Posted on 11/20/2003 7:58:41 PM PST by yonif
Wilmette's brand-new indoor smoking ban became one of the hottest local issues in recent months, but the village also became one of the first battle grounds in a looming statewide fight over the issue.
Five years after a similar law met with total failure before the Village Board, trustees last week voted 7-1 to effectively ban remaining smoking areas in restaurants, offices and even private clubs such as the American Legion. The law won't take effect until July 1, by which time public health advocates hope to win the fight in other northern suburbs.
One factor which seemed to have turned the issue around since 1998 was organization and mobilization that included local activists, but also pressure from regional and statewide groups. Opponents of the ban, including restaurant owners, smokers and civil libertarians, came to see that as outside interests imposing themselves on a situation which didn't need fixing.
Supporters of the ban say second-hand smoke has become a well-recognized danger and smoking bans a common-sense solution. Joel Africk, a Wilmette resident and CEO of the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago, said his organization and others saw a crack in the foundation of tolerance toward public smoking, and all they did was to hit it consistently.
In 1998, environmental tobacco smoke had become accepted as a danger among the medical community, but the public remained skeptical. Some even saw it as a hysterical overstated danger rooted more in politics than science. Science has since caught up, providing much clearer evidence of the danger.
"This is no longer a novel issue. This time in November 2003, there were literally hundreds of communities around the U.S. that had made the decision to go smoke free. Many more people came forward than in 1998," Africk said. "We had moms who wanted to stand in front of their elementary school with signs. We had families who had lost a loved one to smoking."
With a similar battle won only months before in Skokie, Africk and others took no chances in Wilmette. That meant getting people out to meetings, letter and e-mail campaigns and some money.
Africk said his group ordered about 300 lawn signs and found willing homeowners in the first week, and then ordered more.
"We probably spent around $2,000," Africk said.
They also fought trustees' instincts to find a compromise that might have grandfathered some businesses or exempted others. A later effective date was their sole setback.
Those opposed to the ban included restaurant owners who fear financial ruin, but also many people who felt the ordinance poked too far into people's personal decisions.
For Beth Lambrecht, the lone trustee voting against the proposal, the loudest voices in the debate were not necessarily representative of the community at large. In her downtown jewelry store, Lambrecht said she hears from many people who were opposed to the ordinance, and she believes she gets a fairly representative cross section in the store.
"I wouldn't change my vote. I'm hearing from so many people who were supportive of my position and they were glad I had the guts to say so," Lambrecht said.
On a board that usually works more with local zoning issues, she was surprised to be getting e-mails from as far as Bartlett, Cicero, Chicago Ridge and Oak Park. They were electronic form letters sent by anti-smoking groups.
Africk said local bans will be up for consideration soon in Arlington Heights and Evanston. Only 19 towns have that power because of a clause in state law.
If Illinois follows other states, Chicago will then become the most important final obstacle to a statewide indoor smoking ban. Once the big city goes smoke-free, Africk said restaurant groups and other business interest typically stop fighting the ban and support a state ban as a matter of equality for competitors.
That seems to be true. In my area, there's a county ban that the restaurant and bar owners fought. They lost. Our city has no restrictions. Business in county areas is down 30%-50%. Business in the city is booming.
The county restaurants are converting to carry-out operations. Some of them even have curb-side delivery.
And now the city is being pressured to enact a similar ban. Guess who is pushing that?
It has I would like to see this evidence or at least one death certificate showing the cause of death to be second hand smoke
They did the exact same thing in Delaware. One of the daily newspapers actually had the NERVE to call them on it and refused to print the letters from people outside of the state. The other daily paper printed nearly all of them, because the editorial policy of that paper was in support of the ban.
The sleazy tactics of these anti-smoker groups needs to be publicized more and more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.