HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso - CC - 136-2018RESOLUTION NO. 136-2018
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIIE CITY OF BURLINGAME
APPRO\TNG RESPONSE TO THE SAN MATEO COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT
REGARDING SMOKING ORDINAIICES
WIIEREAS, the 2017-2018 San Mateo County Grand Jury issued a report on h:Jy 26,
2018, entitled "Smoke-Free Multitenant House: No Ifs, Ands, OR Butts"; and
WIIEREAS, the City Council has received the proposed draft response letter attached
hereto as Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
DOES IIEREBY RESOLVE AND ORDERAS FOLLOWS:
That the letter in response to the San Mateo County Grand Jury Report, "Smoke-Free
Multitenant House: No Ifs, Ands, OR Butts" is approved, and the Mayor is authorized to sign and
convey said letter on behalfofthe City.
Michael B , May
I, MEAGAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do y certify that
the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting ofthe City Council held on the 15th day
of October, 2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BEACH, BROWNRIGG, COLSON, KEIGHRAN, ORTIZ
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS : NONE
t
1-S er, City Clerk
WHEREAS, the report made certain findings and recommendations regarding the content
and implementation of smoking ordinances in the various municipalities examined in the report,
including the City of Burlingame; and
WIIEREAS, the City agrees with many of the findings and either has already implemented
or intends to implement most of them, but disagrees with others; and
CIYY
UICHAEL BROWNRIGG, iIAYOR
DONNA COLSON, VICE AYOR
E]f,ILY BEACH
ANN KEIGHRAN
RICARDO ORTIZ
The City of Burlingome
CITY HAIL _ 50I PRIMROSE ROAD
BURI.INGAME, CATIFORNIA 9,I0IG3997
TEL: (650) 55&7201
www burlinaame.orq
October 15, 2018
Honorable V. Raymond Swope
Judge ofthe Superior Court
c/o Charlene Kresevich
Hall of Justice
400 County Center, 2nd Floor
Redwood Ciry, CA 94063-1655
Subject: City of Burlingame's response to 2017 - 2018 Civil Grand Jury Report entitled "Smoke-
Free Multitenant Housing: No Ifs, Ands, Or Butts.'
Dear Judge Swope:
After reviewing the 2017-2018 Grand Jury report entitled "Smoke-Free Multitenant Housing: No Ifs,
Ands, Or Butts", the following are the City of Burlingame's responses to the Grand Jury's findings:
FINDINGS
Fl: Since 1967, exposure to secondhand smoke has killed approximately 2.5 million nonsmokers of all
ages in the United States.
Response: The City agrees with this finding, relying on the Grand Jury's representations in their report.
F2: Enforcement officers report that their primary focus when responding to MUH smoking violation
complaints is to educate alleged smokers regarding the requirements ofthe smoking ordinances, and that
most alleged smokers repo( being unfamiliar with the requirements of the ordinance.
Response: The City somewhat disagrees with this finding. ln the City's experience in code enforcement
conversations with alleged violators, rarely do the alleged smokers say they were unaware of the
ordinance.
The Honorable V. Raymond Swope
October 15,2018
Page 2
F3: The Belmont, Brisbane, Daly City, Redwood City, San Bruno, and the County of San Mateo MUH
smoking ordinances expressly prohibit retaliation against individuals who report a violation; however,
the MUH smoking ordinances for Burlingame, Foster City, the City of San Mateo, and South San
Francisco do not.
Response: The City agrees with this finding as it pertains to the City of Burlingame's Smoking
Ordinance.
F4: Searches for "smoking" or "smoke" using the website search tool for Burlingame and Daly City do
not yield any information regarding their MUH smoking ordinances, whereas the search tools for each
of the other jurisdictions with MUH smoking ordinances do. (See Website Content Table below, column
F4.)
F5: The websites for Burlingame, Daly City, Redwood City, the County of San Mateo, and South San
Francisco do not contain summaries of their MUH smoking ordinances. The websites for each of the
other jurisdictions with MUH smoking ordinances do. (See Website Content Table below, column F5.)
F6: The websites for Belmont, Burlingame, Daly City, Redwood City, the City of San Mateo, and South
San Francisco do not provide specific information on how to make complaints regarding MUH smoking
violations. The websites for each of the other jurisdictions with MUH smoking ordinances do. (See
Website Content Table below, column F6.)
