Yonkers Looks To Put Out Cigarettes At School Bus Stops

  • Comments (5)
Mayor Mike Spano and members of the Yonkers Council of PTA/PTSAs announced the start of the "Pledge For Healthy School Bus Stops" campaign Wednesday outside School 13 .
Mayor Mike Spano and members of the Yonkers Council of PTA/PTSAs announced the start of the "Pledge For Healthy School Bus Stops" campaign Wednesday outside School 13 .

YONKERS, N.Y. – Yonkers is looking to snuff out smoking at school bus stops.

Mayor Mike Spano announced Wednesday the launch of the city’s newest wellness campaign, “Pledge For Healthy School Bus Stops.”  The goal is to encourage adults not to smoke at bus stops while sending their children off to school, he said. 

“There is no debating the hazards of second-hand smoke to our children’s health, especially to those with medical conditions,” the mayor said. “If we really are committed to protecting the health and well-being of our children, then preventing their exposure to the harmful effects of smoking should be a no-brainer for all residents.”

Spano announced the initiative, which last week was passed as a resolution by the City Council, Wednesday outside School 13 on McLean Avenue. There he was joined by Danielle Eaton, president of the Yonkers Council of Parents Teacher Associations, and members of the PTA’s Health and Wellness Committee.

“The Yonkers Council of PTA/PTSAs stands with the Mayor and City Council today in support of this resolution banning smoking from all school bus stops and any efforts to ensure the health and well-being of our children,” Eaton said.

More than 50 percent of children are exposed to second hand every year, according to the Center for Disease Control.  Complications from inhaling the smoke can include ear infections, more frequent and severe asthma attacks and bronchitis or pneumonia, the CDC said.

As part of the Pledge for Healthy School Bus Stops, residents are encouraged to visit the city’s website or Facebook page to submit an online pledge to refrain from smoking at school bus stops in the presence of children.

Superintendent of Schools Bernard Pierorazio joined the mayor in urging residents to take part in the program.

“This initiative provides each citizen with a simple, but effective, way to help our children. We encourage everyone to support the campaign,” he said.

Smokers and non-smokers alike said Wednesday they too were behind the city’s initiative.

“It seems like a common sense thing – not to smoke at a bus stop,” parent Peter Rubin said. “But it’s a good reminder. I don’t see why anyone would have a problem with it.”

  • 5

Comments (5)

Truly a worth thinking! A passive smoking is more hazardous than direct one as unfiltered gases are directly inhaled by others. Legal activities should be carried out to stop smoking activities at crowded places, schools and impacting areas.
tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com for rest of the story.

Sorry, Ms. Silk, but you are misinformed. I have seen asthmatic children react when they are near smoking people outdoors. As someone who smoked, I had the common sense not to smoke around children, indoors or out. A slight breeze can waft the smoke right into people's faces.
I agree you have the right to smoke, but you do not have the right to make anyone ill. You do not have the right to send a child... or an adult... to the hospital because you want to indulge your addiction in an area where people are gathered.
You are correct. It is up to a parent to decide the family line on smoking. However, when you smoke outdoors, you are taking away other parents' rights to make that decision for that family.
In other word (put that) BUTT OUT!

If child or adult alike do not have the same reaction to stepping out into the street as they do to a passing whiff of cigarette smoke then the burden is on you to explain why not. If (collective) you do not suffer such severe (or any I would guess) effects from the vehicles you pass or at a barbecue or watching fireworks then what you suffer from is self-induced anxiety that BRINGS ON an asthma attack (if that, and not mere hyperventilation). In fact, I feel sorry for the child because there's a good chance that it was a parent that planted this idea -- that cigarette smoke is a monster -- in their own child's head which causes this overreaction.

NYC Mayor Bloomberg -- the man who wants the same as you -- unwittingly unmasked all of the anti-smoker rhetoric when, in response to concerns about "toxins" during a large fire at the Staten Island Landfill several months ago, said, "There’s no health issues here, you have fires all the time, smoke goes off into the air." Bloomberg said the fire shouldn't pose a health risk because what burned was mostly old Christmas trees and trees that were knocked down by Tropical Storm Irene.

Quoting one of the most rabid anti-smoker activist researchers in the world -- Dr. Simon Chapman of Australia -- he reinforces that there's no distinction by putting the kind of thing Bloomberg said in context with whiffs of cigarette smoke in the air:

"To me, 'going too far' in [secondhand smoke] policy means efforts premised on reducing harm to others, which ban smoking in outdoor settings such as ships’ decks, parks, golf courses, beaches, outdoor parking lots, hospital gardens, and streets.

"[W]hile tobacco smoke has its own range of recognisable smells, there are few differences between the physics and chemistry of tobacco smoke and smoke generated by the incomplete combustion of any biomass, whether it be eucalyptus leaves, campfire logs, gasoline, or meat on a barbeque. Secondhand smoke is not so uniquely noxious that it justifies extraordinary controls of such stringency that zero tolerance outdoors is the only acceptable policy."

-- Going Too Far? Exploring the Limits of Smoking Regulation, William Mitchell Law Review, October 23, 2007

"For the children" is a way to silence dissent. Any opposition is then held hostage because the alternative is prefabricated to mean one is not for the children. Well my dissent will not be silenced by this gross exploitation of "for the children" -- a shield for the intolerant to hide behind. A child can be painted into ANY scenario. If they're not waiting at a bus stop they're walking to a bus stop, for one. This is no more than another incremental attack on an informed autonomous adult's choice to smoke. It's an excuse to frustrate smokers into quitting by removing one more place they can smoke. Aside from the fact that there is ZERO valid evidence that cigarette smoke outdoors is harmful to anyone, the irony that we're talking about a BUS stop -- where short children's faces are at the same height as a bus' exhaust pipe -- should insult everyone's intelligence. How can anyone say such a thing and not feel ludicrous? As for any argument that children should "not see" someone smoking, that is a lesson for a parent to teach if they want, not for those in power to compel me to "speak" that message by rescinding my right to engage in an otherwise legal activity. In fact, the lesson taught to these children by censoring things from their sight is that when you don't approve of something you eliminate it. That's a greater threat to our way of life than any sign of smoking. In fact, I'm not the one exploiting the children, I'm the one protecting their future so that they grow up to live in a free country.

Founder, NYC Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment (C.L.A.S.H.)