The Smoking Ban Goes Municipal
So far it looks as if the rump City Commission will bide its time and peaceably exit the world of municipal politics.
There is one interesting “talk session” this coming Tuesday, however, that you might like to go to. The issue: “the smoking ban.” The Trib today reports:
[City Manager Greg Doyon] told city commissioners that the ban has prompted complaints from some residents that it is not being strictly enforced.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. There is already a mechanism for this. Go here on the intertubes, file a complaint, and bring the Nanny State down on some poor bar owner. Do it if you want to. It is, sadly, the law.
This, however, is a law passed by the state legislature and enforced by state agencies. There is simply no reason to have some city flunky out there duplicating their efforts, and without a budget to do so. (By contrast the state has tons of money for enforcement and self-aggrandizing publicity; behold the insipid “Smoke-Free Montana” commercials.)
A more positive direction for the City is also to be mentioned at Tuesday’s work session, which starts at 6 p.m. Apparently, the Tavern Ass’n is asking for clarification of the City’s 20-foot ordinance, a rarely enforced provision of City code, put there in a bout of whimsy, which requires smokers to stand at least 20 feet away from any public entrance. It is, at the moment, unclear if the “butt huts” which bars & casinos have built / are building square with City law because the huts’ entrances are typically less than 20 feet away from the door to the bar.
Here, for what it’s worth, is what I consider a simple way to fix this problem: Repeal the 20-foot law. Perhaps there are arguments to be made for it. But the reality is the City has not enforced and will not enforce it; there are simply better things to do with Police’s time. Instead of putting on a pretense and leaving small-business owners in the lurch, can we not just agree this is not a law worth insisting on?
I thought the City-County Health Department was charged with enforcement?
It was one of the entities charged with enforcement (the Department of Health and Human Services or its designee, the law says) , though I’m under the impression its budget for it comes from the state’s various pools of tobacco money. Anyways, my point is that the state’s rule-making apparatus is clearly in charge here, and it is in the interests of everyone to have a standardized process and complaint form. I wonder at the nature of citizen complaints and what they’d like the City to do?? Another reason to show up on Tuesday.
I guess I agree. I dont understand why the City is (wasting time) addressing an issue that they lack standing to enforce. No to mention budget, staffing, direction by the commission….
It is my understanding that DPHHS is in charge of enforcement of the Montana Indoor Act. CCHD does not have the manpower or funding to become a policing agent. I also think the 20 feet perimeter requirement is required by state statute and was not put in place directly because of taverns but as a recognition that people entering a public building, including a bar/casino, should not be subjected to second smoke. This applies to all public entrances – city hall, county courthouse, Benefis Hospital, etc. I was not, and am not in favor of the smoking ban on establishments that sell alcohol. I still believe a person has the choice of entering a place where smoking is allowed or finding a smoke-free bar. An empoyee who does not want second hand smoke has a choice of working or not working in that type of environment. HOWEVER, the law is the law and until and unless common sense happens in Helena (not very likely to happen) we have to abide by the law. In fairness to non-smokers (I have never smoked) I know several people have mentioned to me that they don’t like walking by a bar and being subjected to the smoker right outside the front door of the bar when customers are right outside the door and nowhere near a 20 foot perimeter . This happens downtown and with several bars where foot traffic is not associated with the bar. I am sure they would also never contact DPHHS as they do not want to cause a problem for tavern owners.
Time would be better spent running the animal shelter/services 24/7.
The 20-foot law is definitely a city law — there may be state law about hospitals or schools, but it says right on the signs notifying, for instance, Littles Lanes customers of the ordinance that it’s a city thing
Travis, as usual you are absolutley correct! There is a “city” ordinance requiring a 20 foot non-smoking perimeter be obsrved around any entrance to any public building within the city of Great Falls. This not only includes doors but also includes any window that opens.
Keep up the good work!
anon 2:24 – Not sure what animal shelter services and a smoking ban have in common……????
The 20 foot rule is a City of Great Falls interpretation of an older state law:
“The Montana “Smoking in Public Places” statute (MCA 50-40) requires all public places to be smoke-free. It does not specify the distance designated smoking areas should be from a public place. This section is meant to augment state law by prohibiting smoking within presumptively reasonable minimum distance of twenty feet from entrances, exits, windows that open, and ventilation intakes that serve an enclosed area where smoking is prohibited so as to ensure that tobacco smoke does not enter the area through entrances, exits, open windows or other means.”
