> ## 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. # Puffing in peace - URL: https://www.smdp.com/puffing-in-peace/ - Published: 2006-11-28T16:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-23T23:10:42.000Z - Author: Melody Hanatani - Tags: local, Downtown, #archive-import *WARNINGS: No fines issued as smoking ban takes effect* CITYWIDE — The anti-puff campaign went into effect on Thanksgiving Day, but enforcement was nonexistent over the four-day weekend, allowing smokers to light up without fear of repercussions. Though the ban on smoking in public areas went into effect on Nov. 23, Santa Monica Police officers do not plan to write the hefty $250 fine for violators until after Jan. 1, said Public Information Officer Capt. Alex Padilla. “For the first couple of months, we’re giving just a verbal warning and advice, especially in the downtown area,” Padilla said Monday. “After the first of the year, we’ll definitely start handing out tickets.” Notification, not citation, is usually the case when the city passes local ordinances that keep tourists in the dark until news spreads, Padilla said. Smoking is now prohibited in most outdoor places, including public parks, beaches, the Santa Monica Pier, Farmers’ Markets, the Third Street Promenade, waiting areas such as bus stops and ATM lines, outdoor dining and bars, and within 20 feet of any window or entrance of a public building. After the ban went into effect on Thursday, there were still people lighting up across downtown, either out of defiance or unaware that smoking was no longer allowed. On Monday, a middle-aged man was smoking a cigarette on Second Street during his work break. The man, who chose to remain anonymous for fear he would lose is job, comes to the city from Ontario twice a week and usually smokes in front of his car. “I haven’t been told by anyone that I can’t smoke here,”the man said as he took a puff.“I feel the city is invading people’s privacy too much. As long as you respect those who don’t smoke, it shouldn’t be a mandatory thing.” Jason Lesley, of Culver City, was smoking on Santa Monica Boulevard on Monday while he walked with a friend toward the Third Street Promenade. When he spotted a police officer, Lesley’s thoughts soon turned to whether or not he was allowed to puff outside. But the police officer did not stop him, he said. “I respect the smoking ban,” Lesley said. “It’s a nasty habit. I want to quit.” Lesley, who comes to the city every day for work, is not sure where he is allowed to smoke and believes some signs or literature would be helpful. “I would be frustrated if I get stopped by a police officer and there’s no signs around,” Lesley said. Though no signs have been posted yet, Bayside District Corporation, which manages Downtown Santa Monica, has handed out informative brochures created by the City Attorney’s Office to restaurants about the smoking ban. The Santa Monica Police Department is also working with area hotels on ways to educate guests. Whether tourists will be cited after enforcement picks up following the new year will be up to the officers involved, Padilla said. “We believe when we have tourists from another country, we will enforce appropriate measures to advise of municipal ordinances,” Padilla said. Santa Monicans who think they live in the city with the strictest anti-smoking regulations should think again. The city council in Belmont, located 23 miles south of San Francisco, is in the process of drafting what would be the strictest anti-smoking regulations in the country. The city’s ordinance would ban smoking in virtually every place except for detached single-family homes. The city of Calabasas, located 24 miles north of Santa Monica, near Woodland Hills, enforced its smoking ban on public areas beginning March 17. In the three months that Ray Soria, a code enforcement officer, has worked in Calabasas, he has never had to issue a citation, which fines first-time offenders $100 and second-time violators $500. “Any action to prevent environmental tobacco smoke is a good thing,” said Dimitri Stanich, spokesman for the California Air Resources Board, a department within the California Environmental Protection Agency. “We know that ETS \[Environmental Tobacco Smoke\] is responsible for all sorts of different kinds of diseases. It has a more severe impact on children and the elderly and it actually has been strongly correlated with breast cancer in premenopausal women.” The California Air Resources Board identified ETS, also known as “second-hand smoke,” as a Toxic Air Contaminant on Jan. 26 of this year. The fact that the board officially identified ETS as a Toxic Air Contaminant means it will begin a mitigation process by analyzing different measures to prevent ETS exposure. “The staff is going throughout California to look at sources of tobacco smoke, where it accumulates and looking at ways to diminish public exposure,” Stanich said. The board would only consider banning smoking statewide as a last resort, Stanich said. “We feel less regulation on the books is better,” he said. “We think educational outreach might be more effective.” *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on November 28, 2006.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/112806.pdf?ref=smdp.com)