Smoking at home: WA Apartment Buildings

Tacoma group pushing for smoke-free apartments
ROB CARSON; Staff writer
08/29/10

In parody media source The Onion’s version on YouTube, a somber news anchor intones: “The nation’s anti-tobacco lobby won another victory today when Congress passed legislation restricting smoking to a single room in Iowa.”

Absurd? Sure. Yet restrictions on smokers continue.

In Washington, as elsewhere, the battle over secondhand smoke is moving from airplanes, bars and office buildings to an arena that once seemed impenetrable: private residences.

Next month, Tacoma-Pierce County Health Board members will consider a proposal to classify secondhand smoke as a “nuisance” in multi-unit housing.

The proposal, which backers want inserted into the state’s landlord-tenant law, is one of dozens of attempts in communities around the country to extend no-smoking restrictions from public places to rental housing.

“This is the last piece of the puzzle that needs to be placed,” said Nan Hogan of University Place, who helped write the proposed legislation. “We’ve got smoke-free motel rooms, smoke-free restaurants, smoke-free bars, smoke-free office buildings and even prisons. Why should we go home and have to breathe it there?”

Hogan is a member of the Pierce County group PUSH, for People United for Smoke-free Housing. They point out that in most multi-family structures there is no practical way to seal one apartment from another.

Smoke seeps through walls, around doors and through electrical outlets. Shared ventilation systems circulate the same air throughout all units without adequately filtering it.

PUSH isn’t asking the Board of Health to make any special rules in Pierce County. The group wants the board to pass the proposal, so PUSH then can use it as ammunition in its effort for a statewide law change during the next legislative session.

According to the state Department of Health, 86 percent of renters in Washington prefer smoke-free housing, including more than half of people who smoke.

Also, the Health Department says, every year in Washington about 500 children younger than age 5 get asthma from breathing secondhand smoke.

Smokers’ rights advocates tend to regard efforts to control smoking in rental apartments as unnecessary and an assault on private rights.

“This is political correctness run amok,” said Gary Nolan, U.S. director of the Citizens Freedom Alliance, which advocates for smokers’ rights. “They’re taking away the rights of the landlord. We have a republic, and they’re telling this guy what he can do with his private property. These people should be ashamed of themselves.”

Landlords have the right to declare their apartments smoke-free if they want to, Nolan said, and that’s the way things should remain.

“They can say on their own, ‘No smoking in any of our buildings,’” he said. “The free market has a way of working these things out.”

Nolan acknowledges that efforts to control smoking in apartments are gaining ground. Nationally, 27 local jurisdictions have passed ordinances limiting or prohibiting smoking altogether in multi-unit rentals, including eight cities in California.

Hogan said she was moved to join the cause by personal experience.

She and her husband lived for years in a West End Tacoma apartment building overlooking the Tacoma Narrows. Their lives changed, Hogan said, when a chain smoker moved into the apartment below them.

Hogan, who is 73 and has a history of bronchial problems, started wheezing.

“I had never even heard the term ‘secondhand smoke’ until then,” she said. “What astounded me was there was nothing I could do about it.”

PUSH wants to change the state’s landlord-tenant law by defining secondhand smoke as a nuisance. Destroying landlords’ property, engaging in gang activity and using drugs already are considered nuisances under the law.

In the scenario PUSH envisions, tenants bothered by smoke would follow the procedures already in place for other nuisances: If tenants create a nuisance, the landlord can give them three days’ notice to move out. If they don’t move, the landlord can go to court and start an eviction process.

The Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department and its board, which will look at the proposal at a study session Sept. 15, have historically taken the lead on anti-smoking issues.

The former Health Department director, Dr. Federico Cruz-Uribe, was an evangelist on the subject.

With the support of the health board, Cruz-Uribe banned most outside advertising of tobacco products in 1996, then created a furor in 2003 by banning smoking in most indoor public places, including the county’s bars, restaurants and bowling alleys.

The Washington State Supreme Court threw out Pierce County’s ban, but two years later it became the model for a successful statewide indoor smoking initiative.

The eight-member health board, which is made up primarily of City of Tacoma and Pierce County council members, sets broad public health policy for the city and county. The Health Department director reports to the board.

The department’s current director, Dr. Anthony Chen, is proceeding cautiously. He supports the idea of smoke-free apartments, but with some trepidation.

Reducing smoking is a huge priority for the Health Department, Chen said.

“Smoking is the No. 1 cause of death and is associated with just about every cancer known,” he said. “The effects of secondhand smoke are well-documented.”

But he worries that legislation that is not thoroughly thought out could have unintended consequences.

