Fair Haven Smoking Ban Debate Smolders

By Elaine Van Develde

The Fair Haven smoking ban debate has once again been sparked, but smoldered with a suggested compromise solution — limit the ban to only the permeable surfaces of municipally-owned property.

In other words, with such a ban, smoking would not be allowed in parks with grass, fields and/or wooded area, like Fair Haven Fields, Natural Area and Bird Sanctuary. But, if someone wanted to smoke, they could do so in the parking lot of those places, on an impermeable surface.

It's not quite near being a municipal law yet, though. That will come after more discussion, a draft ordinance, a public hearing and vote.

But it's in the works, as it seems to be agreeable to all on council, including those who were concerned about taking inherent rights away from people on their own property, despite the trend toward park and town-wide bans.

The limited scope suggestion came at Monday night's Borough Council meeting from Councilman Robert Marchese, who sits on the newly-formed Rumson-Fair Haven Municipal Alliance Against Substance Abuse.

"I still think it's a good idea to have a smoking ban solely on municipal-owned property which is a permeable surface," he said, mentioning Fair Haven Fields, Natural Area and Bird Sanctuary, where no smoking ban currently exists, but where smoking poses a threat to the environment and safety. "… If you want a cigarette, go to the parking lot."

That, said Councilwoman Susan Sorensen, is exactly what the Recreation Committee has recommended as well.

In addition to the environmental and safety factors in Fair Haven to consider, Rumson has a similar ordinance on the books. Marchese, thinking ahead toward municipal service consolidation, felt it would be a good idea to model a Fair Haven smoking ban after Rumson's.

He also thought this idea was the least restrictive and most protective at the same time for residents.

Councilman Rowland Wilhelm, who has cautioned that he feels imposing any such restrictions is tantamount to going down a slippery slope toward violation of personal rights, asked if the Alliance would fund cigarette butt receptacles or how that part of it would be handled.

"I'm not a smoker by the way," he said. "I'm just saying, if you're gonna do it, then (cover this base). Some people throw cigarettes where they shouldn't be thrown."

That's exactly the point of such an ordinance, Marchese said.

He suggested that the ordinance, outlining the limited scope suggested and taking into account most elements of Rumson's, be drafted.

The issue will be again workshopped next time with a draft ordinance prepared. There will be further discussion before moving to introduce it, Administrator Theresa Casagrande said.