Response: The City agrees with this finding as it pertains to the City of Burlingame website as of the
date of the Grand Jury Report. The City has updated its website to provide information on how to make
complaints regarding smoking ordinance violations.
F7: The websites for the cities of Belmont, Brisbane, Foster City, Redwood City, San Bruno, San Mateo,
and South San Francisco, as well as the County's Health System website (for unincorporated San Mateo
County) have links on their home pages that lead to information on how to report specific t)?es of
nuisances such as barking dogs, loud parties, abandoned mattresses, and shopping carts. However, these
links do not provide information on how to report MUH smoking violations. Burlingame's website links
to Code Compliance fiom its home page. (See Website Content Table below, column F7.)
Register online with lhe City of Burlingome 10 receive regulor City updotes ol www.Burlingome.oro
Response: The City agrees with this finding as it pertains to the City of Burlingame website as of the
date ofthe Grand Jury Report. That has been corrected.
Response: The Cify agrees with this finding as it pertains to the City of Burlingame website as of the
date ofthe Crrand Jury Report. The City has updated its website to add a summary and FAQs regarding
its smoking ordinance.
The Honorable V. Raymond Swope
October 15, 2018
Page 3
Response: The City agrees with this finding as it pertains to the City of Burlingame website as of the
date of the Grand Jury Report. The City has updated its website to provide information on how to make
complaints regarding smoking ordinance violations.
Response: The City agrees with this finding as it pertains to the City of Burlingame website as of the
date of the Grand Jury Report. The City has updated its website to provide links to the TPP and TEC
websites.
F9: ln all MUH jurisdictions, the issuance of citations for violations of MUH smoking ordinances is
limited by the need to (1) observe the violation in progress, (2) see other compelling evidence that a
violation had occurred, or (3) have the alleged violator admit to law or code enforcement that he or she
had been smoking in violation of the MUH smoking ordinance.
Response: The City agrees with this finding as it p€rtains to the City of Burlingame.
Fl0: The towns/cities of Colma East Palo Alto, Half Moon Bay, Menlo Park, Millbrae, Pacifica, Portola
Valley, and San Carlos do not have smoking ordinances that restrict smoking in their multiunit
residences, except in some common areas. Atherton, Hillsborough, and Woodside have no multiunit
housing.
Response: The City neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding. The City is not familiar with smoking
ordinances of the jurisdictions listed in the finding.
Fll: The MUH smoking ordinances for the cities of Brisbane, Burlingame, Daly City, and the County of
San Mateo for its unincorporated areas do not prohibit smoking medical marijuana in multiunit housing.
Response: The City agrees with this finding as it pertains to the City of Burlingame Smoking Ordinance.
F12: The TPP web pages do not include the following information: (a) a summary of residents' rights
and obligations under the MUH smoking ordinances in theirjurisdictions, (b) links to each jurisdiction's
MUH smoking ordinance, and (c) information on how residents of multiunit housing can report
violations of MUH smoking ordinances in their specifrc jurisdictions.
- Regisler online with lhe City of Burlingome lo receive regulor City updotes ol www.Eurlingome.oro
F8: The websites for Brisbane, San Bruno, and the County of San Mateo (on the County Health System
website) provide information about the TPP or TEC or how to contact them regarding an MUH smoking
issue. The websites for the other MUH jurisdictions do not. (See Website Content Table below, column
r8.)
The Honorable V. Raymond Swope
October 15, 2018
Page 4
Response: The City neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding.
Response: The City has insufficient information to agree or disagree with this finding. Although not
familiar with the requests to and responses ofother cities, the City of Burlingame responds forthrightly
to data requests from the TPP and any other requesters.
FI4: The firnding allocation from the Califomia Department of Public Health's Tobacco Control program
for T?P increased fiom $150,000 in FY 2016-2017 to $784,000 in FY-2017-2018.
Response: The City agrees with this finding, relying on the Grand Jury's representations.
