My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_0816_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_0816_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 3:43:37 PM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:44:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
8/16/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
154
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
RECOMMENDATIONS <br />At the Advisory Board of Health meeting on May 25,2004, the following recommendations <br />were made based �r the premise that all employees and customers should be protected from <br />secondhand smoke exposure and be able to work or dine in a smoke-free environment. <br />The Advisory Board of Health recommends the following: <br />Ban smoking city-wide in the following areas: <br />� workplaces, including restaurants and bars (indoor and outdoor) <br />• public places, including outdoor bars and eating areas <br />• entrances (within 25 feet) to workplaces and public places <br />2. Continue to allow hotels and motels to designate guest rooms as smoking and non-smoking <br />as provided under the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act. <br />These study findings and recommendationswill be presented to the Bloomington City Council <br />for consideration at the June 28,2004, study meeting. <br />CONCLUSIONS <br />The Advisory Board of Health spent four months studying the issue of secondhand smoke and <br />considering options for smoking bans in workplaces and/or restaurants and bars. Members of the <br />Advisory Board of Health and public health staff have had numerous discussions with <br />representatives from other cities, organizations, businesses and citizens about the different issues <br />surrounding smoking bans. <br />Smoking restrictions are being widely debated in council chambers, bars, coffee shops, meetings, <br />and in homes across Minnesota. During the course of this study the cities of Minneapolis and St. <br />Paul began public deliberations on smoking bans. Earlier this year a bill was introduced in the <br />House and Senate that would have greatly modified the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act, <br />requiring all workplaces, including bars and restaurants, to be smoke-free. The bill was heard in <br />the Senate but not brought forward in the House. Ten other states and many other cities in the <br />U.S. have eliminated smoking in all workplaces and/or restaurants and bars. <br />Viewpoints about smoking bans are often polarized. Opponents of smoking bans believe that <br />government should not be involved in decisions affecting private business. Many restaurant and <br />bar owners fear they will lose revenues if they are forced to ban smoking. "Smoker's rights" <br />groups maintain that government should not restrict individuals' rights to smoke where they <br />please. <br />Proponents of smoking bans are committed to protecting the public's health. They cite the <br />scientific literature that demonstrates conclusively the harmful effects of secondhand smoke to <br />children and adults and that restaurant and bar smoking bans do not cause significant economic <br />loss to businesses. Supporters believe it is government's role and responsibilityto enact rules <br />and regulations to protect the health and safety of citizens if private business does not. They <br />�� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.