Philip Morris
County Close to Being Smoke-Free
Fields
- Author
- Snyder, W.
- Area
- SLAVITT,JOSHUA/OFFICE
- Type
- NEWS, NEWS ARTICLE
- Site
- N340
- Request
- Stmn/R1-037
- Stmn/R1-102
- Named Organization
- Ca Restaurant Assn
- Contra Costa Times
- Health Dept
- Pg+E
- San Francisco Chronicle
- San Jose City Council
- Smoking Education Coalition
- TI, Tobacco Inst
- Varian Associates
- Walnut Creek Chamber
- Wells Fargo
- Bank of America
- Named Person
- Adza, L.
- Angius, J.
- Barlow, D.
- Bovat, C.
- Brown, B.
- Fradella, L.
- Hubble, M.
- Marshall, C.
- Swigart, K.
- Tsutsui, B.
- Welch, J.
- Wooten, D.
- Document File
- 2025684071/2025684856/Americans for Non Smokers
- 2025684072/2025684855/Americans for Non Smokers
- Litigation
- Stmn/Produced
- Author (Organization)
- Contra Costa Times
- Master ID
- 2025684073/4854
- 2025684073
- 2025684074
- 2025684075-4854 Legislative Approaches to A Smoke Free Society
- 2025684085-4138 A Study of Public Attitudes Toward Cigarette Smoking and the Tobacco Industry in 780000
- 2025684139-4144 Proposition P: Anatomy of A Nonsmokers' Rights Ordinance. The Basics of Beating the Tobacco Industry
- 2025684145-4152 California City and County Smoking Ordinances
- 2025684153-4154 States Placing Limitations Nonsmoking in Public Places. States with Laws Addressing Smoking in the Workplace
- 2025684155-4230 Bibliography on Involuntary Smoking
- 2025684231-4232
- 2025684233-4234 Tobacco Smoke and the Nonsmoker
- 2025684235-4241 Testimony of James L. Repace in the Matter on Senate Bill 1440, the Nonsmokers' Rights Act of 850000. Before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services, Committee on Governmental Affairs Washington, D.C. 850930
- 2025684242-4248 Testimony of Joseph A. Califano, Jr. Before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services
- 2025684249-4255 Testimony of Alfred Munzer, M.D. On Behalf of the Coalition on Smoking or Health and Its Member Organizations the American Lung Association the American Heart Association the American Cancer Society on the Nonsmokers' Rights Act of 850000 Before the Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services Committee on Government Affairs U.S. Senate 850930
- 2025684256-4262 Written Testimony of Stanton A. Glantz, Ph.D. Submitted to the Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate for Hearing on S.1440 the Non-Smokers Rights Act of 850000 850930
- 2025684263-4278 Statement of the Honorable Bill Ross Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation S-1440, on the Non-Smokers Rights Act of 850000 Before the United States Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs Washington, D.C. 850930
- 2025684279-4297 Clean Your Room A Compendium on Air Pollution
- 2025684298-4308 Indoor Pollutants
- 2025684309-4310
- 2025684311-4312 Celebrities Who Have Supported Nonsmokers' Rights
- 2025684313 Known Causes of Residential Fires National Figures for 810000
- 2025684314 Known Causes of Residential Fires California Figures for 810000
- 2025684315-4320 Tobacco Industry Conglomerates - Status Report on Diversification in the Tobacco Industry 840000 Representative Products
- 2025684321-4326 Written Testimony of Professor Marvin M. Kristein. Ph.D. Departments of Economics and Community and Preventive Medicine State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate Hearing on S. 1440, to Restrict Smoking to Designated Areas in All U.S. Government Buildings 850930
- 2025684327-4349 How Much Can Business Expect to Profit From Smoking Cessation?
- 2025684350-4353 Wanted: Smoking Policies for the Work Place. Company Activities in Smoking Control
- 2025684354-4367 A Smokefree Workplace An Employers' Guide to Nonsmoking Policies
- 2025684368 California Poll Majority Would Restrict Smoking
- 2025684369-4372 Strong Sentiment to Restrict Smoking in Public Places
- 2025684373
- 2025684374-4375
- 2025684376 Summary of Results of the 830400 Survey by the Gallup Organization 'survey of Attitudes Towards Smoking'
- 2025684377 840000 Gallup Monthly Report on Eating Out
- 2025684378-4383 the Prevention Index 850000 A Report Card on the Nation's Health Summary Report
- 2025684384-4386 People of Michigan Say 'yes' - They Do Want to Limit Smoking in Public Places
- 2025684387-4389 Public Support for A State Law Restricting Smoking in Public Places
- 2025684390-4391
- 2025684392-4429 Michigan Survey 8
- 2025684430-4436 Testimony of Harry Perlstadt, Ph.D, M.P.H., Chairperson Michigan Coalition on Smoking or Health Before the Michigan House Public Health Committee Sub-Committee on H. B. 4500
- 2025684437 Summary of 800000 Minnesota Poll
- 2025684438 Good Idea Defies Smoke Screen
- 2025684439 Thy Neighbor's Lungs
- 2025684440 Smoking Your Wife to Death
- 2025684441 Oh, to Breathe in Nassau County...
