1. I n t r o d u c t i o n A b s t r a c t Tobacco-free park and recreation policies in Minnesota communities: Perceptions and realities Jean Forster, MPH PhD*, Elizabeth Klein, MPH*, Andrea Hickle, MPH*, Brittany McFadden, BA  *University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 612-626-8864,  Association for Nonsmokers-Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, USA 651-646-3005 R e s u l t s I m p l i c a t i o n s The interview response rate was 86%, with 452 interviews completed. Of those surveyed, 26% of the communities had a tobacco free policy in place, with the average policy in place for over 3 years. Many groups were involved in the process of passing a policy, including board members (77%), commissioners (82%), park and recreation staff (83%), health professionals (60%), youth groups (51%) and anti-tobacco coalitions (31%). This work was funded by grant number RC-2002-0029 from the Minnesota Partnership for Action Against Tobacco M e t h o d s R e s u l t s c o n t i n u e d Objective: To learn more information regarding tobacco-free park policies in Minnesota from key personnel working in park and recreation. Methods: Park and recreation staff and board members from the largest cities in Minnesota were interviewed regarding tobacco-free park policies (n=452). Results: Of those with park policies, relative ease in passing the policy was reported, and only minor problems were encountered since policy adoption. Of those without park policies, perceptions of difficulties and concerns were much greater than the problems encountered by those who passed tobacco-free policies in Minnesota. Implications: Park policies in Minnesota have been well received by the vast majority of park and recreation staff and board members, and few problems were experienced before and after implementation. The adoption of tobacco-free policies for park and recreation systems promotes a tobacco free norm for Minnesota youth, as well as an environment for health and wellness in our local parks. The Tobacco-Free Youth Recreation Project (TFYR), funded by a grant from the Minnesota Department of Health to the Association for Nonsmokers – Minnesota has promoted adoption of these policies. Little is known about the ease or difficulty of passing tobacco-free park policies. This study focused on Minnesota park and recreation areas located in communities greater than 2,200 in population. Two individuals were recruited from each community for participation in a phone survey: a parks and recreation director and a board member. In communities without a park and recreation department or board, an alternate was identified who had involvement in park policy issues. Interview questions were developed in collaboration with TFYR, focus groups, and pre-testing outside of the sample area. Interview topics included current policies, policy development and implementation, problems since policy adoption, attitudes on tobacco free policies, and demographic information. Table 1: Participants in phone survey of staff and board members of park and recreation in Minnesota, 2004 (n=452) Table 2: Tobacco-related policies in Minnesota parks (n=70) Chart 2: Compliance since policy implementation Chart 1: Reported difficulty in passing a tobacco free park policy (n=70) Park & recreation role -Staff member -Board member 57% (253) 43% (192) Male79% (356) Median years experience in recreation15 years Median years in current position7 years Education group -High school/some college -College degree -Graduate degree 35% (156) 45% (201) 20% (90) Policy covers all forms of tobacco 84% (59) Policy prohibits all tobacco use 88% (60) Policy includes all park areas 53% (37) Policy in effect at all times 64% (45) Policy violation carries consequences - being asked to leave - fines 37% (26) 96% (25) 35% (9) Staff (n=8) Board (n=3) Concerns about smokers rights issues75% (6)33% (1) Secondhand smoke is not perceived as a health issue 63% (5)0% (0) Controversy over policy coverage88% (7)67% (2) Worries over costs of publicity50% (4)0% (0) Concerns about penalties 63% (5)33% (1) Concerns over enforcement 88% (7)33% (1) Lack of interest by staff members 13% (1)33% (1) Table 3: Problems encountered by those reporting difficulties passing a tobacco-free policy (n=11) Knowledge of park policies -A lot -Some -A little -Nothing Staff (n=188) 17% (32) 31% (58) 30% (57) 21% (41) Was it reported positive, negative or neutral -Mostly positive -Mix of positive and negative -Mostly negative -Neutral 32% (46) 57% (82) 6% (8) 5% (7) City/county board has discussed a policy 26% (48) Table 4: Familiarity with tobacco-free park policies Chart 3: Perceptions of anticipated problems in trying to pass a policy For those communities with a tobacco-free policy in place, overall compliance has been very positive, and problems have been minor. On the contrary, for individuals who did not have a policy in place, the perception of the problems associated with passing and implementing a policy were much greater than the experiences of those who had passed a policy.