Weather Magnet

News
Print this story  |  Email this story  |  [+] Text Size [-]  

Smoke-free mandate set to begin Jan. 1
Edict is designed to restrict areas for smokers



Smoking outdoors in Oregon will have to be done at least 10 feet from any building entrance, window or air-intake vent, starting Jan. 1, when the state’s Smokefree Workplace Law goes into effect.
ONTARIO — Oregon smokers will be compelled to pay careful attention to where they light up starting Jan. 1 when the state’s  new Smokefree Workplace Law goes into effect.

The mandate bans smoking in most public places and workplaces with only a few exceptions.

“It’s designed to protect employees and patrons from second-hand smoke,” Kelly Jensen, R.N., tobacco prevention and education coordinator, Malheur County Health Department, said.

According to information provided by Jensen, public places are defined as any enclosed area and opening to the public, and place of employment means every enclosed area under the control of an employer that may be frequented by employees.  

And when smoking outdoors, smokers will need to be at least 10 feet away from all entrances, windows and air-intake vents of public places.

Signs stating the new requirement will need to be posted at every entrance.

“It’s a new Oregon law, passed during the most recent legislative session.” Jensen said. 

Among the places that will be included in the smokefree decree are bars and taverns, including bar areas of restaurants, bowling centers, bingo halls, private and fraternal organizations, employee break rooms, privates offices and commercial office buildings, assisted living facilities, movie theaters and indoor entertainment venues.

“It’s an adjustment for the bars and bingo halls,” Jensen said.

Hotels and motels are allowed to designate up to 25 percent of their rooms for smoking guests. However, smoking will be prohibited in common areas such as the lobby, Jensen said. 

Other exceptions to the law, besides smoking in designated motel and hotel rooms, include smoking in certified smoke or cigar shops and smoking of non-commercial tobacco for American Indian ceremonial purposes.

Businesses not in compliance with the new law by Jan. 1 could incur a fine of $500 per day, or a maximum $2,000 fine.

 




Comment Blog - Note: All Comments Subject To Approval

zaffera wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:23 AM:

" I can't believe this B.S. We drink water that in some counties has the highest level of arsnick in it (of course not over the legal limit set by the feds). We breathe air that is filled with not only pollutants from cars and factories but also with pesticides and fertilizers, which can be extremely harmfull. Yet we don't ban the use of these things, why? The air that everyone breathes in their home is dirtier than any smoke filled bar. People are so concerned about breathing in second hand smoke, for pregnant women and children & non-smokers, so why are you in a Bar, pregnant with your kids? Seems to me, these people have issues. I believe that at places of business, there should be a warning, "smoking allowed in this establishment, if you don't like it, don't enter!" We as citizens of this country have the right to smoke if we want to. Obesity in our children is at am epidemic, are they passing laws that tell us what we can feed our children? No!!! I understand that you shouldn't be able to smoke with in 10 feet of an entrance/air intake for a business, thats fine, but telling privately owned businesses that they can't have "smoking" in them is just a violation of their rights!!!! Not to mention, smoking isn't the reason health care cost are rising, its because, the health care system is in it for the "big money". So is smoking the reason that prescription medication is so high? I don't think so. If I choose to smoke, that is my business, I am not subjecting you to it if I am 30 feet away in my car. The air around you on a daily basis is filled with hazardous chemicals that you breath, so quit picking on the smokers. "

to democracy wrote on Dec 16, 2008 9:27 PM:

" You say we live in a Democracy, where majority rules, well you're not entirely correct. If we the people, decide and vote that we don't want fat, or what we perceive as ugly people or any groupof people out on the street, do you honestly believe a majority can accomplish this?

