The Smoke-Free Task Force recommended to the University administration Monday that the University become a smoke-free area within two years. The University Senate will discuss the report during its March meeting, but the ultimate decision lies with the administration.
One student and University employees from offices around campus, including housing, public safety and academics, participated in the task force. It researched other universities that have become smoke-free and polled University students and faculty about the issue during spring of 2008, said Paula Staight, director of health promotion at the University Health Center.
James Cervantes, grants administrator and program assistant in the chemistry department, served on the task force because he thought the cause was in service of public health. The idea of mandating a smoke-free campus was difficult for Cervantes because he thinks lifestyle choices should be freely made unless they’re hurting someone. But in the case of second-hand smoke, he said, it is hurting other people.
Staight agreed. She said second-hand smoke is a proven carcinogen and does not become benign in any setting, including outdoors. The current smoking rule on campus, which requires smokers to stand at least 10 feet from any building, is simply not adequate, she said.
“Health promotion has been a primary push behind this initiative,” Staight said.
Some on campus feel the initiative could be overkill. University sophomore Greg Dietiker said he doesn’t smoke, but it doesn’t bother him if others do.
Dietiker transferred from Portland Community College, which is working on becoming smoke-free. He said PCC has designated smoking areas, which he thinks would be sufficient for the University. In fact, he said, “10 feet seems pretty legitimate.”
ASUO President Sam Dotters-Katz agreed that designated smoking areas could be a good middle ground. His staff will examine the proposal during the coming week, but Dotters-Katz has already formed a tentative position.
“I have great respect for the members of the committee that produced the report,” he said, “but at face value I’m not sure we’re going to be able to support it.”
Whether or not a smoke-free campus would protect public health, enforcement of the new rule poses a problem for all involved.
Cervantes said that even though he supports the idea of a smoke-free campus, implementing it would be an issue. Someone would have to decide who would enforce it and whether personnel would be disciplined for violations.
Yibo Lu, a University freshman and exchange student from China, said having a smoke-free campus isn’t a reasonable goal.
“I think it’s very hard to set up a law to stop smoking because there are a lot of people and it’s hard to control all of them,” she said.
Lu thinks more ashtrays would better address the smoking problem because she dislikes litter from cigarette butts more than she dislikes second-hand smoke.
Dotters-Katz said enforcement of the smoke-free rule would be almost impossible to achieve. He said it would waste professors’ time by making them leave campus to smoke and would be even worse for women on campus at night.
The Environmental Issues Committee will examine the report in the coming week, Sustainability Director Steve Mital said.
Dotters-Katz said he expects some people on campus to be strongly supportive of the issue and others to be vehemently against. Either way, it is an important issue, he said.
It’s a significant issue that affects everyone on campus in a big way, he said.
[email protected]