Naperville Update
Read Newest Articles: IL Naperville Page 2
Smoking ban fires up debate February 07, 2007
By Jake Griffin, Daily Herald Staff Writer
Organizers of several citywide events in Naperville believe a proposed public smoking ban is going too far by forbidding lighting up at outdoor events — and even some ban proponents agree. “We’re just looking for a designated place for smokers at these events instead of a wholesale ban,” said Chuck Corrigan, president of Naperville’s Festival and Events Support Team. “You can define what’s a public area and what’s not.” The city council is expected to vote on a smoking ban that could include outdoor events such as Ribfest and Last Fling at its Feb. 20 meeting. The current draft of the ordinance includes those events. “I think we can come up with a compromise, but as far as what that end result will be, I don’t know,” Councilman Grant Wehrli said. “What I don’t want to see is smoking where dining tables are at these events because that entirely defeats the purpose of the ban.” Organizers of Ribfest, Naperville’s annual Fourth of July celebration, said the proposal already is causing problems. Officials from the Naperville Exchange Club, which runs Ribfest, said volunteer numbers are down this year because people are afraid they won’t be able to smoke while working. Anti-smoking forces in Naperville are willing to concede some space at large outdoor public events for smokers, but they believe nonsmokers’ rights should take precedence. “Our group has talked about this issue and we’re OK with it,” said Lynn Harrison, a founding member of Smoke-Free Naperville. “We’re fine with an area as long as it’s far away. It’s very frustrating when you spread your blanket out at these events and somebody comes along and sits down next to you with a cigarette.” Event organizers say they’d prefer a designated area for smokers. They also want backstage areas to be exempt from the ban to allow performers and their crews to smoke without ramifications. Corrigan’s group sent the city a five-point plan it believes would clear up the problems with the proposed ban. The group’s concerns center on the definitions of public place and smoking paraphernalia as well as repercussions to event organizers if someone is caught smoking at their events. Corrigan said he hopes the group’s recommendations will be considered before the council votes. “They have my attention on the issue,” Wehrli said. “We should be able to come up with something that satisfies everyone.” When the council signed off on the current draft of the proposed ordinance last month, there was some concern with prohibiting smoking at outdoor venues. However, officials decided to retain the language while gathering public input on the matter during a 30-day comment period that ended last week. Read
Smokers fire back at ban efforts
Naperville resident submits letters seeking to ease rules February 03, 2007
By Jill Jedlowski, Daily Herald Staff Writer
In the final hours of a month long public comment period on Naperville’s proposed smoking ordinance, resident Joe Faye delivered a dramatic statement Friday in the form of several hundred letters calling for the city to ease potential restrictions. Until then, most correspondence had been overwhelmingly in favor of not only a smoking ban but a strict one at that, city officials said. On Friday afternoon, Faye dropped off about 830 signed form letters at city hall from people opposed to the current draft of the law, which he said is “inherently unfair.” The notes, he said, came out of a resident campaign to maintain smokers’ rights. “A majority are smokers” who signed a copy of his letter, Faye said, “but I was able to get a lot of nonsmokers on board, too.” He solicited participation by approaching people in restaurants, bars and on the streets. “That’s a pretty big statement,” Dan DiSanto, assistant to the city manager, said of Faye’s results.
The public review period ends today. The ordinance could go into effect July 1. “The reality is that there’s going to be a law, and I’m not even necessarily arguing there shouldn’t be,” said Faye, who is a casual cigar smoker. “But there needs to be flexibility in businesses and some reasonableness.”
Before his bundle of letters arrived, the city had received roughly 300 comments on the matter. One particularly vocal resident group has been Smoke-Free Naperville. “The vast majority were in support of a smoking ordinance,” DiSanto said. “About half of those liked the language as is and the other half didn’t like the hardship exemption.” The hardship clause would allow bars or restaurants to reinstate smoking privileges if business declines over three months. Until Friday, most of the anti-ordinance sentiment came from the restaurant industry. In addition, some of the city's festival organizers have expressed concern about a provision banning smoking at outdoor functions such as Naper Days and Ribfest.
Faye’s letters, though, indicates a more grass-roots movement. The wording touches on how businesses could suffer if smokers are forced “to seek out new ways of enjoying their lifestyle.” It calls for an ordinance that allows smokers and nonsmokers to coexist without infringing on each other’s rights. It suggests mandatory smoke filtration systems in bars and smoking restaurants and flex hours that would permit smoking later in the day and after dinner time. In all, the feedback was better than city officials had expected. The next step will be for staff members to summarize the input in a report to the city council. “We’ll present them with all the numbers and break down some of the data,” DiSanto said. “We will include all of the comments to them, if they want to look them over.” The council is expected to vote on the ban at its Feb. 20 meeting. Read
February 1, 2007
Peter Burchard
City Manager’s Office
ATTN: Smoke-Free Ordinance
400 S. Eagle Street
Naperville, IL 60540
Dear Mr. Burchard:
I understand that from January 5, 2007, to February 3, 2007, the City of Naperville will be collecting comments regarding the proposed Smoke-Free ordinance from interested parties.
