People Ban: MD Baltimore

City Council approves smoking ban delay

August 17, 2007
by Julekha DashStaff

A bill that would delay an indoor smoking ban by one month won unanimous approval from the Baltimore City Council this week.

Restaurants will get until Feb. 1 to tell their customers to butt out.

City officials want to delay the ban so that it coincides with a statewide smoking ban. This way, restaurant owners will not have to adopt one set of guidelines and then prepare for the statewide ban.

The delay is good news for restaurant owners who dread having to tell their patrons to put out their cigarettes on New Year’s Eve.

The Baltimore City Council approved the indoor smoking ban in February, and the state passed its ban two months later after intense lobbying by health advocates and restaurant industry leaders. The latter argued the ban would hurt business, while smoke-free advocates argued that similar bans in other states have not harmed restaurants.

---

City Council OKs smoking ban

February 26, 2007
Julekha DashStaff
Smokers will no longer be able to light up in Baltimore City bars and restaurants after Jan. 1, following the City Council’s approval of a bill Monday evening that bans smoking in those public places.

The 9-2 vote, in which three members abstained, came more than one year after the bill was introduced. Baltimore City Mayor Sheila Dixon said in a statement that she is “excited to sign this bill as soon as possible.”

Under the legislation, bars and restaurants could face a $500 fine if they violate the smoking ban, and individuals could face a $250 fine. Bar and restaurant owners could apply for a waiver, but only after proving the smoking ban has hurt their sales.

The waiver would then be at the discretion of Baltimore City health commissioner.

The City Council’s support for the smoking ban in a city with working class roots highlights the growing support for a smoking ban among the general public as more jurisdictions nationwide go smokefree. Several council members, including those who favored the smoking bill, sympathized with the owners of small bars in areas such as Highlandtown and South Baltimore whose livelihood depends on offering neighborhood residents a place to smoke.

The bill “gives no consideration to establishments that have invested in ventilation systems for non-smokers,” said Baltimore City councilwoman Helen Holton, who represents the 8th district and voted in favor of the smoking ban. But ultimately Holton and other council members who questioned the bill said they voted in favor of the ban after residents in their area voiced their support for it.

Dixon, however, said in statement that smoking bans that have taken effect in other jurisdictions have had little or no effect on bar and restaurant business. Montgomery, Howard, Talbot and Prince George’s counties in Maryland already have smoking bans.

Meanwhile, the smoking ban in Baltimore City will make it easier for smoke-free advocates to make their arguments to lawmakers who are weighing a statewide smoking ban.

Baltimore City Council Vice President Robert W. Curran, the bill’s lead sponsor, described the meeting as a “historic night for the city of Baltimore.”

“Very rarely do we get a chance where a single vote can save lives,” Curran said.

Opponents of the smoking ban, which include the Restaurant Association of Maryland and licensed beverage associations, said the smoking ban will have a devastating effect on neighborhood bars.

“These places aren’t going to survive,” said Frank Boston, a lobbyist with the Baltimore Licensed Beverage Association, which represents restaurants and liquor stores.

More than 50 supporters of the smoke-free ban showed up to the City Council meeting and broke into applause each time another council member voted for the bill. The brouhaha prompted Baltimore City Council President Stephanie Rawlings Blake to ask the audience to hold its applause until the vote is over.

Smoking ban: How they voted
Baltimore Sun – Baltimore,MD,USA
The City Council advanced a proposed smoking ban on second reader procedural vote yesterday. That puts the ban up for final approval Feb. 26. …
?
Smoking ban to be aired
Baltimore Sun – Baltimore,MD,USA
Shropshire, who has met with about 10 restaurant and bar owners who are concerned about the effects of a smoking ban, has wavered in recent days on what …

---

Smoking bans are dangerous to a free society’s health

December 6, 2006
By Thomas A. Firey

Early next year, the Baltimore City Council and the Maryland General Assembly will likely vote on legislation to ban smoking in all bars and restaurants. If passed, these laws would end the nuisance and clothes-fouling stench of tobacco smoke in public places and reduce the health risks of secondhand smoke.

And yet, the city and state would be wrong to pass them.

Proponents justify a ban by arguing that secondhand smoke is a health risk. But all sorts of human activities are risky – from contact sports to rock climbing, from skiing to swimming, from riding a bike to having sex. Yet many people swim, bike and play football because they take pleasure in doing so, and that’s their choice. In a liberal society, people are free to make their own risk and lifestyle choices – including whether to smoke.

