|
|
|
After hearing the results of an air-quality study on the effects of second-hand smoke in eight Rolla establishments, the City Council approved a motion Monday to review a draft ordinance that would ban smoking in all workplaces and public places.
The study, completed Jan. 26 by the School of Medicine at the University of Missouri in Columbia, found “the level of particulate-matter air pollution was more than 45 times higher in places that allowed smoking compared to those that were smoke-free.”
In monitoring one smoke-free and seven smoking establishments for an average of 52 minutes in each public place, the EPA air-quality index for the smoke-free establishment registered “good,” as compared to “hazardous,” “very unhealthy,” “significant harm” and “unhealthy” indices for the smoking establishments.
The draft ordinance prepared by SAFERolla, also known as the “Rolla Smokefree Air Act of 2009,” would ban smoking in “all enclosed public places,” including bars, restaurants, entertainment areas, hotels, taxicabs, and any other “common-use areas.” Additionally, the ordinance would prohibit smoking in places of employment, in private clubs and in many outdoor areas, especially areas within 20 feet of outside entrances to buildings or near spectators at sporting and other public events.
Council Member Lou Magdits, Ward 4, said the ordinance was a very controversial issue.
“I really struggle with telling a private club how to conduct its business,” Magdits said to the Council. “I think it’s going one step too far.
“What will it take to get this to the people?” Magdits asked City Administrator John Butz.
Butz, while acknowledging he did not expect the council to take any immediate action on the issue, said the council could place the issue before voters in a non-binding resolution, or host a forum or public hearing. Also, Butz said, the council has the direct authority to ban smoking within the city.
Ward 3 Council Member Sue Eudaly said she did not want to spend $10,000 to $20,000 on an election. Butz, however, said the actual cost of placing the issue before voters would be approximately $2,000 to $3,000.
Despite an abbreviated discussion by the council on the SAFERolla proposed smoking-ban ordinance, council members unanimously approved a motion to continue reviewing it and to bring the ordinance forward for council approval or denial.
After hearing the results of an air-quality study on the effects of second-hand smoke in eight Rolla establishments, the City Council approved a motion Monday to review a draft ordinance that would ban smoking in all workplaces and public places.
The study, completed Jan. 26 by the School of Medicine at the University of Missouri in Columbia, found “the level of particulate-matter air pollution was more than 45 times higher in places that allowed smoking compared to those that were smoke-free.”
In monitoring one smoke-free and seven smoking establishments for an average of 52 minutes in each public place, the EPA air-quality index for the smoke-free establishment registered “good,” as compared to “hazardous,” “very unhealthy,” “significant harm” and “unhealthy” indices for the smoking establishments.
The draft ordinance prepared by SAFERolla, also known as the “Rolla Smokefree Air Act of 2009,” would ban smoking in “all enclosed public places,” including bars, restaurants, entertainment areas, hotels, taxicabs, and any other “common-use areas.” Additionally, the ordinance would prohibit smoking in places of employment, in private clubs and in many outdoor areas, especially areas within 20 feet of outside entrances to buildings or near spectators at sporting and other public events.
Council Member Lou Magdits, Ward 4, said the ordinance was a very controversial issue.
“I really struggle with telling a private club how to conduct its business,” Magdits said to the Council. “I think it’s going one step too far.
“What will it take to get this to the people?” Magdits asked City Administrator John Butz.
Butz, while acknowledging he did not expect the council to take any immediate action on the issue, said the council could place the issue before voters in a non-binding resolution, or host a forum or public hearing. Also, Butz said, the council has the direct authority to ban smoking within the city.
Ward 3 Council Member Sue Eudaly said she did not want to spend $10,000 to $20,000 on an election. Butz, however, said the actual cost of placing the issue before voters would be approximately $2,000 to $3,000.
Despite an abbreviated discussion by the council on the SAFERolla proposed smoking-ban ordinance, council members unanimously approved a motion to continue reviewing it and to bring the ordinance forward for council approval or denial.
