The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07 - Smoking on Piers Beaches & Other Public AreasCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH IN CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 21 August24,2004 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: General Services Department David E. Niederhaus, Director, 949 - 644 -3055 dniederhaus(a)city.newport- beach.ca.us City Attorney's Office Daniel Ohl, Deputy City Attorney, 949 - 644 -3131 dohl(d) city. newport- beach. ca. us SUBJECT: Smoking on Piers, Beaches and Other Public Areas ISSUE: • Should the City approve a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, wharfs, floats, beaches, and certain other public areas? RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Introduce Ordinance No. 2004 -_ (Attachment A), prohibiting smoking on all public piers, beaches, beach walkways, floats, wharfs, and Inspiration and Lookout Points, for first reading and pass to second reading on September 14, 2004. 2. Approve a budget amendment (Attachment K) in the amount of $19,000 to provide for the purchase, installation, and maintenance of smoking ash receptacles. BACKGROUND: Since the Fall of 2003, various environmental groups have advocated a no smoking ban for City piers and beaches. Due to the increased attention to this issue by other beach cities and the State legislature, the Council earlier directed a discussion of a smoking ban on public piers and beaches that took place at the May 25, 2004 Council study session. The City • Attorney's office prepared a comprehensive staff report for the study session that Smoking on Piers and Beaches August 24, 2004 Page 2 summarized the history and progress on smoking bans by various beach cities (Attachment B). After a lengthy discussion during which a number of new issues arose, the Council directed a review of a no smoking proposal for public piers and beaches by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation (PB &R) Commission. The results of the discussion and recommendations by the Commission were to be returned to the Council by staff within 120 days. The minutes of the Council study session are attached (Attachment C). Staff prepared a list of issues associated with smoking on piers and beaches and presented the attached staff report to the PB &R Commission on July 6, 2004 (Attachment D). After a lengthy discussion and numerous public comments, the Commission unanimously supported a no smoking ordinance for piers and certain beaches and requested additional information of staff and continued the item to their August meeting. Minutes of the Commission meeting are attached (Attachment E). On August 3, the PB &R Commission again confirmed their unanimous position on no smoking on piers and certain beaches and other public areas, but asked staff to research more attractive smoking debris receptacles and identify specific locations to place the receptacles before the matter was returned to Council. The staff report and minutes of the meeting are attached (Attachments F & G). The following issues have been considered by the PB &R Commission and the staff: • Should the City adopt a no smoking ordinance for public piers and /or beaches? Should a no smoking ban be extended to areas adjacent to public beaches such as the boardwalk, sidewalks, street ends, and public piers and floats in the bay? What role would enforcement play in the reduction of smoking on piers, beaches, and adjacent public areas? What role, if any, should a public education program play in a no smoking ban? Are current field maintenance activities and facilities sufficient to address litter related to smoking? Should smoking areas be designated to permit smokers access to piers and beaches? DISCUSSION: The no smoking issue has public health, litter, and public education components. While second hand smoke in an outdoor environment may not present a serious second hand . smoke hazard, it is still a threat and nuisance to those with health problems and Smoking on Piers and Beaches August 24, 2004 Page 3 . allergies. The litter component is easier to address and is linked with the level of enforcement. Public education may raise the awareness of the effects of smoking and decrease litter. City staff from the City Attorney's office and the Police and General Services Departments have studied the issues and comments that surfaced at the Council and PB &R meetings, particularly the health, enforcement, and litter issues. In addition, they have documented what other beach cities have done or plan to do with smoking bans on public beaches and piers. Finally, staff surveyed the piers and beachfront public areas to define where smoking, or the litter from smoking, occurs, in order to offer recommendations on specific steps to counter the effects of smoking on the general public and the City. Beach CitV SurveV: The City, with its numerous natural resources, particularly the beaches and the system of public piers, wharfs, and floats, attracts a large number of people. However, like any beach city, we must still address public behaviors or actions that degrade the natural atmosphere of public areas. Staff has provided a matrix of past, current, or intended actions of other California beach cities regarding a smoking ban (Attachment H). As one can see by reviewing the attachment, the trend of beach communities is toward banning smoking on public piers and /or beaches. In addition to a no smoking ordinance, various levels of enforcement, public education, and alternative maintenance activities associated with smoking litter are planned by various beach cities. Current Smoking Bans: Smoking currently is prohibited in the following areas in Newport Beach: a) in restaurants and bars (State Code) b) on or near playgrounds (State Code) c) at entranceways to public buildings (State Code) d) in City restrooms (City Code) e) in City buildings and vehicles (City policy) Enforcement: Enforcement is only one element of a multi - pronged approach to reduce smoking on the beaches. Should a no smoking ordinance be adopted, we anticipate it will be a period of time until there is an increased awareness and corresponding shift in public attitudes. During that phase, there will likely be an expectation from some members of the public to see a higher level of enforcement than is practical. A smoking ban ordinance is . difficult to enforce in a beach type of environment. As with littering in such areas, people are not likely to commit a violation when an enforcement officer is present. So Smoking on Piers and Beaches August 24, 2004 Page 4 until we see the anticipated shift in public attitudes, there may be increased frustration on the part of some members of the public when they do not see an immediate police response to their report of the offense. If the ban is adopted, police officers will only be able to enforce such an ordinance during the normal course of their routine patrol duties, just as they do now with other similar nuisance regulations. We would not envision them being dispatched to such a reported offense, but only advised of its occurrence so they could attempt to observe it while patrolling in the affected area. Obviously, when police officers do engage in enforcement activities related to this ordinance as part of their routine activities, those public safety resources are diverted from other, perhaps more important duties. As it is now, police calls for service and enforcement responsibilities directly impacting public safety will always have a priority over non - emergency enforcement activities such as the enforcement of a no smoking ordinance. Although staff and the PB &R Commission recommend adoption of the ordinance because of the valuable message it sends, staff also recommends that we not be directed to provide active enforcement of a no smoking ordinance. Public Education: Probably the most important aspect of a smoking ban is the value that it conveys in raising public awareness of the problems and hazards associated with smoking. Signage and passive enforcement to include warning smokers should be sufficient to reduce the effects of public smoking, without incurring City costs for active enforcement and a formal City public education program. Numerous public education venues is regarding smoking are promulgated by various regulatory agencies by various public media and in most cases are paid for by tobacco companies. In addition, as noted by the special interest groups, there is a groundswell of emphasis by public media on the negative effects of smoking. The City should not be tasked to undertake yet another public education mandate other than a no smoking ordinance with passive enforcement and an increased litter abatement program. Extent of Proposed Smokinq Ban: Originally, staff did not recommend a smoking ban that would apply to all beaches. Attachment I provides aerial views of public beaches and bay and ocean piers and floats where staff identified a smoking and litter problem, particularly at family oriented locations, listed below. Staffs original recommendation on where smoking should be prohibited was based on this list. Balboa and Newport Piers Public Floats and Piers in Harbor (10) Oceanfront Beaches including Corona del Mar and Little Corona Beaches Oceanfront Boardwalk North and South Bayfront Boardwalk (Balboa Island) East Bayfront Boardwalk (Little Balboa Island) 1gth Street Bay Beach Smoking on Piers and Beaches August 24, 2004 Page 5 Rhine Wharf North Star Beach Pirates Cove and China Cove Beaches The Wedge N Street Bay Beach 10`h Street Bay Beach Marina Park Beach Inspiration and Lookout Points At its meeting of August 3, the PB &R Commission recommended a smoking ban on all public piers, beaches, beach walkways, wharfs, floats, and Inspiration and Lookout Points. This recommendation adds the Balboa Island, Lido Isle and 15th Street beaches to the list above. Staff agrees with the Commission's recommendation, because applying the ban to all beaches will make the City's rules more clear to the public and easier to enforce. Designated Smoking Areas: In an effort to provide smokers an alternative to an ordinance violation, smoking areas could be designated, such as locations at the pier plaza areas and public benches along the various boardwalks. Designated smoking areas are not recommended on the public piers due to fire hazards. Staff experience has been that smokers tend to occupy certain benches at street ends along the boardwalk and the installation of smoking receptacles and signage at those locations might be beneficial. One should expect in most cases for adjacent property owners to protest designated smoking areas. Staff developed a list of designated smoking areas for PB &R Commission review, but the Commission was adamant on the denial of such a designation. The current staff recommendation does not include designated smoking areas, primarily due to the high probability of adjacent property owners' objections. Smoking Ash Receptacles: Both the PB &R Commission and staff also believe that the public will be more likely to comply with the smoking ban, and litter on the beaches will be minimized, if the City provides receptacles for cigarette or cigar butt disposal. The Commission viewed two examples of receptacles, and asked staff to identify more attractive alternatives. Photographs of ten varieties of receptacles are attached (Attachment J). Receptacles will be strategically located along the oceanfront and bayfront, and at Lookout and Inspiration Points. Diplomatically worded signage will encourage smoker cooperation with the ban. Costs: The costs of a smoking ban in public areas are based primarily on the level of enforcement of a ban and the level of litter abatement. If a high level of enforcement is Smoking on Piers and Beaches August 24, 2004 Page 6 directed by the Council, the personnel time taken to address smoking violations will also detract from the normal role of public safety staff. Neither police, fire, nor lifeguard personnel have sufficient resources to address a full time emphasis on banning smoking on piers and beaches. Earlier testimony by police staff noted a probable 85% public compliance rate if a no smoking ordinance was enacted with associated signage and only passive enforcement. Estimated costs for a smoking ban with passive enforcement would be as follows: a) Modification of pier and beach ordinance signs to include new smoking $ 2,000 ordinance (Decals on existing signage) b) Purchase and installation of smoking ash receptacles (25 locations at $ 4,500 $180 each) c) Annual cost to service receptacles and signage $12,500 Submitted by: David E. Niederhaus General Services Director Attachments: (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (J) (K) Total $19,000 Submitted by: I I Daniel Ohl Deputy City Attorney Ordinance No. 2004 - Staff Report (City Attorney's Office) of May 25, 2004 Minutes of Council Study Session of May 25, 2004 PB &R Agenda Item dated July 6, 2004 Minutes of PB &R Meeting of July 6, 2004 PB &R Agenda Item dated August 3, 2004 Minutes of PB &R Meeting of August 3, 2004 Matrix of Beach Communities Smoking Bans Aerial views of oceanfront, beaches, and piers Smoking Receptacle Models Proposed Budget Amendment 0 0 0 ORDINANCE NO. 2004- . AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING CHAPTER 11.08 OF TITLE 11 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE, PERTAINING TO CONDUCT ON BEACHES AND PIERS The City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, HEREBY ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1: Findings: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds and declares that: A. The beaches, municipal piers, public wharves, public floats and other public property are unique and precious resources of the residents of Newport Beach and its visitors. The City of Newport Beach is committed to keeping its beaches, municipal piers, public floats and public wharves clean, safe, healthy and pleasant for everyone. B. Numerous studies have shown that secondhand smoke is a significant public health hazard. The United States Environment Protection Agency (EPA) has classified secondhand smoke as a group A carcinogen, the most dangerous class of carcinogen. Smoking on beaches, piers and wharfs endangers children and others by exposing them to secondhand smoke. Children who observe smoking and tobacco use on public beaches, municipal piers, public floats and public wharves may model the behavior. C. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that secondhand smoke causes 3,000 lung cancer deaths per year among adult non - smokers in the United States. The EPA has concluded that secondhand smoke causes coronary heart disease in non - smokers. Secondhand smoke is especially hazardous to particular groups, including those with chronic health problems, the elderly and children. The CDC has found that secondhand smoke causes children to suffer from lower respiratory tract illness, such as bronchitis and pneumonia, exacerbates childhood asthma, and increases the risk of acute chronic middle ear infection in children. D. Discarding cigarettes, cigarette butts, tobacco and used matches onto the ground on City beaches, municipal piers, public floats, and public wharves is unsightly, unclean and particularly hazardous to small children who handle and sometimes ingest them. The City must collect tobacco litter on City beaches, municipal piers, public floats and wharves or it will be collected by storm water and washed directly into our ocean and bay waters in violation of the City's storm water pollution prevention permit, and, to the detriment of ocean life and all ocean users. • E. The City Council has determined that banning smoking and the improper Page 1 of 3 Attachment A disposal of tobacco products on City beaches, municipal piers, public floats and public wharves is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Newport Bea --h residents and visitors. D. The municipal code does not currently prohibit smoking on City beaches, municipal piers, public floats and public wharves. SECTION 2: Chapter 11.08 of Title 11 of Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 11.08.080 Smoking on City Beaches, Municipal Piers, Public Floats and Public Wharves A. "Smoke" or "Smoking' shall mean the carrying or holding of a lighted pipe, a lighted cigarette or lighted cigarette of any kind, or any other lighted smoking equipment and a lighting of a pipe cigar or cigarette of any kind and inhaling, emitting, or exhaling the smoke of a pipe cigar, or cigarette of any kind or any other smoking equipment. B. No person shall smoke within the boundaries of anv public oceanfront or • front beach, including public walkways and strands adjoining beach areas the municipal piers public floats, public wharves Inspiration Point or Lookout Pont except in certain outdoor locations and patio areas, if any, that the City Council specifically designates by a resolution as temporary or permanent smoking • areas. C. Disposal of Smoking Waste: No person shall dispose of any cigarette cigar or tobacco, or any part of a cigarette or cigar, including cigarette and cigar butts and ashes and used matches in any place where smoking is prohibited under this Chapter, except in any specifically designated smoking waste receptacle. D. A violation of this section is an infraction. Punishment under this section shall not preclude punishment pursuant to Health prescribing act of littering. Nothing in this section shall preclude any person from seeking any other remedies,penalties or procedures provided by law. SECTION 3,: That if any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one to more sections, sub- sections, sentences, clauses and phrases be declared unconstitutional. • Page 2 of 3 SECTION 4: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this • Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the day of , 2004, and adopted on the day of , 2004, by the following vote, to -wit: AYES, COUNCILMEMBE NOES,COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS • MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK u F: \users \cat \shared \0 rd i n a n c e \C i g a re t t e B u t t \081204. d oc Page 3 of 3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT • Study Session Agenda Item No. sS4 May 25, 2004 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Office of the City Attorney Daniel K. Ohl, Deputy City Attorney, (949) 644 -3131 dohl ancity.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Smoking on Beaches and Piers Staff seeks direction from City Council from the following alternatives: 1. Prepare an ordinance to prohibit smoking on City beaches and /or piers, with either passive or aggressive enforcement; or 2. Refer the issue to the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission for further study and public input; or • 3. Gather additional information from other jurisdictions and report back at a later date. INTRODUCTION Staff has been asked to present a report on the implications of prohibiting smoking on public beaches and /or piers. The report reviews possible benefits and implications of implementing a smoking ban, including a review of what other cities have experienced. The report also addresses input received from the Police Department and General Services Department on enforcement issues, signage and public education requirements, and estimated cost to implement such a ban. BACKGROUND At a November 2003 City Council meeting, Earth Resource members carried a plastic bag containing an estimated 10,000 discarded cigarette butts which they claimed had been collected during a cleanup at the Newport Pier. In April of 2004, high school students also appeared at Council Chambers with discarded cigarette butts they had collected. Various organizations, including Earth Resource Foundation, Stop Tobacco Abuse from Minors Pronto (STAMP), Orange County Tobacco Use Prevention Coalition have participated in efforts to ban smoking in other jurisdictions. According the Earth Resource • Foundation, more than 450,000 people in the United States die each year from tobacco related disease and more than 50,000 people in the United States die from second hand smoke. In addition, litter from cigarette butts creates debris on the beaches and is one of the commonly left litter items. Attachment B Smoking on Beaches May 25, 2004 Page 2 According to the Office of the Governor of California, as of April 4, 2003, 16.6% of adults • in Califomia smoke, while estimates from the Orange County Health Agency for smoking in Orange County are lower at 11 %. It is estimated that approximately 8 million visitors come to Newport's beaches and piers each year, and, estimating that 30% of the population are adults, an estimated, 264,000 people smoke each year on City beaches and piers (8 million, x 30 %, x 11 %). The number of cigarettes smoked on City beaches and piers creates a litter problem, in addition to the health and environmental problems created by smoking and second hand smoke. For example, on November 15, 2003, the Earth Resource Foundation claims they picked up 10,000 cigarette butts with a 165 people the day after the beach had been mechanically cleaned. This figure was significantly higher than what was recovered in Huntington Beach (4,000), San Clemente (6,000), Laguna Beach (3,000) or Dana Point (1,000). SIMILAR BANS ON BEACHES OR PIERS Solana Beach: On October 7, 2003 the Solana Beach City Council approved an ordinance to ban smoking on their beaches and in their parks. Since this is a relatively new ordinance, there has been insufficient time to evaluate the effectiveness of the ordinance or enforcement issues. Enforcement was anticipated to be minimal or non- existence, with a goal of obtaining compliance by a public education and signage. Seal Beach: Seal Beach has a ban on smoking on the municipal pier. The impetus for • the ordinance was to prevent fires on the pier. Enforcement is done by the police department with supplemental enforcement by lifeguards. According to the Marine Safety Chief, voluntary compliance has been high with signage on the piers stating that smoking is prohibited. Hanauma Bay, Hawaii: Hanauma Bay, a well known snorkel location on Oahu in Hawaii, has instituted a smoke free beach program to protect sea turtles from ingesting cigarette butts. San Clemente: San Clemente has recently banned smoking on beaches and piers. Santa Monica: Santa Monica has recently outlawed smoking at the beach. Los Angeles: The City of Los Angeles is considering a proposal to prohibit smoking at Venice, Cabrillo, Dockweiller and Will Rogers' beaches. Huntington Beach: Huntington Beach is considering a ban on smoking. Manhattan Beach: Manhattan Beach is considering smoke free beaches. Laguna Beach: Laguna Beach is considering a ban as well. Encinitas: Encinitas voted against banning smoking on the beach. • Smoking on Beaches May 25, 2004 Page 3 According to Narsis Kabiri of the County of Orange Tobacco Use Prevention Program, • the following cities in California have smoking bans in parks and recreational areas: Santa Monica (no smoking permitted in parks or beaches) Beverly Hills (no smoking permitted in parks) San Fernando (no smoking permitted in parks and recreation center) Pasadena (no smoking permitted in parks, including golf course) El Cajon (no smoking permitted in parks and recreational areas) La Puente (no smoking permitted in public places) Santa Cruz (beach, boardwalk is a non - smoking facility, considering banning on beaches) IMPLICATIONS OF BANNING SMOKING Positive: 1. May help promote a healthy, tobacco free lifestyle by public showing support and general opposition to smoking. 2. May help reduce litter from cigarette butts on the beach, creating a more aesthetically pleasing beach. Negative: • 1. May create enforcement expectations that staff, whether police, lifeguards or code enforcements, cannot manage, given their current responsibilities and staffing levels. The public may expect City staff personnel to actively enforce violations by warnings or citations, and such expectations may not be met. Either additional personnel will be needed or enforcement personnel will be diverted from other activities. The need for additional personnel may be mitigated, to some extent, by adopting a policy of limited enforcement. 2. May have unintended consequences by displacing smokers to other public areas such as sidewalks, street ends and parking lots. Doing so may create additional problems at locations closer to storm drain openings. MUNICIPAL AND STATE CODES REGARDING SMOKING AND LITTERING Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 11.08.050 provides that no person shall throw, place, bury or otherwise dispose of non - combustible waste matter on any beach except in trashcans. A fine of $100.00 is imposed for a first violation. Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 6.25.020 prohibits smoking in public restrooms. A fine of $100.00 is imposed for violation. Smoking within 25 feet of a playground or a tot lot sandbox is prohibited by Health & Safety Code 104495, with a fine of $250.00 for its violation. • As of January 1, 2004, State law prohibits smoking inside an occupied public building, and within 20 feet of a main exit, entrance or operable window of an occupied public building. Smoking on Beaches May 25, 2004 Page 4 RIGHT TO SMOKE A question of whether or not this ban would be an infringement of a person's "right to smoke' may be raised. However, smoking is not a protected right under the Federal or State Constitution. The authority to ban smoking is expressly given in California Assembly Bill 846 and Health and Safety Code Section 104495 which authorizes cities and counties to implement smoking bans more stringent than what the state has imposed. PUBLIC EDUCATION If a smokirg ban is implemented, an aggressive public education and'signage program will be necessary. Press Releases, notification to renters and property owners, and the Chamber of Commerce may all assist with this. The General Services Department has estimated the cost of additional signs on the beach at $15,000 to $25,000. It may also be necessary to install cigarette butt receptacles at beach entrances, parking lots, bay beaches and street ends. The estimated cost for such receptacles is unknown at present, but estimated to be in excess of $10,000.00. Such receptacles will also have to be cleaned periodically, most likely by hand, at additional costs. BEACH CLEANING • Currently, the beaches are cleaned mechanically five times a week. During a three • month period during the summer, mid June to the end of September, mechanical beach cleaning occurs seven days a week. Some areas are very difficult to clean mechanically due to their proximity to other items such as seawalls, sidewalks, and patios. In addition, the adjoining areas are subject to street sweeping seven days a week, and litter picking and hand sweeping seven days a week as well. Bay beaches and street ends are cleaned by hand. PARTNERSHIPS To assist with the implementation of a smoking ban, partnerships with local organizations such as the Surf rider Foundation, Earth Resource Foundation and /or other local groups may be considered. Prepared & Sub itte b' Daniel K. Uhl, Deputy City Attorney F P, users\ cat\ shared\ da \CCstaffReports \SmckingOn6each. dcc • RECEIVED is CITY OF NEWPORT GPEAQUES City Council Minutes Study Session May 25, 2004 - 4:00 p.m. INDEX ROLL CALL Present: Heffernan (arrived at 4:15 p.m.), Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols (arrived at 4:10 p.m.), Mavor Ridgeway Absent: Adams (excused) CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. — None. 2. BUDGET — CIP PRESENTATIONS. (100.2004) City Manager Bludau stated that the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is being reviewed at the current meeting to allow time prior to the adoption of the budget to make any changes requested by the City Council. Using a PowerPoint presentation, Public Works Director Badum displayed a bar graph showing the CIP expenditure history from 1986 through 2005. He noted • that there has been a slow, steady increase in expenditures over time with a couple of spikes for projects such as the Arches Interchange, Bonita Canyon Sports Park, MacArthur Boulevard widening and some of the oil spill projects in Balboa Village. He briefly outlined the CIP process and stated that the departments submitted requests totaling $20 million. Through a cooperative effort with the department directors, the proposed projects were narrowed down to a preliminary program totaling $16.7 million. Public Works Director Badum displayed a list detailing the master project schedule. He stated that there are various factors that need to be taken into consideration when determining what can legitimately be accomplished in a given fiscal year, and pointed out that the schedule helps to reduce the number of rebudgets. At the request of Mayor Ridgeway, Public Works Director Badum further explained that the bar graphs to the right of the list show the gtaff members that will be assigned to the projects. which is one of the factors taken into consideration when determining the master schedule and what can be accomplished. Public Works Director Badum displayed a list of some of the CIP projects that will rebudgeted in 2004 -05. City Manager Bludau noted that the underground utility projects are not a part of the CIP because they are not completed with City funds. Public Works Director Badum added that for informational purposes. the costs for engineering and design will be included in the budget . even though the Citv would be reimbursed once a district is formed. Council Member Rosansky asked if the money spent by the City for Volume 56 - Page 914 Attachment C City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 INDEX undergrounding on City property is included in the budget or the CIP. Public • Works Director Badum stated that it's not included in either because it's difficult to predict what the City's share will be and the City doesn't have control over what will be charged by the utility companies. Council Member Rosansky asked how the expenses are handled. Public Works Director Badum stated that a request for a budget amendment to appropriate the City's share is usually included with the