Lakewood is in the news again – mentioned in an August 16, 2016 Editorial Opinion of the Tacoma News Tribune – for having created buffers surrounding children in public parks to distance them from obnoxious adult behavior, i.e. smoking.
Unlike the Fife City Council whose members voted 4-2 earlier this month to ban “all tobacco products, smoking and e-cigarettes/vaping” in all seven of its public parks, Lakewood’s council two years ago voted 4-3 to continue the deadly habit albeit 50-feet away from designated play areas.
Fife joins the parks departments of Tacoma (2009), Gig Harbor (2007), Puyallup (2005) and the 21 properties of the Peninsula Metropolitan Parks District (2012) in banning smoking and tobacco products.
Lakewood remains an odd man out.
“Parks attract children, and leaders must err on the side of shielding youth from secondhand smoke. They also must do what they can to de-normalize the use of tobacco in social settings where kids watch adults closely,” the TNT Editorial Staff opined.
“In the end, the council decided an outright ban was the best way to protect people.”
Not Lakewood.
Lakewood City Councilwoman Marie Barth said government shouldn’t be intruding on the private lives of its citizens.
In backing off a ban on smoking and tobacco use in city parks, Barth stated in the Jan. 19, 2014 Tacoma News Tribune, “I just don’t think we need somebody telling us what to do all the time, every day, everywhere we go. Expanding this to e-cigarettes, I just think we’re overreaching common sense.”
Quoting statistics from the Wall Street Journal about the declining numbers of adults smoking, plummeting sales of tobacco products, and the disinclination of youth to pick up the habit, Councilman John Simpson claimed such evidence demonstrated the power of disseminated information.
“In other words,” Simpson write in the February 13, 2014 edition of Lakewood Patch, “education programs warning the public about the dangers of smoking and tobacco products are having a clear and sustained effect on diminishing the number of smokers.”
But of the arguments used by Barth – who cast the lone dissenting vote in the Rental Inspection Program (RIP) decision – or that of Simpson who, with Barth, voted not to ban smoking, which of the two were applied in the August 1, 2016 verdict (6-1) of the Lakewood City Council to approve the RIP?
Neither one.
Despite Barth’s adage with regards smoking – “I just don’t think we need somebody telling us what to do all the time, every day, everywhere we go” – RIP does just that.
If there’s one thing RIP is, it’s intrusive.
Though Lakewood acknowledges the existence already of five separate programs with which to deal with property issues, with RIP Lakewood has crossed the threshold, literally, into the private domain of rental properties. With clipboard and checklist and red pen in hand, inspectors will examine everything from “suitable food preparation space” to wattage of light bulbs.
Simpson said education programs work – and therefore government intrusion into the lives of its citizens is not necessary – in changing the habits of people, specifically with regards smoking.
But education, pursuing a “robust educational program”, is exactly what RIP architects recommended not to undertake, opting instead for the implementation of the clipboard-carrying, fine-levying, threshold-crossing inspector encroaching upon private property.
And the council agreed.
To “protect the public,” they said.
“I just don’t think we need somebody telling us what to do all the time, every day, everywhere we go.”
They why can’t Lakewood have recreational cannabis shops? Always have to drive into Tacoma and end up shopping/eating/spending there instead.
Thank you, Mr. Anderson for your on-target letter.
It will be interesting to watch the results of our city council’s decision to implement the RIP / RRISP.
What will City Council have to say when we have our first lawsuit, injury or death generated by their blind drive to expand government and to disturb so many innocent victims in such an intrusive manner?
By passing the RIP / RRSIP City Council has created an environment that will promote human conflict and thereby places the health and safety of our Lakewood Police, citizens and childrens lives in jeopardy.
City Council’s reaction to my statement above will predictably be, “Show me the facts and statistics.” “Nothing like that has ever happened in Lakewood before.”
My reaction to City Council, should we have one dead cop, citizen or child will be, “Now we have a statistic and we have a fact, but it is too late. Could we not have closed the barn door before the horse left the barn? Can’t we think for ourselves and prevent problems instead of blindly copying other city programs without adding our own brain power?”
I am not saying tragedy is going to strike, but I am saying City Council has set us up for the distinct possibility for tragedy
While City Council’s heart may be in the right place, City Council’s mind is in the wrong place.
Education of Lakewood citizens regarding their resources related to defective housing is obviously the better choice.
Just like your smoking example; we can educate citizens regarding the evils of smoking, but I do not see City Council entering everyone’s homes to confiscate any smoking products found inside.
If we do a good job educating citizens about smoking and they choose to smoke, let them smoke in authorized locations.
The same concept can be applied to the poor and disadvantaged. If we educate them and they refuse to use any of the existing resources designed to solve rental property condition problems, let them live as they choose.
There is absolutely no need or justification to involve innocent victims in a problem slum-renters themselves refuse to solve.
City Council is now hard pressed to reverse their decision, because to do so would take maximum backbone and courage and most council politicians do not wish to lose face. Once they have the $93,000 guy in place and start crossing thresholds it is difficult to turn back.
Any negatives that flow out of this will be covered by a political smoke screen. Though that be the case, I have a feeling you, Mr. Anderson, and I will be there to hold City Council accountable for this travesty of justice.
Joseph Boyle
First off hitlers anti smoking rules and laws seem like angels compared to this! Hitler even invented the propaganda passive smoke/ passervschen as they called it!
It’s been proven they chemical analysis that it harms nobody it’s make up is 96% water vapor and ordinairy air! SG report 1989 page 80.
Even OSHA could find no harm caused by exposure to it! Hense no rules can be made as harm must be proven before any resultant rules or laws can be made.
These smoking bans are made under criminal law where no victim or even harm must be shown!
That leaves but one thing a hatred of anything smoking by a few Prohibitionist groups well funded and politically backed by Obama over the last 8 years illegally using federal tax money to lobby for these laws!
What The Frank? There should not be any smoking in the parks. people exercise, play, do sports etc.. We go to the park for the fresh air not for second hand smoke from someone who does not care about their own health or anyone else.
Come on City Council grow some balls!!!