Posted on 07/20/2009 10:29:56 AM PDT by End Times Sentinel
It's not just indoor public places in Eau Claire where lighting up is prohibited. Now residents of a south side, owner-occupied housing complex will have to snuff out smoking in their homes, the most recent sign of public anti-smoking sentiment.
Members of the Fairfax Parkside Homeowners Association on Wednesday voted to outlaw smoking inside residences that are part of the 34-unit development. The ban also prohibits smoking in shared spaces, such as porches and garages, but does allow it in yards and on patios.
Of the 19 association members who voted on the issue, 15 favored the anti-smoking regulation proposed by association President Dave Hanvelt, while four argued that residents should be allowed to smoke in their homes.
"This doesn't restrict a smoker from living here," Hanvelt said of the smoking prohibition. "It just means that there are restrictions on where they can smoke."
Fairfax Parkside is believed to be the first Eau Claire development in which homeowners aren't allowed to light up indoors.
"I'm not aware of any other instances where that is the case," said Julie Marlette, coordinator of the Tobacco Free Partnership of Eau Claire County.
The adoption of the indoor anti-smoking rule likely won't impact many Fairfax Parkside homeowners, as Hanvelt said he doesn't know of any smokers in the development. But it does restrict future homeowners there from smoking, and visitors also won't be allowed to smoke inside.
"You don't want to have to worry about your non-smoking neighbor moving out and a smoker moving in," he said.
Hanvelt proposed the regulation earlier this year because homeowners in the development own twin homes, or each side of a duplex-style home. Because of their close proximity, smoke from one unit could flow into the one next door.
"If we all lived in separate units, this wouldn't have been necessary," Hanvelt said, noting homeowners association members made sure to allow outdoor smoking so as to not be too restrictive.
The Fairfax Parkside regulation marks an extension of non-smoking rules from public places to private residences. Last year the Eau Claire City Council approved a controversial ban on smoking in indoor public places, including taverns.
The issue prompted heated response from people on both sides of the issue, and opponents were concerned that the ban could open the door to prohibitions on smoking in people's homes.
Word of the smoking restriction enacted at Fairfax Parkside has some people fuming.
"We worried that this might happen, and now it appears that it has," said Sally Jo Birtzer, a nonsmoker who is president of the Eau Claire City-County Tavern League and general manager of Wagner's Lanes. "As long as tobacco is a legal product, people should be allowed to smoke it in their own homes."
While preventing smoking in privately owned homes is unusual, prohibiting the practice in rental residences isn't unheard of in Eau Claire and elsewhere. Some landlords don't allow renters to smoke indoors in an effort to keep those living quarters cleaner and to reduce the chances of a house fire.
Stomping out smoking in multifamily rental units is a growing trend in other parts of the U.S., Marlette said.
"I think people are recognizing the exposure that is occurring to secondhand smoke in multiunit housing," she said. "It is definitely a bona fide health issue, and I think we're going to see more requests for those units to go smoke free."
Dave FitzGerald, one of the Fairfax Parkside developers who also lives there, initially questioned whether the non-smoking measure would hinder future sales in an already tough housing market. But FitzGerald, a nonsmoker, said the anti-smoking rule could attract buyers too, especially given that nearly four of every five people don't smoke.
"Could we lose a sale to somebody who is a smoker? Certainly," FitzGerald said. "But I think there is a better chance of having somebody be willing to live here because there isn't any smoking."
Hanvelt knows firsthand the frustrations of living next to a smoker in a shared-space residence. He previously spent thousands of dollars at a former residence retrofitting his unit to prevent cigarette smoke from a next-door neighbor from making its way to his home, but the effort proved unsuccessful, he said.
Now he looks forward to living in a smoke-free environment.
"We adopted this for our own safety and health," Hanvelt said. "This is a very nice place to live, and we want to keep it that way."
I see your point, and I do disagree with the increased tobacco taxes, and private property smoking bans.
What *I* was trying to point out, the behavior of many smokers does not help the cause.
Looking only at this particular situation at this particular time, I'd say you are 100% correct. The only problem is that there is a committed movement out there that HATES smoking and they'll do whatever it takes to stamp it out....with no regard for things like property rights or individual liberty.
The anti-smoking movement will take stories of private anti-smoking efforts and use them to justify even more intrusive government interference. While most FReepers understand the distinction between freely entered contractual restrictions and government edicts, unfortunately much of the general population do not.
As the general public hears more and more stories like this they will become less resistant when it's the city council, and not the HOA, dictating what legal activities can and can not be done in the privacy of one's own home.
Got that point and even affirmed it. Unconsiderate behavior by many smokers contributed to the strenous reaction against tabak, no doubt at all.
