Today the Daily Herald reported that the commissioners of the Buffalo Grove Park District unanimously decided to ban smoking from all facilities including outdoor parks. The district previously had a smoking ban only for indoor facilities, as do most park and recreation agencies in the state.
Parents, more today than ever, need to be role models for our children. No longer can our kids look to movie stars and athletes to be the perfect example of how to lead one’s life. So why would we tolerate cigarette smoking, a harmful and proven killer, to be present in our parks?
“Maybe it will send a message to our village, to also prohibit smoking in restaurants and bars, just like they did in Skokie, just like they did in Highland Park, just like they’re doing hopefully in Chicago in the not-too-distant future,” said Park Board of Commissioners President Scott Jacobson, who pushed for the ban.
Parks need to be, and in most cases are, a place for children and adults to recreate and have fun together. Illinois and its park and recreation agencies have some of the best park systems in the nation. But, smoking in our parks does not send the appropriate message to our kids. Congratulations to the Buffalo Grove Park District for taking this huge leap in protecting our kids from the dangerous effects of smoking.
What do you think of the ban on cigarette smoking at outdoor parks and facilities? Has your agency made similar bans? Are there plans to in the future?
To Whom It May Concern:
Buffalo Grove is overstepping their governmental authority by enacting a more severe smoking ban than Illinois state law currently dictates in the IL Clean Indoor Act of 1990. Buffalo Grove is not one of the 20 municipalities with the power to enact bans at this time. Before our governor signs HB0672, if he does, your ban is illegal.
I have also been in contact with the city of Flora, IL and their city legal department for the same reason. They have also passed an illegal smoking ban ordinance.
I am reposting a communication from the Illinois Smokers group “http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers that I sent to a member this past March. It should help clarify why Buffalo Grove cannot institute this ban. I do not see BG on the list, and “outdoor areas” are not among the places where smoking is banned.
Sincerely,
Garnet Dawn
———————————————————————-
From: “Garnet Dawn”
Date: Tue Mar 8, 2005 5:15 pm
Subject: Which Illinois towns are able to ban smoking?
Hi,
Yes! Here it is. This subject came up was when HB 3996 was defeated last year. See below, where each of the communities grandfathered in before the Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act - 1990 is listed. Hope this helps.
Garnet Dawn
——————————————————————————–
FROM: billquin…..,
Tue, 08 Mar 2005 21:38:03 -0000
SUBJECT: Which Illinois towns are able to ban smoking?
Through conversation someone mentioned that certain towns did not have the power to ban smoking. Does anyone know anything about this? I own a business in the suburbs that could be affected by this. Thank you ahead of time.
——————————————————————————–
Date: Thu Apr 1, 2004
Subject: The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act - 1990 vs House Bill 3996
There is much confusion about the Illinois Clean Indoor Act and the 20 communities that are exempt.
Section 9 is the one naming the Illinois communities with the right to ban smoking, should they choose to do so. This is because they instituted smoking regulations before the 1990 Act was passed.
House Bill 3996 was defeated yesterday. If this bill had passed it would have allowed any and all municipalities in Illinois to impose smoking bans on bars and restaurants. Therefore, “Leveling the Playing Field,” as the Antis love to say.
The defeat of this bill was a major victory, in my opinion. Now is the best time to contact Illinois restaurants to ensure they continue to fight smoking bans.
Garnet Dawn
———————————————————————————-
www.creative.tribalddb.com/acs/frames/rights.html
Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act
What Does The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act Do?
The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act (Public Act #86-1018), which took effect July 1, 1990, establishes non-smoking as the policy for the State of Illinois. It changes the way employers, restaurant proprietors, businesses, school administrators and government officials must oversee smoking on their property. Under the Clean Indoor Air Act, all public places are assumed to be NON- SMOKING unless an area is designated for smoking. An owner MAY designate the entire premises as non-smoking. An owner MAY NOT designate the entire premises as smoking with the exception of bowling alleys; bars; hotel rooms; non-public sections of factories or warehouses; and private, enclosed offices occupied ONLY by smokers.
