Fewer than 14% of Californians smoke cigarettes or other tobacco products.

They have the right to choose the health risks of smoking for themselves. But they do not have the right to impose their smoke involuntarily on others. That is why California has statewide laws that ban smoking in workplaces, restaurants and bars.

Now legislators are considering taking the next step -- preventing smokers from imposing smoke involuntarily on those who live in apartments or condominiums. With shared walls, floors, ceilings or ventilation systems, the drift of smoke is inevitable and palpable in neighboring units.

A child with asthma or an elderly person with multiple health issues -- or any non-smoker who doesn't want the health hazard of secondhand smoke -- is out of luck if a smoker moves into an adjacent apartment or condo. For most in this situation, the choice is to move out or to endure the health hazard. For low-income people who cannot afford to move, there is no choice; they have to endure the smoke.

Assembly Member Marc Levine, D-San Rafael, attempts to address this problem with Assembly Bill 746, which would enact a statewide ban on smoking in apartments and condos that have two or more units and share walls, floors, ceilings or ventilation systems. While details remain to be worked out, this bill is the right thing to do.

Some landlords and condo associations already have voluntarily adopted smoke-free policies in leases, bylaws, rules and regulations that renters or buyers sign -- no different than enforcing quiet hours or no-pet rules. And 29 California cities and counties, starting with Belmont in the East Bay in 2007, already ban smoking in apartments and condos.

The Belmont experience is telling. The city has not had a compliance problem. According to city manager Greg Scoles, complaints of smoking infractions are rare and resolved quickly by making people aware of the rules. The city has an education program, which was key during the transition period. The city, to his knowledge, has not issued any citations, which carry a $100 fine.

Landlords have lower costs for turning over units -- units that smell of smoke or are covered in residue are more costly to clean. Risk of fire also is reduced, improving the cost of fire insurance.

While Belmont's debate was contentious and City Council Member Coralin Feierbach says she was the target of insults and threats, she believes it was all worth it. She has received nothing but gratitude since it passed.

One person's smoke invading a neighbor's dwelling is not just a nuisance in the way that excessive noise at 3 a.m. is a nuisance. It is a health hazard. Levine is on the right track with AB 746.