Posted on 05/20/2004 9:30:16 PM PDT by writer33
SCC student government wants $100,000 to get smokers out of building entrances
A Spokane Community College student government senator has proposed a $100,000 solution to the problem of messy smokers clogging up busy building entrances.
“The entire campus looks like an ashtray,” said SCC student senator Andrew Gibbs. “All last year everyone's like, ‘Can you do something about the smokers?' ”
The student government has already approved the plan, which now needs an OK by the trustees to get started.
Gibbs made his proposal that included building four $20,000 smokers' shelters at Tuesday's Community Colleges of Spokane Board of Trustees meeting.
Also included would be 34 stand-alone ashtrays and 40 signs telling people of a policy he's proposing to prohibit smoking within 25 feet of buildings. In the proposal, Gibbs said security officers could issue citations as a deterrent, but that would be discussed at a later date.
Gibbs said that with some negotiating, he could deliver his solution for as low as $75,000, with some redesign in the structures.
“The students didn't want to see anything cheap or chintzy,” Gibbs said.
This spring, SCC's sister college, Spokane Falls Community College, erected two $2,681 smoking huts as part of a $20,574 student-funded plan that includes 30 mounted ashtrays and dozens of signs.
Gibbs' SCC proposal received some questioning from the trustees.
“Patches would be a lot cheaper than shelters,” said trustee chair Carol Landa-McVicker.
After the meeting, Landa-McVicker said she had some concerns.
“That's a lot of money in a time of budget crunches,” she said Wednesday. “I just have a problem with smoking. I think this sends a message that we're promoting smoking.”
Trustee Helen Malone said during the presentation, “Being a smoker, I find a lot of smokers' habits offensive myself.”
Another college employee suggested the creation of a program to help people stop smoking on campus.
Sharon Kelly, chair of the classified staff council, said, “It's wonderful they are taking this on. We do appreciate the students for doing that.”
Gibbs' presentation included schematic drawings of two sizes of smoking shelters; the largest would be roughly the size of a single-car garage; the smaller would be roughly half that size. He's working on getting the costs down to $15,000 for each “weather shelter.” The structures would have benches and lighting.
After his presentation, Gibbs said he first wanted to install campus garden gazebos for smokers. That was shot down by a campus planning committee that didn't believe gazebos fit into the existing environment at SCC, which Gibbs said is more “square and cold.” The proposed shelters would be constructed with the same masonry bricks used on campus buildings. The shelters also come with a landscaping budget.
Gibbs said some students have come forward to criticize the smoker-friendly idea.
“People feel it's not fair we're building them shelters and non-smokers are getting nothing,” Gibbs said.
The $100,000 would come from the student government building fund, which is made up of the $64 fees full-time students pay each quarter at SCC. The student council approved the plan May 5. Trustees are expected to vote during their June meeting.
Spokane Falls Community College went through a similar process last year when the student government allocated $35,000 for shelters and new ashtrays. The total amount spent was $20,574, which included two shelters that many students referred to as bus huts.
“It's a start,” said SFCC president Mark Palek.
Palek added that he feels it's the school's responsibility to educate students about the dangers of smoking.
The new SFCC smoking shelters have not been popular with students.
Heather Bell, 23, an interior design student at SFCC, said that when it rained, she entered one of the smoking huts and left quickly because it smelled so bad.
“It's gross. You don't even have to go into it to smell it,” Bell said. “I ended up standing by it under a tree.”
Heather Darr, 23, gasped when she heard SCC was considering spending $100,000 on smoking shelters.
“I think it's a total waste of money,” she said.
SCC student Scott Schuster lit up a cigarette between classes outside a busy doorway as students and faculty walked through crowds who smoked and played Hacky Sack.
Schuster's no fan of a smoking hut.
“I tell you man, I smoke, I vote, so deal with it,” Schuster said. “Put a barbecue in there and I'll think about it.”
“Patches would be a lot cheaper than shelters.”
Here you go.
Waste of money
And Duct Tape is cheaper still. Guess where we want to put that, Carol?
Give them an inch and they want a yard...........
The non-smokers have EVERYWHERE......how about some compromise here folks.
Next it will be licenses allowing the bearer to shoot any smoker that steps outside the shelter while still smoking.
If they can afford, and are willing to spend the funds, I don't see a problem here.
Please, don't give them any MORE bright ideas.
I don't see a problem here, either. I'd love to see something like this at my school. The smokers crowd around the entrances and really stink up the place.
I understand your point......I have a question for you (the general you, not you personally)......Why would non-smokers complain about a shelter away from the entrances for smokers?
The non-smokers didn't want smoking in the building, so smokers went outside. Non-smokers don't like dealing with the smokers at the doors and want them to move away. But many non-smokers get up in arms when a proposal like this is made. I don't understand the rationale.
I think the key to remember is this is taking place at a college, the home of American socialism. Some members of the faculty would probably throw a fit about it here as well, claiming that money could better be spent on their particular pet project or department.
I understand about the location part of it............but I see it occurring all over the country.....even on private property.
This is a brilliant idea. The smokers get someplace relatively comfortable to ply their habit and non-smokers get clean air around the entrances to buildings. It's a win-win situation.
Is it going to cost $17,960 for the signs?
At $256 annual fees for full-time students, the entire inflated cost could be borne by fees from around 391 students.
The way this kid throws around dollars, his move from student politics to grown-up politics would be seamless.
Sometimes don't you think that America will wake up from her trivial obsessions, the brouhaha over smoking being one manifestation, only when something so bad and nasty and catastrophic, either an act of god or jihad, that'll then jolt us out of our politically correct, censorised infatuation with controlling every aspect of an individual's behavior, including speech, which is regulated by cries of anguish and horror if one dares step over the invisible, but not mythical line of current perceived probity.
Sure, you're "free" but you can't do this and this.
What makes me laugh is Americans calliing other countries socialist, when we have let the ninny nannies call the shots in our Granny Control Individual Behavior State of Major Concern.
LOL!
Because it's what they do. It isn't about smoke in most cases. It's about power and control.
Personally, I think the cost should be born by the people doing the complaining. Maybe if there was a premium on whining, there would be less of it.
You know that, I know that and lots of others know that. What is scary is that so many don't understand it, and many of them are right here on FR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
