> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # City considers new smoking laws - URL: https://www.smdp.com/city-considers-new-smoking-laws/ - Published: 2008-04-10T15:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-24T19:11:35.000Z - Author: Melody Hanatani - Tags: Government & Politics, Promenade, #archive-import *Restaurant operators to be held responsible* CITY HALL The City Council took the first step toward holding restaurant owners responsible for their part in enforcing the citywide smoking ban, but it was cigarette usage in apartments that stole the show on Tuesday night. The first look at an ordinance amendment that would hold restaurant owners and managers accountable if they knowingly permit customers to smoke outside — a violation of city code — received a favorable response from the council, which pushed the proposition forward to the next meeting for final adoption. Smoking is illegal anywhere within 20 feet of public entrances, exits and windows in the seaside city. The ban, which went into effect on Thanksgiving Day in 2006, encompasses outdoor areas of assembly, such as the Third Street Promenade, Farmers’ Markets, outdoor dining areas, bus stops and ATM lines. The amendment would also reduce the infraction fine from $250 to $100, a recommendation by the City Attorney’s Office which received complaints from violators. Coupled with the mandatory penalty assessment affixed by the court in criminal cases, the total penalties amounted to more than $900, according to Adam Radinsky, who heads the Consumer Protection Unit for the city. The adjusted fines are also in line with penalties in other cities that have adopted similar ordinances, including Beverly Hills, Calabasas and Burbank. Restaurants will also be required to post signs notifying patrons of the smoking ban at their establishments. But the issue that took center stage during the discussion concerned whether the council should look into regulating smoking in multi-resident complexes where second-hand smoke could make its way into multiple units through vents and cracks in the walls. Any legislating in this realm could have an impact on the tenancy rights of rent control tenants who are smokers. Most of the cities that have adopted ordinances pertaining to smoking in apartments have banned the activity in common areas, Radinsky said. “One thing we noticed that in most complaints we received... have been from folks who are getting smoke through the walls or through the ceiling and the floors of the units,” Radinsky said. Apartment residents urged the council to take action and draft an ordinance that would ban smoking in all units, many telling stories of how second-hand smoke has impacted their health, some developing breathing problems, others speaking of adversarial relationships formed with their landlords. The Northern California town of Belmont is the only city in the state and perhaps the country that has banned smoking in most multi-resident units and condominiums. The only exemption are for units that do not share a ceiling with another unit. The ban will not take effect for a few more months. James Levesque, a single father of two teenage girls, has lived in a rent-control unit since December 2005 and just last week performed a test demonstrating how second-hand smoke travels from one unit to another. Using specialized monitoring equipment that can detect small airborne particles generated by cigarettes, Levesque found the pollutant level was high outside of the apartments of two smokers in the building, both of whom had their doors closed. Levesque also detected particles in the bedroom of a non-smoker who resides above a smoker. Levesque said that he has attempted to work with management and the smokers in his buildings but with no progress on the matter. He complained that he is unable to open all 11 windows in his apartment and has to leave the front door open to ventilate the unit, leaving the family with little privacy. His daughter, Gaby Levesque, a student at Santa Monica High School, said that her friends complain about the smoke when they come to visit. “This year my varsity soccer coach noticed my breathing struggles and suggested I get tested for asthma,” she said. One apartment resident said that her manager came up with a model that forces every new tenant to sign an agreement agreeing not to smoke on the premises. The building has gone from nine smokers to three. “My personal health has improved so dramatically,” Santa Monica resident Willow Evans said in reference to the results from the no-smoking agreements. “I can actually take a whole breath without coughing.” “It’s really stunning just what a difference it has done for all of us,” she added. > “If I want to go into my house and smoke, I think that’s my business.” — Katz said > “I think we’ve got to be very careful before we start stepping on people’s private rights,” A major area of concern for apartment owners appears to be determining who would be responsible for enforcement. “I encourage you to proceed with caution and thoughtfulness,” Bill Dawson, the vice president of the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles, said. Dawson works for a company that manages a number of properties in Santa Monica, two of which are non-smoking properties. “The problem we come across is how do we get from a building that has no prohibition on smoking to a building that is non-smoking,” Dawson said. In the end the council directed staff to prepare an ordinance that would ban smoking in common areas in multi-family developments while allowing designated smoking areas. Staff was also asked to conduct several public workshops to facilitate a discussion among competing interests about a possible regulation on smoking in units. The proposed ordinance would also establish a tobacco licensing requirement in Santa Monica, penalizing retailers who are repeatedly caught selling tobacco to minors by revoking their license to sell such products. The council also asked staff to pass a non-binding resolution encouraging pharmacies to stop selling cigarettes. The United States is the only country in the world where pharmacies still sell tobacco. Mayor Herb Katz said he felt the council would need to be careful about regulations when it comes to people and their private living quarters. Katz, who quit smoking 28 years ago, added that the problem with second-hand smoke in apartment buildings stems from the fact they were not built properly. Some alterations have been made to staff recommendations that hold restaurant owners accountable since it was originally proposed to the business community last year. One of the biggest areas of concern for business owners was the short 30-day turnaround time after the changes are enacted during which time restaurant owners would have to educate their staff and post signage. Radinsky said that the effective date will be pushed to a total of 90 days from adoption, giving restaurant owners until mid-July to comply. The expanded timeline would also allow a city marketing campaign on the smoking ban more time to circulate. Another concern of the business community — the vagueness in the term “knowingly” or “intentionally” — was also taken into consideration. In a letter addressed to the City Council last week, Tom Larmore, the chairman of the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce, suggested that the city ordinance mirror the state’s definition of “knowingly” and “intentionally” as outlined in its regulation on smoking. Larmore wrote a proposed revision to the amendment which stated that no business owner should be deemed to be acting knowingly if they have complied with the provisions of the ordinance, which includes posting signage and requesting a customer to refrain from smoking. Radinsky said the amendment will incorporate state language that does not force employees to eject smokers or to ask them to stop smoking if there is a risk of physical harm. He did not suggest incorporating the state language about not holding business owners liable if they had already posted signage or requested a customer to refrain from smoking. Misti Kerns, the CEO and president of the Santa Monica Convention and Visitors Bureau, said she appreciated the expansion of the effective date by a total of 60 days but reminded city officials that the height and peak of the tourist season is in July. “It’s very difficult to roll out some sort of a comprehensive multi-language training program and tools of production when we are at our busiest time in the community,” Kerns said. Garry South, a Santa Monica resident since 2003, urged city officials to actively enforce the amendment, noting that he has complained to restaurant owners a number of times about patrons openly smoking in outdoor areas. “Too many times their attitude has been that it’s not their problem, and more frequently than not, they’ve gotten snippy with me rather than with the offender,” South said. “The excuse ran from the ridiculous to the ludicrous.” *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 10, 2008.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/041008.pdf?ref=smdp.com)