Sunday, June 24 , 2018, 10:30 am | Overcast 65º


Craig Allen: It’s Time for Santa Barbara to Ban Smoking

It's disgraceful to breathe secondhand smoke damage in the birthplace of the environmental movement

The time for a smoking ban inside Santa Barbara city limits is now!

I know I’m going to receive a lot of pushback from smokers, and I welcome it! The reality is that, although I am a strong supporter of personal freedoms, I do not support one person’s right to exercise their freedom at the expense of others. This is exactly the situation with smoking in public. Whether the smoker is standing on a street corner, at an outdoor café or driving in their car, they are forcing others to breathe smoke. This is simply wrong and unacceptable.

It is estimated that 73,000 people die in the United States each year from secondhand smoke. Everyone knows that smoking kills people, so there is no point in discussing or debating this issue. If it were possible for a person to smoke without affecting anyone else, I am all for their right to do so. The reality is that it is next to impossible for anyone to smoke without it affecting others.

I am a member of Spectrum Fitness and work out several times each week at the downtown location. Each time I leave the gym, I walk to the parking lot and pass behind the Canary Hotel. Without fail, there are hotel employees sitting back there smoking, and I must walk through a cloud of their smoke to get to my car. Wrong, wrong, wrong! Why is it acceptable in society, and more to the point here in Santa Barbara, the birthplace of the environmental movement, for me or anyone else to be forced to breathe smoke? In fact, almost without exception, any time I am walking downtown or driving my car I am forced to breathe smoke. A change in local smoking ordinances is long overdue.

In 1975, Minnesota enacted the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act, making it the first state to restrict smoking in most public spaces. (In 2007, Minnesota enacted a ban on smoking in all restaurants and bars statewide.) Aspen, Colo., became the first U.S. city to restrict smoking in restaurants, in 1985. In 1987, Beverly Hills initiated an ordinance to restrict smoking in most restaurants, in retail stores and at public meetings. In 1990, San Luis Obispo became the first city in the world to restrict indoor smoking in all public places, including bars and restaurants.

California’s 1994 statewide ban on smoking was expanded in 1998 to include a restriction on smoking in bars. The California smoking ban encouraged other states, such as New York, to implement similar regulations. There are currently at least 37 states with some form of smoking ban. Some areas in California began banning smoking across entire cities, including every place except residential homes. More than 20 cities in California have enacted park and beach smoking restrictions.

A 2007 Gallup poll found that 54 percent of Americans favored completely smoke-free restaurants, 34 percent favored completely smoke-free hotel rooms and 29 percent favored completely smoke-free bars. Several studies have documented health and economic benefits related to smoking bans. In the first 18 months after Pueblo, Colo., enacted a smoking ban in 2003, hospital admissions for heart attacks dropped by 27 percent while admissions in neighboring communities without bans showed no change. The decline in heart attacks was attributed to the ban, which reduced exposure to secondhand smoke. A similar study in Helena, Mont., found a 40 percent reduction in heart attacks following the imposition of a smoking ban.

Many studies have been published in health industry literature on the economic effect of smoking bans. The majority of these government and academic studies have found there is no negative economic impact associated with smoking restrictions and many findings indicate there may be a positive effect on local businesses. A 2003 review of 97 such studies of the economic effects of a smoking ban on the hospitality industry found that the “best-designed” studies concluded that smoking bans did not harm businesses. A 2006 review by the U.S. Surgeon General found that smoking restrictions were unlikely to harm businesses in practice, and that many restaurants and bars might see increased business.

In 2003, New York City amended its smoke-free law to include all restaurants and bars. The city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene found in a 2004 study that air pollution levels had decreased sixfold in bars and restaurants after the restrictions went into effect, and that New Yorkers had reported less secondhand smoke in the workplace. The study also found the city’s restaurants and bars prospered despite the smoke-free law, with increases in jobs, liquor licenses and business tax payments.

Santa Barbara is widely known as an environmentally focused city. We depend on tourism for our local economy, which is second only to education as our primary economic driver. I believe strongly that an overwhelming majority of visitors would prefer a smoke-free Santa Barbara, and that a citywide ban on smoking would promote improved tourism and therefore improved economic activity and tax revenues.

Santa Barbara has long been known as the birthplace of the environmental movement in the United States. It is time we place the same focus on our local air quality and the health of our citizens and visitors that we have placed on other environmental issues. Frankly, it is an embarrassment that we are so far behind on something as basic as banning smoking, which has more than sufficient scientific proof supporting the damage of secondhand smoke to our health.

I call on the City Council to make this a priority — to protect the health of those who choose not to smoke, and to make Santa Barbara a more appealing place for visitors to come, enjoy our city and spend their money.

Craig Allen, CFA, CFP, CIMA, is president of Montecito Private Asset Management LLC and founder of Dump Your Debt. He has been managing assets for foundations, corporations and high-net worth individuals for more than 20 years and is a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA charter holder), a Certified Financial Planner (CFP) and holds the Certified Investment Management Analyst (CIMA) certification. He blogs at Finance With Craig Allen and can be contacted at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) or 805.898.1400. Click here for previous Craig Allen columns. Follow Craig on Twitter: @MPAMCraig.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through PayPal below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Enter your email
Select your membership level

Payment Information

You are purchasing:

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >