BLANK PAGE 
MONOGRAPH 3 

Major Local 

Tobacco C.ontro1 

Ordinances 

in the 

United States 

US DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 

AND HUMAN SERVICES 

Public Health Service 

National Institutes of Health 

NIH Publication No. 93-3532 

May 1993 
BLANK PAGE 
Foreword 

The adoption of local ordinances regulating the use or sale 

of tobacco represents an extraordinary social trend in the United 

States. Although such laws were virtually unheard of just a decade 

ago, hundreds of cities and counties across this country have taken 

aggressive action to control smoking in public settings as well as 

making it more difficult for minors to obtain tobacco. 

Major Local Tobacco Control Ordinances in the United States 

provides clear documentation of the extent to which local communities are enacting legislation to restrict or severely curtail 

tobacco use. The monograph also represents a social barometer 

regarding the seriousness with which communities view the 

smoking problem and the range of remedial actions taken to 

reduce tobacco use through socially responsible public policies. 

These ordinances are not based on social whim, however, but 

are based on decades of scientific research, which has increasingly 

documented the health consequences of tobacco for users and 

non-users alike. Since the early 1960’s, medical science has left 

no doubt about the deadly nature of tobacco use, especially the 

practice of cigarette smoking. The scientific data base establishing 

a causal connection between smoking and increased death rates 

from various cancers, cardiovascular diseases, chronic obstructive 

lung diseases, fetal distress, and other chronic and debilitating 

conditions is truly staggering. Between 1960 and 1990, more than 

60,000 scientific citations appeared in the worldwide literature 

linking cigarettes and other forms of tobacco use to these adverse 

health outcomes. Smoking is a health hazard in its own right, 

but smoking potentiates the risks of several environmental and 

occupational carcinogens. More than 400,000 premature deaths 

annually occur in the United States directly attributed to the 

effects of cigarette smoking. Of course, we should recall that 

even smokeless tobacco is a health hazard. 

Such high levels of death and disability affect us all, however, 

whether we smoke or not. In a comprehensive study conducted 

by the Congress’ Office of Technology Assessment in 1985, it was 

estimated that cigarette smoking alone cost this Nation upwards 

of $95 billion annually. Given the spiraling increase in costs for 

both acute and long-term health care over just the last few years, 

such costs would be substantially greater in 1993 dollars. As a 

Nation, we simply cannot affcjrd to pay for the health care costs 

associated with smoking. 

iii 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Our knowledge of the health consequences resulting from 

exposures to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) (often termed 

passive or involuntary smoking) has lagged behind our knowledge 

about active smoking. The first studies suggesting a correlation 

between ETS and acute health effects in nonsmokers did not appear 

until the 1970’s-r some two decades after studies linking cigarette smoking to lung cancer in smokers. Those early epidemiological studies on ETS primarily involved very young children, usually 

under the age of 2, who lived with parents who smoked and 

demonstrated a consistent elevation in risk between ETS and acute 

respiratory tract infections and symptoms. A decade later, in 

January 1981, the first studies appeared suggesting an association 

between ETS and lung cancer in adults, and later studies appeared 

purporting an association between 1Yl.S and coronary heart disease 

(CHD). 

By the time the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. 

Surgeon General published their separate reports in late 1986, a 

significant body of information was available for both reports to 

conclude that nonsmokers’ exposure to ETS was hazardous, for 

both children and adults. In subsequent years, literally hundreds 

of additional studies have been published: More than 100 studies 

now exist on ETS and respiratory effects in children up to age 

18years; over 30 studies examine ETS and lung cancer in adults; 

and more than a dozen investigations examine the relationship 

between ETS and CHD. 

If there were any lingcring doubts among legitimate scientists 

about the validity of ETS as a significant health risk, those doubts 

evaporated in January 1993, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its long-awaited risk assessment. Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other 

Disorders, the EPA report, reached the following major conclusions: 

In adults: 

ETS is a human lung carcinogen, responsible for approximately 

3,000 lung cancer deaths annually in U.S. nonsmokers. 

In children: 

ETS exposure is causally associated with an increased risk of 

lower respiratory tract infections such as bronchitis and 

pneumonia; an estimated 150,000to 300,000 cases annually 

in children up to 18 months of age are attributed to ETS. 

ETS exposure is causally associated with increased prevalence 

of fluid in the middle ear, symptoms of upper respiratory 

tract irritation, and a small but significant reduction in lung 

function. 

iv 
Foreword 

ETS exposure is causally associated with additional episodes 

and increased severity of symptoms in children with asthma; 

it is estimated that up to 1 million asthmatic children have 

their condition worsened by exposure to ETS. 

ETS exposure is a risk factor for new cases of asthma in children who have not previously displayed symptoms. 

E73 is the ONLY agent ever classifled as a human carcinogen by 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency where the risk is based on 

actual ambient levels of exposure. 

The grassroots response to this evolution of scientific certainty 

is clearly documented in this monograph. Indeed, this response is 

nothing less than revolutionary in its importance for public health 

practice in this country. One lesson is the role of city and county 

governments in promoting public health; more than 700 local 

ordinances offer strong testimony to the ability of local government to tackle complex issues at the community level. In the past 

such problems were thought beyond the scope or ability of local 

government to address adequately. But as this document makes 

clear, it has been local government action-not State or Federalwhich has pursued and enacted stringent control measures restricting or banning smoking in public settings and limiting the accessibiIity of tobacco by young people. 

Because tobacco use is by far the leading cause of premature 

death and disability in our society, the role of tobacco control 

policy in health care cost containment-whether at the national, 

state, or local level-cannot be overstated. And, as this publication 

illustrates, all of us can take tangible steps to contain these costs 

by reducing smoking and thus preventing disease. 

Major Local Tobacco Control Ordinances in the United States 

should also provide a tangible boost for local tobacco control 

policy development. It contains a comprehensive review of local 

and State tobacco control legislation, trends in tobacco control 

ordinances, and model laws for reducing both nonsmokers’ exposure to ETS and youth access to tobacco products. It is, in short, a 

call to action to all who wish to improve the health of our Nation 

through reasonable and prudent public health policies that reduce 

tobacco addiction among our young and protect nonsmokers 

from the documented hazards of environmental tobacco smoke. 

Nevertheless, true prevention of smoking-related illnesses must 

depend on individual responsibility and action. Each of us as 

individuals must do our part. 

Samuel Broder, M.D. 

Director 

National Cancer Institute 

V 
BLANK PAGE 
Acknowledgments 

Major Local Tobacco Control Ordinances in the United States 

was developed through the Smoking and Tobacco Control 

Program (STCP), Donald R. Shopland, Coordinator, National 

Cancer Institute, Rethesda, Maryland. The editor was Mark 

Pertschuk,J.D., Co-Director, Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights 

(ANR), Berkeley, California. 

Special recognition is due Leonard Casey, Systems Manager, 

Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, for creating and maintaining 

the data base of local tobacco control ordinances on which this 

volume is based. 

The editor acknowledges the contributions of the 

following staff members of Americans for Nonsmokers’ 

Rights, who provided expertise on a wide range of tobacco 

issues as well as technical and editorial assistance in 

the preparation of this monograph: 

Patricia Brazil, Manager, Educational Programs 

Julia Carol, Co-Director 

Leonard Casey, Systems Manager 

Kevin Goebel, Manager, Legislative Programs 

Greg Heiman, Research Assistant 

Robin Hobart, M.P.H., M.P.P., Policy Analyst 

Patricia Kates, Research Assistant. 

The staff of the NCI Smoking and Tobacco Control 

Program gratefully acknowledges the following individuals, whose contributions made this monograph possible: 

Peter H. Fisher 

Coalition on Smoking OR Health 

Washington, D.C. 

Jane Moore 

Association of State and Territorial Health Officials 

Washington, D.C. 

vii 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D. 

Western Consortium for Public Health 

Berkeley, California 

Julie Williamson, M.P.H. 

California Tobacco Control Resource Partnership 

Western Consortium for Public Health 

Berkeley, California. 

Special thanks to the Coalition on Smoking OR Health, 

Washington, D.C., for its contributions both to this monograph 

and in tracking State and local tobacco policy developments. The 

Coalition is composed of the American Cancer Society, American 

Heart Assocation, and American Lung Association. 

The editor acknowledges the contributions of the 

following staff members of R.O. W.Sciences, Inc., Rockville, 

Maryland, who provided technical and editorial assistance in the preparation of this monograph: 

Richard H. Amacher, Project Manager (STCP Monographs) 

Barbara Shine, Copy Editor 

Keith Stanger, Graphics Specialist 

Jacqueline Tressler, Project Manager (STCP Support Services) 

Ronald Wolf, Data Analyst. 

viii 
Page 

Foreword .......................................... iii 

Acknowledgments................................... vii 

Introduction ....................................... 1 

Background ........................................ 5 

Chart I. Smoking Ordinances: 

Summary of Provisions ............................... 21 

Chart 11. Smoking Ordinances: 

Workplace Provisions ................................ 43 

Chart 111. Smoking Ordinances: 

Other Provisions .................................... 65 

Chart IV. Access to Minors: 

Vending Machine Ordinances ......................... 87 

Chart V. Access to Minors: Tobacco 

Sampling and Licensing Ordinances .................... 97 

Appendix A. Summary of Local Ordinances. by State ....... 103 

Table 1. Local smoking ordinances. total number. 

bystate ................................. 105 

Table 2. Local ordinances restricting youth access 

to tobacco. total number. by state ............ 107 

Appendix B. State Tobacco Control Laws ................ 109 

Table 1. State laws restricting smoking in public places .. 111 

Table 2. Age restrictions for sale of tobacco products .... 113 

Table 3. Restrictions on tobacco sales through vending 

machines. by State ........................ 115 

Table 4. Restrictions on distribution of tobacco product 

samples. by State ......................... 116 

Appendix C. Model Local Ordinances ................... 117 

Model Ordinance Eliminating Smoking in Workplaces and 

Enclosed Public Places (100% Smokefree Ordinance) .... 119 

Model Smoking Ordinance (Partial Ban) .............. 125 

Model Tobacco Vending Machine Ordinance .......... 133 

Model Tobacco Free Sampling Ordinance ............. 135 

Model Sale of Tobacco to Minors Ordinance ........... 137 

ix 
BLANK PAGE 
Introduction 

Major Local Tobacco Ordinances in the United States is a departure in both scope and format from the previous efforts in this 

monograph series. While our earlier monographs examined new 

and emerging information concerning our scientific knowledge 

about cigarette smoking and smokeless tobacco and interventions 

that may affect these behaviors (US DHHS, 1991 and 1992), this 

volume identifies, in matrix format, all known tobacco control 

ordinances at the local level in the United States through mid1992. 

While the primary purpose of the STCP monograph series 

is to summarize information and findings from NCI-funded trials 

and studies, the monographs are intended also to serve as “a 

mechanism for codification and synthesis of information relevant 

to the use of those agencies, institutions, and individuals in the 

Nation that can affect the formulation of public policy related to 

smoking and tobacco use” (US DHHS, 1991). 

The first STCP monograph (US DHHS, 1991) clearly demonstrated that, while interventions directed toward the individual 

are important, to accelerate the decline in smoking rates, comprehensive approaches arc now required which emphasize changes 

to the smoker’s (and potential smoker’s) larger social environment. The environmental changes believed most important to 

influence smoking initiation and cessation include 

e Increased tobacco costs; 

0 Media campaigns; 

0 Declining social acceptability of smoking; 

0 Limitations on where smoking is permitted; and 

0 Restriction of minors’ access to tobacco. 

This monograph examines trends in the passage of local 

ordinances in two major poiicy areas: (1) limiting smoking to 

protect nonsmokers and (2) reducing youth access to tobacco. 

In addition to an examination of local ordinances, this volume 

includes model ordinances based on existing laws for the assistance of policymakers at the community level. Two model ordinances address the issue of protecting nonsmokers in enclosed 

public places and workplaces, and three address minors’ access to 

tobacco. These latter modcls address tobacco vending machines, 

1 
MONOGRAPH 

ORGANIZATION 

AND DATA 

COLLECTION 

Smoking and Tobaccco Control Monograph No. 3 

free tobacco samples, and licensure for retail sales of tobacco 

products. 

Information contained in this volume was developed for the 

National Cancer Institute by Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights 

of Berkeley, California. This publication covers ordinances 

adopted through September 1992. 

The ordinances included in the data base came from several 

sources. The first is ANR’s collection of local tobacco ordinances. 

Other ordinances were identified and obtained through mailings 

to agencies in all 50 states. Those surveyed included local nonsmokers’ rights groups, State health officers, and voluntary health 

agencies, including the American 1.ung Association, American 

Heart Association, and Amcrican Cancer Society. 

Other ordinances were identified from media sources such 

as news clips. Some werc idcntificd from existing lists of ordinances, including those of the Tobacco Free America Clearinghouse, the Texas Health Department, Colorado GASP, and 

Massachusetts GASP. In all caser, ordinance texts were collected 

and analyzed. 

Charts I through 111 cover the provisions of ordinances that 

restrict smoking to protect nonsmokers. To be included, such 

ordinances must have as their purpose and effect the protection 

of nonsmokers from the health effects of passive smoking. Not 

included are older ordinances that merely limit smoking to 

prevent fires. There are also numerous ordinances and administrative policies adopted by cities and counties that limit smoking 

only in government offices. Because of their limited impact on 

the public at large, these ordinances are not listed here; however, 

they may be obtained through city or county clerks. 

Charts IV and V cover ordinances restricting youth access 

to tobacco products. Chart IV covers ordinances eliminating or 

restricting the placement of cigarette vending machines. Chart V 

covers ordinances that ban or limit distribution of free tobacco 

product samples and ordinances mandating tobacco retail licensing. Licensing ordinances arc included only if they provide a 

mechanism for revocation to enforce the law against sales to 

minors. 

Appendix A contains two tables listing the number of local 

tobacco control ordinances, by state. Table 1covers smoking 

ordinances, while Table 2 covers youth access ordinances. 

Appendix B contains information on State tobacco control 

laws. Table 1 covers clean indoor air laws, Table 2 lists age 

2 
Introduction 

restrictions for tobacco sales, Table 3 covers State vending machine 

laws, and Table 4 covers State restrictions on the free sampling of 

tobacco products. 

Appendix C contains model local ordinances. 

New tobacco control ordinances are continually being 

passed. The editors greatly appreciate readers’ contributions to 

future updates of this publication. Please mail copies or lists of 

ordinances to ANR, 2530 San Pablo Avenue, Suite J, Berkeley, CA 

94702, or telephone (510)841-3032. 

HOW TO USE To condense a large amount of information into a small 

THE CHARTS space, abbreviations are used extensively. The word “yes” in a 

given column indicates that smoking is restricted in the given 

environment or that an ordinance contains the given provision. 

Chart I, Smoking Ordinances: Summary of 

Provisions, is a quick reference to the current provisions 

of local smoking ordinances. It lists the original date of 

enactment, population of affected areas, and whether 

smoking is limited in workplaces, restaurants, and retail 

stores. An asterisk marks the original date of passage of 

an ordinance that has since been amended. 

Chart 11, Smoking Ordinances: Workplace Provisions, is a matrix of the workplace provisions of smoking 

ordinances. It lists whether smoking is limited in meeting 

rooms, whether nonsmokers are entitled to designate their 

own work areas as no-smoking areas, whether nonsmokers 

are given a preference in disputes over smoking policy, 

whether retaliation against employees who assert rights 

under the ordinance is prohibited, whether smoking is 

limited in common work areas, and whether smoking is 

completely eliminated. 

Chart 111, Smoking Ordinances: Other Provisions, 

lists miscellaneous other provisions of smoking ordinances. 

This includes whether smoking is limited in food markets, 

health facilities, public transportation, enclosed public 

places, and schools. Chart 111also lists the enforcement 

agency or mechanism specified in the ordinance. 

Chart IV,Access to Minors: Vending Machine 

Ordinances,lists the provisions of local ordinances that 

limit cigarette ven di ng m ach in es. 

3 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Chart V, Access to Minors: Sampling and Licensing 

Ordinances,lists the provisions of ordinances limiting the 

free sampling of tobacco products and/or requiring licensing of tobacco retailers. 

4 
Background 

ENVIRON- There is no longer any doubt that exposure to environmenMENTAL tal tobacco smoke (ETS) is a cause of death and disease among 

TOBACCO nonsmokers. Indeed, any genuine controversy on the issue 

SMOKE ended in 1986, with the publication of the Surgeon General’s 

report on the health consequences of involuntary smoking (US 

DHHS, 1986a). The report concluded the following: 

1. Involuntary smoking is a cause of disease, including 

lung cancer, in healthy nonsmokers. 

2. The children of parents who smoke compared with the 

children of nonsmoking parents have an increased 

frequency of respiratory infections, increased respiratory symptoms, and slightly smaller rates of increase 

in lung function as the lung matures. 

3. The simple separation of smokers and nonsmokers 

within the same air space may reduce, but does not 

eliminate, the exposure of nonsmokers to environmental tobacco smokc. 

These findings were echoed by other reports from the 

National Academy of Sciences and other national and international scientific bodies (NAS, 1986b). These reports contributed to a surge in efforts to protect nonsmokers from the health 

effects of ETS through legislative and policy changes (Pertschuk 

and Shopland, 1989). By far the most significant trend was the 

passage of local smoking ordinances, which had been enacted at 

a steady pace since the late 1970’s. By the time the predecessor 

to this publication, Major Local Smoking Ordinances in the United 

States, was published in the fall of 1989, 397 ordinances limiting 

smoking in workplaces, restaurants, or other places had been 

enacted (Pertschuk and Shopland, 1989). 

Scientific knowledge of the health risks associated with ETS 

has increased dramatically during the past several years. Prior to 

1981, however, there was no direct evidence that demonstrated a 

link between ETS exposure and chronic disease in adults at levels 

commonly experienced by nonsmokers, although a number of 

previous reports in the series issued by the Surgeon General had 

established a direct association between El3 and respiratory 

problems in infants and young children. 

5 
1992Report of 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Lung Cancer 

Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No.3 

In 1982, when Dr. C. Everett Koop issued his first report as 

U.S. Surgeon General (US DHHS, 1982), an assessment of the 

then available scientific evidence on ETS was included. The 

report cited three independent epidemiologic studies on lung 

cancer in nonsmoking wives who lived with smoking husbands. 

Each study observed an increased risk for lung cancers and two 

demonstrated an increased risk with increased levels of smoking 

by the husband. While the report did not find the evidence 

sufficiently compelling to conclude that a causal connection 

existed, it warned that involuntary smoking could indeed pose 

a carcinogenic risk to the nonsmoker and that individuals should 

avoid exposure to ambient tobacco smoke to the greatest extent 

possible. 

Between 1981 and 1986, when Dr. Koop issued his seminal 

report, The Health Consequences oflnvoluntary Smoking, 13 studies 

on ET5 and lung cancer had been added to the scientific literature 

base. Other studies examining 1:TS and other chronic diseases 

existed, including several that supported a link between ETS and 

coronary heart disease. 

With the growing recognition that tobacco smoke poses a 

significant health threat to individuals other than the smoker, 

the Congress as well as Federal health and regulatory agencies 

were increasingly being asked to take action to protect the public. 

The General Services Administration issued new rules for protecting workers and visitors to all Federal buildings, and in 1988 

Congress banned smoking on all domestic airline flights of 

6 hours or less duration, resulting in virtually smokefree air 

travel for all but less than 1 percent of all flights in the United 

States. 

One of the more significant actions by a Federal agency 

occurred in 1990, when the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) began a formal risk assessment to determine 

whether ETS meets the Carcinogen Risk Assessment guidelines for 

classifying a compound carcinogenic. Uy the time EPA issued its 

draft report, Respiratory Health Effects ofPussive Smoking: Lung 

Cancer and Other Disorders, in May 1992, findings from 26 casecontrol and 4 prospective cohort studies from 8 different countries comprised the available scientific evidence on ETS and lung 

cancer; all 4 cohort studies and 20 of the 26 case-control studies 

showed an elevated risk for lung cancer in never-smokers 

exposed to ETS (US EPA, 1992). 

Many of these also showed a dose-response effect; that is, 

the greater the level of exposure, the greater the lung cancer 

risk. The overwhelming weight of the evidence permitted EPA 

to conclude that E'E belongs in the category of compounds 

6 
Background 

classified as Group A (known human) carcinogens, a category 

reserved for only the most toxic of compounds regulated by EPA, 

such as radon, asbestos, and benzene (US EPA, 1992). 

ETS and In addition to lung cancer, the EPA report examined the 

Children issue of ETS and respiratory diseases and disorders in children 

and concluded that ETS exposure was causally associated with 

(1)increased prevalence of respiratory symptoms such as cough, 

sputum, and wheezing; (2) increased prevalence of middle-ear 

effusion; and (3) a small but statistically significant reduction 

in lung function (US EPA, 1992). 

The report further estimatcs that ETS contributes 150,000 

to 300,000 lower respiratory infcctions annually in infants less 

than 18 months of age, resulting in between 7,000 and 15,000 

hospitalizations annually. Of equal importance, EPA estimates 

that ETS is causally related to additional episodes and increased 

severity of preexisting asthma in children and exacerbates symptoms in approximatcly 20 percent of the estimated 2 million to 

5 million asthmatic children annually. The EPA report leaves 

open the question of whether En is directly related to asthma in 

children who have not previously exhibited the disease, terming 

the evidence "suggestive but not conclusive" (US EPA, 1992). 

Nonetheless, the 133 from parents who smoke half a pack or 

more daily may contributc up to 26,000 new cases of asthma 

annually. 