This letter serves as representation of my current position of the proposed Smoking-Free ordinance. I am against the proposed ordinance in its current state.
I believe that the ordinance is currently written in a way that is unfair to smokers and unfair to the businesses that allow patrons to smoke. I believe that this ordinance will have a negative impact to businesses in Naperville by forcing smokers to seek out new ways of enjoying their lifestyle.
I would encourage passing of an ordinance that would allow smokers and non smokers to interact with one another without encroaching on each others rights. Please consider other options such as:
- An ordinance that requires smoking restaurants and bars to have smoke filtering systems in order to eliminate second hand smoke.
- An ordinance that allows smoking flex hours, smoking after prime time dinner hours, from 10:00 pm until bar or restaurant closing.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely
- A Newsletter Reader
Meeting Information 7 p.m. First and third Tuesdays of each month Council Chambers Municipal Center 400 S. Eagle St. Smokers fire back at ban efforts ReadSmoking ban fires up debate Read
Exemption riles ban proponents
Businesses could petition council to let smokers back in if sales lag
By Jake Griffin, Daily Herald Staff Writer
January 03, 2007 If a Naperville restaurant or bar experiences a 10 percent revenue drop after the city imposes a public smoking ban, the establishment’s owner can petition the city to allow smokers back in. While other exemptions are listed in the city’s proposed smoking ban, this so-called “hardship” exemption could have the greatest impact on the ban’s effectiveness, smoking opponents said. Based on similar language in the smoking ban from Madison, Wis., Naperville’s city council added language for this potential loophole at Tuesday’s meeting. The proposed ordinance will undergo a 30-day public comment period starting Friday, and then come back to the council for final consideration. The possible hardship exemption was something local restaurant owners requested, but is something proponents of the smoking ban are concerned most about. “It’s the only thing that’s left that is an issue for us,” said Tony Andrews, president of Smoke-Free Naperville. “We’ve taken a great ordinance and watered it down.” Andrews said his group doesn’t want to cause any business to go under, and he doesn’t believe a smoking ban will do that. “Historically, objectively, that’s never happened,” he said. “There has never been a study to prove an economic loss from a smoking ban.” It would be the only exemption of its kind in Illinois if enacted July 1, which is the current planned effective date. Other exemptions in Naperville’s proposed ban include hotel rooms, nursing home bedrooms, private clubs and home-based businesses. Some councilmen believe the exemption could fortify a business owner who experiences a worst-case scenario after the ban is imposed. “If the data that Smoke-Free Naperville has put forth that all businesses prosper, then this is no threat,” Councilman James Boyajian said. “I have a hard time with us up here rolling the dice on someone else’s job. It’s a flawed mechanism for relief, but it’s the best we can do.” The exemption would only be allowed if a business experiences a 10 percent loss in the first three months after the law is enacted. The losses would be compared to average revenue from the same three months of the preceding three years, according to the drafted ordinance. The hardship exemption will only be allowed in the first year the ban is enacted. The council could vote on the final draft of the smoking ban as early as February, but no date has been set. Naperville would be the fourth DuPage County community to ban smoking, joining Burr Ridge, Hinsdale and Wheaton. Read
Smoking ban to be written up for Naperville residents
Naperville council orders draft of ordinance to show public next month BY JAKE GRIFFIN, Daily Herald Staff Writer
December 20, 2006 Ashtrays soon could be the dodo bird of restaurant accoutrements in Naperville. The city council ordered the city's legal team to draft an ordinance that would ban smoking in all city restaurants and bars and allow only a few exemptions for other public places. The city will publish the draft ordinance and gather public input throughout January about the proposed new law and the possible exceptions before the council votes on it in February. Retail tobacco stores, home businesses other than day care centers, theatrical productions, nursing homes, hotels, private clubs and golf courses are exempted from the ban under the current proposal. Those exemptions have the support of Smoke-Free Naperville, the group that pushed for a smoking ban last fall. "I think we've learned a lot about secondhand smoke in the last year," said Lynn Jele, a Smoke-Free Naperville supporter. "I just wanted to remind you that at one point in time, it was OK to have asbestos in our businesses and around employees, and that was considered normal." The council got hung up a few times debating certain nuances of the proposed law. One of the unresolved issues is the definition of picnic. Because the proposed law would ban smoking at outdoor events and outdoor dining locations, the council is hoping to exclude picnics and parades. Some of the councilmen aren't sold on banning smoking at outdoor events like Ribfest and Last Fling. "I still don't understand how we're going to enforce smoking outdoors at some of these larger venues," Councilman John Rosanova said. But others believe it can be accomplished in Naperville because it's been done elsewhere. "There is going to be a lot of public and peer-to-peer pressure not to smoke at these events," said Councilman James Boyajian. "Certainly this has happened in very large areas elsewhere. This is not a new idea where you have thousands of people in attendance." The council also gave preliminary approval to a hardship exemption of some sort for businesses that can prove financial adversity as a result of the smoking ban. Boyajian recommended the hardship be more than a 10 percent loss of gross revenue for the three months following the effective date of the new law. Currently, the city is planning to enact the ban July 1. But because Ribfest will run from June 30 to July 4 next year, the city would require Ribfest to enact smoke-free rules a day before the rest of the city. Violators of the smoking ban would be subject to a $50 fine. Repeat violators would be fined a higher dollar amount each time they're caught. Read
For those who are residents in Naperville, a smoking ban has not yet been voted upon. The City Council had planned to further discuss it on December 19th, so it isn't a "done deal". It now appears that smoking ban topic may be postponed in view of the upcoming City Council election. Read: Election season opens in Naperville "Robert Fieseler, a patent attorney in Chicago, said some of the issues he believes are important are contrary to the current majority of the council. He’d like to repeal the culture tax, build a parking deck at the Fifth Avenue train station, remove parking on Washington Street and avoid a public smoking ban."