- 2025684442 Contra Costa Packs It in
- 2025684443 Clearing the Air
- 2025684444-4445 Secondhand Smoke
- 2025684446 Tobacco Company Crusaders Try Weapon of 'courtesy'
- 2025684447 Cigarette Makers Set Greed Record
- 2025684448 Why Does Anyone in This Nation Still Smoke Cigarettes?
- 2025684449 Good Neighbor
- 2025684450-4451 Frisco Votes An Antidote to Smoking Poison
- 2025684452 News Item: San Francisco Passes Toughest Anti-Smoking Law in U.S.
- 2025684453 'thank You for Smoking'
- 2025684454
- 2025684455
- 2025684456-4457
- 2025684458
- 2025684459
- 2025684460
- 2025684461 5 Regulation of Smoking - Initiative Statute Argument in Favor of Proposition 5. Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 5
- 2025684462-4474 Cigarette Smoke and the Nonsmoker
- 2025684475-4482 A Rebuttal to the Tobacco Industry's Paper, 'cigarette Smoke and the Nonsmoker'
- 2025684483-4486 Response to American Lung Association of Superior, California Document 'the Need for Smoking Control Legislation in Butte County: A Case Statement'
- 2025684487-4488
- 2025684489-4493 A Statement on the Health Effects of Passive Smoking
- 2025684494 Los Angeles City Public Smoking Issue Public Opinion Survey Summary of Findings
- 2025684495 Survey of Los Angeles City Voters 506 Interviews Margin of Error: Plus or Minus 5 Percent
- 2025684496
- 2025684496A Poll Shows L.A. Voters Oppose Anti-Smoking Law for Business
- 2025684497
- 2025684498
- 2025684499-4500 Appendix: A Slanted Poll on Smoking Law
- 2025684501-4504 Michigan Tobacco and Candy Distributors and Vendors Association Michigan Statewide Survey 850429 - 850430
- 2025684505-4506 Account of Tobacco Institute Poll in Fort Collins, Colorado, 841100
- 2025684507-4509 Tobacco Institute Poll Raising Eyebrows Here
- 2025684510-4522 Development of A Comprehensive Ordinance Regulating Smoking in Enclosed Public Places and Places of Employment
- 2025684523-4532 Regulation of Smoking in Public Places and the Workplace
- 2025684533-4549 Opinion 82 - 55 Regulation of Smoking in the Workplace in the City and County of San Francisco
- 2025684550-4565 Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684566-4577
- 2025684578-4581 Addiction Mortality in the United States, 800000: Tobacco, Alcohol, and Other Substances
- 2025684582-4605 Economic Costs of Smoking: An Analysis of Data for the United States
- 2025684606-4611 Questions and Answers on Proposed Nonsmokers' Rights Legislation
- 2025684612-4631 A Quantitative Estimate of Nonsmokers' Lung Cancer Risk From Passive Smoking
- 2025684632-4633 the Oregon Indoor Clean Air Act and You An Explanation of the Law and the Rules for Its Implementation
- 2025684634-4639 Smoking in the Workplace City of San Jose Ordinance 21830
- 2025684640 Cityline Thank You for Observing San Diego's New No Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684641-4642 Thank You for Observing San Diego's No-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684643-4645 City of Ft. Collins No-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684646-4653 the Smoking Policy Handbook
- 2025684654-4655
- 2025684656 Equal Employment Opportunities 42 Uscs 2000e-2. Discrimination Because of Race, Color, Religion, Sex, or National Origin
- 2025684657 Compiled Laws Annotated 37.2202 Employer, Prohibited Acts
- 2025684658-4669 Model Smoking Pollution Control Ordinance
- 2025684670-4680 An Ordinance Amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to Regulate Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment.
