05-1074SUBSTITUTE - 12/07/OS
ORDINANCE
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Presented By
Referred To
CouncilFile# OS-1074
Ordinance #
GreenSheet# 3028840
23
Committee Date :
An Ordinance prohibiting smoking in bars and restaurants; creating responsibilities for
proprietors; prohibiting retaliation; and providing penalties for violation.
. ;.'r' � ,: - ;
THE COUNCIL OF THE CTI'Y OF SAINT PAiJL DOES ORDAIN:
'�i�{ /9 ��;�u
Section 1. That the Saint Paul L.egislaUve Code be amended by adding thereto a new Chapter
238 to read as follows:
��,� ���� CHAPTER 238. PUBLIC SMOHING IN LICENSED LIQUOR
ESTABLISHMENTS AND RESTAURANTS
� 19 'g�
ec. 238.01 Purposes and Findings of Fact �'� ��
The City Council finds that: ��� �
Tobacco smoke is a leading cause of disease in nonsmokers and a major source of indoor air
pollution. Secondhand smoke causes heart disease, lung cancer, respiratory infections,
decreased respiratory function and other health problems. Secondhand smoke kills an
estimated 35,000 to 62,000 Americans each year from coronary heart disease. Secondhand
smoke also causes an estimated 3,000 lung cancer deaths in America each year.
These effects are well documented, and numerous medical and scientific authorities,
including the American Medicai Association, the Surgeon General, the National Institute on
Occupational Safety and Health, the National Cancer Institute, the Environmental Protection
Agency, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Toxicology Program and the World
Health Organization have recognized the deadly effects of exposure to secondhand smoke.
The proposed Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, a global treaty negotiated by
more than190 countries, declares that "scientific evidence has unequivocally established that
exposure to tobacco smoke causes death, disease and disability."
There is no safe level of exposure to tobacco smoke. Science has been unable to find any
level of dilution at which smoke does not cause cancer. Neither the separation of smokers
and nonsmokers, nor the introduction of new ventilation systems, can eliminate the health
hazards caused by secondhand smoke.
Page 1 of 6 -{� b
��� i .oS
\"L�'t
Employees in smoky workplaces are at special risk. One study has estimated that working
2 in a smoky bar for eight hours is equivalent to smoking 16 cigazettes. Also at special risk are
3 children, elderly people, and those with cardiovasculaz disease or impaired respiratory
4 function, including people with asthma and those with obstrucrive airway disease.
5
6 Objective evidence does not bear out the fear that elimination of public smoking will hazm
7 a community's economy or resuit in a net loss of jobs in restaurants and bars. On the contrary,
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
4�
many independent economic studies have shown that the elimination of smoking has no
material economic impact on a community. These studies are drawn from the experience of
hundreds of communiUes that have successfully eliminated smoking in workplaces and
public places. The states of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, and New York have
adopted laws ending all smoking in bazs, restaurants, and other public places, as have the
nations of Ireland, New Zealand and Norway.
By reducing the exposure of young people to adult smoking and unhealthy role modeling,
elimination of smoking in public places furthers Minnesota's goal of reducing youth
smoking.
There is no legal or constitutional "right to smoke." Business owners have no legal or
constitutional right to expose their employees and customers to toxic chemicais, whether in
tobacco smoke or otherwise. On the contrary, employers have a common law duty to provide
their workers with a workplace that is not unreasonably dangerous.
Accordingly, the City Council finds and declares that the putpose of this ordinance is to:
(1)
�Z)
(3)
Protect the public health, weifare and safety by better ensuring the ability of
citizens to breathe safe and uncontaminated air;
Affirm that the right to breathe has priority over ihe desire to smoke; and
Protect vulnerable populations, including employees, children, the elderly and
those with chronic health conditions.
Sec.238.02 Definitions.
As used in this ordinance:
(a) "bowling centers� �pool halls, rental halls and bin og halls" means those
establishments licensed under Chapter 322 . 403, and 405 of the Saint Paul
L,egislative Code, whether or not they are also a licensed liquor
establishment.
(b) "Licensed liquor estabiishmenY' means an estabiishment that has an on-sale
intoxicating liquor license; an on-sale 3.2 nercent malt -itamint�ieieating
liquor license ; a wine license and/or a strong beer license issued pursuant to
Chapters 409 or 410 of the Saint Paul L,egislative Code, as amended from
Page 2 of 6 � ,�
�v
time to time, but does not include outdoor azeas and does not include the
guest rooms of a hotel or motel.