Smoking ban's 1st draft out
Naperville to exempt some rooms in hotels and nursing homes By Jennifer Taylor, Special to the Tribune
November 24, 2006 The Naperville City Council has taken its first crack at crafting a draft smoke-free ordinance, with most members agreeing it would cover bars and restaurants. Local tavern and restaurant owners have been the biggest critics of the proposal that would ban smoking in all enclosed public places, saying it would hurt their businesses if other municipalities in the region did not also adopt similar ordinances. "Secondhand smoke is a problem," Councilman Kenn Miller said Tuesday. "However, I am a free-market person and believe in people's rights. Whatever we come up with will not be perfect, and we may end up tweaking it down the road." The council also agreed to direct city staff to further research hardship waivers for restaurants and bars. It is expected to take that up Dec. 19. A final reading of the law is likely to come in January. Exemptions the council agreed on include stage plays where cast members must smoke; private and semi-private rooms in nursing homes; retail tobacco stores and hookah bars where no alcohol is served; 25 percent of hotel and motel rooms; home-based businesses; and private clubs not open to the public. The council agreed to ban smoking at outdoor festivals such as Ribfest. The city also will consider a smoke-free perimeter of 15 feet from any entrance, passageway, window or outdoor patio where smoking is permitted. Penalties for violation of the law slated to take effect July 1 are $50 for the first offense, $100 for the second and $150 for the third. But council members agreed that the third penalty could go higher and will discuss it in December. Read
Council delays vote on smoking ban November 9, 2006
Jennifer Taylor NAPERVILLE -- The Naperville City Council tabled debate this week on a proposed smoking ban, opting instead to hear more public testimony before deliberating on the matter. The council is ready to discuss exemptions to the proposed law, which would ban smoking in all enclosed public places and places of employment. Exemptions may include restaurants or taverns that demonstrate an economic hardship under the proposed law, hotels with smoking-only rooms, private nursing-care facilities, private clubs or lodges, home businesses and retail tobacco stores. The draft ordinance also includes a provision requiring smoke-free perimeters around the entrances of establishments. City staff suggested a 20-foot perimeter in their report. The city also is considering restricting smoking at outdoor events such as Ribfest and the Last Fling festivals. "I'm ready to support a smoking ban, and it needs to be quicker," Council Member Richard Furstenau said. "If we don't have reasonable exemptions, I don't want a smoking ban," Council Member Jim Boyajian countered. Read
Restaurateurs want to meet before smoking vote By Jill Jedlowski, Daily Herald Staff Writer
October 10, 2006 As Naperville officials close in on what will likely be a citywide smoking ban of some sort, restaurateurs Monday asked for another crack at making sure their voices are heard before plans are cemented. Rather than submitting questions or comments via a town hall meeting or in writing, business owners want to assemble a small task force committed to hammering out the details of the hot topic, which is set for more city council discussion next month. Naperville merchants put in the request at Monday’s legislative committee meeting of the Naperville Area Chamber of Commerce. There was no opposition from the roughly 50 people in attendance. Jim Bergeron, owner of two downtown eateries, including Jimmy’s Grill, said stakeholders want the chance to break down a complicated topic. “This an extremely large issue,” Bergeron said. “It deserves the time and due process in order to really hammer out a good, comprehensive solution.” Councilman Richard Furstenau raised the only objection. “It’s going to happen in our town, and there’s going to be few exceptions,” he said. “That’s how I see it. I don’t need a committee to tell me that.” There was just one stipulation, voiced by Councilman James Boyajian: All stakeholders — such as the Smoke-Free Naperville group — must be offered an opportunity to be represented in the group. No one objected. Tony Andrews, president of Smoke-Free Naperville, said he was surprised by the news. He wondered about the timing, given that the issue has been up for public consideration for months. “I don’t know what they would expect to accomplish, besides slowing the process down, that we haven’t already done,” he said of the restaurateurs. “I’m not thrilled.” The potential smoking ordinance or even ban — and possible exemptions — are scheduled to be on the Nov. 7 council agenda. Read
Naperville split over smoking
Proposed public ban has `limited' exceptions, and that sparks a debate September 15, 2006
