You’ve only got five days left to legally smoke or vape in your West Hollywood apartment — and that includes the patio or balcony.
A new section of the WeHo municipal code goes into effect Jan. 1 that prohibits smoking in “existing units” in multi-family dwellings, which basically means most apartments.
The city defines “smoking” as cigarettes, cannabis and tobacco vapes, and other products made from tobacco and/or nicotine.
Those caught breaking the new rule are subject to a fine ranging from $100 to $500. Lucky for you, it won’t be grounds for eviction or imprisonment.
Why, you ask?
Here’s what the city says:
Numerous studies have found that tobacco smoke is a major contributor to indoor air pollution and that breathing secondhand smoke is a cause of disease in nonsmokers. At special risk are elderly people, individuals with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory function, such as asthmatics and those with obstructive airway disease. The U. S. Surgeon General has concluded that there is no risk- free level of exposure to secondhand smoke.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency has found secondhand smoke to be a risk to public health and has classified secondhand smoke as a group ” A” carcinogen, which is the most dangerous class of carcinogens. The California Air Resources Board has put secondhand smoke in the same category as the most toxic automotive and industrial air pollutants by categorizing it as a toxic air contaminant for which there is no safe level of exposure. Secondhand smoke can seep under doorways and through wall cracks.
The City Council finds and declares that the purpose of this Chapter is to protect the public health and welfare from secondhand smoke by prohibiting tobacco and cannabis smoking and vaping in enclosed and unenclosed common areas of multi -family dwellings and tobacco smoking in all new multi -family dwelling units, to gradually reduce secondhand smoke in multi -family housing, and to promote self -enforcement through educational outreach regarding smoking prohibitions. Regulating secondhand smoke is challenging and must balance various considerations and interests.
The City Council further finds that, in the interest of the public health and welfare, imposing restrictions on smoking or vaping cannabis in the privacy of one’ s residence is not warranted for tenants that consume cannabis for medicinal, therapeutic or recreational purposes. State law does not allow cannabis smoking in public places and prohibiting cannabis consumption in private units would not leave available safe alternatives.
At special risk are elderly people, individuals with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory function, such as asthmatics and those with obstructive airway disease.
Exactly why I move from pinko Weho. How dare the windbag council propose such a preposterous thing? Well, that’s what Weho is known for. Being weird! I’m not for smoking but get real. Unenforcible,.
Good. It is about time.
Smoking is not illegal. They are not ready for this, which is why the ordinance in a little lax. They were to offer assistance with cessation and devices to purify the air or capture smoke for the people who do smoke. The city is not ready for this. Smoke-Free Housing Ordinance On April 19, 2021 the City of West Hollywood City Council adopted a smokefree multifamily housing ordinance. Effective July 15, 2021, smoking tobacco in common areas and in new units or new tenancies of multi-family dwellings including on private balconies or patios of multi-family dwellings is prohibited. Effective January… Read more »
I called the city of West Hollywood to ask how this policy will be enforced. They told me they don’t a plan yet.
The City passes unenforceable policies and yet the ones that are enforceable they take little action get themselves tied up in paperwork and dialogue. A most inefficient and problematic form of municipal government. Either the left hand knows not what the right hand is doing or it is purposefully set up thus way. Circular arguments of word salad speak is the standard
. Pitiful
Lovely, Tuesday evening a family or group of two adults and two small children were sitting on the steps of the neighboring building adjacent to our driveway smoking away in clouds of cannabis. By the way, they were a lovely family of color. Nice.
By the way?
It was a burger joint on SMB.
Apropos of what?
The whole argument about “second-hand smoke” is disgustingly exaggerated. Read these articles from respected sources: from the National Cancer Institute: https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article/105/24/1844/2517805; the New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/1998/07/20/us/judge-voids-study-linking-cancer-to-secondhand-smoke.html; and even Penn & Teller’s “BS” show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKcibsUqN2A. Follow the money. This is all from the shrill exaggerations from people who are wholly unqualified to pass laws like this from any scientifically-informed basis. VOTE OUT THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL INCOMPETENTS!
Women, children and minorities affected disproportionately….
Really? How do you figure that? Please explain I must be a bit on the dumb side.
LOL. How sad.
Just follow the money. Our tobacco taxes fund the anti/smoking think tanks; who push prefab anti-smoker model ordinances through local grant recipients like West Hollywood project etc; who astroturf “community buy-in” and overpower local pushback; and here are.
All the concerns we raised before still apply: these policies are anti-working class, anti-renter, anti-poc and don’t align with contemporary principles of addiction medicine.
All the citizens of West Hollywood have to do is vote the members of the city council out of office and vote in people who will rescind this ordinance. I used to smoke cigarettes but quit years ago. What annoys me is the smell of tobacco. Pot? Not so much.
I find the last paragraph sooooo telling. Are our elected officials benefitting from BIG CANNABIS for their election campaigns?
“…in the interest of the public health and welfare, imposing restrictions on smoking or vaping cannabis in the privacy of one’ s residence is not warranted for tenants that consume cannabis for medicinal, therapeutic or recreational purposes.”
Yup, look no further than the home town sellout….ahem the home town developer that early on impressed the residents. What a world we live in.
Cannabis is not illegal. If people cannot smoke at home, do you want them having to drive somewhere or otherwise be on the road because they chose to indulge?
Think!
Whassamatta, you?
Muy Bueno