Shawnee Update
Shawnee Council Votes On Smoking Ban
September 24, 2007
SHAWNEE, Kan. — The Shawnee City Council met Monday night to hear the smoking ban suggestions made by the special task force that has been studying the options.
The task force of citizens has been working on a possible public smoking ban for months. It suggested several options to the council, including exemptions on veterans’ halls, hotel rooms and outdoor patios, as well as a grandfather clause that would exempt bars that are primarily drinking establishments rather than restaurants that also serve alcohol.
The final vote passed 7-1. It included several exemptions. Hotels in the city would need to make 75 percent of their rooms smoke-free. And smoking would be allowed in tobacco shops, on outdoor patios and in establishments where less than 33 percent of gross sales are food.
To Smoke or Not to Smoke
September 21, 2007
BY: Jessica Marshall, Managing Editor
Shawnee’s mayor-appointed smoking task force will make a presentation and recommendation to Shawnee City Council members Monday.
BY: Jessica Marshall, Managing Editor
Shawnee’s mayor-appointed smoking task force will make a presentation and recommendation to Shawnee City Council members Monday.
The council will either adopt or reject a smoking ordinance, or take the task force’s recommendation under advisement and revisit the issue in October.
In the meantime, a resident and business owner sound off as the city moves closer to a smoking ban decision.
Tony Lang, Clean Air for Shawnee Committee coordinator, has lived in Shawnee since 1930. Lang, 78, said he started smoking at age 14 and quit Feb. 12, 1982. He organized the informal petition this summer that garnered about 1,600 signatures.
Ellen Lane-Haney is co-owner of Foobars Bar & Grill, 6505 Nieman Road. She has been a smoker for 27 years. Lane-Haney has spoken at public meetings about the smoking ban.
Lang and Lane-Haney agreed to express their views on why Shawnee should or should not have a smoking ban.
Why should Shawnee have/not have an ordinance regulating smoking?
Lang: People wanted to help (with the petition) and they all had a reason, it was either they were asthmatic, they had a parent or family member who was a nonsmoker die of lung cancer, people affected in some way by smoke. People were flocking to us wanting clean air in the city of Shawnee, and it’s more than just the restaurants and bars, it’s the work places. One woman who lives in
Shawnee told me �I work in Mission. I know this won’t help me, but I work in an office where they will not quit smoking, and I can’t stand it.’ There are many people out there like that. The people in Shawnee want to go about their day and do their business in Shawnee without being contaminated by smoke.
Lane-Haney: There is a need to differentiate between a restaurant that serves alcohol and a bar that serves food. I think restaurants with 60 percent or more of their business coming from food can be nonsmoking. But bars shouldn’t because they’re a different story. Restaurants are more family-oriented. I wouldn’t want to take my kids out to dinner in a smoking environment, because smoking and nonsmoking sections really don’t work. But in a bar, you anticipate people will be smoking. Not all of my patrons smoke, but I circulated a petition against the smoking ban around here and about 25 percent of the people who signed it are nonsmokers.
How will a smoking ban affect you?
Lang: I’m an ex-smoker and I don’t like the smell of smoke. I don’t like my clothes to smell like smoke. And I have emphysema, but that’s my own problem. I don’t like to go into a restaurant where I can smell smoke. I can’t go to the neighborhood bar with friends and have a cocktail or a drink because of the smoke. I find myself cheated out of a lot of activities because of my aversion to smoke. And I’ve found all these other people who feel the same way.
Lane-Haney: Theoretically, I could lose my business over it when we’ve got towns around like Merriam. The people who want to drink and smoke will just go six blocks to Merriam. I’ve got no room to expand for a patio or anything. … I’ve got one year left on my lease, so if (the council adopts a smoking ban) I’ll finish out the year and be done with it. I think it’s going to be too hard on my business. And it’s a great neighborhood bar, a community gathering place, so there’s a loss in that. Rusty’s reopened as a nonsmoking bar and that lasted about two months.
What’s your opinion on the opposition’s side?