So now we have goverment telling us how we have to run our buisness, or what we can do, and you think it's a good thing, but what's next, does this start to come into your own home.It's way more then an issue of smoker vs non-smoker. "

bowler wrote on Dec 16, 2008 3:04 PM:

" Yippie, no more smoke. I wont know how to act the next morning when my clothes dont reek of that crap. Good job Oregon!! "

Democracy wrote on Dec 16, 2008 10:59 AM:

" How can you say that ONE person spoke. I don't see how that could be right, but even if that is the case, that ONE person was elected by voters!! Democracy in action at its finest. I am not saying I agree with it one way or another. I just think its funny what everyone is saying about it. Its done. At least for the time being, you don't really have a choice in the matter any more. "

Melvin wrote on Dec 11, 2008 10:10 AM:

" I've studied the bible a great deal. It took me 4 years to read the bible. I can't understand all of it, but I reckon I understand a great deal of it. Jesus said that folks ought not smoke (Gal 6: 7-8). Sometimes you gotta study and pray about the verses of scripture in order to understand what the good lord is trying to tell you...open your hearts to the spirit of the lord. It also states that two men ought not lay together. That's all I'm gonna say about this issue. "

Linda in Oregon wrote on Dec 10, 2008 11:24 AM:

" Democracy,
You are right that we live in a democratic state, however you are wrong, the people did not speak, ONE person spoke and refused to bring this issue to the voters.
I agree with the person who said it should be the business owner's choice. I am not saying it is an overly bad thing, the state just overstepped their bounds.....again. "

inforodeo wrote on Dec 10, 2008 9:56 AM:

" (but yeah ... it IS weird to ban smoking from bars. pregnant women and children shouldn't be there in the first place - why not constrain all filthy habits to the same private establishments?) :) "

inforodeo wrote on Dec 10, 2008 9:53 AM:

" 1) As a former smoker and an ardent reader of scripture, i can agree it says nowhere in the Bible that one shouldn't smoke. It also doesn't say we shouldn't run stop signs, let toddlers play near pools unattended, or serve rat poison to house-guests.
There are, however, numerous references to health(Prov 3:7-8, Acts 27:34), Taking care of our bodies (Rom 1:22-27), not to mention the hundreds of examples Christ himself set in his ministry ... examples of staying away from addictions, not leaning to our own intelligence (which, interestingly enough, comes up in those scriptures above), etc.
It's sad to see how many churches have modified themselves to appease man rather than God, and how often people like to put forth the argument that "it doesn't specifically say that", rather than understanding the content of scripture, and seeing the obvious implications of those things which ARE written.

2) One of the things that helped me quit smoking a few years back was the Seattle non-smoking laws. As much as these laws will initially seem like a 'violation of our freedoms', reducing the number of places where it's ok to smoke around pregnant women, children, and other non-smokers is actually a good thing for the majority of folks. This law is less strict than similar laws in other states - it still allows businesses (like hotels) to designate 'smoking areas'. "

HRL wrote on Dec 10, 2008 6:41 AM:

" to Melvin

I think smoking is incredibly stupid and that the people who do it are a bunch of brainless addicts, but I'd like you to quote me the chapter and verse in the Bible that mentions smoking. My guess is that you've never read the book beyond a passage or two that the TV evangelist that you sent money to told you to read. "

Melvin wrote on Dec 8, 2008 8:47 AM:

" In the bible is states that you shouldn't smoke. The Lord told us a long time ago that smoking is bad. Just turn to the Lord and he will help you quit. "

Democracy wrote on Dec 7, 2008 9:20 PM:

" You people can say what you want to about choice and freedome and owners deciding and all that mess. Bottom line, this is a democracy, and the people have spoken. Smoking in public is out. Get over it and move on. "

chuckles wrote on Dec 7, 2008 7:31 PM:

" Maybe next year they can outlaw drinking in bars and while they are at it maybe we can also ban fat people from eating out where the general public is forced to watch them gorge their rolls of blubber as they "drive up my health insurance rates".

