County smoking ban could affect CPAC

A proposed outdoor smoking ban on Pima County property would mean that an evening out at the Community Performance and Art Center would have to be smokeless. But officials there don’t think it would keep many people away. The county is considering a smoking ban on most outdoor county properties that would end designated smoking areas around entrances and the unofficial smoking spots in breezeways and parking lots. It would not ban smoking in county parks or on hiking trails. CPAC board president Nancy Karsh said that with the facility located on a 17-acre campus, nobody will be ducking out for a quick smoke at intermission.

An outdoor smoking ban, Karsh said, “is going to be a problem. Essentially it’s going to mean no smoking that evening.” CPAC Executive Director Chris Ashcraft said “my first inkling is I’m not too sure that this would affect us. People really love this place and I feel the regulars will come.” Karsh could not estimate the number of smokers among the regular attendees, but said that based on the statewide indoor smoking ban in bars and restaurants, she doubts that CPAC will lose many patrons.

The no-smoking proposal was made by county Human Resources Director Allyn Bulzomi, who said the goal is “to create a healthy environment for our employees and public when on county property.” Bulzomi is gathering feedback from county departments and plans to get the proposal on the Board of Supervisors agenda by mid-November. If the board adopts the proposal, it could go into effect Jan. 1. About one-third of 5,300 county employees are smokers and 100 of those are enrolled in a stop-smoking program.

A memo that County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry sent to the County Supervisors said “the new policy would ban all tobacco use on all County property, including exterior spaces, and would apply to all employees, visitors and others on County property.” The policy would apply to all county vehicles and to construction workers on county projects and vendors visiting county buildings. “At this time the proposal does not specifically address county parks,” Bulzomi said.

The no-smoking proposal would not affect agencies that lease land from the county, such as the Country Fair White Elephant thrift store, and if the proposed policy does wind up covering parks, it would not affect Sahuarita Park, which is leased by Sahuarita Unified School District. The no-smoking policy was recommended by the county’s Health Insurance Benefit and Wellness Advisory Committee to continue the county effort to educate employees on wellness.

“Based on the premium discounts, which can total $40 per month, there has been a significant shift by employees toward health and wellness activities with 100 employees enrolled in QuitPower for tobacco cessation; 3,200 employees receiving personal feedback on health and safety issues as a result of taking their health assessments; numerous employees seeking preventative exams and health screenings; and over 2,000 employees submitting exercise tracking logs,” Huckelberry said in the memo. The county’s efforts already have reduced health care claims significantly, Bulzomi said. While no exact savings figure was available, he said the ratio of claims to premiums has dropped by 15 to 20 percent, though an increase in premiums caused part of that change.

More telling, he said the 3,200 or so county employees with Health Savings Accounts have saved $8 million over the past several years by consuming less in health care services. In order to keep such savings from flowing to health insurers, the county plans may soon insure itself, which also would save money that otherwise would go into corporate profits. In October, the county will seek bids for one or more health plan administrators who would handle claims under the self-insurance program, Bulzomi said. It is possible the county may randomly test non-smokers who are receiving premium discounts to see if they are complying because Maricopa County and other employers have discovered an unusual level of respiratory-related illness among people claiming to be non-smokers, Bulzomi said.

Poor smokers in NY spend quarter of income on cigarettes

Poor smokers in New York State spend about a quarter of their entire income on cigarettes, nearly twice as much as the national average for low-income smokers, according to a new study. The study, conducted by the non-profit research group RTI on behalf of the state's health department, found there was no statistically significant decline in the prevalence of smoking among poorer New Yorkers between 2003 and 2010, even as the habit declined by about 20 percent among all income groups.

"Although high cigarette taxes are an effective method for reducing cigarette smoking, they can impose a significant financial burden on low-income smokers," Matthew Farrelly and his co-authors wrote in the conclusion of their paper, which was published this month in Plos One, an online, peer-reviewed journal. Using data from the state health department's New York Adult Tobacco Survey, researchers calculated that smokers in New York earning less than $30,000 a year spent an average of 23.6 percent of their earnings on cigarettes, compared with about 14.2 percent nationally.

The state's wealthier smokers - those earning over $60,000 - spent an average of 2.2 percent of their income on the habit, about the same as the national figure. New York has the highest state cigarette tax in the nation, at $4.35 a pack, compared with a national average of $1.46. New York City imposes an additional $1.50 tax. The researchers said they did not have enough data to measure whether city residents were shelling out an even larger portion of their earnings on cigarettes. The low-income now spend twice as much of their earnings on cigarettes as they did in 2003, when the state imposed a tax of $1.50 on each pack.