He said it could unfairly effect low-income people and minorities, groups more likely to be smokers and also more likely to be renters. He also worries that apartment owners could be hurt financially.

“Particularly in this economy, that could end up having a negative impact on the overall health of the community,” Chen said.

The social justice argument does not sway Scott Neal, manager of the tobacco-use prevention program at Public Health-Seattle & King County.

“Whenever the topic of smoke-free housing comes up, you always have somebody bring up that argument,” Neal said. “The way we look at it is, that’s actually a good thing.”

The fact that smokers are more likely to be renters means this is a good way to reach them, he said.

“We know that creating smoke-free environments helps people quit smoking,” he said. “When a landlord creates a smoke-free apartment, it doesn’t mean that people have to be evicted. It just means they have to alter their behavior.”

And, while some apartment owners worry about losing tenants or having to enforce no-smoking rules, others enthusiastically support new smoke-free rules.

In a 2007 survey of apartment owners and managers conducted by the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department, 82 percent of respondents said a smoke-free policy would provide positive benefits. The top three benefits were decreased cleaning costs, less cigarette trash on the property and less risk of fire.

Smoke-free apartments are cheaper to clean between tenants, they say; carpets and curtains don’t have to be replaced, painting needs doing less often.

“If a smoker lived in a place, you can do as much cleaning as you want, but there’s still the scent of smoke inside of it,” said Chelsea Tornga, manager of the 40-unit Oasis Apartments on Delin Street in Tacoma. “The residue from smoke sticks to the walls, so you have to repaint. The smell stays in the carpets.”

Smokers are a leading cause of apartment fires, so owners’ liability insurance premiums often go down when they go smoke-free.

Seattle and King County have taken a collaborative approach rather than adopting any sort of “thou-shalt” position on apartment smoking, Neal said.

One of their most effective tools, he said, is education.

“A lot of landlords think no-smoking policies are illegal,” Neal said. “We let them know that’s not the case. Making their property smoke-free is a decision that’s entirely up to them; it’s like a pet policy.”

When tenants call the Health Department to complain about smokers in their building, Neal said, public health workers visit the landlord, carrying educational material.

“We take as much information as we can,” he said. “We even have a booklet that talks landlords through the process of establishing smoke-free housing.”

The point is not getting smokers to leave, Neal said; it’s getting them to quit smoking.

“What we tell landlords is, when you go smoke-free, make sure you have the support there for the people who do want to quit,” he said. “You don’t want to leave them hanging.”

Rob Carson: 253-597-8693 rob.carson@thenewstribune.com

---

Smoking Ban Starts in Some KCHA Properties
1/2/2008
Sara Lerner
Starting this year, residents who live in some King County public housing are no longer allowed to smoke inside their apartments. KUOW’s Sara Lerner reports.
FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE KING COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY HAS COMPLETELY BANNED SMOKING IN THREE OF ITS PROPERTIES.
RHONDA ROSENBERG IS A SPOKESWOMAN FOR THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.
ROSENBERG: “I would characterize this as the ability to broaden housing options. In the private marketplace, there are many, many units that are smoke free. Many people are actually willing to pay a premium for a smoke–free environment. Just because you’re poor, does that mean you shouldn’t have the same option, too? “
THE AVERAGE RENT AT THE BUILDINGS WITH THE NEW BAN IS $185 DOLLARS PER MONTH.
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY CHOSE PLAZA 17 IN AUBURN AND NORTHRIDGE 1 IN SHORELINE FOR THE BAN. ROSENBERG SAYS THAT GIVES SENIORS WITH DISABILITIES AN OPTION FOR A SMOKE–FREE LIVING ENVIRONMENT.
SHE SAYS THE DECISION WAS MADE BASED ON GEOGRAPHY, AS WELL.
THE GOAL IS TO GIVE TENANTS LOOKING FOR SMOKE–FREE HOUSING SOME OPTIONS ALL OVER THE COUNTY. A THIRD SMOKE–FREE PROPERTY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN WHITE CENTER.
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY CONDUCTED A SURVEY LAST YEAR TO LOOK INTO SMOKING. ROSENBERG SAYS EIGHTY PERCENT OF THE RESPONDENTS SAID THEY’D LIKE TO LIVE IN A BUILDING THAT’S NON–SMOKING.
FOR NOW, THE KING COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY HAS NO FURTHER PLANS TO EXTEND SMOKING BANS ON ITS PROPERTIES.
SARA LERNER, KUOW NEWS.

---

Smoking foes bring the fight to apartment buildings -Seattle

January 16, 2007
Sanjay Bhatt

A year after a statewide smoking ban took effect at workplaces, restaurants, bars and other public places, a new battlefield over secondhand smoke is emerging: apartment buildings.