ETS and In early 1997, researchers at the University of California, 

Coronary San Francisco, published the first detailed analysis of the evidence 

Heart Disease linking ETS and coronary heart disease (CHD) (Glantz and 

Parmley, 1991). The study estimated that secondhand smoke 

kills 53,000 nonsmokers in the United States each year from 

cancer, heart disease, and lung disease, making it the third leading 

cause of preventable mortality, ranking behind active smoking 

and alcohol use. After an examination of 13 epidemiological 

studies, the investigators concluded that ETS was causally associated with CHD in nonsmokers and that such exposure may 

be responsible for 10 times more deaths annually than those 

attributable to El3 and lung cancer. 

Finally, in June 1991, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) joined the growing number 

of scientific and regulatory agencies to publish on the subject 

of secondhand smoke as an occupational carcinogen (NIOSH, 

1991). NIOSH recommended eliminating smoking in all workplaces. The only alternative, according to NIOSH, is restricting 

smoking to completely separated smoking lounges with independent ventilation systems ex haus t i ng secondhand smoke outside. 

7 
LOCAL SMOKING 

ORDINANCES 

The Trend 

Toward 

Smokefree 

Ordinances 

Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Serious proposals for local ordinances restricting smoking to 

protect nonsmokers first appeared in the early 1970’s. Activity 

began simultaneously in several states, including Florida, Maryland, Colorado, Minnesota, California, and Massachusetts. In 

1977, Berkeley, California, enacted the first modern ordinance 

limiting smoking in restaurants and other public places. Similar 

ordinances continued to pass during the late 1970’s and early 

1980’s. The 1986 Surgeon General’s report on the health consequences of involuntary smoking greatly accelerated the passage 

of such ordinances. By 1988, nearly 400 ordinances to restrict 

smoking had been enacted throughout the United States 

(Pertschuk and Shopland, 1989). 

Such ordinances typically restricted smoking in workplaces, 

restaurants, and other public places. Smoking was completely 

eliminated in most enclosed public places such as banks, theaters, 

laundromats, and retail stores. Many ordinances prohibited 

smoking in all enclosed places open to the general public. 

Restaurants were usually treated differently. Most ordinances 

required restaurants to set aside a minimum nonsmoking area, 

generally 40 or 50 percent of the restaurant’s seating capacity. 

In some Ordinances, smaller restaurants were exempted from the 

law. 

In workplaces, employers were required to develop a written 

smoking policy providing basic protections for nonsmoking 

employees. Smoking was normally eliminated in certain common areas, such as restrooms, hallways, and conference rooms. 

Nonsmokers were often given the right to designate their own 

work area as a no-smoking area. In many ordinances, nonsmokers were granted a preference in any dispute over smoking 

and nonsmoking scctions (Pcrtschuk and Shopland, 1989). 

When the Environmental Protection Agency initially made 

public the conclusions of its draft Risk Assessment on Environmental Tobacco Smoke in 1990, Communities began to consider 

secondhand smoke as far more dangerous to the public health 

than previously realized. In 1990, Lodi, California, started a trend 

by adopting an ordinance completely eliminating smoking in 

restaurants. Other cities and counties followed. Aspen, Colorado, passed the first 100-percent smokefree restaurant ordinance 

in 1986. However, it was not until the release of the EPA draft 

risk assessment, and subsequent passage of Lodi’s ordinance, that 

the passage of such laws found favor widely (Figure 1). Many 

communities followed, including Sacramento, California, which 

extendcd the total ban to workplaces as well as restaurants. 
Background 

Figure 1 

100-percent smokefree ordinances, by year enacted 

Number of 

Ordinances 

(Cumulative) 

45 -

40 - +Cumulative Total 

35 - -0- Restaurant and Workplace 

- +Restaurant 

30 

4Workplace

20 

25 

15 

-

-

- L

0 

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992’ 

Year 

‘Through September 1992. 

By the middle of 1992, the passage of smokefree ordinances 

had begun to accelerate significantly (Figure 1). Although the 

majority of the ordinances have passed in California, several have 

been proposed or passed in other states, including Massachusetts, 

Wisconsin, and Washington. 

Even cities in tobacco-producing states have begun to pass 

ordinances restricting smoking. Voters in Greensboro, North 

Carolina, twice upheld their smoking ordinance, the second time 

by a three-to-one margin. 

Tobacco Not surprisingly, the tobacco industry has fought aggressively 

Industry against local smoking ordinances (Samuels and Glantz, 1990). 

Response The industry recognizes that nonsmokers’ rights ordinances 

reduce the social acceptability of smoking, helping smokers to 

quit and leading to a reduction in the number of children who 

begin smoking (Roper, 1978). The tobacco industry recognized 

the profound impact of smoking ordinances much earlier than 

the health establishment did. In 1978, a secret public opinion 

survey conducted on behalf of the Tobacco Institute concluded 

the following: “What the smoker does to himself may be his 

9 
Economic Impact 

Of Smokefree 

Ordinances 

Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

business, but what the smoker does to the nonsmoker is quite a 

different matter. . . . This [the nonsmokers’ rights movement] 

we see as the most dangerous development to the viability of 

the tobacco industry that has yet occurred” (Roper, 1978). 

The tobacco industry’s strategies on local ordinances range 

from legal challenges to various political attacks (Samuels and 

Glantz, 1991). Although the industry continues to suggest that 

smoking ordinances are unconstitutional, State and Federal 

courts have consistently upheld the right of cities and counties 

to protect the public health by limiting public smoking. In 1992, 

the 100-percent smokefree restaurant ordinance in Lodi, California, was upheld by a State appeals court, which found that the 

ordinance was reasonable and that there is “no constitutional 

‘right’ to engage in smoking” (California v. Smith, 1992). 

Because of the success of local ordinances, the tobacco 

industry has sought the enactment of preemptive State laws on 

tobacco issues (Pertschuk and Shopland, 1989). This includes 

laws addressing both clean indoor air and access by minors, 

such as limitations on tobacco vending machines. State proposals preempting local smoking restrictions have, for the most part, 

been defeated, but they have passed in Florida, Pennsylvania, 

Virginia, Nevada, Illinois, Oklahoma, and New Jersey. All except 

Florida allow preexisting local ordinances to remain in effect 

but eliminate the power of local governments to adopt future 

ordinances. 

During the 1990’s, there has been a significant trend toward 

the passage of 100-percent smokefree ordinances, those that 

eliminate smoking completely in restaurants and workplaces, 

rather than the partial bans typical of the 1980’s (Figure 2). The 

economic impact of smokefrce restaurant ordinances has been a 

subject of debate. To date, all credible, scientific studies have 

found no evidence of negative economic impact of smokefree 

ordinances on restaurants. 

In the most comprchensive study available, researchers at 

the University of California, San Francisco, analyzed sales data 

from the State Board of Equalization for four California cities 

with 100-percent smokefree ordinances (UCSF, 1992). Their 

analysis found that a smokefree restaurant ordinance had no 

negative impact on total restaurant sales in the four study cities. 

In addition, the research indicated that there may be a competitive advantage for smokefree restaurants relative to other businesses. The presence of a smokefree restaurant ordinance was 

associated with a small but statistically significant increase in 

the fraction of total retail sales that went to restaurants. 

10 
Background 

Figure 2 

100-percent smokefree ordinances, by year of passage 

Number of 

Ordinances 

18. fJ Workplace 

16 ' 0 Restaurant 

14 1 Restaurant and Workplace 

12 

10 

8. 

6 -

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992' 

Year 

'Through September 1992. 

Individual studies also have been conducted in several cities 

with smokefree restaurant ordinances: the cities of Bellflower and 

San Luis Obispo, California, and Aspen, Colorado (unpublished 

studies, Bellflower and San Luis Obispo, California; unpublished 

study, Aspen Resort Association). Their findings are consistent 

with the UCSF study, showing either no negative impact on 

business or a positive economic impact. 

Findings: There are 543 city and county smoking ordinances 

listed in this publication, covering a total population of 

66,797,055. 

A total of 423 cities and counties limit smoking in workplaces. 

The ordinances range from simple requirements for written smoking policies to the total elimination of smoking in the workplace 

(see Chart 11). 

A total of 505 cities and counties limit smoking in restaurants. 

These range from laws that merely require restaurants to set aside a 

nonsmoking section of unspecified size, to a growing number of 

ordinances that completely eliminate smoking in restaurants 

(see Chart I). 

11 
YOUTH ACCESS 

TO TOBACCO 

PRODUCTS 

Cigarettes 

Smokeless 

Tobacco 

Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

There are 419 local ordinances that limit smoking in retail 

stores (see Chart I). 

A trend was found in the strength of smoking ordinances 

passed since the late 1970's. In general, the adoption of stronger 

ordinances has increased over time. For example, in 1984, there 

were no local ordinances completely eliminating smoking in 

restaurants or workplaces. By 1987, only one ordinance banned 

smoking in restaurants, while none did so in workplaces. In 

contrast, by September 1992 there had been 11ordinances 

adopted that completely eliminated smoking in restaurants, 

11 in workplaces, and 20 in both (Figure 1). 

More than 90 percent of current smokers began smoking 

ar, children or adolescents (US IIHHS, 1988). Each day in the 

United States, another 3,000 children begin smoking, and of 

these, more than 750 will die prematurely because of smoking 

(US DHHS, 1989). Contrary to popular belief, the problem of 

tobacco use by children is not improving. Although smoking 

rates among high school seniors decreased 9 percent from 1977 

to 1981, in the following 10 years, the daily smoking rate dropped 

only another 2 percent (Johnston et al., 1989). Of special concern 

are smoking rates among girls, which have increased over the past 

decade. This trend is in sharp contrast with the decline in most 

other drug use, including alcohol, over the same period. 

The earlier a child begins to use tobacco, the less likely that 

he or she will be able to quit, and children are beginning to 

smoke at younger ages ('Johnston et al., 1989). Young smokers 

often underestimate the harmful effects of their tobacco use and 

do not recognize that they quickly move from experimentation 

to addiction. In a National Institute on Drug Abuse study, 

95 percent of daily smokers in high school predicted they would 

not be smoking 5 years after school, yet 75 percent were still 

smoking in followup studies 7 to 9 years later uohnston et al., 

1987). 

An increasingly severe problem is the use of smokeless tobacco (Le., moist snuff and chewing tobacco), especially 

among male adolescents and young adults. By 1990, almost one 

in five male high school students in the United States reported 

recent smokeless tobacco use (CDC, 1991). Local surveys typically 

reveal that 40 to 60 percent of young males have tried smokeless 

tobacco (Boyd et al., 1987). The prevalcnce of use varies greatly 

by region, with the highest rate found in the South and the 

lowest in the Northeast (Marcus et al., 1989). First experimentation often occurs betwecn ages I0 and 12 (Boyd and Glover, 

1989). Use of smokeless tobacco can lead to nicotine addiction, 

and habitual users who attempt to quit experience many of 

the same symptoms and problcms that cigarette smokers have. 

12 
Backgound 

Tobacco Vending Machine 

Ordinances 

The health risks of smokeless tobacco use include oral cancer as 

well as various other diseases of the mouth, gums, and throat 

(US DHHS, 1992). 

Forty-nine States and the District of Columbia have laws 

that make it illegal for retailers to sell tobacco products to minors 

(usually defined as children under the age of 18)(see Appendix B). Despite these laws, children generally have easy access to 

tobacco products. Studies have shown consistently high rates of 

sales to children: Retailers sell to underage youth in field trials 

70 to 100 percent of the time, over the counter and through 

vending machines (Altman et al., 1989). 

In response to the problem, there has been a dramatic rise 

in the adoption of local ordinances to reduce minors’ easy access 

to tobacco. The most common of these ordinances ban or limit 

the placement of cigarette vending machines (Figure 3). Other 

provisions include bans on the distribution of free tobacco products and licensing of tobacco rctailcrs. 

Studies on interventions to reduce youth access to tobacco 

show that the major predictor for success is active, local enforcement of laws prohibiting the sale of tobacco to minors ( Altman 

et al., 1989; Jason et al., 1991). Civil penalties are preferable to 

criminal penalties, as youth access to tobacco is often a low 

priority for police and the court system (Feighery et al., 1991). 

Civil offenses are generally handled administratively, and many 

local jurisdictions designate the health department or the city 

manager as the enforcement agency. Rather than being found 

guilty by a court of law, an offender may pay a fine or lose his 

or her license to sell tobacco products. 

Former Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan 

and former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop both called for a 

total ban on tobacco vending machines. Although vending 

machines account for a relatively small percentage of total tobacco 

sales, they account for 16 percent of sales to minors (Office of the 

Inspector General, 1990). Those sales are frequently to the youngest customers (US DHHS, 1989). Young children, often too intimidated to attempt over-the-counter purchases, have no such barrier 

when facing a vending machine. In fact, studies have found that 

children can purchase cigarettes through vending machines in 

90 to 100 percent of their attempts (Contra Costa County HSD, 

1991). 

Findings: To date, 161 cities and counties have passed ordinances that partially or completely ban tobacco vending machines 

(see Chart IV). They are joined by the States of Hawaii, Nebraska, 

New York, and Utah. 

13 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Figure 3 

Tobacco vending machine ordinances 

Number of Ordinances 

(Cumulative) 

r 

I I 1 I

I 120 t1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992’ 

Year 

‘Through September 1992. 

A significant number of vending machine ordinances are 

partial bans that permit the placement of machines in bars and 

other facilities from which minors are excluded by law (Figure 3). 

The effectiveness of a partial ban is limited: According to one 

study, minors succeed in buying tobacco 77 percent of the time 

from vending machines placed where minors are prohibited 

(Forster et ai., 1992b ). Several jurisdictions with partial bans 

have included a requirement that vending machines be placed a 

prescribed distance from the entrance to an exempted area, to 

avoid placement in unattended lobbies and entries. 

A smaller number of ordinances require simply that cigarette vending machines be equipped with electronic locking 

devices designed to be operated by an attendant. Such devices 

have proven ineffective against sales to minors, primarily because 

they are often left on by retail stores and remain unmonitored 

(Forster et al., 1992a). The State of Utah and the City of Seattle, 

Washington, both passed legislation requiring locking devices, 

only to find them ineffective. Surveys found that some operators 

never installed the devices, while others disabled them, left 

them on continuously, or activated them without verifying 

the purchaser’s age. Utah and Seattle went on to ban vending 

machines except in bars. 

14 
Background 

Tobacco 

Sampling 

Bans 

Licensing 

Tobacco 

Retailers 

Both cigarette and chewing tobacco manufacturers distribute 

free product samples as part of their advertising and promotional 

activities. Typically, distribution of free samples is conducted in 

locations where young people congregate: music concerts, county 

fairs, athletic events, and motor sports races (Davis and Jason, 

1988). 

Although most States prohibit the distribution of free samples 

to underage youth, there is significant evidence that such laws are 

poorly enforced (Davis and Jason, 1988). A survey of elementary 

and high school students found that 20 percent of high school 

students and 4 percent of elementary students reported receiving 

free samples, and approximately half of elementary and high 

school students reported having seen children and adolescents 

receive free samples (Davis and Jason, 1988). At one county fair, 

adults videotaped a distribution booth on the fairgrounds at 

which samples were given to 9 out of 13 children (aged 14 to 16) 

who asked for them. 

Findings: Sixty-eight cities and counties have passed ordinances prohibiting the distribution of free tobacco product 

samples or coupons for free samples (see Chart V). These ordinances typically eliminate free sampling completely or, at minimum, do so on public property, such as sidewalks and fairgrounds. 

Requiring a license to sell tobacco provides localities with a 

mechanism to enforce merchants’ compliance with laws prohibiting tobacco sales to minors. Merchants more carefully monitor 

tobacco sales to minors when such sales jeopardize their license 

to sell tobacco to adults. Only those ordinances that actually 

provide a mechanism for revoking or suspending 2 tobacco 

license for selling to minors are included in this document. 

One city, Woodridge, Illinois, has carefully monitored its 

licensing ordinance and has found it extremely effective in reducing tobacco sales to minors, particularly over-the-counter sales. 

Not only have the sales rates to children fallen since passage of 

the ordinance, but a survey of seventh- and eighth-grade students 

found a SO-percent decrease (from 46 percent to 23 percent) in 

experimentation with cigarettes and a 69-percent decrease (from 

16 percent to 5 percent) in the number of regular smokers 

(Jason et al., 1991). 

Findings: Thirty-three local jurisdictions have enacted 

licensing ordinances (sce Chart V). 

15 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

REFERENCES Altman, D.G., Foster, V., Rasenick-Douss, L., Tye, J. Reducing the illegal sale of cigarettes to minors. Journal of the American 

Medical Association 261: 80-83, 1989. 

Boyd, G.M., et al. Use of smokeless tobacco among children 

and adolescents in the United States. Preventive Medicine 167: 

402-421, 1987. 

Boyd, G.M., Glover, E.D. Smokeless tobacco use by youth in 

the U.S. journal ofSchool Health 59: 189-194, 1989. 

California v. Smith, Superior Court of California, County of 

San Joaquin. Appellate Department. Decision No. 50887, 1992. 

Centers for Disease Control. lobacco use among high 

school students. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 40: 617-

619, 1991. 

Contra Costa County Health Services Department. 'Tobacco 

Control Project. Contra Costa County Health Services Department, unpublished data, 1991. 

Davis, R.M., Jason LA. The distribution of free cigarette 

samples~ominors. American Ioiirnal of Preventive Medicine 4: 21- 

26, 1988. 

Feighery, E., Altman, D., Shaffer, G. The effects of combining education and enforcement to reduce tobacco sales to minors: A study of four Northern California communities. Journal 

of the American Medical Association 266: 3163-3171, 1991. 

Forster, J.L., Hourigan, M.I., Kelder, S. Locking devices on 

cigarette vending machines: Evaluation of a city ordinance. 

American Journal ofpublic Health 82: 1217-1219, 1992a. 

Forster, J.L., Hourigan, M.L., McCovern, P. Availability of 

cigarettes to underage youth in three communities. Preventive 

Medicine 21: 320-328, 1992b. 

Glantz, S.A., Parmlcy, W.W. Passive smoking and heart 

disease: Epidemiology, physiology, and biochemistry. Circulation 83: 1-12. 1991. 

Glantz, S.A., Smith, L.R.A. The Effect of Ordinances Requiring 

Smoke Free Restaurants on Restaurant Sales in California. University 

of California, School of Medicine, Institute for Health Policy 

Studies, San Francisco, March 1992. 

16 
Backnound 

Jason, L.A., Ji, P.Y., Anes, M.D., Birkhead, S.H. Active enforcement of cigarette control laws in the prevention of cigarette 

sales to minors. Journal of the American Medical Association 266: 

3159-3161, 1991. 

Johnston, L.D., O’Malley, P.M., Bachman, J.G. National 

Trends in Drug Use and Related Factors Among American High School 

Students and Young Adults, 1975-1986. U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services; Public Health Service; Alcohol, Drug Abuse, 

and Mental Health Administration; National Institute on Drug 

Abuse, 1987. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 87-1535. 

Johnston, L.D., O’Malley, P.M., Bachman, J.G. Drug Use, 

Drinking and Smoking: National Survey Results from High School, 

College and Young Adults Populations, 1975-1988.U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services; Public Health Service; Alcohol, 

Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration; National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1989. DHHS Publication No. (ADM) 89- 

1638. 

Marcus, A.C., Crane, L.A., Shopland, D.R., Lynn, W.R. Use of 

smokeless tobacco in the United States: Recent estimates from 

the Current Population Survey. National Cancer Institute Monographs 8: 17-23, 1989. 

National Academy of Sciences. The Airliner Cabin Environment: Air Quality and Safety. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1986a. 

National Academy of Sciences. Environmental Tobacco Smoke: 

Measuring Exposures and Assessing Health Effects. Wash-ington, 

DC: National Academy Press, 1986b. 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 

Current Intelligence Bulletin 54: Environmental Tobacco Smoke in 

the Workplace: Lung Cancer and Other Health Effects. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control, 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, June 1991. 

DHHS Publication No. (NIOSH) 91-108. 

Office of the Inspector General. Youth Access to Cigarettes: 

A Report of the Office of the Inspector General. New York OIG, May 

1990. Publication No. OEI, 02-90-02310. 

Pertschuk, M., Shopland, D.R. (Editors). Major Local Smoking 

Ordinances in the United States: A Detailed Matrix of the Provisions 

of Workplace, Restaurant, and Public Places Smoking Ordinances. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health 

Service, Nationai Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, 

1989. NIH Publication No. 90-479. 

17 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Roper Organization. A Study ofPubZic Attitudes Toward 

Cigarette Smoking and the Tobacco Industry in 1978, Volume I. 

The Roper Organization, Inc., 1978. 

Samuels, B., Glantz, S.A. The politics of local tobacco 

control. Journal ofthe American Medical Association 266: 2110-

2117,1991. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The 

Health Consequences of Smoking: A Report of the Surgeon General. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health 

Service, Office on Smoking and Health, 1982. DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 82-501 79. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The 

Health Consequences of Involuntary Smoking: A Report of the 

Surgeon General. U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, 

1986a. DHHS Publication No. (CDC) 87-8398. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The 

Health Consequences of Using Smokeless Tobacco: A Report of the 

Advisoly Committee to the Surgeon General. U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National 

Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, 1986b. NIH 

Publication No. 86-2874. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The 

Health Consequences of Smoking: Nicotine Addiction. A Report of 

the Surgeon General. U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, 

Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, 

Office on Smoking and Health, 7 988. DHHS Publication No. 