- 2025684681-4686 Ordinance Number 0-15865 An Ordinance Amending Chapter IV, Article 5, Division 1 of the San Diego Municipal Code by Amending Sections 45.0101, 45.0102, 45,0103, 45.0104, 45. 0105, 45.0107 and 45.0108 Relating to Regulation of Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment
- 2025684687-4689 Ordinance No. 298-83 (Health Regulations) Amending Part II, Chapter V, of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Health Code) by Adding Article 19 Thereto, Regulating Smoking in the Office Workplace
- 2025684690-4702 Ordinance No. 85-005 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 37 of the Sacramento City Code Relating to Smoking
- 2025684703-4704 Ordinance No. 85-016 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 37, Section 37.22, of the Sacramento City Code Relating to Smoking
- 2025684705-4709 Ordinance No. 3476 Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 9.14 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit Smoking in Elevators, Public Restrooms, and Indoor Service Lines and Regulating Smoking in the Workplace
- 2025684710-4716 Ordinance No. 16.84 An Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Repealing Section 21.46 of the Mountain View City Code, and Adding Article II to Chapter 21, Relating to the Protection of One's Right to Fresh Air Through the Prohibition and Regulation of Smoking in Certain Places
- 2025684717-4720 Proposed Ordinance Regarding Smoking in the Workplace
- 2025684721 San Francisco Anti-Smoking Law A Success
- 2025684722 Sf Controls Are Working Smokers Survive Their New Habit
- 2025684723 A Month with Smoking Law: Problems Resolved Smoothly
- 2025684727
- 2025684728-4731 No Smoking Ordinance, Implementation and Enforcement.
- 2025684732-4733
- 2025684734-4734A
- 2025684735 No Smoking Ordinance Information
- 2025684736-4738 Non-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684739-4739A Smoking Ordinance - Status Report on Implementation of Enforcement and Effectiveness
- 2025684740-4751 the San Francisco Experience with Regulation of Smoking in the Workplace: the First Twelve Months
- 2025684752-4753
- 2025684754
- 2025684755-4757
- 2025684758-4761 Contact List for Information Regarding the Experience of California Cities Relative to Enforcement of Existing Smoking Regulation Ordinances
- 2025684762-4763
- 2025684764-4773 Testimony of Robert D. Tollison on the 'non-Smokers Rights Act of 850000' S. 1440 Before U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services
- 2025684774-4815 Economic Impact of Instituting Smoking Prohibitions in U.S. Government Buildings
- 2025684816-4819 Pleasant Hill City Council Considers Model Smoking Law
- 2025684820 L.A. Councilman to Propose Anti-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684821 L.A.'s Gravy Train Does the City Council Care How Tawdry It Looks?
- 2025684822 City Panel Studies No-Smoking Proposal
- 2025684823 Watered Down No-Smoking Law Gets Preliminary Ok. No-Smoking Ordinance Endorsed
- 2025684824 L.A. Council Acts to Limit Smoking at Places of Work 10-1 Vote for Measure
- 2025684825-4826 Council Adopts Tough Law on Smoking on Job
- 2025684827-4828 Conflicts Mostly Solved Few Fired Up Over L.A. Smoking Law
- 2025684829 L.A. Council Acts to Ease Curbs on Smoking at Work Victory for Businesses
- 2025684830 Tobacco Firms Act to Snuff Out Smoking Law View Weakening of L.A. Plan As Just A First Step
- 2025684831 No-Smoking Law Opponent Hosting Council at Resort. Council: Desert Retreat
- 2025684832-4833 L.A. Strengthens Draft Ordinance to Curb Smoking Penalty for Retaliation. Orange County Revives Anti-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684834 Council Puts Some Muscle Back in L.A. Smoking Law
- 2025684835 L.A. Approves Strict on-Job Smoking Law Smoking: Law Approved, Goes to Bradley
- 2025684836 Bradley to Sign No-Smoking Ordinance, Press Aide Says
- 2025684837 the Region Law's Opposition Doused
- 2025684838 Clock Running for No-Smoking Plans
- 2025684839-4841 Smoking on the Job No More Ifs, Ands, Butts - It's Law
- 2025684842-4843 A Month with Smoking Law: Problems Resolved Smoothly
- 2025684844 Jonesville County Health Coalition Announces Introduction of Jonesville Smoking Law
- 2025684845-4847 Medical Association Head Endorses Nonsmokers' Rights Plan
- 2025684848-4854 Michael Schildberger Show Radio 310 Melbourne Australia Friday, 850726 9:10 A.M.
