| 1/18/2006 3:00:00 PM | Email this article • Print this article | Proposed smoking ordinance hotly debated at city council meeting
Wayne Engle
Courier Staff Writer
A capacity crowd in the Madison City Council chambers hotly debated a proposed smoking ordinance last night, taking sides over whether the city should ban smoking in most enclosed public places, including most retail businesses. Opponents said the government should not take on what some perceive to be an activist role that meddles in residents’ private affairs.
A number of members of Jefferson County P.R.I.D.E., an anti-smoking organization, wore orange T-shirts with the group’s logo on the front.
One of them, a senior citizen named Russell James, said he was a former smoker who strongly supports an ordinance. “My mother died of lung cancer, and she never smoked a cigarette in her life. ... She worked next to a man who was a chain smoker,” James said. “If this ordinance was passed, it might encourage some people to quit smoking. It’s a bad thing.”
Ann Hatton said she’s never smoked. But she said doctors have detected a spot on her lung, the beginning stages of a lung disease related to tobacco smoke. She said it is treatable up to a point.
Hatton said both her parents smoked their entire lives — her mother until she was diagnosed with a fatal disease three weeks before her death; her father, until he took his dying breath.
“When somebody is smoking around us, everybody is affected — not just the smoker,” Hatton said.
Zell Schirmer, carrying an oxygen unit she uses due to lung damage from years of smoking, told the council, “Our daughter died at age 41 from a smoking-related illness. I favor the passage of this ordinance.”
But Doug Rogers said he opposes the ordinance. “We won’t outlaw fast food. We won’t outlaw butter and eggs,” he said. “We couldn’t even walk past Hinkle’s if we did that.” The crowd chuckled at the mention of the local restaurant.
“I think it’s a bit of a waste of time (outlawing public smoking) when factories are moving to other countries and taking our tax base with them,” Rogers said.
Two teen-age members of P.R.I.D.E., Lindsey Lockridge and Andrew Forrester, stood side-by-side at the microphone in their orange T-shirts to say they support the ordinance because of the danger second-hand smoke poses to children in the home, closed vehicles, and restaurants that allow smoking.
Property, personal rights
Jeannie Stotts told the council she was opposed to the ordinance, viewing it as government interference in property rights.
“I will decide for myself whether I will ban smoking in my business,” said Stotts, who is a partner in a firm of attorneys.
Stotts also said that passing an anti-smoking ordinance in the city of Madison, while the rest of Jefferson County has none, would mean that property owners outside the city limits would have more rights than she does. She said she believes a countywide referendum would be more fair than an ordinance. “Smoking or not smoking should remain a personal choice,” Stotts said.
City attorney Rob Barlow said he doesn’t think it would be permitted under Indiana law.
A number of pro-ordinance speakers cited statistics about lung cancer and other illnesses that can be caused or exacerbated by tobacco, and about how merchants in other municipalities are reported to have seen their business improve after they banned smoking. But Cris Sauer, owner of Shipley’s Tavern, said, “Statistics can be used any way you want to use them.”
Sauer, who said he opposed the ordinance, noted that as proposed it provides an exemption for taverns and private clubs, but expressed doubt about whether that would stand once an ordinance was adopted.
In response to a question from the council, Sauer said he believes “at least 75 percent” of his customers are smokers.
Kim Crawford said, “I am asking you to respect all the public’s health and pass this ordinance to ban all smoking from public places.” She compared the dangers of tobacco to those of asbestos and noted that the government regulates the use and disposal of it.
Heather Foy, community wellness coordinator for King’s Daughters’ Hospital, said she supports the ordinance “in its fullest form.” She said that in her job she has seen what second-hand smoke can do to non-smoking family members. Foy also said she would “love to see” a referendum on banning smoking in public places, expressing confidence that it would win easily.
Second-class citizens?