action before the City Council at the meeting where the ballot count is conducted. The information is provided in the Notice of Intent which is typically provided 45 days prior to the public hearing. City Manager Bludau added that the budget amendment transfers the money from the unappropriated general fund. Mayor Ridgeway asked where the money is assigned when the transfer is done. Public Works Director Badum stated that separate funds are set up for each district. Council Member Webb stated that whether it's in the CIP or the budget depends upon what is being constructed. He further stated that the amount that the City puts forward is partially offset by the money that is received from the assessment district. Public Works Director Badum added that staff is trying to find a better way to present assessment districts in the budget and that it's difficult to guess which ones will move forward and which ones won't. Mayor Ridgeway stated that it's a large amount of money and should be identified. City Manager Bludau noted that not all assessment districts have City contributions. When there are City contributions, Mayor Ridgeway asked if they go into the CIP or the general fund. Administrative Services Director • Danner stated that it's both and explained that it's a general fund contribution to a capital project and is budgeted as a capital project. The budget amendment transfers the money from unappropriated general fund reserves into the fund established for that assessment district. Continuing with his presentation, Public Works Director Badum stated that with the CIP for 2004 -05, more money is being moved into the maintenance and operating budgets. He explained that several CIP projects are actually maintenance projects. He displayed a table showing the structure of the CIP and stated that the document is organized by fund. He then displayed a summary showing the projects. transferred from the CIP to various department operating budgets. City Manager Bludau noted that comparing the 2004 -05 CIP to previous CIP's isn't a pure comparison because of the shift of funds from the CIP to the general fund and operating budgets in 2004 -05. In response to Council Member Webb's question, Public Works Director Badum stated that the money being budgeted for street light conversions is for individual conversions. Public Works Director Badum displayed a summary showing the expenditures by fund. He noted that some of the expenditures will increase because of the addition of project rebudgets that can't be calculated until closer to the end of the current fiscal year. Public Works Director Badum provided a list and a brief description of some of the major projects being included in the 200.3 -05 CIP. • City %lanager Bludau suggested that the City Council take a critical look at the Volume 56 - Page 915 E City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 projects being proposed in the preliminary C1P, and consider if there are other priorities for the available funding. Public Works Director Badum continued listing some of the major projects in the various funds, including the general fund, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), gas tax, tide & submerged land, contributions, and transportation & circulation. Council Member Webb referred to Item No. 7, Dover Drive Sidewalk Design, of the regular meeting agenda and noted that it would be funded out of the transportation & circulation fund. He asked if it was possible that construction on the project could begin next year. Public Works Director Badum stated that it wasn't included in the budget because staff didn't know how much money would be required to get approval. He explained that the project is near a wetlands area, which could change the cost significantly, but that it could be included on the checklist, if desired. City Manager Bludau asked if the money would be available. Public Works Director Badum stated that there is some money in the transportation & circulation fund that is currently unappropriated. Public Works Director Badum continued listing some of the major projects in the building excise tax and Measure M funds. Council Member Webb asked if any commitment had been received from the Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA) on funding the bridge construction for the Jamboree Road Widening. Public Works Director Badum stated that the TCA staff understands that they have a commitment, but have also stated that they wouldn't have funding available until 2010. Council Member Webb stated that the TCA needs to be reminded that the bridge construction is supposed to be their number one add on project. Public Works Director Badum stated that they have been reminded, but that other potential resources for funding are also being looked at. City Manager Bludau asked what the anticipated cost of the project is expected to be. Public Works Director Badum stated that it's expected to be approximately $4 to $5 million. Council Member Webb recalled that it was approximately $5 to $6 million. City Engineer Patapoff confirmed that it is expected to cost over $5 million. Public Works Director Badum provided a list of the assessment districts currently under consideration and the estimated costs to the City. In the category of miscellaneous projects, he listed the Bonita Canyon Sports Park storage facilities. In response to Mayor Ridgeway's question, Public Works Director Badum stated that the storage facilities would be paid for from the interest earnings of the park's bond proceeds. Additionally, he listed Fire Station #7 as a miscellaneous project, and stated that the land acquisition process still needs to be resolved. Council Member Rosansky asked if the figure of $2,750,000 for the fire station was just for construction, or if it included the land acquisition. After a brief discussion, Public Works Director Badum stated that the figure is just for land acquisition and that a more accurate figure would be determined towards the end of the current fiscal rear. Public Works Director Badum continued listing major projects in the various Volume 56 - Page 916 1 Dk City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 funds, including the water enterprise and wastewater enterprise funds. Council Member Webb asked which pipelines were included in the pipeline master plan. City Engineer Patapoff stated that the two main transmission lines include those at Irvine Avenue, south of Bristol, and at ]r-nne Avenue and Dover Drive. Public Works Director Badum stated that other projects of note in the CIP include the Mariners Branch Library, Newport Coast Elementary Loop Road and Newport Coast Community Center. Council Member Webb asked if the shortage for the Mariners Library totaled $300,000 to $400,000. Public Works Director Badum responded in the affirmative and stated that its a result of the increase in the price of steel and other construction materials. Mayor Ridgeway asked when the project was expected to go to bid. Public Works Director Badum stated that it would be shortly and that construction should commence in August of 2004. The grand opening is expected to occur in July '2005. Council Member Webb asked how the tennis court project is being handled. Public Works Director Badum stated that the tennis court project is being combined with the library in order to obtain a better price. Council Member Heffernan asked how much the school district is contributing to the loop road project. Public Works Director Badum stated that the entire project is being financed from the interest earning proceeds from the bond sell. The school district will maintain and operate the road once it is in place. Mayor Ridgeway noted that before the final CIP budget is adopted, the City Council will have the opportunity to incorporate any additional requests. He reminded the council members to think about what capital projects are needed in their districts. City Manager Bludau stated that the council members are encouraged to notify him of any desired projects as soon as possible to allow staff the tzme to determine solid cost estimates. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he has already talked to staff about the design drawings for the West Bay streets. Council Member Bromberg stated that he has also been working with staff on some projects on Balboa Island, and agreed that it's important to present the ideas as early as possible to determine what will be feasible. 3. TOP STAFF PRIORITIES FOR 2003/04 STATUS REPORT. Using a PowerPoint presentation, City Manager Bludau stated that the first priority of staff in the 2003 -04 fiscal year was to certify the land use and the implementation plans, which are both a part of the Local Coastal Program (LCP), and present them to the Coastal Commission for initial review. He reported that the City Council would consider the land use plan at the regular meeting, Item No. 21. He stated that the remainder of the LCP would be built around the land use plan. and that final certification of the entire LCP is expected to occur by the end of the 2004 -05 fiscal year. Volume 56 - Page 917 11NO1 Dk (100 -2004) • E • City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 INDEX Mayor Ridgeway noted that a late fine of $1,000 per month has been paid by the City since June of 2003. City Manager Bludau stated that staffs second priority was the implementation of a code and water quality enforcement program. He stated that this was accomplished and he displayed some of the statistics from the division. He specifically noted that approximately 95% of the notices of violations and i 2% of the administrative citations that were issued in the current fiscal year were water quality related, and that education was a large part of the program. City Manager Bludau stated that the County looks at Newport Beach as a model in the area of water quality enforcement. Council Member Nichols asked how much water quality code enforcement is costing the City. City Manager Bludau stated that it's listed separately in the budget and totals approximately $521,000. He added that $1.5 million in new grants were awarded for water quality projects and studies in the 2003 -04 fiscal year. Staffs third priority was to complete the baseline data and analysis for the general plan update and the evaluation of the land use plan. He reported that the City is on track with this priority. The fourth staff priority was to temporarily reconfigure the Mariners Park playfield and complete design development for the new Mariners Library. He reported the progress that has been made, as also discussed during the CIP presentation, and stated that the park playfield final reconfiguration and the opening of the new library is • anticipated to take place in the fall of 2005. The fifth priority, start and complete design of the Santa Ana Heights fire station, has not happened. City Manager Bludau explained that the City was delayed by site selection and acquisition. City Manager Bludau stated that staffs sixth priority was to complete the annexation of West Santa Ana Heights/Country Club/Mesa Drive areas and create a redevelopment agency. He reported that this did not happen and that no application has been submitted. He listed the reasons for this and stated that staff intends to bring an annexation application to the City Council before July of 2004. City Manager Bludau stated that very little progress was made on staffs seventh priority, the City Hall replacement project and addressing the long term space needs. He explained that this was due to a conflict of interest issue and the uncertainty surrounding the City's long term ability to do some financial planning. He stated that master planning efforts will begin, however. Staffs eighth priority was to negotiate cable TV" franchise agreements with Cox and Adelphia. He reported that the first readings of the cable communications franchise and right -of -way ordinance took place at the City Council meeting on May 11, 2004. Once the franchise ordinance is in effect, the franchise agreement negotiations will take place. City Manager Bludau stated that the ninth priority of staff was to develop a standardized evaluation process assessing the need for a standardized form and training the organization in the new form and evaluation process. He reported that the new form has been developed and instructions are currently being prepared. • In response to Council Member Nichols' question, City Manager Bludau explained that the form is a written evaluation form for the annual performance Volume 56 - Page 918 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 INDEX evaluation of the City's employees. He added that it was determined that a • more ;standardized form was desired. City Manager Bludau stated that staffs tenth priority was to continue the emphasis on disaster preparedness focusing on the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) process, development and training. He reported that progress was limited due to the maternity leave and then resignation of the City's Emergency Services Coordinator. A recruitment for the position is currently underway. City Manager Bludau reported that a complete update of the City's Emergency Management Plan was completed and distributed. Progress was also made in working with the various committees that focus on the roles that the different departments would play in an emergency. This process is ongoing. Council Member Webb asked how the City Council is involved in the training process. City Manager Bludau stated that, to date, they have not been. Council Member Webb expressed his opinion that the City Council should be involved. City Manager Bludau stated that two years ago, a Study Session item dealt with the issue and that the City Council has been invited to observe the disaster preparedness exercises that have been conducted. Mayor Ridgeway added that when it was discussed at the Study Session, it was agreed that the safety personnel, fire and police, effectively take over in an emergency. Council Member Webb stated that it might be appropriate for the City Council to participate in some of the training programs. Fire Chief Riley stated that under • the current Emergency Management Plan, which was adopted by the City Council, the City Council's role is to continue doing what they already do, which includes promulgating rules and regulations, and making authoritarian decisions on major policy issues. The actual emergency operation activities are empowered to the City Manager and the support departments. Depending on the type of emergency, it is usually the Police Chief, Fire Chief, Public Works Director or General Services Director who would become the key person to manage the City resources in response to an emergency. Fire Chief Riley stated that regarding training, Citywide management training is conducted as well as specific training by function. He stated that the Department Operating Centers (DOC's) and their link to the EOC have been the focus. He suggested that staff could keep the City Council informed of training exercises and that the City Council could observe any of these that they desire. He further suggested that the C:.ty