Rapid City Update
City smoking ban delayed
February 12, 2006
Scott Aust
??????
RAPID CITY – More fine-tuning is needed before a proposal to ban smoking within 50 feet of public entrances to city-owned buildings or facilities goes into effect, the Rapid City Council decided Monday.
“As much as I agree with what we’re trying to do here, this resolution still needs a lot of work in determining what is a public entrance? Does that include parks? There’s just still a lot of questions,” Alderman Malcom Chapman said.
Clayton Heib, a former smoker, asked the city and Pennington County to ban smoking in front of public buildings so people don’t have to walk through secondhand smoke to enter. The county enacted a ban last month within 50 feet of the entrance to the courthouse.
The council decided Monday to send the proposal back to the Feb. 15 legal and finance committee meeting for more discussion.
Heib said he thought the ban would be a “slam dunk.” He said the intent was to ban smoking in front of buildings, not public parks or parking lots.
“In California, they just passed legislation that secondhand smoke is hazardous material. Now, I realize that they are kind of way out there thinking, but if even a nutcase can realize this, is it so hard for Rapid City to realize that secondhand smoke kills?” Heib said.
He expressed concern that the proposal will be delayed for several months.
Mayor Jim Shaw said there are problems with the way the resolution is written that have nothing to do with support or opposition to it.
For example, the resolution refers to “city-owned” facilities. As written, it would not apply to the City/School Administration Center because the building is owned jointly with Rapid City Area Schools, not solely the city.
“I think most council people are probably in favor of the intention,” Shaw said. “I think it’s an excellent idea. I don’t believe there’s anyone on the council trying to delay this, trying to sidetrack it. It’s not that at all. It’s just trying to make sure we get the language correct.”
Chapman said he fully supports the intent and, in fact, doesn’t think it goes far enough. He suggested he would support banning smoking within 200 feet of public buildings but thinks the language of the resolution needs to be more accurate.
“I don’t think it will be delayed and delayed, but if we’re going to do it, we should do it the right way and get the language right,” he said.
?
