Smoking policy survey results show unresolved issues on campus

Sixty-nine percent of respondents in a recent survey on the MHCC smoking policy said tobacco use should be allowed outside on campus in designated areas.

The survey showed 122 out of 176 respondents favored allowing restricted smoking on campus. Individuals can be seen lighting up every day in a variety of locations on the main MHCC campus despite a blanket ban on use of tobacco products on college property.

Results of the campuswide survey on the smoking policy will be evaluated next week by representatives of the administration and the Associated Student Government.

Gale Blessing, the MHCC director of institutional safety and security, and Linda Hoppes, the ASG director public safety and campus sustainability, “will discuss some possible next steps at that time,” said Blessing in an email Wednesday.

“What I got out of the survey is that we are in need of a space for smokers,” said Hoppes.

The survey featured nine questions ranging from “Should tobacco use remain banned everywhere on campus with no designated areas?” and “Should there be more Public Safety Officers to enforce the non-smoking policy?” to “Is the presence of second-hand smoke a concern for you?”

Hoppes, who moved from senator of advising and counseling to her current position this term, said the survey became available at the end of winter term, and although it is still available to take, the results was tabulated last week.

“I’m bummed. I wanted more feedback, but I did what I could,” said Hoppes of the responses collected.

She added that about three weeks ago, she and her fellow ASG members took a more active role in promoting and advertising the survey in the Main Mall, Library, College Center and Bookstore, both with flyers with QR codes and in-person solicitations.

Hoppes said the survey came about as a result of ASG members discussing the policy after walking past people using tobacco openly on campus. She said the original idea of a survey came from Melanie Snider, the former director of public safety and campus sustainability before Hoppes.

According to Hoppes, the survey was written as a collaboration by Snider, the ASG Director of Communications Laura Aguon, Manager of the College Center David Sussman, Blessing, ASG Chief of Staff Katherine Lindquist and Student Events and Special Projects Coordinator Pam Kuretich.

She added that there were three central reasons to creating the survey: that there was no place for smokers to smoke on campus, that there was no place to dispose of cigarette butts and that when people did smoke on campus, others were exposed to second-hand smoke.

“We had 100 responses as of three weeks ago,” said Hoppes, adding that they were up to 176 responses as of last week.

Of the 176 responses, 22 came from college faculty and staff and 152 responses came from students. The other two submissions were identified as other. Of the respondents, 175 said they were from Gresham campus, three from Maywood and one from the Bruning Center.

In the survey, 141 respondents said they had not used tobacco products on MHCC properties since tobacco use was banned on campus in January 2010. However, 115 respondents said that tobacco use should not be banned without a designated usage area. One hundred twenty-two respondents said tobacco use should be allowed outside on campus in designated areas.

Asked where a designated tobacco use area should be established: 103 respondents said that it should be by the pond in Parking Lot A, 75 said in a designated kiosk by the Health/Physical Education building, 92 respondents said in a designated kiosk in Parking Lot W and 86 respondents marked “Other.”

Further, 95 respondents said the presence of second-hand smoke was a concern for them, though 105 respondents said that there should not be more Public Safety Officers patrolling and enforcing the policy.

Ninety-nine respondents said there should be no increase in the $15 fine handed out to those caught smoking on campus, 31 respondents said the fine should be $20-$30, 17 respondents said that it should be a $30-$40 fine, six respondents said the fine should be between $40-$50 and 23 respondents said the fine should be more than $50.