'How Would You Like It If You Went to a Wine Tasting and You Couldn't Taste the Wine?'

May 6, 2008
Jacob Sullum
The Chicagoland International Pipe & Tobacciana Show, held over the weekend in St. Charles, Illinois, was smoke-free this year, thanks to a state smoking ban that took effect in January. Organizers of the event, the country's largest pipe show, had hoped attendees would be allowed to light up as members of a private club:

The hall is strictly staffed with volunteers, convention-goers were to pay $15 to join the club, and attendees were to sign a waiver stating they "freely and willingly accept all the risks of smoking, second-hand smoke, third-hand smoke, and all other risks, both real and imagined, regarding smoking tobacco."

But St. Charles police, DuPage County health officials and anti-smoking advocates didn't buy it.

"This is the first time we've seen such a blatant attempt . . . to actually undermine the law through legal sophistry," said Mike Grady, the American Cancer Society's Illinois director of public policy. "We're very happy with the outcome. This is the perfect example that the law is being enforced."

Pipe smokers, banished to tents outside the convention center, were understandably irked. "How would you like it if you went to a wine tasting and you couldn't taste the wine?" said one. "It's a freedom issue."
Read

---

St. Charles snuffs out smoking ban
March 16, 2007
Denise Linke

Because neighboring towns failed to pass smoking bans, St. Charles on Monday will repeal the ban it enacted in February, a city official said.

Aldermen approved the ban, which prohibits smoking in any building open to the public, with the understanding that it would stand only if the Geneva and Batavia City Councils also approved it. Officials from all three cities worked together to draft the ban.

After hearing protests from local shop owners and restaurateurs, Geneva voted down the smoking ban 8-7, with Mayor Kevin Burns casting the tie-breaking vote, while Batavia tabled the ordinance indefinitely.

"We can feel good knowing we put something together that the majority of the City Council approved, but we're not going to proceed with an ordinance that puts our businesses on an unequal footing with businesses in neighboring communities," said City Administrator Brian Townshend on Friday.

The council must formally repeal the ban because it does not contain a clause making its passage contingent on action by Geneva and Batavia, said Assistant City Atty. Aaron Reinke.

"Unless the City Council chooses to take further action, it will go into effect May 1," Reinke said.

St. Charles officials will not stop trying to curb smoking in the city even after repealing the ban, Townshend said. On March 5, aldermen approved a resolution strongly supporting a statewide smoking ban, and officials hope to revive the issue in the region in the near future.

"Even though the ban didn't pass elsewhere, there's still a strong interest in the Tri-Cities to do something about public smoking," Townshend said.
Read

---

St. Charles council to consider ban on public smoking

January 18, 2007
Michele du Vair

ST. CHARLES -- The city council next month will be faced with a decision on banning smoking in any public place in the city.

The council's government operations committee of the whole voted overwhelmingly this week to recommend passage of a clean air ordinance at the next full council meeting, slated Feb. 5. The proposed ban coincides with similar efforts to restrict smoking in Batavia and Geneva to create a unified, Tri-Cities approach to the issue.

In St. Charles, the proposed ban would make it unlawful to smoke in any enclosed area of a public place -- defined by the ordinance as any area that is open to and used by the general public.

Thus, the ordinance bans smoking in businesses, government, educational and health care facilities, bars and restaurants, retail stores, theaters and public transportation vehicles. It also makes it unlawful for those in control of public places -- either through ownership, occupancy or lease -- to knowingly permit smoking in banned areas.

Some exceptions noted

There are some exceptions to the proposed ban. If approved, smoking still would be permitted in private clubs or lodges and sleeping rooms rented to guests as long as the smoking rooms do not exceed 20 percent of the establishment's total. Most private dwellings used for business would be exempt from the proposed ban, as would large-venue events that occupy a yet-to-be determined square-footage minimum.

And private events, regardless of size, also would be exempt. For example, weddings or private sales meetings held in a rented banquet room could permit smoking because the events are invitation only. Many of the large-scale conventions held at venues such as Pheasant Run Resort likely would permit smoking.

The proposed ban requires the posting of "no smoking" signs in all applicable areas. A person caught smoking in a "no smoking" area would be fined between $50 and $250.

Anyone who owns, operates or manages a "no smoking" area but permits smoking anyway would be fined at least $100 for the first offense, $250 for the second and $550 for the third and subsequent offenses.

Weighing in on the issues

Several concerns were raised by residents at the committee hearing:
• Fear of monetary loss to area businesses.

• Singling out of smoking as the politically correct topic of the day while other health hazards, such as alcohol and tanning beds, are permitted.

• Rights of both smokers and nonsmokers.

• Health hazards associated with smoking and secondhand smoke.

"Smoking stinks," said resident Earl Johnson. "It killed my father. It killed my mother. It killed my sister and countless other people."

And it's not just smokers who suffer, according to David Riggs, regional vice president of the American Cancer Society. He said secondhand smoke is the third leading cause of preventable death in America today and that a person who works eight hours in a smoke-filled environment suffers the same negative effects as a person who smokes 16 cigarettes.

But David Lencioni, president of Blue Goose Supermarket Inc. in St. Charles, questioned the accuracy of scientific reports that claim secondhand smoke is deadly.

"It's a politically correct topic with zealots who feel it's OK to lie for a good cause," Lencioni said.

He advocated a free market approach to the issue.

"If there are enough businesses out there who want to be smoke-free, they'll be established," he said.

And they'll be successful, Lencioni added.

Al Heriaud of Aurora, national director of the Illinois Licensed Beverage Association, predicted a 22 percent to 35 percent revenue loss to area bars and restaurants based on what he said happened in Springfield after its smoking ban was implemented.

But Michele Golegos, owner of Corfu Restaurant in St. Charles, said her restaurant has more business on the days it bans smoking. That's because many nonsmokers would rather stay home than go out to eat in smoke-filled restaurants, Golegos said.

"It's all bad news about smoking," Golegos said. "It's not just economics. It's about common sense. It's about the health of our families."
Read