Open letter to the Philadelphian Owners Association Board of Directors:
SUMMARY:
A smoking policy of increased fines without a corresponding modification to the “rules of engagement” and threshold for fining repeat offenders is not a solution at all.
DETAILS:
As you read the following, please consider it from two perspectives:
- What if you lived next to a defiant pot smoker who filled your unit with pot smoke every day? How would you feel knowing at any moment, the potato chip eating, pot smoker could fall asleep on his lazy-boy recliner, causing a fire which could send choking smoke and flames racing down the hallway, trapping elderly residents in their homes?
- A Board member who has the fiduciary responsibility to use all tools at its disposal to protect the safety of 1,200 residents from known, documented fire & health hazards.
The solution for ongoing, defiant smokers is twofold:
1. Escalating, prohibitively expensive fines: e.g. a fine starting at $500, then $1,500 , $3,000, $5,000, etc. It doesn’t actually matter whether or not the fine is later negotiated down. It only needs to create a giant financial consequence for thwarting the association’s no-smoking policy and creating a dangerous and unhealthy environment for neighbors. It needs to be a deterrent.
2. The threshold for “evidence of smoking” cannot rely on a resident opening the front door and inviting staff into the unit to observe ashtrays and cigarette butts. Rather, in ongoing cases of defiant smokers, simply smelling smoke outside the resident’s door or smoking pouring into the neighbor’s apartment should be enough to trigger the fine.
INCENTIVES:
- As you pass motions, please pay special attention to the incentives it creates. For example, in the case of ongoing smoking defiance where opening a door is met with a $3,000 fine, the fine for refusing to open the door can’t be $25 or $500. Otherwise, you incentive not opening the door.
BURDEN OF PROOF:
- It is reasonable to have a different burden of proof for the first offense vs subsequent offenses.
- For repeat offenders, don’t burden staff with the near impossible task of convincing the smoker to open the door for self-implication, or expecting staff to observe cigarette butts or ashtrays from inside the offender’s apartment. Smoke pouring into the neighbor’s unit is proof enough.