Where Smoking is Banned:
-In taxis, service lines, rest rooms, polling places, meeting rooms and assembly halls; sports arenas; public buildings, e.g., libraries, museums.
-In at least half of waiting areas of plane, train and bus terminals.
-In designated areas of restaurants seating 40 or more persons.
Where Smoking is Allowed
-Any outdoor area.
-Public lobbies, common corridors; bars; hotel and motel rooms.
-Restaurants, meeting, banquet rooms, assembly halls used for private functions.
SMOKING IN THE WORKPLACE:
-Employers must develop a company smoking policy that provides employees with smoke-free areas. However, no company will need to alter the building’s physical makeup to comply.
-Employees can declare their immediate work area smoke-free and employers must find alternatives if this solution is not satisfactory.
-No employee may be discriminated against for insisting on rights provided under the ordinance.
-In disputes with smokers, the rights of non-smokers have priority. THIS WENT INTO EFFECT JULY 24, 1988.
What Does The Law Require?
The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act requires Management to make reasonable efforts to prevent smoking in a public place outside of designated smoking areas by:
* posting appropriate signs
* using existing barriers and ventilation
* contacting law enforcement officials
* other appropriate means
Which Establishments Are Covered Under The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act?
This law applies to any enclosed, indoor area used by the public or serving as a place of work. This includes (but is not limited to):
* offices
* hospitals
* hair salons
* meeting rooms
* schools
* retail stores
* restaurants
* theatres
* grocery stores
* nursing homes
* libraries
* banks
Which Communities Are Covered Under The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act?
This law applies to all local municipalities in Illinois EXCEPT those “home rule” communities which passed their own local clean indoor air ordinances prior to October 1, 1989. These home rule communities are:
* Arlington Heights
* Champaign
* Chicago
* DeKalb
* Des Plaines
* Downers Grove
* Elgin
* Elmhurst
* Evanston
* Highland Park
* Hoffman Estates
* Joliet
* Northbrook
* Oak Park
* Orland Park
* Park Ridge
* Schaumburg
* Skokie
* Urbana
* Wilmette
Garnet,
The way I interpret the clean air act as saying a person can smoke in an outdoor area. It says nothing about communities being unable to ban smoking in some places. Also, under the section about where smoking is allowed restaurants are listed, but I have been in plenty of restaurants that are not in one of the 20 municipalities who may enact a ban, and the restaurant is completely smoke free. Just because the law says smoking is not banned in a place does not mean the owner of that place may not ban smoking.
I think it is great what Buffalo Grove Park District has done. Impressionable children playing in a park or at a little league baseball game should not see adults, that they look up to, puffing away on a cigarette. Many of the children want to be professional athletes in the future and all smoking will do for them is slow them down and lead to problems later in life, such as cancer.
This ban should also help to keep Buffalo Grove’s parks clean. Lets face it, how many smokers do you see when they are done smoking a cigerette go and seek out a container to throw out the cigerette butt. I have never seen any! They usually just throw the butt right on the ground where they have been ashing their cigerette.
I am a resident of the Villiage and I find this ban a ludicrous encroachment on civil liberties. Of course smoking is dangerous and self-destructive, and a terrible message for parents to send to children. This is why I do not smoke. This is why if parents see others smoking, they should take the opportunity to educate their children on the myriad detriments of smoking. However, last time I checked, smoking is legal. And mature adults have the right, not privilege, to smoke in open places not protected by Clean Air Act.
Not only do I disagree with the act of smoking, but I have a real problem with flag burning too. However, if I saw someone burning a flag at Willow Stream I would take the opportunity to make my point known, but I would never ever suggest a park ordinance which limited this action which lies fully within the confines of our carefully thought out and well-reasoned laws. And though there are important distinctions between burning a flag and smoking, there are common underlying principles of legality that can not be debated.
To add insult to injury, the park passed this ordinance without taking any initiative to encourage debate, even though the ordinance affects a large number of people (I’d know how many if there was any kind of research or background available from the Park District, but I doubt this logical step was even considered). One member of the public, though it is not known if she even resides in the community, attended the meeting. Had I known, I would have attended and made my voice heard, for that is the joy and the glory of local government. In a time when our privacy is being slowly corroded by national law, I suppose it is not beyond the bounds of tragic possibility that even our rights in public, are being eroded.