By Jennifer Taylor, Special to the Tribune While becoming smoke-free would be a healthy step for Naperville, there should be "limited" exceptions to a proposed ban on lighting up in enclosed public places and businesses, the City Council said. The rights of nonsmokers, smokers and business owners were discussed at a town hall-style meeting Wednesday, but speakers on both sides of the smoldering issue dealt mainly with the possible economic fallout of a ban on smoking. Noting that citizens' well-being is paramount, the council said future discussions would focus on exempting some establishments from the proposed ban. "Sooner or later if you want a society that is healthy, you've got to get rid of the cigarettes," Councilman Richard Furstenau said. But he added, "I believe there should be exemptions, but limited." Those exemptions might include restaurants or taverns that could demonstrate they'd incur an economic hardship under the proposed law, hotels with smoking-only rooms, private nursing-care facilities, private clubs or lodges, home businesses and retail tobacco stores. The City Council, which is slated to discuss the issue again Nov. 7, was presented with studies and testimonials on studies that suggest smoking bans do not harm businesses. And in many cases, studies showed that establishments actually prosper after banning smoking. According to city staff, no Illinois community with a smoking ban has experienced negative economic consequences. Skokie, Highland Park and Wilmette are the only municipalities in the state with smoke-free ordinances in effect for more than a year. A contingent of Naperville restaurant owners, backed by the Restaurant Association of Naperville and the Greater Naperville Chamber of Commerce, disagreed. They said such a ban would hurt their businesses if neighboring municipalities did not adopt similar smoke-free ordinances. Rick Sweeney, owner of Your Neighbor's Restaurant & Bar and chairman of the Restaurant Association of Naperville, said his clientele is split 50-50 between smokers and nonsmokers. And he thinks his business would sharply decline or have to be closed outright if the proposed ban is approved. "Small local proprietors are the ones put out of business," Sweeney said, adding that neighboring municipalities "can't wait to get the revenue we will be missing." Naperville's neighbors--Aurora, Bolingbrook and Plainfield--are not considering smoke-free ordinances. But officials in Lisle, Warrenville, Wheaton and Woodridge are weighing anti-smoking proposals. The Illinois Licensed Beverage Association also submitted data to the Naperville City Council on revenue decline and job losses in communities around the country where smoking bans have been implemented. Steve Riedl, the association's executive director, said municipal smoking bans create an unfair playing field. But he said that some restaurants and bars have fared well after statewide smoking bans have been put in place--such as has occurred in California, Colorado, New York and Massachusetts--because they don't give the competition an advantage. Officials in Skokie, which in July 2003 became the first Illinois municipality to adopt a smoke-free ordinance, report that the ban did not hurt their local restaurants and bars, according to a staff report. In fact, the report says that the number of restaurants and bars that closed or changed hands after the smoking ban went into effect was considerably lower than the number of establishments that closed two years before the smoking ban began. Maureen McHugh, interim executive director of the DuPage County Health Department and spokeswoman for the DuPage Coalition Against Tobacco, said DuPage is assembling a task force to consider banning smoking in the county. The DuPage Mayors and Managers Conference is joining a joint county-municipal task force to examine smoking regulations. McHugh said many municipalities in the region are considering or adopting smoke-free ordinances. Illinois legislators also have debated instituting a statewide smoking ban. Read
Smoking Ban To Be Discussed In Naperville Sep 13, 2006 A lot of smoke could be coming from the Naperville City Council chambers tonight. Not literally. But the hot-button issue of a potential smoke-free ordinance in Naperville will take center stage at a town hall meeting hosted by Naperville Mayor George Pradel and other members of the City Council. The meeting starts at 6 p.m. at the Municipal Center, 400 S. Eagle St. Several municipalities, including Chicago, have passed smoking bans, although Chicago still allows smoking in bars until 2008. City staff has tried to put together the answers to questions officials have come up with in the last month, including whether other cities in close proximity to Naperville were considering smoking bans and what their policies are for businesses, school districts and retirement homes. Read
Naperville smoking ban may boil down to dollars and cents September 12, 2006
JAKE GRIFFIN Sales tax revenues generate the biggest chunk for Naperville's general fund each year, so the bottom line may draw the focus during a town hall debate today about a potential citywide smoking ban. The city has invited economic and health experts to speak before opening the floor to debate. Lobbyists for the Illinois Restaurant Association and an economics professor from the University of Illinois Chicago are among the speakers. The city generates about $29.5 million annually in sales tax revenue. Most of that comes from automobile sales. But the city gathers about $5 million a year from food and drink sales tax. Half goes into the general fund and the other half is for special events and cultural amenities. To hear bar owners and restaurateurs, a smoking ban would have a devastating financial impact on Naperville watering holes, driving patrons to neighboring cities without such laws. However, experience and research suggests smoking bans have little effect on sales tax revenues, say leaders in community with such laws. "Our increase in sales taxes at restaurants and bars has outpaced our overall sales tax increases," said Highland Park finance director Elizabeth Holleb. "We had no expectations going into this year because the data was not very clear." Highland Park enacted a smoking ban in June 2005. Between the following October and December, sales