Ban supporters respond that smokers inflict harm on other people, including bar and restaurant employees and other patrons. But again, all sorts of activities impose risks on others, and again, those people bear those risks willingly. Rock climbers endanger rescue workers, pool owners endanger lifeguards and patrons, fishing boat captains endanger their crews, and so on. We grant people the choice to be rangers or lifeguards or commercial fishermen. Why shouldn’t we allow people to choose to patronize or work in smoking bars and restaurants?

Ban supporters may dispute this, arguing that our society has health and safety regulations to protect people from risk. Smoking bans, they say, are no different than those regulations. But their reasoning is wrong. Most health and safety regulations are justified because they protect people from hidden risks. For instance, government inspects restaurant kitchens because patrons can’t. Bars where smoking is permitted are hardly hidden risks.

In fairness, some safety regulations do involve recognized risks, but few of them are outright bans. Coal mining, farming and commercial fishing are all extremely risky jobs and heavily regulated, yet there is no push to ban them. We respect the entrepreneurs’ choice to own these businesses and the workers’ choice to operate them. If smokers want to smoke in a bar, and an entrepreneur wants to provide that bar, and workers are willing to work there, why shouldn’t we accept their choices?

Liberal societies have market economies in part because the pursuit of profit and the threat of competition force the marketplace to provide choices for people with many different preferences. This should include the choice of smoking-allowed and smoke-free bars and restaurants.

The City Council and General Assembly can nurture that choice by requiring all bars and restaurants to determine their own smoking policies. Smoking-allowed establishments can then choose whether to be all-smoking or to have separate smoking and nonsmoking sections. To help consumers identify which establishments cater to their preferences, bars and restaurants could be required to post their smoking policies at their entrances, and they could be penalized for violating them.

A law like that would allow smokers and nonsmokers to enjoy the environments they choose. If most customers prefer a nonsmoking environment, many bars and restaurants will follow the money and prohibit smoking. But other establishments will cater to smokers and allow tobacco use.

Free societies allow people to make decisions that others don’t like. That includes allowing smokers to have bars and restaurants to cater to their preferences, just as nonsmokers should have establishments that cater to theirs. Baltimore and Annapolis should stand by the ideals of a free society instead of opting to force smokers to live by the preferences of some nonsmokers.

Thomas A. Firey is a Cato Institute policy scholar and senior fellow for the Maryland Public Policy Institute. His e-mail is tfirey@cato.org.

---

Citywide smoking ban stalled
Proponent sends bill back to committee; council might reconsider matter next month
By John Fritze, Sun reporter
December 5, 2006
In a major setback for Baltimore’s proposed smoking ban, its chief proponent unexpectedly yanked the legislation into a committee to shield it from a vote last night — a move supporters said was intended to save the controversial bill from defeat or being weakened.
Read More

---

Proposed smoking ban delayed
City Council sponsor wants to wait until O’Malley is governor, for fear he’d kill bill as mayor

12/1/06
By Doug Donovan

The chief advocate of a proposed smoking ban in Baltimore said yesterday that he plans to delay a final City Council vote on the measure until after Mayor Martin O’Malley becomes governor in January.

Councilman Robert W. Curran said he fears that if the council approves the bill at its final 2006 meeting next Thursday, O’Malley – who prefers a statewide ban – would kill the bill before he becomes governor Jan. 17.

Curran said he believes the bill would have a better chance of passing if the council votes on it Jan. 22, after Council President Sheila Dixon has become mayor.

“We’re in the shadows of the goal line on this, and I’m not going to try to fumble it,” Curran said. “[O’Malley] prefers a statewide bill. Does that mean he won’t sign a local bill? I’m not going to take the risk.”

O’Malley has preferred a statewide ban because he believes a city-specific prohibition would drive patrons of Baltimore bars and restaurants into surrounding counties that do not have similar ordinances.

“The mayor’s position has always been clear: He prefers that this be taken up on the statewide level,” said Raquel M. Guillory, an O’Malley spokeswoman.

Curran said he will ask the 15-member council at its Monday meeting to delay its final vote until Jan. 22. The proposed ordinance would still need to pass on second reader at the council’s Thursday session.

