NEWS

February 13, 2009

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  

“Message from the Mayor”

Why should Sumter be smoke-free?  
            In June, 2006, the Surgeon General of the United States issued a report saying, “Science has proven that there is no risk-free level of exposure to second-hand smoke. … Only smoke-free environments effectively protect nonsmokers from second-hand smoke exposure in indoor spaces.” The report also concluded that nonsmokers who are exposed to second-hand smoke at home or work had a 25-30% increased risk of developing heart disease and a 20-30% increased risk for lung cancer.  Our state was taking no action; many Sumterites thought that our city and county should act.
            When Greenville’s “Breathe Easy” ordinance was set-aside by a Circuit Court judge, plans for a smoke-free Sumter ordinance were put on hold.  Last year, however, the South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the Greenville ordinance, ruling that local governments have the authority to enact ordinances which protect the health and welfare of their citizens
The push for a smoke-free Sumter is not being driven by the mayor and City Council.  Make no mistake about it—I believe we need to enact the smoke-free ordinance without an exemption for bars.  Nevertheless, I presented the proposed ordinance to City Council only after months of encouragement from citizens from all walks of life.  Many business owners are anxious to have a smoke-free ordinance.  The Sumter-Clarendon Medical Society has endorsed the ordinance, as has the board of Tuomey Healthcare System.  Sumterites overwhelmingly want Sumter to be smoke-free. 
            Some who oppose the smoke-free ordinance argue that the ordinance “tramples on” their constitutional or civil right to smoke.  There is no right to smoke cigarettes.  Each of us has the freedom to choose whether to smoke or not to smoke; but the smoker who believes he should be able to light up wherever and when he likes surely “tramples on” the freedom of the non-smoker who chooses to breathe clean air.
            The argument that business owners who want to allow smoking should be allowed to do so may be a little more persuasive, especially if you do not consider the health hazard.  Yet analysis, once again, shows the smoking ban to be a reasonable solution.  Businesses invite all members of the public onto their premises.  Businesses hire employees.  Employees need jobs.  If we balance the right of the business owner with the health of patrons and employees, then the same simple solution is obvious.  Allow smoking outside, away from those who do not wish to smoke.  
            Through all of the discussion about our proposed ordinance, I have not heard anyone refute the most compelling reason for taking action: Second-hand cigarette smoke is harmful to humans.  This irrefutable fact provides the compelling reason for our City to require businesses, including bars, to be smoke free.
            Will a smoke-free ordinance hurt business?  The obvious response is that it has worked fine in every city and county in our state which has enacted one.  After the initial complaints subside, you no longer hear talk of the ban being revoked or lessened.  In fact, Columbia City Council exempted bars from its smoking ban initially, but then reversed itself a few months later.  Today, you hear no complaints, from the public or the businesses.  The reason is simple, and it has been documented by study after study.  Banning smoking in businesses, including bars and restaurants, does not hurt business.  If anything, it helps business.  Have you been told in a restaurant that the entire building is “smoke free tonight”?  I have.  Why does this happen?  Because there are so many people wanting a smoke-free area that the business doesn’t want to hold open the smoking area.  (This is a bad practice; but no worse, I guess, than the fiction of a “non-smoking” zone in a building where any smoking is allowed.)  On the other hand, I have never been to a restaurant or bar and been told that there was “no smoke-free area tonight”.  Figures from the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) tell us why.  Only 20.7% of Sumterites currently smoke, down from 26.1% in 2005.  There are many more non-smokers than smokers and many smokers do not smoke in businesses out of respect for others.  In many instances, allowing smoking costs the business owner money.
            Quite a few restaurant and bar owners want a smoking ban; but they want to know that all other restaurants and bars will be smoke-free.  I don’t believe these astute business operators are worried about losing smoking customers if Sumter has a smoke-free ordinance; they are worried about losing their non-smoking customers.  Think about it.  If a non-smoker has a bad experience with cigarette smoke in a business, he will not come back.  Non-smokers will gravitate to smoke-free businesses, and there are not enough smoking customers to replace them.  If a business is smoke-free, however, the non-smoker and smoker can enjoy that business.  It’s not too much to ask a smoker to step outside to smoke.  Otherwise, the only thing the non-smoker can do is stay away.
            Sumter City Council gave first reading to a smoke-free ordinance at its last meeting.  In its current form, the ordinance exempts bars from the ban and does not include our parks and gardens.  The ordinance must be given a second reading or vote to become final, and that could happen at the next Council meeting.      
            The City Council will have a public hearing on this issue next Tuesday, February 17, 2009, at 6:00 p.m.  We will meet in the auditorium of our historic Opera House in anticipation that many will want to be heard.  This is an important public debate.  If you have an opinion, you should come and state it; but it is important to be a part of meetings such as this one even if you do not wish to speak.  
            I hope that City Council will give final reading to the “Smoke-Free Sumter” ordinance on February 17.  I hope that the final ordinance will include bars and City parks and gardens in the ban.  However this debate ends, I believe it is good that our citizens are involved, interested and participating in the decision-making process.  Sumter is your hometown.  You have a stake in what is happening here.  Your City Council wants to know your feelings on this and other subjects.  I hope that this debate on the smoking ordinance will spur all of us to become more involved in our community.             

                                                                                                            Joseph T. McElveen, Jr.

                                                                                                            Mayor, City of Sumter