Lang: The 17 to 23 percent of people who do smoke (according to statistics from the American Lung and Heart associations) say “Our rights are being violated by not allowing us to smoke.” Well, how about the 80-some percent of us who don’t smoke whose rights are being violated by having to stand there and smell it? I have three sons that smoke, unfortunately. But all three, when they smoke, will go out in the yard by themselves, not standing next to me or a kid or something. Most smokers don’t do that. They are insensitive to the treatment of others. … Get rid of the smoke and maybe more people will starting going to the beer-drinking taverns.
Lane-Haney: Not one person who spoke at the (Aug. 15 task force) meeting have I ever seen at my bar. They’re regulating us and they don’t even patronize us. I think the majority of the people who support the (Clean Air For Shawnee) petition don’t frequent bars anyway. There’s usually smoking in a bar, so if you don’t want to be around it, you don’t go. Also, the majority of my employees smoke, but if they wish to work in a nonsmoking environment they are free to seek employment elsewhere.
What action would you like to see the City Council take?
Lang: I believe they will not vote, but take (the task force recommendations) under advisement and probably pass the ordinance next month. Our plan is to see what the council does. This is their job, to protect the health, welfare and safety of their citizens. If they don’t, then we’ve got to do it ourselves. We’re giving them the benefit of the doubt, let them pass their own ordinance and let’s see if it’s livable for the people. If we have to do an initiative petition, it will be geared around the city election in April … so it will not cost the city more money. Or the council can accept and adopt the petition. It’s up to them.
Lane-Haney: If they pass the smoking ban, I’m hoping they’ll do a 60/40 split, where if you serve less than 40 percent food then you can remain smoking, or allow us to become a private club. As long as it’s reasonable. People, in their desire to do good, become zealous and forget to think reasonably. … (The council) needs to be sure they know what they’re voting for. No smoking is a great idea. I know it’s a bad thing, I know it’s not good for me. But I think they, on that premise, could end up passing the wrong thing for the city.
AS I SEE IT | City bans deny people their constitutional rights
Apr. 30, 2007
By MICHELLE R. DISTLER
By MICHELLE R. DISTLER
As an asthmatic, I initially thought smoking bans were a good idea. I still think they are, but not one that the government should implement. It is a decision that is best left to the individual owners and their customers through the power of the purse.
Upon further thought on the matter, I remembered taking my oath of office and swearing to uphold the Constitution. Although there is nothing stated specifically to the rights of smokers or nonsmokers, the Constitution does speak directly to individual liberties and private property rights. I do not want to open Pandora’s Box and give the government undue power and control over our lives.
Communities across the country are wrestling with the dilemma of whether to enforce smoking bans, and unfortunately we’re quickly losing sight of our obligation as a society to protect civil rights in the process.
The constitutional purpose of our government is to promote commerce, build roads, protect us from foreign invasion and protect individual rights. This includes property rights. Any act to the contrary is an outright violation of the Constitution. A smoking ban is a violation of property rights, period.
The Constitution was written in such a manner to specifically limit the power and scope of government to preserve our individual rights — rights that are being eroded daily with a variety of seemingly small encroachments, such as the smoking ban.
Just as eminent domain started as a good idea and a means to acquire private land for the public good, it has become extremely problematic when untrustworthy government officials and self-serving developers define what is in the public’s best interest. Tax increment financing also began as an effective means to restore blighted areas until insiders began using it to increase their personal profits.
Everyone has the freedom of choice to go into any building where people are allowed to smoke or not smoke. But no one has the inalienable right to go into a privately owned business and demand that it be smoke-free or demand that a smoke-free building allow smoking.
No one should have the right to use government to force an owner to make his property smoke-free. In doing so, all our rights become easier targets for anyone disagreeing with, or who is offended by, the practice of our personal freedoms.
In the long run, this is far more dangerous than secondhand smoke ever could be.
Supply and demand drives free enterprise, and I think the best way to implement a smoking ban is to support those establishments that cater best to your desires. I think we must remember that whether as employees or patrons to businesses, we are the “guests” of the property owners.
My concern is for the property rights of all Shawnee residents and business owners.
Michelle R. Distler serves on the Shawnee City Council.
Motion to adopt smoking ban rejected by Shawnee council
Despite that action, the mayor will appoint a task force to study the issue.
Despite that action, the mayor will appoint a task force to study the issue.
