City Passes Smoke Ban (Scranton, PA)

The Scranton Times-Tribune ^ | 12-08-06 | Stacy Brown

[Namyak]

On the same day Allegheny County was sued over its new law and one week after Erie County was advised by its solicitor against such an ordinance, Scranton City Council “rolled the dice” and approved a smoking ban Thursday.

“Our solicitor wants to roll the dice, but it behooves us to proceed with caution, because I think we can ill afford more litigation in Scranton,” said Councilwoman Janet Evans, whose motion to table the ordinance failed. Council passed the ordinance by a 4-to-1 vote.

Solicitor Amil Minora reiterated his belief that the panel was on solid footing in going forth with the ordinance.

Jones Day, the law firm that has represented tobacco giant R.J. Reynolds in numerous product-liability cases, filed a lawsuit against Allegheny County on behalf of two restaurant owners, according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

The lawsuit seeks an injunction to block that county’s smoking ban, citing a state law that some claim prohibits local governments from enacting such laws.

When the Allegheny County Council was debating the ordinance, solicitor Michael Wojcik said it could violate the state Clean Indoor Air Act, which he said prohibits all counties except Philadelphia from passing any local smoking bans, according to the Tribune-Review.

Last week, Erie County solicitor Thomas Talarico also advised that city that such a ban would violate state law.

However, by not specifically legislating smoking or nonsmoking, the state left any further ban to the discretion of municipalities, Mr. Minora said.

The Scranton ordinance would prohibit smoking in nearly all businesses, including bars and restaurants. Bars that get 90 percent of their income through the sale of alcohol could apply for a one-year exemption, under the law.

After Mrs. Evans warned that the ordinance referred to a health department, which Scranton doesn’t have, it was amended to read “health inspector.”

Council President Judy Gatelli excitedly said: “It is my proud pleasure to declare (the ban) legally and lawfully adopted.”

Mrs. Gatelli, a nurse at West Scranton High School, said she would attend a ceremony at 1:30 p.m. Monday where Mayor Chris Doherty will sign the ordinance into law.

The law is to take effect Jan. 7.

[Namyak]

I can tell you right now, this ban will cause the death of at least half the bars in Scranton, especially since no neighboring municipalities are even considering such a move. For a city where a conservative estimate of 30% of the bar-going crowd smokes, this is monumental stupidity.

[demsux]

My city in Missouri just voted down a smoking ban ordinance.

I have to give credit to the council for letting THE PEOPLE decide...not imposing it unilaterally.

[poobear]

Tobacco Prohibition. We'll be able to tell our grandchildren about it.

[DumpsterDiver]

Smoke 'em if ya got 'em!

[elkfersupper]

Why is it that people get to vote on smoking bans but not on such things as speed limits?

[DaBearOne]

Does the no smoking ban include a ban on receiving tobacco tax dollars in their coffers. If so then, I am all for the ban. (except where I live.) Oh yes please encourage them to ban demoncrapts too.

[Gondring]

ping

[Namyak]

Well in this case, we didn't get to vote on it. City Council basically rammed it down our throats, at the behest of a group of highschoolers and out-of-town doctors.

[Sterm26]

I'm a Philly smoker and the new ban just went into effect here in September. It's funny ( a sad kind of funny) watching the security guards at Eagles games chasing the drunk smokers all over the stadium....an open-air facility, no less. Don't know how it's affecting the restaurants and pubs, I'm no longer a part of that scene, but I haven't seen many smokers crowding the sidewalks outside of those places.

We do have a councilman who's trying to revise the ban, giving business owners a bigger say in what goes on int their establishments....

[Ron2]

Next they will ban gasoline engines, then ban walking, then ban eating to fight fat. Maybe they'll ban voting so they save time and conflict.

[Gabz]

Nanny State Ping..............

[Jonah Hex]

I wonder how Scranton feels about 30,000 lbs of bananas...

[seedman81]

Smoking has been banned in all restaurants here in California for some time. Not long after enacting that law, the state banned smoking in all bars, whether they serve food (usually snacks) or not. The law actually was written to protect the employees of the bar or restaurant, not the customers. Some small establishments have found a loophole in that if the owner has no employees, smoking can proceed. The general thought was that the bars would suffer but it has not been the case. They seem to thrive just as they did pre-ban.

[xowboy]

"a ban on receiving tobacco tax dollars in their coffers."
________________________________________

And they call us addicts.

[GYPSY286]

The policymakers want us to believe that they are doing this for health reasons - but they cant'show/prove why second hand smoke is only harmful in privately-owned bars/businesses but NOT in casinos. Notice how these "bans" are popping up all over PA - now that the Casinos are coming to town. How can a small family owned bar compete with the casino down the stree that allows smoking AND free drinks? Stamping on the little guy's right to pursuit of happiness as far as I'm concerned. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY! Lobbyists, unions and big businesses run this country - not the people.

[Namyak]

That's what Scranton's reasoning is, it is to protect the employees from exposure to SHS, the most toxic substance in existence. SHS is so toxic, there is no safe exposure level, at least according to the Surgeon General.

Philosophical questions aside regarding the employee's choice to work in that environment, if SHS is such a harmful substance, why don't they apply OSHA regulations regarding exposure to harmful chemicals in the environment to bars and restaurants? Take the most harmful substance found in tobacco smoke, and make that the basement. Exposure past that certain threshold for a 8-hour work shift is a violation. The reason they won't do this is because OSHA already has safe exposure levels for all the chemicals in tobacco smoke, and you would never reach those in a bar or restaurant environment. This has nothing to do with "saving" the employees from their decision to work at a bar, and everything to with control over our lives.

[patton]

I have an idea - let's adopt the same clean air standards for all emissions. Ban cars, fire, breathing, farting...

[demsux]

The general thought was that the bars would suffer but it has not been the case. They seem to thrive just as they did pre-ban.

BS alert

Source please

[seedman81]

The source would be...me. That was just my observation in my neck of the Greater Central Valley. It seems to me that people are still frequenting the local drinking establishments regardless of the ban as smoking is allowed outside the bar (open air). Have you found it to be different where you are?