Posted on 05/21/2006 7:42:17 PM PDT by SheLion
BANGOR - A majority of Maine residents - 79 percent - are nonsmokers, a statistic provided by the Smoke-Free Coalition of Maine on Thursday to local policy-makers, tenants and landlords to get them involved in making their public and private housing facilities smoke-free.
The coalition's conference, attended by nearly 50 people, was designed to reduce the involuntary exposure of tenants to secondhand smoke, which can seep through ventilation systems, walls and electrical outlets. The coalition hosted a similar conference on Wednesday in Portland.
Twenty-eight percent of Maine's housing is renter occupied, Jim Bergman, keynote speaker and co-director of Smoke-Free Environments Law Project in Michigan, said. Bergman is a lawyer who has worked to define the rights of landlords and tenants, which includes a landlord's right to make a facility smoke-free.
"Smoking is not a problem a landlord can mitigate," Bergman said. "[Tenant] complaining always continues."
Smokers are not a protected group under Maine law or anti-discrimination laws, Bergman said, who offered numerous statistics. When a smoking tenant moves out, it costs a landlord $600 to $1,500 more to clean and repair a residence than when a nonsmoker leaves.
Sam Schors and Billie Jo Stanwood, managers with the Fickett Property Management which has rental units in Jonesport, Cherryfield and Columbia Falls, said they agreed with Bergman about the costs incurred with renters who smoke.
"The cost is far more to repair units after smokers move out, even when compared to pet owners," Schors of East Machias said. "You could spend up to $4,000 in carpet replacement just because of cigarette burn holes.
"One of the reasons we're here today is to see how we can transition to smoke-free housing."
The Smoke-Free Housing Coalition began in September 2003 with impromptu meetings motivated by a number of tenants who were frustrated by their exposure to secondhand smoke.
In fiscal year 2006, the Partnership for a Tobacco-Free Maine funded the coalition with a $35,000 grant to continue its efforts and marketing through events such as the conference, which was only the second of its kind in the nation.
The American Lung Association gave the state of Maine "straight A's" on its report card, the only perfect score in the nation, for its tobacco prevention and spending efforts, smoke-free air, cigarette tax and youth access laws.
Gov. John Baldacci, during his keynote address which kicked off the event, praised the coalition and the Partnership for a Tobacco-Free Maine for their work focused on prevention.
"We never had the opportunity in our state, because of tight times in economics, to fight for prevention; we were always trying to just plug holes and stop crises," the governor said. "There are now so many people working together under the same umbrella, landlords and tenants working together to protect children and tenants from secondhand smoke."
After his speech, Baldacci was presented with a green hard hat, designating him the "Top Construction Engineer for Smoke-Free Housing" in Maine.
The Mount Desert Island and Ellsworth Housing Authority is one of 16 housing authorities nationally to commit to the nonsmoking idea and today is expected to approve revisions officially making its Bar Harbor Housing Authority smoke-free, Linda Kelley, assistant director of the MDI-Ellsworth Housing Authority, said Thursday.
"We met very little resistance," Kelley said of the Bar Harbor tenants. "I was kind of surprised."
She said she hopes to have the four other authorities, Ellsworth, Southwest Harbor, Tremont and Mount Desert, smoke-free in at least two years.
Sure, landlords can do with their own property what they want, so how come private business owners of bars, taverns and restaurants in Maine couldn't do the same thing?
This state talks out of both sides of their mouths!
Ping to Maine FReepers!!
Quite a coalition.
hahaha.. thanks. Good catch!
I am wondering about the barf alert here.
Wasn't your position on this that property owners had the right to set smoking rules the last time there was a controversy? You wanted individual bar & restaurant owners to say "smoking" or "no smoking" so as to provide a choice. Knowing full well that all would say "smoking".
Well, here we have it in housing. The landlord has the right to say yes or no to smoking. What is wrong with that concept?
Or is it that you feel smokers have rights, but those offended by smoke have no rights?
Thanks for the ping!
Often it isn't just a matter of being 'bothered' by secondhand smoke.
I used to be a smoker. Evey fall, I would get seriously ill with chronic sinusitis to the point they were going to operate. (This was after several years of fevers, penicillin, etc.)
They finally did an allergy test to see what I was allergic too - bingo! cigarette smoke.
So I stopped smoking. But I had to give up more than one job because of exposure to smoke and I had to curtail many of the social events and political events - conferences, etc, because, even tho' by then smoking wasn't allowed in the convention halls, it filtered thru' the air vents...and I would end up with a two week bout of sinusitis for attending one meeting.
