Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Smokefree Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cary council reviews options to expand smokefree rules on town grounds and in public places
Summary
Council members on June 23 reviewed staff's proposed updates to a 2007 ordinance to address e-cigarettes and other nicotine delivery products on town grounds, parks and publicly accessible indoor spaces; staff outlined signage, enforcement and staged penalty options and will return with draft language and cost estimates in the fall.
At a June 23 Cary Town Council work session, staff presented multiple options for updating the town's smokefree and tobacco rules, including adding e-cigarettes and nicotine-delivery products to existing bans, adopting tobacco-free language for town grounds and parks, and prohibiting smoking in publicly accessible indoor places.
Scott Barry, introduced by the mayor as the town's presenter on the item, outlined the background: Cary last updated its ordinance in 2007 and state law changed over the last decade to allow municipalities more authority to regulate e-cigarettes and smoking in public spaces. "Our current ordinance was last updated in 2007," Scott Barry said. Staff noted that Wake County and Raleigh have adopted broader measures in recent years, and Raleigh's ordinance in particular was a model staff used when preparing options.
Staff described four tiers of potential amendments: 1) add vaping and e-cigarette language to existing bans at town properties; 2) adopt tobacco-free wording for town buildings, parks, greenways and other town-owned grounds; 3) add restrictions for town-owned outdoor facilities beyond buildings; and 4) consider prohibiting smoking in privately owned public places (for example, retail lobbies or hotel common areas) where state law permits municipal regulation.
On enforcement, staff proposed a graduated approach that starts with education and written notices for operators, and allows sworn officers to issue infractions of up to $50 for individual violations; repeat violations by business operators could carry higher fines (up to $200) after warnings. Scott Barry and other staff stressed that enforcement calls would be complaint-driven and that signage and a public education campaign would likely accompany any ordinance changes.
Council members debated scope and philosophy. Several members favored a stronger public-health approach for town-owned facilities, parks and greenways to eliminate secondhand exposure and model behavior for youth; others expressed concern about overreach into private businesses and the cost of signage and enforcement. One council member noted that the statute language and how "smoking" or "tobacco/ nicotine products" are defined will determine what can legally be regulated.
Staff said they will prepare draft ordinance language with building blocks so the council can adopt a version similar to neighboring jurisdictions or pick and choose elements. No formal ordinance vote occurred on June 23; staff will return in the fall with draft text, legal analysis of statutory authority and estimates for signage and education funding.