The researchers concluded that to make the cigarette tax less regressive, the state should spend more of the resulting revenue on programs that help low-income smokers quit the habit, although both the researchers and the health department say this would be a challenge. "They can be a hard-to-reach population," Peter Constantakes, a health department spokesman, said in an interview on Wednesday. Raising the cost of cigarettes through taxation is a proven method of encouraging smokers to quit, he said. The state spends about $41 million a year on tobacco control programs - about half of what it spent four years ago.

No U/A certification required for depicting smoking scene in films

Ministry of Information& Broadcasting and Ministry Of Health has decided to drop the clause that necessitated "UA" Certification for the films showing tobacco products as per the amendment to the notification regarding depiction of Smoking Scenes in Films. Films showing use of tobacco products will now not be considered for "UA" certification on this ground alone.

As per the new notification, it is obligatory to display anti-tobacco health spots of minimum 30 seconds at the beginning and middle of the films displaying tobacco products or their use. Also, an audio-visual disclaimer of minimum 20 seconds on the ill-effects of tobacco use shall be displayed at the beginning and middle of the films displaying tobacco products or their use. In addition to the health spots and disclaimers, the films showing use of the tobacco products shall also be required to display an anti-tobacco health warning in the form of a static message during the period of display of the tobacco products or their use in the films. It has been agreed between the two Ministries.

 To serve as a good news Ministry of Health & Family Welfare has agreed to bear all the costs relating to production of such health spots and disclaimers. These health spots and disclaimers prepared by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare will be provided to the Central Board of Film Certification in digital beta format for distribution to the filmmakers at the time of their application for certification.

Tax credited for smoking decline

Recent reports indicate that some legislation tough on tobacco companies is beginning to lead to a decrease in the amount of smokers in both Wisconsin and the United States. A statement yesterday from SmokeFree Wisconsin said since April 1, 2009, when President Barack Obama raised the tax on cigarettes from $0.39 to $1.01, one million adults on Medicaid stopped smoking, which should result in cheaper health care for taxpayers.

This tax increase, along with the statewide public smoking ban from 2010, has made Wisconsin more closely resemble smoke-free state. Rep. Jon Richards, D-Milwaukee, wrote the Smoke-Free Wisconsin Act. This act ensures smoke-free air in restaurants, bars and workplaces throughout Wisconsin. Richards said making cigarettes more expensive is an effective way of reducing smoking, particularly for young people.

“The smoke-free workplace law we passed in 2010 and tobacco prevention efforts are also working to significantly reduce smoking among children and adults across Wisconsin. Yet, smoking still remains the leading cause of preventable death in Wisconsin,” Richards said in an email to The Badger Herald. “Our work is far from done.” Maureen Busalacchi, executive director of SmokeFree Wisconsin, agreed raising taxes on cigarettes has proven to be effective in discouraging young people from smoking.

Busalacchi said she also thinks the tax increase has encouraged people who want to quit smoking to follow through with it. Busalacchi also noted some people have moved to candy cigarettes, which are taxed less. Busalacchi said she thinks all types of cigarettes, tobacco or not, should be taxed equally, including candy cigarettes. She also said better programs should exist in all parts of Wisconsin to help smokers quit.

 “It has been shown in the past that people do quit smoking when the taxes on cigarettes are raised,” Busalacchi said. ”More needs to be done to reduce smoking in our state. Programs should be made available in more places in Wisconsin to help smokers quit smoking.” Director of University Health Services Sarah Van Orman said she is also in favor of the tax increase on cigarettes. She said it has been proven to reduce smoking and decrease the amount of individuals who start smoking. Van Orman said more funding is needed to ensure all individuals have access to programs and counseling to help them quit smoking.

 According to Van Orman, these programs are partially funded through lawsuits against tobacco companies, but some of that funding has been lost. If more people had the resources to quit, then the state would be one step closer to reducing smoking-related diseases, Van Orman said. “Smoking is still the leading cause of preventable death in Wisconsin, and one of the reasons health care costs are high,” Van Orman said. “Smoking causes diseases such as cancer and congestive heart failure. Raising the taxes on cigarettes will ultimately decrease the amount of youth smokers, which should lead to a long-term reduction of smoking throughout the nation.”

 Pete Madland, executive director of the Wisconsin Tavern League, said the League opposed the smoking ban during the legislation. He said it has had a negative effect on taverns across the state. Madland said members of the League tell him people spend less time in the bars and instead go to the liquor store, get a six pack of beer and go home. He added there will likely not be an effort to overturn the ban despite it’s detriment to taverns. “Our members are trying to adjust to the law and according to polls, the smoking ban is very popular throughout the state, so I don’t see any politician taking the incentive to try and change it,” Madland said.

Jerry Brown signs bills on cigarette sales and infant health

California will crack down harder on stores that sell cigarettes to minors and hospitals will be required to screen infants for congenital heart disease under new legislation signed by Gov. Jerry Brown. The governor's office announced the bill signings on Saturday. Brown has been whittling down more than 700 bills that were passed in the final week of the legislative session, which ended after midnight on Sept. 1.

