L.A. City Council extends restaurant smoking ban to outdoor cafes, effective next year

Smokers in Los Angeles lost another refuge today when the City Council unanimously approved a ban on lighting up in outdoor cafes, food courts and within 40 feet of the city’s ubiquitous mobile food trucks.

With the move, city officials are following the lead of municipalities across California, including Burbank, Beverly Hills, Calabasas and Santa Monica, which already ban smoking in outdoor dining areas. California law bars smoking inside restaurants and bars.

Councilman Greig Smith said he proposed the measure more than a year ago after noticing that he was often choked up after being forced to walk through smoking patios to get inside his favorite restaurants — a practice that he said was particularly dangerous to children.

“We have an opportunity, folks, to extend and continue the great fight to get people out of the habit of smoking, to continue to protect the public health, which is really one of our main focuses and our responsibilities,” said Smith, who added he was contacted by members of the Legislature and officials in cities who hope to adopt similar measures.

The city already bars smoking at parks, beaches and within 25 feet from playgrounds, sports fields and picnic areas. No one appeared at the meeting to oppose the extended ban. But the ordinance was roundly praised by representatives from groups including the American Cancer Society, the American Lung Assn. and California’s Clean Air Project, as well as downtown resident Peggy Moore.

Moore said she and her neighbors enlisted lawyers and doctors over the last year to try to stamp out smoking in the outdoor cafes on the ground floor of her building. “This ordinance will help those smokers move away from under our windows, allow us to go back out on our open patios and participate in our lives,” Moore told the council.

Council members worked with business interests over the last year to craft exemptions for bars, nightclubs serving patrons 18 and older, and venues holding private events.

“We’re not happy to see any infringement of public freedoms and our personal freedoms, but we are happy with the way the ordinance was written,” said Brian Berman, director of membership at Cigar Rights of America. “We are happy we were able to come to a compromise.”
 
The rules will not go into effect for a year — giving business owners time to post signs and explain the new regulations to their customers. “We want to be good for business,” said Councilman Tom LaBonge, who shepherded the ordinance through the Arts, Parks, Health and Aging Committee. “Restaurants, nightclubs are a part of our business establishment, but at the same time public health is No. 1.”
 
Violators face fines of up to $250, but the measure will be self-enforced along with the rest of the city’s smoking laws.

-- Maeve Reston at L.A. City Hall

Comments

[Terrence]

It's about time! Smoking in outdoor dining areas is a huge nuisance. Sorry smokers, really, but your legitimate right to poison yourself doesn't include the right to poison everyone else. I know it's hard but perhaps it's time to make that run at quitting?

[cagran]

This is absurd. The City Council continues going after the open air freedoms of normal smokers and yet the emerging marijuana establisments are given a green light. Have you ever smelled marijuana and know how many carcinogens there are in that smoke? It's completely backwards! Appparently the Council prefers illegal drug use to tobacco.

[sureeta]

For crying out loud, Los Angeles has some of the worst air quality anywhere. Why not outlaw the use of cars if you are so concernred about toxic substances!

[Bic]

Finally. Now I can enjoy eating in an outdoor patio, just like the Alcove in Los Feliz (they've had a non-smoking outdoor area for years and business is booming). Thank you LA City Council.

[Eva]

How about bus stops now? When I have to stand for twenty minutes waiting for a bus, and someone is smoking next to me, then it becomes an infringement on MY rights. BAN SMOKING AT BUS STOPS!!!

[robert]

YAY! Now I will be able to sit on an outdoor patio with my kids and not have to worry about breathing someone's toxic smoke. Why shouldn't us non-smokers, who represent the VAST majority of the dining public, be able to enjoy outdoor dining? Let's face it, smoking is a dying business, in more ways than one. Restaurateurs would be well served to get behind this movement...even the California Restaurant Association didn't oppose it! L.A. is not the first major city to do this, and certainly won't be the last. Certainly, there are many other sources contributing to our region's poor air quality and we need to continue tackling those as well....but smoke-free outdoor dining is a true breath of fresh air in the right direction!

