The public is invited to provide comment on an ordinance prohibiting smoking in workplaces and public places within the City of Rolla at the Rolla City Council meeting on Tuesday, July 5 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall (901 N. Elm Street).
“Discussion on the smoke-free workplace ordinance will continue at the public hearing on July 5,” said John Butz, Rolla City Administrator. “The Rolla City Council is trying to obtain public feedback, and we encourage you to provide comments during this portion of the meeting.”
For more information, please call City Administration at 426-6948. To review the DRAFT ordinance prohibiting smoking in workplaces and public places within the City of Rolla, please visit www.rollacity.org/admin/agenda.shtm#agenda.
13 comments:
the current ordinance is poorly written and will cause some enforcement problems.
It is all too simple; the ordinance should read : "ANYPLACE WHERE THE PUBLIC CAN ENTER, SMOKING IS PROHIBITED"
That covers everything and it is fair for all and a lawyer and the courts could not see fault in it!!
James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 10 that the protection of property is the first object of government. (Your body is your most precious property.)
What does it mean to own property? It means that you control the property. If you cannot allow a legal activity on your property, then you do not control it, and by extension, you do not own it.
This whole ordnance is crap. There is a limit to what government can do, and this is taking it way too far. If anyone is going to decide on this, it should be the voters anyway. That can ban it on city property, that's fine, but private property, no way!
Sorry folks !!!!!!! It's all over and a done deal - NO SMOKING in the buildings of Rolla !!!!!!!!! FINALLY !!!!!!!!! Ya-Hoo !!!!!!!!!
Yes because when liberals hate smoking they want the government to ban it everywhere..when normal people hate smoking they avoid places where it is smokey.
I hate smoking, but your not correct. Smoking in non-business buildings in not prohibited. And any business building can be smoked in if there are no witnesses as the ord. will be enforced by citizen complaints.
something to think about.
going to get my brown shirt out, been in the closet since 1945....
Socialized risk: when others bear the cost of the consequences of risky behavior--whether we're speaking of poor investment decisions or lifestyle choices.
Don't we all feel a little manipulated now? It is impossible to sort out how much of the enthusiasm for the smoking ban was altruism for one's fellow man, and how much was resentment for shouldering the cost of this risky (but still legal) behavior. In the eagerness to perfect our fellow man, the poor business owner has had his property rights trampled!
Smoking ban proponents are happy, but the puppet masters are ecstatic.
While I am not for more government in most instances, I recognize that it is necessary when individuals behave in ways that affect the health and well being of others.
I am so tired of having to pass through smoke from smokers puffing away at public door entrances or being forced to breath it at work. In this instance I support the ban on smoking. Let the smokers keep it at home.
I would bet anything that there are any number of fine upstanding citizens who would not hesitate to drop a dime on a smoker but would turn their head if they saw a dope deal go down.
Government doing what it does best: turning one segment of the population against another. Thanks to their insolvent pyramid schemes (Social Security and Medicare) they've succeeded in turning younger against older; thanks to confiscatory personal income taxation they turn one income bracket against another; examples abound. As someone in the hearing on the ordinance said, "Freedom is the absence of coercion."
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." [George Washington]
Very bad mistake, Rolla city council. When will city councils(such as yours) learn that you are essentially killing the big golden goose(that is, revenue that comes in to your community, due to the fact smokers can actually enjoy themselves inside a limited number of restaurants/bars/etc. that allow it, FOR ONCE!), by passing such an unnecessary ban? Why can't communities like Rolla just leave the very few businesses that permit indoor smoking(which last I checked, did NOT make up a majority of all businesses), alone?
I believe that is a very bad mistake for Rolla businesses not to allow smoking. I believe they need to go back to the old way.
Post a Comment