(c) "Other person in chazge" means the agent of the proprietor authorized to
perform administrative direction to and general supervision of the activities
within a bar or restaurant at any given time.
(d) "Proprietor' means the party who holds the license or licences for a bar or
restaurant. The term "proprietor" may apply to a corporation as well as an
individual.
(e) "Restaurant" ' means an establishment that is
operating under a license issued pursuant to L.egislative Code Section
331A.04(d�}$j(19)(20) er (21) or 22 , as amended from time to time,
but does not include outdoor areas and does not include the guest rooms of
a hotel or motel.
(fl "Smoking" means the inhaling, exhaling or combustion of any cigar,
cigarette, pipe, tobacco product, weed, plant or any other similar article.
"Smoking" includes possessing or carrying a lighted cigar, cigazette, pipe or
any other lighted smoking equipment. "Smoking" does not include the use of
tobacco by an enrolled member of a federally-recognized Indian tribe as part
of a traditional Indian spiritual or cultural ceremony.
Sec.238.03 Prohibitions.
Smoking is prohibited in restaurants, pool halls�bowling centers, rentai halls, bineo
halls and licensed liquor establishments.
Sec. 238.04 Responsibilities of Proprietors.
The proprietor or other person in charge of a bar or restaurant shall:
(a) Post "no smoking" signs that comply with the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air
Act Rules, Minnesota Rules, part 4620.0500, as amended from time to time;
(b) Ensure that ashtrays, lighters, and matchbooks are not provided in any azea
where smoking is prohibited; and
(c) Ask any person who smokes in an area where smoking is prohibited to refrain
from smoking and, if the person does not refrain from smoking after being
asked to do so, ask the person to leave. If the person refuses to leave. the
proprietor or person in char�e of the bar or restaurant shail contact the olice
deuartment and ask that the �erson be tresnassed from the establishment.
Sec. 238.05 Additional Private Prohibitions.
Page 3 of 6 �
.� ,OS
��.
1 Nothing in this ordinance prevents the proprietor or other person in charge of any place,
2 including, without limitation, any outdoor space, from prohibiting smoking in any such place.
3
4 Sec. 238.06 Retaliation Prohibited.
5
6 No person or employer shall discharge, refuse to hire, or in any manner retaliate against, any
7 employee, applicant for employment, or customer because the employee, applicant or
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
customer exercises any right to a smoke-free environment afforded by this ordinance or other
law.
Sec. 238.07 Employee's Rights Preserved.
An employee who consents to work in a setting where an employer allows smoking does not
waive or otherwise surrender any legal rights the employee may have against the employer
or any other party.
Sec. 238.08 Other Applicable Laws.
This ardinance is intended to complement and go beyond the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air
Act, Minnesota Statutes §§144.411 to 144.417, as amended from time to time. Nothing in
this ordinance authorizes smoking in any location where smoking is prohibited or restricted
by other laws.
Sec. 238.09. Violation and Penalties.
(a) Proprietors. It is a violation of this ordinance for the proprietor to fail to
comply with the requirements of section 238.04, or to retaliate against an
employee, applicant for empioyment or customer, as prohibited by section
238.06.
(b) Penalties. Failure to comply with the requirement of this ordinance shall be
a basis for adverse action under Saint Paul I.egislative Code §310.06(b)(7).
(c)
. A violation of any provision
of this ordinance shall be considered a violation of the provisions of the
le�islative code relatine to the licensed activit�under § 310.05(m)(2) and
shall be punishable accordin�y under that section.
Sec. 238.10. Severability.
If any portion of this ordinance, or its application to any circumstances, is held invalid, the
Page 4 of 6
1,2'� ��
1 remaining provisions shall be considered severable, and shall be given effect to the
2 ma�cimum extent possible.
�
Page 5 of 6 `�����
1 Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after passage, approval and
2 publication, or Mazch 31, 2006, which ever is later.
Requested by Department of:
Adopted by Council:
�� J�
. �� -'`,-
/
'�� .�� '� �:`i
By:
Fo proved by Cit Attorney
By:
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By :
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
CO ��cit
Gontact Person & Phone:
Councilmember Dave Shune
266-8620
Must Be on Council Agend
1 frNOV-05
Date Initiated: �
16NOV-05 ! Green Sheet NO:
�
Assign
Number
For
Routing
Order
Total # of Signature Pages _(Ciip All Locations for Signature)
Action Requested:
An ordinance prohibiting smoking in bars and restaurants; creating responsibilites for proprietors; prohibiting retaliation; and
providing genalries for violation.