Council could plan to participate in the upcoming Citywide drill on September 9, 2004. Council Member Heffernan asked what the chain of command would be in an emergency. Fire Chief Riley stated that typically the Police Watch Commander or the Fire Battalion Chief would call for the activation of the EOC. All key EOC response personnel would be notified to respond and the situation would be assessed. If it is determined that a local emergency overwhelms the City's resources, the City Manager would declare a local emergency and the City Council would be asked to ratify that decision. He stated that this would be the most important role of the City Council because it enables the City to apply to the State for a State declaration of a local emergency, which is then passed on to the Federal government for a Federal declaration of a local emergency. Fire • Chief Riley explained that this process allows the City to obtain State and Volume 56 - Page 919 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 • Federal funding, and additional resources. The City Council would also be needed to make some major policy decisions. Council Member Heffernan asked who determines what situations are handled first. Fire Chief Riley stated that the City Manager would be the Director of Emergency Operations and would make those decisions. Council Member Bromberg asked if the City Council could change the procedures or if they were set by State mandate. Fire Chief Riley stated that the procedures are established in the City's Emergency Management Plan, which can be amended by the City Council. City Manager Bludau stated when discussing emergency response, it needs to be remembered that different people may be playing different roles. Fire Chief Riley agreed and added that the duties of the positions of the EOC are included in the supplies located at the EOC and that the first task of anyone responding to the EOC is to become familiar with their role. It may take two hours to get the entire EOC in place. Council Member Bromberg requested that a clarification be provided on what the City Council's role is and what decisions they would make in the event of an emergency. City Attorney Burnham stated that there is an ordinance that requires that the City Council adopt and periodically review the emergency operations plan. The City Council is not involved in the actual administration of the plan. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he observed an emergency drill earlier in the day and didn't know where the chain of command began. Fire Chief Riley stated that the drill was a part of the "Every Fifteen Minutes" education program, and • demonstrated the City's response to a two - vehicle collision involving kids and alcohol. He stated that the first arriving officer on the scene becomes the incident commander until relieved by someone of higher authority. In this situation, the activities of the police and fire departments are coordinated under a joint command due to the criminal nature of the event combined with the safety issues. Mayor Ridgeway complimented the City's efforts on disaster preparedness. Council Member Bromberg agreed that the City is very well off. He stated that at a future meeting, it needs to be determined what the City Council's role would be in a catastrophic event. Council Member Webb stated that it would be appropriate for the City Council to observe the drill in September and become more aware of its role. In response to Mayor Ridgeway's question, City Manager Bludau stated that some of the 2003 -04 staff priorities would probably be included in the 2004 -05 priorities and that he would present these to the City Council in August 2004. 4. SMOKING ON BEACHES AND PIERS. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that San Clemente recently instituted a ban on smoking, and is in the process of installing their signs and beginning enforcement. He stated that he has talked to several other jurisdictions and has learned that the ordinances have not been in effect long enough for them to determine how effective they will be. • :v'layor Ridgeway asked if information was gathered from the jurisdictions on Volume 56 - Page 920 INDEX (100 -2004) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 INDEX proposed enforcement. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that San Clemente • plans to do passive enforcement, install signs and conduct public education, and that violators would be informed of the code. If they fail or refuse to abide by the regulation, they would be cited. Mayor Ridgeway asked if the ordinances are subject to Coastal Commission review. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that he had not heard of such a requirement. City Attorney Burnham stated that he did not feel that the Coastal Commission would have any jurisdiction. Council Member Bromberg asked how Newport Beach compares to other jurisdictions in terms of the number of visitors to the beach. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that with the exception of a couple of cities. Newport Beach has the highest number of visitors. He reported that the annual visits to Newport Beach totals approximately 8 to 8 '/x million. Council Member Heffernan asked if there was an understanding as to why some of the jurisdictions banned smoking on either the beaches or the piers and others banned it on both. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that Seal Beach banned smoking on the piers only and that it may have been the result of experiencing a pier fire a number of years ago. The other jurisdictions didn't express a problem with the piers, but included them because they were a part of the beach. Council Member Heffernan noted that. Solana Beach has had the ban in effect the longest of any of the jurisdictions. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that he was unable to speak with anyone from that city. Council Nlember Heffernan asked if there were any court rulings on the matter. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that his research has not found that the State and Federal constitution guarantees the right to smoke. Council Member Heffernan asked if the findings • of the ordinances that have been adopted focused on the smoking aspect or the trash aspect. Deputy City Attorney Ohll stated that the initial focus has been on the litter aspect and then secondly, the health aspect. Mayor Ridgeway asked if any of the jurisdictions created areas for smoking. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that San Clemente created an exemption for a restaurant at the base of the pier. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that one of the City's three beach cleaners was modified with a fine screen that could pick up cigarette butts. He stated that the problem is that it also picks up natural rocks and seashells. He added that smokers also tend to congregate near benches and that. the butts in these locations have to be extracted manually. General Services Director Niederhaus displayed an example of the new sign that might be created if a ban is adopted. He noted that a decal can be applied to the existing signs, which will save considerable money. Council Member Rosanskv asked how much the signs would cot to change. General Services Director Niederhaus stated that it. would cost less than %5.000. He added that without enforcement, no headway will be made with the litter issue. Mayor Ridgeway asked if the other jurisdictions included sidewalks and parking areas adjacent to the beaches. Deputy Cit.y Attorney Ohl stated that in San Clemente, the ban does not apply to those areas and that they plan to install cigarette receptacles in the areas. In response to Mayor Ridgew'ay's question. • General Services Director Niederhaus stated that his employees do utilize Volume 56 - Page 921 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 INDEX is handheld screens in the smaller areas, but that the manpower is usually not available to perform the function. Mayor Ridgeway confirmed that the General Services Department feels that they are effective on the main beach. General Services Director Niederhaus added that it's difficult to get to the areas where the mechanized equipment can't be used. Stephanie Barger, Earth Resource Foundation, stated that it is fully documented that there is no constitutional right to smoke. She stated that she also has information about what the other jurisdictions are doing, and noted that Seal Beach banned smoking on the piers quite a few years ago due to the fire hazard. Legislation is currently underway to ban smoking on State beaches. Ms. Barger stated that her group is also working on making the violation result in an administrative citation instead of being considered a misdemeanor, so that the court system won't be clogged. She stated that tobacco is the number one drug and the number one cause of death in the country. She stated that the beaches are a play area for children. In closing, Ms. Barger stated that the smoke free beach issue should be looked at like the regulations for the environmentally sensitive areas and that the signs will be effective. She asked the City Council to put the environment and the health of children at the forefront. Council Member Bromberg asked Ms. Barger if she would have an expectation in the future that the City would expend resources to enforce the ban. Ms. Barger stated that unless people know they're going to get a ticket, they will ignore the law. She stated that smoking is obvious and that the issue has is received a lot of publicity, so people know it's coming. Any law should be enforced and she noted the success of enforcement at Hunama Bay. She additionally noted that if the City is willing to expend resources to write parking citations, they should also be willing to expend resources for this issue. Mayor Ridgeway noted that Hunama Bay is very small, whereas Newport Beach has 11 miles of beaches. City :Manager Bludau asked Ms. Barger if she was aware of how the enforcement issue is being addressed in the proposed legislation to ban smoking on State beaches. Ms. Barger stated that the legislation was just introduced earlier in the day, but that she would follow -up on the issue and report back to the City. Jim Walker, Director of Stop Tobacco Abuse from Minors Pronto (STAMP), reported that there's a $250 fine that can be placed on any infraction for smoking on beaches. He stated that this would not be necessary very often and that the ban is expected to be complied with. He explained that over 60% of smokers want to quit and are supportive of a ban. Mr. Walker stated that substantial compliance will reduce trash and the risk of structure fires, and that 95% of the people will comply with the law. He stated that he sees the smoke free beach phenomenon sweeping through the country, that its a health issue and that it's inappropriate to smoke around other people. Scott Moreland, Newport Harbor High School teacher, stated that several of the people in attendance at the current meeting are his students and that they've • been appalled by what they've found in the beach cleanups that they've conducted. He stated that one of his classes is a surfing class and the students Volume 56 - Page 922 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 NU1 D►1 have seen cigarette butts in the water. Additionally, there are pockets . throughout the beach where the City's beach cleaners can't reach. Mr. Moreland stated that people visit Newport Beach and expect to have pristine beaches. He stated that cigarettes are a problem and the matter needs to be addressed. Ellie Burbenbeck, President of the Earth Resources Foundation Club at Newport Harbor High School, noted that various other public facilities have also gone smoke free, such as Disneyland, Irvine Spectrum and Angel Stadium. She felt that it could also be done on the beaches in Newport Beach. She reported that in November of 2003, her club conducted a beach cleanup just a few days after the beach was cleaned by the City and that they picked up over 13,000 cigarette butts. She stated that the ban is necessary. Council Member Webb suggested the process to adopt an ordinance begin. He stated that his concern is for both the smoking and the trash. He stated that he doesn't want to be forced to breathe others smoke and feels that it also creates a trash problem. Council Member Rosanksy stated that he doesn't see the issue as just a litter problem. He asked how the Police Department enforces the other activities that are prohibited on the beach. Police Chief McDonell stated that they are enforced based on calls for service, observation and discretion. He stated that it's a matter of priorities, and that enforcing no smoking on the beach would not be a high priority. Council Member Rosansky confirmed with Police Chief McDonell that there is a police presence on the beach and that some enforcement would occur. Police Chief McDonell stated that it's important to understand that the . public often gets frustrated when a law is adopted and there isn't adequate enforcement. He stated that there's a difference with the ban on smoking in bars because there's an incentive for the bar owner to maintain compliance. Mayor Ridgeway asked if a smoking ban would create too high of an expectation. Polio Chief McDonell stated that it would create frustration on the part of those that want to see it more heavily enforced. Council Member Rosansky asked the Police Chief if he felt that people were gene:-ally law abiding. Police Chief McDonell stated that there is generally an 85% compliance rate with any law. Council Member Rosansky concluded that without enforcement, there is the potential then to reduce 85% of the smoking and the litter associated with it. Mayor Ridgeway noted the signs at the base of the Balboa Pier, which state that 3 -wheel and 4- wheel bicycles on prohibited on the boardwalk. He stated that the police do not enforce it. Police Chief McDonell stated that its a matter of priorities. City Manager Bludau asked if the Police Chief would expect his officers to respond to every call for service. Police Chief McDonell stated that he expects his officers to do their routine patrol and that responding to every report of cigarette smoking would not be a priority. Council Member Bromberg asked the Fire Chief his opinion on the lifeguards enforcing the ban. Fire Chief Riley stated that it would be highly contradictory to the directive given to the lifeguards, which is to keep their eyes on the water. He stated that they are public safety professionals and it would not be an • appropriate use of City resources. Volume 56 - Page 923 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2004 1 ►11 isCouncil Member Rosansky asked if the lifeguards currently enforce any of the activities that are prohibited on the beach. Fire Chief Riley responded in the negative and stated that the exception is the blackball ordinance, which is a no surfing ordinance in effect dining certain times of the year on certain areas of the beach. He stated that compliance is sought and if the lifeguard is not effective, the police are called for enforcement. Regarding smoking on the piers, Fire Chief Riley stated that it's not an issue in Newport Beach because the piers are concrete. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he doesn't like scofflaws and the expectations of enforcement. Council Member Nichols asked if there are any restrictions on the City enforcing a smoking ban on a State beach. Mayor Ridgeway responded in the negative. Council Member Nichols stated that there is no good evidence that secondary smoke causes deaths. It is even less relevant when done outdoors. Council Member Heffernan expressed his support of a ban for both the issues of smoking and trash. He stated that staff should be directed to draft an ordinance, and that enforcement shouldn't be an issue. It will be self policing and is a statement made by the City. • Mayor Ridgeway suggested that the matter be looked at by the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission, noting that there are several issues that still need to be addressed. Council Member Heffernan stated that he doesn't want to see the matter get bogged down and that the City Council should still have the final say. Council Member Bromberg stated that the idea of having a ban is a good idea for the both health and litter reasons. He stated that he also doesn't like scofflaws either and that his primary concern is enforcement. Council Member Bromberg noted Ms. Barger's expectation that the law would be enforced. Council Member Bromberg agreed that it would be a good idea to have the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission look at the matter further. He stated that there must also be an understanding that any ban would involve voluntary enforcement. City Manager Bludau noted that the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission doesn't meet again until Juh• 6, 2004, but that the City Council could set the timeframe for when the matter would be addressed and return to the Citv Council. Mayor Ridgeway suggested that the matter return to the City Council in ninety days. Council ;Member Heffernan noted that this would given the Park:, Beaches & Recreation Commission an opportunity to study how the newly- enacted bans are • working in the other cities. Volume 56 - Page 924 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes May 25, 2001 115-10-ON City ;Manager Bludau suggested that it could return to the City Council in 120 days. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. ADJOURNMENT - at 6:15 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on May 18, 2004. at 2:15 p.m on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. 0,�-t Alm. Recording Secretary Mayor OIM-n itic - 4rl" ��RT 13 City Clerk c7 UV4 Volume 56 - Page 925 • CI E`wPORT General_; Services; Department. J PB& R Commission Agenda July 6, 2001 TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation, Commission FROM: General Services Director SUBJECT: Smoking on Piers and Beaches Deco m m en u -bons Support a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, beaches. and certain other public areas. Designate certain areas for smokers on beaches and adjacent public areas. Equip dcsigated areas with smoking urns and support funding for the maintenance of the urns. • Issues • Should the City adopt a no smoking ordinance for public piers anchor beaches? Should a no smoking ban be extended to areas adjacent to public beaches such as the board'waik, sideCVaiks, street ends, and Public piers and Boats in the bay? 'What role would enforcement play in the reduction of smoking on piers, beaches. and adjacent public areas? What role, if any, should a public education program play in a no smoking ban? Are cu<Lcnt field maintenance activities and facilities sufficient to address litter related to smoking:' Should smoking areas be designated to perinit smokers access to piers and beaches? Background Since the fall of 2003. various environmental -groups have advocated a no smoking ban for City piers and beaches. Attachment D Due to the increased attention to this issue by other beach cities and the State legislature, the Council earlier directed a discussion of a smoking ban on public piers and beaches that took place at the Nlay 35. 3004 Council study session. The City Attorney's office prepared a comprehensive staff report that summarized the history and progress on smoking bans by various beach cities (Attachment A). After a lengthy discussion in which a number of new questions arose, the Council directed a review of a no smoking proposal for public piers and beaches by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation (PB &R) Commission. The results of the discussion and recommendations by the Commission are to be returned to the Council by staff within 120 days. The minutes of the Council study session are attached (Attachment B). Discussion City staff from the City Attorney's office and the Police and General Services Departments have studied the issues and comments that surfaced at the Council study session, particularly the health and litter issues. In addition, they have documented what other beach cities have or plan to do with <,mokin- bans on public beaches and piers. Finally, staff surveyed the piers and beachfront public areas to define where smoking, or the litter from smoking is located, in order to offer recommendations on specific steps to counter the effects of smoking on the general public and the City. Beach Citv Survev The City, with its numerous natural resources, particularly the beaches and the system of public piers and floats, attracts a large percentage of the general public. However, like any beach city, we must still address public behaviors or actions that degrade the natural atmosphere of public areas. Staff has provided a matrix of past. current, or intended actions of other California beach glues regarding a smokin` ban (attachment C1. As one can s °e by reviewing Attachment C, the trend of beach communities is toward banning smoking on public piers and /or beaches. In addition to a no smoking ordinance, various levels of enforcement, public education, and alternative maintenance activities associated with smoking litter are planned by beach cities. Potential No Smokinv Areas Staff has developed a map of the City which identifies the two ocean piers, the ocean beaches, the bay beaches. the public pier and float system in the harbor, as well as numerous public beaches on the islands and in the Upper Newport Bay (Attachment D). In addition, we have provided a listing of public piers and floats. bay beaches, ocean vista points, and bench locations. NVe have also identified the areas of the greatest litter associated with smoking, such as public piers and floats, bay beaches. and ocean or bayfront bench locations (Attachment E). is No Smoking Ordinance The ultimate z ;oal of a smoking ban ordinance is to reduce smoking- related litter on the beaches • by increasing= public awarcaess of the issue. The underlying theory is since people who smoke 1) - on the beach have no means of lawfully disposing of their cigarette waste, a smoking prohibition, • with an increased public awareness of the prohibition and its related issues, wilt reduce the frequency of cigarette- related litter. A key element for this assessment is the objective of diminishing the frequency of the violation. The violation, whether it is a smoking or littering ban, will not be eliminated but will occur less often. As with litter control models, the successful smoking ban ordinance should combine public education, enforcement, providing appropriate d'_SpOSaI receptacles, and m•aint ?n :inC ?. Through SIIC }i a collective effO rt we Should erpv_rip, Ce over time, a reduction in the amount of cigarette - related litter. After a survey of public areas and hearing testimony of the public at the Council study session, staff is favoring a no smoking ordinance for the public piers and floats (ocean and bay) and certain portions of public beaches or adjacent public areas. At this time, we are not advocating a smoking ban at all public outdoor areas. Current Smoking Bans Smoking is prohibited: a) in restaurants and bars (State code) b) on or near playgrounds (State code) c) at entranceways to public buildings (State code) d) in City restrooms (City code) e) in City buildings and vehicles (City policy) • Interest Croups As noted in the Deputy City Attorney's study session report (Attachment A), a number of organizations adamantly advocate a smoking ban on public piers and beaches. IN11ile it is inconclusive and probably unlikely that second hand smoke on piers or beaches results in tobacco *elated disease, snnnkino in public places is still found to be objectionable by the majority of the general public. The Commission can expect a significant amount of public comments from special interest groups regarding a smoking ban, including their current and future roles in public education and litter removal. Litter The special interest groups who wish to see the City approve a smoking ban on the piers and beaches also have focused on the amount of litter created by indiscriminate littering by smokers. Beach maintenance staff focused on the cigarette butt titter issue late last year by modifying a beach cleaner with a special filter screen capable of retrieving cigarette butts from ocean beach sand. While the cleaner was highly effective in removing the cigarette butts from beach sand, the downside was that much of natural beach materials (shells and gravel) that facilitate traction for City beach vehicles was also removed. Some of the special interest groups identify public smoking as the main source of cigarette or • cigar butt line- on piers and beaches. Staff opines from considerable experience that smok::_ butt litter on the beach emanates primarily from the flotsam that drifts southward from the upper Santa Ana River watershed to Newport beaches. In addition, much of the bayfront butt litter is -3- also linked to the upper San Diego Creek watershed, and in some cases the boating public. if staffs opinion is true, then a smoking ban on piers and beaches may only have a minimal effect on the amount of litter caused by beach visitors. • Litter Programs rn addrditinn t�� the (`ity fill! times pier and b_`aeh maintenaricc pro, mC, ih ?Cr' are the fpllpwlno additional City litter programs: a) Adopt -A -Beach Program — Authorized by a recently revised Council policy, this program is now managed for the City by a no smoking advocate, Stephanie Barger of Earth Resources. After a recent kick -off event, over 50 citizens have Volunteered to clean public beaches with City provided kits. b) Summer Beach Litter Pro ram (Grant) — For the third consecutive summer, the City has been the recipient of over 522,000 from the State to fund a beach litter program assoc:ated with recycling interests. The funds will be used to hire laborers to nick up litter on the beach and adjacent areas. c) Youth Employment Program (YEP) — An annual summer program (June to later August) wherein three to seven students am hired to collect litter on beaches and piers. Limits of Proposed Smoking Ban Attachment I) provides an aerial view of public beaches and bay and ocean piers and floats. • Attachment E provides a listing of special public areas associated with ocean or bay fronts. Staff has developed the following list of areas using the two attached resources where staff is recommending that smoking should be prohibited: Balboa and Newport Piers Public Floats and Piers in Harbor (10) Oceanfront Beaches including Corona del iivtar and Little Corona Beaches Oceanfront Boardwalk North and South Bayfront (Balboa Island) East Bayfront (Little Balboa island) 14`h Bay Beach Rhine Wharf North Star Beach Pirates Cove and China Cove Beaches The Wedge N Street Bay Beach IO'h St,:cet Bay Beach Manna Park Beach Inspiration and Lookout Points Designated Sinokin2 Areas In an effort to provide smokers an alternative to an ordinance violation, smoking areas should be • desigmated, such as locations at the pier plaza areas and public benches alone the various -4- boardwalks. Designated smoking areas are not recommended on the public piers due to fire hazards. Staff experience has been that smokers tend to occupy certain benches at street ends • along the boardwalk and the installation of smoking urns and signage at those locations would be beneficial. One should expect in some cases for adjacent property owners to protest designated smokin.- areas. Staff could develop a list of designated smok=ing areas for Council approval. Photographs of two varieties of urns for cigarette or cigar butt disposal are attached (Attachment F) — Examples of the rims µill he displayed at the (:pn>_miSgipn meeting. 1. Enforcement Enforcement is only one element of a multi- pronged approach to reduce litter on the beaches. Should a no smoking ordinance be adopted, we anticipate it will be a period of time until there is an increased awareness and corresponding shift in public attitudes. During that phase, there will likely be an expectation from some members of the public to see a higher level of compliance than what is practical. A smoking ban ordinance is difficult to enforce in a beach type of environment. As with intering in such areas, people are not likely to coiiunn a violation whcu an enforcement officer is present. So until we see the anticipated shift in public attitudes, there may be increased frustration on the part of some of those same members of the public when they do not sce an immediate police response to their report of the offense. If the ban is adopted, police officers will only he able to enforce such an ordinance during the normal course of their routine patrol duties, just as they do now with other similar nuisance regulations. We would not envision them to be dispatched to such a reported offense, but only advisee] of its occurrence so they could attempt to observe it while patrolling in the affected area. Obviously, when police officers do engage in enforcement activities related to this ordinance as part of their routine . activities, those public safety resources are diverted from other, perhaps more important duties. As it is now, police calls for service and enforcement responsibilities directly impacting public safety will always have a priority over non - emergency enforcement activities such as the enforcement of a no smoking ordinance. Public Education Probably the most important aspect of a no smoking ban is the value that it conveys in raisin; public awareness of the problems and hazards associated with smoking. Signage, passive enforcement, and designated smoking areas may do more to negate the effects of public smoking than active enforcement and a formal City public education program and at considerable less cost. Numerous public education venues regarding smoking are promulgated by various regulatory agencies by various public media and in most cases are paid for by tobacco companies. In addition, as noted by the special interest groups, there is a groundswell of public h rr r king ,- Ci i l.i . i,,, a to emphasis by pubic n-�c�ia on iiic ric �ative Buel`fS Oi SiiiOniu�. The �ii�' should i10, v� tasked undertake yet another regulatory or public education mandate other than a no smoking ordinance With passive enforcement and an increased litter abatement program. Costs The costs of a smoking ban in public areas is based primarily on the level of enforcement of a ban and the level of litter abatement. If a high level of enforcement is directed by the Council, • the olcri :me costs to ad JresS smok: —," l;of - qt :oGS "l I7 .2,15o detract t'.