The following are the City of Burlingame's responses to the Grand Jury's recommendalions:
RJ: Each jurisdiction with an MUH smoking ordinance (Belmont, Brisbane, Burlingame, Daly City,
Foster City, Redwood City, San Bruno, City ofSan Mateo, South San Francisco and the County ofSan
Mateo for its unincorporated areas) should improve their educational outreach to residents regarding
such ordinances, including at a minimum each of the following, by no later than March 3 I , 2019:
e Publishing summaries of residents' rights and obligations rurder their MUH smoking ordinances,
including on their websites
. Publishing information on how to report violations of MUH smoking ordinances, including on
their websites
o Informing residents that they can report violations of MUH smoking ordinances anonymously
o lnfomring residents, including on their websites, that it is unlawful for any landlord or other
p€rson to take any retaliatory action against them for having reported a violation of an MUH
smoking ordinance
o Ensuring that information about reporting MUH smoking ordinance violations is just as readily
accessible on their websites as information about other forms ofnuisance
o Ensuring that, upon tlping the word "smoking," or the like in the search features oftheir websites,
users are directed to all information about the j urisdiction's MUH smoking ordinance and related
complaints process
Response: The City has updated its website to include "Frequently Asked Questions" conceming its
smoking ordinance, and made other changes to the website to meet the searchability goals, and to better
meet the goals of all of tiese recommendations.
ll Regisler online wilh lhe Cily of Burlingome lo receive regulor City updo'les ol www.Burlinoome.org a
F13: TPP reported limited success in obtaining MUH smoking complaints data from jurisdictions,
making it difficult to assess the efficacy of MUH ordinances and develop trend information.
The Honorable V. Raymond Swope
October 15, 2018
Page 5
Response: The identities ofall complainants in code enforcement matters are held as confidential by the
City of Burlingame. The City, however, will also consider the proposed amendment to its ordinance.
R3: The cities of Brisbane, Burlingame, Daly City, and the County of San Mateo for its unincorporated
areas should amend their MUH smoking ordinances, by no later than December 31, 2018, to prohibit
smoking medical marijuana in multiunit housing.
Response: The Burlingame City Council considered this issue with its last amendments to the ordinance
and made a policy determination that prohibiting access to substances deemed medically necessary for
the treatment or management ofan illness was outside the scope of the regulation.
R4: Each jurisdiction with an MUH smoking ordinance (Belmont, Brisbane, Burlingame, Daly City,
Foster City, Redwood City, San Bruno, City of San Mateo, South San Fmncisco, and the County of San
Mateo for its unincorporated areas) should, by June 30,2019, evaluate ways to improve its collection and
retrieval of complaints of MUH smoking violations so that:
Information regarding each complaint of an MUH smoking ordinance violation, and the response
to it (complaints data) is recorded in a searchable electronic database
The jurisdiction can evaluate trends in the complaints data and the efficacy of the MUH smoking
ordinance
Response: The City takes this recommendation under advisement.
R5: Each jurisdiction with an MUH smoking ordinance should, by December 31, 2018, make their
complaints data (with names of alleged violators deleted) available to the TPP and TEC on at least an
annual basis.
Response: This information is available upon request at any time.
R6: Each jurisdiction with an MUH smoking ordinance should, by December 31,2018, conduct a review
of current methods used by the public to report MUH smoking violations and possible improvements
(including online reporting on their websites and use ofmobile phone apps) to ensure ease ofreporting.
Response: The City will review current methods of reporting MUH violations by December 31,2018.
a
Regisler online with lhe City of Buriingome 'lo receive regulor City updotes ol www.Burlingome.oro -
R2: The cities of Burlingame, Foster City, San Mateo, and South San Francisco should amend their
MUH smoking ordinances, by no later than December 3 1, 201 8, to prohibit retaliation against individuals
who report violations of the MUH smoking ordinances.
Response: The City has not been requested to respond to this recommendation.
The Honorable V. Raymond Swope
October 15, 2018
Page 6
R7: The towns/cities of Colm4 East Palo Alto, Half Moon Bay, Menlo Park, Millbrae, Pacifica, Portola
Valley, and San Carlos should, by December 31, 2018, hold public hearings to evaluate issues and hear
residents' views on restricting smoking in multiunit housing in theirjurisdictions.
Response: The City has not been requested to respond to this recommendation.
R8: TPP and TEC should update their web pages by March 31, 2019,to include the following:
. Links to MUH jurisdictions' smoking ordinances and their summarieslFAQs
o Information on how to report violations of MUH smoking ordinances in each applicable
. Jurisdiction
The Burlingame City Council apprcved this response letter at its public meeting on October 15, 2018.
Sincerely,
Michael Brownrigg
Mayor
Regisler online with lhe Cily of Burlingome to receive regulor Cily updoles ol www.Burlingome.org