tax revenues in the food and beverage sector increased 8.8 percent compared to the same period the year before. Sales tax revenue as a whole was up only 4.3 percent during the same time period, Holleb said. Skokie and Wilmette have two years of data with a smoking ban in effect. Neither city reports ill effects from a ban. "We're a different animal in terms of sales tax than a Naperville or a Skokie," said Bob Amoruso, Wilmette's finance director. "There were some individual restaurants whose owners and much of the clientele catered to smokers and they're still in business." Skokie's sales tax revenues from bars and restaurants has increased more than 11 percent since the ban went into effect. Village Trustee Don Perille, said the seven-member board agonized over the smoking ban, but eventually voted unanimously to approve it. "We worried a little bit because we didn't want to hurt any businesses that were in town," he said. "Politically, I haven't seen any damage; economically, there has to be some, but it's minimal and will be corrected when Chicago's ban takes effect." None of the businesses that complained about the ban before it was passed has closed, Perille said. Members of Wilmette's American Legion post, who complained the loudest when the law was enacted there two years ago, are still bitter about it, but admit no ill effects. "It's just a lot of sour opinions now," said Curt Johnson, the post's bar chairman. "These are people who fought for our freedoms and can't have a damn cigarette in their own private club anymore, but people get over it." The town hall meeting in Naperville begins at 6 p.m. inside the council chambers at city hall, located at 400 S. Eagle St. The meeting will be broadcast live on local cable stations. Read
City looks to clear air on smoke-free guidelines
Council wants public input on how far to go with ban 9-6-06
By Kate R. Houlihan,staff writer Smoking – and whether to ban it – may be the hottest topic floating around Naperville these days. The issue raises a pack of questions: Indoors, outdoors or both? What places, if any, could be exempt from such a ban? In a time when it's almost en vogue for municipalities around the state to take up the issue and the year in which the surgeon general's office issued a report that said there's no safe level of secondhand smoke exposure, there's no clear answer. Naperville's City Council was forced to take a close look at smoking in public places when SmokeFree Naperville, a local grassroots group advocating smoking restrictions, presented petitions with more than 3,000 signatures to the council in July. Council members took notice and asked city staff to research smoking ordinances in other communities. In August the council heard about what neighboring suburbs and Chicago had done. Before making firm decisions on what areas an ordinance could touch or exemptions, the council decided to seek public input from residents and businesses. A town-hall meeting will be held Sept. 13 to hear from a panel of speakers, including an economist, medical expert and representative from the local business community, and to hear opinions. In DuPage County, Burr Ridge and Hinsdale already have smoke-free ordinances. Chicago's went into effect in January for indoor public places, with restaurants and bars having until July 1, 2008, to get in compliance. Wheaton is about to join the ranks. A smoke-free ordinance is expected to pass on in October and would most likely go into effect Jan. 2, said Wheaton communications manager Gary White. "They're still looking at a few things inside the ordinance itself," White said. "Council is pretty adamant about putting something together that was comprehensive enough." White said the two bowling alleys in Wheaton would probably be exempt. "There were a handful of people that really came and voiced concerns against the ban," he said. "A good amount of people came in and were really supporting the health benefits of not smoking in public areas. I think that's the big thing behind the council's decision, the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Smoking thoughts
But what do Naperville smokers think about the potential end to their light-up days?
Twenty-eight-year-old smoker Lisa Weller's job takes her from New York to Florida and back to her Naperville home, so she's seen the effects of smoke-free ordinances first-hand. Enjoying Last Fling on Sunday, she said when there are children and people nearby eating in a restaurant, it's better to keep smoke away from patrons. "When you can't (smoke), it helps you not do it," she said, adding when she's out of town she has no problem with stepping outside to smoke. But places such as bars are fine for indoor imbibing, seeing as it's adult clientele and part of bar culture, she said. Outdoor venues such as concerts also are fine, she said. "There's a place for everything," she said. Same goes for Tony Smith of Naperville, who was enjoying a cigarette as he waited to enter Last Fling. He said outdoor smoking should definitely be allowed and places available for smokers who do want to enjoy themselves. In a memo to the council, city staff recommended that smoking be prohibited in scheduled public outdoor events. The council gave no opinion on any staff recommendations at recent meetings.
Economic woes?
Some concerns center more on the dollars and cents side of things. According to a city memo, Naperville has 320 of what are known as "dining venues." Of that, 100 are restaurants, restaurant/taverns or simply taverns. Only five are taverns, with 32 restaurants and 63 restaurant/taverns rounding out that number.