Apr. 25, 2007
By LINDA CRUSE, Special to The Star
By LINDA CRUSE, Special to The Star
A Shawnee councilman’s attempt to pass an ordinance banning smoking in public places failed on Monday night.
The Shawnee council voted 5-2 against approving a motion by Councilman Dan Pflumm that the city adopt an ordinance similar to one recently approved in Overland Park.
Pflumm sought the decision now rather than wait for a study of the issue by a task force that Mayor Jeff Meyers plans to appoint soon. The vote Monday will not affect plans to proceed with the task force.
Pflumm simply believed there was no need to wait.
“It’s time to vote yes or no,” he said. “No one wants to give an opinion.”
Overland Park’s new smoking law is set to go into effect Jan. 2. It will ban smoking in most public places, including bars, but allows smoking in outdoor seating areas and in tobacco shops.
Several Shawnee council members said they were not prepared to vote on a smoking ordinance yet.
“I understand Mr. Pflumm’s passion to see something in place,” said Councilwoman Dawn Kuhn. “But it’s not responsible to pass something that we haven’t had the time to read and that our own city attorney hasn’t signed off on.”
Councilman Kevin Straub cast the other vote in favor of the ban. Franke Goode abstained.
Mayor Meyers said he favored moving forward with the task force, which is to be comprised of private citizens as well as business, bar and restaurant owners.
In March, the council voted 4-2 to appoint a task force to study smoking ban-related issues. Meyers said 20 residents and business owners volunteered to serve on the task force. He has selected 12 individuals to serve and is waiting for confirmation from all members before announcing their names.
Councilwoman Michelle Distler questioned whether the city should proceed with appointing the task force and spending $3,500 to hire a facilitator in view of a recent announcement that Lawrence’s smoking ban was under review by the Kansas Supreme Court.
Meyers said the city still needed to obtain input regarding a potential smoking ban from citizens and business owners.
“If something develops, we will just make adjustments,” he said.
Currently, Shawnee prohibits smoking in public places except in designated smoking areas. The proprietor of a business can determine how much area can be designated for smoking. Once in place, the task force is expected to meet six to eight times over a four- to six-month period. The council then will take the task force’s recommendations under advisement but will not be bound by its recommendations.
The council discussed a potential smoking ban in 2005, but decided to postpone discussion until Johnson County Commissioners discussed a possible countywide ban. The county convened a task force and later adopted a ban in unincorporated areas.
In addition to Overland Park, other cities around the metropolitan area have passed some sort of ban, including Olathe and Leawood. The Shawnee task force will examine what impact bans have had on businesses in those cities.
Smoking Ban Decision Delayed
Mar 26, 2007
Reporter: 13 News, Email Address: 13news@wibw.com
Reporter: 13 News, Email Address: 13news@wibw.com
A decision to ban smoking on county property, is at least a week away. Shawnee County Commissioners today decided to put off their decision.
Commissioner Vic Miller introduced the resolution. He says he was spurred by complaints from county employees about having to endure second-hand smoke.
If this new resolution is passed, people wanting to smoke would actually have to be somewhere off the property – the only exception is the Expocentre.
Commissioners want to hear from county department heads on possible impacts before making a decision.
Currently, the county prohibits smoking inside county buildings, but people can smoke outside on the grounds
Shawnee ignites smoking ban talk
March 7, 2007
BY: Jessica Marshall, Managing Editor
BY: Jessica Marshall, Managing Editor
Shawnee could appoint a task force to look at smoking ordinance options for the city’s bars and restaurants.
Finance and Administration Committee members recommended Tuesday that the City Council from a task force that would include business, bar and restaurant owners, and private citizens. The full council is expected to discuss the issue March 26.
“I struggle with us telling businesses what they can and can’t do,” Council-man Neal Sawyer, a Kwik Shop district manager, said. “I make my living selling Cokes, Twinkies and smokes. Cigar-ette sales are continuing to increase, contrary to popular belief. But the reality is that a smoking ban of some type is going to happen. I believe that a task force is the best way to get people involved to see what they want.
“We have to make sure that we pass something that’s enforceable. � We need to let the task force get down to the nuts and bolts of it.”
Councilmen Mickey Sandifer and Kevin Straub agreed.
