|
|
|
|
Share/Bookmark this Topic:
|
| Message |
Author |
by linkup
on Sun Jul 29, 2007 5:03 pm |
|
| Topic posted at request of J Sydney. |
|
|
linkup
Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: Oct 01, 2005
Posts: 1201
Location: Anywhere but here
|
| |
Back to top |
|
|
| |
|
by BWilliams
on Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:01 pm |
|
You should probably also quote why he wants a topic:
Quote: Belmont temporarily tabled its draconian ordinance after nation-wide media exposure and Email (and local citizen) outcry. The Calabasas ordinance, copied by El Cajon almost word for word from Section 2 on, can be read at www.cityofcalabasas.com. The final El Cajon City Council vote is due in August.
My own little city sits right next to El Cajon and the Nazis are coming for ME next! Help me, people! Don't just sing to the choir, Email Mayor Mark Lewis at www.ci.el-cajon.ca.us with your comments.
|
|
|
BWilliams
Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: Jun 05, 2003
Posts: 1104
Location: New York City
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by smallbird
on Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:17 am |
|
According to the City of El Cajon's website, there is no mayor...just a City Manager. So what is Mr. Lewis' e-mail address? Maybe I'm missing a crucial link here.  |
|
|
smallbird
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Jan 03, 2007
Posts: 367
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by jsidney
on Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:09 am |
|
The City of El Cajon has a council-manager system. The City Manager, a professional, "nonpolitical", public administrator, directs administrative operations and is responsible to the City Council for enforcement of city ordinances.
The City Council has sole authority to enact city ordinances.
The El Cajon Council consists of Mayor Mark Lewis and Councilmembers Jillian Hanson-Cox, Gary Kendrick, Bob McClellan, and Dick Ramos. They are listed on the El Cajon website on the "City Council" page. Their private E-mail addresses are not listed. Letters addressed to them must be sent through the City Manager or City Clerk E-mail link.
Thanks, Sunbird. I'll post a synopsis of the El Cajon problem when I am awake enough to write it short and accurate. Up all night again researching on my computer. |
|
|
jsidney
Toker
Joined: Jun 07, 2007
Posts: 95
Location: California
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by jsidney
on Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:23 am |
|
Oops! What I mean by "awake enough to write".
Thanks, SMALLBIRD.
Also thanks, linkup, for your aid. |
|
|
jsidney
Toker
Joined: Jun 07, 2007
Posts: 95
Location: California
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by jsidney
on Thu Aug 16, 2007 8:16 am |
|
Sorry I haven't been maintaining this thread. I have been running as fast as I can, fighting alligators in the adjacent little cities of El Cajon and La Mesa.
Tuesday, August 14, the El Cajon City Council passed its "every public place in the city" along with its "snitch for pay" smoking ordinance.
"Councilman Gary Kendrick, who initially introduced the ban as a prohibition on smoking in fast food restaurant children's playgrounds , said "This ordinance does not affect the considerate smoker. This ordinance affects the inconsiderate smoker." "
The same night La Mesa Councilman Ernie Ewin initiated a ban "on smoking on public outdoor patios and where children are present". Councilman Ewin said "This ordinance will not affect the considerate smoker. It will affect the inconsiderate smoker."
Tweedledum and Tweedledee. |
|
|
jsidney
Toker
Joined: Jun 07, 2007
Posts: 95
Location: California
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by jsidney
on Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:39 am |
|
I have found the Soylent Green factory. It is named the Technical Assistance Legal Center (TALC). It is at www.phi.org/talc
This organization is funded by California Proposition 99 cigarette taxes through the California Department of Health Services. The webside contains Model Tobacco Control Ordinances for California cities, so they won't have to write their own. TALC is the originator of the "private enforcer" (the snitch for pay) law. The website is huge. Its officially stated mission is to "provide California communities with free technical assistance on tobacco control policy issues." They offer this same free, California cigarette tax funded service to cities in other states.