Concerns have wafted around town regarding the possibility of declining revenues if a smoking ordinance is passed and smokers decide to pack it up and motor to another suburb for their dining pleasure. Jim Bergeron, owner of Jimmy's Grill and Brickhouse Pizzeria and a member of the Naperville Restaurant Association, told The Sun in August that the issue wasn't one of disputing health, but of making economic decisions too quickly that could have ramifications for local businesses. But such economic concerns may not come to pass, at least according to Skokie Director of Health Lowell Huckleberry. "Our business continued to thrive and was pretty much equal to or better than the four communities surrounding us," Huckleberry said. "It's pretty definitive we did not suffer." Skokie was a trendsetter in the smoke-free ordinance world. The ordinance went into effect Aug. 7, 2003, and restaurants with bars could continue to permit smoking until July 7, 2004, at which point they had to have floor-to-ceiling walls with ventilation to continue to allow smoking. "We were early in the game and that made a huge, huge difference what we went through," Huckleberry said. The village compared its sales tax from the two years before the ordinance went into effect with the two years after. Huckleberry said there was an 11.18 percent increase in sales tax revenue from eating and drinking establishments, which was similar or more than nearby Evanston, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove and Niles. "We have more restaurants in Skokie now than when the ordinance passed," he said. "You really can't pass any kind of ordinance if you say we're only going to pass ordinances that affect no one. I haven't seen any hard evidence that shows anyone was negatively affected." Cracking down Should an ordinance come to pass in Naperville, how would it actually be carried out? "Among those municipalities with smoke-free ordinances, enforcement is performed by a variety of city departments, including the health department, city manager's office, police department and the fire department," said Meghan Fay, administrative intern, in a city memo. "Some cities have departments to inspect for compliance while conducting other mandatory inspections. Other ordinances are enforced by divisions within county government." Fines are the most common form of punishment, the memo said. As far as shock value, the idea of smoke free as the way to be isn't quite as new or trendsetting anymore. Huckleberry said it's getting easier to put a complete ban on smoking in cities, rather than playing the exemption game, and that people aren't taken aback. "It's getting to be expected," Huckleberry said. "It's not a surprise anymore." Read
Proposed smoke ban to get closer look in Naperville
City seeks more comments on idea August 17, 2006
By Jennifer Taylor Naperville city officials said Tuesday they want more comments from residents and business owners before further considering a proposed smoking ban in the city. The proposal would ban smoking in all enclosed public places and places of employment. The most heated debate is centered on restaurants and bars, whose owners believe a ban in Naperville, without support from the rest of the region, would hurt their businesses. "Our position has been we do not oppose a smoking ban. We oppose a smoking ban that creates an economic hardship to Naperville," said Jim Bergeron, owner of Jimmy's Grill and Brickhouse Pizzeria in the downtown. "If we can make [a law] work that has with it the ability to make a level playing field, we are all for it." Riff Menza, owner of Frankie's Blue Room and Features in the downtown, agreed. He submitted a petition with about 2,000 signatures opposing Naperville-only smoking ban. The restaurant owners want to see surrounding municipalities such as Aurora and Bolingbrook also adopt smoke-free ordinances. The citizen group Smoke-Free Naperville brought the issue to the council last month along with a petition with 2,750 signatures supporting the smoking ban. Most City Council members requested more information on potential exemptions from the ordinance. Exemptions may include restaurants or taverns that demonstrate an economic hardship under the proposed ordinance, hotels with smoking-only rooms, private nursing care facilities, private clubs or lodges, home businesses, and retail tobacco stores. The draft ordinance also includes a provision requiring smoke-free perimeters around the entrances of establishments. City staff suggested in their report a 20-foot perimeter. The city also is considering restricting smoking at outdoor events such as Ribfest and the Last Fling city festivals. Last month the city announced its intention to consider a smoke-free ordinance and took a preliminary look Tuesday at a proposed draft. The council agreed it would continue a public process by holding a town hall meeting in September, post information about the ordinance on its Web site, and send letters to businesses in town. According to a staff report, 44 percent of Illinois' population is covered by smoke-free ordinances. Municipalities that have adopted smoke-free ordinances include Burr Ridge, Chicago, Hinsdale, Oak Park, Park Ridge, Highland Park, and Evanston. The municipalities of Bloomington, Normal, Champaign and Elk Grove Village have smoke-free ordinances slated to take effect early next year. Many eateries in town have acted on their own. More than 80 restaurants, including Front Street Cantina, Red Door Tavern and Old Country Buffet, already have chosen not to allow smoking in their establishments, according to the report. City staff recommended the ordinance, if adopted, go into effect 90 days after passage. The staff report also suggested that violation of the ordinance carry a $50 fine for the first offense and progressively increase thereafter. The ordinance also would require businesses to post "No Smoking" signs. Read
Naperville moves ahead with smoking ban August 15, 2006 Naperville's city council moved forward Tuesday with plans for a smoking ban in public places. The council reviewed a report that researched various smoking ordinances around Illinois. They also directed their staff to start drafting one for Naperville that would ban lighting up in bars and restaurants and outdoor fairs. Restaurant owners argue they will lose patrons to other businesses in towns that allow smoking. The council wants to vote on a law by December. If it passes, it could go into effect by March of next year. Read
Residents seeking Naperville smoking ban 06/17/06
Sarah Pulliam NAPERVILLE — Tony Andrews wants to blow the smoke out of Naperville. Andrews, president of the grass-roots organization Smoke-Free Naperville, has collected more than 2,000 signatures since late April for a petition to make Naperville DuPage County's first smoke-free city. "Lake and Cook County are doing this. Why are we not at the forefront of this?" he said. Alison Murphy, assistant to Naperville's city manager, said the city council has no plans to talk about a citywide ban. But Andrews hopes to change that. He plans to bring the petitions before the council by the end of June. "I know it's not going to happen in one day," he said. "I know there's a process, and I'd like to start that." Geneva last month launched a Smoking Task Force to consider possibly banning smoking in all public places. The task force — made up of aldermen, businessmen and residents — is sending letters to St.