“I think the task force could look at what are the pros and cons,” Straub said.
“I’ve been thinking of the task force idea and letting the business owners get their say in this,” Sandifer said. “I really have a problem of being able to walk in somebody’s business and tell them what they’re going to be able to do. If you want to show somebody you don’t want smoking in their business, don’t go to it. � What are we going to say next, you can’t smoke in your car because you have a child in the back seat? They say this is a free world, and we just keep chiseling it down to nothing.”
Councilwoman Michelle Distler, who is not a voting committee member, said she supports the business owners’ rights.
“I can appreciate not being around smoke as an asthmatic. I choose to sit in nonsmoking and that’s my choice,” she said. “The business owners may choose to not allow smoking. If it’s true that people don’t want smoking, I think eventually it’s going to drive business that way on its own without the government control.
“Park Lanes, Shawnee’s bowling alley, has cut its smoking hours down to about nothing, because there’s kids there and people don’t want (smoking) there. But it was the business owner and the manager making that decision, not us telling them they have to.”
Sara Singer, assistant to the city manager, presented to the committee results from last year’s countywide smoking survey. Of 1,393 respondents, 85 percent said they do not smoke. Sixty-six percent said the most important factor when picking a place to dine is how well the smoking section is separated, while 12 percent said the most important factor is the ability to smoke. Also, 75 percent said they request nonsmoking tables when they dine out, and 27 percent said they would more frequently visit bars and restaurants that restricted smoking.
Joe Bolduc, Merriam, the Kansas Business Rights Association president who has attended similar discussions in Overland Park and Roeland Park, told the committee, “You folks have got to be one of the most open-minded boards I have talked to in months.” He called the county’s survey “seriously flawed” because it lacked input from businesses. Bolduc said the results depend on who is surveyed and how the survey is worded.
“Reality is most businesses will take control of the issue and make the changes necessary,” he said. “Also, I think most of us know that drinking and smoking kind of go hand in hand, especially in the small neighborhood bars. � In this country, more and more, they’re trying to dictate what adults should be doing, and it’s getting really out of hand.”
Chuck Tabor, owner of The Peanut, said people should be allowed to smoke in bars if they want to.
“I’m a nonsmoker. I own a bar, and I can’t stand it. But 95 percent of the people who come into my bar love to smoke. I also have a policy that none of my employees smoke because it’s nasty and we handle food. But I think it’s gotta be freedom of choice. A lot of people like to drink and have a cigarette,” he said.
“The biggest problem I have is how can you ban something that is legal? It’s common sense,” Tabor said. “I don’t want anybody smoking in an airplane while I’m 35,000 feet in the air. You’re not gonna have it in the emergency room where people are on oxygen or whatever. Don’t want it in PowerPlay with the kids or when you’re working. There’s certain places where you know you should not smoke.”
Singer showed a copy of the Mid-America Regional Council’s model ordinance compared to Shawnee’s existing ordinance, which states that smoking is prohibited in public places, except in designated smoking areas.
There are no provisions for employers but many have policies in place. There also are fines up to $500 associated with the ordinance, but City Manager Carol Gonzales said, to her knowledge, no one has ever been fined.
In the metro area to date, Overland Park, Leawood, Olathe, Prairie Village, Fairway, Roeland Park, Mission Woods, Lee’s Summit, Independence, Kansas City, Mo., and unincorporated Johnson County have enacted smoke-free ordinances. Some of these cities have exempted hotels and private clubs.
“I’ve been pushing for a nonsmoking ordinance,” Councilman Dan Pflumm said. “Not to say that I want to shut down bars. But we need to start with something. I’d be willing to work with the bar owners, like no smoking and then after 10:30 at night, that’s fine. The issue is when people go to eat and they take their kids and they’re sitting right next to somebody who’s smoking. With some of the bars, like the new one that’s off of Ridgeview and (Kansas Highway 10), you can’t even get in there on Saturday night. Many of those people are driving out of their way because it’s nonsmoking.
“I think that we need to do what a lot of the other cities have done. Overland Park started with a no smoking ordinance and it didn’t start with the bars. There’s a lot of other issues n office buildings, public buildings and areas where people work during the daytime.”