[Ramsey]

This is rediculous. How many personal freedoms do we have to lose before we become RUSSIA! You can carry weed, a controllled substance, and buy it all over, but smoke a legal item and get a ticket. It's a sad day.

[e cig]

While were at it lets ban farting in public as well.

[Data Entry Services]

Now I will be able to sit on an outdoor patio.

[dean]

there is no right to inflict physical damage on someone, which is PRECISELY what occurs with second hand smoke. the article is biased, as, the lead should NOT be, "Smokers in Los Angeles lost another refuge..." but rather, "Residents in Los Angeles will live longer..." there is no analogy between smoker and nonsmoker rights. in no way is a smoker inconvenienced or damaged when a human elects NOT to smoke; however, of course a non-smoker is both inconvenienced and damaged when a human elects TO smoke. is a side-effect of nicotine addiction the loss of common courtesy and a gain of desire to harm others?

[Homesure Services]

Nice article.For crying out loud, Los Angeles has some of the worst air quality anywhere. Why not outlaw the use of cars if you are so concernred about toxic substances!

[Homesure Services]

The City Council continues going after the open air freedoms of normal smokers and yet the emerging marijuana establisments are given a green light.

[Local Internet Marketing]

It's about time! Smoking in outdoor dining areas is a huge nuisance. Los Angeles has some of the worst air quality anywhere. Why not outlaw the use of cars if you are so concerned about toxic substances!

[sell gold online]

We know that it’s very tough for smokers. But you smokers know that if you poison yourself that means its effect is going to be held on other people also. So, Thanks to City Council.

[Local Internet Marketing]

While I have to agree with protecting citizens from second hand smoke, I still don't still government intervention is the way to go. Private business owners should be able to determine their own smoking rules at their own establishments. The people will vote with their dollars. If they don't like the smoking, they will eat and drink somewhere else. This is just another step in the wrong direction.

[James Kimes]

Well....I think its great that people are being protected from second hand smoke. I realize that smokers think their rights are being violated...but come on...Their second hand smoke not only affects others...it is detrimental to everyones health. Thank you government intervention!

[Geoffrey]

Agree with sureeta. Councilman Smith complains about walking through an outdoor patio where he is exposed to cigarette smoke, but is apparently oblivious to the oppressive carcinogenic fumes spewed out by all forms of carbon-burning engines and generators that he breaths all day long, every day, in his home, in his office, and while walking through that very same patio. Maybe that's the source of his "choking up"? It's certainly the source of more emphysema, asthma and cancer than second-hand smoke in an open air environment.

This is pure political opportunism, and has absolutely nothing to do with public health. Responsible adults should be able to choose what substances enter their body. If you don't want to inhale any second-hand smoke, steer clear of the smoking patio. If you don't care, fine. If this were really being done out of principled concern for public health, they'd start with cars and work their way through airplanes to manufacturing plants before getting anywhere near cigarettes.

[electronic cigarette]

Thank god electronic cigarettes are around to fight this ban!

[Pablito]

This is awesome news. 'Personal freedoms' should most certainly not include doing scientifically proven medical damage to others around you. Second-hand smoke is dangerous. The more public places we can ban smoking, the better. There's no benefit in continuing to humor this selfish, lunatic fringe.

[Chatteress]

Good ... I also agree with the poster about banning at bus stops.

[neal thomas]

As a life long smoker I solved this absurd ban along with a host of other stupid restrictions against tax paying citizens of L.A. years ago. I took my business, my buying power most of my employees and my freedom to another state.Too bad, California used to be a great place to live and work. That ceased to be true decades ago.
N. Thomas

[Local Internet Marketing]

I'm personally very allergic to smoke. Even with the ban of smoking indoors, I still have to pass by many smokers that smoke in front of office buildings and restaurants. Sorry smokers, but i'm just very allergic to smoke!

[Business Book Summaries]

Wow, I wish they would enforced the same law across all of California!

[Auto Repair Marketing]

As an ex chain smoker for 10 years, I wish this law would have been enforced long time back. The more inconvenice, the better in quitting smoking.

[bankruptcy]

This ordinance will help those smokers move away from under our windows, allow us to go back out on our open patios and participate in our lives.