighboring communities, they made an exception.
http://www.valleynewslive.com/story/23762032/tobacco-is-no-longer-tolerated-at-valley-city-parks

New, desirable norm with tobacco

By: Ryan Bakken, Grand Forks Herald
Usually, cultural change in North Dakota starts in the bigger cities and seeps down to less populated towns.
That isn’t necessarily the case when it comes to tobacco, however.
Earlier this year, Cooperstown, N.D., a town of about 1,000 people in Griggs County, passed a tobacco ban in its city park. The ban includes the use of smokeless tobacco.
The Grand Forks Park Board hasn’t taken that extra step.
“We accepted the state law, which has no ban on smokeless,” said Bill Palmiscno, Park District director. “And, the way it was explained to us by the city health department, the smoking ban is about being around activities. If you go off alone somewhere in the park, you’re OK to smoke.”
Leading the charge in Cooperstown was Julie Ferry, administrator of the Nelson-Griggs Health Unit.
“I can’t take credit for it,” Ferry said. “The credit needs to go to health-minded people on the Cooperstown Park Board and their employees.”
A popular – and somewhat defensible – argument for not including smokeless tobacco is that there’s no second-hand damage to non-users, as there is with smoke. But Ferry comes well-armed to argue that point.
Her case is that: 1) Chew can have second-hand damage because it’s spit on the ground and can be consumed by youngsters and pets; 2) Chew sets a bad example; and 3) Banning chew can help to set a new, more desirable norm.
“If we adopt policies that limit places you can do something, that creates a new social norm,” Ferry said. “The social norm used to be that you could smoke on airplanes. Now you can’t.
“The consequence to others is them seeing it and thinking it’s an acceptable behavior. We need to role model for our youth.”
Molly Soeby, a first-term commissioner who has brought diversity to the Grand Forks Park Board in more ways than her gender, hasn’t given up her efforts to make parks tobacco-free. She has applied for a grant to conduct two surveys about the issue. One would be for the general public and the other specific to golfers and softball players, anticipated to be the demographic most opposed to a ban.
“The whole purpose behind this is to not get kids started because it’s so addicting,” Soeby said.
If the grant comes through, the survey should be completed by the end of summer. If the survey is favorable to her cause, Grand Forks may become the next Cooperstown.
“It’s sometimes easier to watch what bigger cities do, so you can find out where the battlegrounds are,” Ferry said. “On the other hand, because everyone knows everyone else, small towns can get things done faster.”
http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/267941/publisher_ID/40/