He said he is confident the second-reader vote will pass because it needs only a majority of present council members. But he will need eight council members for final passage in January.

Melvin R. Thompson, vice president of the Restaurant Association of Maryland, said Curran does not have the votes he needs. “We’ve talked to just about every council member, and we’re not sure the votes are there to pass the measure,” Thompson said.

Dixon has been supportive of the measure and is studying how businesses in other cities across the nation have fared under smoking bans. But even if Dixon ends up displaying her preliminary support for the bill Thursday, her vote will not matter once she leaves the council to become mayor. That means Curran will have to find another supporter.

Proponents of the smoking-ban legislation – which would impose a prohibition starting in 2008 on all public places including bars and restaurants – are hopeful that if the bill passes in Baltimore, the General Assembly would be more inclined to pass a statewide version. In Maryland, only Howard, Montgomery, Prince George’s and Talbot counties have bans.

Despite his preference, O’Malley is unlikely to advocate a statewide ban because it never emerged as part of his campaign platform, according to the mayor’s aides. Bills for statewide bans have failed to pass the General Assembly over the past three years.

But two Democratic state lawmakers – Del. Barbara A. Frush of Prince George’s County and Sen. Robert J. Garagiola of Montgomery County – said they intend to champion the measure again next year.

Sen. Thomas M. Middleton, a Charles County Democrat who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, said the steady success of smoking bans in some of Maryland’s largest counties is sure to ease the path for a statewide ban. The more jurisdictions in Maryland that enact bans, he said, the more restaurant owners will want a level playing field within the state.

“If the governor makes it a legislative initiative, then I think that it gets wings,” Middleton said. “When you look at the percentage of the membership of the Maryland Restaurant Association that is operating under a ban, I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if soon you’re going to see [it] as a part of their agenda – either not opposing a ban or even supporting a statewide ban.”

The Baltimore City Council’s five-member Judiciary and Legislative Investigations Committee, which Curran chairs, voted, 4-1, for the bill last month. The committee added a few amendments that slightly weakened the measure and helped gain the backing of some council members, including Vice President Stephanie Rawlings Blake, who is likely to become council president.

One change would make violations of the proposed ban a civil violation rather than a criminal offense. Smokers caught breaking the law would be fined $250, and business owners would face a $500 penalty for each smoker they allow to light up.

The ban as proposed would begin Jan. 1, 2008, giving Baltimore businesses and the city Health Department about a year to implement it.

---

Baltimore panel OKs smoking ban
November 21, 2006
BALTIMORE — The full City Council is expected to approve a ban on smoking in all public places, including bars and restaurants by January 2008.
A committee approved the measure on Monday; the full council could vote as early as next month.

---

Baltimore Washington Medical Center to enact smoking ban
Nov 16, 2006
Baltimore Washington Medical Center in Glen Burnie said Thursday it is banning smoking on its campus, effective next spring.

---

City Council holds hearing on proposed smoking ban

Oct 26, 2006
Kathleen Cullinan

BALTIMORE – Bartenders and anti-smoking advocates packed into a Baltimore City Council committee hearing Wednesday and tucked into a lengthy debate on a proposed smoking ban in bars and restaurants.

Advocates hung signs from the balcony and passed stickers out in the crowd. City Health Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein ticked off health problems linked to even the slightest level of exposure to second-hand smoke.

“The freedom to light up and smoke anywhere you please is not so sacred … that restaurant and bar patrons alike must tolerate the chronic ailments” associated with it, Councilman Robert Curran said in an interview before the hearing. He sponsored the bill that would restrict smoking in many enclosed public places.

Curran, D-3rd District, and others tried to pre-empt concerns about a negative impact on area businesses, citing reports they said showed no such fallout came of similar bans that passed in other cities. But Ron Furman, who owns Max’s Taphouse in Fells Point, was unconvinced.

“They’re going to put the little places out of business,” he said, standing outside the hearing. “Will the restaurants survive? Yeah. Will the steakhouses survive? Yeah.”

Curran estimated he is a few votes short of getting his bill passed. He predicted a vote would take place in January. City Council President Sheila Dixon hasn’t taken a stance yet on the issue, a spokeswoman said, and turned up at the hearing to hear it debated.

Joy Martin, who owns Club Charles, said in an interview that the proposed ban amounted to government meddling.

Her customers would be forced outside, she said, and “it’s a heck of a lot more dangerous out on the street in Baltimore City than smoking.”

