California City Prohibits Smoking in Apartments

July 13th, 2009 by Matt DiChiara| Posted in Political Corner, Smoking Issues and Apartments | 7 Comments »

smoking banned in apartments

Richmond, CA, a city of about 100,000 people located in San Francisco’s East Bay, has passed a local ordinance that will ban smoking in all apartment buildings. The new law comes on the heels of another smoking ordinance passed earlier this year that prohibits smoking in public places such as parks, parades and farmer’s markets.

Richmond’s new ordinance, which prohibits smoking in all multi-unit housing facilities, is one of the strictest anti-smoking laws in the nation. Only two other towns, Belmont and Calabasas, both in California, have similiar types of restrictions that extend to residences. Dublin, also located in the East Bay, passed a less restrictive ban, which requires that half the units in apartment buildings with more than 16 units must be smoke-free.

Councilman Tom Butts, seemed to acknowledge that the Richmond City Council reviewed a variety of proposal’s before passing the outright ban, stating “This idea that somehow you could bifurcate buildings and make portions of it smoking, portions of it nonsmoking, it just doesn’t work.” Indeed, we have heard how smoke travels between rental units through the smallest of channels, such as electrical sockets.

We have reported on local and state government’s efforts to pass laws that protect renters from secondhand smoke in apartments for the past year or so. We have seen lawsuits, restraining orders, redundant state legislation, outright bans and owners devising policies suit their renters.

We tend to think that apartment owners should have the right to make the rules for their apartments, since they will act in a way that will please the largest amount of their tenants. If a tenant does not like a certain policy, then they can choose to move into a different apartment. If the owner enacts sweeping changes, such as a smoking ban, then a tenant should have an opportunity to break their lease without penalty.

What do you think? Does the government have a responsibility to ensure that it’s citizens are not exposed to dangerous elements in their apartments? Should an apartment owner be forced to enact certain policies? Apartments must remove asbestos, but you can’t exactly buy a pack of asbestos at the store.

Have you witnessed disputes amongs renters over secondhand smoke? Have you lived or worked in an apartment complex that adopted smoking policies?

7 Responses to “California City Prohibits Smoking in Apartments”

  1. EricKNSeattlesays:
    July 13, 2009 at 12:48 pm

    Stunning. I think it’s ok to have some properties be N/S. But to have the WHOLE town be N/S is crazy. The more and more Government encroaches into our personal lives, the more people will be outraged. This is not going in a good direction.
    E!

    Reply
  2. Austin Apartment Prossays:
    July 14, 2009 at 5:57 am

    As someone who supports the smoking bans we’ve implemented in bars and restaurants here in central Texas, I have to say this measure goes too far in my opinion. I agree with the previous comment that having certain properties be non-smoking might be appealing to some renters, but trying to force it upon all the apartment residents in a given town is classic government gone wild.

    Reply
  3. Condo Ownersays:
    October 12, 2009 at 4:52 pm

    As someone who always opposed such laws on principal, I now find myself living above a smoker in a condo I just purchased. My eyes have been opened to the issue. Each and every day, the inside of my unit smells like tobacco smoke from the neighbor downstairs smoking. It is driving my wife crazy with concern over our new born’s health. It is an unquestionable nuisence. Ban it!

    Reply
  4. Melissasays:
    July 27, 2010 at 10:35 am

    I agree with Condo Owner. Secondhand smoke is extremely bad. Why should an individual that does not wish to smoke for whatever reason, be forced to smell that not only disgusting smell but unhealthy substance? If a smoker wishes to kill it self day by day with lighting up than do it where it does not affect anyone else who wishes to be tabacco free! California needs to enforce no-smoking in balaconies in Apartments and Condos and enforce the commercial feet restriction to residential as well. 20 feet away from an entrance to the apartment or condo. Unbelievable that restaurants and bars have it but a place of HOME doesn’t… where’s the logic in that???

    Reply
  5. Alberto Yoshiokasays:
    August 10, 2010 at 2:14 am

    Hey I was just wandering close to the web and discovered your website, surely glad I did since it had some of the data I had been searching for for any report for school, thanks.

    Reply
  6. Elizabeth Kendricksays:
    April 10, 2011 at 4:12 pm

    We are one of those families affected by this ban in our complex and are now facing eviction. We don’t smoke anywhere but on our back patio which is not connected to any other unit. So it’s okay for tenants to sit anywhere they want and smoke marijuana, but it’s not okay for us to smoke a cigarette. Please stay out of my life. I thought this was my apartment. I thought that’s why I paid rent. They complex wont let us out of our lease and are now threatening to evict us and sue. Today it’s cigarettes, tomorrow it will be something else. How long will it be before they want to install cameras in your living rooms to “make sure” you’re behaving properly? Think it won’t happen? Think again. If they can tell you what not to do inside your unit, then you have no right to privacy anywhere, period.

    Reply
  7. whateversays:
    April 16, 2011 at 5:20 pm

    Dear Elizabeth Kendrick,

    Give me a break. Nobody gives a sh*t about your life or how you die and the gov dont do this because they give a sh*t about what you do in your home so no worry about stupid camera thing. You smokers spread cancer to other people, slowly MURDER everyone else who have to breathe your poisonous cig smoke. Oh and no one gives a sh*t if you smoke inside your apt w door shut to keep the smoke inside as long as the complex is not a ‘smoke-free’ building. If you smoke outdoor, you must stay at least 20 feet from the building (in CA) or public area. You smokers are like fat people sitting on the plane but worse, you INVADE other people’s rights to their own home/space/health thus the law must protect everyone else (though they probably care more about healthcare cost/lost income/economy than our actual health). You can be in denial all you want but we have a right to protect our health too. I work in a hospital and see people suffering and painfully dying (think of it like being progressively choked to death over the years) from COPD and lung cancers (smoking-associated type) ALL THE TIME and I have zero sympathy for them for what they inflict upon themselves, just like people who get HIV from one night stands. SMOKERS ARE DISGUSTING.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

 

Ask A Question

We'll answer it on our blog!

Send us your question     

 

Renters Guide

Become an expert on everything apartment related … read more

 

What Kind of Roommate are You?

The kind who leaves socks everywhere? Or the elusive, 'Awesome' Roommate?

Start the Quiz

Facts and Figures

Want to calculate average rent for your city? Interested in rental trends and industry statistics? MyNewPlace has always been a big fan of using data to draw meaningful conclusions about the multifamily and apartment rental industry. Here we share our findings with you!

Read More

Categories

Recent Comments