By Joseph Slacian
jslacian@thepaperofwabash.com
WABASH, Ind. – An ordinance seeking to eliminate smoking in workplaces and public places throughout the City of Wabash is expected to be considered on Monday, Nov. 26, by the Wabash City Council.
Under the measure, proposed by Dan Gray, executive director of the Wabash County Tobacco Free Coalition, smoking would be prohibited in all enclosed public places including bars, bingo facilities, parking structures, polling places, lobbies, restaurants, restrooms, retail stores, service lines, theaters, all private clubs and hallways and other common areas of apartment buildings, condominiums, trailer parks, retirement facilities and nursing homes.
It also would be prohibited in all private and semi-private rooms in nursing homes, and all hotel and motel guest rooms.
“Smoking cigarettes are the number one preventable cause of diseases and death in the United States. Secondhand smoke is the third,” Dan Gray, Wabash County Tobacco Free Coalition executive director, told The Paper of Wabash County. “It is classified as cancer-causing agent by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with more than 70 chemicals that cause cancer.
“The thinking behind a Wabash smoke free ordinance is to protect all people of Wabash from this danger. Smoke free policies are the most effective way to protect everyone from secondhand exposure. The U. S. Surgeon General has concluded that that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke. There is an estimate of 1,300 deaths among Hoosiers each year that die from secondhand smoke exposure.
“It makes sense to take this step to make Wabash a healthier place to live.”
The measure also seeks to ban smoking within 15 feet of entrances, operable windows and ventilation systems where smoking is prohibited, on all outdoor property adjacent to buildings owned, leased or operated by the City of Wabash and that is under control of the city, within 15 feet of outdoor seating and serving areas of restaurants and bars, within 50 feet of all outdoor playgrounds, and 15 feet from the point of service – whether one is on foot or in a vehicle – of all outdoor service lines, among other sites. The state’s smoking ban currently prohibits smoking within 8 feet of doorways.
“The original state law had it at 20 feet,” Gray said. “The 8 feet was a compromise to get the law passed. It is a proven fact that 8 feet from an open door or window does not prevent the smoke to move into the building entrance when the door is opened. We have had businesses comment that 8 feet is not enough, they still can smell the smoke when someone enters the building if someone is standing outside smoking.
“This does not mean you cannot smoke on the sidewalks where the businesses are located. You just are not to linger in front of the entrances or windows of those buildings. Again, it is a measure to provide better protection.”
He also defended prohibiting smoking in private clubs, saying, “We can justify prohibiting smoking anywhere a group of people gather based on public health. Prohibiting smoking in any public gathering, whether it is in bars or private member clubs, protects everyone, even those that smoke. Smoke free air, even for those that smoke, help the lungs to properly breathe cleaner air.
“During the time a person that smokes is not exposed to the dangerous smoke, the lungs have an opportunity to be relieved from the restrictions caused by the secondhand smoke. We learn that everyone benefits.”
Mayor Scott Long, in October, took to Facebook to seek public input and launched a poll which overwhelming (64 percent of those responding) disapproved of the ban.
“The survey question could be misleading in how someone would respond,” Gray said. “The proposed ordinance is not against smoking and does not prevent people from smoking and using the electronic cigarette. It limits where you can smoke or vape in public places only. It is about secondhand smoke exposure, not smoking.
“What we read on social media does not represent what the majority believe to be right. I am not sure how you would measure the results of that survey. All I know that when I first saw it and when the survey was over, the percentage did not change.”
Several Council members questioned by The Paper of Wabash County also said they had concerns with the measure.
“I was taken back initially by the sheer scope in which the proposed ordinance wanted to affect the businesses in the private sector,” Council President Eric Schoening said. “Especially when I felt a majority of businesses in the community had already made policies to reduce, if not eliminate, smoking in their establishments. They made the decision based upon their clientele and the economic impact achieved through their policy. Those that still offer smoking in their establishments must feel they are catering to a demographic that desires a location to patronize and socialize for them specifically.”
He said he’s received three comments from the public, two of which came he was unable to verify the persons’ identities. The third thought the ban was a good idea, he said, “but also thought it was taking away from people’s personal liberties.”
Council member Doug Adams doesn’t believe the ordinance is needed as written.
“I believe most of the smoking people understand that others have concerns about smoking and do their best to not infringe on their personal space,” he told The Paper. “I also believe that those that are not considerate of others are going to smoke as they choose anyway smoking ordinance or not.
“I have at times, including first Fridays, looked for smokers downtown and have not seen a problem. As far as businesses and private clubs I think it is up to them as to whether they allow smoking or not in their facilities.”
Council member Mitch Figert said, “The proposed ordinance being presented by the Wabash County Tobacco Free office is comprehensive in the fact that it limits tobacco use in nearly all forms and all public settings. The benefits to this type of ordinance, in my opinion, improve the overall health of the community and protect children from second hand smoke while playing in the park and enjoying community events. As adults we are able to make our own choices, but many times children do not have that same opportunity.”
Council member Marc Shelley said that while he understands the sentiment behind the measure, “I do not favor the ordinance.”
“I believe in the public and their ability to ‘vote’ economically with their dollars whether to visit a smoking or non-smoking environment,” he told The Paper. “It is restricting the public’s ability to choose, and that I oppose. I do not favor additional government control over our lives. We have more than enough already at the national and state level.
“So if the ordinance is proposed, I intend to vote ‘no.’
However, he, as well as Schoening and Adams, expressed concern about how the measure would be enforced. One Wabash Police Department officer has already told The Paper that even if the measure is passed, he won’t enforce it.
Adams said, “If the ordinance were to pass I feel that enforcement would become another issue.
“One of my biggest concerns lies in the scope the government plays in our private lives,” Schoening said. “There are aspects of this ordinance that open the door for over-reach. The overall tone of the ordinance is authoritarian and open to excesses, such as Sec. 6-286 Liberal Construction. The other aspect of this ordinance that I see it being difficult to administer the policing and execution of it.”
The section of the measure he refers to says “this article shall be liberally construed so as to further its purposes.”
Council member Bryan Dillon also questioned how the measure could be enforced, noting former Mayor Bob Vanlandinghamoften said passing an ordinance is easy; getting it enforced is difficult.
“I do have concerns about how the ordinance would be enforced and also protecting the right of local business owners and citizens who do use tobacco,” Figert said. “Those questions I hope can be answered by Mr. Dan Gray when then ordinance is formally presented to the council.”
Council member Bonnie Corn said she has been contacted by several constituents, 10 of whom want to ban smoking in bars and seven who want to keep smoking available.
“I’m not sure people are paying attention,” she said.
Council member Bob Greene failed to respond to The Paper questioning.
Gray said he appreciated the Long’s efforts to get public input on the matter.
“This policy effects everyone in Wabash and everyone should have a voice,” he said. “We elect the mayor and our City Council to represent the city’s desires and to protect us from any harm or dangerous activity. We all recognize that everyone does not agree with everything that is decided. But we, however, try to represent the belief’s and desires of the majority. Our government was built on that principle.”
Figert also encouraged the public to continue contacting council members with their views on this and other topics.
“I continue to encourage constituents to reach out to their council member and attend council meetings,” he said. “We are elected to represent the majority of our constituents but the only way we can do that is if they are willing to share their opinion. I am optimistic that when this ordinance is presented that there will be guests sitting in the council chambers to speak for or against it but would encourage citizens to attend meetings routinely to stay engaged with the leadership of their city.”
The Wabash City Council will meet at 6 p.m. Monday at Wabash at Wabash City Hall.