Lawsuits filed to overturn smoking ban - 90K signatures thrown out

I have permission to post this person's comment - In ohiosmokersrights@yahoogroups.com, Deborah Kistner
smokerchic06@...> wrote:

Good on the Franklin County one that was filed yesterday. OLBA is
suing the D o H. Judge assigned is David Cain, which is good, he
ruled against Tracy Sabetta on signature collection during the
campaign, he threw out 90K plus signatures. So that is a plus on
our side, I might just email Judge Cain and tell him how just this
week a judge in Adams County Colorado overturned they smoking ban
because it it unconstitutional and does not allow for due
process............sound familiar
bsr71555 wrote:
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?
AID=/20070414/NEWS02/704140399/-1/NEWS

Article published Saturday, April 14, 2007
2 court actions filed to bar ban on smoking from taking effect

BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS - Two court actions have been filed to prevent new
smoking-
ban rules from taking effect even before a legislative panel takes
them up on Monday.

The Buckeye Liquor Permit Holders Association and the Ohio
Licensed
Beverage Associations, whose members are largely bars and
restaurants, filed actions this week in Hamilton and Franklin
County
common pleas courts respectively.

Both argue the Ohio Department of Health overstepped its authority
when it proposed a last-minute exemption for some veterans groups
and
other private clubs, which bars, restaurants, bowling alleys, and
others that serve alcohol or food consider to be their competition.

The law as passed by voters on Nov. 7 prohibits smoking in
workplaces
and any other indoor public place with few exceptions. To quality
for
an exemption, a private club would have to be a non-profit
organization, could have no employees, could have no nonmembers or
anyone under age 18 present, and be located in a stand-alone
structure from which smoke could not move to another smoke-free
area.

The rules, however, added a sentence stating that an organization
member is not an "employee" in the eyes of the ban. This would be
true even if the member is a paid worker.

The Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review is expected to consider
this and other smoking-ban rules at a Statehouse hearing Monday.
If
the committee does not object, the rules could take effect at the
end
of the month and the state could begin actively enforcing the law.

The private club exemption has the support of Gov. Ted Strickland
but
is opposed by the American Cancer Society and other organizations
that pushed Issue 5 last fall.

Although the private club is extremely narrow in the law, some
voters
have said they were confused by language that appeared on the
ballot
that simply listed private clubs among the few exemptions with no
qualifying language.

The same language was also supposed to exempt "family owned
businesses" with no qualifying language. Funny how "family owned"
became only family can work there and no others are allowed into the
place of business. Only in America do you vote for a law and have
the qualifying language and rules created AFTER the vote. Does
anyone else think this stinks or is it just me?

Pam Parker
GCtavern

No votes yet

More lawsuits are needed... on this. The more, the better.

Tracy Sabetta is a whore for the anti-tobacco movement. She lives in a big house paid for by BIG ANTI-TOBACCO money. And this chick rails on and on about Big Tobacco. What a hypocrite she is.

If someone bothers you while you're smoking, kick them smartly in the shin. It works like a dream...

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

Local health departments face funding problems because of smoking
ban.

Copied with the permission of Brittany Morehouse :

Since state lawmakers have determined that enforcing the smoking ban
is a local responsibility, many cities and counties are backed into a
corner.
Ravenna's health department will have to dip into its own budget to
pay for the extra costs it endures. Although the state is subsidizing
local government, it's not enough.

"We're getting a whopping $847.00," said Kevin Poland, who is the
city's mayor and president of the health board. "That subsidy doesn't
even cover the materials to pass out and we as a small community..it
is going to be a burden financially to enforce this."

Poland also said there are problems with enforcment because if there
is a violation it must be heard in front of the city's health board.
The five member group are all volunteers and will inevitably be
judging their peers.

"If there are appeals to the health board's decision," he
adds, "those appeals are filed in Franklin County. That means we have
to hire attorneys down in Franklin County or travel to Columbus."

Ravenna's health commissioner, Lynette Blasimen, agreed there are
manpower concerns.

"I'm excited about the smoking ban, unfortunately, that excitement
has to be off balanced with...now what do we do with this great law?"

Other departments, like the one in Portage County, just can't come up
with the money to pay for enforcement. Portage County hasn't passed a
health levy since 1955.