Such a restriction might be legally valid, but still may not be practically enforceable.
The case you referenced dealt only with the legal validity of the covenant restriction. The existence of the forbidden cats did not appear to be at issue.
I believe this is what d_m_o_f was referring to. Is the HOA going to get any relief from the court if the homeowner completely denies smoking, and the only evidence against him is the word of his neighbor?
Here everyone knew they could make up new rules by majority vote when they bought.
Its not cigs, its incense...
Yeah.. But who in their wildest dreams thought people would start banning smoking in one’s own house. Cigarette smoke does not go through walls.. especially when there is a firewall between units. It’s Outrageous and sets a dangerous precedent.
“Smokers rarely help their own cause.”
After years of abuse, it should not be a surprise when there is no longer considerations for the abusers.
“The most common piece of litter I see? By far, cig butts.”
Littering of any object is morally reprehensible. That said, it used to be very convenient for cigarette disposal, however the war on tobacco has made it very difficult to find an appropriate disposable receptacle. It is odd that when trash cans are rare, litter seems to increase....
“I wonder if smoker my wife and I had to walk behind on a public sidewalk the other day, whose smoke was constantly hitting us in the face, realize how physically offensive her actions are to others? I doubt it.”
Ah, the good little anti tobacco sheep. Do you get offended when you walk past the city busses and you have to smell diesel? Do you get offended when someone lights a fire in their chimneys and you have to smell that odor?
You remind me of the lady sitting at a table next to mine at an outdoor deck. The restaurant was grilling and the smoke from the grill was billowing across the two tables. I lit up a smoke and the lady went ballistic. When I pointed out to her that the mere sight of my cigarette was not cancelling out the billowing grill smoke that she was sitting in, she realized her idiocy and left in shame.
The reality is that life is full of “offending” odors, sights, sounds, etc. The fact that you pick one thing that is offensive to you and then sit and dwell on it, shows that the ANTI tobacco zealots have infiltrated every aspect of our lives very successfully. Now, even supposed conservatives applaud their continual advancing control.
“If four out of five smoked and passed this rule then we would have a news article worth posting.”
Yep and those four would be domonized to high heaven.
No matter what you say about me, if you smoke in public and your smoke gets in others peoples faces, it makes you a RUDE person.
“...unless you have a favorite establishment close enough to walk to.”
I am lucky to have such a fine establishment. However, MI is considering an all out ban on smoking tobacco, so I don’t look for them to be in business very long after it passes.
“People should not smoke in public out of RESPECT for others. If you smoke outdoors where other people are, you are full of DISRESPECT for others.”
So, people should stop driving out in public out of respect for others? Heck, why would considerate people spew those offensive fumes into any area where people are present. How about grilling out in public? Bon fires?
Smoke is smoke.
“Will towns get into the act and ban all homeowners from smoking in their own home?”
Yep, many are. California is leading the way.
“It’s about our LIBERTY being chipped away.. If that doesn’t scare you it should.”
Correctomundo, and for saying the same I have been called paranoid, right here on FR no less. It is shameful the success that the NEA has had in dumbing down our society.
I cannot recall many times over the past several years where smoke from cars, grills or fires has smacked me in the face.
On the other hand, I can’t count how many times I’ve had to put up with cig smoke even over the last month.
The ratio is at least 500 to 1, if that low.
“No matter what you say about me, if you smoke in public and your smoke gets in others peoples faces, it makes you a RUDE person.”
When in public, I make extra effort to be polite to everyone I encounter. Right up until I encounter someone who will exaggerate their idiocy at the sight of a cigarrette. For example, try walking through a super market with an unlit cig hanging out of your mouth. You will see the full display of the ANTI smoker zealoutry and their rudeness.
When I encounter the panickers, zealots and outright idiots, my politeness is emphatically set aside. You may, or may not fit into one of these categories. I do suspect that if you are experiencing a ton of people blowing smoke in your face that you should take a look at your own behaviour.
So, you blow smoke in the faces of folks who you define as zealots, idiots or panickers.
I bet you’re a real treat to be around.
I tend to agree with Glenn Beck.. There is an all out assault on home ownership of the likes we’ve never seen.. Obama “coming to the rescue” by allowing people to stay in their foreclosed properties by paying rent. Oh that sounds soooo good doesn’t it? Could it be setting the stage for the Gov’t to own ALL property or is that just crazy talk?.. We don’t want to believe it because after all “It Can’t Happen Here” now can it? Our denial will let our Country fall into either Fascism or an Oligarchy.
Rude people get rude treatment from me. Deservedly so.
Beck is a little to “black helicopter” for me, but he does make some good points. I tend to think of this as the proletariate vs. the borgious (sp?) battles.
Class warfare will do that every time.
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.