CSUN clashes on tobacco proposal 
January 23, 2012 by Fantasi Pridgon
After informational talk, opinions lead to no formal stance
CSUN has not officially supported nor opposed the Tobacco Free UNLV initiative, but discussion of the project has sparked controversy within the undergraduate student government.
An informational luncheon was held with the intention of clearing up confusion that stemmed from a presentation by the group during a senate meeting last year. During the meeting, disagreements over the current policy draft prevented what Tobacco Free UNLV Director Susan VanBeuge was hoping would result in an endorsement by CSUN.
“There are some people in CSUN that are completely against it, others who are completely for it and everywhere in between,” said undergraduate student body president Sarah Saenz.
The luncheon was organized in part by CSUN health sciences senator Andrew Elkins.
Though Sen. Elkins said the luncheon was not closed to the public, it was not announced as a public meeting. Only one attendee, a friend of hotel senator Michael Rubin, was not a member of CSUN.
Elkins said the luncheon was intended specifically for members of CSUN to make an informed decision to back or oppose the proposed tobacco free policy.
Justin Grewal, another CSUN health sciences senator, said that he welcomes a policy that eliminates or reduces exposure to tobacco use on campus but he feels that CSUN should not endorse Tobacco Free UNLV’s draft policy as it stands.
“I believe that a tobacco free policy would greatly benefit UNLV and the health of our students,” he said. “But the policy as proposed by Tobacco Free UNLV is currently a draft and revisions need to be made and certain issues should be addressed in order to garner CSUN’s support.”
CSUN liberal arts senator Mark Ciavola shares a similar view.
“It goes too far,” he said. “If students find smoke bothersome, there are ways we can address the issue without banning tobacco products completely.”
Ciavola said that he learned at the luncheon that under Tobacco Free UNLV’s suggested policy, unlit cigarettes would be banned. He said that when he asked VanBeuge if “unlit.”
VanBeuge clarified that in fact, Tobacco Free UNLV does not have the authority to enact university policy. The project’s ideas and research, including surveys of students, faculty and staff, were presented to UNLV administrators in the hope that changes may be made.
But Ciavola is concerned about Tobacco Free UNLV’s suggestion because he believes students could be punished for even small infractions on the rules, such as having a pack of cigarettes in a car parked on campus.
“Because this is being done with federal grant money, that comes from student tax payers,” Ciavola said. “Their own money is being used against them.”
But Tobacco Free UNLV would not have the authority to penalize individuals who broke university policy even if the rules were changed to align with the project’s suggestions. Disciplinary measures would have to be set out by university administration.
Tobacco Free UNLV has spent more than a year and a half disseminating information about its efforts, gathering public opinion data and passing along research and suggestions to UNLV administration. It launched a website, tobaccofreeunlv.com, in August 2010.
But Ciavola thinks that the breadth of the draft policy is not widely understood and he said that he does not think students would support Tobacco Free UNLV’s efforts if they knew the extent of the changes the project would like to see enacted by administration.
VanBeuge explained that punishing students is not part of the project’s goal — that health and wellness are her and her colleagues’ only concerns.
“We’re not trying to make it politics,” she said.
Elkins said that he supports Tobacco Free UNLV and that he is the only senator to fully back the policy.
“I recognize that smoking and secondhand smoke is a public health issue,” he said, “and that is why I feel so strongly that the Tobacco Free policy is the right decision for our university.”
Ciavola also took issue with the process by which Tobacco Free UNLV gathered opinions from students.
“The only information they have comes from students who care enough about the issue to respond,” he said.
Approximately 4,000 students responded to the surveys, which were sent through university RebelMail accounts.
Ciavola said numbers are being twisted to fit the Tobacco Free UNLV agenda and that in reality, students are not informed about the project.
“At no time has the actual policy, word for word, been distributed to students to get their honest opinion on what is at stake,” he said.
Though the whole of the draft policy was never distributed to every student, VanBeuge said that the document is given freely to anyone who asks to see it.
Every person who attended the CSUN luncheon with Tobacco Free UNLV was given a copy of the draft.
Elkins acknowledged the difficulty of gathering representative information on student opinion.
“There are 28,000 students, so there is a large number of people that are not necessarily represented in the surveys,” Elkins said. “So it’s a challenge to really understand what the overall student population feels.”
VanBeuge said that was one of the reasons she was excited to collaborate with Elkins and have a chance to talk with CSUN representatives and answer their questions.
“There just seemed like there was so much misinformation,” she said, regarding perceptions of the project among the undergraduate student government.
Saenz said CSUN has done their best to communicate with facilitators of Tobacco Free UNLV and had multiple opportunities to ask questions and get as much information as they could about the initiative.
“It’s a very divided and polarized group,” VanBeuge said of CSUN.
Ciavola was dissatisfied when VanBeuge declined to answer when he asked her in the meeting how much money she is paid.
“That was a legitimate question because it’s public money,” he said. “She refused to answer that question.”
Megan Downs, who handles Tobacco Free UNLV for the UNLV Office of Media Relations and prepared the project’s budget documents for The Rebel Yell, explained that because federal dollars are involved, the university takes careful steps when it releases information about the project’s grant.
