Council appears ready to snuff smoking

CITY HALL — Broad public smoking restrictions were put on the fast track Tuesday after the City Council dismissed a suggested series of public input meetings as “duplicative,” instead directing staff to return with a stringent draft ordinance that council members said would elicit many of the same stakeholder opinions during the required public hearing.

Cutting public outreach out of the process, at least for now, is expected to shave months off the adoption of any potential public smoking restrictions that are sure to go beyond Glendale’s current bans on smoking inside city buildings or within 25 feet of outdoor seating areas at parks or during public events.

“I say let’s just get to it,” Councilman John Drayman said.

Most on the council were in general agreement that it was time to fortify citywide restrictions on second-hand smoke, a step that more than 30 cities in Los Angeles County have already taken, including Burbank.

“I think we ought to get this on the books soon,” Councilman Dave Weaver said.

In August, Burbank started enforcing a smoking ban on all city property, including downtown sidewalks, alleyways and other pedestrian areas and city parks. Other cities, like Calabasas, have taken their restrictions further to include the majority of apartment units and most all public gathering areas.

Community development officials will likely return in June with a draft ordinance incorporating a greater number of restrictions that could then be parred down during the public hearing process to better reflect the community’s appetite, officials said.

A draft ordinance will also likely mobilize greater numbers of those on either side of the debate — more so than a set of three community meetings that often seem less urgent to the public, city officials said.

“There is nothing like a proposed ordinance to get people to come down and give their input,” City Manager Jim Starbird.

Initiating the public input process after a draft ordinance has been presented would be a prudent move because stakeholders would have “something concrete to look at,” said Guadulesa Rivera, a community advocate for Glendale Adventist Medical Center.

“Otherwise, it’s just a free-for-all,” she said.