Recommendations� Approve (A) or Reject (R):
Planning Commission
CIB Committee
Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions:
1. Has this person/fircn ever worked under a contract for this department�
Yes No
0`j-�o��
3028840
ueoamnerrc serrciorerson mmavua[e
0 ooncil
1 ouncil � DeoartmentDirector I
2 iN Clerk I Ciri Clerk
3 t I '
4 i
5 i I I
Civil Service Commission I 2 Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
' Yes No
3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normally possessed by any
current city employee?
Yes No
Explain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
-Advantages If Approved:
�
DisadvantaqesifApproved:
�DisadvaMages ff Not Approved:
Transaction:
Fundin5l Source:
Financial I nformation:
(Explain)
Cost/Revenue Budgeted:
Activity Number:
Council File # ���
Ordinance # ���
Green Sheet # J�� � n� I v
ORDINANCE
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Presented
Referred To
Committee Date :
An Ordinance prohibih smoking in bars and restaurants; creating responsibilities for
proprietors; prohi ting retaliation; and providing penalties for violation.
THE COUNCTL OF CTI'Y OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. That the Saint Paul
238 to read as follows:
CHAPTER 238.
ESTA]
Sec. 238.01 Purposes and Findings of
The City Council finds that:
IKING IN LICENSED LIQUOR
AND RE5TALlRANTS
Tobacco smoke is a leading cause of disease in nonsmo ers and a major source of indoor air
pollution. Secondhand smoke causes heart disease, lun ancer, respiratory infections,
decreased respiratory function and other health problem Secondhand smoke kills an
estimated 35,000 to 62,000 Americans each year from coron heart disease. Secondhand
smoke also causes an estimated 3,000 lung cancer deaths in A rica each year.
These effects aze well documented, and numerous medical and cienti
including the American Medical Association, the Surgeon General, the atio
Occupational Safety and Health, the National Cancer Institute, the Environ e
Agency, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Toxicology Progra
Health Organization have recognized the deadly effects of exposure to seco;
The proposed Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, a global treaty
more than190 countries, declares that "scientific evidence has unequlvocally a
exposure to tobacco smoke causes death, disease and disability."
; authorities,
il Institute on
al Protection
and the World
hand smoke.
ot�ated by
ab � shed that
There is no safe level of exposure to tobacco smoke. Science has been unable to fi�
level of dilution at which smoke does not cause cancer. Neither the separation of sn
and nonsmokers, nor the introduction of new ventilation systems, can eliminate the
hazazds caused by secondhand smoke.
Code be amended by adding thereto a new Chapter
Page 1 of 5 �� � ����t�
�5 l�1 `�
Employees in smoky workplaces are at special risk. One study has estimated that working
in a smoky bar for eight hours is equivalent to smoking 16 cigarettes. Also at special risk are
children, elderly people, and those with cardiovascular disease or impaired respiratory
function, including people with asthma and those with obstructive airway disease.
Objective evidence does not bear out the fear that elimination of public smoking will hazm
community's economy or result in a net loss of jobs in restaurants and bars. On the contrary,
m y independent economic studies have shown that the elimination of smoking has no
mat �al economic impact on a community. These studies are drawn from the experience of
hundr s of communities that have successfully eliminated smoking in workplaces and
public p ces. The states of California, Connecticuf, Delaware, Maine, and New York have
adopted la s ending all smoking in bars, restaurants, and other public places, as have the
nations of Ir and, New Zealand and Norway.
By reducing the
elimination of ;
sraoking.
of young people to adult smoking and unhealthy role modeling,
in public places furthers Minnesota's goal of reducing youth
There is no legal or con titutional "right to smoke." Business owners have no legal or
constitutional right to expo their employees and customers to toxic chemicals, whether in
tobacco smoke or otherwise. the contrary, employers have a common law duty to provide
their workers with a workplace atis not unreasonably dangerous.
Accordingly, the City Council finds`�nd declares that the purpose of this ordinance is to:
(1) Protect the public health, elfare and safety by better ensuring the ability of
citizens to breathe safe and contaminated air;
(2) Affirm that the right to breathe s priority over the desire to smoke; and
(3) Protectvulnerablepopularions, inclu �ng employees, children, the elderly and
those with chronic health conditions.
Sec.238.02 Definitions.