Go to this site and explore it throughly. I do feel like Charlton Heston in the final minute of Soylent Green. |
|
|
jsidney
Toker
Joined: Jun 07, 2007
Posts: 95
Location: California
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by dumpstermcnuggets
on Thu Aug 16, 2007 4:53 pm |
|
jsidney wrote: Sorry I haven't been maintaining this thread. I have been running as fast as I can, fighting alligators in the adjacent little cities of El Cajon and La Mesa.
Tuesday, August 14, the El Cajon City Council passed its "every public place in the city" along with its "snitch for pay" smoking ordinance.
"Councilman Gary Kendrick, who initially introduced the ban as a prohibition on smoking in fast food restaurant children's playgrounds , said "This ordinance does not affect the considerate smoker. This ordinance affects the inconsiderate smoker." "
The same night La Mesa Councilman Ernie Ewin initiated a ban "on smoking on public outdoor patios and where children are present". Councilman Ewin said "This ordinance will not affect the considerate smoker. It will affect the inconsiderate smoker."
Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
So much for thinking the San Diego area was one of the few parts of Cali where outdoor smoking bans/outdoor patio bans weren't widespread.   All the outdoor smoking bans, and especially Calabasas-style smoking bans, are another nail in the coffin(sp?) as to why I'll never consider moving to California. Though never mind I already had very long scratched Cali. off my list, due to their 1995 + 1998 smoking bans for restaurants and bars.
I also fear that all the outdoor smoking ban hysteria will probably spread into Arizona soon enough, if by some chance its not there yet.... *sigh* |
|
|
dumpstermcnuggets
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Nov 06, 2006
Posts: 360
Location: Health Fascism Capital of the Midwest, Illinois
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by runamok
on Thu Aug 16, 2007 7:11 pm |
|
jsidney wrote: I have found the Soylent Green factory. It is named the Technical Assistance Legal Center (TALC). It is at www.phi.org/talc
This organization is funded by California Proposition 99 cigarette taxes through the California Department of Health Services. The webside contains Model Tobacco Control Ordinances for California cities, so they won't have to write their own. TALC is the originator of the "private enforcer" (the snitch for pay) law. The website is huge. Its officially stated mission is to "provide California communities with free technical assistance on tobacco control policy issues." They offer this same free, California cigarette tax funded service to cities in other states.
Go to this site and explore it throughly. I do feel like Charlton Heston in the final minute of Soylent Green.
They're getting bolder all the time. This is blatant use of public dollars to affect public policy in favor of a political agenda.
From their site:
"Future tobacco control efforts will focus on policies that have proven effective in reducing smoking prevalence and consumption (e.g. cigarette excise tax increases, restrictions on places where people can smoke, and restrictions on the marketing and sale of tobacco products)..."
They're not even attempting to hide behind the SHS bs. They admit right here what we've known all along.
It's like "Everything you wanted to know about how to persecute smokers but were afraid to ask".
S-C-A-R-Y fuggin' place. This is where some of 'em live! |
|
|
runamok
Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: Dec 20, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by runamok
on Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:22 pm |
|
I just read their document titled:
"The Benefits of Adding a Private Right of Action Provision
to Local Tobacco Control Ordinances"
http://talc.phlaw.org/pdf_files/0050.pdf
Has to do with giving private citizens....for lack of a better term..."snitch power".
It's quite clear that the intent here is to give tobacco control advocates (antis) license to roam the streets and bars in search of victims (read: smokers) who they can take to court and shake down for cash.
The antis (or any Tom, Dick or Harry whose got some time on their hands) would also be free to conduct their own sting operations on tobacco retailers.
This is without a doubt where they want to go with enforcement. They know (and they point it out here) that police and sheriffs departments give these bans extremely low priority and it's making them crazy. They want to police the bans (and the retailers) themselves. |
|
|
runamok
Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Joined: Dec 20, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
|
