Should I vote for what I want?

October 27, 2023 12:26 PM

My strata is debating banning smoking/vaping, I loathe both but am unsure of my vote.

I live on the bottom floor of a 40 story condo tower, I'm the only suite that has a patio. For over five years I have complained to my strata about cigarette butts, often still lit, being tossed down onto my patio from residents living above.

Everytime I go out I have to pick up a few or a few dozen cigarette butts.

Strata has put up signs, sent out warnings, etc with no effect. Because of this there is going to be a vote next month on banning all forms of smoking/vaping everywhere in the strata, including inside private homes.

I'm torn, the butts on my patio are disgusting and dangerous yet I don't love voting to stop people from doing as they please inside their own homes.

Is it overkill to punish all smokers for the actions of what may be a single individual.

How would you vote?

posted by Cosine to Human Relations (33 answers total)

Vote for your own interests. If you're the only one who's affected, then you will be outvoted, no problem. Most likely the reason they're even having this vote is that there's been complaints about smoke / smell from multiple residents. Otherwise why would vaping even be mentioned?
posted by aubilenon at 12:45 PM on October 27, 2023 [36 favorites]

Banning all smoking will be better for everyone. I'd vote to ban it.
posted by mmf at 1:10 PM on October 27, 2023 [21 favorites]

No. And look at it this way, you will be improving their health and extending their lives. Win-win-win.
posted by y2karl at 1:13 PM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]

You're allowed to vote your own interest! Also, I expect others without patios will be supporting a ban in the interests of health and/or resale value. But if they don't, the measure will just fail.

(Frankly I think people tossing potentially still smoldering butts into an area where there might be some flammable material is an unacceptable safety risk, but what do I know?)
posted by praemunire at 1:16 PM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]

I understand the desire to not limit personal freedom, but smoking & vaping are things that, even if people are doing them inside their own homes, affect other people living near them. It's not just the gross butt-litter, which will continue as long as there are people smoking cigarettes, but also the smell and the health effects of smoking & vaping, both of which permeate outside individual condo units.

Units belonging to smokers also require a lot more cleanup when they move out, which could affect your fees if you pay into any sort of HOA or shared maintenance fund.

I think you can vote in favor of the ban with a clear conscience here.
posted by rhiannonstone at 1:19 PM on October 27, 2023 [20 favorites]

What? No, this is really invasive and I would vote against this. "Inside their own homes" is key here, for me. Also, vaping doesn't put cigarette butts on your patio. ALSO also, this will be selectively enforced against people with less social clout in your building.

If smells are getting to other units, that's a problem that should be solved differently, as it won't be just smoking/vaping smells.
posted by inexorably_forward at 1:23 PM on October 27, 2023 [12 favorites]

You should vote for what you want in terms of outcome, but I don't think you can sugar coat this as helping people quit smoking. It just means people are going to either smoke outside or get fined.
posted by Ferreous at 1:24 PM on October 27, 2023 [8 favorites]

Smoking rates skew heavily by income level, with poorer people smoking much more. That may not be totally relevant in a strata building, as stratas tend not to be wildly diverse in terms of income levels though how diverse they are depends on owner occupancy rates vs rental rates.. But, for example, in the strata where my mom lives, there are lots of older residents (some owners, some renters) who have been there for decades and if they were forced out of their homes by a smoking ban -- because it isn't like it is easy to just quit -- they would find it extremely difficult to find new housing in the same price range. The owners would fare better because they could sell their units, but selling and rebuying comes with its own costs so their buying power would be reduced by a percentage in a time when housing prices are very high.

I just spent two years living next to a grandfathered in chain smoker in a rental apartment building that otherwise doesn't allow smoking anymore and it was awful and I hated it so I am entirely sympathetic to the majority perspective here but it is extremely unlikely he could have found other housing without a huge increase over what he was paying here. Would I want him to be homeless so I didn't have to live near him?
posted by jacquilynne at 1:27 PM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]

I used to live on the bottom floor of a smaller building (maybe 24 units across four floors), and had a small patio that upstairs neighbors' balconies overlooked. They dumped their butts, sometimes even still not stubbed out, as you're experiencing, off their balconies onto my patio all the damned time. I was so glad when our building banned smoking - it didn't stop the vapers or pot smokers, but it did significantly decrease the number of butts tossed onto my patio and cleanup I had to do because of smokers' selfishness.