(CDC) 88-8406. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Reducing 

the Health Consequences of Smoking: 25 Years of Progress. A 

Report ofthe Surgeon General. U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease 

Control, Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health 

Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 1989. DHHS 

Publication No. (CDC) 89-8411. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Strategies 

To Control Tobacco Use in the United States: A Blueprint for Public 

Health Action in the 1990's. Smoking and Tobacco Control 

Monograph No. 1. U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, 

National Cancer Institute, 1991. NIH Publication No. 92-3316. 

18 
Background 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Smokeless 

Tobacco or Health: An International Perspective. Smoking and 

Tobacco Control Monograph No. 2. U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes 

of Health, National Cancer Institute, 1992. NIH Publication 

NO. 92-3461. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Respiratory Health 

Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders. U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and 

Development. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA, 1992. 

19 
BLANK PAGE 
Chart I 

Smoking Ordinances: 

Summary of Provisions 

Chart I is a quick reference to the major provisions of local 

smoking ordinances in the United States. It lists significant city 

and county smoking ordinances with the population, date of 

enactment, and whether the law limits smoking in the workplace, restaurants, and retail stores. There are 543 smoking 

ordinances included herein. 

Date Enacted: The date column shows when a given smoking ordinance was adopted (normally by a city council or county 

board of supervisors). In the case of ordinances that have been 

strengthened, the date is that of the first adoption. Those 

ordinances that have been amended are indicated by an asterisk 

next to the date. 

Population: The population column contains the population of a listed city or county. County smoking ordinances 

cover the unincorporated area of the county. This means the 

population is for the area that is not part of an incorporated city 

in the county. The figure for a given county represents the 

population of the unincorporated area. The 543 city and county 

smoking ordinances listed herein cover a total population of 

66,797,05 5. 

Workplaces: The workplace column indicates whether an 

ordinance restricts smoking in places of work. “Public” indicates 

that only government offices are covered. “Private” indicates 

that only private employers arc covered. “All” means both are 

covered. 

Restaurants: ‘The restaurant column indicates whether 

restaurants are covered by an ordinance. Minimum size for 

no-smoking sections is indicated in the first column, and any 

exemption for small restaurants is indicated in the second. 

Retail Stores: The last column indicates whether retail stores 

are expressly covered by a particular ordinance. 

21 
BLANK PAGE 
chart z 

Smoking Ordinances: 

Summary of Provisions 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions' Stores 

ALABAMA 

Auburn 1992 34 All 0% No Yes 

Birmingham 1987 266 All 0% No Yes 

Dothan 1992 54 All SO% No Yes 

Eufaula 1990 13 None 0% so Yes 

Huntsville 1989 160 All 0% No Yes 

Jackson 1991 6 All 0% 19 Yes 

Madison 1990 15 All 25% 19 Yes 

Mobile 1988 196 All 20% 19 Yes 

Montgomery 1989 187 All 0% No Yes 

Pra ttvi 1le 1991 20 All 0% 19 Yes 

Tuscaloosa 1990 78 Public - - No 

ARIZONA 

Chandler 1987 91 All 0% No Yes 

Flagstaff 1989 46 All 0% No Yes 

Gilbert 1988 29 All 50% No Yes 

Glendale 1987 148 All 0% No Yes 

Kingman 1988 13 All - - No 

Maricopa County 1988 169 All 40% No Yes 

Mesa 1986 288 All 0% No Yes 

Paradise Valley 1987 12 None 25% No Yes 

Peoria 1991 51 All 0% No Yes 

Phoenix 1986 983 All 0% No Yes 

Pima County 1987* 248 All - - Yes 

Prescott 1986 26 All 0% No Yes 

Scott sdale 1986 130 All 0% No Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

* Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"means there is no restaurant provision. 

23 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tionsz Stores 

ARIZONA 

Tempe 1987 142 All 50% No Yes 

Tucson 1983* 405 All - - Yes 

Yuma 1987 55 All 0% 100 Yes 

ARKANSAS 

Little Rock3 1987 176 None - - No 

McGehee 1987 5 All - - Yes 

CALIFORNIA 

Agoura Hills 1991 20 All 50% 50 Yes 

Alameda 1987 76 All 50% 50 Yes 

Alameda County 1986 120 All 40% 50 Yes 

Albany 1986* 16 All 100% No Yes 

Alhambra 1989 82 A11 50% No Yes 

Alpine County 1988 1 All 50% No Yes 

Anaheim 1986 266 All 0% 50 No 

Antioch 1985 62 All 40% 50 Yes 

Apple Valley 1991 46 None 60% No Yes 

Arcata 1985 15 All 50% 50 Yes 

Atascadero 1991 23 None 0% 49 No 

Auburn 1991 11 All 100% No Yes 

Belm on t 1988 24 All 0% 49 Yes 

Benicia 1987 24 All 50% 50 Yes 

Berkeley 1977* 103 All 50% No Yes 

Beverly Hills 1987* 32 None 60% No Yes 

Big Bear Lake 1987 5 Public - - No 

Blue Lake 1987 1 All 25% No Yes 

Brea 1986 33 All 25% 50 No 

Bren twood 1985 8 All 40% 50 Yes 

Burbank3 1987 94 None - - No 

Burlingame 1987 27 All 0% 50 Yes 

Butte County 1987 100 All 10% 20 Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"means there is no restaurant provision. 

Though major provisions not covered, this ordinance covers provisions listed in Chart HI. 

24 
chart I 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions2 Stores 

CALIFORNIA 

Camarillo 1988 52 All 50% No Yes 

Campbell 1988* 36 AI1 50% 49 Yes 

Carlsbad 1983 63 All 0% 20 Yes 

Carpin teria 1985 14 All - - No 

Cathedral City3 1982 30 None - - No 

Chico 1986 40 All 10% 20 Yes 

Chula Vista 1984 135 All 0% 20 Yes 

Clayton 1985* 7 All 75% No Yes 

Cloverdale 1989 5 All 50% 49 Yes 

Coachella 1988 17 All 25% 49 Yes 

Colfax 1991 1 All 100% No Yes 

Concord 1985 111 All 40% 50 Yes 

Contra Costa County 1985* 15s All 100% No Yes 

Coronado 1984 27 All 0% 20 Yes 

Corte Madera 1981 8 None 0% 19 Yes 

Cotati 1989 6 All 50% No Yes 

Culver City 1987 39 All 66% 25 Yes 

Cupertino 1985 40 All 30% 50 Yes 

Cypress 1987 43 All 25% 49 Yes 

Danville 1985 31 AI1 40% 50 Yes 

Davis 1987 46 All 50% so Yes 

Del Mar 1983 5 All 0% 20 Yes 

Del Norte County 1988 19 Public - - No 

Desert Hot Springs 1986 12 All 25% 50 Yes 

Dixon 1986 10 All 50% 50 Yes 

Downey 1989 91' A.1I 50% 50 Yes 

Duarte 1989 21 All 50% 49 No 

Dublin 1986 23 All 50% No Yes 

El Cajon 1985* 89 All 0% 19 Yes 

El Cerrito 1985* 23 All 100% No Yes 

El Dorado County 1991 102 All 100% No Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has Imn an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; 'I-'I means there is no restaurant provision

Though major provisions not covered, this ordinance covcrs provisions listed in Chart 111. 

25 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- hemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions2 Stores 

CALIFORNIA 

El Segundo 1989 15 All SO% 40 Yes 

Emeryville 1987 6 AI1 50% 24 Yes 

Escondido 1983" 109 AI1 50% 19 Yes 

Eureka 1985 27 AII 25% No Yes 

Fairfield 1987 77 AI 1 50% 49 Yes 

Fontana 1986 88 AI1 50% 40 Yes 

Fortuna 1988 9 ,411 25% No Yes 

Fremont 1986 173 All 40% No Yes 

Fresno 1987 354 All 50% No Yes 

Garden Grove 1990 143 All 25% 50 No 

Gardena3 1977 50 None - - NO 

Gilroy 1986 31 AI I 50% 49 NO 

Grand Terrace 1985 11 All 25% 50 Yes 

Grass Valley 1990 9 All 100% No Yes 

Gridley 1986* 5 All 50% 49 Yes 

Hayward 1988 111 All SO% 49 Yes 

Healdsburg 1988 9 AII 50% 49 Yes 

Hemet 1986 36 All 0% 50 Yes 

Hercules 198S* 17 All 100% No Yes 

Hesperia 1992 50 1'11bI ic 60% No Yes 

Hollister 1987 19 AII 30% 2s No 

Huntington Beach 1986 182 All 25% 50 No 

Imperial Beach 1985 27 All 0% 20 Yes 

Indian Wells 1990 3 All 77% No Yes 

Indio 1985 37 All SO% so Yes 

Irvine 1986 110 All 25% 40 No 

La Canada Flintridge 1990 19 All SO% No Yes 

La Mesa 1984 53 All 0% 40 Yes 

La Mirada3 1977* 40 None - - No 

La Quinta 1992 11 All 7soh No Yes 

La fa ye tte 198S* 24 All 40% 49 Yes 

' Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; 'I-" means there is no restaurant provision. 

Though major provisions not covered, this ordinance covers provisions listed in Chart 111. 

26 
Chart I 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tionsZ Stores 

CALIFORNIA 

Laguna Beach 1985* 23 All 100% No No 

Laguna Niguel 1989 44 All 20% 49 Yes 

Lakewood 1988 74 Public 0% No Yes 

Lancaster 1988 97 All 50% 50 Yes 

Larkspur 1992 11 All - - Yes 

La t hrop 1991 '7 All 100% No Yes 

Lemon Grove 1987 24 None 0% 49 Yes 

Live Oak 1986 4 All 50% 50 Yes 

Livermore 1985 57 All 50% No Yes 

Livingston 1987 7 All 50% No Yes 

Lodi 1990 52 All 100% No Yes 

Loma Linda 1986 17 All 50% 40 Yes 

Lompoc 1990 38 All 25% 19 Yes 

Long Beach 1985* 429 All 67% No No 

Los Alamitos 1989 12 Public 40% 49 Yes 

Los Altos 1979 26 All 25% 50 Yes 

Los Angeles 1984* 3,485 All 50% 50 Yes 

Los Angeles County 1987* 954 Public 0% No No 

Los Gatos 1980* 27 All 100% No Yes 

Manhattan Beach 1987 32 All 0% 20 No 

Marin County 1981 67 None 0% 19 No 

Martinez 1985* 32 All 100% No Yes 

Marysville 1986 12 All 50% 49 Yes 

Menlo Park 1986 28 All 60% 49 No 

Merced 1987 56 All 50% No Yes 

Mill Valley 1982 13 None 0% 20 No 

Millbrae 1988 20 All 50% 19 Yes 

Milpitas 1985 51 All 50% No Yes 

Mission Viejo 1988 73 All 20% 49 Yes 

Modesto 1987 16.5 All 50% No Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"means there is no restaurant provision. 

27 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (OOO) places mum tions2 Stores 

CALIFORNIA 

Mon t erey 1987 32 All 0% No Yes 

Monterey County 1987 103 All 50% 40 Yes 

Moorpark 1988 25 All 50% No Yes 

Moraga 1986 16 All 40% 50 Yes 

Moreno Valley 1990 119 All 50% 49 Yes 

Morgan Hill 1985 24 All 0% No Yes 

Morro Bay 1986 10 All 50% 29 No 

Mountain View 1984 67 All 50% No Yes 

Napa 1978 62 None 30% 49 No 

National City 1984 54 All 0% 40 Yes 

Nevada County 1991 71 All 100% No Yes 

Newark 1988 38 All 40% 49 Yes 

Newport Beach 1985 67 All 25% 50 No 

Novato 1992 48 All 100% No Yes 

Oakdale 1987 12 All 50% No Yes 

Oakland 1986* 372 All 100% 29 Yes 

Oceanside 1983 128 All 0% 20 Yes 

Ojai 1987 8 Public 50% 20 No 

Ontario 1987 133 All 25% 50 No 

Orange County 1985* 196 All 20% 49 Yes 

Orinda 1985* 17 All 80% No Yes 

Orovi11e 1987 12 All 10% 20 Yes 

Oxnard 1988 142 All 50% 15 Yes 

Pacific Grove 1987 16 None 0% No Yes 

Palm Desert 1986 23 All 25% 50 Yes 

Palm Springs 1986 40 All 25% 50 Yes 

Palmdale 1988 69 All 50% 49 Yes 

Palo Alto 1983* 56 All 100% No Yes 

Paradise 1986* 25 All 100% No Yes 

Pasadena 1984 132 All 25% 50 No 

Petaluma 1987 43 All 50% No Yes 

' Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"mc'aiis there is no restaurant provision 

28 
chart I 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions2 Stores 

CALIFORNIA 

Piedmont 1988 11 All 50% 19 Yes 

Pinole 1985' 17 All 60% 49 Yes 

Pi ttsburg 1985 48 All 40% 50 Yes 

Placer County 1991 87 All 80% No Yes 

Placerville 1991 8 All 50% No Yes 

Pleasant Hill 1986 32 All 40% 50 Yes 

Pleasanton 1986 51 All 40% 50 Yes 

Port Huenem e 1989 20 All 50% No Yes 

Poway 1983 44 All 0% 20 Yes 

Rancho Cucamonga 1988 101 None 40% No Yes 

Rancho Mirage 1987 10 All 66% No Yes 

Redlands 1987 60 All 50% 40 Yes 

Redwood City 1988 66 All 50% No Yes 

Rialto 1990 72 All - - No 

Richmond 1985 87 All 40% 50 Yes 

Riverside 1985 227 All 25% 50 Yes 

Riverside County 1985 35.5 All 25% 50 Yes 

Rohnert Park 1989 36 All 50% No Yes 

Roseville 1991 45 All 100% No Yes 

Ross 1989 2 None 100% No Yes 

Sacramento 1985* 369 All 100% No Yes 

Sacramento County 1985* 641 All 100% No Yes 

Salinas 1987 109 All 50% 40 Yes 

San Bernardino 1988 164 All 0% 29 Yes 

San Bernardino County 1987 367 All 0% 29 Yes 

San Bruno 1987 39 All 50% 49 Yes 

San Buenaventura 1987 93 All 50% No Yes 

San Carlos 1988 26 All 50% No Yes 

San Clemente 1987 41 All 50% No No 

San Diego 1982* 1,111 All 50% No Yes 

* Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"mcans there is no restaurant provision. 

29 
Smokinx and Tobacco Control Monomaph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions2 Stores 

CALIFORNIA 

San Diego County 1982* 415 All 50% No Yes 

San Francisco 1983* 724 All 0% No Yes 

San Jose 1984 782 All 30% 100 Yes 

San Juan Capistrano 1991 26 All 75% 49 Yes 

San Leandro 1988 68 All 40% 49 Yes 

San Luis Obispo 1985' 42 All 100% No Yes 

San Marcos 1983 39 All 0% 19 Yes 

San Mateo 1986 85 All 50% 50 Yes 

San Mateo County 1990* 57 All 75% No Yes 

San Pablo 1985 25 All 40% 50 Yes 

San Rafael 1979 48 None 20% 20 No 

San Ramon 1985 35 All 40% 50 Yes 

Santa Barbara 1984 86 AI1 25% 20 No 

Santa Barbara County 1987 162 All 50% 29 Yes 

Santa Clara 1985 94 All 30% 50 Yes 

Santa Clara County 1985 105 All 33% No Yes 

Santa Cruz 1985 49 All 0% No Yes 

Santa Cruz County 1985 134 All 0% No Yes 

Santa Maria 1988 61 All 50% No Yes 

Santa Monica 1985* 87 All 60% No No 

Santa Rosa 1988 113 All 50% No Yes 

Santee 1983 53 All 0% 20 Yes 

Sara t oga 1987 28 All 67% 49 Yes 

Scotts Valley 1985 9 All 0% No Yes 

Seaside 1992 39 All 25% 49 Yes 

Sebastopol 1988 7 All 50% 44 Yes 

Shasta County 1986 76 All 0% No Yes 

Simi Valley 1987 100 None 50% No Yes 

Solana Beach 1986* 13 All 100% No Yes 

Solano County 1987* 20 All 75% No Yes 

Solvang 1988 5 AI1 50% 9 Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has bccn an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"means there is no restaurant provision. 

30 
chart I 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions2 Stores 

CALIFORNIA 

Sonoma 1988 8 All 50% No Yes 

Sonoma County 1988 160 All 50% No Yes 

South Lake Tahoe 1992 22 All 50% No Yes 

South Pasadena 1988 24 None 50% 29 No 

South San Francisco 1987 54 All 0% 50 Yes 

Stanislaus County 1987 101 All 50% No No 

Stockton 1988 21 1 All 70% No Yes 

Sunnyvale 1986 117 All 60% 50 Yes 

Sutter County 1986 34 All 50% 49 Yes 

Temecula 1985 27 All 25% 49 No 

Thousand Oaks 1987 104 All 50% 39 Yes 

Tiburon 1989 8 All 50% 50 Yes 

Torrance 1987 133 All 50% 50 Yes 

Tracy 1987 34 All 70% No Yes 

Turlock 1987 42 All 50% No Yes 

Tustin 1985 51 All 0% 20 Yes 

Ukiah 1981 15 All 50% No Yes 

Union City 1988 54 All 40% 49 Yes 

Vacaville 1987* 71 All 50% 50 Yes 

Vallejo 1987 109 All 50% 50 Yes 

Victorville 1988 41 All 50% 39 Yes 

Visalia 1992 76 All 100% No Yes 

Vista 1983 72 All 0% 20 Yes 

Walnut 1988* 29 Public 25% 50 No 

Walnut Creek 1985* 61 All 100% No Yes 

Wa t sonvi 11e 1987 31 All 35% 49 Yes 

West Hollywood 1986* 36 All 40% 35 Yes 

West Sacramento 1991 29 All 50% No Yes 

Wheatland 1986 2 All 50% 50 Yes 

Whittier 1991 78 All 100% No Yes 

Wood side 1990 S All 50% No Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates therc has heen an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"means thew is no restaurant provision. 

31 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tionsZ Stores 

CALIFORNIA 

Yo10 County 1988 22 Public - - No 

Yorba Linda 1985 52 All 33% 40 Yes 

Yountville 1990 3 All 80% No Yes 

Yuba City 1986 27 All 50% 50 Yes 

COLORADO 

Arapahoe County 1988 112 All 0% 30 Yes 

Arvada 1986 89 All 25% 30 Yes 

Aspen 1985 5 All 100% No Yes 

Aurora 1986 222 All 0% 50 Yes 

Boulder 1986* 83 Private 0% 30 Yes 

Boulder County 1988 44 All 0% 30 Yes 

Broomfield 1987 25 All 0% 30 Yes 

Canon City 1988 13 All 0% 50 Yes 

Carbondale 1987 3 All - - No 

Colorado Springs 1987 281 All 0% 50 Yes 

Denver 1986 468 All 0% 50 No 

Englewood 1986 29 All 0% 30 Yes 

Fort Collins 1984 88 All 0% 30 Yes 

Glenwood Springs 1988 7 None 50% 30 Yes 

Golden 1986 13 All 75% 30 Yes 

Grand Junction 1985 29 All 0% 30 Yes 

Greeley 1986 61 All 50% 30 Yes 

Greenwood Village 1988 8 All 0% 50 Yes 

Jefferson County 1987 142 All 0% 30 Yes 

Lakewood 1987* 126 All 50% 30 Yes 

Litt let on 1987 34 All 0% 30 Yes 

Longmont 1985 52 All 0% No Yes 

Louisville 1986 12 None 0% 24 Yes 

Loveland 1985 37 All 50% 30 Yes 

Parker 1989 5 All 0% 30 Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"nicans there is no restaurant provision. 

32 
Chart Z 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tionsZ Stores 

COLORADO 

Pueblo 1985 99 All 0% 49 Yes 

Snowmass Village 1989 1 All 67% No Yes 

Telluride 1987 1 All 50% No Yes 

Thornton 1986 55 All 0% 30 Yes 

Trinidad 1986 9 All 0% 20 Yes 

Vail 1990* 4 All 0% No Yes 

Weld County 1988 33 Public - - No 

Westminster 1986 75 All 0% 30 Yes 

Wheat Ridge 1986 29 All 0% 30 Yes 

DELAWARE 

Wi1mi ngton 1989 72 All 0% 74 Yes 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Washington 1988* 607 All 25% 49 Yes 

GEORGIA 

Augusta 1992 45 None 40% 49 No 

Gainesville 1991 18 All 0% No Yes 

Richmond County 1992 142 None 40% 49 No 

Snelhille 1992 12 All 50% 49 Yes 

HAWAII 

Hawaii County 1986 120 None 0% 39 No 

Honolulu 1985 365 None - - Yes 

ILLINOIS 

Arlington Heights 1989 75 All 0% No Yes 

Chicago 1988 2,784 All - - Yes 

DeKalb 1988 35 None 50% 19 Yes 

Des Plaines 1988 53 All 25% 49 Yes 

Downer's Grove 1979 47 None 10% 19 No 

Elgin 1989 77 All 50% 39 Yes 

Evanston 1988 73 None 20% 39 No 

Highland Park 1986 31 None 0% 50 Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has lieen an amendment. * Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"riiciins there is no restaurant provision. 