It's much easier nowadays to avoid secondhand smoke.
those who demonize objectors, thank your lucky stars you aren't allergic to it or aren't constantly exposed to something you are...
I personally like to tell the airlines that I am allergic to peanuts so that they can't serve them on the plane. Sorry for your allergy but, get over it. Or, is it all about you?
I am bothered by people that think their "rights" are more important than mine. I am constantly exposed to these people.
Gather around and I'll tell you a tale. About a town which was receiving more trade and taxes from smokers than it knew. After running them out of the bars, they went elsewhere, and a bunch of bars closed.
"Good riddance," said the citizens,"We don't want bars here anyway."
The cigarette and sales taxes from the bars and the smokers disappeared. But, as we all know, the politicians kept spending like they had before the Temperance forces hit the town. Now the town ran a big defecit so the politicians had to raise taxes: sales taxes, income taxes and property taxes.
Now the citizens are picketing the politicians. People who never smoked in their lives are leaving the town because its property values are dropping due to its high taxes. Jobs are disappearing. Businesses are closing. In the face of rapidly falling collections the politicians have no choice except to raise taxes on the remaining businesses and property owners.
The town: Mesa, Arizona
Beware the law of unintended consequences.
Maine is none too rich, and it collects a bucket of money from smokers.
One is moving out at the end of the month after 3 1/2 years (bought himself a house), so I'll have the chance to check it out.
I figure after 3 1/2 years, I'll probably have to do some basic repairs, but mostly some paint and a lot of soap and water. Average costs to us when a tenant leaves is around $150.
I'll bet the farm it doesn't cost an extra $600.
Oh yeah, and I bet I have the place rented again within two weeks.
So you don't get sinusitus any more?
Or, honestly, are there other things which set it off, like industrial cleaners, waxes, the fumes from new carpet or vinyl?
Check for your own health, not just to answer my question.
It is fashionable to blame all the evils of our society on cigarette smoke (in less than homeopathic quantities), and an easy out for the medical profession.
Quite a coalition.
Yes, and that's 50 people that will lord it over the rest of us in this state!
Don't get me wrong, because I believe that a landowner should be able to make his own rules: no kids, no pets and now no smokers. How about no seniors over the age of 55 because they might not make the year's lease?
And what about the security deposit that most leases require? First and last months rent plus the security deposit for cleaning. They conveniently left this out! And pet owners also have to pay another security deposit for pet's.
And what kills me is: this coalition thinks it's just fine for the landowners to make their own rules, but they won't allow private business owner's in this state to do the same. What's the difference here?
No no, you are trying to start something here. If you read my post #2 before you even came into this thread, you will see my position as I stated it.
If landlords can allow smoking or non without government interception, then why can't the private business owners of restaurants, taverns and bars have the same control over "their" business??
Also, see my post #14.
It bothers me too, that when we leave our homes, there is still a certain "group" that think their rights should trump ours. I will never accept this.
When we are out in the public, we are out among the good, the bad, the ugly AND the smokers. At least that's how it should be until the nazi Maine government and board of health got their teeth into the issue.
You put this so well! Thank you!
Like it or not, the smoking bans are choking our economy. Most of the general non-smoking public do not want to believe this, but we see it more across the United States on a daily basis. Businesses closing, lay-offs, cut-backs. And the vendors that supply the business has to cut back as well.
The trickle down effect.
Maine Rights:
A public yahoo group for anyone who wants to talk about the Maine smoking ban situation.
Maine Smokers Rights
Check it out if you plan on vacationing in Maine and if you are a smoker.
Outside decks for smokers in northern Maine just won't cut it!
Bravo's Mexican Restaurant in Augusta is one outlet that built a patio specially to accommodate smokers.
Taverns brace for smoking ban in different ways.
The following information is from 2002! Imagine how much this has gone up with the added tax increase this past year?!
Maine's excise tax per pack of cigarettes: $1.000
Maine's excise tax collection for the
fiscal year ending June 2002: $95,006,000
Sales tax on tobacco products: 5.00%
Federal excise tax per pack of cigarettes: $0.39
Total federal excise tax collections in fiscal year 2002: $7,512,700,000
Number of six-packs of beer that must be sold in Maine to produce the same state excise tax revenue generated by one carton of cigarettes: 50.8
Number of bottles of wine that must be sold in Maine to produce the same state excise tax revenue generated by one carton of cigarettes: 84.1
Master Settlement Agreement Payments To Date
$182,122,188 has been paid to Maine since the Master Settlement Agreement was signed on November 23, 1998.
I'll bet the farm it doesn't cost an extra $600.
