As tobacco sales fall, state budget suffers

Fewer smokers is bad news for California's budget. A major bond rating agency sounded an alarm this month, saying the state may have borrowed more than $4 billion against settlement money that might never materialize.

A little more than a decade ago, 46 state attorneys general reached a settlement with the four biggest tobacco companies. The companies agreed to pay an estimated $246 billion over a 25-year period to compensate states for tobacco-related health care costs. But there is one quirk: The settlement payments are not fixed, but linked to tobacco sales.

Rather than waiting for annual payments, the state and some local governments decided to borrow money against their anticipated future revenue. All told, they've issued $16 billion in bonds since 2001.
Major bond rating agencies and some municipal finance experts have warned for years that the number of smokers was decreasing more rapidly than expected.
In December, California had to dip into its reserves to cover bond payments. Dick Larkin, director of credit analysis at Herbert J. Sims & Co., said there were two reasons: fewer smokers and a dispute with the tobacco companies that has resulted in delayed payments.

As the state's finances worsened, officials went back to investors. In 2007, California issued $4.4 billion in tobacco bonds. In order to pay back investors by 2047, it assumes that cigarette consumption will decline by about 1.8 percent per year, according to bond filings. But in the midst of increased taxes and antismoking laws, sales have dropped more quickly than predicted. As a result of the decline and the ongoing dispute with the tobacco companies, annual payments have been less than expected since the settlement was signed in 1998, according to Larkin.

If the bonds default, it wouldn't be bad just for investors. California is one of only a few states that guaranteed a portion of its bonds with general fund revenue. If tobacco settlement money does not cover the debt, the state will have to pick up some of the tab. There are currently $2.9 billion in bonds outstanding that are backed by a state guarantee, according to the state treasurer's office.

Although that payment would be subject to legislative approval, it's unlikely it wouldn't be approved.

"No one would trust California anymore," Larkin said. "Their name would be mud in the market."

Unlike most other states, California split its settlement revenue between the state and local agencies -- counties and four major cities, including Los Angeles, San Diego, San Jose and San Francisco. Local governments receive about half of the state's settlement payments.

Some local officials have elected to borrow against expected future payments but haven't guaranteed to cover their debt with general fund revenue. While this could be bad news for investors, it might actually be good news for communities.

"The investor really has a slightly different view on everything," said Peter Bianchini, senior municipal strategist at Mesirow Financial. Local governments aren't on the hook if the tobacco settlement revenue doesn't come through, so they may have been able to borrow more than they would have received if they had waited for the annual payments, he said.

Businesses pass tobacco inspections

Police and state Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services agents conducted surprise inspections at local businesses this week but turned up no violations of the state law prohibiting the sale of cigarettes to people under the age of 18, police said.
At the direction of investigators, an underage youth attempted to purchase tobacco products from a dozen establishments, but no sales were made, police said.

Most extreme anti-smoking laws planned for NSW

Under the plans, which make good on a non-specific pre-election pledge to tighten tobacco laws, smoking will be banned at public playgrounds within 10m of children's play equipment, in open areas of public swimming pools, at major sports grounds and facilities, and within 4m of any building open to the public.

It will also be banned at public transport stops, including bus stops and taxi stands, and at railway and light-rail stations.

While the changes will become effective shortly after the expected passage of the legislation this year, the ban at outdoor dining areas will be deferred to 2015.

The planned NSW laws -- expected to carry fines for non-compliance of about $550 -- will be far more restrictive than in Victoria or South Australia, where there is no legislation requiring outdoor areas to be smoke-free.
The NSW plans also go further than in the Northern Territory and Western Australia, where legislation relates to outdoor dining and drinking areas. The laws will be comparable to or slightly more stringent than in Queensland and Tasmania, where beaches are included in restrictions.

NSW Health Minister Jillian Skinner defended the decision to include transport stops in the ban, saying they were places where it was "difficult, because of queueing, for a non-smoker to remove themselves from exposure to other people's tobacco smoke".

"I am advised NSW Health receives regular complaints from community members who are affected by other people's smoke at transport stops and stations, particularly from those with . . . asthma, or where children are using public transport to travel to and from school," Mrs Skinner said.

Cancer Council NSW chief executive Andrew Penman welcomed the move, saying the evidence was clear that passive smoking caused cancer. "We should be driven by that, and not expect specific evidence of a body count (caused by ambient tobacco smoke) before we bring in these restrictions," Dr Penman said.