`•i;: thie nonnal role 0: pub':. - safety. Neither police, tire, nor kite uard personnel have sufficient resources to address a full - 5 - time emphasis on banning smoking on piers and beaches. Earlier testimony by police staff noted a probable 85 °iu public compliance rate if a no smoking ordinance was enacted. Estimated auxiliary costs for a smoking ban with passive enforcement would be as follows a) Modification of pier and beach ordinance signs to include new smoking S 5,000 ordinance b) Purchase and installation of smokers' urns for butt disposal S 4,500 (S90 x 50 locations) c) Annual cost to service smokers' urns and signage 512.500 d) Signage for designated smoker areas S 1,000 Total 523,000 curnrnar In this report, staff has provided further background information related to a smoking ban and as it might a J1 ' to the City public piers and beach areas. The oaf of any no simol no ordinance P:. 5 Y P P" g � should be to raise public awareness of health and litter issues. Our recommendation is that the Commission support a no smoking ordinance that would apply to certain public areas (as noted above) to the Council as well as passive enforcement of the ordinance, designated smoking areas with signage and urns, and future consideration of an enhanced City litter abatement program that focuses as discarded cigarette or cigar butts if the various current litter profgams do not reduce the problem. Very respectfully, David E. Niederhaus Attachments: (A) City Council Study Session Agenda Item SS -4 dated May 25, 2004 (B) City Council Study Session Minutes dated May 25, 2004 (C) Matrix of Beach Cities No Smoking Intentions /Actions (June 2004) (D) City Map Depicting Public Piers/Beaches/Ete. (June 2004) (E) Listing of City Piers and Floats. Benches, and Bay Beaches (June 2004) (F) Photographs of Smoker's Urns Q • • Pi lJ • m m Q Q ID in (D _Z (7 L � C N Q (D N N � m log O z cn Aitachment C ^. r r r T m G: U. G^ C oN oN CD > > > cQ n > m n S 6 D D 3 CC) w r- > > w Q N m a W 3 CD CD m o O O (D O S N t3 (D (D (D m S N CD O n S CD N O _n N �G Q Z x x x d cu d C O C Q a to x m x x x x x m : x O x Ep w cD x N a � m v W m o' (D FD p co m (D (D Y, C w m v m F j � N v F m log O z cn Aitachment C LISTING OF CITY PIERS AND FLOATS, BENCHES, AND BAY BEACHES (June 2004) PIERS • Newport Pier — (2 donated benches, 40 wooden benches built in place) Balboa Pier -- (8 donated benches, 15 wooden benches built in place) PUBLIC FLOATS Newport Peninsula NI Street & E. Balboa Blvd. (2 wooden benches built in place.) lr_ _t t _ St O A_._ vva�iuu�i�u St. oLEd�cwdicrrwc. Fernando St. & Edgewater Ave. (2 wooden benches built) in place 15`h S t. & Bav Ave. 19th St. & Bay Ave Balboa Island Sapphire & N. Bayfront Emerald & N. Bayfront Opal &, S. Bayfront • Coral & S. Bayfront Park P,ve. & E. Bayfront *All public floats on Balboa Island have two wooden benches built in place at top of gangway BENCH LOCATIONS OCEANFRONT Grant Street 36`h Street 34`h Street 32 "{ Street 30`h Street 28`h Street 26`h Street 15`h Street 8`h Street 7`h Street 6`h Street C Street West Jett Park BENCH LOCATIONS BAYFRONT BEACHES K Street J Street H Street Palm Street Adams Street CFypress Street Buena Vista Blvd 7`, Street 8` Street 10`' Street 151h Street Newport Island Park Channel Park A!1 bz%- `cni s;re,:t ends on Balboa Isl ~d ha -ve benches • Attachment E ......... .... VA PHOTO OF ALTERNATIVE DEBRIS URN 2613047 Smokers' Cease -Fire $65.00 ea + 39/5'" h x 17/5" dia, 151hs. shipp;n; Attachment F • F_ IL • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Regular Meeting • July 6, 2004 - 7pm Convened 7:09pm ROLL CALL Present: Debra Allen Tim Brown Bill Garrett Greg Ruzicka Val Skoro Tom Tobin Roy Englebrecht (arrived at 7:17pm) Staff: Marie Knight, Recreation & Senior Services Director David Niederhaus, General Services Director Teri Craig, Administrative Assistant Chair Allen thanked the commission for electing her as chair twice and thanked Dave Niederhaus and his staff, especially Marcy Lomeli and John Conway, noting the battle with the tree issues and some very long hearings and a lot of hard work especially on tree issues. The Council adopted the new G•1 Policy and noted that it never would have been done without Dave and his staff. She also thanked Marie and her staff, Andrea and Teri, noting that •staff had held her hand through the whole two year process and thanked Teri stating people just do not realize how much work staff does behind the scenes, which is how the Commission is able to sound knowledgeable as so much of it is done for the Commission within the staff reports, and phone calls that are answered. She went on to say how good Marie has made her look with all speeches that she has written. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Chair Allen opened the nominations for Chair for FY 2004/05. Motion by Commissioner Ruzicka to elect Commissioner Tobin as Chair. Hearing no other nominations, Chair Allen closed the nominations for Chair Ayes: Allen, Brown, Garrett, Ruzicka, Skoro Absent Englebrecht Abstain: Tobin Chair Tobin opened the nominations for Vice Chair for FY 2004/05. Motion by Chair Tobin to elect Commissioner Ruzicka as Vice Chair. Hearing no other nominations, Chair Tobin closed the nominations for Vice Chair • Ayes: Allen, Brown, Garrett, Ruzicka, Skoro Absent Englebrecht Abstain: Ruzicka Allachmem G Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting July 6, 200.4 Page 2 COMMISSIONER. ENGLEBRECHT ARRIVED AT 7:13PM Commissioner Ruzicka thanked Commissioner Allen for her leadership and hard work over the last two years. Chair Tobin stated that Commissioner Allen would be a hard act to follow. • DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS Director Knight stated this last week was the Annual 4`h of July Bicycle Parade and Picnic Celebration at Mariners Park and thanked past Chair Allen for coming out and riding in the parade and representing the Commission. She stated that there was a greater turn out then last year and that the event is done in conjunction with the.Mariners Foundation, which staff works closely with. She went on to say that staff had survived the first week of summer programs with day camps up and running, and both pools open this summer for swim programs. At the end of the first full week of summer more revenue has been taken in then all of last year for the summer season. She stated that there are two coordinator positions open; one at OASIS and one for the contract classes and aquatics program; Jan Koriath has moved to Seattle and Chris Peart is moving to Denver. She stated that the position at OASIS has been filled and the new Coordinator wilt begin next week; however, after interviewing for the Recreation Classes /Aquatics position it was decided that staff would wait until the end of summer and re- interview, hoping to get a better pool of applicants. Director Knight went on to say that the Commission may see a familiar face out at the pools as Jim Skahan has been • hired as a temporary coordinator and will help in the supervision of the pool staff and as liaison with field staff. Commissioner Englebrecht asked if this was the first summer for the Park Patrol. Director KnigF.t stated yes, that they had started in October of last year and that staff will be bringing a report at the September meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS Dona Colombero read the following on the fire rings on the peninsula: That after the high tide, full moon, wind and large sea flooding near the Balboa pier lost month, residents were made painfully aware of the dangerous condition being created by the present treatment of the fire rings here. That in front of my house, where the water comes up the sidewalk there is still an area of grey sand marking the exact course of the flood. Watering down and shoveling some of the debris from the rings into a waiting truck, then eventually raking the rest (including charcoal ashes and partially burned pallets) into the existing sand to be sifted and distributed up and down the ocean front is creating an escalating danger to all. Withthin the fire rings there are many things that are not meant to be there such as nails, coat hangers, broken glass and possible toxic materials. Every day the sports leagues, the Jr. Lifeguards • and city sponsored programs and basically all visitors have no knowledge of these hazards and they expect to be able to use all the facilities without danger. Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting July 6, 2004 Page 3 • She asked the Commission to undertake a study of the condition, perhaps enlisting experts in the debris field and make a report with alternative plans for the removal of the fire pits. Commissioner Ruzicka asked staff if there was some kind of state law that mandates that we have those fire rings and that it is virtually out of our hands. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Item pulled by Commissioner Allen 2. Item pulled by staff 3. Item pulled by Commissioner Skoro 4. Bench Donation. Accept donation from Mary Kilfoy of one bench to be installed at the Newport Pier 1. Minutes of the June 1, 2004 regular meeting. Commissioner Allen stated that she had pulled this item as it would need to be recorded that she would be abstaining from voting on the minutes as she had been absent. Motion by Chair Tobin to approve the June 1, 2004 minutes. Motion carried as follows: Ayes: Brown, Englebrecht Garrett, Ruzicka, Skoro, Tobin Abstain: Alien 3. Recreation i3 Senior Services Activity P.eport. Commissioner Skoro asked what the • schedule was for the park patrol. Director Knight stated that the general schedule is anywhere between 4 -9pm during the week, Fridays, 4 -11 pm and weekends vary but that there is usually one on duty during the morning and the other starting later in the afternoon. She stated that these hours are not posted but we are generally covered during the evening during the weekdays and during the day to dusk on the weekends. Commissioner Skoro stated that he had heard from several people on Ocean Boulevard as it is a very hard area to hand and that people it needs attention. Director Knight stated that generally what staff is finding on Ocean Boulevard is that activity increases around sunset and into the evening and that it is part of their patrols regular beat and that they have noticed an increase in activity and they are out there on a regular basis. Commissioner Ruzicka thanked staff for the revised park patrol report. Director Knight reminded the Commission that this report is from May and would not reflect the beginning of the summer as we are always two months behind in reporting. 2. Park Et Tree Division Activity Report. Director Niederhaus stated that the City will be receiving a half million dollars from the Coastal Conservancy for the design of the 55 acre Bie • Canyon Nature Park which is the same group that helped with the native plantings at Castaways and with help staff will be able to build that park with further grant money. He went on to say that the May Beach Maintenance report had been included to the Commission's review and that it was the most current copy. Director Niederhaus noted that some minor Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting July 6, 2004 Page 4 vandalism had been done at the Bonita Canyon Sports Park during the 4`' of July weekend with • the exception of minor graffiti in the restrooms. Commissioner Garrett thanked staff for the inclusion of the Beach Maintenance report. Discussion ensued regarding the graffiti and the possibility of cameras within the parks. Motion by Chair Tobin to receive and approve Items 2 through 4 of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by acclamation. CONTINUING BUSINESS 5. Smoking on Piers and Beaches - Director Niederhaus introduced Deputy City Attorney Dan Ohl and two representatives from the Police Department who are available to comment on the enforcement issue and Mr. Ohl is here for the legal side. He stated that since the report has been prepared, no correspondence has been received and noted that this was a little unusual for an item as controversial as this, however, staff have been in contact with the individuals that spoke at the Council meeting and invited them and shared the staff report with them, and there have been some inquiries from the media. He reviewed the important issues of the staff report with the Commission and noted that the report is specifically for prohibiting smoking on public piers and beaches as this is what the Council directed the Commission and staff to look at. He stated that staff is making two • recommendations: • To support a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, beaches and certain other public areas. • Designate certain areas for smokers on beaches and adjacent public areas. Equip designated areas with smoking urns and support funding for the maintenance of the urns. He stated that a question had come up on whether these recommendations were individual or collective and stated that staff is recommending both. He stated that the first is a no smoking ordinance and the other is to designate certain areas in a fairness issue for smokers as well as to have a place for them to legally abandon their smoking materials staff felt is was necessary to identify places they frequent and then provide smoking urns and some maintenance of that area. He reviewed the issues of the staff report with the commission. He stated that if there were other issues that the Commission wanted to add that staff would be happy to do that. Director Niederhaus stated that this whole issue began in the fall of 2003 with litter clean ups and when different groups began to notice the high number of cigarette butts on the beach and the issue was brought to Council on May 25, 2004 at which time they studied the report by Mr. Ohl and decided that this item should be forwarded to the Commission for study and staff is required to return to Council in 120 days. He stated that one of the first things that was done was to update the beach survey and looked at like cities and others that have initiated some kind of no smoking ordinance. Director Niederhaus stated that staff then • looked at potential no smoking areas, and what area that smoking should be prohibited, and of course the two main ocean piers came to mind and staff then looked at the pier and beach amenities such as benches where staff has noticed that there is always smoking debris left there. He went on to say that a no smoking ordinance has not been developed Parks, Beaches 8 Recreation Commission Regular Meeting July 6, 2004 Page 5 • but staff has copies from other cities and a copy of the Assembly Bill that would prohibit smoking on state beaches. He stated that this