Oakland smoking ordinance delayed

Oakland’s City Council was scheduled to have their second reading (and final passage) of the new secondhand smoke ordinance last night. The item was pulled from the consent calendar, and will be considered again, perhaps with some revisions, in two weeks, at the next Council meeting.

City Council President Ignacio De La Fuente told Bay City News that he was concerned about the new rule restricting smoking within 10 feet of bars:

But De La Fuente said he was concerned that the matter was rushed through on Sept. 19 and there weren’t clear answers to some of his concerns.

De La Fuente said one of his concerns is that the ordinance would require that bar customers move 10 feet away from bars if they want to smoke.

Currently, bar customers can smoke right next to bars.

“We have to have a balanced approach and make sure we can attract nightlife and businesses,” De La Fuente said.

De La Fuente said he understands that an important issue for Reid is not to ban smoking on golf courses.

Several bar owners and staff have attended multiple meetings on the issue, asking the Council to strike this provision because forcing their patrons to stand far away from the door and security staff places customers in danger. The new rule would outlaw smoking patios, like the one at Cafe Van Kleef, wiping out considerable capital investments on the part of nightclub owners.

3 thoughts on “Oakland smoking ordinance delayed

  1. Incredibledaze

    umbrage to one of the only self sustaining businesses that reinvested in itself while others pull out? Please, don’t you remember what this is really all about?
    People will die!
    People will die!
    People will die if its not passed right away, I mean as Council Member Nadel said “Its as dangerous as a gun” to her consitituents. mmmm, not sure she consulted with those in her district who have actually Been Shot but I’m sure she wave that survey around again, so back off.

  2. ScottPark

    Now don’t let your Brunner hatred get in the way of reporting the facts: Jane was with Ignacio on the ten feet from bars, too.

    Although i also understand if you would say that the Council shouldn;t talk about any of this at all because what they really need to do is talk about crime all the time. Isn;t a delay bad here?

  3. V Smoothe Post author

    ScottPark -

    I have never said that I think the Council should only talk about crime. You’re confusing me with Charles Pine.

    I do not think the Council should be passing laws that waste police resources or that will be enforced arbitrarily, if at all. Even with the modifications, I still do not approve of the ordinance.

    However, I appreciate that after months of stakeholders coming to meetings and saying that this aspect of the law would endanger their patrons, the Council has finally, even at such a late hour, acknowledged their concerns. Careful consideration of how ordinances will impact residents of Oakland is always a good thing.