The whiners are not the smokers. Smoking is banned nearly everywhere as it is, and it seems as if they have accepted and comply with that along with the amazingly high tax they pay on cigarettes and the higher premiums they pay for insurance---bottom line is that if you don't want to be in a bar then don't go. I'm very seldom exposed to second hand smoke at all, but I am tired of looking at obese people. They are everywhere.....and yet I'm not so self centered and stupid that I think it is it up to me to whine about regulating some one elses choice of calorie intake. "

They for got something wrote on Dec 7, 2008 7:31 AM:

" Since the smokers will be outside entrances to public places the law should have had wording stating that the establishments provide butt cans for the butts. Now we will have them littering the areas the smokers dispose of them outside. "

Larry wrote on Dec 6, 2008 7:09 AM:

" Hell I thought bars were synonymous with smoking. Although I do believe in smoke free bars, the decision needs to be the owner's choice. A smoke free bar kinda takes the fun out of drinking for some people. ( You know, the ones of recent legal age testing the waters so to speak.) "

Sam wrote on Dec 5, 2008 9:16 PM:

" This is one of those things that's "for your own d*mn good." Smoking is bad for us. Being around smokers is bad for us. We know it, but we're too stupid to change our lifestyle to eliminate tobacco smoke, so the State of Oregon is doing it for us. I've never been in a bar that wasn't full of smoke. Curious to see what that will be like. "

wrote on Dec 5, 2008 12:14 PM:

" It's not JUST second hand tobacco smoke, it's that second hand smoke is a convenient pigeon hole for the unexplained......


VOLATILE ORGANIC compounds originate mainly from solvents and chemicals. The main indoor sources are perfumes, hair sprays, furniture polish, glues, air fresheners, moth repellents, wood preservatives, and many other products used in the house. The main health effect is the imitation of the eye, nose and throat. In more severe cases there may be headaches, nausea and loss of coordination. In the long term, some of the pollutants are suspected to damage to the liver and other parts of the body.


BIOLOGICAL pollutants include pollen from plants, mite, hair from pets, fungi, parasites, and some bacteria. Most of them are allergens and can cause asthma, hay fever, and other allergic diseases.

FORMALDEHYDE is a gas that comes mainly from carpets, particle boards, and insulation foam. It causes irritation to the eyes and nose and may cause allergies in some people.

RADON is a gas that is emitted naturally by the soil. Due to modern houses having poor ventilation, it is confined inside the house causing harm to the dwellers. "

libertylover wrote on Dec 5, 2008 7:16 AM:

" It is within the power of the govt to set rules for PUBLIC OWNED premises.

On the other hand, making rules, for whatever reason, that control private placed open to the public is over the line. Do the pols own the business? the land?

I know, I know. It is for a "good cause", AS ALWAYS. It is nice to know that a "good cause" exempts one from respecting private property AND allows violating the private property rights of citizens.

Tyranny by the state is not tyranny. It is "caring". The appropriate response to this: B.S. "

To here here wrote on Dec 4, 2008 5:30 PM:

" So you want to go to a bar and get hammered with your friends, but don't want to smell like a bar. "

To kieth wrote on Dec 4, 2008 5:15 PM:

" But if I wanted to run my buisness and cater to skunks and farters, that should be my right as a buisness owner and shouldn't have the Goverment tell me who to cater to. "

Freedom wrote on Dec 4, 2008 4:28 PM:

" I think its hilarious that you think not being able to smoke in public is loosing your freedom. As if your rights have been violated in some horrible way. If you want to continue to kill yourself and drive up the cost of health care for the rest of us by slowly poisioning yourself go right ahead. Just don't complain when someone has enough common sense to say that my right to breath clean air in public shouldn't be superseeded by your "right" to kill yourself, especially when its more harmful to those standing around you. This is one of best thing I have ever heard of. "

wrote on Dec 4, 2008 2:35 PM:

" Problem solved.....Bars where smoking is permitted can ONLY employ or be entered by smokers.....

Non smoking bars can ONLY employ or be entered by non-smokers.

