CC Min 1994-01-31 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Dr. Bernhard Votteri, 170 Alameda, Redwood City, stated the current ordinance is a hoax as there is no safe haven from second hand smoke. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mayor Pro Tem Claire declared a five minute recess at 10:05 P.M. Meeting reconvened at 10:11 P.M. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Councilwoman Steinfeld stated she would not support the amendment as she believed the issue of smoking or not smoking is a personal choice; restaurants have a large economic investment that would be affected if the amendment passed; employees have a choice where they work; other substances such as perfumes are not regulated and are just as irritating; the real issue is, the current ordinance mandating 50% smoke free restaurants is working; and air quality standards are regulated now. Councilwoman La Berge stated her strong feelings about the dangers of passive smoke. Councilwoman La Berge stated it was unfortunate that only six members of the Council were present when such an important issue was being discussed. M/S: LA BERGE/GASPARINI TO POSTPONE THE VOTE ON THIS AMENDMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 7, 1994 CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: A YES: COUNCIL MEMBERS GASPARINI, GREENALCH, LA BERGE AND MAYOR PRO TEM CLAIRE NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS SANFILIPO AND STEINFELD MINUTE ORDER NO. 94-028 Councilwoman Gasparini stated the issue of regulating smoking is a difficult one, a matter of values, that businesses are making decisions now in response to strong health care activists. Councilwoman Gasparini advised it was an economic decision that led the airlines' to go smoke free and restaurants will also make that same decision. Councilwoman La Berge agreed it was a matter of values, a health issue, and although this amendment might have negative short term economic impacts employees' health must be the primary issue. Councilman Greenalch stated that what we do and where we do it is already highly regulated, and this restriction is intended to protect citizens, not make it more difficult to do business. Councilman Greenalch stated it was in the best interest of good health to have a smoke free environment and he was not convinced by the "personal choice" argument. Councilman Greenalch said he was convinced by the medical experts and a public policy perspective should prevail. Councilman Greenalch stated he would not push for exclusions and would support the amendment as proposed. Councilman Sanfilipo stated he agreed with Councilwoman Gasparini and wanted to see Redwood City businesses buy signs declaring a smoking or non-smoking establishment and let the customers decide. Councilman Sanfilipo stated Regular Meeting Minutes MINUTE BOOK NO. 52 January 31, 1994 Page No. 122 Page 6