City outlaws smoking in public areas

South Portland adopts ban within 25 feet of parks; no buffer for businesses

SOUTH PORTLAND — The South Portland City Council has adopted a smoking ban, deemed by at least one citizen to be “the most idiotic thing ever passed.”

“You people that drove here tonight inside your cars put more pollution in my air than if I smoked 200 cartons of cigarettes,” Ray Lee told the council. “And that’s a scientifically proven fact.”

However, others came with competing facts, including Ashley Bracy, of the state program Healthy Maine Partnerships, who presented a letter from Tina Pettingill, executive director of the Maine Public Health Association. It called secondhand smoke “a toxin more deadly that arsenic, asbestos or lead.”

“Conclusions from researchers include that smokers need to be at least 20 feet away from non-smokers in order [for the non-smoker] to avoid concentrations of secondhand smoke,” wrote Pettingill.

Establishing a buffer zone was the only real debate among council members. They were unanimous in the basic concept – to ban tobacco products (including chewing tobacco), from “all parks, beaches and outdoor recreation facility owned and/or maintained by the city.”

They had decided that June 20, when adding the world “all” – over the objection of City Manager James Gailey – to a draft presented to them by the high school’s Interact club.

The club got hip to fact that the city’s existing resolution against smoking on public parks and beaches, passed in 2005, was going largely ignored, when Healthy Maine Partnerships visited a meeting of their group. Working with Mayor Rosemarie De Angelis, they gathered data on the need for a real ordinance, including a jar of 1,011 cigarette butts collected during a one-hour excursion to Willard Beach in April.

Led by Elisa Martin and twins Conor and Jackson Beck, the students made an impact, but Gailey intimated that superceding his list of 21 outdoor areas with “all” was maybe taking things too far.

“All,” he pointed out, would include the city golf course on Wescott Street. He speculated that smokers might take their memberships, and their money, to Portland’s Riverside course, or other places where they could still smoke on the greens.

“The bottom line is, either we believe in this, or we don’t,” said Councilor Alan Livingston.

“If we agree to exclude one recreational facility, that doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense,” agreed De Angeles.

“There is a price to do things right,” said Councilor Tom Blake.

However, prior to final passage on July 6, Blake made a motion to eliminate a 25-foot buffer zone around the city’s outdoor spaces.

Blake supported the ban itself “100 percent,” he said, noting, “We are not taking people’s rights away, we are only protecting the majority of our citizens on city-owned property.”

However, he noted that, in many places, private property lies within the proposed 25-foot buffer zone.

“I don’t think we have a right to regulate what somebody does on their own personal property, if that’s legal,” he said.

Councilor Tom Coward agreed, pointing out that, “On the Greenbelt, 25 feet in some places puts you right in somebody’s living room, which is an absurdity, frankly.”

However, Coward was not keen on cutting the buffer entirely. Instead, he suggested only exempting “privately-owned residential property.”

Blake’s motion failed 3-3, while Coward’s passed 6-0.

Blake then made a run at allowing people to smoke on commercial property within the 25-foot safety zone.

“We can’t differentiate who has rights and who does not,” he said. “This treats businesses differently than homeowners.”

But the majority of Blake’s peers would have none of it, killing his second amendment 4-2.

“Being a commercial entity means the public is invited,” said Coucilor Patti Smith. “People shouldn’t have to run the gauntlet to get into the paint store.

“I’m a strong, principled person,” said Smith. “I just feel that smoking, in whatever form you choose, is not healthy. It’s hard for me to vote for anything that isn’t healthy for people.”

In its final form, tobacco use ordinance passed 6-0. It goes into effect Wednesday, July 26.

In addition to Lee, one other person spoke out against the ordinance. Roberta “Bobbi” Lilley said, “Our rights are being ignored or circumvented and we are being told its good for our health.

“Hopefully, all of these bans, from the state’s to the city’s, will get before the Supreme Court,” she said. “This is a personal freedom. This is something that’s been going on for centuries, and people have been living into their 100s.”

In the three tries it took to decide on a buffer zone, the council never stipulated if anyone can use tobacco on private property there, or if only the owner gets a pass. Nor did they define whether an apartment building qualifies as residential, or if it’s considered commercial property.

Smoking already was banned on state parks and beaches, as well as within 20 feet of municipal building entryways in South Portland and on athletic fields within 30 minutes of use.

The new ordinance carries a fine of $100 for the first public use of smoking or chewing tobacco, $250 for the second offence and $500 for each subsequent violation.

However, one passage reads, “Nothing in this ordinance shall prevent the enforcement agent from obtaining voluntary compliance by way of warning, notice or education.”