> ## 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.

# Public polled on smoking ban in public parks
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/public-polled-on-smoking-ban-in-public-parks/
- Published: 2002-06-28T15:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-23T00:24:02.000Z
- Author: Guest Author
- Tags: Government & Politics, Promenade, #archive-import, Homeless

Santa Monica’s Recreation and Parks Committee recommended the city council ban smoking in all 15 of its public parks. Beverly Hills declared its parks smoke-free zones two years ago and Los Angeles is currently moving forward with plans to do the same. Meanwhile, recent scientific studies suggest second-hand smoke contains far more carcinogens than previously believed.

Here are your responses to this week’s Q-Line question: “Can you think of any reason Santa Monica should not completely ban smoking in its parks?”

Q-LINE, from page 3 a public park smoking ban. Thanks in advance to our City Council. I know they will act in a timely and supportive manner and our council members will not compromise the commissioners’ strong recommendation.” ■“Is smoking in front of City Hall going to be included or excluded? What is the definition of a park? Is the front of City Hall a defined park? Where will the smokers from City Hall smoke? I ask the question, or will they be exempt?” ■“There is no reason Santa Monica should not completely ban smoking in its parks or anywhere else in the city. It’s uncomfortable and a hazard breathing second hand smoke while trying to enjoy strolling the Third Street Promenade. People light up immediately upon exiting a non-smoking establishment with no regards for non-smokers. Smoking should only be lawful in one’s home, not apartment, and only if the smoker is single.” ■“The Santa Monica government should remember that communism is dead and to tell people what they can or cannot do is very un-American. Whether a person wants to smoke in his house or outside is his business and none of Santa Monica or anywhere else. Questions like these scare the hell out of me.” ■“Here is an answer to your question. Basic freedom. That’s not a function of government! They should do something about the homeless in the park. They smell more than smoking.” ■“Here are a few reasons Santa Monica should not ban smoking in its parks. 1\. It might hurt the tobacco companies and their rich executives. 2\. It might decrease profits from the medical industry, who treat lung disease, emphysema and other tobacco related illnesses. 3\. It might detract what some people might assume is their constitutional right to smoke anyplace and anywhere.” ■“Let’s see, can I think of any reason Santa Monica should not completely ban smoking in its parks? Let me think. Give me minute. Hmmm... I’m still thinking. Well, I can’t think of any good reason! In fact, I think it’s a great proposal to ban smoking in our wonderful parks.” ■“ Everyone knows that cigarettes are bad for oneself but I think this law goes much too far. It is draconian and do do-gooding gone berserk.” ■“Smoking should not be banned anywhere outside.” ■“There is no evidence that a person could get cancer because of a chance encounter with someone smoking in a park. The idea is ludicrous. Second-hand smoke may be an issue when people are subjected to it for long periods in confined spaces, such as offices. It cannot be an issue outdoors even if you choose to sit next to a smoker on a park bench. Of course our council will pass this recommendation because of their need to control every aspect of our lives. Council Bloom’s recent comments that this may only be a first step and that there are more places that they can think of to ban smoking. If council members were truly concerned about the effects of smoking, they’d be calling the prohibition of tobacco related products nationwide. However, tobacco is not yet an illegal substance and those who use it should not be hounded as criminals. By the way, I do not smoke and never have.” ■“I am far from a smoker’s advocate. All I can say is the City Council is going a little to far to ban smoking from public parks. It’s absurd! Is that all they have to do with their time? To ban smoking outside? What they really need to ban is poisoning our city water with fluoride.” ■“Santa Monica should not completely ban smoking in its parks. It ought to have smoking in designated areas. It’s a more or less a natural place for someone to go smoke and be by themselves. It’s a good form of meditation for them.” ■“I think the logical solution would be to have a smoking section inside each of the parks. I think banning it completely would be unfair. Smoking is legal. They only have outside left in this state. I’m a smoker. Leave us something. I know there are children in the parks but it’s only the fair thing to do.” ■“The City needs to ban sleeping in the parks first!” ■“Has anybody ever seen a gardener in Santa Monica using a leaf blower or hosing down a sidewalk? Both are illegal activities prohibited by Santa Monica law. Both are beneficiaries of zero enforcement by our officials. What is the point of passing a law banning smoking in our parks if it is hollow with no enforcement? Who is going to write up citations on the homeless, for example, who are nothing more than live-in ashtrays with nothing but a view. It is pointless to pass another feel good green law unless vigorous enforcement protocols are specifically mandated and implemented. Based on precedent, they won’t be. So why bother with a park smoking ban, if it is just going to be another political claw of hot smoky air.” ■“I think smoking is OK outside. Don’t blow it in my face.”

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on June 28, 2002.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/062802.pdf?ref=smdp.com)