You know how they inflate their numbers metesky, to make themselves look good. And who is going to dispute them? US! That's who! LOL
I want to be a big boil on the butt of the Partnership for a Tobacco Free Maine and old Mary Beth!
Without a doubt! 
Or, honestly, are there other things which set it off, like industrial cleaners, waxes, the fumes from new carpet or vinyl?
I know the pollen this year almost gagged me, along with all the dust the farmers are kicking up since they started planting. It's been a rough spring. Very dry ( not now, we finally got rain), but the dust and the pollen was killing me.
I'm just hoping that the diagnosis is correct or the diagnosee is not going to avoid the real problem allergens, only the PC one, with less than optimal results. Certain organic solvents, especially those from vinyl and in perfumes get to me too.
Oh yes. And how I hate to get behind a stinky truck and can't pass. The smell can just about kill me. A big whiff of Clorox will put me into a tail spin as well. Holy cow! Strong stuff, like ammonia.
Neither the smell of diesel fuel nor the smell of auto exhaust (in the open) used to bother me, but since catalytic converters, I can barely stand to be next to a car at a stoplight on my motorcycle.
More than a minute or so and I start getting nauseous.
What is coming out of there, anyway? Has anyone checked, or did they just test for the smog gasses the converters were designed to break down?
Well, as long as there are smokers, they don't have to research! Just blame any illness on the smokers. It's all Bush's fault. Get my drift? LOL
Precisely my point as well.
The real damage done by this, though, to smokers and non-smokers alike, is that while the medical industry pursues the tobacco boogeyman, all other sources of carcinogenic compounds, and even fundamental research into cancer itself are given second rank to the tobacco jihad.
Medicine, as a discipline, and the consumers who rely thereon are all getting the shaft, but the money flows where the BS grows.
Yep. The bigger their lies the more grant money they receive. They all can kiss my arze!
"I'm just hoping that the diagnosis is correct or the diagnosee is not going to avoid the real problem allergens, only the PC one, with less than optimal results."
Gosh, so you all are diagnosing long distance and without even seeing the patient? What highly talented folks.
I'm sorry you all suffer allergies or reactions to solvents or whatever (cigarettes??), but that does give you a taste of what it's like for people who can't tolerate cigarette smoke (I'm not one but my wife is).
"involuntary exposure of tenants to secondhand smoke, which can seep through ventilation systems, walls and electrical outlets."
Damn that killer smoke. It'll sneak through your electric outlets,even dry-wall, and get you every-time.
Really, though, we knew it would come to this. Total control over your life. Choice? What choice?
If the landlord (property-owner) doesn't want smoking, there's not much to do about it, but move, as it is the landlord's choice.
But, I so despise these busy-body-do-gooder- moralists.
They lie, cheat and steal. They will not stop until this includes everything, even the house you own.
When are people going to wake up. They don't care about your health. They care about control,(and the mighty dollar) it is really that simple.
No, I am not diagnosing anyone.
It just flat out amazes me, as a scientist, that with the tremendous number of potential allergens that massive numbers of people come into contact with on a day-to-day basis, only one is acknowledged by the medical community on a widespread basis as the cause of everyone's ills.
I am not saying that in some cases the diagnosis is not correct. But in all?
Did you get new carpet? A new car? Paint recently? Have the house fumigated? Is there mold present? Use a Dry Cleaning service? Do recent landscaping? Have new shrubs planted? New furniture? Old furniture? Have a wood shop?--(some wood dusts are real nasty). Refinish hardwood floors? Install a laminate? Get a new house? Do you have one of those air freshener doohickeys plugged in somewhere? etc., etc., etc.
If whoever made the diagnosis did not ask these questions and more, they were not very thorough.
It has been my experience that cigarette smoke is assumed to be the whole problem.
Break down ass/u/me and you see where those assumptions generally lead.
Your mileage may vary.
What? What are you talking about!
I didn't diagnose anyone! I was just saying how the pollen and the dust flying from the tractors this spring has been bugging me.
I sure wish some of you people would read better and understand what you DID read! Geeze!
Actually, our local restaurants went no-smoke many years before it became law. Good 20+ years now. here customer base increased substantially.
The difference between theory and actuality?
Well, thank God I own my own home and have no little ones running around. They can just leave me alone.
I just feel sorry for renters when they just move in, sign a lease and then the landlord won't grandfather the new law he put in place to ban smoking.
It's like the RATS always saying it's Bush's fault. Well, if it isn't his fault, it must be the fault of some smoker somewhere. LOL
Where do you live? MILO? haha! You must live in one of those one horse towns off the Interstate.
In this case, though, the person says he/she had allergy testing done and cigarette smoke was positive. It also sounds like the person has since had years of experience and when he/she has a hard time the one constant is the presence of cigarette smoke.