David Bernie, vice-president of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties, said the harms associated with tobacco justified the laws, but warned that they might prove difficult to enforce.

Statewide Smoking Ban May Face More Exemptions

Anti-tobacco forces are more confident than ever that this year's General Assembly will enact a statewide smoking ban, but there will likely be more efforts to weaken the legislation.
Lawmakers who have led the anti-smoking fight for years said they're optimistic because Gov. Mitch Daniels has endorsed the idea, it passed the House and Senate leaders have promised a committee hearing and vote on their bill, RTV6's Norman Cox reported.
"I mean, certainly the governor's support helps. The public is overwhelmingly in support" of the bill to ban smoking in most public places," said Rep. Eric Turner, R-Cicero.
But the problem in the Senate has always been the insistence of some members to add additional exemptions.
The bill already exempts gambling facilities, cigar and hookah bars, and private clubs where members vote to keep smoking and agree to keep out minors.
But some senators want more exemptions.
"I think that there'll be those people that will be offering exemptions probably for the bars that will want to be put in," said Sen. Ron Alting, R-Lafayette, the chairman of the Public Policy Committee that will hear the bill. "There's some talk about the charity gaming, the Catholic Church and some of those who files a permit that does the charity gaming for the church, bingo or what have you."
But bars have already been given a delay in their deadline for going smoke-free and advocates said they don't want to go any further than that.
"We have given the bars an additional 18 months to get their house in order," said Rep. Charlie Brown, D-Gary. "They have an 18-month period in which they can advise, warn or inform all of their patrons that this facility will be smoke-free in 18 months."
House sponsors aren't saying whether putting in a permanent exemption for bars would kill the bill.
"Well, I think it's too early to make that call," Turner said. "We'll be discussing it probably the rest of the session."
House sponsors said if the bill comes back from the Senate weaker than they version the House approved, there may be a battle royal in conference committee.
In Indianapolis, Mayor Greg Ballard has until Friday to decide whether to sign or veto a smoking ban proposal approved by the City-County Council. Spokesman Marc Lotter said Ballard expects to issue a decision later in the week.

Smoking Ban Ordinance to Be Intro'd Tonight

The Township of Maplewood will introduce an ordinance tonight, Feb. 7, proposing a ban on smoking in public parks, playgrounds and recreational areas.

If the ordinance passes on introduction, a second reading and public hearing will be held on Feb. 21 — before a final vote that night. If approved that night, signs announcing the ban and it attached fines could be in place in parks and playgrounds by late April.

On Jan. 17, Township Committee members gave Town Counsel Roger Desiderio their feedback on the draft ordinance. Mayor Vic DeLuca told Desiderio that he had changed his mind and now thought that including perimeter sidewalks in the ban would be "unreasonable." Other committee members including Jerry Ryan, India Larrier and Deputy Mayor Kathy Leventhal supported this decision, noting that smokers exiting the train would be forced to walk in the street on their way home. Marlon K. Brownlee balked at the exclusion of sidewalks, however: "We're concerned about the safety of people smoking?"

Regarding enforcement, the committee members agreed that enforcement would be passive: Police patrols already assigned to the park would cite violators where they came upon them.

"Believe me," said DeLuca, "other people in the park will enforce it. I don't expect the police to patrol the parks for this." DeLuca also felt that, over time, the signs would work to deter smoking. He added later, "People are not shy about telling a smoker they shouldn't smoke."

The Township Committee also discussed whether or not the ban should be extended to all non-park festivals, but this idea was abandoned. Desiderio gave the example of patrons of St. James's Gate leaving the establishment to smoke during a street festival. Only Brownlee dissented on this decision: "I would like to extend the band to the whole festival, even in the street."

DeLuca said the proposed penalties were as follows: $50-$100 for a first offense; $100-$200 for a second offense; and $200-$500 for a third and subsequent offenses.

Board to support legislation banning smoking in parks

The Warren County Board of Supervisors approved a request Tuesday by the county attorney's office to adopt a resolution supporting legislation aimed at snuffing out smoking in public parks.

Virginia House Bill 142 would allow localities to adopt an ordinance banning smoking in public parks, said Assistant County Attorney Dan Whitten. Localities could prohibit smoking in an entire park or designated sections, he said.

Whitten said he was approached earlier this year by the Parks and Recreation Department to determine who has authority to prohibit smoking in public parks.

"Right now, you can prohibit smoking in indoor facilities, but not outdoor," Whitten said. If the bill passes the General Assembly and the county adopts a consequent ordinance, signs would have to be posted at park entrances, alerting people to the ban.