---

Hearing on Baltimore Smoking Ban Set for Wednesday

10/25/06

BALTIMORE (AP) – A Baltimore City Council committee will hold its first hearing Wednesday afternoon on a measure that would ban smoking in most indoor public areas in the city – including bars and restaurants.

Smokers caught violating the ban could face a 250 dollar fine. Business owners could face a $500 fine.

If the ban becomes law, cigar bars, private clubs and tobacco shops could apply for a waiver that would allow smoking on the premises to continue.

Supporters say a ban would protect employees from secondhand smoke. But critics say a ban is a government intrusion on freedom of choice and could be bad for business.

More than 100 people have signed up to speak at the hearing.

Similar bans are already on the books in four Maryland counties.

---

City Looks To Impose Smoking Ban

Oct 11, 2006
Derek Valcourt

If some on the City Council have their way, Baltimore could be joining a growing number of other cities in the country to ban smoking inside all building including restaurants and bars.

WJZ’S Derek Valcourt spoke to some restaurant owners who are for and against the ban. Timothy Dean decided as of September 1st he would make his popular Fells Pint bistro entirely smoke-free. “I must say that it has increased my business. The beautiful ladies that were coming here when someone lit up a cigarette and left, they are now sitting at my bar ordering more food, ordering more glasses of wine.”

Several other bars and restaurants in the city, including Roy’s, and Fleming’s are already voluntarily smoke-free. That’s why Dean joined several other restaurant owners and employees at a Press Conference urging smoking opponents to call on the City Council to support a proposed city wide ban on smoking in bars and restaurants. The measure was introduced by Councilmen Kenneth Harris and Robert Curran.

Max’s on Broadway has a petition against the ban and a list of reasons why they oppose it. “The loss of sales the loss of revenue and I’ll be taking a pay cut. Especially a city-wide ban, we found a state wide ban but if they are just going to go for a city wide ban then all the city people are going to go into the county.” said one bartender.

The City Council will hold a public hearing on this issue on October 25th.

---

Smoking Ban Debate Heats Up In Baltimore

Aug 14, 2006
Kai Jackson

BALTIMORE- They have one in New York, another in Los Angeles, and even Howard County jumped on board with its very own recently. It’s been a topic of constant debate in Baltimore, and once again the possibility of a smoking ban in Charm City is cropping back up.

For the second straight year, Baltimore City Councilman Robert Curran has authorized legislation to ban smoking in the city’s bars and restaurants.

In Maryland, several counties have installed smoking bans, including Howard, Montgomery, Prince George’s and Talbot counties. Even Washington, D.C. has a ban in place.

“Bar and restaurants workers deserve and have a right to the same smoke-free workplace safe workplace that everyone else is enjoying in Maryland,” Bob Doyle of Smoke Free Charm City told WJZ’s Kai Jackson. “Everyone has the right to go into a public place and know that the air is safe. Everyone has the right to a safe workplace. This is about protecting everybody from what we know is a very dangerous and deadly substance.”

But smokers aren’t the only ones opposed to the law. Many business owners believe banning smoking will hurt business.

“I think some of the smaller neighborhood pubs, if the smoking ban is enforced, it will affect them more than it affects us,” Nick Brocato of Mother’s Bar in Federal Hill said.

The Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene says more than 1,000 Marylanders die each year from diseases caused by secondhand smoke.

---

City smoking ban appears headed for renewed debate

June 24, 2006
John Fritze

A stringent smoking ban proposed for Baltimore that has languished in the City Council for more than a year appears to be headed for renewed debate, possibly reviving one of the city’s most contentious issues during a campaign season.

In a letter this week to fellow City Council members, Robert W. Curran, who represents portions of Northeast Baltimore, said he will give the smoking ban a hearing this fall. Curran said he has the votes needed to have the measure approved in committee, the first step in what would be an arduous battle.

The Baltimore proposal, which was modeled after California’s law, would prohibit smoking in virtually all restaurants and bars as well other public spaces, such as bowling alleys and city-owned vehicles. Smokers who violate the ordinance would receive a $500 fine.

Smoking bans — among the most contentious public policy issues cities and states now face — have been approved in many other large municipalities, including New York, Washington and, as of this month, Philadelphia. Four Maryland counties have approved a ban that covers restaurants and bars.

