smoking: people are talking about it
Here’s the recap!
We got an e-mail yesterday from Dean Celestino Limas informing us of the Executive Council’s approval of a new smoking policy, intended to become effective for the 2010-2011 year. The plan calls for the construction of 8-10 gazebo structures around campus (including Law and Graduate). These structures would become the only places on campus which smoking would be allowed. Furthermore, the administration considers the possibility of a smoke-free campus by August 2011:
Dear Lewis & Clark Students,
Last year the Substance Use and Abuse Task Force was convened by then President Hochstettler to examine a number of substance related issues. One area of focus was tobacco use on campus by students, employees and visitors and input on this issue was solicited via large group meetings, individual community member visits, as well as an institution-wide survey this past spring. After analyzing the results from all three and discussing the options as a task force, the group presented a final report to the Executive Council in late May with several recommendations, including one related to the Institution’s smoking policy. This recommendation asked that Lewis & Clark transition from its current policy of no smokingwithin 25 feet of any building to establishing designated smoking areas across campus with all other areas being smoke-free beginning the next academic year. The recommendation also called for the subsequent year to have the campus transition to an entirely smoke-free environment.
The Executive Council strongly considered these recommendations and while there was much interest in the idea of a completely smoke-free environment, there was a significant desire to help our community transition through this process with continued evaluation from its members after some change had occurred. Therefore, I am pleased to announce that the Executive Council has approved the recommendation to move to eight designated smoking areas on campus beginning in August of 2010 with all other areas being smoke-free. In addition, the recommendation to move to an entirely smoke-free campus will be revisited as a campus discussion in the fall of 2010 and at that time, a recommendation will be made to either 1) remain a smoke-free environment with the exception of eight designated smoking areas, or 2) move to an entirely smoke-free campus beginning in August of 2011.
One question that remains is where exactly will the eight designated smoking areas be located throughout our three campuses and what will those areas include as amenities for smokers. That has not been determined as of this moment and in order to make this decision, we are asking Associate Dean of Students/Director of Wellness Services John Hancock and Associate Director for Health Promotion Melissa Osmond to seek input from the campus community. The Substance Use and Abuse Task Force will function as a working group to advise Ms. Osmond and Dr. Hancock through this process. An online survey will be distributed in early December to gather input as to where the designated smoking areas should be located. The survey will contain several options for possible locations and ask community members to offer their perspectives on which are the most advantageous. Once live, the survey will remain open until January 15 to ensure a robust sample. The campus community is also invited to discuss the matter in person at an open forum on December 3 at 12 p.m. in Thayer of Templeton Student Center.
Questions and comments regarding the transition should be directed to Melissa Osmond, Associate Director of Wellness. Thank you for your support with this transition and please be certain to complete the survey and/or attend a forum about the designated area placement. Have a good week and be well, everyone.Best,
Celestino
The survey referenced in the letter was conducted online late last February, delivered in the somewhat-hilariously-titled “Have An Opinion About Spoking On Campus?” e-mail.
Early this week, the PioLog learned of the Executive Council’s approval of the changes. An investigative article was posted to the PioLog website yesterday about an hour before the e-mail announcement (the article is also today’s dead-tree-form cover story).
Anyone who visited J.R. Howard yesterday saw the large student-made sign, which was hung well before the dean’s e-mail:
Finally, last night the College of Arts and Science’s representative student government, the ASLC Senate, passed a bill condemning the new policy, urging the administration to commit to upholding our current policy instead of creating a new policy (the bill is yet to be posted, but the meeting minutes are linked).
So that’s basically what has happened so far, I think.
[Administrator]
Cary
kennner
dshack
maishaparadox
angelalc
“We urge the Administration to commit to the enforcement of the current smoking policy before creating and enforcing a more stringent one.”
Okay, how do you do that? Currently, it falls to RAs to ask people to move further away from the building to smoke. It’s a daily occurrence for me, like it is for most undergrad students, to encounter second-hand smoke outside the doors of the academic buildings every time I go to or leave class. Sometimes, that’s six times a day. Students who smoke are usually good about moving when asked, but I feel like it’s not fair to me (I’m an RA) to be the one to ask students to move further away from the building every time I have class. Students who smoke KNOW that they are supposed to smoke 25 feet away from buildings, but when it’s raining (and this is Portland, it rains from September to April) that’s not very appealing. Students who smoke do not follow the policy very well, and it’s a difficult policy to enforce because the only people expected to enforce it are RAs, who really have more important issues to attend to than reminding people to move 25 feet away from the building every time they see the smoking policy being violated.
What would the Administration do to enforce the current policy? draw lines on the ground so people know how far 25 feet is? Hire people to specifically police smoking events that violate the current policy? Create more severe punishments for students who smoke within 25 feet of a building? I would definitely support the initiative to more effectively enforce the current policy before replacing it with a harsher policy, but only if that abstract statement is condensed into something more concrete and realistic. I’m skeptical that there really is a way for “the Administration to commit to the enforcement of the current smoking policy.”
Maisha,
I would like to see Campus Safety take a stance on the campus. I see them on an almost daily basis drive by smokers and never once have I seen them ask anyone to move. I think the gazebo idea is a good one, as long as it isn’t a forced area. There should be somewhere where smokers can smoke away from Oregon weather, but somewhere that doesn’t hinder the rest of their lives if they choose not to go there.
-Dith
@Dith Part of the difficulty with calling for full enforcement of the current smoking policy is that it is, ultimately, not coherently enforceable…
Currently the policy is well enforced around the Residence Halls, where the RAs and ADs have that responsibility.
Outside of those areas, it is hardly enforced at all — and, true, it could be much more thoroughly enforced in those areas.
Unless the College is willing to install markers 25′ from all campus buildings, we can not rationally expect people to know all the places they are *not* allowed to smoke. Moreover, the uncertainty resulting from this lack of clarity tends to prolong attempts to move smokers who are violating the policy away from the buildings.
On the other hand, the smoker’s corrals scheme is eminently enforceable, as it provides a clear and mutually understandable indication of where it is and is not chill to smoke — avoiding misunderstandings, and reducing a point of friction in people’s lives. …the plan also provides something that smokers at LC have been after for years: space sheltered from the elements where they can enjoy their smoke. In fact, versions of this plan have been suggested by smokers in past years, though they never (then) got a positive response from the College.
I can buy the request to wait for full enforcement at the transition point between corrals and smoke/tobacco free.
I can see grounds for disagreement, discussion, and change in terms of the number of corrals (i.e. should it be 8 for all the campuses, or some other number?).
I do not, however, see a way to reach full enforcement (short of some truly over the top and very un-LC antics) of the current system — the status quo policy is, sadly, inherently broken.
If there’s a problem with people seeking cover from the weather and smoking within 25′ of the academic buildings, why not install smoking benches with umbrellas outside academic buildings? Smoking benches seem to work quite well for keeping smokers away from residential buildings (I’d guess that they’re the primary reason that smoking near dorms is not ordinarily a problem, not enforcement of the policy). It seems like it’d make far more sense for the school to install a few smoking benches on the academic half of campus and have Campus Security actually enforce policy there; rather than enacting unnecessarily limiting smoking zones, or a reactionary smoking ban.
Good coverage as usual, Cary.