33 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State 

City or County 

Date 

Enacted' 

Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

(000) places mum tied Stores 

ILLINOIS 

Hoffman Estates 1988 47 All 0% 39 No 

Oak Park 1989 54 All 25% 39 Yes 

Orland Park 1988 36 All 0% 39 No 

Park Ridge 1989 36 None 0% No No 

Rockford 1988 139 All 0% No Yes 

Skokie 1987 59 All 0% 39 Yes 

Wilmette 1988 27 All 0% No Yes 

INDIANA 

Bloomington 1987 61 None 25% No Yes 

Fort Wayne 1988 173 None 0% NO No 

KANSAS 

Lawrence 1986 66 All 0% 30 Yes 

Overland Park 1984' 112 All 0% No Yes 

Prairie Village 1986 23 None - - Yes 

Topeka 1986 120 All 0% 30 Yes 

LOUISIANA 

Lake Charles 1989 71 All 50% 49 Yes 

New Orleans 1988 497 All 50% 50 Yes 

MARYLAND 

Howard County 1988* 187 All 0% 75 Yes 

Montgomery County 1988* 646 All 50% 49 Yes 

Prince George's County 1988 530 Public - - No 

Rockville 1987 45 None 50% 25 Yes 

Takoma Park 1990 17 All 50% 24 Yes 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Acton 1982 18 None 25% 24 No 

Agawam 1990 27 Nonc 25% No No 

Amherst 1984 35 Nonc 25% No No 

Auburn 1986 15 Nonc 50% No No 

Belmont 1990 25 A11 - - No 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"mean4 there is no restaurant provision. 

34 
chart I 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted’ (000) places mum tionsZ Stores 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Beverly 1984 38 None 25% No No 

Braintree 1984 34 None 25% 24 No 

Brewster 1986* 8 None 50% No No 

Brookline 1982 55 All 40% 25 Yes 

Cam bridge 1984* 96 All 25% No Yes 

Canton 1985 19 None 25% 24 No 

Chatham 1986 7 None 25% 74 No 

Chelmsford 1986* 32 All 50% No Yes 

Cohasset 1987 7 None 25% No No 

Concord 1989 17 All 50% No Yes 

Danvers 1986 27 None 25% 40 No 

Dennis 1985 14 None 0% 49 No 

Easthampton 1987 16 None 25% No No 

Foxborough 1984 1s None 25% 40 No 

Framingham 1984 65 None 25% 74 No 

Great Barrington 1992 8 All 50% No Yes 

Holden 1987 1s None 25% 39 No 

Holyoke 1987 44 None 50% 25 No 

Hudson 1984 17 None 20% 49 No 

Hull 1987 10 None 25% 25 No 

Lee 1987* 6 All 100% No Yes 

Lenox 1992 5 All 100% No Yes 

Leominster 1986* 38 All 50% 24 Yes 

Lexington 1983 29 All 25% 50 No 

Lynnfield 1984 11 None 25% 100 No 

Malden 1985 54 None 15% 49 No 

Marbl eh ea d 1988 20 None 33% No Yes 

Marlborough 1987 32 None 30% 25 No 

Maynard 1988 10 None 50% No No 

Medford 1984 57 None 25% 40 No 

Millis 1991 8 All 35% No Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has I)cen an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; ‘I-” means there is no restaurant provision. 

35 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions' Stores 

MASSACHUSETIS 

Natick 1987 31 All 25% 25 Yes 

Needham 1983* 28 All 75% 24 Yes 

Newton 1984 83 AI1 15% 50 No 

North Attleboro 1992 25 All 75% 24 Yes 

Northampton 1984 29 None 25% No No 

Norwood 1985 29 None 25% 39 No 

Plainville 1985 7 None 0% No No 

Quincy 1988 85 None 25% 40 No 

Randolph 1984 30 None 25% 40 No 

Reading 1984* 23 None 25% 39 No 

Revere 1984 43 None 25% 40 No 

Salem 1988 38 None 25% 39 No 

Sandwich 1991 15 All 80% No Yes 

Sci tuate 1987 17 None 50% No No 

Somerville 1984* 76 All 35% No Yes 

Sterling 1987 6 None 40% 49 Yes 

Stockbridge 1992 2 All 100% No Yes 

Stoughton 1983 27 None 25% 39 No 

Sudbury 1987 14 All 30% 40 Yes 

Swam pscott 1984 14 None 25% No No 

Tewksbury 1987 27 None 50% No No 

Townsend 1987 8 All - - No 

Walpole 1985 20 None 25% 50 No 

Watertown 1986* 33 All 80% No No 

Wellesley 1985* 27 All 25% 39 No 

West Springfield 1988* 28 All 75% 49 Yes 

Westford 1986 16 None 20% 50 No 

Westminster 1985 6 None 0% 24 No 

Weymout h 1991 54 None 50% 24 No 

Williamstown 1986 8 None 50% 50 No 

Winchester 1984 20 None 25% No No 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"means there is no restaurant provision. 

36 
chartI 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (Ow places mum tionsZ Stores 

MASSACHUSETIS 

Winthrop 1987 18 None 25% 25 No 

MICHIGAN 

East Lansing 1985 51 All 25% 50 Yes 

Marquette 1987 22 All 60% No Yes 

MISSOURI 

Clayton 1988 14 None 25% 40 Yes 

Columbia 1987 69 All 0% 49 Yes 

Des Peres 1989 8 None 50% No Yes 

Independence 1986 112 All 0% 49 Yes 

Jefferson 1989 35 All 0% 49 Yes 

Kansas City 1986 435 All 0% 50 Yes 

Rock Hill 1987 5 None 0% 49 Yes 

NEW JERSEY 

Hillsborough Township 1981 29 None 0% 50 No 

NEW MEXICO 

Albuquerque 1988 385 All 67% No Yes 

NEW YORK 

Chautauqua County 1988 62 All 0% 50 Yes 

Erie County 1975 509 All - - Yes 

Monroe County 1987 439 All 0% 50 Yes 

Nassau County 1985* 799 All 75% No Yes 

New York City 1988 7,323 All 50% 50 Yes 

Ontario County 1987 58 All 0% 50 Yes 

Rockland County 1988 171 All 0% 25 Yes 

Suffolk County 1984 1,201 All 20% 50 No 

Westchester County 1985 243 All - - Yes 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Chapel Hill 1991* 39 All 25% 29 Yes 

Greensboro 1989* 184 None 25% 49 Yes 

* Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has Iwen an amendment. Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"means there is no restaurant provision. 

37 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tionsZ Stores 

NORTH CAROLINA 

New Hanover County 1990 58 All 25% No Yes 

Raleigh 1988* 208 All 33% 29 No 

OHIO 

Akron 1985* 223 All 0% 50 No 

Athens 1988 21 None 50% 30 Yes 

Barbarton 1988 28 All 0% 50 Yes 

Beachwood 1989 11 All 50% 49 Yes 

Cincinnati 1985 364 All 0% No Yes 

Cleveland 1986 SO 6 All 40% 29 Yes 

Cleveland Heights 1987 54 All 30% 30 Yes 

Euclid 1989 55 All 0% No Yes 

Lakewood 1987 60 All 0% 29 Yes 

Lorain 1992 71 All 50% 48 Yes 

Maple Heights 1988 27 All 0% 29 Yes 

Mayfield Village 1986 3 All 10% No Yes 

Medina 1987 19 None 50% 29 Yes 

Parma 1988 88 All 0% 29 Yes 

Parma Heights 1987 21 All 0% No Yes 

Shaker Heights 1988 31 All 50% 30 Yes 

Summit County 1987* 104 All 0% 49 Yes 

Toledo 1987 333 AI1 20% 40 Yes 

University Heights 1987 1s All 50% 29 Yes 

Warren 1987 51 All 0% 29 Yes 

Xenia 1985 25 All 0% 49 No 

OREGON 

Eugene 1980 113 Pub1i c 0% 50 No 

PENNSYLVANIA 

Erie 1988 109 All 20% No Yes 

Lower Merion 1988 23 All 0% 24 Yes 

Pittsburgh 1987 3 70 All 20% 50 Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates thew has tmn an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer arc exempt; "-"nicans there is no restaurant provision. 

38 
chart I 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted’ (000) places mum tiom* Stores 

PENNSYLVANIA 

State College 1987 39 All 0% No Yes 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

Greenville 1987 58 None 50% 99 Yes 

Hampton County 1987 9 Public - - No 

SOUTHDAKOTA 

Sioux Falls 1980 101 All - - Yes 

TENNESSEE 

Germantown 1989 33 None 0% No Yes 

Memphis 1986 610 None 0% 49 Yes 

TEXAS 

Abilene 1987 107 All 0% No Yes 

Addison 1988 9 All 0% 49 Yes 

Amarillo 1988 158 None 0% No Yes 

Arlington 1985 262 None 0% 99 No 

Austin 1986 466 All 0% No Yes 

Bed ford 1986 44 None 0% 99 Yes 

Brownsville 1988 99 All 0% 24 Yes 

Bryan 1986 55 None 0% 49 Yes 

College Station 1990 52 None 50% 49 Yes 

Colleyvi1le 1989 13 All 0% 24 Yes 

Corpus Christi 1986 257 All 25% No Yes 

Dallas 1987 1,007 All 0% 49 Yes 

Del Rio 1987 31 None 0% No Yes 

Den ton 1986 66 None 0% 49 Yes 

Desoto 1989 3 1 All 75% No Yes 

Duncanville 1989 3 6 None 0% No Yes 

Eagle Pass 1987 21 None 0% 49 Yes 

El Paso 1986 515 All 0% No Yes 

Euless 1987 38 None - - Yes 

Fort Worth 1986 448 None 0% 49 Yes 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; “-’I means there is no restaurant provision. 

39 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions2 Stores 

TEXAS 

Galvest on 1989 59 All 0% No Yes 

Garland 1991 181 None 0% 49 No 

Grand Prairie 1986 100 All 0% 49 Yes 

Greenville 1986 23 All 0% No Yes 

Haltom City 1986 33 None 0% 49 Yes 

Houston 1986* 1,631 All 0% 49 Yes 

Huntsville 1987 28 None 30% 49 Yes 

Hurst 1986 34 None 0% 99 Yes 

1rving3 1979 155 None - - No 

Kerr County 1987 18 Public - - No 

Kerrville 1987 17 All 0% No Yes 

Lancaster 1988 22 None 0% 49 Yes 

Leon Valley 1987 10 None 0% 49 Yes 

Longview 1987 70 None 0% No Yes 

Lubbock 1987 186 None 0% No Yes 

Mansfield3 1987 16 None - - No 

McAllen 1987 84 All 0% No Yes 

Mesquite 1988 101 None 50% 49 Yes 

Midland 1990 89 All 0% No Yes 

New Braunfels 1990 27 Publ i c 0% 9 No 

North Richland Hills 1987 46 None 0% 49 Yes 

Plano 1986 129 None 0% 49 Yes 

Richardson 1988 75 All 0% No Yes 

Rockwall 1986 10 Pub1 ic 0% 99 No 

San Antonio 1986 936 None 0% 49 Yes 

Seguin 1988 19 All 0% No Yes 

Sugar Land 1987 25 Public - - No 

Texarkana 1986 32 I'u bl i c - - No 

Travis County 1986 95 All 0% No Yes 

Tyler 1987 75 All - - Yes 

' Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"means there is no restaurant provision. 

Though major provisions not covered, this ordinance covers provisions listed in Chart 111. 

40 
chart I 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions* Stores 

TEXAS 

Wichita Falls 1987 96 None 0% 99 Yes 

VERMONT 

Burlington 1986* 39 All 0% No Yes 

VIRGINIA 

Albemarle County 1989 68 All 20% 74 Yes 

Alexandria 1988 111 None 25% 40 Yes 

Arlington 1987* 171 None 25% 74 Yes 

Charlottesville 1988 40 All 20% 74 No 

Chesapeake 1988 152 Public 0% 49 Yes 

Fairfax 1986* 20 None 25% 99 Yes 

Fairfax County 1985 787 None 25% 99 Yes 

Falls Church 1988* 10 None 25% 49 Yes 

Franklin 1988 8 None 0% 50 Yes 

Hampton 1989 134 None 0% 49 Yes 

Lynchburg 1989 66 None 25% 39 Yes 

Newport News 1989 170 Public 0% 49 Yes 

Norfolk 1979 26 1 None 0% 49 Yes 

Portsmouth 1988* 104 None 0% 49 Yes 

Prince William County 1981* 210 Public 25% 99 Yes 

Stafford County 1988 61 Public - - No 

Virginia Beach 1989 393 None 0% 49 Yes 

WASHINGTON 

Kennewick 1985 42 None 0% No Yes 

King County 1986 603 Public - - No 

Pierce County 1984* 340 All 0% No Yes 

Seattle 1983 516 All 0% 75 Yes 

WEST VIRGINIA 

Fairmont 1987 20 All 0% 30 Yes 

Monongalia County 1992 43 All 50% No Yes 

Morgantown 1991 26 All 50% No Yes 

-

' Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"niwns there is no restaurant provision. 

41 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Restaurants 

State Date Population Work- Mini- Exemp- Retail 

City or County Enacted' (000) places mum tions' Stores 

WISCONSIN 

Madison 1976* 191 None 0% 30 Yes 

WYOMING 

Casper 1988 47 All 0% 50 Yes 

Laramie 1986 27 All 0% 30 No 

Total number of communities covered: 543 

Original date ordinance enacted; asterisk indicates there has been an amendment. 

Restaurants that seat this number or fewer are exempt; "-"means there is no restaurant provision. 

42 
Chart I1 

Smoking Ordinances: 

workplace Provisions 

Chart I1 summarizes the workplace provisions of the major 

local smoking ordinances in the United States. Some of the 

ordinances on this chart do not contain provisions explicitly 

covering workplaces, but are listed because they contain other 

provisions that affect workers, such as restaurant or retail store 

smoking restrictions (see Charts I and 111). A total of 413 communities with workplace smoking provisions are listed. 

Workplaces (Type): The workplaces column indicates 

whether a smoking ordinance restricts smoking in places of 

work. “Public” indicates that only government offices are 

covered. “Private” indicates that only private employers are 

covered. “All” means both are covered. Communities that do 

not have workplace provisions are included on this chart to 

indicate that they have a smoking ordinance covering other 

environments, such as restaurants. 

Meeting Rooms: A “yes” indicates smoking is prohibited in 

meeting rooms. 

Designate Own Area: This column indicates whether or not 

an ordinance contains a provision that allows employees to 

designate their own work area as a no-smoking area. 

NS Preference: “Nonsmoker Preference” refers to a common 

provision in smoking ordinances, which states that in a conflict 

between the health concerns of nonsmokers and the desire of 

smokers to smoke in a given area, the nunsrnukers’cuncerns wiZZ 

prevail. 

Nonretaliation: “Nonretaliation Clause” refers to a provision prohibiting retaliation against an employee who exercises 

rights provided by the smoking ordinance. 

Common Work Areas: A “yes” indicates smoking is prohibited in common work areas. 

1OOOh Smokefree: A “yes” in the last column indicates 

smoking is completely prohibited in enclosed workplaces. 

43 
BLANK PAGE 
chartII 

Smoking Ordinances: 

workplace Provisions 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common l0OW 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

ALABAMA 

Auburn All No No No No No No 

Birmingham All No No No No No No 

Dothan All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 

Eufaula None 

Huntsville All No No No Yes No No 

Jackson All No No No No No No 

Madison All No No No Yes No No 

Mobile All No No No No No No 

Montgomery All No No No No No No 

Prattville All No No No No No No 

Tuscaloosa Public No No No No No No 

ARIZONA 

Chandler All No No Yes Yes No No 

Flagstaff All Yes No No Yes No No 

Gilbert All Yes No Yes Yes No No 

Glendale All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Kingman All No No No Yes No No 

Maricopa County All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Mesa All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Paradise Valley None 

Peoria All No No Yes No No No 

Phoenix All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Pima County All Yes Yes Yes No Yes No 

Prescott All No No No Yes No No 

Scottsdale All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

45 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common l0OW 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

ARIZONA 

Tempe All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Tucson All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Yuma All No No No Yes No No 

ARKANSAS 

Little Rock None 

McG e h e e All No No Yes No No No 

CALIFORNIA 

Agoura Hills All Yes Yes No No No No 

Alameda All Ycs Yes Yes Yes No No 

Alameda County All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Albany All Ycs Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

AI hambra All No Yes Yes No No No 

Alpine County All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Anaheim All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

An tioch All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Apple Valley None 

Arcata All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

Atascadero None 

Auburn All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Belmont All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Benicia All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Berkeley All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Beverly Hills None 

Big Bear Lake Public No No No Yes No No 

Blue Lake All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Brea All Yes No No No No No 

Brentwood All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Burbank None 

Burlingame All No No Yes Yes No No 

Butte County All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

46 
Chart I1 

Work- Designate NS NonState places Meeting Own kef- retaliCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation 

CALIFORNIA 

Camarillo All Yes No No No 

Campbell All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Carlsbad All Yes No No No 

Carpinteria All No No Yes No 

Cathedral City None 

Chico All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Chula Vista All Yes No No No 

Clayton All Yes Yes Ycs Yes 

Cloverdale All Yes Yes No Yes 

Coachella All No No Yes Yes 

Colfax All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Concord All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Contra Costa County All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Coronado All Yes No No No 

Corte Madera None 

Cotati All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Culver City All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Cupertino All Yes Yes Yes No 

Cypress All No Yes No No 

Danville All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Davis All Yes No Yes Yes 

Del Mar All Yes No No No 

Del Norte County Public Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Desert Hot Springs All Yes Yes Yes No 

Dixon All Yes Yes Ycs Yes 

Downey All Yes No Yes Yes 

Duarte All Yes Yes Yes No 

Dublin All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

El Cajon All No No No Yes 

El Cerrito All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

El Dorado County All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Common 1OOoh 

Work SmokeAreas free 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

Yes Yes 

No No 

No No 

Yes Yes 

No No 

Yes Yes 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

Yes No 

Yes Yes 

Yes Yes 

47 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 1Wh 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

CALIFORNIA 

El Segundo All No Yes Yes Yes No No 

Emeryville All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Escondido All Yes No No No Yes No 

Eureka All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Fairfield All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Fontana All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Fortuna All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

Fremont All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Fresno All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Garden Grove All No No No No No No 

Gardena None 

Gilroy All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Grand Terrace All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Grass Valley All ’ Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Gridley All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Hayward All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Healdsburg All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

Hemet All No Yes No Yes No No 

Hercules All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Hesperia Public Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 

Hollister All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Huntington Beach All No Y es No No No No 

Imperial Beach All Yes No No No No No 

Indian Wells All Yes Yes No No Yes No 

Indio All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Irvine All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

La Canada Flintridge All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 

La Mesa All Yes No No No No No 

La Mirada None 

La Quinta All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 

Lafayette All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

48 
Chart II 

Work- Designate NS NonState places Meeting Own Pref- retaliCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation 

CALIFORNIA 

Laguna Beach All Yes Yes Yes No 

Laguna Niguel All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Lakewood Public No No No No 

Lancaster All No No No Yes 

Larkspur All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Lathrop All YCS Y cs Yes Yes 

Lemon Grove None 

Live Oak All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Livermore All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Livingston All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Lodi All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Loma Linda All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Lompoc All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Long Beach All Yes No No Yes 

Los Alamitos Public Yes No No No 

Los Altos All No No No No 

Los Angeles All No No No Yes 

Los Angeles County Public No No No No 

Los Gatos All Yes Yes Yes No 

Manhattan Beach All No No Yes No 

Marin County None 

Martinez All Yes Y cs Yes Yes 

Marysville All Ycs Yes Yes No 

Menlo Park All Yes Yes Yes No 

Merced All Yes Yes No Yes 

Mill Valley None 

Millbrae All No No No No 

Milpitas All Yes Yes Yes No 

Mission Viejo All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Modesto All Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Common 1OOoh 

Work SmokeAreas free 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

Yes Yes 

Yes Yes 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

Yes No 

Yes No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

Yes Yes 

No No 

Yes Yes 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

No No 

49 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100% 

City or County 

State 

(Type) 

places 

Rooms 

Meeting 

Area 

Own 

erence 

Prefation retaliAreas 

Work 

free 

SmokeCALIFORNIA 

Monterey All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 

Monterey County All Yes Yes Yes No Yes No 

Moorpark All Yes No No No Yes No 

Moraga All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Moreno Valley All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Morgan Hill All Yes Yes Ycs No No No 

Morro Bay All No No Yes No No No 

Mountain View All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Napa None 

National City All Yes No No No No No 

Nevada County All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Newark All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

Newport Beach All No Yes No No No No 

Novato All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Oakdale All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Oakland All Yes Yes Ycs Yes Yes Yes 

Oceanside All Yes No No No No No 

Ojai Public No No Yes No No No 

Ontario All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Orange County All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Orinda All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Oroville All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Oxnard All Yes No No No No No 

Pacific Grove None 

Palm Desert All Yes No Yes Yes No No 

Palm Springs All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Palmdale All No No No Yes No No 

Palo Alto All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Paradise All Yes Ycs Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Pasadena All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Petaluma All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

50 
chartI1 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100°h 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

CALIFORNIA 

Piedmont All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Pinole All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Pi ttsburg All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Placer County All Yes Yes Y cs Yes Yes Yes 

Placerville All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Pleasant Hill All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Pleasanton All Yes Yes YCS No No No 

Port Hueneme All Yes No No No No 

Poway All Yes No No No No No 

Rancho Cucamonga None 

Rancho Mirage All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Redlands All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Redwood City All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Rialto All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Richmond All Yes Yes YCS Yes No No 

Riverside All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Riverside County All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Rohnert Park All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Roseville All Y cs Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Ross None 

Sacramento 

Sacramento County 

All 

All 

Yes 

Yes 

N/A 

Yes 

N/A 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Salinas All Yes Yes Yes No Yes No 

San Bernardino All No No No Yes No No 

San Bernardino County All No No No Yes No No 

San Bruno All No NO YCS Yes No No 

San Buenaventura All Yes No No No No No 

San Carlos All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 

San Clemente All No No No No No No 

San Diego All Yes No No No Yes No 

51 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 1ooOh 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

