Garland adopts stricter smoking ordinance

Apr. 27, 2018

After lengthy discussions and comments by Mayor Douglas Athas, City Council members, health association members, e.g. American Cancer Society, restaurant/club owners, private citizens and others, the council recently voted to change Garland’s smoking ordinance.

 

As of May 5, smoking will not be allowed in any restaurant, including the Beef House and the Gold Mine, which currently allow smoking. Bingo halls and private clubs that currently allow smoking are grandfathered so that smoking continues to be allowed in those establishments.

 

The ordinance prohibits smoking in public areas such as parks but allows smoking on golf courses. It also sets a specific number of feet that one must be from the door of an establishment before lighting up.

 

In a press release from the Texas Smoke-Free Coalition, proponents of a complete smoking ban expressed disappointment in the ordinance. Part of their statement follows:

 

“We are disappointed the city of Garland passed a watered-down smoke-free ordinance that continues to leave workers and patrons in Garland exposed to deadly secondhand smoke. The city of Garland has failed in its task to protect public health and safety by exempting bingo halls and leaving a loophole for bars to allow smoking indoors. It shouldn’t matter if you work at a bar or a bank — no employee should have to breathe deadly secondhand smoke to earn their paycheck. Garland’s ordinance is out of step with current standards that prohibit smoking in all indoor workplaces and simply ask smokers to step outside, without exception.”

 

Council Members Jerry Nickerson and Robert J. Smith and the mayor, voted against the ordinance.

 

Athas said that the current ordinance is extensive and has changed almost every restaurant to non-smoking status. He added that all new restaurants being constructed are non-smoking. The mayor agres that there is an obligation to protect the health, safety and welfare of citizens, but there is also an obligation to protect citizens’ personal liberties.

 

Comparisons to other cities do not change his viewpoint.

 

“The argument that we are not like all the other cities in the Metroplex carries zero weight with me,” he said. “I’m actually proud to be a city that can make our own individual choices and not just copy other people.”

 

During the council meeting and in his personal blog, Smith explained that he opposed the ordinance because he believes in the rights of adults to make their own decisions about their health and whether they want to go into an environment where people are smoking.

 

He believes that the decision to adopt the ordinance was partially an economic one.

 

“You can smoke on golf courses – which are no different than any other outdoor, public area. But somehow those are okay, too. Especially when the city owns the main golf course, right? Council, when we make an argument for public health, but then we add in provisions for special interests based solely on economic reasons, then we’re creating different classes of citizens. We’re saying that it’s okay to smoke if you belong to this club, but under others you can’t. These are the types of special interest carve-outs that tend to infuriate the public. It means that this club, that bar, or our public golf course doesn’t have to follow the rules for economic, not health reasons.”

 

Smith sees the ordinance as a “loss of freedom for the private sector to make decisions on their own and he expressed concern over the “stripping away of rights of individuals.”

Archives