Spurred on by nonsmoking tenants and public-health leaders, more private landlords are considering restricting smoking inside their rental units. And local public-housing agencies are also looking at banning smoking in the units of some buildings.

Since the ban took effect, people have gotten used to going out in the community and not being exposed to secondhand smoke, and that’s prompted some to ask, “Why do I have to take it in my home?” says Roger Valdez, manager of the tobacco-prevention program for Public Health — Seattle & King County, which enforces the smoking ban here.

“We’ve been surprised by the increased level of interest to make their apartments smoke-free,” he said.

A year ago last month, the voter-approved Initiative 901 took effect. It prohibits smoking in work settings and public places — from offices to bowling alleys — and within 25 feet of their front doors, or a “reasonable” distance, to keep smoke from wafting indoors.

Compliance has gone well, according to the health department. The first month, the department received 168 complaints and found 16 violations. A year later, the numbers were down last month to 18 complaints, with the department finding just one violation.

“When you think of the thousands of businesses in King County, everyone did what they were supposed to do,” Valdez said. “What we’ve heard now is about people smoking in condos and apartment units.”

While the state ban prohibits smoking in the common areas of private apartment buildings, such as hallways, community rooms and libraries, residents may smoke inside their units unless the landlord prohibits it.

But smoke from one unit can seep through ventilation shafts and doorways into other units, and the ban has emboldened some nonsmoking tenants to complain about that to their landlords.

“Some landlords are dealing with the issue by banning smoking entirely in their buildings to avoid being stuck in the middle,” said Seattle attorney Chris Benis, who advises landlords for the Rental Housing Association of Puget Sound.

In the past year, he says, he has received more calls from landlords asking what legal steps they must take to convert their buildings to being smoke-free. Valdez said the health department supports such voluntary efforts, but is not advocating for an expansion of the smoking ban to include apartment units.

Perhaps nowhere is the issue more controversial than in public housing, where many residents — smokers and nonsmokers alike — have few housing options.

“You have some people who say, ‘My apartment is my castle. I should be able to smoke whenever I want,’ and other people say, ‘Yeah, but your smoke is helping to kill me,’ ” said Terry McLlarky, a resident of Casa Juanita apartments in Kirkland, which is operated by the King County Housing Authority.

McLlarky, who smoked for 40 years before quitting in 2002, is serving on a residents committee that advises the authority on their concerns. Even before the smoking ban went into effect, smoking was not allowed in the common areas of public housing.

Last summer, to find out what public-housing residents had to say about secondhand smoke, the health department and the Group Health Community Foundation, an affiliate of Group Health Cooperative, surveyed 508 households in properties run by the housing authority.

Just over 300 households responded. Most were nonsmoking, with 84 percent reporting they don’t allow smoking inside their units. Nearly three-quarters supported rules that prohibit smoking inside apartments.

This week, the housing authority plans to distribute a second survey targeted at elderly and disabled apartment residents. At the end of the month, the committee McLlarky serves on plans to discuss the issue.

The committee’s last meeting on the issue in September was explosive. “I don’t see any immediate meeting of the minds,” he says.

Indoor smoking comes with a higher risk of fires, litter and increased maintenance costs when smokers move out, authority spokeswoman Rhonda Rosenberg said.

After engaging residents in discussions over the next year, the authority probably will establish limits on smoking in some apartments, Rosenberg said. “It’s a very delicate dance. It’s not as obvious as it would seem.”

In July 2003, the Seattle Housing Authority opened its first and only smoke-free property, the Tri-Court, an 86-unit development in North Seattle. The building had been remodeled and smokers who lived there were moved to other properties at the authority’s expense.

Virginia Felton, the authority’s spokeswoman, said the Tri-Court project came about because many residents with asthma, emphysema and other respiratory problems were asking for a smoke-free building.

This year the authority plans to evaluate whether to expand the smoke-free policy to another building, she said.

Tri-Court resident Susan Vanbuskirk, 58, is allergic to smoke and appreciates living in a smoke-free building, but said compliance isn’t perfect. Sometimes in the evening, when she’s watching TV, she detects whiffs of cigarette smoke coming from somewhere on her floor.

“I used to smoke, so I know what it smells like,” she said.

Sanjay Bhatt: 206-464-3103 or sbhatt@seattletimes.com

---

Residential Smoking Bans Catching On

12/18/2007
Chris Lehman

Smoking is banned in most public places in the Northwest. Some apartment owners are taking those restrictions even further. That means if you live in one of a growing number of apartment complexes around the region, you can’t smoke at home. Correspondent Chris Lehman has more.