CALIFORNIA 

San Diego County All Yes No No No Yes No 

San Francisco All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

San Jose All Yes Yes Ycs No No No 

San Juan Capistrano All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

San Leandro All Yes No No Yes No No 

San Luis Obispo All No No Yes No No No 

San Marcos All No No No No No No 

San Mateo All No No No No No No 

San Mateo County All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

San Pablo All Yes Yes YCS Yes No No 

San Rafael None 

San Ramon All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Santa Barbara All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Santa Barbara County All No No Yes No No No 

Santa Clara All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Santa Clara County All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Santa Cruz All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Santa Cruz County All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Santa Maria All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Santa Monica All No No No Yes No No 

Santa Rosa All Yes No Yes No No No 

Santee All Yes No No No No No 

Saratoga All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Scotts Valley All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Seaside All No No Yes No No No 

Sebastopol All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Shasta County All No Yes No Yes No No 

Simi Valley None 

Solana Beach All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Solano County All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Solvang All No No Yes No No No 

52 
chartII 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common lOOoh 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

CALmORNIA 

Sonoma All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Sonoma County All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

South Lake Tahoe All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

South Pasadena None 

South San Francisco All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Stanislaus County All Yes Y cs Yes Yes No No 

Stockton All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

Sunnyvale All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Sutter County All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Te m e cu 1a All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Thousand Oaks All No Yes No No No No 

Tiburon All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 

Torrance All Yes Y es Yes Yes No No 

Tracy All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Turlock All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Tustin All No No No No No No 

Ukiah All No Yes Yes No No No 

Union City All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Vacavi 11e All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Val le jo All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Victorville All No No No No No No 

Visalia All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Vista All Yes No No No No No 

Walnut Public Yes No No No Yes No 

Walnut Creek All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Watsonvil1e All No No Yes No No No 

West Hollywood All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 

West Sacram ento All Yes Yes Y es Yes Yes No 

Wheatland All Yes Yes Y es No No No 

Whittier All Yes Y cs Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Wood side All Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 

53 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100% 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

CALIFORNIA 

Yo10 County Public Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Yorba Linda All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Yountville All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Yuba City All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

COLORADO 

Arapahoe County All No No No No No No 

Arvada All No No No No No No 

Aspen All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Aurora All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Boulder Private No No Yes No No No 

Boulder County All No Yes Yes No No No 

Broom field All No No No No No No 

Canon City All No No Yes No No No 

Carbondale All No Yes Yes No No No 

Colorado Springs All No Yes Yes Yes No No 

Denver All No No Yes Yes No No 

Englewood All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Fort Collins All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Glenwood Springs None 

Golden All Yes No No No No No 

Grand Junction All Yes No No No No No 

Greeley All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Greenwood Village All No No No No No No 

Jefferson County All No No Yes No No No 

Lakewood All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Littleton All No No Yes Yes No No 

Longmont All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Louisvi1le None 

Love1 and All Yes Yes No No No No 

Parker All No No Yes Yes No No 

54 
chartI1 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100% 

State 

City or County 

places 

(Type) 

Meeting 

Rooms 

Own 

Area 

Preference retaliation Work 

Areas 

Smokefree 

COLORADO 

Pueblo All No No Yes No No No 

Snowmass Village All Yes No Yes Yes No No 

Telluride All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Thornton All No No No Yes No No 

Trinidad All No No Yes No No No 

Vail All Yes No Yes Yes No No 

Weld County Public Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 

Westminster All No No No Yes No No 

Wheat Ridge All No No No Yes No No 

DELAWARE 

Wilmington All Yes No Yes Yes No No 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Washington All No No No No No No 

GEORGIA 

Augusta None 

Gainesville All No No No No No No 

Richmond County None 

Snellville All No No No No No No 

HAWAII 

Hawaii County None 

Honolulu None 

ILLINOIS 

Arlington Heights All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Chicago All No Yes Yes Yes No No 

DeKalb None 

Des Plaines All Ycs Yes Yes No No No 

Downer's Grove None 

Elgin All Yes No No No Yes No 

Evanston None 

Highland Park None 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 1W! 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

ILLINOIS 

Hoffman Estates All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Oak Park All No No No No No No 

Orland Park All Yes Yes No No No No 

Park Ridge None 

Rockford All No No No Yes No No 

Skokie All Yes Yes No No No No 

Wilmette All No Yes Yes No No No 

INDIANA 

Bloomington None 

Fort Wayne None 

KANSAS 

Lawrence All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

Overland Park All Yes Yes No No No No 

Prairie Village None 

Topeka All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

LOUISIANA 

Lake Charles All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

New Orleans All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

MARYLAND 

Howard County All Yes Yes Yes No Yes No 

Montgomery County All Yes No No No Yes No 

Prince George’s County Public Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Rockville None 

Takoma Park All No No No Yes Yes No 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Acton None 

Agawam None 

Amherst None 

Auburn None 

Belmont All No No No No No No 

56 
chartI1 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100°h 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Beverly None 

Braintree None 

Brewster None 

Brookline All No No Yes No No No 

Cam bridge All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Canton None 

Chatham None 

Chelmsford All No No No No No No 

Cohasset None 

Concord All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Danvers None 

Dennis None 

Easthampton None 

Foxborough None 

Framingham None 

Great Barrington All Yes Yes No No No No 

Holden None 

Holyoke None 

Hudson None 

Hull None 

Lee All Yes No No No Yes No 

Lenox All Yes No No No Yes No 

Leominster All No No Yes No No No 

Lexington All Yes No No No No No 

Lynnfield None 

Malden None 

Marblehead None 

Marlborough None 

MaynaW None 

Medford None 

Millis All No No Yes No No 

57 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100% 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

MASSACHUSE'ITS 

Natick All Yes No Yes No No No 

Needham All No No Yes No No No 

Newton All No No No No No No 

North Attleboro All No Yes No No No No 

Northampton None 

Norwood None 

Plainville None 

Quincy None 

Randolph None 

Reading None 

Revere None 

Salem None 

Sandwich All No No No No No No 

Scituate None 

Somerville All Yes No No No No No 

Sterling None 

Stockbridge All Yes No No No Yes No 

Stoughton None 

Sudbury All Yes No Yes No No No 

Swampscott None 

Tewksbury None 

Townsen d All No No No No No No 

Walpole None 

Watertown All No No No No No No 

Wellesley All No Yes Yes Yes No No 

West Springfield All No No Yes No No No 

Westford None 

Westminster None 

Weym ou t h None 

Williamstown None 

Winchester None 

58 
chartI1 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100°h 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Winthrop None 

MICHIGAN 

East Lansing All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Marquette All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

MISSOURI 

Clayton None 

Columbia All Yes No No No No No 

Des Peres None 

Independence All Yes No No No No No 

Jefferson All No No No No No No 

Kansas City All No No No No No No 

Rock Hill None 

NEW JERSEY 

Hillsborough Town- None 

ship 

NEW MEXICO 

Albuquerque All Yes Yes No No No No 

NEW YORK 

Chautauqua County All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Erie County All No No No No No No 

Monroe County All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Nassau County All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

New York City All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

Ontario County All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Rockland County All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Suffolk County All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Westchester County All No Yes Yes No No No 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Chapel Hill All No No No Yes No No 

Greensboro None 

59 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100% 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

NORTH CAROLINA 

New Hanover County All No No No No No No 

Raleigh All No No No No No No 

OHIO 

Akron All No No No No No No 

Athens None 

Barbarton All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Beachwood All Yes Y cs No No No No 

Cincinnati All Yes No YCS Yes No No 

C1 eveland All Yes YCS Ycs Yes No No 

Cleveland Heights All Y cs Yes Yes No No No 

Euclid All No No Yes No No No 

Lakewood All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Lorain All No Yes Yes Yes No No 

Maple Heights All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

Mayfield Village All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Medina None 

Parma All Yes Ycs No Yes No No 

Parma Heights All Yes No Ycs Ycs No No 

Shaker Heights All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Summit County All No No Yes Yes No No 

Toledo All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

University Heights All Yes Yes Yes No No No 

Warren All No No No Yes No No 

Xenia All No No Y cs No No No 

OREGON 

Eugene Public No No No No No No 

PENNSYLVANIA 

Erie All Yes Yes No Yes No No 

Lower Merion All Yes No No No No No 

Pittsburgh All No Yes No No No No 

60 
chart II 

WorkState places 

City or County (Type) 

PENNSYLVANIA 

State College All 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

Greenville None 

Hampton County Public 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

Sioux Falls All 

TENNESSEE 

Germantown None 

Memphis None 

TEXAS 

Abilene All 

Addison All 

Amarillo None 

Arlington None 

Austin All 

Bed ford None 

Brownsville All 

Bryan None 

College Station None 

Colleyville All 

Corpus Christi All 

Dallas All 

Del Rio None 

Denton None 

Desoto All 

Duncanville None 

Eagle Pass None 

El Paso All 

Euless None 

Fort Worth None 

Designate NS Non- Common 100% 

Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeRooms Area erence ation Areas free 

No No No No No No 

No No No No No No 

No No No No No No 

Yes No No No No No 

No No No Yes No No 

No No Yes No No No 

Yes Yes No Yes No No 

No No Yes No No No 

Yes No No No No No 

No No No Yes No No 

Yes No NO Yes Yes No 

No No No No No No 

61 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100% 

State places Meeting Own kef- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area crence ation Areas free 

TEXAS 

Galveston All No No Yes No No No 

Garland None 

Grand Prairie All No No No No No No 

Greenville All No No Yes No No No 

Haltom City None 

Houston All No No YCS No No No 

Huntsville None 

Hurst None 

Irving None 

Kerr County Public Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Kerrville All No No Yes No No No 

Lancaster None 

Leon Valley None 

Longview None 

Lubbock None 

Mansfield None 

McAllen All No No No No No No 

Mesquite None 

Midland All No No No No No No 

New Braunfels Public Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 

North Richland Hills None 

Plano None 

Richardson All No No No Yes No No 

Rockwall Public No No No No No No 

San Antonio None 

Seguin All No No No No No No 

Sugar Land Public No No No No No No 

Texarkana Public Yes No No NO NO No 

Travis County All No No Yes No No No 

Tyler All No No No No No No 

62 
chartZI 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 100°h 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area erence ation Areas free 

TEXAS 

Wichita Falls None 

VERMONT 

Burlington All No No No No No No 

VIRGINIA 

Albemarle County All No No No No Yes No 

Alexandria None 

Arlington None 

Charlottesville All No Yes No No No No 

Chesapeake Public No No No No No No 

Fairfax None 

Fairfax County None 

Falls Church None 

Franklin None 

Ham pton None 

Lynchburg None 

Newport News Public No No No No No No 

Norfolk None 

Portsmouth None 

Prince William Co. Public Yes No No No No No 

Stafford County Public Yes Yes No No No No 

Virginia Beach None 

WASHINGTON 

Kennewick None 

King County Public Yes No No No No No 

Pierce County All Yes Yes Yes Yes No No 

Seattle All No No No No No No 

WEST VIRGINIA 

Fairmont AII Yes No No No No No 

Monongalia County All No Yes Yes Yes No No 

Morgantown All No Yes Yes Yes No No 

63 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Work- Designate NS Non- Common 1Wh 

State places Meeting Own Pref- retali- Work SmokeCity or County (Type) Rooms Area crence ation Areas free 

WISCONSIN 

Madison None 

WYOMING 

Casper All Ycs No Yes No Yes No 

Laramie All No No No No No No 

Total number of communities with workplace ordinances: 413 

64 
Chart I11 

Smoking Ordinances: 

0ther Provisions 

Chart 111 summarizes the provisions of ordinances that 

address smoking in public places. This includes information on 

whether the ordinances limit smoking in food markets, health 

care facilities, public transportation, enclosed public places, and 

schools. The enforcement provisions also are listed. 

Food Markets: A “yes” indicates that smoking is expressly 

limited in food markets. 

Health Facilities: A “yes” indicates smoking is expressly 

limited in health care facilities. 

Public Transportation: A “yes” indicates smoking is limited 

or banned on public transportation. 

Enclosed Public Places: The fourth column indicates 

whether or not an ordinance contains a provision restricting 

smoking in enclosed public places generally (i.e., one that limits 

smoking in any facility open to the public). A provision limiting 

smoking in enclosed public places also covers other environments, including retail stores. 

Schools: The schools column indicates whether smoking is 

banned or limited on school campuses. Ordinances vary in 

coverage, some limited to public schools, others extended to 

private schools or colleges. In some cases, a policy has been 

established by a school board or an individual school, and 

therefore the restriction is not contained in the smoking ordinance itself. 

Enforcement: The last column summarizes the enforcement 

mechanism contained in a given smoking ordinance. If there 

are several enforcement provisions, that which is of the most 

practical significance is listed. For example, if the City Manager 

is given responsibility for receiving and acting on complaints, 

but there is also a specified fine, “City Mgr.” is listed because 

it points to an office to call for assistance. “Health Dept.” 

indicates the city or county health department is primarily 

responsible for enforcement. Other abbreviations include 

“N/S” (no enforcement mechanism is specified), “Code Enf.” 

65 
Smoking and Tobacco Control MonoaraDh No. 3 

(Code Enforcement Officer), “Envir. Res.” (Environmental

Resources Department), “Bd. of Hlth.” (Board of Health), “Envir. 

Serv.” (Environmental Services Department), “Envir. Health 

Div.” (Environmental Health Division), and “Dep. Pub. Saf.” 

(Department of Public Safety). 

66 
Chart Ill 

Smoking Ordinances: 

Other Provisions 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

ALABAMA 

Auburn 

Birmingham 

Dothan 

Eufaula 

Huntsville 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Health Dept. 

Health Dept. 

Health Dept. 

Police Dept. 

Health Dept. 

Jackson Yes Yes Yes Y es Yes Health Dept. 

Madison Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Mobile Yes Yes No Yes Yes Fine 

Montgomery Yes Yes Yes No Yes Health Dept. 

Prattville Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Tuscaloosa No No Yes No No Fine 

ARIZONA 

Chandler Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Flagstaff 

Gilbert 

Glendale 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

City Mgr. 

Police Dept. 

Fine 

Kingman Yes No No No No Police Dept. 

Maricopa County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Mesa Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fire Dept. 

Paradise Valley Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Peoria 

Phoenix 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

City Mgr. 

Fine 

Pima County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Prescott Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Scottsdale Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

67 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

ARIZONA 

Tempe Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Tucson Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Yuma Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

ARKANSAS 

Little Rock Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

McGehee Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

CALIFORNIA 

Agoura Hills Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

AI a meda Yes No Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Alameda County Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

Albany Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Police Dept. 

Alhambra Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Alpine County Yes Yes No Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Anaheim Yes Yes No No No Fine 

Antioch Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Apple Valley Yes Yes Yes No No Health Dept. 

Arcata Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Atascadero No Yes Yes No No City Mgr. 

Auburn Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Belmont Yes Yes No No No Fine 

Benicia Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Berkeley Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Beverly Hills Yes No No No No Fine 

Big Bear Lake Yes Yes No No Yes City Mgr. 

Blue Lake Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Brea No Yes No No No Fine 

Brentwood Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Burbank No Yes No No No N/S 

Burlingame Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Butte County Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

68 
chart Ill 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

CALIFORNIA 

Camarillo Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Campbell Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Carlsbad Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Carpinteria Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Cathedral City No Yes Yes No No Fine 

Chico Yes Yes Yes No No Health Dept. 

Chula Vista Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Clayton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Cloverdale Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Police Dept. 

Coachella Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Colfax Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Concord Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Contra Costa County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Coronado Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Corte Madera Yes Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Cotati Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Culver City Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Cupertino Yes Yes Yes No No City Mgr. 

Cypress Yes Yes Ycs Yes No City Mgr. 

Danville Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Davis Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Del Mar Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Del Norte County No No No No No Fine 

Desert Hot Springs No Yes No No No Fine 

Dixon Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Downey Yes No Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Duarte No Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Dublin Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

El Cajon Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

El Cerrito Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

El Dorado County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Envir. Serv. 

69 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

CALIFORNIA 

El Segundo Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Emeryville Yes Yes Yes Yes No Code Enf. 

Escondido Yes Yes Yes No No City Mgr. 

Eureka Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Fairfield Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Fontana Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Fortuna Yes Yes Yes No Yes City Mgr. 

Fremont Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Fresno Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Garden Grove No Yes No No No Fine 

Gardena Yes No Yes No No NIS 

Gilroy No Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Grand Terrace No Yes No No No Fine 

Grass Valley Y es Yes No Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Gridley Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Hayward Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Healdsburg Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Hemet Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Hercules Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Hesperia Yes Yes Yes No No Code Enf. 

Hollister No No No No No Fine 

Huntington Beach No Yes No No No Fine 

Imperial Beach Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Indian Wells Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Indio Yes Yes No No No Fine 

Irvine No Yes Yes No No Fine 

La Canada Flintridge Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

La Mesa Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

La Mirada No Yes Yes No No City Mgr. 

La Quinta Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

La fa ye tte Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

70 
chart Ill 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

CALIFORNIA 

Laguna Beach No Yes Yes No No Fine 

Laguna Niguel Yes Yes No No No Fine 

Lakewood Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Lancaster Yes Yes Yes Yes No Comm. Dev. 

Larkspur Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Lathrop Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Lemon Grove Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Live Oak Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

Livermore Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Livingston Yes Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Lodi Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fire Dept. 

Loma Linda Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Lompoc Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Long Beach Yes Yes Yes No No Health Dept. 

Los Alamitos Yes Yes No No No NIS 

Los Altos No Yes No No No Fine 

Los Angeles Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

Los Angeles County No No No No No NIS 

Los Gatos Yes Yes No Yes No Fine 

Manhattan Beach Yes Yes No No No Fine 

Marin County No Yes Yes No No Health Dept. . 

Martinez Yes Yes Ycs Yes No Health Dept. 

Marysvill e 

Menlo Park 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

No 

Health Dept. 

Fine 

Merced Yes Yes No No No Fine 

Mill Valley Yes Yes Yes No No Comm. Dev. 

Millbrae Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Mil pitas Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Mission Viejo Yes Yes No No No Health Dept. 

Modesto Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

71 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

CALIFORNIA 

Monterey Yes Yes Yes Yes No NIS 

Monterey County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Moorpark Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Moraga Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Moreno Valley Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Morgan Hill Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Morro Bay Yes Yes Yes No No City Mgr. 

Mountain View Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Napa No Yes Yes No No Fine 

National City Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Nevada County Yes Yes No Yes Yes County Adm. 

Newark Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Newport Beach No Yes No No No Fine 

Novato Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Oakdale Yes Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Oakland Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Oceanside Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Ojai Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Ontario No No No No No Fine 

Orange County Yes Yes No No No Health Dept. 

Orinda Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Oroville Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

Oxnard Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Pacific Grove Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Palm Desert Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Palm Springs No Yes No No No Fine 

Palmdale Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Palo Alto Yes Yes Ycs Yes Yes Fine 

Paradise Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Pasadena No Yes No No No Fine 

Petal u m a Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

72 
Chart Ill 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

CALIFORNIA 

Piedmont Yes Yes Yes Yes No Police Dept. 

Pinole Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Pittsburg Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Placer County Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

Placerville Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Envir. Serv. 

Pleasant Hill Yes Yes Yes Ycs No Fine 

Pleasant on Yes Yes Y cs Yes No City Mgr. 

Port Hueneme Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Poway Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Rancho Cucamonga Yes Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Rancho Mirage Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Redlands Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Redwood City Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Rialto No No No No No City Mgr. 

Richmond Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Riverside No Yes No No No Fine 

Riverside County No Yes No No No Fine 

Rohnert Park Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Roseville Yes Yes Yes Yes No Code Enf. 

Ross Yes Yes Yes Yes No Police Dept. 

Sacramento Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Envir. Health Div. 

Sacramento County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Envir. Serv. 

Salinas Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

San Bernardino Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

San Bernardino County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes NIS 

San Bruno Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

San Buenaventura Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Code Enf. 

San Carlos Yes Y cs Yes Yes Yes Fine 

San Clemente No Yes No No No Fine 

San Diego Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

73 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

CALIFORNIA 

San Diego County Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

San Francisco Yes Yes No No Yes Health Dept. 

San Jose No Yes No No No Health Dept. 

San Juan Capistrano Yes Yes Yes No No City Mgr. 

San Leandro Yes Yes Yes No No City Mgr. 

San Luis Obispo Yes Yes No No No City Mgr. 

San Marcos Yes No Yes No No City Mgr. 

San Mateo Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

San Mateo County Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

San Pablo Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

San Rafael Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

San Ramon Yes Yes Yes Ycs No City Mgr. 

Santa Barbara Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Santa Barbara County Yes Yes No No No Health Dept. 

Santa Clara No Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Santa Clara County Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Santa Cruz Yes Yes No Yes No Health Dept. 

Santa Cruz County Yes Yes No Yes No Health Dept. 

Santa Maria Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Santa Monica Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Santa Rosa Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Santee Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Saratoga Yes Yes No Yes No City Mgr. 

Scotts Valley Yes Yes No Ycs No Health Dept. 

Seaside Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Sebastopol Yes Yes Yes Yes No Police Dept. 

Shasta County Yes No No Yes No Health Dept. 

Simi Valley Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Solana Beach Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Solano County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Envir. Serv. 

Solvang Yes Yes Yes No No City Mgr 

74 
Chart I11 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

CALIFORNIA 

Sonoma Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Sonoma County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

South Lake Tahoe Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Envir. Serv. 

South Pasadena Yes Yes No No No City Mgr. 

South San Francisco Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Stanislaus County Yes YCS No No No Envir. Res. 

Stockton Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Sunnyvale Yes Yes YCS No No Fine 

Sutter County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Temecula No Yes No No No Fine 

Thousand Oaks Yes Yes Y cs Yes No City Mgr. 

Tiburon Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Torrance Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Tracy Yes Ycs Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Turlock Yes Yes YCS No No Envir. Res. 

