It’s been almost five years since Michigan restaurant and bar goers have been asked their preference: smoking or non-smoking?

Effective May 1, 2010, Michigan legislature passed the Michigan Indoor Clean Air Act, prohibiting smoking in any public indoor location, and two years later, Oakland University developed its own policy in response to the new legislation.

New policy

Although OU has been “smoke-free” since November of 2012, on Sept. 9, 2013 students received an email from John W. Beaghan, vice president for Finance and Administration and treasurer to the Board of Trustees, with a policy update.

According to Beaghan’s email, OU was expanding the campus-wide Clean Air Act, rendering smoking on campus to be officially prohibited indoors and outdoors.

Referenced as Policy 475, the exact verbiage from OU Administrative Policies and Procedures reads, “smoking is prohibited on all owned or operated Campuses and Grounds, and in all University owned or operated Buildings and vehicles.”

New fixtures on campus during fall of 2013 were OU Clean Air Act signs fastened to light posts, brandishing the universally recognized symbol for “no smoking.”

Shawn Czewski, Environmental, Health & Wellness Director for OUSC said that in speaking with OU’s Health & Safety department, “there isn’t much [the department] could do other than place the signs we see on campus,” in regards to policy implementation.

Campus enforcement

Things get more interesting when OUPD’s role in enforcing the policy is examined.

“The main issue of this policy,” Czewski said, “is that it states individuals can not smoke outdoors, but there is no law in Michigan stating smoking is prohibited outdoors,” — a statement confirmed by OUPD Administrative Lieutenant Nicole Thomson.

While the university has made its desire for a smoke-free campus clear with the enactment of Policy 475, there really is little that can be done to enforce it.

“That is why we don’t see OUPD getting involved with the issue, because it would be unlawful,” Czewski said. “If someone were to get violent, we would see OUPD stepping in.”

Czewski said that he has personally confronted students about smoking on campus and asked them to put their cigarettes out, but had little success and he said he has interacted with “repeat offenders,” resulting from minimal outside enforcement.

Due to the fact that application of the policy does not rest on OUPD, Czewski said that he actively encourages students to not smoke on campus, and has heard of involvement from the Dean of Students when it comes to individuals smoking near the Oakland Center.

Tolerance on other campuses

OU transfer student Zach Micklea said that the Michigan school he previously attended had a much lower tolerance for smoking on campus.

“I was once approached by an officer who aggressively asked if I had been smoking,” Micklea said.

“I told him that I wasn’t, and he proceeded to interrogate me, asking if I was really a student and what teachers I had,” Micklea said. “I couldn’t believe it, since I had an armful of books and hadn’t even been smoking in the first place. Groups of kids would still smoke,” he said, “but there was always a lookout, and if a cop came around, all the kids would scatter.”

Other Michigan schools potentially looking to their police departments for aid in keeping campus smoke-free begs an ethical question of whether or not officers who, according to Thomson, cannot enforce policies like 475 which disagree with state law, should be able to discourage students from smoking on campus.

“The policy has been put in place to hopefully mold OU into a smoke-free campus in the future,” Czewski said. “Things take time.”

“The university needs to get educated,” he said, not only on the facts of smoking, but on the policy and what it means for smokers and non-smokers alike.

“I would like to see OU smoke-free one day,” Czewski said, “but I don’t know if the university is as enthusiastic as I am at the moment.”

Contact Staff Reporter Kaleigh Jerzykowski via email at [email protected]