Related Documents:
Document Images
2025084'724
! W
00
d`
P-4
County close to bei
By Bill Snyder
Umes sta0 wher
Contra Costa is close to becoming the first county
- - in the state in which every city regulates smoking, and
local businesses have warned the ordinances will be
intrusive, difficult to administer and bad for business.
But businesF people and officials in some of the 68
California cities that have passed anti-smoking laws
say those fears may be exaggerated.
When San Francisco adopted what was then the
toughest anti-smoking ordinance in any major Ameri-
c-an city, pro-smokers responded with a bitter, $1.2
million-rrtnpaign that missed repealing the law by a
whisker.
Nearly two years later, said some of the city's larg-
est employers, people are wondering what all the fuss
was about.
"It has gone incredibly weU,"said John Angius, a
spukesman for PG&E, which employs about 7,000
people at 11 San Francisco locations. "The few probs lems we've had were solved by moving some
furniture
around."
In Pasadena, restaurant owners worried that a pro-
posed anti-smoking law would drive away customers
frustrated by long waits in designated smoking sec-
tions.
But six months after the law went on the books, a
survey by the city showed the measure was "effective,
easily enforced" and having no effect on the restau-
ant business.
The county government and 15 of Contra Costa's
18 incorporated cities have adopted ordinances re-
stricting smoking in restaurants, public buildings and
work places, and the last three communites - Orinda,
-
Moraga and Pleasant Hill - are expected to act on
similar laws by next month.
If the non-smoking forces continue their winning
ways, they will have won over 19 elected bodies rep-
resenting 706,500 people in less than six months. To-
tal expenditures have been less than $10,000, said
Carolyn Bovat of the Smoking Education Coalition,
which orchestrated the local anti-smoking movement.
The so-far unbroken string of victories in Contra
Costa came so easily that tobacco industry lobbyist
Kristen Swigart commented, "It must be the right
t~ng to do politically."
tlre nearly identical ordinances ban smoking in
public places, including stores, theaters and bank lob-.
bies, and require restaurants with 50 or more seats to
~
reserve 40 percent of the dining area for non-smokers.
At the work place, 40 percent of an employee
lunchroom must be set aside for non-smokers and
smoking is banned in elevators, hallways and confer-
ence -
ence rooms.
Smoking in private offices is permitted, but if a
--- -
conflict between smokers and non-smokers can't be
resolved by a compromise, the rights of the non-smok-r er will prevail, the laws say.
Unlike the brouhaha that erupted in San Francisco
-
when the anti-smoking law passed in 1983, opposition
in Contra Costa has been relatively light, said
Bovat.
"I expected a tougher
fight," she said. "But I
guess the time has come
for this."
Public hearings
around the county at-
tracted few participants,
and nearly all the speak-
ers against the mea-
sures were either repre-
sentatives of the tobacco
industry or speakers for
local chambers of com-
merce, Bovat said.
Opponents of the
measures said they were
unenforcable, unneces-
sary and a generally
noxious instance of gov-t ernment poking its nose
into the business of
business.
Jack Welch, execu-
tive vice president and
general manager of the
Walnut Creek chamber,
said, "We feel the fewer
smoke-free
Members of the East Bay restaurant industry op-
posed the measures, and like their colleagues in Pasa-
dena, they feared it would be impossible to balance a
variable number of customers with an invariable seat-
ing arrangement for smokers and non-smokers.
"Every restaurant is different, and every hour and
every meal is different," said Lea Adza of the 8,000-
member California Restaurant Association.
Swigart, a Sacramento-based lobbyist for the To-
bacco Institute, characterized measures like the one in
- - Walnut Creek as "unenforcable" and called for self-
regulation by businesses.
"We think it is something better done voluntarily,"
she said.
But in San Jose, efforts by the City Council to con-
vince businesses to police themselves were unsucces-
ful, said Doug Barlow, chief of the city's code compQ-e ance division.
"We got numerous calls from citizens saying noth-
ing was happening," he said. And in November 1989,
the city passed a mandatory law restricting smoking
in public places.
In. Poway, a city of 38,000 near San Diego, city oft'i- ,
cials said their smoking-control law has been easy to
------ - -
enforce and cost the city very little.
"After the fust year," reads a city memo,''the ordi-
- -
nance is totally accepted."
City officials in Mountain View said their ordi
nance was working well, and in nearby Palo Alto, a
-- - -
spokesman for Varian Associates, which employs
5.500 people, said, "It went so smoothly that it wasn't
even recognized."
Although most anti-smoking ordinances call for
civil penalties and fines, all the city officials contacted
by the Times said they didn't need to wield a big stick.
