CITIES SHOULD HAVE FREEDOM ON TOBACCO USE

* Legislators should butt out of whether local governments can pass their
own ordinances

I'm not a tobacco control advocate. In fact, the King City Council and I
decided against enacting an ordinance to ban smoking in the workplace just
recently. But I think it would be dangerous to deny local governments the
right to consider their own laws governing tobacco use.

That's why I am against House Bill 2806, which would prevent Oregon cities
from enacting ordinances to regulate indoor smoking in bars or restaurants.

It's not appropriate for the state to decide for any Oregon community how an
issue that needs to reflect community values, such as secondhand smoke,
should be handled.

State lawmakers should butt out.

While we in King City clearly don't see eye-to-eye with the city council
members in Corvallis who passed the state's first ban on smoking in public
places, we absolutely defend their right to take that stand. Elected city
leaders are best able to gauge what is in the best interests of their
community and their residents. What's best for Corvallis isn't necessarily
best for King City. Is that really a surprise?

Certainly the Legislature is in no position to dictate to King City
residents or the residents of any Oregon city how best to handle such a
complex local issue.

The King City Council considered the facts. We weighed the opinions of both
tobacco control advocates and those advocating for smokers' rights.

During the process, we were thrust into the media spotlight. It wasn't
surprising that what we were considering made the news -- if an ordinance
had passed, it would have had an impact on virtually every person in King
City.

In the end, we decided it was best for King City not to enact this
ordinance.

Don't get us wrong. We don't think secondhand smoke is a blessing. There are
plenty of credible and respected parties who told us it is a health risk. We
don't think many in our community like secondhand smoke.

We were presented with public opinion polls showing support for a smoke-free
workplace ordinance. For now, we just believe that adults should continue to
be responsible for making their own decisions.

What about the King City Council's fact-finding process could be of concern
to the state lawmakers who support HB 2806? Can it be that these legislators
lack trust in those of us elected to guide our cities and make complex local
decisions?

Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers said, "It's entirely appropriate to have
local lawmakers weigh off the benefits vs. the costs" of local smoking
ordinances.

The Oregon Constitution understands that. It gives local governmental bodies
the right to pass ordinances they deem to be in the best interests of their
communities.

Even though I'm no tobacco control advocate, I think the state is treading
on dangerous ground here.

Give us local lawmakers some credit. Don't deny local governments the right
to consider laws governing something as local as tobacco smoke.

Don't pass HB 2806.