Tustin Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Ukiah Yes Yes YCS No No City Mgr. 

Union City Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Vacaville Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Vallejo Yes Yes Y cs Yes No City Mgr. 

Vi ctorvill e Yes Yes Yes No No City Mgr. 

Visalia Yes Yes Y cs Y cs Yes Police Dept. 

Vista Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Walnut No No YCS No No NIS 

Walnut Creek Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Watsonville Yes Yes No No No N/S 

West Hollywood Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

West Sacramento Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Code Enf. 

Wheatland Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

Whi ttier Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Woodside Yes Yes Yes YCS Yes Fine 

75 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

CALIFORNIA 

Yo10 County No No No No No NIS 

Yorba Linda No Yes No No No Fine 

Yountville Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Yuba City Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

COLORADO 

Arapahoe County Yes Yes Yes Yes No Shcriff 

Arvada Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Aspen Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Aurora Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Boulder Yes Yes Y es Yes Yes Fine 

Boulder County Yes Yes No Yes No Health Dept. 

Broomfield Yes Yes No No No Health Dept. 

Canon City Yes No Yes No No Fine 

Carbondale Yes Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Colorado Springs Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Denver No Yes No No Yes N/S 

Englewood Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Fort Collins Yes YCS Yes Yes Yes NIS 

Glenwood Springs Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Golden Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Grand Junction Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Greeley Yes YCS Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Greenwood Village Yes Yes Yes Yes No Police Dept. 

Jefferson County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Sheriff 

Lakewood Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

Littleton Yes Ycs Yes Ycs Yes N/S 

Longmont Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Louisville Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Loveland Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Parker Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes N/S 

76 
chart III 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

COLORADO 

Pueblo Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Snowmass Village Yes Yes Yes Yes No Dep. Pub. Saf. 

Telluride Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Thornton Yes Yes Yes Yes No Code Enf. 

Trinidad Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Vail Yes Yes No No Yes NIS 

Weld County No No No No No N/S 

Westminster Yes Yes Yes Y es No Code Enf. 

Wheat Ridge Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

DELAWARE 

Wilmington Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Police Dept. 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Washington Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

GEORGIA 

Augusta No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Gainesville Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bus. License 

Dept. 

Richmond County No No No No No Health Dept. 

Snellville Yes Yes Y cs Yes Yes Police Dept: 

HAWAII 

Hawaii County Yes Yes No No No Bldg. Dept. 

Honolulu Yes Yes No No No Bldg. Dept. 

ILLINOIS 

Arlington Heights Yes Yes Yes Y es Yes Health Dept. 

Chicago Yes Yes Yes Ycs No Fine 

DeKalb Yes Yes Yes No Yes City Mgr. 

Des Plaines Yes Yes Yes Y es Yes City Mgr. 

Downer’s Grove No Yes No No No N/S 

Elgin Yes Yes Y es Y cs Yes Code Enf. 

Evanston No No No No No Health Dept. 

Highland Park Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

77 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

ILLINOIS 

Hoffman Estates No No No No No City Mgr. 

Oak Park Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Orland Park No No No No No Fine 

Park Ridge No No No No No Fine 

Rockford Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Skokie Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

Wilmette Yes Yes No Yes No Fine 

INDIANA 

Bloomington Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Fort Wayne Yes No No No No Health Dept. 

KANSAS 

Lawrence Yes Yes Yes Yes No N/S 

Overland Park Yes Yes Yes Yes No N/S 

Prairie Village Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

Topeka Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

LOUISIANA 

Lake Charles Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fire Dept. 

New Orleans Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

MARYLAND 

Howard County Yes Yes Yes Yes No Police Dept. 

Montgomery County Yes Yes No Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Prince George’s County No No No No No N/S 

Rockvi11e No Yes Yes No No Health Dept. 

Takoma Park Yes Yes No No Yes Health Dept. 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Acton No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Agawam No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Amherst No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Auburn Yes Yes Yes No Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Belmont No No No No No Health Dept. 

78 
chart Ill 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

MASSACHUSEl'TS 

Beverly No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Braintree No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Brewster No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Brookli ne Yes Yes Yes No No Health Dept. 

Cambridge Yes Yes No Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Canton No No No No No Rd. of Hlth. 

Chatham No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Chelmsford Yes Yes No No Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Cohasset No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Concord Yes Yes No Yes No Bd. of Hlth. 

Danvers No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Dennis No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Eastham pton Yes Yes Yes No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Foxborough No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Framingham No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Great Barrington Yes Yes No Yes No Bd. of Hlth. 

Holden No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Holyoke No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Hudson No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Hull No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Lee Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Lenox Yes Yes Yes Ycs Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Leominster Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Lexington No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Lynnfield No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Malden No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Marblehead Yes No Yes Yes No Bd. of Hlth. 

Marlborough No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Maynard Yes No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Medford No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Millis Yes Yes Yes Y es Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

79 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

MASSACHUSElTS 

Natick Yes Yes Yes Yes No Bd. of Hlth. 

Needham Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Newton No No No No No Health Dept. 

North Attleboro Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Northampton Yes Yes Yes No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Norwood No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Plainville No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Quincy No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Randolph No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Reading Yes No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Revere No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Salem No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Sandwich Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Scituate No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Somerville Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Sterling Yes No Yes Yes Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Stockbridge Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Stoughton No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Sudbury Yes Yes No Yes No Bd. of Hlth. 

Swam pscott Yes Yes Y cs No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Tewksbury Yes No Ycs No Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Townsend No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Walpole No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Watertown No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Wellesley No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

West Springfield Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bd. of Hlth. 

Westford No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Westminster No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Weymout h No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Williamstown No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

Winchester No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

80 
chart Iff 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Winthrop No No No No No Bd. of Hlth. 

MICHIGAN 

East Lansing Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

Marquette Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes City Mgr. 

MISSOURI 

Clayton Yes Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Columbia Yes Yes YCS No No Health Dept. 

Des Peres Yes No No No No NIS 

Independence Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fire Dept. 

Jefferson Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Code Enf. 

Kansas City Yes Yes Yes No No Health Dept. 

Rock Hill Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

NEW JERSEY 

Hillsborough Township Yes Yes No No Yes Fine 

NEW MEXICO 

Albuquerque Yes Yes Yes Ycs No Fine 

NEW YORK 

Chautauqua County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Erie County Yes Yes No No Yes Health Dept. 

Monroe County Yes Yes Yes Ycs Yes Health Dept. 

Nassau County Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

New York City Yes Yes Yes YCS Yes Health Dept. 

Ontario County Yes Yes Ycs Yes Yes NIS 

Rockland County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Suffolk County No Yes Yes No No Health Dept. 

Westchester County Yes Yes Yes Ycs Yes Health Dept. 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Chapel Hill Yes No Yes No No City Mgr. 

Greensboro Yes No No No No Fine 

81 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

NORTH CAROLINA 

New Hanover County Yes No No No No Health Dept. 

Raleigh Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

OHIO 

Akron No No No No No Health Dept. 

Athens Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Barbarton Yes Yes Ycs Yes No Health Dept. 

Beachwood Yes Y cs Yes Yes Yes Fire Dept. 

Cincinnati Yes YCS YCS Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Cleveland Yes Yes YCS Yes No Health Dept. 

Cleveland Heights Yes YCS Yes Yes YCS Health Ilept. 

Euclid Yes YCS Yes No No Fine 

Lakewood Yes Yes Yes No Yes Health Dept. 

Lorain Yes Ycs Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

Maple Heights Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fire Dept. 

Mayfield Village Yes Yes Ycs Yes Yes Fire Dept. 

Medina Yes Yes Ycs Y(2.5 Yes Health Dept. 

Parma Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Dep. Pub. Saf. 

Parma Heights Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fire Dept. 

Shaker Heights Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Summit County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Toledo Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Envir. Serv. 

University Heights Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fire Dept. 

Warren Yes No Yes Yes Y cs Health Dept. 

Xenia No No No No Yes Fine 

OREGON 

Eugene Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

PENNSYLVANIA 

Erie Yes Yes Ycs Ycs No Fine 

Lower Merion Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Pittsburgh Yes Yes Yes Ycs Yes Dep. Pub. Saf. 

82 
chart III 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

PENNSYLVANIA 

State College Yes No Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

Greenville Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

Hampton County No Yes No No Yes Fine 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

Sioux Falls Yes No No No No Fine 

TENNESSEE 

Germantown Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Memphis Yes No Yes No No Health Dept. 

TEXAS 

Abilene Yes Yes YCS Yes Yes Fine 

Addison Yes Yes YCS No Yes Fine 

Amarillo Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Arlington No Yes YCS No Yes Fine 

Austin Yes Yes No Yes Yes Fine 

Bed ford Yes Yes Y cs No No Fine 

Brownsville Yes No Yes No Yes Health Dept. 

Bryan Yes Yes Y cs No Yes Fine 

College Station Yes Ycs Ycs YCS No NIS 

Colleyville Yes Yes Ycs Yes Yes NIS 

Corpus Christi Yes Yes YCS YCS No Health Dept. 

Dallas Yes Ycs Y cs YCS Yes NIS 

Del Rio Yes Yes No Ycs No Fine 

Den ton Yes Yes No No Yes Fine 

Desoto No Yes YCS No Yes N/S 

Dun canvi 11e 

Eagle Pass 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

YCS 

Ycs 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

N/S 

Fine 

El Paso Yes Yes Y cs YCS Yes Health Dept. 

Euless Yes No No No No Fine 

Fort Worth Yes YCS Yes Y cs Yes Fine 

83 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

TEXAS 

Galvest on Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Garland No Yes No No Yes Fine 

Grand Prairie Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

Greenville Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Haltom City Yes Yes No Yes Yes Fine 

Houston Y es Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

Huntsville Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

Hurst Yes Yes Yes No No Fine 

Irving No Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

Kerr County No Yes No No No NIS 

Kerrville Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Lancaster Yes Yes No No Yes N/S 

Leon Valley Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Longview Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

Lubbock Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Mansfield No Yes Yes No Yes N/S 

McAllen Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

Mesquite Yes Yes Yes Yes No Envir. Health Div. 

Midland Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

New Braunfels Yes Yes Y es No No NIS 

North Richland Hills Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

Plano Yes No No Yes Yes Fine 

Richardson Yes Yes Yes No Yes Envir. Health Div. 

Rockwall No No No No No Fine 

San Antonio Yes Yes Yes No Yes Fine 

Seguin Yes Yes No Yes Yes Fine 

Sugar Land No No No No No NIS 

Texarkana No Yes No No Yes Fine 

Travis County Yes Yes No Yes Yes Fine 

Tyler Yes Yes Y es Yes Yes Fine 

84 
Chart III 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

TEXAS 

Wichita Falls Yes Yes Yes Yes No Fine 

VERMONT 

Burlington Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

VIRGINIA 

Albemarle County Yes Yes No No Yes Health Dept. 

Alexandria Yes Yes No No No City Mgr. 

Arlington Yes Yes No No Yes Fine 

Charlottesville Yes Ycs Yes No Yes Health Dept. 

Chesapeake Yes Yes No No No Health Dept. 

Fairfax Yes Yes No No No Health Dept. 

Fairfax County Yes Yes No No No Health Dept. 

Falls Church Yes Yes No No No NIS 

Franklin Yes Ycs No No Yes Health Dept. 

Hampton Yes Yes No No No Health Dept. 

Lynchburg Yes Yes Yes No Yes Health Dept. 

Newport News Yes Yes No No Yes Health Dept. 

Norfolk Yes Yes Yes No Yes Health Dept. 

Portsmouth Yes Yes No No Yes City Mgr. 

Prince William County Yes Yes No No Yes Fine 

Stafford County No No No No No County Adm. 

Virginia Beach Yes Yes Yes No Yes Health Dept. 

WASHINGTON 

Kennewick Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fine 

King County No No No No No NIS 

Pierce County Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Seattle Yes Yes Yes No Yes Health Dept. 

WEST VIRGINIA 

Fairmont Yes Yes Yes Ycs Yes City Mgr. 

Monongalia County Yes Yes Yes Yes No Health Dept. 

Morgantown Yes Yes Yes Yes No City Mgr. 

85 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Health Public Enclosed 

State Food Facili- Trans- Public 

City or County Markets ties portation Places Schools Enforcement 

WISCONSIN 

Madison Yes Yes Yes No Yes Health Dept. 

WYOMING 

Casper Yes Yes No Yes Yes Health Dept. 

Laramie Yes Yes No Yes Yes Fine 

86 
Chart IV 

Access to Minors: 

Vending Machine Ordinances 

Chart IV lists local ordinances limiting the use of tobacco 

vending machines. There are 161 communities listed. All listed 

ordinances restrict placement of tobacco vending machines. In 

general, such ordinances apply to all tobacco products, including 

cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. 

Year Enacted: The first column lists the year of enactment 

of each vending machine ordinance. 

Total Ban: A "yes" in the second column indicates an 

ordinance that completely eliminates tobacco vending 

machines, without exception. 

Bars Exempted: A "yes" in the "Bars Exempted" column 

indicates that tobacco vending machines are permitted in bars 

and other facilities from which minors are excluded by law. 

In some cases, ordinances mandate that vending machines, 

although permitted in bars, must bc placed a specified distance 

from doorways, typically 25 feet, to discourage purchases of 

tobacco products by young people. 

Locking Devices: A "yes" in the "Locking Devices" column 

indicates that tobacco vending machines are permitted but must 

be equipped with a mechanical device intended to be controlled 

by an employee. Such devices have generally been found ineffective against sales of tobacco products to children. 

Tokens: A "yes" in the last column indicates that vending 

machines are permitted if they operate on tokens rather than 

cash. As with over-the-counter sales of tobacco products, tokens 

may not be sold to minors. 

87 
BLANK PAGE 
chartIV 

Access to Minors: 

Vending Machine Ordinances 

State 

City or County 

Year 

Enacted 

Total 

Ban 

Bars 

Exempted 

Locking 

Devices Tokens 

ARIZONA 

Cottonwood 1992 No Yes No No 

CALIFORNIA 

Alameda County 1991 No Yes Yes No 

Albany 1992 No Yes No No 

Amador County 1991 No Yes No No 

Atascadero 1992 Yes No No No 

Berkeley 1991 Yes No No No 

Capi tola 1991 Yes No No No 

Clayton 1992 No Yes No No 

Contra Costa County 1991 No Yes No No 

Cupertino 1992 No Yes No No 

Davis 1992 Yes No No No 

Duarte 1989 No Yes No No 

El Cerrito 1991 No Yes No No 

Escondido 1991 No Yes No No 

Fairfield 1992 No Yes No No 

Hercules 1992 No Yes No No 

Hesperia 1992 No Yes No No 

Lafaye tte 1992 No Yes No No 

Laguna Beach 1992 Yes No No No 

Larkspur 1992 Yes No No No 

Loma Linda 1991 No Yes No No 

Los Gatos 1991 Yes No No No 

Manteca 1976 No Yes No No 

Novato 1992 No Yes No No 

89 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

State Year Total Bars Locking 

City or County Enacted Ban Exempted Devices Tokens 

CALIFORNIA 

Oakland 1992 No Yes Yes No 

Orinda 1992 No Yes No No 

Palo Alto 1991 No Yes No No 

Paradise 1991 No Yes No No 

Petaluma 1991 No Yes No No 

Pinole 1992 No Ycs No No 

PIymou th 1992 No Ycs No No 

Rancho Mirage 1990 Yes No No No 

Sacramento 1991 Yes No No No 

San Francisco 1991 No Yes No No 

San Jose 1992 No Yes No No 

San Luis Obispo 1992 Yes No No No 

San Luis Obispo County 1991 Yes No No No 

San Marcos 1977 No Yes No No 

San Mateo County 1992 No Yes No No 

Santa Cruz 1991 No Yes No No 

Santa Cruz County 1991 No Yes No No 

Santa Monica 1991 Yes No No No 

Santa Rosa 1991 No Yes No No 

Scotts Valley 1991 Yes No No No 

Seaside 1992 No Yes No No 

Sebastopol 1992 No Yes No No 

Siskiyou County 1992 No Yes No No 

Solana Beach 1992 No Yes No No 

Solano County 1991 Y cs No No No 

Vacaville 1992 No Yes No No 

Vallejo 1991 Yes No No No 

Walnut Creek 1991 No Yes No No 

Watsonville 1991 Yes No No No 

West Hollywood 1992 No Y cs No No 

West Sacram en to 1991 No Yes No No 

90 
Chart IV 

State 

City or County 

CALIFORNIA 

Whittier 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Washington 

ILLINOIS 

Buffalo Grove 

Charleston 

Chicago 

Elk Grove Village 

Elm hurst 

Woodridge 

LOUISIANA 

Iowa 

MAINE 

Orono 

MARYLAND 

Bowie 

Takoma Park 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Barre 

Brookline 

Cam bridge 

Chelmsford 

Dennis 

Framingham 

Lee 

Lenox 

Leomins ter 

Millis 

Year Total Bars Locking 

Enacted Ban Exempted Devices Tokens 

1991 No Yes No No 

1990 No Yes No No 

1990 No Yes Yes No 

1990 No Yes Yes No 

1991 No Yes No No 

1991 No Yes Yes No 

1990 No Yes Yes No 

1989 No Yes Yes No 

1990 Yes No No No 

1990 Y cs No No No 

1991 No Yes No No 

1990 No Yes No No 

1991 No No Yes No 

1991 No Yes Yes No 

1991 No Yes No No 

1991 No Yes Yes No 

1991 No Yes No No 

1984 No No Yes No 

1992 Yes No No No 

1992 Yes No No No 

1989 No Yes No No 

1991 No Yes Yes No 

91 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

State Year Total Bars Locking 

City or County Enacted Ban Exempted Devices Tokens 

MASSACHUSE'ITS 

Needham 1991 No No Yes No 

Plymouth 1992 No Yes No No 

Provincetown 1992 Yes No No No 

Somerville 1992 No No Yes No 

Stockbridge 1992 Yes No No No 

MICHIGAN 

Ann Arbor 1990 Yes No No No 

East Lansing 1991 No Yes Yes No 

Flushing 1991 Yes No No No 

Ingham County 1992 No Yes Yes No 

Marquette County 1990 No Yes No No 

Rochester Hills 1990 No Yes No No 

Sterling Heights 199 1 No Yes No No 

MINNESOTA 

Anoka 1989 No Yes No No 

Austin 1991 No Yes No Yes 

Big Lake 1990 No Yes No No 

Blaine 1989 No Yes No No 

Bloomington 1990 Yes No No No 

Brooklyn Center 199 1 Yes No No No 

Brooklyn Park 1990 Yes No No No 

Cannon Falls 1990 No Yes No No 

Champlin 1989 No Yes No No 

Chanhassen 1991 Yes No No No 

Cokato 1990 Yes No No No 

Coon Rapids 1990 Yes No No No 

Deer River 1989 No Yes No No 

Delano 1990 Yes No No No 

Duluth 1990 No Yes No No 

Edina 1992 Yes No No No 

Falcon Heights 1991 Yes No No No 

92 
Chart IV 

State Year Total Bars Locking 

City or County Enacted Ban Exempted Devices Tokens 

MINNESOTA 

Golden Valley 1990 Yes No No No 

Hutchinson 1990 Yes No No No 

Jackson 1990 No Yes No No 

Ken yon 1990 Yes No No No 

Milaca 1990 Yes No No No 

Minneapolis 1990 No Yes No No 

Minnetonka 1990 Yes No No No 

Mora 1990 Yes No No No 

New Brighton 1989 No Yes No No 

North field 1990 Yes No No No 

Owatonna 1990 Yes No No No 

Preston 1988 Yes No No No 

Red Wing 1990 No Yes No No 

Redwood Falls 1990 No Yes No No 

Richfield 1990 Yes No No No 

Roseville 1991 Yes No No No 

Sartell 1990 Yes No No No 

Shoreview 1991 No Yes No No 

St. Cloud 1990 Yes No No No 

St. Louis Park 1990 Yes No No No 

St. Paul 1990 No No Yes Yes 

W acon ia 1989 Yes No No No 

West St. Paul 1990 No Yes No No 

White Bear Lake 1989 Yes No No No 

Worthington 1990 No Yes No No 

NEWJERSEY 

Bernards Township 1991 No Yes No No 

NEW MEXICO 

Albuquerque 1991 No Yes No No 

93 
State 

City or County 

NEW YORK 

Buffalo 

Great Neck Plaza 

New York City 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Raleigh 

NORTH DAKOTA 

Bismarck 

Grand Forks 

Jamestown 

Mandan 

Valley City 

PENNSYLVANIA 

All en t own 

Bethlehem 

Eas ttown 

Haverford 

Pittsburgh 

Radnor 

Tred yf frin 

Uwchlan Township 

Warrington Township 

West Goshen Township 

TEXAS 

Houston 

WASHINGTON 

Everett 

King County 

Lynnwood 

Mountlake Terrace 

Seattle 

Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Year Total Bars Locking 

Enacted Ban Exempted Devices Tokens 

1991 No Yes No No 

1991 Yes No No No 

1991 No Yes No No 

1992 No Yes No No 

1992 No Yes No No 

1990 No Yes No No 

1992 No Ycs No No 

1992 No Yes No No 

1992 No Yes No No 

1990 No Yes No No 

1990 No Yes No No 

1991 No Yes No NO 

1991 Yes No No No 

1990 No Yes No Yes 

1991 Yes No No No 

1991 Yes No No No 

1991 No YCS No No 

1991 Yes No No No 

1991 No Yes No No 

1991 No Ycs No No 

1990 No Yes No No 

1988 No Yes No No 

1989 No Yes Yes No 

1991 No Yes No No 

1991 No Y es No No 

94 
Chart IV 

State Year Total Bars Locking 

City or County Enacted Ban Exempted Devices Tokens 

WASHINGTON 

. Snohomish County 1991 No Yes No No 

Vancouver 1989 No Yes No No 

WYOMING 

Gillette 1991 No Yes No No 

Total number of vending machine ordinances: 161 

95 
BLANK PAGE 
Chart V 

Access to Minors: Tobacco Sampling 

And Licensing Ordinances 

Chart V lists local ordinances that limit or ban the free 

distribution of tobacco product samples and those that require 

tobacco retailers to hold a revokable license. 

