Transcript Powers of County Legislatures and Boards of Health in Maryland

www.mdsmokefreeapartments.org

Health Impact
 “There is no safe level of exposure to tobacco smoke” –
Report of the Surgeon General (2010)
 Secondhand smoke can have 80-90% of the health
impact of chronic smoking (J. Barnoya, MD, MPH (2005))

Economic Impact
 Reduce property owners/managers maintenance and
turnover costs
 Reduce health care and loss of life costs
 Reduce insurance premiums
 Limit liability for owners/managers

Safety Impact
 Reduce risk of residential fire
Protection From Secondhand Smoke




Secondhand smoke (SHS) contains more than 7,000
identifiable compounds released as gases or particles,
including at least 70 known cancer causing compounds
50,000 nonsmokers die each year from cancer caused by SHS
Even brief exposure increases the risk of respiratory
infections, ear problems and asthma, especially in children
and other health vulnerable populations
“At present, the only means of effectively eliminating health
risks associated with indoor exposure is to ban smoking
activity.” - American Society of Heating, Refrigerating & Air Conditioning
Engineers (ASHRAE)
Lower Costs

2012 Indiana study estimates SHS leads to health care and
loss of life costs in excess of $1.3 billion annually

HUD estimates that apartment turnover costs are 2 to 7 times
greater when smoking is permitted


A survey of housing authorities and subsidized housing
facilities in New England found the cost to rehabilitate a
smoking unit was $1,500 to $3,000 more than a nonsmoking unit
Some insurance companies offer discounts on property
casualty insurance for multi-unit owners with a smoke-free
policy
No Smoking
Light Smoking
Heavy Smoking
General Cleaning $240
$500
$720
Paint
$170
$225
$480
Flooring
$50
$950
$1,425
Appliances
$60
$75
$490
Bathroom
$40
$60
$400
TOTAL
$560
$1,810
$3,515
Source: Smoke-Free Housing New England, 2009
Reduce Risk of Fire
Smoking is among the leading causes of
residential fires in multi-unit buildings and the
number one cause of fire deaths in the U.S. (Source:

National Fire Protection Association)
National Fire Protection Association 2010 Data:


◦
17,500 smoking related residential fires
◦
540 civilian deaths
◦
1,320 civilian injuries
◦
$535 million in direct property damage
#1 NFPA Recommendation to avoid residential
fires: “If you smoke, smoke outside”
Soaring Demand



Only 18% of American adults
smoke, and roughly half that
total smoke in the home
8 out of 10 asked in a multistate survey indicate they
would prefer to live in a
smoke-free complex
1 out of 2 say they have
moved or would move because
of tobacco smoke drift
NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT

TO SMOKE
Proponents of smokers’ rights often argue that smoke-free laws or
policies:
◦ Violate an individual’s constitutional right to privacy; or
◦ Discriminate against smokers in violation of the Equal
Protection Clause

All courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, considering the issue
have found:
◦ Smoking is not a protected liberty, and
◦ Smokers are not a protected class of people

Important Note: Several state constitutions include a broader
protections than the federal constitution; however, no state court
has found smoking is a constitutionally protected right.
No smoking laws and policies do NOT violate the right to
privacy



The Constitution protects the “fundamental right to privacy,” and any
law encroaching upon this right must pass a heightened level of court
scrutiny
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held the fundamental right to
privacy only applies to marriage, intimate relationships and rearing of
children
No court has extended the right to include smoking
No smoking laws and policies do NOT discriminate against
smokers


The Equal Protection Clause guarantees “equal protection of the laws,”
meaning a law cannot treat groups of people differently without
adequate justification
Laws discriminating against an inherent characteristic (i.e. gender or
race) are rarely upheld, but laws discriminating against other groups
need only be “rationally related to a legitimate government goal.”
NO FEDERAL LAW PROHIBITS SMOKE-FREE LAWS OR POLICIES


All 50 states (and the District of Columbia) have the
authority to enact smoke-free housing laws
No federal or state law prohibits an owner, property
manager or housing authority from making their
apartment building smoke-free
Family Smoking and Tobacco Control Act (2009)
 Sec. 916. Preservation of State and Local
Authority.

“Nothing…shall be construed to limit the authority of
a…State or political subdivision of a State…to enact, adopt,
promulgate, and enforce any law, rule, regulation or other
measure with respect to tobacco products that is in addition
to, or more stringent than, requirements established under
this chapter, including a law, rule, regulation or other
measure relating to or prohibiting the sale, distribution,
possession, exposure to, access to, advertising and
promotion of, or use of tobacco products by individuals of
any age…”
PHAs/SECTION 8/SUBSIDIZED HOUSING



Since July 2009 HUD has issued three notices addressing the
benefits and legality of smoke-free public housing.
Most recently, HUD issued Notice H 2012-22 which “strongly
encourages Public Housing Authorities to implement smoke-free
policies”
“The right to smoke or not to smoke is not a right that is protected
under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because smokers a not a
protected class under federal law.” – U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development

HUD notices applies to all Multifamily Housing rental assistance
programs
 Smoke-free policies are optional, but HUD
established several requirements for those
PHAs that choose to adopt these policies,
including:





Update the House Rules and Policies and Procedures
Be in accordance with state/local law
Notify applicants of smoke-free policy and provide at least
30 days notice to existing residents
No individual can be denied occupancy because they
smoke
Cannot ask an applicant or resident if they smoke or
anyone in their household smokes









Over 350 Public Housing Authorities in at
least 30 states have implemented smoke-free
policies (more than 10% of national total),
including:
Boston, MA
Detroit, MI
Seattle, WA
Santa Barbara, CA
San Antonio, TX
Santa Fe, NM
Portland, OR
All Maine Public Housing (12,000 residents)



Use the same warning/enforcement methods for
smoking rule violations that are used for any other
rule.
Proliferation of smoke-free policies has not led to
large numbers of evictions. In both market rate
and subsidized housing, compliance rates are very
high.
Individuals are not being asked to quit, just refrain
from smoking indoors – HUD clearly requires that
residents may not be denied occupancy because
they smoke
Global Advisors on Smokefree Policy

http://www.njgasp.org/
Tobacco Control Legal Consortium

http://www.tclconline.org/
The Center for Social Gerontology

http://www.tcsg.org/
Smoke-Free Apartment House Registry

http://www.smokefreeapartments.org/
MD Smoke-Free Apartments

www.mdsmokefreeapartments.org
Legal Resource Center for Public Health Policy
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
500 West Baltimore Street
Baltimore, MD 21201
(410) 706-0842
[email protected]