Foes Call Lakewood Smoking Curbs Too Weak

The City Council, unveiling its proposed no-smoking law to the public for the first time, faced emotional testimony this week from a handful of nonsmokers who argued that the proposed law does not go far enough.

“Some people say that this is a no-smoking regulation,” said UCLA psychology professor William J. McCarthy, one of six people who urged city officials to draft a stronger law. “But there is nothing in the ordinance that regulates public smoking.”

If passed, the law would restrict smoking in city-owned facilities. But despite evidence that an overwhelming majority of Lakewood residents support smoking restrictions, the city regulation would make smoking limits voluntary in other public areas, such as restaurants, retail stores, churches and hospitals.

The proposal would require business owners to post one of three signs, provided by the city, at the entrance of their establishments: “No Smoking,” “Smoking Allowed in Designated Areas” or “Smoking Allowed.”

The council is expected to approve the ordinance at its Sept. 27 meeting, city spokesman James Barnes said.

McCarthy, representing the American Cancer Society, said no-smoking regulations should address the potential harm to the health of nonsmokers who breathe secondary smoke where smoking is allowed.

“The signs would not be sufficient to protect nonsmokers,” McCarthy said, adding that small children, the blind and tourists who do not speak English would not read a sign posted in a store or restaurant where smoking is allowed.

“I do think stronger protections are needed than the proposed ordinance allows,” he said.

Many local businessmen support the proposal because of the provision allowing them to choose a smoking restriction for their establishments or reject one altogether.

“It’s a good ordinance, and we thoroughly support it,” said Lakewood Chamber of Commerce President Dewey Smith, one of five people who praised the proposal.

Charles Hallum, a spokesman for the Lakewood Center Merchants Assn., also applauded the proposal: “We all know smoking is bad, but (restrictions) should be dictated by businessmen.”

The city has been weighing a smoking regulation since February. A citizens committee, formed in March, polled the city’s 1,900 business owners and interviewed 400 residents for their views on a smoking law.

The poll found that 81% of Lakewood residents do not smoke and that 81% of residents and business owners support smoking regulations in public areas. But just 56% of businesses now restrict smoking. Even smokers agreed that local retail stores should have mandatory no-smoking areas.

All the City Council members said they would vote for the proposal at their next meeting after adding a six-month monitoring provision.

“Nothing is cast in concrete,” City Councilman Larry Van Nostran said in suggesting the provision that would require city officials to report by June 30 on the effectiveness of the law.

“The idea is to place the responsibility on the business owners so they enforce the policy they choose,” Mayor Jacqueline Rynerson added. “It’s a partnership between people and business.”

But others who spoke during the Tuesday night public hearing accused the City Council of bowing to business interests and not protecting nonsmoking residents.

‘It’s for the Businesses’

“This ordinance is not for the public, it’s for the businesses,” Paul Burkhardt said during an emotional plea to the council to strengthen the regulation’s language. “Aren’t you here to serve the public that voted you in?”

Resident Fred Baisley, a member of the California Nurses Assn. on Substance Abuse, told the council that recent statistics show that 365,000 Americans die yearly of smoking-related illnesses. His group estimates that there are 20 deaths daily in California related to smoking.

“If we had that number die for any other reason,” he said, “we’d have the police out in force. This ordinance should go back and be made stronger. It affects us. It kills us.”