Smoking ban passed by University Senate
The GCSU University Senate approved a campus-wide smoking ban in a majority vote this past Monday. The new ban prohibits smoking on campus except in designated smoking areas.
The smoking ban was a modified version of a proposal originally presented in the spring of 2009 by the University Senate’s Resource, Planning and Institutional Policy Committee (or RPIPC). The RPIPC developed a proposal due to a survey by the Student Government Association that found 60 percent of respondents would favor GCSU’s campus to be smoke-free.
“What we needed to do is respect the right of non-smokers,” said Doug Oetter, former chair of the RPIPC. “There are people on this campus that are adamantly opposed to having to breathe someone else’s smoke for health reasons.”
To prevent non-smokers from breathing smoke, the smoking ban creates 17 areas throughout campus for smokers to use. Smoking anywhere else on campus, except city-owned sidewalks, would be prohibited.
“Our major consideration was to respect the rights of smokers, who should give the opportunity to go have a cigarette and return to wherever it is they need to be within like 15 minutes,” Oetter said.
In the original proposal, smokers that refused to move to designated areas could face fines, however the new policy does not mention fines.
“If you violate the policy, like any policy, you’re going to be talked to by your professor, supervisor, or boss and he’s going say ‘hey you’re not supposed to do that here at Georgia College,’” said Greg Brown, a committee member who helped with the smoking ban. “If it gets to be where the person becomes obstinate about their right to smoke then there might be some issues that are underneath Georgia College’s ways of enforcement.”
The new policy does not have an implementation date, but University Senate members are spreading the word.
“All the new incoming freshmen are going to be told this is a no-smoking campus except in certain areas,” Brown said.
Not all University Senate members feel the smoking ban is necessary or beneficial.
“I would completely agree to limit smoking in front of, lets say, a main entrance because I really value the opinions of non-smokers that don’t want to go through the smoke,” said Andrei Barkovskii, associate professor of microbiology. “But to do a major kind of ban with basically parking lot designated for smoking, I’m not sure it’s doable.”
Other members worried about the effect the ban would have on smokers.
“The plan seems to be fairly restrictive and exposes smokers to the harshest of elements,” professor of economics John Swinton said.
Students and faculty were able to provide their opinions in a poll that was taken from Aug. 29 to Oct. 29. Sixty-three percent said they would approve of the smoking ban.
“The majority was for (the ban), but the majority was not that significant of a majority,” Barkovskii said. “It wasn’t really overpowering.”
The proposal took into account both sides of the argument.
“We really had people diametrically opposed on such extremes and we tried our best to find common ground and we think this is it,” Oetter said. “We just hope for their cooperation.”
Posted by 