I realize about the potential allergens. In fact, cigarette smoke isn't just one potential allergen. If I remember correctly there are many, many, many chemical compounds in a commercial cigarette.
"One of the reasons we're here today is to see how we can transition to smoke-free housing."
Just make it so. But, be aware that you may lose some people's business. It's the trade-off that is a judgement call.
Similarly, when restaurants and bars are allowed to choose, and some choose to be smoke-free, everyone wins. The smokers have the ability to find a place where they can be comfortable, and the non-smokers can also do likewise. When it is forced on everyone, a lot of businesses lose.
These gents need to understand that their decisions will have consequences, which may be positive or negative in effect. They need to make their own bed, and then lay in it.
In my POST # 8, I wrote a detailed account explaining that, altho once a smoker - who understands the addiction - that after finally finding out cig. smoke was what was causing my VERY REAL and debilitating bouts of chronic sinusitis which, at the shortest, lasted 2 weeks, with fevers 105 and penicillin, (doctor's bills) - and having to change jobs and curtail many social/political events pre-bans - You think I should accept these circumstances without complaint because I think it's "all about" me - and that your rights to smoke supersede my right not to be ill, etc.
You said you are "I am bothered by people that think their "rights" are more important than mine. I am constantly exposed to these people"?
On the other hand, my NOT smoking does not make anyone uncomfortable nor ill - your logic doesn't hold water
A person's RIGHTS does not include making someone else ill. Iee., your 'rights' end where my nose begins. Your 'rights' in this matter do not equate
$162 million in taxes. In theory someone's going to have to make that amount up. Bread, board and booze tax in restaurants?
Last place I worked, yes - all new carpets, formaldehyde glued cubbies, no windows allowed open, etc...Since I retired - 8 years ago - not ONE case of sinusitis.
and your point is?
If you rent to another smoker, it will be much less expensive to prepare, because the new tenant won't/shouldn't care about the smell.
The point was that many different chemicals can cause problems, some of which are in cigarette smoke, admittedly.
It is just that other, common sources are often ignored if someone is smoking within smelling distance.
As in the attribution of cancer to cigarette smoking: If you ever smoked, regardless of the other chemicals you were exposed to in your lifetime, and got cancer, guess what gets the blame?
Yep. The cigarettes.
Now how many non-smokers will get cancer from the other chemicals because it was blamed on the cigarettes? That is the disservice of which I speak, one which is being perpetrated on smokers and non-smokers alike.
not hardly - but neither do I live in gay-Portland
And the same with your Christmas Dinner as well. So, it's not just limited to cigarettes.
These gents need to understand that their decisions will have consequences, which may be positive or negative in effect. They need to make their own bed, and then lay in it.
Well said. Some say that smoking bans do not hurt, but they sure don't help. I know I haven't gone out to a Maine restaurant since they forced the smoking ban. And I was a good tipper. But it's my time and my dime, and I won't spend my money in an reform school atmosphere.
And it's not just the business. It's all the vendors that supply the business. They, too, suffer.
Well, when Big Tobacco fell to their knees in front of the Attorney Generals and passed the Tobacco Settlement, all these Partnerships for a Smoke Free Everything were born from the boards of health.
They scream they want smoke free everything, yet you know darn well they don't. How many people would lose their jobs? Nothing would make me happier to see them back out looking for a job.
The non-smokers do not realize the money that smokers contribute to the state economy! And if everyone stopped smoking, that money would have to be made up from someplace else.
As I have stated, I was a smoker - I realize how hard it is to beat the addiction. I was forced to 'duto' my health. (This allergy that brought on serious illness was not my supposing it was cigarette smoke - I had no clue it was. It was the medical tests that brought it out, loud and clear.)
But there is another side to the economy equation of smoking.
I served in an admin. capacity, many years ago - before any anti-smoking laws were a blip on the radar - with the Berkshire County Lung Association in Mass. - (then they were "TB") and in later years, as a director of the Maine State Lung Association. Another side of the money equation is the health costs that add a great deal to our medical/insurance costs.
AS an aside, I do find it comical that many of the folk who scream about the cost of gas, think nothing of paying five bucks for a cup of la-tee or $7.00 for a pack of cigarettes...
Why do you constantly refer to it as "our addiction?" You are really standing my fur on end here.
It's a habit. And one that most of us choose to have.
Not only that, but there are all kinds of addictions. Lots of people are addicted to running 10 miles every day. Others are addicted to working out in the gyms.
People are addicted to Coke or Pepsi. So, what's your point?
Poor you!
Poor you!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.