The bill on tobacco sales (AB 1301) requires the state to suspend a store's license for 45 days for three violations within five years. For five violations within five years, the license is permanently revoked. The legislation was authored by Assemblyman Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo). The healthcare legislation (AB 1731) will ensure infants are tested for congenital heart disease before they're discharged from the hospital.

The disease is found in seven to nine of every 1,000 babies, according to the March of Dimes, an advocacy organization that focuses on infant health. The program could cost state healthcare programs between $600,000 and $1.8 million per year to cover the tests.

Council to appoint panel to study smoking issue

Smoking inside or outside restaurants,such as Hooligan’s on the Square, could go by the wayside if the Denton City Council passes a smoking ban ordinance. Smokers may have fewer places to light up in Denton next year, depending on an ad hoc committee’s work over the next few months. The City Council is expected Tuesday to appoint residents to an advisory committee to take up the matter.

The city staff has offered a time frame to develop an ordinance that could be put in front of the council by the end of 2012, according to city spokeswoman Lindsey Baker. The city has heard from many residents since the City Council first discussed the matter in a work session in January. Several residents asked the council last year to pass a smoke-free workplace ordinance for Denton. “We’re still getting e-mails,” Baker said. Public smoking bans aren’t new. California implemented a statewide ban for most public places in the mid-1990s. Most states have passed a statewide ban in recent years. State Rep. Myra Crownover, R-Corinth, introduced legislation for a statewide smoking ban in 2011, but the matter failed.

It was the third time a comprehensive smoking ban had been introduced at the state level. Many believed the legislation had the votes, but a minority in the Texas Senate used a rule to keep the legislation off the floor. Some business owners are concerned that they will lose customers if smoking is banned in their establishments, but others argue — as Crownover has — that waiters, bartenders and other workers are exposed to secondhand smoke, and that costs Texas taxpayers in additional Medicaid expenses.

The Texas Department of State Health Services promotes the adoption of comprehensive smoking bans. More than 30 Texas cities have enacted smoking bans for enclosed workplaces, including bars and restaurants. Many North Texas cities — including Dallas, Flower Mound, Frisco, McKinney, Plano, Richardson, Rowlett and Southlake — have adopted such bans in the last five years. In his personal view, Chuck Fremaux, board chairman of the Denton Chamber of Commerce and a longtime Denton businessman, believes the choice of whether to allow smoking belongs to a business owner, “so if I lose customers, that’s my problem,” Fremaux said. However, he understands why many restaurant owners want the ban.

They can have the smoke-free environment with less risk to the business. After Dallas passed its smoking ban, some customers drove to Addison’s bars and restaurants, Fremaux said, hence the rationale for a statewide ban. “Everyone is on an equal footing, then,” Fremaux said. During its work session in January, the Denton City Council learned that Houston and El Paso had both studied the impact of the smoking bans there and found little evidence it affected sales in bars and restaurants. Dallas’ loss was deemed statistically insignificant.

As a result, the council showed little interest in January in pursuing an economic study of impacts a smoking ban might have on Denton. Instead, the council told the staff they wanted to put together a committee that represented a variety of community interests. The city staff has prepared a proposal that would include a 15-member committee with representatives from the medical and public health community, all three chambers of commerce and residents. But the council could go in a different direction if it preferred, Baker said.
The ad hoc committee is likely to be charged with helping the council define public places and workplaces and recommending any exceptions that might be included in the ordinance. In addition to forming the ad hoc committee, the council will hold public hearings during its regular meeting Tuesday for four zoning changes and one specific-use permit for a home-based hair salon. The meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m. and will be preceded by a council work session scheduled for 3 p.m.

Warren mayor's no-smoking zone gets tabled by City Council for now

Smoking outside city buildings in Warren has some folks steaming. The Warren City Council voted Tuesday to table a request from Mayor Jim Fouts asking it to pass a measure banning smoking within 100 feet of all city buildings. The issue went before the City Council after Fouts used his executive authority to implement the ban without council approval.

But Judge John Chmurna had the signs removed from the 37th District Court, saying Fouts didn't have the authority to issue the ban without the council voting on it. "At the 37th District Court, we're all about the law, and if there's no law preventing you from doing that, I don't like signs on this building preventing you from doing that," Chmurna said. "Jim Fouts is the mayor of the city of Warren; he's not the ruler of a kingdom."

Fouts said he had a city attorney research the issue and, based on that, said he believes he can issue the ban on his authority alone. "I guess there's no real downside (to making it a law) except I didn't want to be involved with the government red tape, where you have to write up people and impose fines," Fouts said. "I thought we could do it on the basis of common courtesy."