“It’s an issue I feel really deeply about,” said Curran, a former smoker. “It’s very rare that we in elected office can make an impact on the lives of our citizens.”

If the Judiciary and Legislative and Investigations Committee approves the measure, it would represent a significant step forward for the legislation, but many at City Hall doubt the bill can gain enough momentum this year to capture the eight votes it needs for final approval by the full council.

Renewed discussion of Baltimore’s legislation comes weeks after Howard County became Maryland’s fourth jurisdiction to approve a ban in restaurants and bars. Establishments that allow smoking will have until 2007 to comply with the new measure. Montgomery, Prince George’s and Talbot counties also have bans.

Curran’s bill, which he introduced in March, has stalled for months. Opponents have argued that the ban would crush small, mom-and-pop taverns along the border of Baltimore County, where no local smoking restrictions exist.

Mayor Martin O’Malley, the Democratic candidate for governor, said through a spokeswoman yesterday that he prefers a statewide ban to a local one, though he has remained noncommittal on whether he would sign a council ordinance if approved. Many, if not most, council members have sided with O’Malley on the issue.

“I still think it should be statewide,” Council President Sheila Dixon said of a ban. “But I think it warrants discussion. … I think it’s finally time to have that open discussion.”

Smoking opponents have failed to persuade the General Assembly to enact a statewide smoking ban for four sessions. In other jurisdictions, such as New York, state law followed action by large cities, though many anti-smoking advocates in Maryland believe a statewide law is achievable whether or not a Baltimore ban is approved.

“Its time is definitely here,” said Stephen M. Peregoy, president and chief executive officer of the American Lung Association of Maryland. “We certainly hope to see a change this year.”

Republican Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. has opposed a statewide ban on smoking in bars and restaurants. Montgomery County Executive Douglas M. Duncan, who dropped out of the running for governor Thursday, signed the county’s ban in 2003 after vetoing an earlier version in 1999.

The City Council last weighed in on the issue in 2004, when it voted 9-6 with three abstentions against a nonbinding resolution to support statewide legislation. A year before that, a majority of council members supported a nearly identical resolution.

Councilman Edward L. Reisinger, who represents South Baltimore and who owns a bar with his wife, said he opposes a city smoking ban because of the effect it would have on small businesses.

“Small-business people wouldn’t have a shot” at survival under the bill, Reisinger said. “In my bar, the clientele, whether it’s middle-aged or older people, they smoke. They come in and they get their beer and they want to be able to smoke a cigarette.”

Melvin R. Thompson, vice president of the Restaurant Association of Maryland, said the group remains opposed to statewide and local smoking bans. Thompson said the association looked forward to re-entering the city debate this fall, if necessary.

Curran’s bill covers a wide range of businesses, including adult-care facilities, hotels and sports arenas. Private clubs and bars that derive 50 percent of their revenue from non-cigarette tobacco sales — such as cigar bars — could be exempted.

“Once it happens, it becomes part of the social norm,” Curran said. “Why should we Baltimoreans be treated as second-class citizens? There’s no real excuse.”

---

O’Malley, Duncan for smoking ban, pretty much

5-20-06
larry.carson

Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley opposes a local ban for the city, but he said he is not opposed to a statewide law.

Montgomery County Executive Douglas M. Duncan signed a local ban into law in his county and supported local ban bills in Baltimore City and Howard County, but said he won’t support a statewide law until enough local jurisdictions enact them to create what he called a “critical mass” – or until the General Assembly approves one.

O’Malley, in Columbia on Tuesday for a political reception sponsored by former County Councilman C. Vernon Gray at a lakefront restaurant, appears to have changed his stance.

The mayor has consistently opposed a local ban in Baltimore for fear it would hurt businesses. On Tuesday, he stuck to that position, but he added, “It seems like the science is on the side of doing it.”

Asked if he would back a statewide ban – which has failed four years in a row in the General Assembly – O’Malley said, “I’m not quite there yet, but I’m leaning hard that way.”

County Councilman Ken Ulman, a west Columbia Democrat running for county executive and a big O’Malley backer, is co-sponsor of the current Howard smoking-ban bill, which is due for a vote June 5.

Meanwhile, Duncan, who held a campaign picnic Thursday evening at the Circle D farm in Glenwood, seems equally conflicted.