Further, as far as complaints that the law is not being enforced, the City should simply point out that it is not their job to enforce it.
Finally, I will leave you with this comment from the Tribune’s website. I can tell you from personal experience that the writer is speaking the truth:
How soon will know the effects of this law on the state coffers? One if my kids is a casino attendant here in Mizoo and she says that business is way off too (and her tips are down 60%.)
You can see it all over town, like I said at the begining of this law, I give casinos 1 year tops and many of them will start to close. Right or wrong on this anti-smoking law all that has or will be accomplished is we will have more unemployed in town and accross Montana. Those who do work in casinos might want to get a head-start in job hunting. But remember to thank all those anti-smoker folks for saving your health, they just did not tell you that in order to save your health you would loose your job in due time.
Lets face it. The law is probably not going to be changed. What we had was a bunch of “do gooders” many who probably for the most part never set foot in a bar/casino who decided “big government” would help all of those poor souls who freely entered bars/casinos by eliminating smoke. Now the “do gooders” many who never went to the bars/casinos anyway are still not going to those places while many smokers are either staying home or traveling to Indian casinos. I know that bar business is down quite a bit in most bars/casinos…….but not all have experienced the dramatic declines experienced by others. When unemployment increases thanks to the law, the taxpayers will experience a double whammy. Less tax reveues (tobacco and alcohol) and higher costs providing unemployment benefits.
I work in the gaming industry. I’m trying to work extra hard lately, and seem indispensible. Ever hear of unintended consequences, “Do-gooders”? Who’s next? You fat people need your menus set for you!
SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE. Ask the anti-tobacco folks to tell you what truly is in second hand smoke…when it burns from the coal its oxygenated and everything is burned and turned into water vapor………………thats right water……….you ever burned leaves in the fall…know how the heavy smoke bellows off…….thats the organic material releasing the moisture in the leaves the greener the leaves/organic material the more smoke thats made……thats why second hand smoke is classified as a class 3 irritant by osha and epa as of 2006……..after that time EPA decided to change the listing of shs as a carcinogen for political reasons…….because it contained a trace amount of 6 chemicals so small even sophisticated scientific equipment can hardly detect it ……..they didnt however use the normal dose makes the poison computation when they made this political decision. However osha still maintains shs/ets as an irritant only and maintains the dose makes the poison position…….as osha is in charge of indoor air quality its decisions are based on science not political agendas as epa’s is. We can see this is true after a federal judge threw out the epa’s study on shs as junk science……… Wednesday, March 12, 2008 British Medical Journal & WHO conclude secondhand smoke “health hazard” claims are greatly exaggerated The BMJ published report at:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057
concludes that “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer are considerably weaker than generally believed.” What makes this study so significant is that it took place over a 39 year period, and studied the results of non-smokers who lived with smokers…..
meaning these non-smokers were exposed to secondhand smoke up to 24 hours per day; 365 days per year for 39 years. And there was still no relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. In light of the damage to business, jobs, and the economy from smoking bans the BMJ report should be revisited by lawmakers as a reference tool and justification to repeal the now unnecessary and very damaging smoking ban laws. Also significant is the World Health Organization (WHO) study:
Passive smoking doesn’t cause cancer-official By Victoria Macdonald, Health Correspondent ” The results are consistent with their being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer. The summary, seen by The Telegraph, also states: ‘There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood.’ ” And if lawmakers need additional real world data to further highlight the need to eliminate these onerous and arbitrary laws, air quality testing by Johns Hopkins University proves that secondhand smoke is up to 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations.
The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). – (Excerpted from “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains” with permission of the author.)
The Myth of the Smoking Ban ‘Miracle’ Restrictions on smoking around the world are claimed to have had a dramatic effect on heart attack rates. It’s not true. http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7451/
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: “Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)…It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded.” -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec’y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997
-harleyrider1978
harleyrider1978
Wow, this guy really enjoys his cancer sticks and I always thought these things eventually killed ya? I need to run out and get a pack so I can enjoy good health and get plenty of water vapor!