SAN MARCOS: New smoking limits in force in city parks, on trails
Signs direct those who light up to designated areas
By ANDREA MOSS - Staff Writer | ∞
The San Marcos City Council recently approved a policy that limits where people can light up in local parks and trails. (Don Boomer/Staff photographer SAN MARCOS ---- Five months after the San Marcos City Council approved a policy limiting where smokers can light up in parks, the city is putting the policy into action.
City staff members recently created designated smoking areas in all of San Marcos' large parks and posted signs that prohibit smoking in the other areas of the parks.
That sets the stage for park rangers and sheriff's deputies to begin citing people who smoke in the off-limits areas. Violators face up to a $1,000 fine and up to 90 days in jail.
However, Community Services Director Craig Sargent-Beach said Thursday the city will focus first on voluntary compliance.
"We'll start out educating people and reminding them that there are designated places and asking them to relocate to those locations when they choose to smoke," he said. "And then we'll gradually move towards enforcement if there's not a willing compliance to do that."
All the smoking areas are near parking lots but away from playgrounds and other spots used heavily by children. City trails are also covered by the policy, which was approved in April.
Smaller recreation areas, or mini-parks, are covered but will not get no-smoking signs or designated smoking areas because state law already bans smoking near tot lots.
Three of the city's biggest parks ---- Bradley Park along Rancho Santa Re Road, Woodland Park on Woodland Parkway, and Walnut Grove Park ---- were virtually empty early Friday afternoon, with a few dog walkers and one young mother and her daughter the only users.
Standing in Bradley Park and watching her small black-and-white terrier mix, Tori, check out the underside of every bush the dog could reach from its leash, Lois Atherton said she hadn't heard about the new policy but thought it was probably a good idea.
"I don't smoke, so it won't really affect me," she said. "But a lot of kids use the park. So it's nice to know they'll have a smoke-free place to play in."
Sara Reveles, who was helping her 2-1/2-year-old daughter Kia totter around on the grass at Woodland Park, said she, too, liked the idea of putting some distance between smokers and children.
"My husband smokes, so he might not like it," Reveles said. "But I don't let him smoke around (Kia) at home either."
In adopting the policy, San Marcos became the 11th city in the county to ban or limit smoking in its parks. Other North County cities on the list include Del Mar and Solana Beach.
San Marcos' policy fell short of the total smoking ban that Councilman Chris Orlando and representatives of the American Lung Association, the American Cancer Society and the Vista Community Clinic had sought.
Before the policy was approved, members of Mission Hills High School's AVID Club told the council they had collected nearly 6,000 cigarette butts during two cleanups of three local parks. Club members also said an informal survey they conducted found 98 percent of the 247 people they asked favored a smoke-free policy for San Marcos parks.
Although Orlando joined his fellow council members in approving the policy that allows smoking in designated areas, he pledged to bring the issue back to the council after a year.
Sargent-Beach said it was clear a lot of people like the idea of a smoke-free environment.
"I think it helps with providing a very positive image of the city and for the health of the people and children that live here," he said. "And it's not like we're prohibiting it from happening. We're just asking that it be relocated to a location that won't disturb other people."
Contact staff writer Andrea Moss at (760) 739-6654 or amoss@nctimes.com.
Advertisement
To Bad wrote on Sep 26, 2008 12:53 PM:communities that ban smoking even partially don't get the money they receive from cigerette tax taken away. If you ban it then don't try to get the revenue it produces.
Kewl wrote on Sep 26, 2008 1:27 PM:No more burning bar-b-ques!! Can we pour water on their picnic if they burn a bar-B-que?
What ever wrote on Sep 26, 2008 1:29 PM:happened withthe cigarette tax issue where the cities were to pay to help people quit smoking? Someone steal the money?
John E wrote on Sep 26, 2008 2:20 PM:Banning smoking from more and more places will help people quit, while protecting those around them. Also, the fire danger is very real in some of the parks, such as Brengle Terrace.
Ban everything wrote on Sep 26, 2008 2:56 PM:First of all, I'm neither a smoker nor drinker. I worry less about second hand smoke killing me than I do about the vagrants, groups of obviously 'impaired' hanging around (pot/drugs/drunk/mental?)..menacing looks. Crime on the rise everywhere. Car-jackers, purse snatchers, knife/guns in hiding. When will decent citizens rise up about and scream more about safety in parks or anywhere that is more threatening than second hand smoke or invading a gnat-catcher's habitat? Oh, do you notice all the cellphone users taking photos of kids, families, cars, etc? They get your 'location' and size you up. Give me a smoker over wondering who is following me home. Lung disease is horrid, but alcohol (eg: drunk driving), drugs, gangs, thieves, sickos kill millions more than second hand smoke. That's my opinion only of course and I know everyone else will disagree and spend their energies on getting rid of 'butts' instead of REAL crime.
No smoking OUTSIDE wrote on Sep 26, 2008 5:12 PM:First we couldn't smoke indoors, now we can't smoke OUTSIDE? What kind of GESTAPO is running this city? What next?
Seriously.... wrote on Sep 26, 2008 5:48 PM:aren't there a lot more important things to worry about than second hand smoke?
No One wrote on Sep 27, 2008 6:34 AM:Why don't they just get it over with? No smoking in California period, it's pretty much headed in that direction anyway.
Of course they'll still sell them but you'll have to step out to Arizona or Nevada to smoke em.
Jeez.
cancerous wrote on Sep 27, 2008 8:18 AM:i dont want to smell your filthy smoke in a public place...you are the ones that are gestapo. get over it and start being a little progressive. you people are probably the same ones that will choose a lifestyle that causes lung cancer and then complain you don't have free healthcare to fix it
Jaque wrote on Sep 27, 2008 8:38 AM:I didn't realize there so many smokers in the San Marcos parks that would prompt a new city ordinance. Poor mothers of 2 1/2 year olds!
Al wrote on Sep 27, 2008 2:06 PM:A good new law! Most, not all, smokers are absolutely disrespectful, lazy, a-holes. They throw their butts out their car windows because they don't want to clean-out their car ashtrays, they litter parks, sidewalks, beaches parking lots, and even my front yard wiht thier butts. I have no sympathy for these losers because they lost smoking ares. You ruined it for yourselves. As far as lost tax revenue, that will be offset buy fewer lung cancer cases and the associated hospital costs which we all pay for one way or the other.
mike wrote on Oct 15, 2008 9:59 AM:wow another way our government is taking away or freedoms... cat drink on thr beaches, now we cant smoke in parks where we want... ee whiz gives us a break whats next taking away our right to bare arms?
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement
Videos
Advertisement