BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 1333 Hearing Date: April 12,
2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Block | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Version: |February 19, 2016 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Matthew Dumlao |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: State beaches and parks: smoking ban
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Under existing law, smoking is prohibited inside a public
building, in a state-owned vehicle, or in an outdoor area within
20 feet of a main entrance, exit, or window. Smoking or
disposing of smoking related waste within 25 feet of a
playground or sandbox area is prohibited and punishable by a
$250 fine for each incident (Section 104495 of the Health and
Safety Code).
Under state law, there is no prohibition against smoking in an
outdoor area of a public building unless otherwise prohibited by
state law or local ordinance, and signs describing the
prohibition are posted. However, many cities, counties, and
colleges have adopted more restrictive ordinances prohibiting
smoking. For example, the Counties of San Mateo and San
Francisco, the Cities of San Diego, Los Angeles, Huntington
Beach, Pasadena, Carson, and Davis, among others, have adopted
ordinances banning smoking in parks or public beaches.
The State Parks system currently prohibits smoking in certain
situations, such as on specific guided walks, buildings, and
trails. Additional smoking restrictions are imposed where there
are high fire dangers.
PROPOSED LAW
SB 1333 (Block) Page 2
of ?
This bill has two goals: (1) reduce tobacco product waste and
(2) make state parks and state beaches free of second hand
smoke.
Specifically, this bill would:
Prohibit smoking or disposing of used cigar or cigarette
waste on a state beach or a state park system.
Establish a maximum fine of $250 for a violation of this
law.
Require the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) to
post signs indicating that smoking is prohibited.
Cigars and cigarettes are defined to include tobacco or any
other plant that is used as an alternative or supplement to
tobacco or nicotine.
Enforcement will not go into effect until signs on the state
beach or state park have been posted.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
One of the main arguments in support of this bill by both the
author and supporters is the negative environmental impact of
tobacco product waste on beaches. According to the author,
"Cigarette waste has proven to be very detrimental to the
environment. Various nonprofit organizations have found that
discarded cigarette butts were the number one waste item found
on beaches. According to a study by the California Ocean
Protection Council, about 40% of debris collected by the
California Coastal Cleanup day in 2010 were trash from
smoking-related activities."
Furthermore, the author points out the fire risk posed by
smoking, particularly in State Parks. According to the author,
"California has been known to be prone to wildfires. Statistics
show that there were roughly 68,417 fires that burned about
10,125,149 acres in the 2015 fire season. In 2014, there were
63,417 fires that burned 3,577,620 acres. Ninety percent of
those fires are caused by humans and discarded smoldering
cigarettes are largely responsible. The prevalence of smoking
increases the likelihood of a wildfire and potential destruction
in state parks."
SB 1333 (Block) Page 3
of ?
Finally, the author and supporters argue that this bill will
help address public health concerns associated with smoking on
state beaches and parks. According to the author, "A recent
study by Stanford University showed that a non-smoker standing
downwind from a smoker outdoors can be exposed to substantial
levels of contaminated air. This research points to the
potential risks that a visitor to California state parks and
beaches may encounter."
The Surfrider Foundation argues that "requiring the California
Department of Parks and Recreation to create and post signs at
state beaches and the state park system to notify visitors of
the smoking prohibition would create some costs at the outset,
but evidence suggests far more money will be saved in the long
run as less damage is done and employee time is better spent."
Furthermore, the Amigos de Bolsa Chica suggest that "the act of
smoking in itself is incongruent with the behaviors expected of
persons visiting state parks and beaches. While our organization
believes in people's personal rights regarding decisions
pertaining to their own habits and health, we understand that
state parks and beaches are shared spaces, and despite the fact
that these are for the most part, outdoor and open-air spaces,
it is not uncommon to experience large agglomerations of people
in those beaches and parks, especially during certain seasons of
the year. Thus, we believe that SB 1333 will protect children
and other visitors from the known negative effects of
second-hand smoking, much like the existing law that makes it a
crime for a person to smoke within 25 feet of a playground or
sandbox area."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
None received.
COMMENTS
Previous legislative attempts to prohibit smoking at state parks
and beaches:
AB 1142 (Bloom) in 2013: Similar to SB 1333, this bill would
SB 1333 (Block) Page 4
of ?
have prohibited smoking at state parks and beaches and would
have established a fee of $250 for a violation. (Died in
Assembly Governmental Organization Committee).
SB 4 (Oropeza) in 2009: This bill was passed by the Legislature
in 2010, but ultimately vetoed by the Governor. Like SB 1333, SB
4 would have made it an infraction ($100 fine) for an individual
to smoke on a state beach or state park. It included an
exemption for designated campsites at state beaches and
specifically exempted Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation
Area. Also, enforcement of the prohibition would only go into
effect once signs were posted. In his veto, Governor
Schwarzenegger argued it crossed the line of government
intrusion.
How does this bill fit in with existing littering laws? Under
existing law, it is unlawful to litter on public property,
including on state beaches and state parks. Despite the law,
small items like cigarette butts are easy to litter without
others noticing. Smoking, however, is a much more visible act
and it would be easier to identify and confront individuals who
are smoking in prohibited areas. It is likely this would help
reduce litter from tobacco products. Furthermore, receiving a
fine for smoking would not preclude and individual from also
receiving a fine for littering if both violations occurred.
A lesson on creating a smoke-free public space: The University
of California, Davis campus became smoke and tobacco free on
January 1, 2014. Since then, compliance on campus has been very
high. Their success is due in part to a strong advertising
campaign along with a grace period to help smokers get used to
the new policy.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
None.
SUPPORT
American Lung Association in California
Amigos de Bolsa Chica
Association of California Healthcare Districts
California Association of Recreation and Park Districts
California State Firefighters' Association
County Health Executives Association of California
SB 1333 (Block) Page 5
of ?
Save the Bay
Sierra Club California
Surfrider Foundation
OPPOSITION
None received.
-- END --