PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in
Multi-Unit Housing (MUH)
April 4, 2011 – City Council
Eric Walsh, MD, MPH/Director & Health Officer
Public Health Department
Joy Guihama, MPH/Division Manager and Statice Wilmore/Program Coordinator
Health Promotion and Policy Division/Tobacco Control Program
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Background on Issue
 In May 2008, City Council directed staff to research issues related to
drifting tobacco smoke in multi-unit housing and to return with information
on the problem.
 In March 2010, following the MUH informational report presented, the
Public Safety Committee directed staff to come back with
recommendations to address the problem.
 February and March 2011, Public Safety Committee heard comments
from the Public, as well as a report from staff and voted to move the issue
to the full Council for discussion without recommendation.
 Staff gathered and/or researched related information on 1) health
impacts, 2) existing state/city codes, 3) other communities with
ordinances and 4) community input.
2
City of Pasadena Recognized as
Leader in Tobacco Control
 Over the last 20 years, the City has developed and enacted
tobacco control policies, reducing youth access to tobacco
and the public’s exposure to harmful secondhand smoke.
 In 2008, City Council adopted a comprehensive policy to
prohibit smoking in certain outdoor areas:
>
>
>
>
20-feet from business entryways;
At outdoor dining areas;
At outdoor shopping malls; and
In other designated outdoor public spaces.
 There are protections from exposure to secondhand smoke
where the public work, eat, and play. However, many are still
exposed to harmful drifting tobacco smoke where they live.
3
Health Effects of Secondhand Smoke
(Drifting Tobacco Smoke)
 The 2010 Surgeon General Report states: “There is no safe level of
exposure…inhaling the complex chemical mixture of combustion
compounds in tobacco smoke causes adverse health outcomes,
particularly cancer, cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases, through
mechanisms including DNA damage, inflammation, and oxidative stress.”
 There are more than 200 scientific research and peer-reviewed articles
documenting the dangers of secondhand smoke.
 Approximately 20+ studies are specific to multi-unit housing have
shown that tobacco smoke drifts from neighboring units, vents,
patios, balconies, open windows/doors, light fixtures, and plumbing.

Bohac DL; Hewett MJ; Hammond SK; Grimsrud DT. Secondhand Smoke Transfer and Reductions by Air Sealing and
Ventilation in Multiunit Buildings: PFT and Nicotine Verification. Indoor Air, published online 20 July 2010.

Wilson, KM; Smith, Michael, Tobacco-Smoke Exposure in Children Who Live in Multi-Unit Housing. Pediatrics. 2011; 127:
85-91. (www.medpagetoday.com/primarycare/smoking/23879)

Winickoff , J; Gottlieb, M; Mello, M. Regulation of Smoking in Public Housing. New England Journal of Medicine. 2010;
362: 2319-2325.
4
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Information on California Communities
Statewide (as of October 2010, over 30 MUH policies in CA*)
 Most MUH policies (34) prohibit smoking in common areas
and 13 cities/counties have ordinances that prohibit
smoking within a certain percentage of units.
 Compliance times for landlords to designate nonsmoking units range
from 90 days to five years.
 Recently the Los Angeles City Council directed its City
Attorney to prepare an ordinance to address smoking in
certain outdoor areas and in common areas of apartment
buildings.
5
(*Note: As reported by the Center for Policy and Organizing)
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in 100% MUH
Information on California Communities
 The most comprehensive ordinances designating 100%
smoke free MUH are Richmond and South Pasadena.
 South Pasadena – 100% of units be non-smoking by
9/4/13.
 Richmond – 100% of units to be non-smoking, made
effective 1/1/2011.
 Belmont – 100% of units to be non-smoking; but allows a
14 month grace period for current cigarette smokers.
 Sebastopol – 100% of units to be non-smoking by
11/2/2011.
 Most recently adopted policies (~last 90+ days) in
Union City and Santa Clara County will require 100% of
units to be non-smoking.
6
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Local Opinion Polls
Two Community Surveys
 2008 (N=900 residents; smokers oversampled at 18%):
 77% support policy to prohibit smoking in outdoor common areas
 63% support a policy to prohibit smoking inside residential units and
to prohibit smoking on residential balconies and patios
 2009 (N=114 MUH residents; smokers oversampled at 16%):
 79% wanted to be protected from smoke entering their homes
 75% would prefer to live in a non-smoking section of the building and
72% wanted to live in a completely non-smoking building
 80% were in favor of a law requiring some units to be non-smoking,
with 74% stating it should be applicable to new and existing
7
buildings
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Local Business Sector Outreach
 Staff conducted outreach sessions with more than 14
relevant MUH groups during late spring/early summer of
2010 to obtain input on initially proposed MUH smoking
restrictions. Groups included:
 Apartment Association of Greater LA (AAGLA)
 California Apartment Association (CAA)
 Foothill Apartment Association (FAA)
 Pasadena Chamber of Commerce
 Pasadena Housing Practitioners Advisory Meeting
 Pasadena Neighborhood Coalition
8
Overall Health and Economic Benefits in
Addressing Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
 Reduces level of tobacco exposure-markers in nonsmokers,
especially lowering risks among infants/children from middle ear
infections, premature births, low-birth weight babies, Sudden Infant
Death Syndrome (SIDS) and other diseases.
 More than 250 poisonous ingredients identified in tobacco smoke,11 of
which are class A carcinogens.
 Epidemiologic studies show involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke
linked to increased cancer risks, heart disease, pulmonary disease,
asthma attacks and sudden infant death syndrome.
 No smoking policies in homes/housing also encourages smoking
cessation and discourages initiation of smoking by youth.
 Reduces fire hazards. Reduces insurance premiums for
landlords/owners. Offers faster turnover of smoke free units.
 Reflects CA, LAC and local nonsmoking rates, community
trends.
9
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Recommendation A
A. Specifically define secondhand smoke as a public
nuisance under Pasadena Municipal Code Section
(PMC) 8.04.020 “P” and subject to an
administrative penalty pursuant to PMC Chapters
1.25 and 1.26.
 CA Civil Code defines a nuisance as anything harmful to
health, or indecent or offensive to the senses, so as to
interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or
property.
 Nuisance already exists in the Pasadena Municipal Code,
section 8.04.020 “P” under the general nuisance provisions.
It defines nuisance as “any accumulation of rubbish,
filth, garbage, liquid waste, dust, smoke, fumes…to be
offensive to the senses of the public or detrimental to
public health.”
10
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Recommendation B
B. Prohibit tobacco smoking on patios and balconies, and in
outdoor common areas, of multi-unit housing;
 Establishing non-smoking buffer zones would minimize and
control unwanted exposure to harmful drifting tobacco smoke in
all multi-unit housing.
 Minimizes drifting tobacco smoke exposure especially to children
and youth in common areas, such as pool areas, courtyards, etc.
11
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Recommendation C
C. Require disclosure of the ordinance requirements to all
prospective and existing tenants and buyers in rental,
lease and purchase agreements by January 2012;
 Most people want to be compliant with existing laws. Disclosure
provides communication to existing and potential tenants and owners
of the ordinance, to ensure no-smoking provisions are clearly stated.
 Other California communities have incorporate disclosure language
into their MUH notification and implementation process.
12
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Recommendation D
D. Establish phase-in period for 100% smoke free multi-unit
housing by 2014.

