BANGOR, Maine — If a proposal by Bangor’s Wellness Committee is approved, there may be no butts about it when it comes to smoking on city park land.
Members of the Bangor City Council’s parks, recreation and harbor committee wrangled over the idea — and possible implementation — of a policy limiting or banning the use of tobacco products in city parks Monday afternoon.
Not everyone present at the meeting was in favor of any blanket resolutions, rule changes or ordinance enactments. Councilor James Gallant had reservations about any changes not involving input from smokers and nonsmokers alike.
Parks and Recreation director Tracy Willette introduced the Wellness Committee proposal to ban the use of tobacco products in parks to the council committee, which had 10 members present.
“This particular concept, like many others over the years, will get some good discussion about what we think will best succeed here, short- and long-term, and there are several options we can evaluate individually to determine what fits and what won’t,” said Willette. “Our initial approach was to bring this up formally and then follow this meeting up with another meeting.”
The next meeting, tentatively scheduled for 6 p.m. Aug. 21 or 28, will be a public workshop involving the parks, recreation and harbor committee and Bangor’s Public Health Advisory Board. It also will be open to smokers and smokers’ rights groups to weigh in on any possible public policy.
“Do we decide to go through an entire citywide ordinance, do we decide to take the approach of a citywide resolution or do we create an ordinance designating certain parts of parks as tobacco-free and some not?” said Willette, who used the city’s leash law as an example of the latter option, which allows for dogs off leashes on certain trails and park areas such as Cascade Park, Brown Woods and Prentiss Woods.
“We’ll try to develop a couple of concepts at the workshop to bring to the council committee for discussion,” Willette added. “We’re very early in the process and will give plenty of opportunity for folks to weigh in along the way, and I think it’ll be a good discussion to have.”
Gallant said he wasn’t comfortable enacting any kind of policy regarding tobacco use without involving both sides of the issue, meaning that smokers and smokers advocacy groups should be included in the discussion.
“I don’t think it’s fair to ban anything if you only have those from one side involved in the process,” Gallant told fellow committee members.
Shawn Yardley, Bangor’s Health and Community Services director, said the city has to frame the issue and take a position, either with a phased-in approach or an ordinance.
“This isn’t about being against the smoker,” Yardley said. “What we are is for the health of everyone, so we want to frame this in a way that protects everybody’s right to breathe clean air without denying someone’s right to find some way to smoke.”
Gallant also had reservations about the viability of enforcing any restrictions, be they through an ordinance, resolution or other form.
“His concern from the beginning was about enforcement,” Yardley said. “My point is I don’t think that necessarily has to drive this because there’s a cost to the city in cleaning up after smokers with butts and tobacco products left behind.”
Yardley, a former smoker who quit 23 years ago, has a personal preference when it comes to what form he would like city policy to take.
“We’ve been successful at the Folk Festival in limiting where people can smoke and people have been really, really good about that, but that wouldn’t be my preference,” he said. “My preference would be to be clear with an ordinance and be strategic in enforcement of that through signs and training to help people intervene and remind people about smoking restrictions.”
A phased-in approach could involve designating certain parks as ones where smoking is allowed and others — where children are regularly present — as ones where it isn’t.
“When I first began my career, you could smoke at your desk,” said Yardley. “And then you could smoke in certain areas of the office. Then it was only outside, and then it was beyond 50 feet of the building. I’m confident that, over time, things will change.”
Wise idea.
Excellent idea I could only suggest that all city property smoking be outlawed ….nothing worse then going to the park or fair or standing in line to go to the civic center events and someone is smoking infront of u..the smoke blowing back in kids faces and other adults…
What crap.
Lets ban drinking on the sidewalks downtown infront of bars.. I hate the Idea that drinking on the streets of Bangor are allowed.. My wife got accusted by bar drunks while we were walking down town one evening. do we want to go back, I don’t think so. frigging drunks on the streets and this is what the city is proud of. enterainment corrodor my butt.
You like to pick and choose, lets ban outdoor drinking.. You know what. Bars aren’t suppose to serve drunks. you want to ban smoking lets call the ATF in to make the bars meet compliance on serving drunks.