"We haven't used fines and we aren't interested in
using them., We are interested in gaining compliance,"
id B
wn
bal
istaAt to the
i
ma
a
er
f
ar
a $ro
, ass
c
ty
n
g
o
~ , sa
~ guess the ~lmg C_ uperjino.'}
rules put on business has cow ,~;: ',1!l;si~~ months we've had five complaints. I think
the better. Let us 6e1(- .. ~, ,that means it is working."
reguiate." for 1hl,S- . ~ 14,slno~Cers in other cities concede the new era
Bovat, the coalition's it t~ t tsn t t~a~l~~a~tter all.
only paid staffer and on't like it when someone tells me to put out a
mayor of Glayton, re -Carolyn Bov43t 'qgarblte,'but this is working out pretty well," said
plieds "The air you ' Laura'.Fradella, a pack-a-day smoker at Wells Fargo's
reath is a health issue. anll-smokm
b ~' San Francisco headquarters.
v
af
~'
e is go
Making it s
- ; QCtIV1SE!
en7unent's responsibility. - s ;+ Please see SMOKE, Page 13A

I
x
x
i
----------- ---
I .
/ . ... .... , ., ..,,. Uul
sive erpecta ;. 1'm here in the fervent hope that on
fiuth sides .rre expected tu sil;n a behalf of all the people of the world,
SMOKE
From Page 1 A
Fradella works in a small, poorly
ventilated section of the bank that
houses 16 employees, evenly divid-
ed between smokers and non-smok-
ers.
Since the anti-smoking ordi-
nance went into effect, smokers
agreed to use smokeless ashtrays
provided by the company and not to
indulge their habit in hallways or
near other people's work areas.
"It has become a non-issue
here," said Fradella's supervisor.
Dennis Woolen.
A publicist for the bank said
Wells Fargo has introduced similar
policies throughout its California
-
operations and-is pleased with the
results. "We've been pleasantly sur-
prised prised at how easily it was imple-
mented." she said.
Like other employers contacted,
officials at the Bank of America
headquarters in San Francisco said
their expenditures to comply with
the law have been negligible and of-
fice work flow has not been disrupt-
--
ed.
ruvanrun }i!°~~natu5tarl anu U.J.
policies tnt ,dral America. They
delivered letters to the U.S. and So-
Not every experience with the
new law has been pain free, howev
er.
At the San Francisco Chronicle,
reporters were reduced to taking
smokes on the fire escape, and the
first weeks of the smokeless news-
room were "pretty tense." said li-
brarian Michael Hubble.
---
"But things have quieted down;'he said.
Claudia Marshall, an"- employee
of a bathroom products wholesaler
in San Francisco, said she was fired
Sunday. Novenber 17 1985 Coetre Costa TIrroe4-P-aqe /~A
a
EXTENDED WEAR
SPECTACUL.AR!
Contact Lenses Are My Only Business!
SERVICE QUAL[TY VALUE
$SOFT LENSES
9 9 COMPLETE
PRICE INCLUDES FITT-!NG t~r a c v sads
t+c5on~ti
dst+c5on
Mll 1
k
e
l
7
~eRky er~
yer
nA
Fi
A Wea
ensaM c
t~OC~WI
/M(;NAEL S. rnte~. SYtNt39 day savkrr on nwA! Pntsc~lptlons. 2nd Patr of tbrrna-
bna onpu ly
.
WM1Et3. O.D.. LIMITED TIME ONLY-ACTNOWI
Also Avahable: ®ausch & Lomb Daily Wear Lenses $69 complete
and Ciba 3oM Cobrse $129 complete.
Dr. Michael S. Cypress, Optometrist, Inc.
1ti40San Miguel Orlve, Sulte 102
Walnut Cresk, CA 94596 (A15) 947-0955
(2 btocks east of Nocdstroms)
r
a Jwtss mdtlary hunor guard in f_atn-
cy 19th Century uniforms and tri-
comer hats.
30 minutes after she asked her boss
to stop smoking and is suing for
$100,000.
The city Health Department re-
ceived dozens of complaints in the
first months the ordinance wentinto
effect, and needed to assign a full-
time inspector to handle the flood of
calls. By last spring, however, the
flood had been reduced to a t_rickle
and the inspector now spends about
one day a week worrying about
smoking, said Bruce Tsutsui, who
enforces the law.
)WN
%OF
ORIGINAL
PRICE
0
c; 0l p[ 11.101_1 - 1
'61 'n©N 's,)nj
uo uosiad u!
(dx3 s3
aadaa-

2025684726
~