Media Relations enlisted the advice of UNLV’s legal department before releasing Tobacco Free UNLV’s budget information to The Rebel Yell, but our request was met within one week.
VanBeuge asserted that Tobacco Free UNLV has nothing to hide.
“It’s a public institution,” she said. “This is public money. There’s nothing sinister.”
Saenz said she spoke with VanBeuge after the luncheon and apologized for behaviors that “may not have been as professional as they should have been.”
“We recognize the work that they have put into this initiative,” Saenz said. “Certain personal opinions should have been absent from the discussion.”
Elkins said he also apologized to VanBeuge for what he called an “attack” on her views and Tobacco Free UNLV.
Fantasi Pridgon reports on health issues for The Rebel Yell. Contact her at fantasi.pridgon.ry@gmail.com.
So the CSUN meeting was a waste of time. Why CSUN won’t support Tobacco Free UNLV is beyond me. It is simple – the rights of nonsmokers must outweigh the rights of smokers. As a nonsmoker, I cannot avoid the foul smoke from smokers outside of the Student Union, the Dining Commons, Lied Library, or even in the Tropicana Parking Garage. All it takes is one smoker to light a cigarette and walk. The smoke blows right on everyone else. If smokers were courteous and remained stationary in smoking zones, that would be fine. The reality is that smokers do not care about the rights of nonsmokers. I watched a smoker light a cigarette in the parking garage, carry it past the SSC buildings without taking a puff (all while the smoker was blowing back on anyone in his path), finally take a puff, and then flick the cigarette onto the ground in front of the gym. He didn’t bother to put it out so the smoker continued to pollute the air. The biggest insult was that there is an ashtray right next to where he tossed his cigarette. Shame on you CSN for not supporting this endeavor. You folks really do just get paid to do nothing.
Why won’t CSUN support TFU? I can only speak for myself. The proposal simply goes too far, and is not focused on protecting students from inhaling second-hand smoke. It is, instead, focused on a complete ban and zero-tolerance policy against the possession of any tobacco product on campus – for which students could be expelled for violating, under UNLV’s code of conduct.
1. Students who do choose to use tobacco (a perfectly legal substance) should be able to do so in the open air on campus, perhaps in designated areas, and away from buildings in accordance with UNLV’s 25-foot restriction policy.
2. Students who live on campus should not have to completely leave campus, sometimes at night, in an unsafe neighborhood, to smoke a cigarette or engage in use of chewing tobacco or e-cigarettes, which do not affect other students.
3. Unlit cigarettes should not be banned at all, because this would prohibit students from keeping packs of cigarettes in their dorm rooms, in their cars parked in UNLV lots, or in their backpacks, for later use on or off campus. Under the proposal, students who leave campus to smoke would not be able to return with a pack of cigarettes in their backpack.
4. Dr. VanBuege made it clear in this information session that she was not open to changing the language of the Tobacco Free proposal, which as currently written, would ban the POSSESSION of ALL tobacco products on campus – including unlit cigarettes.
5. If enacted, this policy will be covered by UNLV’s code of conduct, which will result in reprimands for students who violate the tobacco ban. Students can be fined, even for guests they invite on campus, and punishments can – and will eventually – include expulsion.
6. A complete tobacco ban will also prohibit smoking in your car – if parked on UNLV property. It will ban the use of tobacco during tailgates at UNLV Rebels games. And while TFU maintains that private events such as the Rodeo (One of UNLV’s highest revenue-generating events) will still be able to use tobacco, the policy will prevent anyone from carrying tobacco products into the Rodeo via UNLV property. (Unless we’re going to use helicopters to airdrop the tobacco into the private event — doubtful, though)
While Tobacco Free UNLV and CSUN are not able to implement official university policy, UNLV’s administration is. And if this proposal is implemented, as-is, students could be expelled for possessing unlit cigarettes, or for using tobacco products like chewing tobacco and e-cigarettes, that do not affect other students.
That is why I, along with many other members of CSUN, favor a compromise solution – which would allow students to continue using tobacco in designated areas away from high traffic areas and buildings, so all students can continue to enjoy life at UNLV.
Dr. VanBuege has already stated that Tobacco Free UNLV will not agree to any compromise that allows the use of tobacco products on campus, and is not willing to change the language in the current proposal to remove “unlit cigarettes” to allow students to possess tobacco for use in appropriate areas on campus, or off campus at a later time.
I recommend that EVERY student who believes this issue is important – either from a pro-tobacco, anti-tobacco, or student rights perspective, reach out and speak to CSUN senators before making blanket statements like “You folks really do just get paid to do nothing.”
I do not take a salary from CSUN, because I do not believe students should pay me to represent them. It is estimated in the TFU grant application that 40% of students use tobacco. I represent all students in my college, whether they choose to use tobacco or not.
These issues are not black and white.
Go Rebels wrote: “It is simple – the rights of nonsmokers must outweigh the rights of smokers.”
Thomas Jefferson’s first inaugural address March 4, 1801: “During the contest of opinion through which we have passed the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will of course arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; ***** that the minority possesses their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression. “*****