Ice cream trucks, outdoor traveling food vendors, concerts on broad street Pets in parks or downtown. I can find plenty of things to ban. tatoos, pericings weird hair cuts. all offensive to “MY TASTE” Come on city fathers, protect me and my family. Protect us from the offensive. do your job. I have the right to feel safe while walking in town from these preditors of the innocent walkers.
It is just like TV, if you don’t like the station don’t watch it.
You don’t like the smoke in the park go somewhere else.
All this because you want to get rid of the kids in pickering square. Bull Crap.
This has nothing to do with Pickering Square.
Sure.
Were you at the meeting?
There was a meeting?
Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee. It was Monday. That’s what this story is based on. I don’t recall any of my colleagues on the committee referring to whatever problems there may be at Pickering Square as having anything to do with banning tobacco use at Hayford Park, Rolland F. Perry City Forest, etc.
Maybe they should stop the people who are shooting up and using bath salts in the parks before they try to ban smoking in parks. Next step if this goes thru will be no smoking in public places.
Thousands die of smoke related deaths every year. There was one reported death dew to Bath salts last year? this is reefer madness at it’s extreme. If parents set a good example in parks perhaps the butts to booze to bath salts patterns may start to change. peer pressure starts at home.
Thousands die in hospitals due to medical error. Thousands die in car accidents. Causation of second hand smoke related deaths has not been proven and this is what we are talking about is second hand smoke. Yardley even mentioned the cost of cleaning up cig butts, what a joke if he thinks city employees clean up cig but specifically, he is off his rocker. Cig butts may be swept in conjunction with other trash but that’s about it. How about all the graffiti, beer cans bums sleeping on benches, maybe if the bums parents set a better example by not smoking in the park he would’nt pass out on the bench. As another poster said we have much larger problems to deal with in this city besides smoking. Feel good proposal that is not worth the paper it is written on.
The debt that all men pay, There is no BUTTS….
Why should anyone, other than the smokers themselves, have to clean up cig butts?
Thousands die of auto injuries. Thousands die in construction related injuries. Thousands drown. Thousands starve. While I agree that parents need to set a good example, there is no pattern. The pattern, in my opinion, is crap.
Yes one death reported to bath salts but why don’t you go as Bangor and Brewer PD how many calls they’ve been to responding to someone on bath salts. I’ve talked to a few of them and they don’t worry about a cigarette smoker attacking them with what seems like super human strength at times. I don’t smoke so I have no pony in this race….. oh wait, I like freedom and having the ability to use legal substances if I wish. Whether you like it or not, tobacco is legal and adults have the choice of whether or not to use it.
I don’t smoke. I don’t want my kids to smoke. But, some of my best friends smoke, and they are as respectable as anyone else. Do I like smoke wafting over me and my kids in a public place? Not so much, I guess… Do I think I or my kids will be harmed by being occasionally subjected to second-hand smoke? No, I don’t, and I would sacrifice that subjection for the civility of respecting the right of responsible adults to light up if they want to, especially in public where their rights are supposedly protected. Of all the serious ills of a community that we all have to put up with, smoking is not one in my book.
Well put. And most respectable smokers take care to no let their smoke stream into a non smokers face. We’ll always have grubs, but I stand to the side, and try not to bother others. And smokers… don’t throw your butts on the ground!!!!!!
Exactly! If you don’t want butts on the ground, then enforce the littering laws.
I haven’t smoked for 20 years (quit for obvious health benefits of my body and my wallet.) There are too many laws to enforce and the more there are the less respect people have for them.
And remember, once they legalize marijuana, you won’t be able to smoke it anywhere either if the ‘ban on smoking’ anywhere is allowed to progress any further.
We’ll vaporize, my friend….no smoke, no smell….
I don’t care for perfume. Has there been a study to test the effects of perfume on the system? (other then animals..) Lots of people offend with the pungent odor of perfumes. Smokers will follow this regulation as much as the dinks follow the distracted driver rule, or the not crossing in a crosswalk deal. Next they’ll try to tell me what time in the morning that I can purchase beer…
They should at least ticket the litterbugs that throw butts everywhere.
Dear Mayor Weston, could you please have the police or compliance officers go to the downtown bars every night and check if the bars are serving drunks, I think it against the law to serve drunks. I also believe the legal limit is .08
Don’t forget to stop in to the concert beer tents also.
Thank you for your time.
RedButton
Weston is not the mayor and has no more authority to direct the Police Department in how it conducts its job than his colleagues on the City Council.