I have zero sympathy for that level of entitlement. And in a 40 story building like you mention, I'm assuming there will be kids being subjected to secondhand smoke, so in your position, I absolutely would vote to ban smoking with zero guilt. Given shared walls in areas with high population density and the reality of air circulation, I don't think the "gets to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home" thing is a strong argument here when weighed against the impacts on other residents; we already restrict excessive noise levels for very similar reasons.

(US-based experience here, though; I grew up with anti-smoking ads on TV, and I've only lived in cities in US states where bars started banning smoking indoors in my late teens/early 20s, and then started enforcing limits requiring you to be at least 25 feet away from their doors in order to light up in my late 20s/early 30s. YMMV culturally.)
posted by Pandora Kouti at 1:46 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]

I would vote for the ban not just because of the butts, but to prevent ever getting stuck with a chain-smoking neighbor stinking up my home.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 1:56 PM on October 27, 2023 [5 favorites]

Here is another thing: Tobacco Mosaic Virus. It cannot be killed. Cigarette butts, tobacco in any form, spit from tobacco chewers and the touch of smokers' hands transmit it. Where I live, I garden in large pot and containers in both our courtyards. The owner loves me because do I ever provide curb appeal and on my own dime at that. However, partying drunk smokers have killed or stunted everything from heirloom sweetpeas to Heavenly Blue morning glories. And you can't talk to a smoking drunk -- show them the damage and they'll grab the nearest blooms while I"m trying to explain and go 'Ooh, how pretty!'

So there’s something else to back up any complaint: the property damage your upstairs neighbors are doing to the greenery.
posted by y2karl at 1:56 PM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]

Let's look at this from a different perspective: what will actually get people to comply? People aren't going to quit smoking over this, so if you ban smoking people will just close their curtains and smoke indoors where no one can see them, thus making things worse. Ask the building to create a designated, outdoor smoking area with butt receptacles. Both my current and former apartment buildings had this (I wonder if it's legally required here?) and it seems pretty effective in getting people to smoke where they are supposed to smoke and only there.
posted by capricorn at 1:57 PM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]

If you want a non-smoking strata, which it sounds like you do, you should vote for a non-smoking strata.
posted by Leontine at 2:17 PM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]

Vote your interests.

Careful about getting into accommodations for smokers. In a 40 floor building one of the major obstacles to smoking outdoors is the speed and availability of the elevator. This is an expensive fix. Far better would be to have severe enforcement penalties for smoking and lesser for vaping.
posted by shock muppet at 2:22 PM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]

The butts are a fire risk. If the smokers could behave themselves this wouldn't have been an issue but they couldn't so now remove their ability to smoke at home. Most condos I see here in Ontario don't allow smoking anyways because the smoke never stays contained within the unit and if people smoke on balconies we're back to the fire risk when they toss their butts.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 2:50 PM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]

Let's look at this from a different perspective: what will actually get people to comply?

Condo associations can fine violators, and if the fine is not paid, get a lien on their property. If someone is able to smoke/vape in their unit surreptitiously and not get fined because there are no complaints, good for them. OTOH, if they're making the hallway reek or dropping cigarette butts off the balcony, they're gonna have a bad time.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 3:32 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]

I don't love voting to stop people from doing as they please inside their own homes.

That's great but your patio isn't their home. They're infringing on your property by throwing their cigarette butts on your patio. That right there would be enough to make me vote for a ban.
posted by cooker girl at 3:37 PM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]

We voted on this when I was living in a condo, and serving on the condo board.

Like you (I think), I was really concerned about the general idea of limiting what someone could do within the bounds of their own unit. What convinced me to support the ban was the data one owner circulated regarding house fires that initiate from cigarettes.

Vote passed 100%.
posted by NotMyselfRightNow at 3:53 PM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]

My condo did this and it's amazing.