Dear Anonymous (no name….hmmm? Are you ashamed of your opinions?),
Garnet,
The way I interpret the clean air act as saying a person can smoke in an outdoor area. It says nothing about communities being unable to ban smoking in some places. Also, under the section about where smoking is allowed restaurants are listed, but I have been in plenty of restaurants that are not in one of the 20 municipalities who may enact a ban, and the restaurant is completely smoke free. Just because the law says smoking is not banned in a place does not mean the owner of that place may not ban smoking.
The clean air act does say that, unless a municipality is one of the 20 grandfathered in before the 1990 Clean Air Act, they may not apply more stringent smoking ban ordinances than the state bill already does. It also clearly states that people MAY SMOKE OUTSIDE. The Act only applies to PUBLIC places. Restaurants and bars are privately owned. This is where the arguments for trying to ban smoking in restaurants gets into trouble. An owner can decide what type of business they desire to have. From that point, it is up to the customer to decide whether they want to patronize that business. That is what free trade and private property are all about. A smoking ban is a government regulation. A smoke free restaurant is that way by the owner’s choice. Here’s an interesting tidbit:
Restaurants and bars are private property according to a US Supreme Court ruling in the early 1970’s involving leafleting Vietnam War protesters turned away from a shopping mall. The Supreme Court said a place of business does not become public property just because the public is invited in. By that same reasoning, a restaurant or bar is not public property.
I think it is great what Buffalo Grove Park District has done. Impressionable children playing in a park or at a little league baseball game should not see adults, that they look up to, puffing away on a cigarette. Many of the children want to be professional athletes in the future and all smoking will do for them is slow them down and lead to problems later in life, such as cancer.
You are entitled to your opinions, but you really do not know what you are talking about. Every time society has tried to ban something, it only becomes more popular. Children usually want what they can’t have. Why do most boys have Playboy or Hustler magazines hidden away somewhere? That is why educational interventions in schools are only driving up smoking rates. Studies have proven it. In the demographics of college aged students, smoking percentages are at an all time high. These are the kids whom ant-tobacco special interest groups have tried to brainwash against smoking since before they could walk.
This ban should also help to keep Buffalo Grove’s parks clean. Lets face it, how many smokers do you see when they are done smoking a cigarette go and seek out a container to throw out the cigarette butt. I have never seen any! They usually just throw the butt right on the ground where they have been ashing their cigarette.
Do you consider smokers to be a different species? They are the same as you, except they smoke. They are your neighbors and friends. Some do, sure, and I’m ashamed of them. Have you ever asked any of them to clean up after themselves? I have asked sloppy (even non-smoking! Egad!) people to police an area when they were leaving a mess behind. Non-smokers are often slobs too.
Many smokers, myself included, have been complaining for years about the lack of outdoor ashtrays. You have probably only seen what you wanted to see. Many smokers, when in parks, at beaches or just enjoying nature, even butt out a cigarette and place it back in a partial or empty cigarette pack to dispose of later. However, I will certainly butt mine out on the ground, entering a store, if no receptacles are provided. I use them if they are there, and so do others. How stupid do building and store management firms have to be before they realize that people who can’t smoke indoors must put out their cigarettes when entering a building.
I do know how many people I have seen just throwing paper/food/etc. garbage on the ground, when there are trash receptacles everywhere. Litter is litter. We have littering laws. Why can’t non-smokers see the messes they make themselves? We don’t need to itemize our laws into subcategories. I certainly hope the majority of adults aren’t that retarded.
In closing, Buffalo Grove is overstepping their current authority and the outdoor park district smoking ban is illegal. In the meantime I suggest Buffalo Grove smokers just ignore the “No Smoking” signs. They are worthless.
Garnet Dawn
Garnet, your opinions are appreciated but please refrain from derogatory comments. This is not the place for insults and rude remarks…take that somewhere else. Thanks.
I have never been accused of being insulting or rude on any forum before. Smokers are usually on the receiving end for that. There is a first time for everything. It’s your site…….
