While there is wide agreement that exposure to secondhand smoke in multifamily housing is a serious problem, how to protect residents of multifamily housing from drifting secondhand smoke has been challenging and divisive. Public health and tobacco/nicotine-free networks have largely focused on the adoption of smoke-free housing policies that prohibit or limit smoking at multifamily properties. These policies have often been challenged by tenants’ rights organizations concerned about the consequences of including eviction as an enforcement tool of these policies, especially in communities already facing significant housing instability. This conflict has often limited the ability to adequately address the problem of secondhand smoke exposure in multifamily housing.
Purpose
Leveraging over a decade of collaboration between public health and tenants’ rights members, the California Healthy Housing Coalition (CHHC) brought a small group of partners together to have a facilitated discussion that explored the impacts of a range of approaches to addressing secondhand smoke exposure in multi-family housing. The goal was to develop a set of principles that balance health protections with housing stability to aid future efforts to create equitable approaches to addressing this challenging issue. While not intended as a model policy or formal policy recommendations, our hope is that this document can serve as a guide for communities interested in crafting a solution that is fair to all parties and does not have disparate impacts on low-income and other marginalized communities.
Process
Through a series of facilitated meetings, stakeholders shared their experiences working on the issue, identified challenges they’ve encountered, learned from experts about key topics and best practices, and developed consensus-based principles for an equitable approach to smoke-free housing. Final revisions were made based on a broader peer review process that included members of the California Healthy Housing Coalition and other key public health and tenants’ rights stakeholders.
Remaining Challenge
This document contains a series of consensus-based principles that can help guide a community’s exploration of an equitable approach to smoke-free housing. There was, however, one critical area where the group was unable to reach consensus: whether an equitable approach to smoke-free housing could include eviction in the enforcement process. While covered in more detail in the document, the group felt that the role of eviction, if any, needs to be determined by the impacted community based on local priorities and resources.
Principles Equitable Smokefree Housing
Role of eviction
We did not reach consensus about the role of eviction in the enforcement process. To some, the significant health risks of continued exposure to second-hand smoke justifies the use of eviction as a last resort should all other steps in the enforcement process fail to change smoking behaviors. To others, the long-lasting impact of eviction on housing instability, the risk of becoming unhoused, and on health eliminates eviction as an equitable enforcement option.
Ultimately, the group felt that any decision about the role of eviction should be made by impacted stakeholders based on available local resources (cessation services, restorative justice facilitators or other mediation services, other affordable housing options, etc.) and laws. Where eviction is being considered the group agreed that it should only be pursued as a last resort, after all steps in the enforcement process have been completed and documented, including providing an option for a voluntary move-out agreement or a “non-renewal of lease” that allows the lease to be terminated without a formal eviction being placed on the tenant’s record.
Acknowledgements
The California Healthy Housing Coalition would like to thank:
Liz Williams with Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, Laura Clauson Ferree* with California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc., Amanda Blasingame* with Legal Services of Northern California, Brandon Kitagawa with Regional Asthma Management and Prevention, Andrea Portenier with Smokefree Air For Everyone, and Lupe Arreola and Nina Rosenblatt with Tenants Together for their open and honest discussion of this challenging topic.
Paul Cummings and Tracey Andrews with the Alameda County Department of Public Health, Kara Skahen and Jackie Siewert with the Association for Nonsmokers– Minnesota, Jade Le with La Familia, Manaire Vaughn and Rachel Chambers with Public Health Law Center, Schoene Mahmood and Gwynn Alexander with the Restorative Justice Project, Center for Urban Resilience, Loyola Marymount University, Larell Smith-Bacon with Restorative Response Baltimore, and AddieRose Mayer with SEEDS for sharing their expertise on best practices in their fields.
The US EPA, including Alheli Banos, for supporting this effort and providing a neutral facilitator to aid in the workgroup’s exploration of this topic.
Pat Tallarico, whose facilitation of this challenging discussion allowed all perspectives to be respected and heard.
And finally, to CHHC members and partners who reviewed drafts and provided invaluable feedback on this document.
* Laura Clauson Ferree and Amanda Blasingame are members of a Legal Services Corporation-funded organizations and are prohibited from advocating for a specific government outcome. They participated in the workgroup to provide insight on the impact of such policies on low-income and disabled tenants, and do not take any position on any recommendations for specific government policies or proposals.
Additional Resources
- Smoke-free Multiunit Housing Model Ordinance
- California-specific Smoke-Free Housing Policy Enforcement Guide from Public Health Law Center
- Housing and Urban Development Smoke-free Multifamily Housing Policy and Toolkits
- Database of local smoke-free housing policies in California
- Fact sheet on secondhand marijuana smoke
- National Association of Community and Restorative Justice – Map and Directory