So some background, there was never any issue on my floor with tobacco but there was frequently cannabis smell. There were probably multiple units, but one was consistently bad. And note the "but other smells..." wasn't an issue because our units have negative pressure. The problem is that when people smoke they frequently open their windows which reverses the pressure. Presumably they don't want to deal with their own stink either. I contacted management multiple times, but this was when cannabis was illegal and so they wanted to pretend they didn't know, just to make their lives easier. The smell drove me crazy and gave me migraines.

Then when cannabis was about to become legal we passed a new bylaw to make the building (But not the property, annoyingly) smoke-free and vape-free. Smokers who lived in the building and already smoked in their units could apply to be grandfathered in. Anyone using cannabis for medical purposes could apply for an exemption. The the time the rule went in there were 6 smokers grandfathered in and no cannabis users. The grandfathering was specific to the person -- so for example if you were a smoker who smoked in your unit, your guests could not smoke and if you sold your unit, it was not a "smoking unit." since the new owners were not grandfathered. And crucially, the grandfathering did not allow for smells intruding into others space. If the hallways stinks you lost your grandfathering.

So the new by-law passed and now the hallways don't stink! Hurray!! I don't think this drives any low-income smokers into homelessness because it is not banning smokers, it's just saying you can't smoke or vape in the unit. Smokers still live here. People smoke cannabis in the yard all the time. I would really like the whole property to go smoke and vape free, and then smokers still won't move out, they'll just smoke on the sidewalk, but at least our yard won't stink. The hallways don't stink anymore. The smell doesn't come into my unit anymore (because negative pressure, it would get sucked in from the hallway before).

Once in the past few years I have smelled cannabis in the hall and I've submitted a complaint and management has sent a notice to the offending units and that was the end of that.

Anyway, I say vote for it. People are doing things in their own homes that damages OTHER PEOPLE's enjoyment of their own homes. It's no different than blasting a stereo, except, you know, it's poison. I mean if they were smoking in an airtight tank, trapping the stinky air and releasing it in the middle of a lake or something, I wouldn't care. They're not. It stinks. If they close the curtains, it still stinks.

Now all this said, you said you live in the ground floor. The main concern I would have is that possibility that smokers who no longer smoke in their units or on their balconies (gross...surely everyone else on their own balcony can smell them) are going to end up smoking outside your window on the ground floor. Make sure the rule doesn't allow that either and then go forth, breathe, and be merry,
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 3:55 PM on October 27, 2023 [7 favorites]

I would vote against and I would endorse everyone getting nice little ash can thingies they can drop their bits into.
posted by A Terrible Llama at 4:17 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]

Given that the smokers have been given plenty of warnings about the cigarette butts, and yet have decided to keep tossing them into your patio, I don't think you have to feel that bad voting to ban smoking.

But since this is still being debated, personally I'd suggest an amendment to only ban cigarettes, not vaping. The problem is cigarette butts, vaping-only would solve that - it would also presumably be more likely to pass as a measure.
posted by coffeecat at 4:18 PM on October 27, 2023 [6 favorites]

I live in California and.. I think having 100% smoke-free rule is common for apartments and condos here. People go smoke outside. So you may have an increase in smoking wafting up into your apartment?
posted by latkes at 5:05 PM on October 27, 2023 [1 favorite]

If folks want to smoke *discretely* there are absolutely tons of low cost/effort ways to do this inside their own apartments without bothering others (sploofs are widely available at corner stores and online and DIY for well under $20).

My bet is that this just makes it a whole lot easier to deal with the folks that are smoking such that others notice and are bothered enough to report it.
posted by forkisbetter at 5:41 PM on October 27, 2023 [2 favorites]

Yeah, we have a smoke-free environment where I live and it's in the lease, but I certainly do smell ye olde pot smoke outside fairly frequently.