As used in this ordinance:
(a) "bowling centers and pool halls" means those establis
licensed under Chapter 322 of the Saint Paul L.eg
Code, whether or not they aze also a licensed
establishment.
(b) "Licensed liquor establishment" means an establishment that has�i
on-sale intoxicating liquor license; an on-sale non-intoxicating liquor
license ; a wine license and/ar a strong beer license issued pursuant
Page 2 of 5 ff G
/f
(`�, t
05-�01�
1 to Chapters 409 or 410 of the Saint Paul L.egisiative Code, as
amended from time to time, but does not include the guest rooms of
3 a hotel or motel.
(c) "Other person in chazge" means the agent of the proprietor authorized to
perform administrative direction to and general supervision of the activities
within a bar or restaurant at any given time.
(d) "Proprietar' means the party who holds the license or licences for a bar or
restaurant. The term "proprietor" may apply to a corporation as well as an
, individual.
(e) `RestauranY' has the meaning specified in Legislative Code Section
31A.04(d)(17)(18)(19)(20) or (21), as amended from time to time, but does
n include outdoor areas and does not include the guest rooms of a hotel or
(f� "Smokin " means the inhaling, exhaling or combustion of any cigar,
cigarette, p' e, tobacco product, weed, plant or any other similar article.
"Smoking" in udes possessing or carrying a lighted cigu, cigarette, pipe or
any other lighte moking equipment. "Smoking" does not include the use of
tobacco by an enro ed member of a federally-recognized Indian tribe as part
of a traditional India spiritual or cultural ceremony.
Sec.238.03 Prohibitions.
Smoking is prohibited in restaurants, pool
establishments.
Sec. 238.04 Responsibilities of Progrietors.
and bowling centers and licensed liquor
The proprietor or other person in charge of a bar or
(a) Post "no smoking" signs that comply with the l
Act Rules, Minnesota Rules, part 4620.0500, as
shall:
Clean Indoor Air
from time to time;
(b) Ensure that ashtrays, lighters, and matchbooks are not p vided in any azea
where smoking is prohibited; and
(c) Ask any person who smokes in an area where smoking is prohibi d to refrain
from smoking and, if the person does not refrain from smoking er being
asked to do so, ask the person to leave.
Sec. 238.05 Additional Private Prohibitions.
Nothing in this ordinance prevents the proprietor or other person in charge of any place,
including, without limitation, any outdoor space, from prohibiting smoking in any such place.
Page 3 of 5 �� �-G?�
r
,
(�5' 1t�1 �l
Sec. 238.06 Retaliation Prohibited.
No person or employer shall dischazge, refuse to hire, or in any manner retaliate against, any
employee, applicant for employment, or customer because the employee, applicant or
customerexercises anyright to a smoke-free environment afforded by this ordinance or other
Sec.`�38.07 Employee's Rights Preserved.
An empl ee who consents to work in a setting where an employer allows smoking does not
waive or o erwise surrender any ]egal rights the employee may have against the employer
or any other y.
Sec. 238.08 O er Applicable Laws.
This ordinance is int ded to camplement and go beyond the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air
Act, Minnesota Statute §§144.411 to 144.417, as amended from time to time. Nothing in
this ordinance authorizes oking in any location where smoking is prohibited or restricted
by other laws.
Sec. 238.09. Violation and
(a) Proprietors. It is a�io
comply with the requi�
employee, applicant for
238.06.
of this ordinance for the proprietor to fail to
of section 238.04, or to retaliate against an
�yment ar customer, as prohibited by section
(b) Penalties. Failure to comply wi the requirement of this ordinance shall be
a basis for adverse action under S t Paul Legislative Code §310.06(b)(7).
(c) A licensee who violates any provision o this ordinance shall be punished by
a fine of not to exceed $300. A licensee o violates any provision of this
ordinance within one year after having been etermined to have committed
a previous violation shail be punished by a fine f not to exceed $1,000. Each
day of violation constitutes a separate offense.
Sec. 238.10. Severability.
If any portion of this ardinance, or its application to any circumstances, is h d invalid, the
remaining provisions shall be considered severable, and shall be given e ect to the
maacimum extent possible.
Page 4 of 5
/
lr-`��
��i
C�,
i Section 2.
2 ublicatio
This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after passage, approval and
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
BY:
ApproVed by MayoY: Date
By:
Requested by Depa ent of:
By:
�
r
Form Approqed�by Cit,p / Attoz
; f � t
^ 7 �
Approved by Mayor for SuPnnission to ouncil
BY: _ _. _
Adopted by Council: Date
�s-�d ��/
Comment Supporting a Smoking Ban in Bars and Restaurants
City of Sk Paul
December 7, 2005
! am pleased to see momentum building on a smoking ban in bars and
restaurants. Please do what you can to enact a smoking ban in these places.