is something that needs to be done and that the prohibited areas should be narrowed down. He stated that in areas where smoking is already prohibited, such as restaurants and bars by state code, and are on or near playgrounds. Also you will notice that there are signs at the entrance that state that you must stay 20 feet away from the opening when smoking. He stated in City vehicles and buildings. He stated that there are three interest groups here tonight. He went on to say that staff also focused on the auxiliary issue of litter. Director Niederhaus stated that adjacent homeowners of any designated smoking area might have problems because of the smoke or people congregating there. He stated that they are treading very softly on that issue, and went on to say that the big issue is enforcement and stated that he would like to give credit to CPT Newman that wrote the paragraph on enforcement and emphasize that a smoking ban ordinance is difficult to enforce in a beach type environment and if the ban is adopted, police officers will only cite during the normal course of their routine patrol just as they do now with other nuisance issues. Chair Allen stated that she had some concerns that the businesses around the piers had not been notified of the issue and that it would be helpful to get feedback from them before a recommendation is sent back to Council. • Commissioner Brown stated that he fully supports a no smoking ordinance but that it would be helpful to hear from the residents that live adjacent to the designated areas listed in the staff report. He asked if it was essential to designate smoking areas and if so wouldn't we want input from those residents/ businesses that live close to those areas and if the Commission recommended approval would those designated areas listed in the report be the ones that would be forwarded to City Council. Director Niederhaus stated that areas have not been specifically designated and as you can see there are 90 of them listed. Staff has been looking at the 12 -14 bench areas along the boardwalk and staff has not contacted the Balboa BID or West Newport, Central Balboa Homeowners' Associations or the BPPA, and thought that this was just a preliminary discussion as staff was unclear if the Commission would refer the issue to the Beach Committee for further study and staff did not want to be so specific in the first go round, but would like to be reasonable to smokers as well. Chair Tobin asked if there were options of the design of the urns other than what has been provided. Commissioner Skoro asked if there was feedback from other cities relative to comparing absolute enforcement of the ban into passive enforcement, and has it actually deterred smoking? • Director Niederhaus stated that staff has talked to San Clemente but would refer this to Mr. Ohl. Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting July 6, 2004 Page 6 Commissioner Skoro asked Director Niederhaus of the Assembly Bill status and what • beaches would it effect if passed. Director Niederhaus stated that the Assembly Bill had been distributed and would get the timeline in a few minutes Commissioner Skoro asked if there was any feedback on the legal issue of the no smoking ban. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that research has been done in conjunction with this issue and contacted other jurisdictions, no one has been able to come up with a case or a statute anywhere that states that anyone has a constitutional right right to smoke. He stated that every jurisdiction that he has talked to regarding enforcement will be using passive enforcement and that no one knows how this will work. The only exception to that is Santa Monica as they have indicated that they will be aggressively enforcing the issue. Commissioner Englebrecht asked Mr. Ohl if he believes that the burr might just be the designated smoking areas or had staff any information of what other cities had done with designating smoking areas. Mr. Ohl stated that San Clemente has an area at the base of the pier adjacent to a restaurant much like what Commissioner Allen made reference to, but other than that is • unaware of designated areas where people are allowed to smoke but rather designated areas where they are not allowed to smoke. He stated that if we displace them off the beach, that smokers are going to go elsewhere. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that he would like to know what cities have designate smoking areas and where are they located and asked that staff research that issue. Chair Tobin opened the public discussion Jim Walker, Director of STOP Tobacco Abuse of Minors and commended City staff for the great work and stated that he has worked with many cities on this issue and is here to answer any questions that the commission might have. He stated that he has information on civil liberties and noted that that your right to smoke ends at someone else's nose. Narcis Kabiri, Health Education Association from the County of Orange Tobacco Use Prevention Program, distributed information on tobacco use and a fact sheet. She stated that the Seal Beach and Santa Barbara pier, Santa Monica beach, Pasadena parks are smoke free without any designated areas. She stated that the boardwalk in Santa Cruz is smoke free and are looking to expand that area. Commissioner Allen asked if there is a concern that should the City designate a fixed area that the smokers will move the problem adjacent and asked for guidance on that and do • they find that the problems occurs away from the pier. Ms. Kabiri stated that these cities have completely banned it so they do not have that problem. She stated that they did work with businesses and restaurants and that Parks, Beaches 8 Recreation Commission Regular Meeting July 6, 2004 Page 7 • restaurant's were able to designate a particular smoking area outside. She stated that it becomes easier to make it completely smoke free then have a smoking area here and there because every beach is laid out differently. Carolyn Wilkinson, Newport Harbor High School stated that she believes that self policing will work and that people may still smoke if the police are not around to ticket them but people for the most part are law abiding, and that if they see a sign that says no smoking, that most will follow that direction. She presented the 13,000 cigarette butts picked up from the beach back in April by the pier. Amy Brewer, Community Alliance Network distributed a letter urging the support of the ordinance and stated that as a resident she also supports no smoking on the beach. Leslie Serrel, Oncology Education Coordinator at Hoag Cancer Center and on behalf of Medical Director Dr. Bob Dittman urged the support for any smoking cessation that this City can help with. Chair Tobin closed the public discussion Commissioner Englebrecht stated that smoking was allowed many years ago anywhere, then no smoking areas were designated in restaurants and on airlines and now studies • have come out and stated that second hand smoke is as much of a killer as smoking and so now we have no smoking in restaurants and bars. He is encouraged that most cities do not have designated areas for smoking and stated that he would be hard pressed to come up with designated areas and would be more inclined to say "smoke free beaches." There is no need to provide designated areas for smoking. Commissioner Allen stated that we need to find out how the residents along the ocean front would feet if there were smoking areas and noted that we are a different than San Clemente, but added that she is not abdicating smoking areas as she would not want to live next door to one. She stated that she is concerned that since we have 11.8 linear miles of beach of that 6.5 miles is ocean and 5.5 bay beaches and hoped that staff would encourage homeowners, HOA and business associations for any ideas and comments and asked staff to research other cities for information on whether it has affected tourism. Commissioner Ruzicka asked if the smoking companies had tried to ban these ordinances. Mr. Ohl stated that he was unaware of any of the national tobacco companies intervening and in fact some of the literature gathered from the web sites has been just the opposite stating that they are supportive of these type of efforts. Commissioner Brown stated his support of Commissioner's Allen and Englebrecht comments. He asked if they could recommend on one of the recommendation without the • other. Director Niederhaus stated yes. Parks, Beaches ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting July 6, 2004 Page 8 Commissioner Brown stated again that he supports a no smoking ordinance but is not • ready to reject the idea of designated smoking areas. He stated that he is leaning that way but since there is time, more information is needed on what impacts negative and positive that designated smoking areas could have. Commissioner Ruzicka asked if we could table this. Commissioner Skoro asked that if and when this is passed on to Council and assuming that smoking areas are designated would we need to specify those areas in the recommendation? Director Niederhaus stated that a couple of routes could be taken. If the Commission is in favor of a no smoking ordinance and the issue is the second recommendation, but remembering that staff is trying to be fair to smokers by giving them an outlet and to address litter issue and to have signs posted. He stated that there is no ownership of the designated area paragraph, which is why staff did not list those specifically, but if they had, staff would have notified HOA and business associations at that time. Commissioner Englebrecht again stated that there is no need to even discuss designated areas. Commissioner Garrett stated that designated areas could open a huge can of worms and • that it it is not a good idea, but possibly an area on each of the piers for fisherman could be designated, also commented that the floats should be addressed. He went on to say that we should look at this more quickly than later. Commissioner Skoro asked how long staff would need to address these issues. Director Niederhaus stated that he would be ready for next month. Motion by Commissioner Skoro to table this issue until August for action. Commissioner Ruzicka asked if staff would notice all that would be influenced by such an ordinance. Director Niederhaus stated that they would notify HOA's and business associations as well. He also stated that staff would withdraw the second recommendation if that is the direction of the Commission. Commissioner Allen stated that the recommendation should stay as is because the commission would receive more response from the community. Commissioner Ruzicka asked that the motion be restated. Commissioner Skoro stated that his motion was to table the issue until August with stated • recommendations as is. Motion carried by acclamation. • Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission Regular Meeting July 6, 2004 Page 9 OLD BUSINESS 6. Committee Reports • Finance - Commissioner Garrett stated that they met with Director Knight several weeks ago and approved the budget. • Park Development - Commissioner Skoro stated that the next meeting would be July 20 at 8:30am in the Fire Conference Room and asked the Commission to notice the grading that has been going on at Upper Bayview at Jamboree and Coast Highway. He stated that enhancement information had been given at the June meeting and hopefully within a year the park would be completed. • Rec Ft Open Space Element - Nothing to report. • Recreation Activities - Nothing to report. • Seniors - Director Knight stated that City staff is still meeting with the Friends and that nothing has been finalized. • Beach Activities - Commissioners Garret thanks staff for the inclusion of Beach Maintenance as part of the monthly Parks Et Tree Activity Report. • Ad Hoc - Community Service Award - Director Knight asked the Commission for any recommendations and stated that press release would be done requesting nominations from the community. • - Youth Sports Liaison - Nothing to report FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS • Smoking on the Beach Et Piers - August • Donation Brochure- September • Irvine Terrace Park Encroachment • Review of Council Policy G -5 possibly requiring approval of HOA where benches will be installed or gage number of benches in parks. • Liability Aspects at Marina Park • Ordinance 11.04 — Conduct in Parks • Special Tree Committee appointment - October • Staff report on Fire Rings ADJOURNMENT - 8:37pm Submitted by: • Teri Craig, Admin Assistant • • 0 a�2Ew�R >� �NiK�9S_0 oN I# U � S TO: Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission FROM: General Services Director SUBJECT: Smoking on Piers and Beaches Recommendation PB &R Commission Agenda Item No. August 3, 2004 Support a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, beaches, and certain other public areas. Additional Possibilities 1. Designate certain public areas for smokers on public beaches and piers and equip those areas with signage and smoking ums. Support funding for the maintenance of the ums. or 2. Equip certain public areas near or adjacent to public beaches and piers with signage and smoking ums for the purpose of litter control. Background Staff provided the attached report to the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission (PB &R) on July 6 (Attachment A). A copy of the minutes of that meeting are also attached (Attachment B). After considerable discussion of the issues and recommendations as well as listening to public input, the PB &R Commission unanimously supported the primary staff recommendation of a no smoking ordinance for public piers, beaches, and certain other public areas. The Commission was hesitant to support the second staff recommendation of designating certain areas for smoking on or adjacent to the public beaches without further information. The Commission also requested staff to poll businesses and business associations on their perception of the effects on City tourism should the Council approve a no smoking ban on public piers and beaches. Discussion Designated Smoking Areas Staff reviewed the history of placing benches along the ocean boardwalk as a means of assessing resistance to designating certain rest areas on the oceanfront boardwalk as designated smoking •areas. In addition, in conversation with at least one oceanfront residents- association; it was clear thai designating boardwalk benches as des] ; ated smoking areas would not be accept2jle to Attachment F adjacent property owners. Staff has retracted their recommendation that smoking areas be • designated, but has retained the alternative for Commission consideration (Alternative I). The only locations for designated smoking areas that seem to be acceptable and appropriate are the ends of the asphalt walkways that extend from the ocean boardwalk toward the ocean. There are eight of those walkways along the ocean beach extending from Orange Avenue to Balboa Pier. A smoking urn could be installed in the center of the cul de sac end of the walkway along with signage at four of the eight walkways. In addition to the walkway proposal, staff recommends that urns be placed at a number of other public locations or oceanfront boardwalk, to combat litter. The attached listing of the walkways and recommended urn locations is provided (Attachments C and D). The three residents' associations (West, Central, and BPPA) have been noticed of the Commission review of the issue of designating smoking areas along the oceanfront. Urns Smoking urns are available in either plastic or masonry materials. Staff favors the masonry model for durability and appearance, The total cost per urn is $185. A model will be displayed at the Commission meeting. The recommended urn is already in use at the base of the San Clemente Pier. Costs The original staff report to PB &R (Attachment A) provided a cost estimate of $23,000 for • signage changes, urns, and urn maintenance which coincides with Alternative 1 provisions. If the Commission supports a no smoking ordinance and Alternative 2 above, the total cost would be reduced to $13,214 (see Attachments C and D). The cost for Alternative 2 is as follows: Ii.:Ci 1 —'tea•. . "M. 4.'