Tobacco Sampling: A “yes” indicates that the community 

has an ordinance that limits or bans free distribution of tobacco 

products. While most ordinances eliminate the practice completely, some prohibit it only on public property. There are 

68 tobacco sampling ordinances included in this publication. 

Licensing: A “yes” in the second column indicates that 

the city or county requires tobacco retailers to hold a special 

license. Only ordinances that provide a mechanism for revoking 

or suspending the license are listed in this chart. (Some vending 

machine ordinances require licenses as a means of enforcing 

the ordinance, but licensing does not apply to other retail sales 

of tobacco. Those ordinances are listed in Chart IV.) There are 

33 tobacco retail licensure ordinances included in this publication. 

97 
BLANK PAGE 
Chart V 

Access to Minors: Tobacco Sampling 

And Licensing Ordinances 

State Tobacco Year Year 

City or County Sampling Enacted Licensing Enacted 

CALIFORNIA 

Albany Yes 1992 No 

Berkeley Yes 1991 No 

Clayton Yes 1992 No 

Contra Costa County Yes 1991 No 

El Cerrito Yes 1991 No 

Hercules Yes 1992 No 

Lafayette Yes 1992 No 

Long Beach Yes 1991 No 

Oakland Yes 1992 No 

Orinda Yes 1992 No 

Pinole Yes 1992 No 

San Francisco Yes 1988 No 

San Mateo County Yes 1992 No 

Seaside Yes 1992 No 

Sebastopol Yes 1992 No 

Solana Beach Yes 1986 No 

Solano County Yes 1991 No 

Vallejo Yes 1991 No 

Walnut Creek Yes 1991 No 

West Sacramento Yes 1991 No 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Washington Yes 1990 Yes 1990 

GEORGIA 

Atlanta Yes 1986 No 

99 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

State Tobacco Year Year 

City or County Sampling Enacted Licensing Enacted 

ILLINOIS 

Buffalo Grove No Yes 1990 

Charleston Yes 1990 No 

Chicago Yes 1991 Yes 1991 

Elk Grove Village Yes 1991 Yes 1991 

Elmhurst Yes 1990 Yes 1990 

Woodridge Yes 1989 Yes 1989 

INDIANA 

Indianapolis No Yes 1991 

MARYLAND 

Bowie Yes 1987 No 

Takoma Park Yes 1990 No 

MASSACEUSEITS 

Amherst Yes 1987 No 

Barre Yes 1991 Yes 1991 

Belmont Yes 1990 No 

Boston Yes 1984 No 

Chelmsford Yes 1991 No 

Concord Yes 1991 Yes 1991 

Framingham Yes 1984 Yes 1984 

Lee Yes 1992 No 

Lenox Yes 1992 No 

Leominster Yes 1989 Yes 1989 

Millis Yes 1991 Yes 1991 

Needham Yes 1991 No 

New Bedford Yes 1989 No 

Newton Yes 1982 No 

North Attleboro Yes 1992 No 

Sandwich Yes 1991 No 

Somerville Yes 1992 Yes 1992 

Stockbridge Yes 1992 No 

100 
chart v 

State Tobacco Year Year 

City or County Sampling Enacted Licensing Enacted 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Wellesley Yes 1990 No 

Weymouth Yes 1990 No 

Worcester Yes 1984 No 

MICHIGAN 

East Lansing Yes 1991 Yes 1991 

Ingham County Yes 1992 Yes 1992 

Marquette County No Yes 1990 

MINNESOTA 

Albert Lea Yes 1991 Yes 1991 

Blaine Yes 1989 No 

Brooklyn Center No Yes 1991 

Brooklyn Park No Yes 1972 

Chanhassen No Yes 1991 

Deer River Yes 1989 No 

Duluth Yes 1990 Yes 1990 

Excelsior No Yes 1972 

Kasson No Yes 1983 

Minneapolis Yes 1990 Yes 1990 

Minnetonka No Yes 1990 

Owatonna No Yes 1990 

Redwood Falls Yes 1990 No 

Roseville No Yes 1991 

Sartell No Yes 1990 

St. Cloud No Yes 1990 

St. Paul Yes 1990 No 

NEW MEXICO 

Albuquerque Yes 1991 No 

NEW YORK 

Erie County Yes 199 1 No 

101 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

State Tobacco Year Year 

City or County Sampling Enacted Licensing Enacted 

NEW YORK 

Great Neck Plaza Y cs 1991 No 

OHIO 

Cincinnati Yes 1988 No 

TEXAS 

Austin Yes 1988 No 

Dallas Ycs 1990 No 

WASHINGTON 

Everett No Yes 1990 

King County Yes 1991 Yes 1988 

Mountlake Terrace No Yes 1991 

Seattle Yes 1991 Yes 1991 

Snohomish County No Yes 1991 

Vancouver Yes 1989 No 

Total tobacco sampling ordinances: 68 

Total licensing ordinances: 33 

102 
Appendix A 

Summary of Local Ordinances, 

By State 

103 
BLANK PAGE 
Appendix A 

Table 1 

Local smokingordinances, total number, by state 

Enclosed 

Retail Public 

Total Workplaces Restaurants Stores Places 

Alabama 11 10 10 10 8 

Arizona 16 15 13 15 14 

Arkansas 2 1 0 1 1 

California 242 224 231 203 142 

Colorado 34 32 32 31 28 

Delaware 1 I 1 1 1 

District of Columbia 1 1 1 1 0 

Georgia 4 2 4 2 2 

Hawaii 2 0 1 1 0 

Illinois 15 10 14 10 9 

Indiana 2 0 2 1 0 

Kansas 4 3 4 3 

Louisiana 2 2 2 2 

Maryland 5 4 4 2 

Massachusetts 68 23 66 19 17 

Michigan 2 2 2 2 2 

Missouri 7 4 7 7 2 

New Jersey 1 0 1 0 0 

New Mexico 1 1 1 1 1 

New York 9 9 7 8 7 

North Carolina 4 3 4 3 0 

Ohio 21 19 21 19 17 

Oregon 1 1 1 0 0 

105 
- - 

Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Table 1 (continued) 

Enclosed 

Retail Public 

Total Workplaces Restaurants Stores Places 

Pennsylvania 4 4 4 4 4 

South Carolina 2 1 1 1 0 

South Dakota 1 1 0 1 0 

Tennessee 2 0 2 2 0 

Texas 51 2s 44 42 28 

Vermont I 7 1 1 1 

Virginia 17 6 16 15 0 

Washington 4 3 3 3 2 

West Virginia 3 3 3 3 3 

Wisconsin 1 0 1 1 0 

Wyoming 2 2 2 1 2 

-

Totals 543 413 50s 419 298 

106 
- - - 

ADDendix A 

Table 2 

Local ordinances restricting youth access to tobacco, 

total number, by state 

Vending Tobacco Total Machines Sampling Licensing 

Arizona 1 1 0 0 

California 56 55 20 0 

District of Columbia 1 1 1 1 

Georgia 1 0 1 0 

I11inois 6 6 5 5 

Indiana 1 0 0 1 

Louisiana 1 1 0 0 

Maine 1 1 0 0 

Maryland 2 2 2 0 

Massachusetts 26 15 21 6 

Michigan 7 7 2 3 

Minnesota 45 42 7 12 

New Jersey 1 1 0 0 

New Mexico 1 1 1 0 

New York 4 3 2 0 

North Carolina 1 1 0 0 

North Dakota 5 5 0 0 

Ohio 1 0 1 0 

Pennsylvania 10 10 0 0 

Texas 3 1 2 0 

Washington 7 7 3 5 

Wyoming 1 1 0 0 

Totals 182 161 68 33 

107 
BLANK PAGE 
Appendix B 

State Tobacco Control Laws 

109 
BLANK PAGE 
Table 1 

State laws restricting smoking in public places" 

Alabama none 

Alaska 1975 0 0 1' PO 0. 0 

Arizona 1973 0 OP 0 

Arkansas 1977 0 ob 

California 1976 0 PO. 0 or 0 .PO 0 

Colorado 1977 0 PI'. 0 0 OP 0 . 

Connecticut 1973 PP 0. 0 PO 00 0 

Delaware 1960 PO P Od 0 ~ ~~ 

District of Columbia 1975 PO 0 0. 0. 0 

Floridae 1985 OI'P.0 0 0. OP 0 

Georgia 1975 P 

Hawaii 1987 0 PO. 0.00 0 0 

Idaho 1975 PP. 0 0 00 

Illinois' 1989 0 PO. 0 0 00 

Indiana 1987 0 0 0 

Iowa 1987 0 PO. 00 0.00 

Kansas 1987 0 PO. 0 0. OP 

Kentucky 1972 0 

Louisiana 1992 0 0 0 . 

Maine 1981 0 0 0 0. 0.00 

Maryland 1957 00 P OP 

Massachusetts 1988 0.00 PO Od 0 

Michigan 1968 0 0 OP 0 

Minnesota 1975 0 0 .PO 0 0 

Mississippi 1942 

Missouri 1992 0 0 0.0 

Montana 1979 0. 0 0. 0 

Nebraska 1979 0 0 00 0 

Footnotes at end of table. 

Source: State Legislated Actions on Tobacco Issues, Coalition on Smoking OR Health, 1992, 

111 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Table 1 (continued) 

h

2 

U 

s 

w

u 

m 

c 

ra 

3 

2 

Nevadae 1975 00 PO Od 0 

New Hampshire New Jerseye 

New Mexico 

1981 

1985 

1985 

0 

0 

0 

0 

.PO 

.PO 

0 

PP 

OP 

0 

0 

New York 1975 0 PO. 00 0.00 

North Carolina none 

North Dakota 1987 0 PO. 0 0 .PO 0 

Ohio 1981 0 00 0 P 0 

Oklahomae 1987 0 00 0 0 0 

Oregon

Pennsylvaniag

Rhode Island 

1977 

1977 

1977 

0 

O 

PO. 

00 

P 

0 

0 

0 

OP 

0 

00 

0 

OdP 

0 

0 

0 

South Carolina 1937 ..PO 0 Pb 0 

South Dakota 1974 0 PP 0 0 P 0 

Tennessee 1990 0 

Texas 1975 O P 00 P 0 

Utah OP 0 

Vermont 0 0 

Virginiaf

Washington 

0 0 

.PO. 

00 

.PO 

West Virginia Wisconsin 1913 

1983 0 PO 0 

0 

OP 0 

Wyoming 1989 0 

112 
- - 

Appendix B 

Table 2 

Age restrictions for sale of tobacco products 

Alabama 

Alaska 

Arizona 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Del aware 

District of Columbia 

Florida 

Georgia 

Hawaii 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montan a 

Nebraska 

Minimum Age Minimum Age for 

for Cigarettes Smokeless Tobacco 

19 19 

19 19 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

17 17 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

18 18 

Source: State Legislated Actions on Tobacco Issues, Codition on Smoking OR Health, 1992. 

113 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Table 2 (continued) 

Minimum Age Minimum Age for 

for Cigarettes Smokeless Tobacco 

Nevada 18 18 

New Hampshire 18 18 

New Jersey 18 18 

New Mexico 18 

New York 18 18 

North Carolina 18 18 

North Dakota 18 18 

Ohio 18 18 

Oklahoma 18 18 

Oregon 18 18 

Pennsylvania 21 18 

Rhode Island 18 18 

South Carolina 18 18 

South Dakota 18 18 

Tennessee 18 18 

Texas 18 18 

Utah 19 19 

Vermont 18 18 

Virginia 18 18 

Washington 18 18 

West Virginia 18 18 

Wisconsin 18 18 

Wyoming 18 18 

114 
Table 3 

Restrictions on tobacco sales through vending machines, by State 

Sign Posting Restrictions on Placement Total Ban 

Alaska 0 

Arkansas 0 0 

Colorado 0 0 oa 

Connecticut 0 0 

District of Columbia 0 

Florida 0 

Georgia 0 

Hawaii 0 

Illinois ob 

Indiana 0 

Iowa 

Louisiana 0 ~ 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts 

Michigan 

Minnesota 0 

Mi ssour i 

Nebraska 0 

New Hampshire 

New Mexico oa 0" 

New York 0 

Ohio 0 

Oregon OC 

Rhode Island 

South Dakota 

Texas 

Utah 0 

Vermont 0 

Virginia 

Wisconsin 0' 

Wyoming 0 

a Smokeless tobacco products only. 

Mandates signs warning of the dangers of cigarette use ditring pregnancy. (Not restricting youth 

access.) 

Preempts power of localities to pass stronger ordinances. 

dPlacement is not restricted, but lockout devices are required on machines in areas accessible to youth. 

Source: State Legislated Actions on Tobacco Issues, Coalition on Smoking OR Health, 1992. 
Smoking and Tobacco Control MononaDh No. 3 

Table 4 

Restrictions on distribution of tobacco product samples, by State 

Public Smokeless 

Date Minors Tobacco 

Enacted Only Only 

Arkansas 1991 0 

California 1991 

Georgia 1987 0 

Illinois 1988 0 

Indiana 1987 0 

Iowa 1991 0 

Kansas 1984 oa 

Kentucky 1992 0 I 

Louisiana 1988 0 

Maine 1983 0 

Minnesota 1986,1987 

Missouri 1992 0 

Nebraska 1989 0 

New Hampshire 

New York 

1987 

1992 

0 

0 

Oregon 1989 0 

Pennsylvania 1990 0 

Rhode Island 1988 0 

Utah 1983, 1986, 1989 

Wisconsin 1989 0 

Wyoming 1991 0 

‘Applies to cigarettes only. 

Source: State Legislated Actions on Tobacco Issues, Coalition on Smoking OR Health, 1992. 

116 
~ 

Appendix C 

Model Local Ordinances 

117 
BLANK PAGE 
Appendix C 

Model Ordinance Eliminating Smoking 

In Workplaces and Enclosed Public Places 

(lOOo/o Smokefree Ordinance)’ 

Sec. 1000. Title 

This article shall be known as the Smoking Pollution Control Ordinance. 

Sec. 1001. Findings and Purpose 

The City Council does hereby find that: 

Numerous studies have found that tobacco smoke is a major contributor to indoor air 

pollution, and that breathing secondhand smoke is a cause of disease, including lung 

cancer, in nonsmokers. At special risk are elderly people, individuals with cardiovascular 

disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory function, including asthmatics and 

those with obstructive airway disease; and 

Health hazards induced by breathing secondhand smoke include lung cancer, heart 

disease, respiratory infection, decreased respiratory function, bronchoconstriction, and 

bronchospasm. 

Accordingly, the City Council finds and declares that the purposes of this ordinance are 

(1)to protect the public health and welfare by prohibiting smoking in public places and 

places of employment; and (2)to guarantee the right of nonsmokers to breathe smokefree 

air, and to recognize that the need to breathe smokefree air shall have priority over the 

desire to smoke. 

Sec. 1002. Definitions 

The following words and phrases, whenever used in this article, shall be construed as 

defined in this section: 

1. “Bar” means an area which is devoted to the serving of alcoholic beverages for 

consumption by guests on the premises and in which the serving of food is only 

incidental to the consumption of such beverages. Although a restaurant may contain 

a bar, the term “bar” shall not include the restaurant dining area. 

2. “Business” means any sole proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, corporation, or 

other business entity formed for profit-making purposes, including retail establishments where goods or services are sold as well as professional corporations and other 

entities where legal, medical, dental, engineering, architectural, or other professional 

services are delivered. 

Developed by Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, 2530San Pablo Avenue, Suite J, Berkeley, CA 94702, 

(510) 841-3032. Used with permission. 

119 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 ~ 

3. “Employee” means any person who is employed by any employer in the consideration 

for direct or indirect monetary wages or profit, and any person who volunteers his or 

her services for a non-profit entity. 

4. “Employer” means any person, partnership, corporation, including a municipal 

corporation, or non-profit entity who employs the services of one or more individual 

persons. 

5. “Enclosed Area” means all space between a floor and ceiling which is enclosed on all 

sides by solid walls or windows (exclusive of door or passageways) which extend from 

the floor to the ceiling, including all space therein screened by partitions which do not 

extend to the ceiling or are not solid, “office landscaping,” or similar structures. 

6. “Place of Employment” means any enclosed area under the control of a public or 

private employer which employees normally frequent during the course of employment, including but not limited to work areas, employee lounges and restrooms, 

conference and classrooms, employee cafeterias, and hallways. A private residence is 

not a ”place of employment” unless it is used as a child care or health care facility. 

7. “PublicPlace” means any enclosed area to which the public is invited or in which the 

public is permitted, including but not limited to banks, educational facilities, health 

facilities, laundromats, public transportation facilities, reception areas, restaurants, 

retail food production and marketing establishments, retail service establishments, 

retail stores, theaters, and waiting rooms. A private residence is not a “public place.” 

8. “Restaurant” means any coffee shop, cafeteria, sandwich stand, private [or] public 

school cafeteria, and any other eating establishment which gives or offers for sale food 

to the public, guests, or employees, as well as kitchens in which food is prepared on 

the premises for serving elsewhere, including catering facilities, except that the term 

“restaurant” shall not include a cocktail lounge or tavern if said cocktail lounge or 

tavern is a “bar” as defined in Section 1002(1). 

9. “Retail Tobacco Store” means a retail store utilized primarily for the sale of tobacco 

products and accessories and in which the sale of other products is merely incidental. 

10. “Service Line” means any indoor line at which one (1) or more persons are waiting for 

or receiving service of any kind, whether or not such service involves the exchange of 

money. 

11. “Smoking” means inhaling, exhaling, burning, or carrying any lighted cigar, cigarette, 

weed, or other plant in any manner or in any form. 

12. “Sports Arena” means sports pavilions, gymnasiums, health spas, boxing arenas, 

swimming pools, roller and ice rinks, bowling alleys, and other similar places where 

members of the general public assemble either to engage in physical exercise, 

participate in athletic competition, or witness sports events. 

120 
Appendix C 

Sec. 1003. Application of Article to City-Owned Facilities 

All enclosed facilities owned by the City of shall be subject to the 

provisions of this article. 

Sec. 1004. Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places 

A. Smoking shall be prohibited in all enclosed public places within the City of 

, including but not limited to the following places, and with the 

following exceptions: 

1. Elevators. 

2. Buses, taxicabs, and other means of public transit under the authority of the 

City of , and ticket, boarding, and waiting areas of public transit 

depots. 

3. Restrooms. 

4. Service lines. 

5. Retail stores. 

6. All areas available to and customarily used by the general public in all businesses and non-profit entities patronized by the public, including but not 

limited to attorneys offices and other offices, banks, laundromats, hotels, and 

motels. 

7. Restaurants. 

8. Public areas of aquariums, galleries, libraries, and museums when open to the 

public. 

9. Any facility which is primarily used for exhibiting any motion picture, stage, 

drama, lecture, musical recital, or other similar performance, except when 

smoking is part of a stage production. 

10. Sports arenas and convention halls. 

11. Every room, chamber, place of meeting or public assembly, including school 

buildings, under the control of any board, council, commission, committee, 

including joint committees, or agencies of the City or any political subdivision 

of the State during such time as a public meeting is in progress, to the extent 

such place is subject to the jurisdiction of the City. 

12. Waiting rooms, hallways, wards and semiprivate rooms of health facilities, 

including but not limited to hospitals, clinics, physical therapy facilities, doctors’ offices, and dentists’ offices. 

121 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

13. Lobbies, hallways, and other common areas in apartment buildings, condominiums, retirement facilities, nursing homes, and other multiple-unit residential facilities. 

14. Lobbies, hallways, and other common areas in multiple-unit commercial 

facilities. 

15. Polling places. 

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, any owner, operator, manager, or other person who controls any establishment or facility may declare 

that entire establishment or facility as a nonsmoking establishment. 

Sec. 1005. Regulation of Smoking in Places of Employment 

A. It shall be the responsibility of employers to provide a smokefree workplace for 

all employees, but employers are not required to incur any expense to make 

structural or other physical modifications. 

B. Within 90 days of the effective date of this article, each employer having an 

enclosed place of employment located within the city shall adopt, implement, 

make known, and maintain a written smoking policy which shall contain the 

following requirements: 

Smoking shall be prohibited in all enclosed facilities within a place of employment 

without exception. This includes common work areas, auditoriums, classrooms, 

conference and meeting rooms, private offices, elevators, hallways, medical facilities, cafeterias, employee lounges, stairs, restrooms, vehicles, and all other 

enclosed facilities. 

C. The smoking policy shall be communicated to all employees within three (3) 

weeks of its adoption. 

D. All employers shall supply a written copy of the smoking policy upon request to 

any existing or prospective employee. 

Sec. 1006. Where Smoking Not Regulated 

A. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article to the contrary, the following 

areas shall not be subject to the smoking restrictions of this article: 

1. Bars. 

2. Private residences, except when used as child care or health care facilities. 

3. Retail tobacco stores. 

4. Restaurants, hotel and motel conference or meeting rooms, and public and 

private assembly rooms while these places are being used for private functions. 

122 
Appendix C 

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, any owner, operator, manager, or other person who controls any establishment described in this section 

may declare that entire establishment as a nonsmoking establishment. 

