IBJNews

Talks start on Indiana smoking-ban compromise

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Legislators began negotiations Monday toward a compromise on proposed statewide smoking restrictions, with a leading supporter of a comprehensive ban saying the bill shouldn't prevent cities and counties from adopting tougher ordinances.

Republican Rep. Eric Turner of Cicero, who is leading the House-Senate conference committee handling the smoking ban bill, said he wouldn't support a provision added to the bill last week by the Senate that would block any new local smoking ordinances. That is one of several changes senators made in watering down the statewide restrictions.

Numerous cities and counties around the state currently have local ordinances that ban smoking in public buildings and workplaces, including restaurants and bars.

"I don't want to go down that path of trying to trump what locals have successfully done for a number of years," Turner said.

The House-approved bill would prohibit smoking in nearly all public places and businesses but give bars an 18-month exemption to the ban and continue to allow smoking at Indiana's 13 casinos, private clubs, retail tobacco stores, and cigar and hookah bars. The Senate greatly weakened the measure by cutting bars out of the proposed ban and adding new carve-outs for assorted businesses like veterans homes and nursing homes.

Casinos have argued they would see fewer gamblers if they were covered by the smoking ban — potentially threatening the some $650 million a year in tax revenue the state receives from them.

Mike Smith, president of the Casino Association of Indiana, told the conference committee that casinos worried that local governments could include them in local bans in the future if state law didn't prevent such action.

Republican Sen. Beverly Gard of Greenfield, the smoking ban bill's Senate sponsor, said she thought it was important to protect the right of cities and counties to adopt tougher smoking rules than whatever becomes state law.

Gard said that many new bars and restaurants had opened around Greenfield despite tough smoking bans in the city and Hancock County.

"It is a very family-friendly environment," she said. "No one can tell me that going smoke free is going to be bad for business because in my county and my hometown it has not been bad for business."

The negotiators expect to offer a compromise bill by the end of this week, when legislative leaders are planning to adjourn this year's session.

Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels has said he wants to see a statewide smoking ban with as few exemptions as possible, but hasn't specified what exemptions he believed were acceptable.

Anti-smoking advocates are opposing efforts to extend the bar exemption past the September 2013 deadline approved by the House. Opposition from health advocates last year to a House-approved bill that included a bar exemption without an end date contributed to its defeat in a Senate committee.

Sen. Michael Young, R-Indianapolis, offered an amendment the Senate adopted last week that would prohibit local ordinances from banning smoking at any home businesses. But Young, who was among those who opposed the bill in the Senate's 29-21 vote, said he thought smoking rules in general shouldn't be covered by state law.

"I just think this is an issue the local communities should decide," Young said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. In my opinion the estridge companies are crooks. They filed bankruptcy on their 'track housing' side of the business two weeks before they closed on one of my clients' homes. When my client first interviewed Estridge as a builder 6 months before, they specifically ASKED about the solvency of their business, knowing that some builders were struggling. Estridge truly misrepresented their financial situation at that time. I suppose I am more unhappy with the whole system than I am with the builder because what the heck==you can file bankruptcy on 'track homes' but still keep building and make money off of 'custom built' homes??? How ridiculous! They are all homes. How can a company be allowed to bilk thousands of dollars from their subcontractors but still be allowed to build houses?? they should have been made to pay back all their unpaid contractors before being allowed to profit from building any more houses! This alone makes them and the system crooks in my eyes. I would never build an estridge home and I would not recommend for my clients either. If they were truly 'bankrupt' how could they afford to keep building homes anyway??? The whole system needs fixed.

  2. I live a couple blocks east of the Angie's campus and my house is assessed for ~$160,000. If I could get that amount, let alone $384,000 (a 140% bonus), I'd sell in a minute. Either Angie's stockholders just got fleeced, or Angie's is getting about a 58% discount on their property taxes, if these properties are actually worth what they paid Mr. Oesterle for them. Which do you think is the case?

  3. Perhaps the IMA board is really to blame! They agreed to hire Charles. They can't seemingly find donors among themselves, or bring in new blood that will support the museums operating budget with an expanded museum and money to provide curators with something to do (ie buy art). The headlines of disarray at the museum and mass firings are hurting the reputation of the museum for some time to come. If people on the board had misgivings, perhaps they shpuld have more forcefully opposed efforts that they have seemingly been unable to fund, like expansion and the costs it has created!

  4. See, I told u Indyman and Dipsicle....this 8 days is overkill. It's barely worth a weekend....great job Tony George! Your dream has been fulfilled....he fans want the I r l back. Thats how good it was.....and that sucked.

  5. I have been in training for a short time now but right off I can see that safety and quality are the number one issues, my experience as of late has been a positive one, the employees along with Jeff the plant manager and the operation supervisor as well as the engineers are a highly motivated group of people, what an asset for the area to have and for company's in need of a quality metal products.

ADVERTISEMENT