The following information is for businesses and citizens searching for information on the new Anti-smoking ordinance. More information will be added and updated in the future.
The ordinance applies to all enclosed areas of places of employment, including private clubs when utilizing the services of compensated employees.
The ordinance does not apply to: outdoor places of employment; private residences (unless used as a childcare, adult day care or health care facility); or up to 20% of hotel/motel guest rooms.
8 comments:
Does this go for local restauants with smoking sections as well. For ex. applebees and local bars??
Yes, the no smoking ordinance applies to all indoor places of employment. There is not an exception for separately ventilated restaurant or bar areas.
You know it is just really sad that the city council didn't put it to the citizens of Rolla to vote for this. I have no doubt it most likely would have passed but when is enough enough when it comes to government (local or federal) to make descisions for it's citizens? When do we as voters lose our voice and the power that our votes represent. So answer me this city council.....how many signatures am I gonna need to put in front of you to get this over turned and put to the voters?
Regarding the smoking ordinance City Council deliberated for more than two years on the issue and gave considerable consideration to a “non-binding” vote on the issue. Rolla is a 3rd Class Statutory City and there is no mechanism for a citizen-petition referendum in state law; consequently, only the City Council can call for referendums (different from a Charter or Home Rule City where citizens can initiate referendums). A non-binding referendum/election would have cost the City between $6,000 – 10,000 (depending on the number of issues on the ballot), and after months of Council deliberation and public comment a majority of the City Council felt it was their obligation to represent their constituencies by the enacting of the ordinance. At no point were there unanimous votes from City Council on the issue as both sides were well represented. Citizens certainly have the right to initiate petitions to express consensus and opinions to the City Council, but there is no set number of signatures needed to reverse the smoking ordinance. Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback.
John D. Butz
Rolla City Administrator
John...thank you for your response to my question. I just feel it should be left to the voters...if not at least to the business owners. Or couldn't you have passed an ordinance that said if a place had smoking that it had to have adequate ventalation or machines to filter the smoke and order from the air? Mind you, I am a smoker and the ban does not bother me in the least, however I feel this is just taking away the rights of the business owner and the voter.
All this ordinance has done is killed local business. Typical of "nanny-state" pols. The "Tater Patch", usually packed, is losing business despite having some of the best food in the area. I'm a non-smoker and I despise "protocol facist" politicians who want to foist their belief system on others. You can bet the people that pushed this don't patronize "Tater Patch". This has been a goldmine for "Sputs" outside the city limits but I don't go there. I will not vote for any city council member who voted for this. Again, I don't smoke but I do not support legislating against privately owned businesses.
What if the entire point of your businesss is smokeing such as a hookah lounge placed near campus its vaporizing the tobaco not burning it and no one but someone who wanted to be in that enviroment would have any reason to enter this kind of business it would provide a much safer place than the bars for student to come and unwind no worring about young adults drinking and driveing. Would this ordinance be telling me that no i could not open this small and local business that would help suport our economy?
Good question. The City's "smoke-free workplace ordinance" does not specifically mention electronic cigarettes or hookah. In response to an inquiry from a local establishment the City determined e-cigarettes were allowed (i.e. not a violation of the ordinance). Subject to further clarification from City Council I believe Hookah bars/lounges would not be allowed in Rolla based on my limited understanding of same. If tobacco is "burned" for purposes of inhaling it would be prohibited. The distinction between "vaporize" and "burn" would have to be made. However, and perhaps more importantly, since Hookah does produce the release of tobacco-related carcinogens in the air (second-hand) that would more than likely be a violation of the ordinance.
Post a Comment