But Bob Griffin, who said he owns a pool hall, told the council, “Tobacco is the roots of this community. ... They raised you on the profits from (growing) tobacco.”
Griffin, who said he is a smoker, said the current anti-tobacco campaigns “make me feel like the colored people did when the signs said, ‘Colored Eat in the Back.’ ” He also pointed out that most of the people who oppose smoking drive cars, which can pollute the atmosphere.
Samantha Goldsmith said the debate for her was “not as much about smoking as it is about choices, and about how many decisions we’re going to allow the government to make for us.”
Goldsmith said the decision on whether to ban smoking from a business should “remain in the private realm,” and said customers can make their own choices about patronizing businesses that allow or do not allow smoking.
“Privately-owned businesses are just that — privately owned,” Goldsmith said.
Harmful to business?
A restaurant owner, Herb Parker of Frisch’s, told the council, “My biggest issue is, you’re telling me what I can do on my property. This is going to hurt my business — it will hurt it.” Parker said industry statistics show that smoke-free restaurants lose business to restaurants that permit smoking. He said in a city the size of the Madison “the pie is only so big. You’re taking part of my pie and putting it on somebody else’s plate.”
Mary Clashman voiced support for the ordinance. “I eat out four or five times a week, and I’ve had to get up and leave a restaurant after I got my food a number of times because someone sat down at the next table and lit up a cigarette,” she said.
Dr. Jennifer Roney, an obstetrician-gynecologist, said she supports the ban. She said it has been proven that second-hand smoke is harmful to pregnant women and children. She said 30 to 40 percent of the women whose babies she delivers are smokers.
Griffin spoke one more time, asking how many of the council members smoke. All said they do not, although a couple acknowledged having smoked years ago.
“So you guys are going to make this decision for us smokers?” Griffin asked.
Huntington and several council members criticized Griffin for the implication that they couldn’t be impartial about the ordinance. They said they have taken an oath to work for the good of all the people in the city.
Another public meeting on the smoking ordinance is to be held as part of the council meeting Feb. 21, Huntington said
|
Reader Comments
Posted: Friday, January 20, 2006
Article comment by:
Chistine Siehl
As I agree that people can choose not to patronize establishments that allow smoking, that is counter-productive for the business and city in general. First it forces money that would have normally stayed in town, out of town to business that honor non-smoking preferences. Secondly if you have less people smoking you could quite possibly increase the length of all of your patrons lives, thus increasing the length of time someone could be a potential customer They will live longer, as will the business owner. Let's move Madison forward to the 20th century.
Posted: Friday, January 20, 2006
Article comment by:
Donna Sizemore
I do smoke, but I also respect people who do not because lets all face it, it is a filthy habit that is more addictive than most drugs. Just because I choose to harm myself it does not give me the right to put others in danger. Just smoke in private. Bars I beleive should be exempt because you do not have to go there and the people who do are hurting themselves with drinking anyway. In a resturant your only there a short time anyway. yes we were raised to beleive tobbacco supported our families, but we all know now farmers are the poorest people around. Businesses are not private places there is a time and place for everything. Maybe if we do not smoke in front of our young people it will set a better example for them.
Posted: Thursday, January 19, 2006
Article comment by:
Michael Davis
former madison resedent i now live in ga we have smoking bans in most all areas here has not hurt business at all i say pass the ordanance
Posted: Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Article comment by:
Kelley Wilson
Please pass the smoking ban ordinance. I live in California and the smoking ban for public places WORKS! It's a win-win situation believe it or not. I know of quite a few people including myself who would visit Madison more often, (possibly even move back) if there weren't so much smoke everywhere.
Posted: Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Article comment by:
Jerry Jones
I lived in madison all my life (43 years) and i think non smokers are discramenting us smokers. if i was a non smoker i would be for the smokers. we have a right to what happen to our freedom?? we got people overseas fighting for freedom. and you non smokers wants to take ours away. it's not fare...
|
Article Comment Form
|