For me, it "ss a question of health_ t do not go into establishments where there is
smoking prevalent, and that excludes me sometimes from the company of
iriends. 1 have one uncle who died of a smoking-related disease as�d another still
living with it I have no desire to suffer the same probtems.
The assertion that there is a negative net economic resuli of such a ban is
ridiculous. Add up the cost of heart bypass operations, pacemakers, oxygen
therapy and a host of other health costs directly attributab4e to tobacco smoke,
then compare that with the relafively batanced business net effects of the bans
experienced in other, more progressive places. The current upward spirai in
health costs is strangling both govemment and private employers.
We have been quite concemed with outdoor air qua{ity in the Tw+n Citiss,
measuring it and regulating emissions. Why aren't we more concerned abou# air
quality in confined areas like buildings?
Thar�k �,
��/�.a 4'° ��----�
Les Everett
1988 Brewsfer St #109
St. Paul, MN 55108
651-641-1880
LAWOFFICES
Collins, Buckley, Sauntry & Haugh, �
West 1100 Frst Nalional Bank Building
332 Minr�sota Street
Sairrt Paul, Minnesota 551Q1-1379
Teleptpne: 65�227-06�1
Fac CS}2Z7-0758
wu✓.v.cbsh.r�et
December 7.-2005
VIA HAND DELIVERY
St. Paul Ciry Council
City Hall
I S West Kellogg
St. Paul, NIN �5102
Dear Couracil Members
l/S-id��
� r�i �. sa,m�
Mark W. Gehan
*�r wama<zr�emey
.n,omas a.aca,ne9
o Dan O'Connell
Chnstine L Stroemer
=7haras t McEliistrem
* (�nstoPlw K WaGNer
* • Watter G. Bauch
Garth G. Gavenda
Sarah A Remdl
Matlhew W. Telleen
�r ca,�i
�: Theotlore J Collins
Renred
"Wiiliam E_Haugh, Jr
isaz-ises
Eugene D BucklEy
This law firm represents Dan Dahiin who has ope.ated the Buttery at 6th and Robert for almost
thirty years. Dan is also my friend
Tonioht. the Counctl wiil conduct a hearina on an ordinance io prohibit smokine in St. Paul bars
and restaurants. You nave allotted fifteen ininutes for interested persons io discuss this issue.
Because the outcome appears to oe a foregone conciusion, my ciien* has asked me to write this
letter expressing his deep disagreement and rearet.
My client will be ciosing the Bfittery on December 23_ 2G0�. The ordinance will make it
impossibie for him to continue in business. He does not question your sincer.ty. but he has asked
me to suaoest to �ou that yov are out oi touch with what it takes to keep a business like his in
operation �
Dan asked me also to convey to you that he has ereatly enjoved his many years as a cit�zen of
Downtown. He has made many friends in the Downtown community and he will miss them.
Res ectfully,- ��
Y�:.��% � �
r
MARK W. GEHAN
MWG:cmc
cc: Mayor Randy Kelly
Mayor-Elect Chris Coleman
� n�so na�mea i� wisr�sci
iCerefietl Cy t�e NanaW BoarE of Tnal Pflwcary as a Cml Tnal Atlwcate
t CmI TrW SpecWSS Czmfietl bY the CMt Lm�aoon Secmi of t�e Nmrtwsota State Bar Psonanm
oCPA. CemFed tyfie Mm��esda 9a@ Boa`tl d AccaaHar�cy � CPA. InatWe
�biBAuiFinarsz "Felb�arotNZMfencm��catlemyof Msfirtnnyyawy¢rs-
. AI50 Atlmilletl in Mrciugan. Texas arA The Dvstrict ot Colianbu
J� io��
�'.VNT �AUL �REA
CHAMB£R OF COMMERCE
Chazvber of Commerce Ceni¢i
401 �,�'on6 Robert Sueei
5�:� i5o
saini ra�,t, ��limesota;;lo1
Suburban Business Cenrer
193i West Counry Road B2
Suire 241
Roseville, Minnesora »113
Phone: 6>1.2235000
Fax: 651Z23SI19
YOUR
BUSINESS
ADVOCAT�
December 8, 2005
Councilmember Dave Thune
Room 310-B City Aall
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Deaz Councilmember Thune:
The Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce represerns over 2200 member businesses,
over 50% of which aze located in Saint Paul. Our membership includes retail
establishments, insurance companies, health care industry and the hospitality industry-
among many others. We bring the broad business perspective to public policy issues.