Charles, Batavia, West Chicago, Elburn and the Kane County Board, inviting them to attend task force meetings and give input. Jessica Gerdes, the DuPage County Health Department's program manager for tobacco prevention, said Naperville's smoking rate is the lowest in the county at 13.7 percent compared to a county average of 17 percent. "If Naperville does this, other municipalities I believe feel encouraged to do this as well," she said. Local officials in Illinois are considering more smoke-free ordinances than anywhere else in the nation, said Bronson Frick, associate director of the Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights. "The success of the smoke-free movement is local policy," Frick said. " ... The tobacco industry loves to have it at the state level so they can lobby against the laws." In Naperville, Andrews said, "Eighty to 90 percent of the people we talk to sign (the petition). Some people grab the petition before I give my spiel." Read
I would like to know how 15-year-olds can be allowed to sign a petition for a city smoking ban ordinance? Highschool students determining the future of business and adults? It's obscene! When will cities/villages learn that these children are being brain washed and are not adult enough to add their influence to these ban decisions? Is this supposed to be a real petition? I thought residents needed to be qualified as voters to sign municiple ordinance petitions.... Why don't they start dipping their pet dogs' and cats' paws in paint to let them "sign" the petition too? Residents breathe life into smoking ban June 13, 2006
By Sarah Pulliam, staff writer Tony Andrews wants to blow the smoke out of Naperville. Andrews, president of the grassroots organization Smoke-Free Naperville, has collected more than 2,000 signatures since late April for a petition to make Naperville DuPage County's first smoke-free city. "Lake and Cook County are doing this. Why are we not at the forefront of this?" said Andrews, 39. Alison Murphy, assistant to the city manager, said the City Council currently has no plans to talk about a citywide ban. But Andrews hopes to change that. He plans to bring the petitions before the council by the end of June. "I know it's not going to happen in one day," he said. "I know there's a process and I'd like to start that. The details are difficult to come by." Jessica Gerdes, program manager for tobacco prevention for the county Health Department, said Naperville's smoking rate is the lowest in the county at 13.7 percent compared to a county average of 17 percent. "If Naperville does this, other municipalities I believe feel encouraged to do this as well," she said. Deerfield, Highland Park and Wilmette are the only cities in Illinois that have smoke-free workplaces, restaurants and bars, according to the Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, a nonprofit organization based in Berkeley, Calif. Local lawmakers in Illinois are considering more smoke-free ordinances than anywhere else in the nation, he said. In Naperville, Andrews said he and a group of about eight people go to the Riverwalk or coffee shops to get support for the petition. "Eighty to 90 percent of the people we talk to, sign. Some people grab the petition before I give my spiel," Andrews said. "It was really encouraging that I'm not alone." Smoke-free Naperville recently celebrated its one-year anniversary of existence as a grassroots organization. Contact Sarah Pulliam at 630-416-5275 or spulliam@scn1.com. Read(Caption on photo: Sammy Rothman, 15, of Naperville, uses the back of her friend Ashlyn Erickson, 15, of Woodridge, to sign a petition that would ban smoking in all of Naperville.)
Naperville unlikely to go smoke-free anytime soon
04/19/06
By Mike Mitchell
STAFF WRITER
The cherry glow in the dark and the wafts of smoking tailing in the air are becoming an endangered scene.
Yes, a smoker's right to puff and exhale is being challenged nationwide. Already, 14 states have implemented statewide smoking bans in bars and restaurants, and even Scotland and Ireland have joined in with a nationwide ban.
It's no surprise that cigarettes and cigars pose dangers to smokers, and many times its secondary effects — medically proven or not — are a nuisance to others.