.a�.•`Y - s.: "i. 1 •. .• S 184.613 ca. $3,6192.66 8 sign 1 '��''w�-��0 �•` ::�i i 1 .% .. �_ ;.. � rY:.�llX.I�3i � S'§�.{I�lnl�l.l :.:� poles (labor . .. •11 11 Total 58,214.02 If neither Alternative is approved by the Council, the total cost of the no smoking ban will be approximately $.2,000 to apply no smoking decals to existing regulatory signage. Effects on Tourism Staff has referred the question of effects on tourism or businesses of a City no smoking ban to • the Economic Development Committee, the two Chambers of Commerce, the Newport Visitors 2- • and Business Bureau, and the oceanfront businesses from 22"d Street to A Street. All entities were noticed of the pending issues and the PB &R Commission hearing. Update of No Smoking Ban Since the July PB &R Commission meeting, other beach cities are considering or approving no smoking bans as well. In northern California, Santa Cruz and Capitola are now considering smoking bans on beaches. Since the Commission meeting on July 6, the City of Huntington Beach has approved a no smoking ordinance. Staff will provide an oral update of legislation related to a no smoking ban to the Commission on August 3. Limits of Proposed Smoking Ban Attachment C provides a listing of special public areas associated with ocean or bay fronts. Attachment D provides an aerial view of public oceanfront beaches and ocean piers. Staff has developed the following list of areas using the two attached resources where staff is recommending that smoking should be prohibited: Balboa and Newport Piers Public Floats and Piers in Harbor (10) Oceanfront Beaches including Corona del Mar and Little Corona Beaches Oceanfront Boardwalk • North and South Bayfront (Balboa island) East Bayfront (Little Balboa Island) 19`h Bay Beach Rhine Wharf North Star Beach Pirates Cove and China Cove Beaches The Wedge N Street Bay Beach 10`h Street Bay Beach Marina Park Beach Inspiration and Lookout Points (only non beach locations) Summary Staff continues to support a no smoking ban on public ocean and bay piers, ocean and certain bay beaches, and certain other public areas as detailed above. In addition, staff has provided the two proposals of designating smoking areas on or adjacent to public beaches (Alternative 1) or only equipping other public areas with signage and smoking urns (Alternative 2). Staff favors Alternative 2 primarily to combat litter. Very respectfully, • t David E. Niederhaus -3- 0 Attachments: (A) Smoking on Piers and Beaches PB &R Commission Agenda dated July 6, 2004 (B) .Minutes of the July 6, 2004 PB &R Commission Meeting (C) Proposed Um and Designated Smoking Locations (D) Map of Oceanfront • • -4- s July 22, 2004 TO: General Services Director FROM: Operations Support Superintendent SUBJECT: Proposed Urn and Designated Smoking Locations Staff feels that designated smoking areas could be placed at the end of the asphalt walkways (fingers) leading on to the beach, thus keeping these areas away from residential properties. The walkways are located at the following street ends along the oceanfront: > Orange Street > 20`r Street 12`h Street 11`h Street > Island Street (2) East and West sides of the Balboa Pier • > B Street The following are locations that staff feels would be appropriate sites for smoking urns: > (2) McFadden Plaza Base of Balboa Pier > 15`h Street and Oceanfront Sidewalk (2) Corona del Mar Main Beach > (5) Oceanfront Street Ends with benches at 36`h , 341h 32 °d 28 " , 26' Streets r Wedge and Oceanfront — at the start of walkway to beach Rick Greaney • Attachmeet C Parks, Beaches ft Recreation Commission Regular Meeting August 3, 2004 • Page 4 Donated for Penny Weiner Myers and Donated by Isidore Myers) Motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Brown, Englebrecht, Garrett, Ruzicka, Skoro Nays: Allen, Tobin Motion by Chair Tobin to receive and approve Items 1 through 3 and 5 of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by acclamation. CONTINUING BUSINESS 7. Smoking on Piers and Beaches - Director Niederhaus stated that staff supports the following recommendation: Support a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, beaches, and certain other public areas. Additional Possibilities: • Designate certain areas for smokers on beaches and adjacent public areas. Equip designated areas with smoking urns and support funding for the maintenance of the urns. OR • Equip certain public area near or adjacent to public beaches and piers with signage and smoking urns for the purpose of litter control. Director Niederhaus stated that it seemed to him that it had been generally unanimous from the last meeting that the Commission was in favor of a ordinance but not with naming designated areas. He reported that notices of the meeting had been mailed to residents and businesses from the west end of McFadden Square and A Street had been notified and had received no response. Commissioner Englebrecht stated that he is not in favor of designated smoking areas and suggested that the "urns" will not enhance the beautification of the area. Director Niederhaus stated that there needs to be something as most people are reluctant to put out there cigarettes in trash cans as it is a fire hazard. Commissioner Ruzicka stated that he agrees with Commissioner Englebrecht. Commissioner Garrett stated that no one will want an areas around there home to be a designated smoking area and or urns. He went on to suggest that a recommendation be made to the Harbor Commission regarding smoking on the bay and the harbor floats. Chair Tobin opened the public hearing • Marta Hayden, Newport Beach Visitors Et Conference Bureau stated that she could find no reason that a ban of this sort would cause a deterrent in tourism but that the reality is that there is a litter problem and something should be done about that. Attachment G Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission Regular Meeting August 3, 2004 Page 5 • Richard Luehrs, Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce stated that he had contacted many business owners and that none had a problem with the banning of smoking. He commented that regarding the enforcement issue it would be preferred not to have headlines about enforcing the no smoking rule but it be enforced by complaint only. Dennis Baker, Arts Commission, stated that the urns on display here are hideous and suggested that more investigation be made in ones that work and look good within the City. The following people spoke in support of a ban on smoking at the beach and opposed any designated smoking areas, that visual clutter is also a concern: Stephanie Barger; Earth Resources Jim Walker Nancy Skinner Elie Erpenbeck Louise Fundenberg Kay Mortenson Karla Duesterberg Christine Crahan Alexander Machowsky Jesse Low Wendy Brooks • Ray Halowski, Surfrider Foundation stated that the Commission is focusing on the wrong issue that litter is the issue, cigarettes right or wrong are legal and we just need to get people to change their habits. Discussion ensued regarding the "urns" and the consensus was that they should be called receptacles and that the ones displayed at the meeting will not work and that staff should investigate other receptacles. Chair David Colley, Arts Commission offered guidance from the Arts Commission regarding smoking receptacles. Chair Tobin closed the public hearing Chair Tobin stated that it seemed that no one was in favor of the types of receptacles displayed here at the meeting. Motion by Commissioner Ruzicka to: • Support a no smoking ordinance on the beach • Not designate smoking areas. • Investigate the best placement for smoking receptacles. • Investigate alternative types of smoking receptacles. • Motion carried by unanimous vote. OLD BUSINESS • A • Z V N O E CN c tp C6 - Q N J N O N J V Q 2 rn m N c C) Vi N 10 Q N a Attachment 11 Y m Q x x y N m X _ m X O m X N 0 _ N N d � 3 O m N m Q) N L N m x _T O O d X m m X X x c jo m Y N C x Q a m `Y J C m m x x m a c 0 U w w U ami m c 0 L N m > U w a c 3 U w N a� U m C m a> c N E m m -0 m N m 'C O L m L m m m 'E W rn C: 2 m 3 rn J rn Q w J rn Q w J m �' L c m U c0 m U m m a> m c: m Z V N O E CN c tp C6 - Q N J N O N J V Q 2 rn m N c C) Vi N 10 Q N a Attachment 11 . or A A. 7AN!" v �.MIYI 7. N r1i", Id Flu r 71 . im _v , roll JL T. 11147 1 IMF, it r7l, '4 Gx 4' % 14W, All.Z. ler- i 4 0- IN; ...640 6% IVA ..�) I - S S. co DI N .10 F- Iec!Ot. co,cq ez� mom um um, to CCU- Q c CM M 9 ImItm cm SO 0 c c Gi u-, a. o rc - .2 C, 441 v.m e. L6 U. L6 ........ 2-A Z:� ll Wl 'y ..�) I - S S. co DI N .10 F- Iec!Ot. co,cq ez� mom um um, to CCU- Q c CM M 9 ImItm cm SO 0 c c Gi u-, a. o rc - .2 C, 441 v.m e. L6 U. L6 ........ 2-A Z:� Smoking Receptacle Models • A B C D • • 212lbs/$514 E 146lbs/$147 215lbs/$230 197lbs/$159 F 93lbs/$180 H I J l0lbs/$78 10lbs /$83 270lbs/$230 G tr - °a Ash cover keeps cigarette Waste contained and out of sight 35lbs/$169 35lbs/$347 Attachment J City of Newport Beach BUDGET AMENDMENT 2004 -05 FFECT ON BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE Increase Revenue Estimates X Increase Expenditure Appropriations AND Transfer Budget Appropriations SOURCE: from existing budget appropriations from additional estimated revenues NX from unappropriated fund balance EXPLANATION: NO. BA- 009 AMOUNT: $is,000.00 Increase in Budgetary Fund Balance X Decrease in Budgetary Fund Balance No effect on Budgetary Fund Balance This budget amendment is requested to provide for the following: To increase expenditure appropriations due to no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers and beaches. ACCOUNTING ENTRY: BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE Fund Account 010 3605 REVENUE ESTIMATES (3601) • Fund /Division Account EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS (3603) Description General Fund Fund Balance Description Division Number Account Number Signed: <f . Signed: Signed: Financial Approval: Administrative Services Director istrativeApproval: City Manager City Council Approval: City Clerk Amount Debit Credit $19,000.00 " Automatic $12,325.00 $175.00 $6,500.00 ate g ©, Date Date Attachment K Description Division Number 3140 General Services - Operations Support Account Number 7040 Overtime - Miscellaneous Division Number 3140 General Services - Operations Support Account Number 7425 Medicare - Fringe Division Number 3140 General Services - Operations Support Account Number 8170 Maintenance - Beach Cleaning Division Number Account Number Signed: <f . Signed: Signed: Financial Approval: Administrative Services Director istrativeApproval: City Manager City Council Approval: City Clerk Amount Debit Credit $19,000.00 " Automatic $12,325.00 $175.00 $6,500.00 ate g ©, Date Date Attachment K . RG UI% ANTS IN I AVOR • OF SMOKE -FREE BEACHES Dear Newport Beach City Council Members, Thank you for demonstrating the leadership and decision making responsibilities of your office in protecting the health and hell being of your conununitY. Jinn Walker Director Stop Tohacco Abuse of Alinors Pronto (STIATP) WATER QUALITY: Ordinance demonstrates to State the intention to comply with California clean water policies. What future cigarette butt litter there may be can be said to largely originate from up stream communities that should themselves now do a better job of managing their own pollution run off. ;\ewport Beach maintains leadership role in State clean water efforts. OIN71L LIBERTIES The United States Constitution does not guarantee smoker's rights. What the US Constitution does say is "... all inen are created equal, that the>> are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberh, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights. - overninents are instituted among nnen.. With this in mind and "in writing ": 1.) Consider, there is no other more preventable cause for the loss of life today than that caused by tobacco use. (,Approximately 435, 000 Americans die from tobacco use each year - that's essentialh, a death toll comparable to a "9 -II R'orld Trade Center - each week.") 3.) Consider, how liberty has been sadly confused with indulging in an addition, which by definition restricts an individual's ability to exercise their personal freedom. (Some 60'/'o of smokers say they would prefer not to smoke.) 3.) Consider. hoer the "pursuit of happiness" has been sadly used to justify drug use. 4.) And then consider that right after the Constitution defines it's purpose, it clarifies that governments role is not to abdicate the responsibility of decision malting but in deed, to make secure the lives, freedom to choose and happiness of its citizens. • ENFORCEMENT: INIewport Police Department has said this ordinance should meet with at least 85°10 voluntary compliance. which is a significant success and a tremendous reduction in cigarette butt litter. 0 0 0 1 t 4!t C t.. a 7 I V 7L 1� �J T r. ANAMS- , A AN 6-VW6. " "i ;, '�;d'5w � 7c.: � '� .. ;4tt ,'y " - .:� � �" �� .d i' �; ... •; :i� �y . =! L ;;, s 0 f r o _ so o C' t0 N N� Z S rt� o- b L , � 0:1 l z i .NmNOo A m $ no 0 f r o _ so o C' t0 N N� Z S rt� n u 1 J n u �; mac.; rI 11 0 • op �'- ,x.., - - -- - - — _ •,., -•�.- - .,o.,;- -, -.,,may :,_ http: //by 18fd.bay l 8-liotmail.msn.com/co-i-bin/Letmsg9curmbox= FOOOOOOOO] &a= 420899c2... 6/31/2004 0 • Ohl, Daniel M From: RCTelecom aaol.co n Sent: Tuesday, August 242 2004 9:27 AMA; To: dohlta?city.ne.wport- beach.ca.us Subject: Smoking Ban Th s is really going too far, I am a smoker who happens to take every ciaa-ette with. me when I leave the beach. Also, there are no ashtrays at the beach for smokers to begin with. I have always been aware of where i smoke and do not litter. What about all the styrofcam cups at the beach? Are we going to ban having a coffee at the beach next? I do not support this ban and will not come to Newport again if it passes. I have enjoyed going to Newport for over 20 years and I can take my business elsewhere. Why put ashtrays at the beach after the ban, this is again another backwards approach of our government at work. •J Thank you, Louise Fiduccia (7 14) 434 -3574 08/24.'2004