We will not be testifying tonight on the proposed tightening of the smoking ban, but
would like you to Imow that we sfand in opposition of a local ordinance. This proposed
ordinance would change the regulatory landscape for hundreds of Saint Paul business
owners, just eight short months after the first smoking ban was enacted.
We do not dispute the hannful affects of secondhand smoke. Since May 2004, the
Chamber has been in support of a statewide smoking ban that would minimize economic
displacement and ensure fair competition.
The thrust of our opposition is about the importance of maintaining a stab[e regula[ory
environment. It is unfair to the small businesses in this city that spent tens of thousands
of dollars to redesign and construct their property to comply with Ramsey County's
ordinance, which went into effect in March of this year.
A stable and predictable tax & regulatory environment, where businesses can make
investrnents with a fair amount of certainty, is critical to a healthy economy.
Si�ificantly changing the smoking ban in the City of Saint Paul so soon after it was
enacted, sends a message of an unstable regulatory environment to businesses
considering investing in Saint Paul.
I appreciate your consideration of our position.
Sincerely,
C.���rr�' (�,��,�� y��
Sandra Westerman �
Vice Presidern of Public Affairs �
s a i ai t p a u l.c la a m b e r, c o m
� JHN 1'(�b4
I'IF'Lb l.l I T I,UUIYI.l L
OlCO!>JJYV r.G1/UG
� /��5�
innec�polis
city of lakes
January 2046
Council Member Dave Tbune
City Tiail Room 310-B
I S West Kellogg Blvd
St Paul, MN 55102
Dear Council Member Thune:
We are writing to declaze our support for secondhand tobacco smoke protections, and
offer our partnership to implement a Saint Paul-Minneapolis regional secondhand smoke
protection policy.
After the vote to weaken Hennepin County's protections, opponents of sacondhand
smoke protections were reportedly shouting "On to Minneapolis." Let lhere be no
mistake: We have no interest whatsoever in bringing the secondhand smoke back into
Minneapolis bazs or other workplaces. Hennepin County took a step backwazds, but
Minneapolis is.not following.
We are every bit as committed to protecting Minneapolis baz workers and customen
from secondhand smoke as we aze to protecting people in offices, stores, govemment
huitdings, restaurants and other indoor public gathering spols.
We appiaud your leadership in extending secondhand smoke protections to Saint Paul
bazs. In Minneapolis, we have seen that our ordinance is already achieving its ambitious
objective—studies show the air in our public placcs is significantly safer than before the
law was passed. In addition, citizens overwhelmiagly support smoke-&ee aiz. We be]ieve
the Minneapolis protections will be even more successful when Saint Paul bars are
protected, since ihe air in the two T`win Cities will be more consistently and universally
smoke-&ee and safe.
TOD (6�2) 673•2157
NFFIRMATNE ACTION EMPLOYER
� Recycled Peper 90%
Fost Qonsumer Fiber
J HIY 1 ( � l�4
� January 2006
Page 2
I'll"Lb l.l I i I.UUlYl.1L
oicc>�."»-rv i .c�c
!� /d��
As you plan to impiement the piotections cun'enUy pending before the Saint Paul City Cotancil,
please let us lrnow if Minneapolis can be helpful. Together, Minneapolis, Saint Paul,
Bloomington and Golden Valley will have the beginnings of a very sobust regional secondhand
smoke policy, and we want to work with you to make the policy a success for all involved.
We also offer our partnership in the dtive to enact a statewide law to protect baz and restavrant
workers and customers. W orldng together with you and others, we hope this is ihe year that
statewide pzotections wili be enacied.
Sincezely,
Mayor R.T. Rybak
City of Minneapolis .
� Ly���
Cam, Gordon
Counci�YlG�her Ward 2
Council Member Wazd 5
t
Gary Schiff
Gounoil Member Wazd 9
ac: Mayor Chris Coleman
Betsy XTodges �
Cowlcil Memb Ward 13
0
'sa Goodman
Councit Member Wazd 7
c ����i�/�
Ralph Reirungton
Council Membex Wazd 10
Elizabeth G idden
Council Member 'VVazd 8
/�
� Scott Benson
Council Member Ward 11
TOTAL P.02