BUT, you see the problem is non-smokers enter certain premisis KNOWING there is smoking allowed then complain about the smoke.....

Let the smokers blacken their lungs in peace, non-smokers go elsewhere...But enough have complained that now is it law.......Do ANY of you know what is in the "Clean" air you beathe everyday, but don't complain about? I'd venture to say that you do not, do some research on the subject and be prepared to to start coughing and choking.... "

Keith wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:21 AM:

" That's the best news I've heard in a long time. There's nothing worse than being in a public place and smelling smoke. All you smokers quit your whinning. Imagine if everywhere you went it smelled like a fart or skunk. You wouldn't like that, would you? "

Jim wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:16 AM:

" When it says "smoke-free mandate" does that refer to two fellers going on a date without smoking? I've never heard of such nonsense. Sounds like a California law to me. If a feller wants to smoke with another feller on a date that is his own business, not the governments business. "

about time wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:10 AM:

" To whats next: You are probably someone that thinks smoking in your car with kids present is ok also. Seriously, if you want to smoke do so just dont do it in places where others have to breath your smoke also. Why is that such a hard thing to comprehend?? "

HRL wrote on Dec 4, 2008 6:55 AM:

" To "what's next"

Would you expect the authorities to show up in your home if you were administering rat poison to your children? "

whats next wrote on Dec 3, 2008 8:48 PM:

" Where will it end! Will the gestapo come into your home to make sure your not smoking next? say goodbye to your freedoms. "

adsfiughscdi n dsch wrote on Dec 3, 2008 7:23 PM:

" Oregon Sucks! Glad I moved to Idaho... "

Peter wrote on Dec 3, 2008 5:31 PM:

" I too say that I'm very happy that this day is finally coming. Over 80 percent of the adult population don't smoke. Their health certainly should trump the minor inconvenience to smokers of having to smoke outside. Secondhand smoke has been shown time and time again to he harmful to the health of all non-smokers. "

Here here wrote on Dec 3, 2008 4:06 PM:

" I can't begin to tell you how excited I am about this change!! Being able to take kids to bowling alleys without having to worry about coming home that night smelling like smoke will be great!! And to be able to have a drink or two with friends and not go home smelling like a bar will also be a nice change. Yeah Oregon. "

Secondhand Rose wrote on Dec 3, 2008 2:56 PM:

" Thank God!! It is about time Oregon passed this law!! "

About time wrote on Dec 3, 2008 1:28 PM:

" I cannot say how happy I am to see this finally happen. I frequent bars and absolutley hate the smoke. Most smokers I know are considerate of others and alot of them even agree with this new law. I know there will be some that wont and will ramble on e about there rights but really, we that dont smoke should not have to deal with it at places where we like to go. Good Job State of Oregon!! "


TERMS OF USE

Those who post comments are accountable for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they furnish. While we encourage writers to utilize this service on our Web site, we also strongly suggest they treat it as public forum where good taste counts. We reserve the right to decline for approval objectionable material from these blogs.

Writers that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments - such as racists language, threats or comments unrelated to the story - will not be approved for the blogs. Also, entries that are unsigned or "signatures" by someone other than the actual writer will not be approved.

While writers can still post anonymously, we strongly suggest that they do not do so.

Opinions, guidance and other information expressed in Argus Observer story blog comments and on the Argus Observer blogs represent the individuals' own views and not necessarily those of the Argus Observer. The Argus Observer furnishes this type of forum and does not endorse and is not accountable for statements or advice from anyone other than an designated Argus Observer spokesperson.


(optional)
   

All Newspaper Ads
Place a classified ad

Community Calendar
July 2009
S M Tu W Th F S
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31

» This Week's Events
» Submit an Event
Click to View All Events

Business Directory
Find a business near you
Business Type

OR Business Name

Web Search
Google
 

Find out about our RSS feeds and what they are.

Copyright © 2009 Argus Observer - www.argusobserver.com. All rights reserved. | Unathorized reproduction is prohibited.