Cleveland (OH) bans vaping at parks (according to one news blurb), but cannot find new law

Discussion in 'Legislation News' started by Bill Godshall, Jul 22, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. Bill Godshall

    Bill Godshall Executive Director
    Smokefree Pennsylvania
    ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    According to one badly written news article at a source I never heard of, Cleveland (OH) City Council banned vaping at parks during last week's council meeting.
    Cleveland Bans E-Cigarette Smoking / ideastream - Northeast Ohio Public Radio, Television and Multiple Media

    It appears that it only applies to outdoor parks and outside some city owned buildings, but the article's headline is inaccurate, and the artilce is confusing (and badly written because the idiot author claimed the measure would help reduce smoking).

    But I couldn't find the proposed ordinance/resolution/policy anywhere at the City Council's website
    http://portal.cleveland-oh.gov/CityofCleveland/Home/Government/CityCouncil

    Its also not mentioned in last week's publication "The City Record"
    https://www.dln.com/cr/index2014/July162014.pdf
     
  2. Painter_

    Painter_ Super Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2013
    Location:
    In my happy place
    I posted this last week in News and Media. The source is idea stream which is the group that owns the public TV (WVIZ) and radio station (WCPN) outlets in Cleveland. I would suspect that they would be a reliable source but I checked the city council minutes and cannot find record of it in the minutes.
     
  3. rothenbj

    rothenbj Vaping Master Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Location:
    Green Lane, Pa
    This could be the first Vapor regulation- if it appears to be a regulation and is reported as a regulation but there is no regulation it becomes a regulation.
     
  4. Bill Godshall

    Bill Godshall Executive Director
    Smokefree Pennsylvania
    ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Painter wrote

    I'm not doubting that Cleveland City Council banned vaping at certain locations, but I'm trying to find out specifically where vaping was banned by the council (as the news article contradicted itself). Since the reporter inaccurately claimed that the city's vaping ban would reduce smoking, I don't consider that reporter to be a reliable source for news (but then again virtually all news media have made false and misleading claims about e-cigs).

    Please note that an Ordinance is legally required to ban vaping in workplaces and public places, while municipalities can more easily (and typically without any public input) approve municipal policies to ban vaping (or anything else) on property owned by the municipality. This was clearly the latter type of municipal policy.
     
  5. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    NW Ohio US
    http://www.clevelandcitycouncil.org/committee-calendar/?from_date=07/16/2014&to_date=07/16/2014



    Committee of the Whole
    July 16, 2014 @ 9:00 AM


    DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH

    Ord. No. 695-14

    By Council Member Cimperman

    To amend Sections 235.01 and 235.02 of the Codified Ordinances of Cleveland, Ohio, 1976, as amended by Ordinance No. 473-11, passed April 25, 2011, defining smoking to include alternative nicotine products, including electronic cigarettes, in the smoking ban on City property.

    Remarks by Director of Public Health Department: See Legislation.

    Remarks by Director of Law Department: There is no legal objection to the passage of this legislation if amended.
     
  6. KODIAK (TM)

    KODIAK (TM) Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2014
    Location:
    Dead Moose, AK
    Alternative nicotine products? I pity the poor basterd caught chewing Nicorette gum while waiting in line at the DMV. Remind me to add Cleveland to places I'll never go. (And my world is getting pretty small these days)
     
  7. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    How the heck does one get away with saying that?
     
  8. dragonpuff

    dragonpuff Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    Location:
    Over the river and through the woods, Western NY
    From said article:
    "Public health people see e-cigarettes as a renormalization of tobacco use."

    Public health people? Really?? This is coming from the county Health Commissioner :facepalm:

    I know plenty of "public health people" who would disagree with you sir :rolleyes:
     
  9. DaveP

    DaveP PV Master & Musician ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Joined:
    May 22, 2010
    Location:
    Central GA
    The sad part is that this official is probably more informed than the people who elected him.

    Why can't people understand that vaping is not smoking and it should be encouraged, not banned? Eventually there will be honest evaluations of ecig juice and finally the people will be able to make an informed decision.

    The first thing they need to understand is that it's not smoke, it's water vapor. The second thing I'd like people to understand is that it contains nothing that's harmful to the vaper or the bystander. Once those two things are in the category of general knowledge, we will have acceptance.

    http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/08/kentucky-center-for-smoke-free-policy.html

    This is the article from which he derived the 90% inhalation number for tobacco cigarettes. While it might be higher for microscopic particles of combustion, it should be similar for mist droplets. There's also no sidestream vapor from an ecig. All exposure to bystanders is from the exhaled vapor.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1675218/pdf/brmedj01472-0013.pdf
     
  10. Kent C

    Kent C ECF Guru Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    NW Ohio US
    Likely because the Director of the Law Department thinks that since a majority of council voted for the amendment, then it's lawful. IOW, all that matters is democracy, without any consideration of actual laws, rights, precedents, etc. Iow, the type of reasons why the Founders rejected a Pure Democracy.

    "Which is better - to be ruled by one tyrant three thousand miles away or by three thousand tyrants one mile away?" (attributed to) Mather Byles, Sr. Boston 1770
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page