Smoke-free policy criticized

By MARA McGINNIS
Reporter Assistant Editor

Despite the university's smoke-free policy implemented in 1993, smoking on campus continues to pose a major health concern and no one seems to be taking any responsibility for it, faculty and staff members reported at the Faculty Senate Executive Committee's March 1 meeting.

According to Cindy Konovitz, assistant dean in the School of Pharmacy, so much smoke seeps into her office through building vents and the crack of her door that she sometimes can't even see her computer. She told senators that she had exhausted all other outlets for dealing with the problem and felt that the FSEC could help address the issue.

"I'm not against individual rights," said Konovitz. "I am concerned about getting the fumes of other people's cigarettes into my office so much so that I can't work. I have students in there and they clearly are breathing in the carcinogens coming in from second-hand smoke."

Corinne Jorgensen, assistant professor of information studies, noted similar problems. "I have asthma and I think it is highly inappropriate that when I am working in a university that claims to have a smoke-free policy, that I am subjected to cigarette smoke."

The policy states: "It is the responsibility of all members of the university community to observe this smoke-free policy and to remind others of their responsibility."

Jorgensen also objected to the fact that, based on the policy, it is up to her "to be the person who is responsible for enforcing the no-smoking rule."

Charles Smith, associate professor of music theory, called the university's smoke-free policy "hopelessly flawed" because it "actually propels the people who don't smoke to be the enforcers of the policy, which isn't protecting them at all."

Enforcement "normally comes after the building head, department chair or someone else already has made a request of the individuals and they refuse to comply or refuse to identify themselves," explained John Grela, director of Public Safety. At that point, he said, a call should be placed to Public Safety to request an officer to assist.

"One of the problems that we have when we have sent officers to a variety of locations is that as soon as they see the car pull up, everybody runs," explained Grela. "I can't station somebody there during normal business hours or through the evening.

"If we do catch someone, we forward their names to personnel (in the case of faculty or staff) or the ombudsman (in the case of students) so that they can discuss the matter and take the appropriate steps," added Grela. "Those individuals, believe it or not, have ended up with community service and normally it is picking up cigarette butts at a variety of locations."

"I'm very discouraged by what I'm hearing here," replied Jorgensen. "What I'm seeing is nobody willing to take any kind of responsibility. This (procedure) of identifying the individual, identifying the building supervisor, getting the building supervisor to call Public Safety. It is two hours before anyone shows up. It's insane."

Concerns arose about "butt stops," and many said they believed these cigarette-butt containers encourage smoking closer to the buildings. Michael Dupre, associate vice president for university facilities, explained that when the policy first was implemented, facilities was instructed to remove butt containers from entryways. But over time, he said, it was deemed that the butts on the ground were more obtrusive than the smokers standing there and facilities personnel were instructed to reinstall the butt stops upon request.

William Baumer, professor of philosophy, said that people who smoke will go to the nearest most comfortable place to do it. "We cannot expect Public Safety or (Occupational and Environmental Safety Services) to enforce this rule. There's too many people, too many places, too much to do. It is up to the department chairs and the administrative assistants and other department officers to assist in the enforcement."

Faculty ideas to address the problem included building "butt huts;" designating cars as the only place where faculty and staff could smoke; making students walk while smoking to reduce their congregating in entranceways; handing out tickets for smoking so offenders have to pay a fine, and establishing an annual campaign to promote stricter policy enforcement.

But the FSEC declined to be involved in addressing the problem, voting down a motion to establish an ad hoc committee on the issue.