Duncan opposed a ban in Montgomery when it was proposed in 1999 but supported a 2003 bill and signed it into law. He became convinced, he said, after watching bans enacted in New York, Delaware and California, that businesses would not suffer, and a later economic survey argues just that.

But Duncan does not support a statewide ban for now.

“Before any statewide ban happens, you need critical mass across the state,” he told The Sun in December.

Prince George’s, Montgomery and Talbot counties in Maryland have enacted smoking bans, and Washington also has imposed one.

Early endorsements

The Howard County Education Association has issued the year’s first political endorsements, choosing Ulman as its pick for county executive and endorsing four Democrats and a Republican for the County Council.
“It’s tremendously important,” Ulman said. “There are so many teachers in this county who have made a difference in my life.”

Ann DeLacy, president of the teachers u nion, said Ulman was chosen because of “the steadfast support he has exhibited toward the education budget and the funding of educators’ salary increases.”

She said Republican candidate, Council Chairman Christopher J. Merdon also is held in high regard by the teachers.

“Chris is a nice young man and a good person, but we looked at what happened when there was a budget shortfall,” she said.

That was three years ago, when Ulman and the other council Democrats backed a 30 percent increase in the local income tax proposed by County Executive James N. Robey, while Merdon proposed budget cuts instead.

The big surprise came in the teachers’ choice for council District 4, covering west Columbia and Fulton, where the 4,500-member u nion chose Joshua Feldmark over Mary Kay Sigaty, a sitting school board member. Both are Democrats.

“We endorsed [Sigaty] when she ran for school board,” DeLacy said. “We think she’s doing a good job on the school board. Josh Feldmark shares our vision and goals.”

“I feel great about it. It really means a lot,” Feldmark said.

Sigaty, who is in the midst of a four-year board term, said she was “mystified” by the u nion’s choice, which she said was “short-sighted.”

The u nion also endorsed Democrats Courtney Watson in District 1, Calvin Ball in District 2, and Jennifer Terrasa in District 3.

The only Republican on the teachers’ list is county Police Chief Wayne Livesay, who is running for the District 5 council seat, covering the western county. Livesay will retire as chief effective May 31. Republicans Greg Fox and Jim Adams also are seeking the nomination for that seat, as is Democrat Don Dunn.

DeLacy said Livesay “is terrific.”

“He’s not partisan, and he understands the u nion,” she said.

Republican Del. Warren E. Miller suggested that a teachers’ u nion endorsement might hurt Livesay in a western county GOP primary, but that’s not the way Livesay sees it.

“To me it’s not just about u nions, it’s about educating our kids,” the police chief said.

“I think I’ve done very good for the men and women of the Police Department,” the five-term u nion president said. “I will win. Chuck’s been there 16 years, and he’s out of fresh ideas.”

Fitzgerald said he would improve pay and benefits for the deputies.

Cave disagreed with Fitzgerald’s assessment.

“I feel confident that I and my staff have plenty of new ideas to continue to make this the good sheriff’s office it is,” the sheriff said.

Smoking ban discussion on Baltimore Sun online forum

Duncan has submitted testimony to state lawmakers considering a state ban, but only to describe his county’s experience. Maryland’s General Assembly has considered bills proposing a statewide ban for the past three years, but the measures have never escaped committee. A new bill is expected to be introduced during this winter’s session, Appler says.

On Friday, Duncan sent a letter to O’Malley describing the ban’s public health benefits and how businesses have not been hurt by the prohibition. He sent a similar letter to Guy Guzzone, chairman of the Howard County Council, which is likely to vote on a measure next month.

“Before any statewide ban happens, you need critical mass across the state,” Duncan said.

Appler says that public support for smoke-free ordinances for indoor public places has already achieved a critical mass and that candidates for governor should take notice. A recent American Cancer Society poll showed that 97 percent of Maryland voters think that exposure to secondhand smoke is a health hazard. Nearly 70 percent of voters in Baltimore and its suburbs favor smoke-free legislation; 72 percent of voters in the Washington suburbs also support such a measure.

Despite the support, a push on the statewide level this winter could still face an uphill battle in Annapolis. Ehrlich spokeswoman Shareese DeLeaver says the governor “does not feel the state has the right to infringe on personal freedoms by banning smoking in public areas.”

“If such a bill would pass,” DeLeaver says, “it would most likely have a grim future of being signed into law under this administration.”

doug.donovan@baltsun.com
Read