Generalities aside, it's sort of a mystery why Naperville hasn't jumped aboard. This is the same town, after all, that wins an award in what seems like a monthly occasion, the same kind of progressive town that has libraries that offer books on mp3 files and celebrates its birthday all year long.
So what's keeping Naperville from establishing a citywide ban?
The answer isn't so simple. Jim Bergeron, owner of Jimmy's Grill, at 245 S. Washington St., and member of the Naperville Restaurant Association, said a ban would cripple local restaurants that have no affiliation with major chains.
"I can't sit here and watch a short-term decline of 30 to 40 percent and still be here," said Bergeron, who was referring to recent studies on states that have gone smoke-free, which have recuperated losses after the bans were initially imposed. "My business depends on (smokers); you know I've got to put food on the table, too. If a ban is put in, it would significantly impact my business."
The City Council doesn't have anything planned in the coming weeks for a discussion on the ban, and according to Mayor George Pradel, a smoking ban isn't expected to be voted on anytime this year.
At this point, in the short term, the likelihood of a local ban is slim.
Still, that doesn't leave out the possibility that Illinois would consider a statewide ban. After all, the Chicago City Council put a ban into effect in January for public facilities and restaurants and bars will have two years to comply.
"I'm really for the idea that locally elected village boards, mayors and presidents will have their own choice," said state Sen. Kirk Dillard, R-Hinsdale, whose district includes Naperville. "Rather than letting officials whose district is 200 miles from Naperville make the decisions, I think the municipalities should make the decision.
"Naperville is unique and has an incredibly vibrant restaurant scene, and someone from Pickney might not understand that."
It's true that Naperville's downtown area would be the focus of a ban — particularly if it were imposed only on the city.
However, a 2003 study by Zagat, a restaurant and leisure guide, found that the city of New York was not negatively affected by a citywide ban. A study published in the October 2004 issue of Contemporary Economic Policy found that restaurants in smoke-free cities increased in property value after the bans were put into effect.
And there a host of studies that show that revenue is not affected several years after a statewide ban is implemented.
Anti-smoking groups have further increased momentum, as fewer cigarettes were smoked in 2005 than in any other time since 1951, according to the Association of State Attorneys General.
"It is really ridiculous for a lot of these businesses to think that a ban will hurt their business," said Debbie Isbell, president of Smoke-Free Naperville. "There are plenty of studies out there that show restaurants and bars won't lose sales long-term.
"The restaurants are saying that they are afraid to lose their business, but it may be just a smoke screen," Isbell said. "It wouldn't surprise me that the tobacco companies are not working with the restaurants in Naperville."
Isbell said the Chicago ban should increase pressure on Naperville to pass a local ban.
Meanwhile, DuPage County also passed a smoke-free resolution earlier this year for unincorporated areas in the county. The county does not have the authority to mandate Naperville, since it operates by home rule.
Pradel said he would prefer the state to pass a smoking ban before the county could.
Nevertheless, the county is taking other measures to do away with smoking. In March, County Board Chairman Robert Schillerstrom talked about creating a $1-per-pack tax on cigarettes, which would raise $40 million a year, helping a budget deficit.
Gary Sooter, coordinator for the tobacco prevention and control program for the DuPage County Health Department, said he isn't convinced that smokers have a right to light up while dining or hanging out at the bars.
"You're going to have people out there that are going to say it's a freedom of choice," Sooter said. "Well, I'm sorry, but the government has everything to do with sanitation and health. The government puts regulations to help protect the ozone and the environment. Show me the Constitution where it says people have the right to smoke."
Still, some smokers feel like a targeted minority group in the U.S. — largely unrecognized as people without rights.
Garnet Dawn Scheuer, Midwest regional director for the Smokers Group and also head of the Web site at www.illinoissmokersrights.com , said several amendments are being violated with any kind of smoking ban.
Scheuer, who lives in Lake Bluff, said she has been contacting restaurant associations and the beverage industry to build a defense against smoking bans.
"The entire issue is shaky at best," said Scheuer, who said smokers are the bulk of the dining crowd and will probably stay home with a ban. "Most of the smoking bans are not inclusive with smokers' rights. You know a lot of people make the argument that we don't have the right to smoke in public, but once again, they have no right to breathe clean air."
Scheuer even suggests that if a statewide ban were passed, people would be tempted to break the law by creating "smoke-easies" — a smoker's parlor, referencing the Prohibition days of the speakeasies.
Both Bergeron and Rick Sweeney, chairman of the Naperville Restaurant Association, also said the majority of the attendees in bars and restaurants are smokers.
"Oh, there's no question. I'd say about three-quarters of the bar are smokers," Sweeney said. "People who smoke tend to stay longer and tip better. My gut feeling is it won't be the same if a ban ever comes around. Smokers might avoid a place if they want to watch NASCAR or a ballgame and can't smoke.
"But (the City Council) is very realistic, and they'll talk together before anything happens," he said. "Even though the city wins all these awards, there is work involved. And nothing should be done without talking to the people."
|