I will always defend smokers, and I hope I’ve clarified a few confusing smoking issues. There are no benefits in me spending any more time here. However, I will not drop the issue of Buffalo Grove’s illegal ordinance.
As an IPRA member, I don’t appreciate IPRA taking a position on the topic, even if on a Blog Site, unless it has full IPRA Board approval.
It’s legal to smoke outdoors - leave it at that!
You want to take on something else that’s even tougher? Try banning dogs from parks. It’s also legal in most park districts and the damage caused is far greater than smoking.
As an IPRA Member, I am surprised that a fellow member (and most likely in the field) would advocate for smoking. At least someone is taking notice to an issue that closely affects our youth and is an adversary to the term “recreation”. The article has nothing to do with dogs. I dont think the article was intended to provide a “lobbyist” view to anti-smoking, let alone asking to seek “full board approval” for an informative forum.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Hello there!
I’m from nowhere near Illinois so you don’t need to attach a lot of weight to my opinion, but I didn’t notice any derogatory comments by Garnet in the posts above the one that cautioned her.
She seems to make an excellent legal point: is Oak Grove acting illegally? If so, will the officials be held responsible?
It would seem that the state law is pretty clear on the grandfathering question. Bringing up restaurant bans is obviously a red herring since individual business bans are a totally different animal than government mandated ones.
Is it possible that the legislators in Oak Grove were not familiar with the State law? If that’s the case I would think they’d be grateful to Garnet for pointing out their mistake: they certainly couldn’t be intending to break the law, could they?
Michael J. McFadden
Author of Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains
http://cantiloper.tripod.com
Administrator, as an avid user of Illinois parks (like 3 times every week, including today), I find it very disturbing that Scott Jacobsen, a park president, would use his position to promote what can only be described as a personal vendetta.
There is plenty of credible information available which counteracts the anti-smoking crowd’s claims of the dangers of second hand smoke, which leads one to believe they are exagerating their claims to promote indoor bans as a step towards their dreams of a “smoke free society”, rather than only to protect non smokers as they claim to be doing.
However, an outdoor ban is clearly a major violation of freedom of choice in that it’s intent is to protect smokers from themselves whether they want that protection or not.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind a smoke free society all that much. After all, we had one for thousands of years, so why can’t we have one now? Smoking is a proven health hazard, so why don’t the 25% of Americans who smoke just quit? The fact is Americans were quitting with a rapid decline in the percentage of smokers from 1965 to the early ’90’s which came to an abrupt halt at 25% when charitible health organizations went political and lobbied for laws designed to force smokers to quit. Nobody likes to be forced to do anything. It takes the feeling of self accomplishment out of quitting smoking. Plus quiiting gives one the feeling that they are selling out America by succumbing to tyranny.
Do-gooders with a control mentality can never understand why those who they are trying to help would rebel against them. They don’t understand why there is an increase in smoking on college campuses after all the money they spent in educating those same students when they were in elementary school. The fact is, an alarming amount of that “education” consisted of deliberately misleading information and some outright lies as to the effects of both direct and indirect smoking which I am not going to get into on this message board.
It should be clear to anyone that when youth reach the rebellious age and are learning to think for themselves, they despise those who lied to them and who attempt to take away their freedom of choice, and only respect those who have taught them honor, integrity, and our sacred American values of liberty and justice for all.
So Mr. Jacobsen, if you read this message board and truely want to do your part in keeping kids from smoking, I strongly advise you and your comissioners to lift the ban and put a sign up at a conspicuous place in your parks which says something like…
Although the management of this park considers tobacco a health hazard and advises against it’s use, we believe in the sacred American value of freedom of choice and will never enact a smoking ban in this park.
Smokers, please act responsibly and dispose of your cigarette butts in the containers we have provided for you.
By doing so, Mr. Jacobsen, you will acquire true respect and admiration and you won’t have to worry about how many kids you might have caused to take up the habit of smoking by rebeling against your tyranny.
Thank you for reading this and lets all respect each other’s freedom of choice!
Jim Blogg
President of Forces Illinois
http://forces-illinois.org