I say vote for what you want. No good comes from smoking except for tobacco companies making bank, unfortunately.
posted by jenfullmoon at 5:42 PM on October 27, 2023

I know so many people who live in apartments in the US where a neighbour's second-hand smoke severely aggravates their asthma or their migraines. It is very, very hard for someone who is sensitive to secondhand smoke to find safe housing. Vote to ban smoking! There's lots of smoker-friendly housing available, and very very little smoke-sensitive housing available.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 8:27 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]

Used to be ashtrays on bus seats, train seats, airplane seats. I was a smoker until I hit 30, I had no idea how rude I was, esp smoking in my parents home but really just anywhere. Austin went smoke-free maybe mid 90s, I remember all of the bars being up in arms, thinking that they would lose all their customers blah blah.

Those ppl aren't inconsiderate louts because they smoke, they are inconsiderate louts. Throwing their garbage out onto your patio is disgusting but I bet it flies under their radar, they'll get offended that someone dare complain. Getting fined will help them see the light, though I don't know how you'll know who is doing it.

Vote "No smoking" and see how your luck runs, might take a bit of time for ppl to play nice.
posted by dancestoblue at 8:46 PM on October 27, 2023 [3 favorites]

One person's right to the enjoyment of their home stops at the point where it encroaches on my right to the enjoyment of my home. End of.
posted by tubedogg at 8:50 PM on October 27, 2023 [4 favorites]

Mod note: One removed. Do not advise dangerous solutions!
posted by taz (staff) at 11:28 PM on October 27, 2023

Tobacco smokers are straight up revolting, and while I have a little sympathy for therapeutic cannabis smokers there are other CBD and THC delivery methods that don't stink, cause fires, or leave disgusting resin blobs everywhere. Ban that shit.
posted by seanmpuckett at 5:23 AM on October 28, 2023 [2 favorites]

I agree with cooker girl. Insofar as your vote is concerned, you’re not infringing on what people do inside their own homes. If they had been smoking inside their homes and not flinging cigarette butts out their windows onto your patio—despite multiple communications to stop doing so—well, then they’ve forfeited the right to smoke in their own homes. Not because of the smoking in their own homes part, but because they apparently can’t stop themselves from throwing trash out the windows when doing so. Your vote would be to stop the disgusting and inconsiderate littering, and losing the ability to smoke in their own homes would be collateral damage brought about by their own behavior.

Generally speaking I don’t have anything against smoking. But I do find it loathsome that most smokers seem to view the world as a trash can for their cigarette butts.
posted by slkinsey at 10:39 AM on October 28, 2023 [1 favorite]

I understand the desire to not impose your will on others, but when people smoke in multi-unit buildings they are not making a personal choice, they are forcing all of the other tenants in the building to take on the very real risks that come with that one person's decision to smoke. We all know that second and third-hand cigarette smoke is dangerous - it's not just linked to lung cancer, but also SIDS, asthma, heart disease, strokes, and many other kinds of cancer like throat, bladder, and brain cancer. It can permanently damage childrens' lungs. It can harm pets. Smoking is also is a major fire concern.

Cigarette smoke in multi-unit buildings does not stay contained to the smokers' unit. It always spreads - through ventilation, tiny cracks in the wall, electrical outlets, ceiling lights, plumbing, windows, hallways. The people subjected to the smoke and the cigarette butts don't get a choice; there is no foolproof way to keep it all out of your unit and from harming you and your family. From epa.gov: "The U.S. Surgeon General has determined that there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke and that eliminating smoking in indoor spaces is the only way to fully protect nonsmokers from secondhand smoke exposure."
posted by Stoof at 12:15 PM on October 28, 2023 [4 favorites]

Presumably the tenants could currently get in trouble for littering on your balcony. Why isn't that happening and why would a ban on smoking be enforced more effectively than a ban on littering?
posted by deadwax at 4:26 AM on October 29, 2023 [1 favorite]

>I don't love voting to stop people from doing as they please inside their own homes.

They are not smoking in their own homes. They are smoking in a shared building. Smoke does not care about the legal boundaries defined by strata documents. It seeps through cracks, under doors, permeates HVAC conduits, goes out the smokers' windows and back into the neighbors' windows.
posted by mrgoldenbrown at 9:39 AM on October 29, 2023