Parks and Recreation Director Dan Lenz said he's received several complaints from people about smoking in parks, particularly around playgrounds and areas with a high concentration of children and pregnant women.

"There have been incidents where people actually got into arguments about smoking," he said. Lenz said that at places like Bing Crosby Stadium in Front Royal, smokers can be asked to step outside to smoke "but we can't enforce it."

Lenz added that he's a little surprised that a similar bill hasn't been introduced or approved before now, given the prevalence of anti-smoking campaigns. He hopes the bill will "appease as many people as possible."

The county attorney's office will take the board's resolution to Richmond on Thursday for Local Government Day, Whitten said. They plan to seek support for the bill from state Sen. Mark D. Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg; Del. C. Todd Gilbert, R-Woodstock; Del. Beverly J. Sherwood, R-Winchester; and Del. Michael J. Webert, R-Marshall.

If approved by the General Assembly and Gov. Bob McDonnell, the bill would become law on July 1.

E Cigarette Review: How Smokers Are Quitting Today

Electronic cigarettes now help millions of people to quit smoking without side effects, a solution which was not possible many years ago. The traditional cigarettes contain more than 500 carcinogens and other poisons which can be traced to smoking. Most people are now educating themselves with the dangers of breathing acetone fumes or carbon monoxide, and are therefore, getting encouraged to embrace electronic cigarettes.

Tobacco smoking is now banned in public places in many parts of the world because the people close to the smoker can also suffer from different kinds of diseases, including lung cancer. Electronic cigarettes help in changing all of that. For one thing, e-cigarettes are smokeless, and the smoker can even inhale a smoke resembling vapor. He will even get the dose of nicotine needed for the day without health risks.

The long part of the e-cigarettes is the battery, which is rechargeable and the butt is an atomizer which contains a liquid that is comprised of vegetable oils, flavoring, and the nicotine. What happens when the oil meets the electric charge of the battery is that it becomes vaporized and the smoker will inhale the vapors which taste just like the smoke from a real cigarette and you don’t have to worry about any smells, smoke stains, or annoying your non-smoking coworkers.

Electronic cigarettes have different shapes. Some look like pipes, cigars or cigarettes, while others are made to look like many items which are socially acceptable, such as pens. One may find e cigs in different levels of nicotine depending on the smoking habit of the person. The most common ones are Zero mg (zero nicotine), 6 mg, 11 mg, 14 mg, 18 mg and 24 mg. The best electronic cigarette will have no lingering smell, no ash, no tar and no foul smoke.

Medical marijuana provider sues Mount Holly

A nonprofit that wants to market medical marijuana has sued after being denied a site in Burlington County.

Compassionate Care Foundation Inc. wants a judge to overturn a decision last month by Westampton’s Land Development Board. The board’s members voted 4-3 against the nonprofit’s plan to grow and sell marijuana at a vacant warehouse on Hancock Lane.

In rejecting the proposed facility, the township board said “the intended use … was not a contemplated use” when a local zoning ordinance was adopted, according to the lawsuit. But Compassionate Care argues medical marijuana should be allowed at the site as an agricultural crop.

Township officials could not be reached for comment on the suit, which was filed in Superior Court here. A hearing is scheduled for March 23.

Compassionate Care, which is based in Mount Laurel, is one of two state-approved providers of medical marijuana struggling to find a home in South Jersey. The other supplier, Compassionate Sciences ATC, was rebuffed in October when it sought to open a marijuana dispensary at a former furniture store on Route 73.

New Jersey legalized medical marijuana in January 2010, authorizing six nonprofit groups to operate in distinct zones across the state. But Gov. Chris Christie, citing concerns over federal laws against the drug’s sale, did not give his approval until July of last year.

So far, no marijuana has been sold legally in New Jersey and at least four town boards have turned away the businesses.

A Camden property owner, Ilan Zaken, also wants approval to lease two commercial buildings in the Gateway area to a state-approved supplier. The city’s zoning board on Monday night considered Zaken’s request to allow the production and sale of medical marijuana.

Board members took no action after about four hours of testimony, including criticism of the proposal by representatives of two nearby employers, Campbell Soup Co. and Cooper University Hospital, according to Frank Fulbrook, a city activist who is working with Zaken.

Fulbrook said the city board is expected to announce a decision March 5.

Compassionate Care at one point had a tentative lease for a site in Bellmawr, but it broke off that agreement due to the state’s delay in implementing the medical marijuana law.