According to the Ohio Department of Health, the responsibilities of the owners / managers of an affected business must: 1) prohibit smoking; 2) post

Big Jim

Grossman will be back for more money to run his department... bet on it. This guy is a fanatic about smoking and will beef up his department three-fold, if necessary, to enforce this law. I hope it all pans out the way you predict, bigjim. It would serve them right if their budget went way over and Grossman goes with hat in hand to wrangle more money for the Health Department.

Jim Delaney or Jim Avolt was quoted in the Blade (dont recall which one)as saying that all business owners should appeal any charges of smoking - because it will cost the smoke police about $3,000 PER violation to appeal. Could add up to huge bucks. As long as there is shred of doubt whether the owner knew the person was smoking - or if his warnings to put out the cigs went unheeded - or the slightest hint that the report was a ploy to just make trouble for the owner - I dont see how the courts could find the owners guilty. Heresay is still hearsay - and a lot of the reports will be based on hearsay. By the time it gets to a courtroom - most of them will come down to 'he said, she said'.

I did not believe you were legally allowed to bring a knowingly false prosecution against a party? In that - if the law reads that these specific items cited above are the obligations of the bar/pub owner and it is reasonable to believe that the owner has adhered to them - is it legal for charges to be brought anyway?

I'm looking at it from the reverse end - doesn't the county have an obligation - since it's such a publicly held knowledge that Grossman is a fanatic and the likely costs that will occur if he isn't restrained to a reasonable degree - don't we tax payers have something to say about this?

I don't feel kindly toward footing the bill for one persons' crusade.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

" ...no penalty for mis-reporting a smoking violation."

really? What would happen if I called the state and said that an official at the LC Board of Health allowed me to smoke inside their building and I did?

MikeyA

MikeyA

Grossman is obsessed with smokers is he used to be one. There's nothing worse than a smoker who quits. They're the most rabid smoker-haters in the entire world as a rule.

----------------------

BRING THE TROOPS HOME-NOW!
Why should one more drop of our soldiers blood be spilled on foreign soil? Why fight/die for 'freedom' anymore when our citizens are pissing it away at the voting booth?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

'I used to have compassion, but they taxed it and legislated it out of existence.'

is Bill Delaney. I've spoken with him personally, and he said yeah, he quit, but it was a personal decision, and no one forced him to, and he's an adult and doesn't mind in the least being around smokers. My personal theory is, the vast majority of ex-drinkers and smokers want both outlawed everywhere so they never see it, therefore they'll not be tempted to start again. In other words, weak-willed, so they get the government/big brother to do it for 'em. Just my theory.

----------------------

BRING THE TROOPS HOME-NOW!
Why should one more drop of our soldiers blood be spilled on foreign soil? Why fight/die for 'freedom' anymore when our citizens are pissing it away at the voting booth?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

'I used to have compassion, but they taxed it and legislated it out of existence.'

Damn! I hope he doesn't quit drinking his evening scotch or we'll all be in real trouble. I just don't understand the ex-drinkers/smokers/whatever. They quit. So what? Is everybody else supposed to crawl under a rock and die? I don't get the psychology of it.

MikeyA, these are all uncharted waters. Although giving false testimony in sworn police complaints is addressed in Ohio Revised Code, the bullshit anonymous calls that will result in smoking ban investigations / violations is not addressed at all. Before this time, an unsworn complaint has never been the basis for anything. This is what happens when an anti smoking law is written by anti-smokers and not legislators who tend to see things in a more sensible manner. Don't blame me, I didn't vote for it.

As far as your point of smoking in government buildings, I've got a great idea! You get your digital camera and follow me down to the Health Department on S. Erie. We'll both goto the lobby, I'll hold-up the daily paper to prove the date and will fire-up a cigar. You take some pictures and forward them to the State for a violation. If someone recognizes me, I'll get a $100 fine, but the "owner or manager" will get a $250 fine. Hell, we can take turns and do it 5 times, until the "owner or manager" of the Lucas County Health Department (Grossman) gets fined $2,500. Whatever excuse they use to get out of the fine will be gold to the tavern owners because they can use it too. Good Idea, no?

** Note . . . I've had 4 margaritas and may not think this is a good idea in the morning.

Big Jim

Jim

Once I catch up to ya on the margaritas I think I'll meet ya down there. LOL I just laugh at the absurdity of all of this.

It goes to prove you don't have to have thoughs rooted in reason and logic to attempt to control the lives of others.

MikeyA

MikeyA

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.