Sec. 1007. Posting of Signs 

A. “No Smoking” signs or the international “No Smoking” symbol (consisting of a 

pictorial representation of a burning cigarette enclosed in a red circle with a red 

bar across it) shall be clearly, sufficiently, and conspicuously posted in every building or other place where smoking is regulated by this article, by the owner, 

operator, manager, or other person having control of such building or other 

place. 

B. Every restaurant shall have posted at every entrance a conspicuous sign clearly 

stating that smoking is prohibited. 

Sec. 1008. Enforcement 

A. Enforcement of this article shall be implemented by the Department of Health 

[or the City Manager]. 

B. Any citizen who desires to register a complaint under this chapter may initiate 

enforcement with the Department of Health [or the City Manager]. 

C. The Fire Department or the Health Department shall require, while an establishment is undergoing otherwise mandated inspections, a “self-certification” from 

the owner, manager, operator, or other person having control of such establishment that all requirements of this article have been complied with. 

D. Any owner, manager, operator, or employee of any establishment regulated by this 

article may inform persons violating this article of the appropriate provisions 

thereof. 

E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, a private citizen may bring 

legal action to enforce this article. 

Sec. 1009. Violations and Penalties 

A. It shall be unlawful for any person who owns, manages, operates, or otherwise 

controls the use of any premises subject to rcgulation under this article to fail to 

comply with any of its provisions. 

B. It shall be unlawful for any person to smoke in any area where smoking is prohibited by the provisions of this article. 

C. Any person who violates any provision of this article shall be guilty of an infraction, punishable by: 

1. A fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100) for a first violation. 

123 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

2. A fine not exceeding two hundred dollars ($200)for a second violation of this 

article within one (1) year. 

3. A fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500)for each additional violation 

of this article within one (1) year. 

Sec. 1010. Nonretaliation 

No person or employer shall discharge, refuse to hire, or in any manner retaliate 

against any employee or applicant for employment because such employee or applicant exercises any right to a smokefree environment afforded by this article. 

Sec. 1011. Public Education 

The Department of Health [or City Manager] shall engage in a continuing program to 

explain and clarify the purposes and requirements of this ordinance to citizens 

affected by it, and to guide owners, operators, and managers in their compliance with 

it. Such program may include publication of a brochure for affected businesses and 

individuals explaining the provisions of this ordinance. 

Sec. 1012. Other Applicable Laws 

This article shall not be interpreted or construed to permit smoking where it is 

otherwise restricted by other applicable laws. 

Sec. 1013. Severability 

If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this article or the application thereof 

to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect 

the other provisions of this article which can be given effect without the invalid 

provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this article are declared to 

be severable. 

Sec. 1014. Effective Date 

This article shall be effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its adoption 

and shall be reviewed within one year of its effective date. 

124 
Appendix C 

Model Smoking Ordinance 

(Partial Ban)’ 

Sec. 1000. Title 

This article shall be known as the Smoking Pollution Control Ordinance. 

Sec. 1001. Findings and Purpose 

The City Council does hereby find that: 

Numerous studies have found that tobacco smoke is a major contributor to indoor air 

pollution; and 

Reliable studies have shown that breathing secondhand smoke is a cause of disease, 

including lung cancer, in healthy nonsmokers. At special risk are elderly people, 

individuals with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory function, including asthmatics and those with obstructive airway disease; and 

Health hazards induced by breathing secondhand smoke include lung cancer, heart 

disease, respiratory infection, decreased respiratory function, bronchoconstriction, and 

bronchospasm; and 

Accordingly, the City Council finds and declares that the purposes of this ordinance 

are (1)to protect the public health and welfare by prohibiting smoking in public places 

except in designated smoking areas, and by regulating smoking in places of employment; 

and (2) to strike a reasonable balance between the needs of persons who smoke and 

the need of nonsmokers to breathe smokefree air, and to recognize that, where these 

needs conflict, the need to breathe smokefree air shall have priority. 

Sec. 1002. Definitions 

The following words and phrases, whenever used in this article, shall be construed as 

defined in this section: 

1. “Bar” means an area which is devoted to the serving of alcoholic beverages for 

consumption by guests on the premises and in which the serving of food is only

incidental to the consumption of such beverages. Although a restaurant may contain 

a bar, the term “bar” shall not include the restaurant dining area. 

2. “Business” means any sole proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, corporation, or 

other business entity formed for profit-making purposes, including retail establishments where goods or services are sold as well as professional corporations and other 

entities where legal, medical, dental, engineering, architectural, or other professional 

services are delivered. 

2Developedby Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rtghts, 2530 San Pablo Avenue, Suite J, Berkeley, CA 94702, 

(510) 841-3032. Used with permission. 

125 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

3. “Emp1oyee”means any person who is employed by any employer in theconsideration 

for direct or indirect monetary wages or profit, and any person who volunteers his or 

her services for a non-profit entity. 

4. “Employer” means any person, partnership, corporation, including a municipal 

corporation,or non-profit entity, who employs the services of one or more individual 

persons. 

5. “Enclosed Area” means all space between a floor and ceiling which is enclosed on 

all sides by solid walls or windows (exclusive of door- or passageways) which extend 

from the floor to the ceiling, including all space therein screened by partitions which 

do not extend to the ceiling or are not solid, “office landscaping,” or similar structures. 

6. “Place of Employment” means any enclosed area under the control of a public or 

private employer which employees normally frequent during the course of employment, including, but not limited to, work areas, employee lounges and restrooms, 

conference and classrooms, employee cafeterias, and hallways. 

a. A private residence is not a “place of employment” unless it is used as a child care 

or health care facility. 

b. The dining area of a restaurant is not a “place of employment.” 

7. “PublicPlace” means any enclosed area to which the public is invited or in which the 

public is permitted, including but not limited to banks, educational facilities, health 

facilities, laundromats, public transportation facilities, reception areas, restaurants, 

retail food production and marketing establishments, retail service establishments, 

retail stores, theaters, and waiting rooms. A private residence is not a “public place.” 

8. “Restaurant” means any coffee shop, cafeteria, sandwich stand, private [or] public 

school cafeteria, and any other eating establishment which gives or offers for sale 

food to the public, guests, or employees, as well as kitchens in which food is prepared 

on the premises for serving elsewhere, including catering facilities, except that the 

term “restaurant” shall not include a cocktail lounge or tavern if said cocktail lounge 

or tavern is a “bar” as defined in section 1002(1). 

9. “Service Line” means any indoor line at which one (1) or more persons are waiting 

for or receiving service of any kind, whether or not such service involves the exchange 

of money. 

10. “Smoking” means inhaling, exhaling, burning, or carrying any lighted cigar, cigarette, weed, or other plant in any manner or in any form. 

11. “Sports Arena” means sports pavilions, gymnasiums, health spas, boxing arenas, 

swimming pools, roller and ice rinks, bowling alleys, and other similar places where 

members of the general public assemble either to engage in physical excercise, 

participate in athletic competition, or witness sports events. 

126 
Appendix C 

Sec. 1003. Application of Article to City-Owned Facilities 

All enclosed facilities owned by the City of shall be subject to the provisions 

of this article. 

Sec. 1004. Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places 

A. Smoking shall be prohibited in all enclosed public places within the City of 

, including, but not limited to, the following places, and with the 

following exceptions: 

1. Elevators. 

2. Buses, taxicabs, and other means of public transit under the authority of the City 

of , and ticket, boarding, and waiting areas of public transit depots. 

3. Restrooms. 

4. Service lines. 

5. Retail stores, except areas in said stores not open to the public and all areas within 

retail tobacco stores. 

6. All areas available to and customarily used by the general public in all businesses 

and non-profit entities patronized by the public, including but not limited to 

attorneys offices and other offices, banks, laundromats, hotels, and motels. 

7. Restaurants [provided, however, that this prohibition does not prevent (a) the 

designation of a contiguous area within a restaurant that contains a maximum of 

twenty-five percent (25%) of the seating capacity of the restaurant as a smoking 

area or (b)the providing of separate rooms for smokers and nonsmokers so long 

as the rooms designated for smoking do not contain more than twenty-five 

percent (25%) of the seating capacity of the restaurant]. 

8. Public areas of aquariums, galleries, libraries, and museums when open to the 

pub1 ic. 

9. Any building not open to the sky which is primarily used for exhibiting any 

motion picture, stage, drama, lecture, musical recital, or other similar performance, except when smoking is part of a stage production. 

10. Sports arenas and convention halls. 

11. Every room, chamber, place of meeting or public assembly, including school 

buildings under the control of any board, council, commission, committee, 

including joint committees, or agencies of the City or any political subdivision 

of the State, during such time as a public meeting is in progress, to the extent 

such place is subject to the jurisdiction of the City. 

127 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

12. Waiting rooms, hallways, wards, and private or semiprivate rooms of health 

facilities, including but not limited to hospitals, clinics, physical therapy facilities, doctors’ offices, and dentists’ offices. 

13. Lobbies, hallways, and other common areas in apartment buildings, condominiums, retirement facilities, nursing homes, and other multiple-unit residential 

facilities. 

14. Lobbies, hallways, and other common areas in multiple-unit commercial 

facilities. 

15. Polling places. 

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, any owner, operator, manager, 

or other person who controls any establishment or facility described in this section 

may declare that entire establishment or facility as a nonsmoking establishment. 

Sec. 1005. Regulation of Smoking in Places of Fmployment 

A. It shall be the responsibility of employers to provide smokefree areas for nonsmoking 

employees within existing facilities to the maximum extent possible, but employers 

are not required to incur any expense to make structural or other physical modifications in providing these areas. 

B. Within 90 days of the effective date of this article, each employer having an enclosed 

place of employment located within the City shall adopt, implement, make known, 

and maintain a written smoking policy which shall contain at a minimum the 

following requirements: 

1. Any employee in a place of employment shall have the right to designate his or 

her workarea as a nonsmoking area and to post the same with an appropriate sign 

or signs, to be provided by the employer. 

2. Smoking shall be prohibited in all common work areas in a place of employment, 

unless every person who works in that area agrees in writing that a smoking area 

will be designated. 

3. Prohibition of smoking in auditoriums, classrooms, conference and meeting 

rooms, elevators, hallways, medical facilities, lounges, cafeterias, and restrooms. 

4. In any dispute arising under the smoking policy, the health concerns of the 

nonsmoker shall be given precedence. 

C. The smoking policy shall be communicated to all employees within three (3) weeks 

of its adoption. 

D. All employers shall supply a written copy of the smoking policy upon rcquest to any 

existing or prospective employee. 

128 
Appendix C 

E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, every employer shall have the 

right to designate any place of employment, or any portion thereof, as a nonsmoking 

area. 

Sec. 1006. Where Smoking Not Regulated 

A. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article to the contrary, the following 

areas shall not be subject to the smoking restrictions of this article: 

1. Bars. 

2. Private residences, except when used as child care or health care facilities. 

3. Hotel and motel rooms rented to guests. 

4. Retail tobacco stores. 

5. Restaurants, hotel and motel conference or meeting rooms, and publicand private 

assembly rooms while these places are being used for private functions. 

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, any owner, operator, manager, 

or other person who controls any establishment described in this section may declare 

that entire establishment as a nonsmoking establishment. 

Sec. 1007. Posting of Signs 

A. “Smoking”or “No Smoking” signs, whichever are appropriate, with letters of not less 

than one inch (1”)in height or the international “No Smoking” symbol (consisting 

of a pictorial representation of a burning cigarette enclosed in a red circle with a red 

bar across it) shall be clearly, sufficiently, and conspicuously posted in every building 

or other place where smoking is regulated by this article, by the owner, operator, 

manager, or other person having control of such building or other place. 

B. Every restaurant shall have posted at every entrance a conspicuous sign clearly stating 

that a nonsmoking section is available, and every patron shall be asked his or her 

preference. 

Sec. 1008. Enforcement 

A. Enforcement of this article shall be implemented by the Department of Health [or the 

City Manager]. 

B. Any citizen who desires to register a complaint under this chapter may initiate 

enforcement with the Department of Health [or the City Manager]. 

C. The Fire Department or the Health Department shall require, while an establishment 

is undergoing otherwise mandated inspections, a “self-certification” from the owner, 

manager, operator, or other person having control of such establishment that all 

requirements of this article have been complied with. 

129 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

D. Any owner, manager, operator, or employee of any establishment regulated by this 

article may inform persons violating this article of the appropriate provisions 

thereof. 

E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, a private citizen may bring 

legal action to enforce this article. 

Sec. 1009. Violations and Penalties 

A. It shall be unlawful for any person who owns, manages, operates, or otherwise 

controls the use of any premises subject to regulation under this article to fail 

to comply with any of its provisions. The owner, manager, or operator of a restaurant 

shall not be deemed in violation of Sec. 1007(n) if the host or hostess of the restaurant 

fails to ask the seating preference of patrons, but shall be deemed inviolation thereof 

if the restaurant has no stated policy requiring that patrons be asked their preference. 

B. It shall be unlawful for any person to smoke in any area where smoking is prohibited 

by the provisions of this article. 

C. Any person who violates any provision of this article shall be guilty of an infraction, 

punishable by: 

1. A fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100)for a first violation. 

2. A fine not exceeding two hundred dollars ($200)for a second violation of this 

article within one (1) year. 

3. A fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500)for each additional violation of 

this article within one (1) year. 

Sec. 1010. Nonretaliation 

No person or employer shall discharge, refuse to hire, or in any manner retaliate against 

any employee or applicant for employment because such employee or applicant excercises 

any right to a smokefree environment afforded by this article. 

Sec. 1011. Governmental Agency Cooperation 

The City Manager shall annually request other governmental and educational agencies 

having facilities within the City of to establish 

local operating procedures in cooperation and compliance with this article. 

Sec. 1012. Other Applicable Laws 

This article shall not be interpreted or construed to permit smoking where it is otherwise 

restricted by other applicable laws. 

130 
Appendix C 

Sec. 1013. Severability 

If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this article or the application thereof 

to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the 

other provisions of this article which can be given effect without the invalid provision or 

application, and to this end the provisions of this article are declared to be severable. 

Sec. 1014. Effective Date 

This article shall be effective thirty (30)days from and after the date of its adoption, and 

shall be reviewed within one year of its effective date. 

131 
BLANK PAGE 
Appendix C 

Model Tobacco Vending Machine Ordinance3 

Sec. 1000. Title 

This ordinance shall be known as the Tobacco Vending Machine Ordinance. 

Sec. 1001. Findings and Purpose 

The City Council does hereby find that: 

Smoking is responsible for the premature deaths of 434,000 Americans each year from 

lung cancer, heart disease, respiratory illness, and other diseases; and 

The U.S.Surgeon General has declared that nicotine is as addictive as cocaine or heroin, 

and children can become addicted to these products through easy purchase from tobacco 

vending machines; 

Accordingly, the City Council finds that prohibiting tobacco vending machines is 

necessary to protect the health and welfare of the public. 

Sec. 1002. Definitions 

“Tobacco Vending Machine” means any machine or device designated for or used for the 

vending of cigarettes, cigars, tobacco, or tobacco products upon the insertion of coins, 

trade checks, or slugs. 

Sec. 1003. Tobacco Vending Machines Prohibited 

No cigarette or other tobacco product may be sold, offered for sale, or distributed by or 

from a vending machine or other appliance, or any other device designed or used for 

vending purposes. 

Sec. 1004. Enforcement 

Violations of this ordinance are subject to a fine of $1,000per day for each violation. The 

City Manager and City Attorney shall enforce this ordinance. 

Sec. 1005. Severability 

If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this article or the application thereof 

to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the 

provisions of this article which can be given effect without the invalid provision or 

application, and to this end the provisions are declared to be severable. 

Sec. 1006. Effective Date 

This article shall be effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its adoption. 

3Developed by Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, 2530 San Pablo Avenue, Suite 1, Berkeley, CA 94702, 

(510) 841-3032. Used with permission. 

133 
BLANK PAGE 
Appendix C 

Model Tobacco Free Sampling Ordinance4 

Sec. 1000. Title 

This ordinance shall be known as the Tobacco Free Sampling Ordinance. 

Sec. 1001. Findings and Purpose 

The City Council does hereby find that: 

Smoking is responsible for the premature deaths of 434,000Americans each year from 

lung cancer, heart disease, respiratory illness, and other diseases; and 

The U.S. Surgeon General has declared that nicotine is as addictive as cocaine or heroin, 

and children can become addicted to these products through the use of free tobacco 

samples; 

Accordingly, the City Council finds that prohibiting the distribution of free cigarette 

samples or coupons is essential to protect the health and welfare of the public. 

Sec. 1002. Definitions 

1. “Public Place” means any area to which the public is invited or in which the public 

is permitted, including but not limited to any right-of-way, mall or shopping center, 

park, playground, and any other property owned by the City, any school district, or 

any park district. 

2. “Retail Tobacco Store” means a retail store utilized primarily for the sale of tobacco 

products and accessories and in which the sale of other products is merely incidental. 

Sec. 1003. Tobacco Samples Prohibited 

No person shall knowingly distribute or furnish without charge, or cause to be furnished 

or distributed without charge, cigarettes or other tobacco products, or coupons for 

cigarettes or other tobacco products, in any public place or at any event open to the public, 

except in retail tobacco stores. 

Sec. 1004. Enforcement 

Violations of this ordinance are subject to a fine of $1,000 per day for each violation. The 

City Manager and City Attorney may enforce this ordinance, and the Police Department 

shall also have the authority to issue citations for violations. 

Developed by Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, 2530 San Pablo Avenue, Suite J, Berkeley, CA 94702 

(510) 841-3032. Used with permission. 

135 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Sec. 1005. Severability 

If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this article or the application thereof 

to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the 

provisions of this article which can be given effect without the invalid provision or 

application, and to this end the provisions are declared to be severable. 

Sec. 1006. Effective Date 

This article shall be effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its adoption. 

136 
Appendix C 

Model Sale of Tobacco to Minors Ordinance’ 

Section 1000. Title 

This ordinance shall be known as the Sale of Tobacco to Minors Ordinance. 

Section 1001. Purpose 

The City Council [or Board of Supervisors] finds cigarette smoking and other tobacco use 

by minors to be a continuing problem with grave public health consequences. In 

recognition of the Surgeon General’s conclusion that nicotine is as addictive as cocaine 

or heroin, action is needed to curtail the easy access of minors to cigarettes and other 

tobacco products. Therefore, the purpose of this ordinance is to implement a strict and 

enforceable system to prevent the illegal sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products to 

minors. 

Section 1002. Definitions 

A. “Public Place” means any area to which the public is invited or in which the public 

is permitted, including but not limited to any right-of-way, mall or shopping center, 

park, playground, and any other property owned by the City, and any school district, 

or any park district. 

B. “Retail Tobacco Store” means a retail store utilized primarily for the sale of tobacco 

products and accessories and in which the sale of other products is merely incidental. 

C. “Tobacco Vending Machine” means any machine or device designated for or used for 

the vending of cigarettes, cigars, tobacco, or tobacco products upon the insertion of 

coins, trade checks, or slugs. 

Section 1003. Identification Required 

No retailer shall sell or permit to be sold cigarettes or other tobacco products to an 

individual without requesting and examining identification establishing the purchaser’s 

age as 18years or greater, unless the seller has some other conclusive basis for determining 

the buyer’s age. 

Section 1004. License Required 

After [specify date], it shall be unlawful for a retailer to sell cigarettes or other tobacco 

products unless that retailer holds and maintains a valid license from the City [or County] 

for each location in which tobacco products are sold. The term of the license shall be three 

years if the licensee complies with the provisions of this chapter. 

Developed by Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, 2530San Pablo Avenue, Suite J, Berkeley, CA 94702, 

(510) 841-3032. Used with permission. 

137 
Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 3 

Section 1005. Revocation of License 

A license shall be suspended after notice and opportunity to be heard as follows: 

A. In the case of a first violation, the licensee shall be fined two hundred dollars 

($200)and shall be notified in writing of penalties levied for further violations. 

B. In the case of a second violation, the licensee shall be fined five hundred dollars 

($500) and the license shall be suspended for not less than ninety consecutive 

business days nor more than six months. 

C. In the case of three or more violations, the licensee shall be fined one thousand 

dollars ($1,000) and the license shall be revoked not less than nine months nor 

more than eighteen months from the date of revocation. 

Section 1006. Fee 

The fee for a three-year tobacco retailer’s license is three hundred dollars ($300) for 

each tobacco retail location. 

Section 1007. Non-transferability 

A tobacco retail license is non-transferable, except a new license will be issued to a tobacco 

retailer who changes location. 

Section 1008. Vending Machines 

After [specify date], cigarette vending machines or any other devices for the sale or 

distribution of tobacco products are prohibited. 

Section 1009. Out-of-Package Sales Prohibited 

It is unlawful to sell cigarettes out of the manufacturer’s package with required health 

warnings. 

Section 1010. Tobacco Samples Prohibited 

No person shall knowingly distribute or furnish without charge, or cause to be furnished 

or distributed without charge, cigarettes or other tobacco products, or coupons for 

cigarettesor other tobacco products, in any public place or at any event open to the public, 

except in retail tobacco stores. 

Section 1011. Enforcement 

Violations of Sections 1008, 1009, [or] 1010 of this ordinance are subject to a fine of 

$1,000 per day for each violation. The City Attorney and City Manager may enforce 

this ordinance, and the Police Department shall also have the authority to issue citations 

for violations of Section 1010. 

138 
ADDendix C 

Section 1012. Severability 

If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this ordinance or the application 

thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not 

affect the provisions of this article which can be given effect without the invalid provision 

or application, and to this end the provisions are declared to be severable. 

Section 1013. Effective Date 

This chapter shall take effect on [specify date]. 

139 
BLANK PAGE 
BLANK PAGE