AT LEAST 11,000 APARTMENT UNITS IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON ARE NOW SMOKE–FREE. YOU CAN’T SMOKE INSIDE. YOU CAN’T SMOKE ON YOUR BALCONY. AND IN SOME CASES, YOU CAN’T SMOKE ANYWHERE ON THE PROPERTY. JIM WIARD IS WITH PORTLAND–BASED GUARDIAN MANAGEMENT, WHICH BANNED SMOKING THIS SUMMER IN NEARLY THREE–QUARTERS OF ITS APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN WASHINGTON AND OREGON. HE SAYS NO–SMOKING VIOLATIONS WILL BE HANDLED LIKE OTHER INFRACTIONS SUCH AS EXCESSIVE NOISE.

WIARD: “This will be just another policy that we will talk to the residents about, make sure they understand the policy and make sure they understand the reason for the policy. And we’ll give them a little write–up or violation notice if they do violate that policy.”

WIARD SAYS HIS COMPANY’S RESEARCH SHOWED THAT MOST TENANTS PREFERRED SMOKE–FREE HOUSING. AND HE SAYS HALF OF ALL RENTERS WOULD EVEN PAY MORE FOR IT.

WIARD: “We view a no–smoking policy and a no–smoking property as an amenity for residents that we can provide. And so we’re marketing that policy as an amenity and I think more and more renters are going to be seeking out communities that provide a smoke–free environment.”

APARTMENT OWNERS HAVE A SECONDARY MOTIVATION: COST SAVINGS, SINCE SMOKE–FREE APARTMENTS ARE EASIER TO CLEAN BETWEEN RENTERS AND HAVE A REDUCED RISK OF FIRE. ANTI–SMOKING GROUPS SAY THERE’S ANOTHER REASON TO BAN SMOKING IN APARTMENT COMPLEXES: HEALTH PROBLEMS CAUSED BY SECOND–HAND SMOKE. COLLEEN HERMANN–FRANZEN IS WITH THE OREGON CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION.

COLLEEN: “We received countless calls from renters who were suffering from drifting tobacco smoke coming into their units from vents, under doorways, from people smoking outside on their balconies and coming back into the windows. It was a huge problem.”

BUT SMOKING ADVOCATES DOWNPLAY THAT ISSUE. GEORGE KOODRAY IS WITH A NATIONAL GROUP CALLED THE SMOKERS CLUB. HE SAYS RESIDENTIAL SMOKING BANS ARE THE LAST FRONTIER IN THE FIGHT TO TAKE AWAY RIGHTS FROM SMOKERS.

KOODRAY: “It seems like policies like this is more about the fact that I simply don’t like what you do, and I don’t want to even smell your cigarette remotely in that complex. So as a result I’m going to impose that preference of mine.”

KOODRAY SAYS THERE’S LITTLE ANYONE CAN DO TO FIGHT THE BANS AS LONG AS THEY ARE PRIVATE BUSINESS DECISIONS MADE BY PROPERTY MANAGERS. BUT HE SAYS TODAY’S POLICY MIGHT BE TOMORROW’S LAW.

KOODRAY: “The lengths to which the legislative arena is going to dictate what we do in our lives essentially to protect us from ourselves is limitless if you want to start going down that road.”

THE CITY COUNCIL IN SUBURBAN BELMONT, CALIFORNIA RECENTLY PASSED A BAN ON SMOKING IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS. AND TEMECULA, IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA NOW REQUIRES LANDLORDS TO SET ASIDE AT LEAST PART OF THEIR COMPLEXES FOR NON–SMOKERS. SO FAR RESIDENTIAL SMOKING BANS IN THE NORTHWEST HAVE BEEN INDEPENDENT DECISIONS BY PRIVATE PROPERTY MANAGERS. ANNABEL HARRISON LIVES IN A COMPLEX OWNED BY GUARDIAN MANAGEMENT IN BEAVERTON, OREGON. SHE SAYS SHE HAS NO PROBLEM WITH THE NEW RESTRICTIONS.

HARRISON: “I was okay with it because I’m not a smoker. And I kind of wondered wow, those who are smoking, I wonder how that’s going to affect them.”

HARRISON’S COMPLEX WENT SMOKE–FREE IN JULY. THE SMOKING TENANTS WILL BE ALLOWED TO KEEP SMOKING UNTIL THEIR CURRENT LEASE EXPIRES. AND THEN THEY’LL HAVE TO MOVE OR QUIT. I’M CHRIS LEHMAN REPORTING IN PORTLAND.