Sorry I should have addressed it to the whole council.
Ka Bang is comming up and seems to be a big drunk fest, I would like the police to do their jobs and make sure nobody that is drunk is served any alcohol.
Why worry about cigs being smoked when I haven’t seen any arrest for violating already existing laws, like serving drunks. Selective law inforcement
So then get the City Manager to do it.
I live near a city park and I’m sick of seeing cigarette butts mixed in with wood chips under swing sets. Tobacco is garbage. Those amongst us who are dumb enough to smoke despite all of the evidence, are telling us through their actions that they aren’t smart enough to participate in a meaningful debate about the issue of second hand smoke. Those of us who enjoy living without lung cancer need to behave like adults and put the smokers downwind. Let’s ban this trash.
Lung cancer?? from what? Smoking? I don’t think so. Smoking may cause a lot of things but lung cancer is not one of them.
Cancer has a mind of it own, and a lot of people that don’t smoke get lung cancer.
Yes some smokers get lung cancer but its within the numbers of non smokers.
I have had 3 family members with cancer and asked alot of questions.
It’s not necessarily the tobacco that leads to lung cancer, it is the chemicals the cigarette companies put in the cigarettes to make them more addictive that causes lung cancer. And you are wrong. Smoking cigarettes does cause lung cancer. Most of the non-smokers who get lung cancer live with a smoker and the second-hand smoke gives them lung cancer.
Your stats are way off. Cite valid data please. Smokers definitely have a significantly higher rate of lung cancer than non-smokers, as well as other lung and respiratory diseases. I don’t have any data on relative death rates, but I’ll bet that smoker rates are less than non-smokers.
I’m well aware of non-smokers getting lung cancer and know a couple of them. Just like brain or any other cancer, there are several different kinds of lung cancer but the most prevalent one is greatly induced by smoking.
More liberal NANNISM to distract the voters from real problems…Nothing more…
Nope, you are wrong. When people smoke they effect the health of people around them. When they throw there butts on the ground it cost me money to have it cleaned.
I don’t belive the council should be banning smoking outside. I do not smoke, but also I have never been in a park where it was an issue. If it is a trash issue, will we also ban eating in parks? I would rather see officers handing out speeding tickets for very excessive sped as opposed to spending time trying to police this.
people are much more carefull to throw away thrash then there butts.
“protects everybody’s right to breathe clean air without denying someone’s right to find some way to smoke.” How hard is it to find a way or place to smoke? That’s what your house is for. Smoke at your house, not in public. Your cigarette smoke makes me choke and get congested. And while we’re at it—do you really need to throw your butts out of your car window while you are driving? Right to smoke? How about the right to breathe and the right to drive without a cigarette butt flying through the air thrown by someone who should know better?
Agreed. And then there are those head cases who smoke at filling stations and next to RVs with the propane on.
Will the Wellness Committee be distributing the soma at some future date?
Nanny state supporters. Another law proposed to save people from themselves while justifying it as protecting others from a perceived risk. A risk so low it is inconsequential.
Most of the same people supporting this ordinance would be aghast at any interference with smoking pot.
“hear both sides of the story” that is the importance, a councilor that waits to make a decision after a discussion rather than formulating their own opinion
Lets hear from the business owners. do you want to stop serving drunks at the bars and concerts and stores?
It would be nice if you called the council members and asked them to drop this one.
>>>@<<<
Don’t spit on the ground either, that is just gross.
Why should any of us, especially kids, have to put up with smoke, butts, etc., in a public park?
As usual, some of the defenses for public smoking are ridiculous.
I smoke but not around others who do not. I try to be respectful. There are some actually kind of cute looking butt cans I have seen outside in some places … maybe if more of those were offered in and around public areas smokers would be able to throw their butts away rather than throwing them in a trash can (way to start a fire) or on the ground (which I hate to do…I will usually butt it out and put the filter in my pocket to throw away safely later). Smoking is legal and until it’s not we all need to work together to allow the rights of the smokers to smoke yet protect the nonsmokers as well. Perfume and body sprays can cause immediate asthmatic reactions in a lot of people as well and there are always going to be those who think the earth is a trashcan or an ashtray, but maybe giving more alternatives for the smokers so they don’t have only the ground or a trashcan to get rid of their butts is a good place to start?