Provides sufficient staff time to educate and provide technical
assistance to landlords/owners.

Allows owners and landlords ample time to implement
recommendations as part of multi-year phase-in plan.

Final phase-in of this specific recommendation will allow time for
industry trends to reflect current non-smoking status and patterns,
while still addressing current issues of impacted residents.

Based on scientific evidence of the dangers of 2nd and 3rd hand
smoke on individuals who are not in a position to make complaints.
13
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Proposed Implementation & Enforcement
 Amendments to the PMC will be enforced by the
Public Health Department.
 It is anticipated that these costs can be absorbed within the current
operating budget. However, based on actual implementation,
adjustments may be needed to ensure successful implementation
Staff estimates that the enforcement cost of both 1) phase-in of
program implementation and 2) monitoring is approximately $58,000.
 This includes $8,000 for implementation costs such as materials
and other administrative costs related to signage and mailing
notification.
 Ongoing funding of approximately $30,000 is from tobacco
retail licensing fees which is designated for enforcement use.
It is recommended that this be applied to cover .50 FTE.
14
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Proposed Implementation & Enforcement
Implementation
Outreach/ Letters
Distribution of Signage/Materials
Complaint
Notification Letter
Investigation
Citation
Fine
Payment or Administrative Hearing
15
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Agenda Report Recommendations
 The proposed recommendations reflect input from
impacted relevant MUH housing entities and community
members, in order to take a comprehensive approach to
address and reduce harmful drifting tobacco smoke or
secondhand smoke in multi-unit housing.
 Adoption of the staff recommendations would bring
Pasadena more in line with over 30 other California
communities.
 It would also bring about more consistent practices with the nearby
communities of Burbank, Glendale and South Pasadena, which
have already addressed this growing issue through city legislation.
16
Drifting Tobacco Smoke in MUH
Agenda Report Recommendations
It is recommended that the City Council:
 Find the proposed action is exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, Sec.15308;
 Direct the City Attorney to prepare and return within 60 days with
amendments to the Pasadena Municipal Code to restrict smoking in
multi-unit housing by amending the City’s municipal code as follows:
A. Specifically define secondhand smoke as a public nuisance under
Pasadena Municipal Code Section (PMC) 8.04.020 “P” and subject to
an administrative penalty pursuant to PMC Chapters 1.25 and 1.26.;
B. Prohibit tobacco smoking on patios and balconies, and in outdoor
common areas, of multi-unit housing;
C. Require disclosure of the ordinance requirements to all prospective and
existing tenants and buyers in rental, lease and purchase agreements
by January 2012; and,
D. Establish phase-in period for 100% smoke free multi-unit housing by
2014.
17