COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC HEARING - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Monday, March 7, 2005, 10:22 a.m. - - - 050063 - An Ordinance amending Chapter 10-600 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Public Places -- Prohibited Conduct," by prohibiting smoking in public places and in the workplace, and providing for penalties, all under certain terms and conditions. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO, Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN FRANK DI CICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 - - - P R O C E E D I N G S - - -
Good morning. We're here today to have a public hearing on Bill Number 050063. We welcome you all here today in City Council chambers. There are many, many panels that will be discussing this issue today, both pro and con. What we ask you to do is, please, each side give the other side respect. And we will have a ten-minute smoking break. (Laughter.)
Being funny; being funny. Just want to get you all... see if you're awake, and get you ready to move along with this bill. I'd like to say that we have established a quorum. That's what we were waiting for, and the presence of Councilman Goode, Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller and Councilman Kenney and also Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown.
We'd like the 3 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Clerk to read the title of the bill please.
Bill Number 050063, An Ordinance amending Chapter 10-600 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Public Places -- Prohibited Conduct," by prohibiting smoking in public places and in the workplace, and providing for penalties, all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you very much. The Chair calls the first panel, the city administration panel, Commissioner John Domzalski, Commerce Director Stephanie Naidoff, Health and Fitness Czar, Gwen Foster, and the Fire Commissioner, Lloyd Ayers. If there is anyone in the room who has not signed up who wishes to testify, would you please see the clerk on this side of the room so we can add you to the list. Good morning. Turn the mike on, please.
Good morning, Chairwoman Tasco, and members of the Public 4 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Health Committee and Human Services. I'm John Domzalski, Health Commissioner for the City of Philadelphia, And I'm pleased to present testimony in support of Bill Number 050063 amending Chapter 10-600 of The Philadelphia Code to prohibit smoking in public places in the workplaces. I will speak about the harmful effects of smoking which is a major public health concern, specifically addressing the health effects of secondhand smoke. And I'll begin by briefly talking about what we do on an ongoing basis with regard to tobacco control in the Philadelphia Department of Public Health. The Philadelphia Tobacco Control Program coordinates a variety of tobacco programs, including smoking cessation, public awareness, youth counter marketing and enforcement activities. Programs for those attempting to stop smoking are offered at all city health centers and at nursing centers across the 5 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 city, as well as at hospital-sponsored programs. Public awareness programs target communities that have high tobacco use incidence. Youth access enforcement program with the Department of Licenses and Inspection and the Health Promotion Council conducts compliance checks for illegal tobacco sales to minors. Smokeless Homes is a program presented to families with children with asthma. All of these initiatives strive to increase awareness of the harmful effects of smoking, and to reduce the level of exposure to secondhand smoke for all Philadelphians. With regard to secondhand smoke, it is the third leading cause of preventable death in the United States, and it is composed of smoke from the burning tip of tobacco products and from exhaled smoke. It results in nearly 54,000 deaths every year from heart disease, lung cancer and sudden infant death syndrome in the United States. Exposure to secondhand smoke 6 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 is also associated with asthma, bronchitis, pneumonia and ear infections in children. This smoke contains several thousand chemicals, including more than 50 that have been proven to cause cancer. In 1993, the Environmental Protection Agency classified secondhand smoke as a Class A carcinogen. This means that it definitely causes cancer. With regard to workers, smoke-free legislation will protect not only people who are customers of public places: Restaurants, bars and other public facilities, but will also protect workers that must breathe this dangerous smoke day in and day out. A recent study found that the risk of lung cancer in workers, like bartenders and waitresses in establishments that allow smoking, is to 75 percent greater than in 21 the general population. The risk can triple, 22 depending on the number of years worked. 23 This is also a fairness issue. Most 24 of us here -- Most of us here are covered by 25 and work in environments where smoking is not 7 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 allowed. In the United States 76 percent of white collar workers are covered by smoke-free policies, as compared to 52 percent of blue collar workers and only 43 percent of food service workers. Exposure to secondhand smoke is also a major public health concern to the many pregnant women who work through their pregnancies in smoke-filled environments. S. In conclusion, clearly, prohibiting smoke in the workplace can have an immediate and dramatic positive impact on the health of workers and patrons in Philadelphia by protecting them from the dangers of secondhand smoke. Smoke-free public places will help those smokers who want to quit to do so. The more we can do to prevent smoking in the first place and to encourage smokers to quit, the better the health of individuals and the 8 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 health of the community. Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony. )
Thank you very much. We'll have everyone testify and then we'll open the floor for questions. Mrs. Naidoff.
Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair and members of City Council. My name is Stephanie Naidoff, and I am Philadelphia City Representative and Director of Commerce. I'm here today to provide testimony on behalf of the administration regarding Bill Number 050063, the Clean Indoor Air Worker Protection Law, proposing to amend Chapter 10-600 of The Philadelphia Code to prohibit smoking in public places and in the workplace. I'm pleased to have this opportunity to review with City Council and the public 9 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 the economic impact of the proposed ban. The proposed legislation is an important step towards public health and the protection of all Philadelphia's workers. And I believe the negative economic impact of the smoking ban has been exaggerated by a, quote, fear of the unknown. At its simplest level, businesses are successful for two reasons: Because of the people who work there, and because of the people who pay for the business service. The positive economic impact of healthy workers, and consequently the negative economic impact of unhealthy workers, cannot be underestimated. Workers exposed to secondhand smoke get sick more often and generally need more health services, affecting business operator variables like staffing and health insurance premiums. Service workers in the restaurant and bar industry also appear to be among those most at risk of work-related secondhand smoke exposure. S. have workplace protection against exposure to secondhand smoke, only 52 percent of blue collar workers and 43 percent of food service workers are afforded the same protection, as my colleague just said. Restaurant and bar owners, as compared to other businesses, appear to be shouldering greater risks for productivity loss and increased health care costs. In addition to addressing operating cost concerns among business owners, a smoking ban in all workplaces eliminates concerns about fairness and competition. While I understand the fear of the unknown is a common concern when it comes to operating in new ways, history and the experience of others tells us that a smoking ban, with very limited exception, like that being proposed in this bill, is the most equitable choice for all businesses. The smoking ban legislation considered by City Council in 2000 failed in part because the ban would have applied in 11 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 most restaurants and in very few, if any, bars or pubs. At the time the restaurant and hospitality task force, made up of both administration and restaurant and bar industry representatives, and chaired by the then Director of Commerce sought a workable compromise for all and came up short. They found that the proposed remedy for restaurants that wanted to compete on an equal playing field with bars and pubs for business, constructing separate smoking areas with specific ventilation and design standards, was complicated to enforce and cost prohibitive. A complete workplace smoking ban, with very limited exceptions, equalizes the playing field among businesses by eliminating potential business expenses by one particular sector and reducing, if not ending, concerns about fairness. A smoking ban like the one proposed by this legislation has worked in other places. Restaurant and bar smoking bans in 12 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 various cities, states, and even countries like Ireland and most recently Italy have been met with success. On March 1st, Rhode Island became the seventh state to ban smoking in most indoor places, joining California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, and New York in prohibiting smoking in bars, restaurants and indoor workplaces. New Jersey is also considering statewide legislation to prohibit smoking in most workplaces. At the municipal level, a case study of what happened in New York City is helpful to study. 7 percent. Employment in this sector has increased by 10,600 jobs since the law's enactment.
There was a net gain in active liquor licenses. The health and public perception results of New York City's study are also 13 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 hard to rebut. New Yorkers overwhelmingly support the law. Indoor air quality and some important benchmarks for the health of workers have been improved. And the New York Times recently reported that many of the most passionate and outspoken critics of the ban in New York City have come to agree that the doomsday predictions of negative effects simply have not come true. We have a local example to look at as well. Smoking has been banned in all indoor spaces at Philadelphia International Airport since April 30, 2004. 7 percent over sales during the same period in 2003. Arguably, more people are choosing to patronize these establishments because they are now smoke free. I'd also like to say a brief word about the validity of various economic impact studies. Our Budget Office took a look at 14 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 studies of economic impact of smoking bans across the country and came to the following conclusion. In studies where the methodology checked out as sound, smoke-free workplace laws were shown to have a neutral or even a positive effect on business. Further, they found that tobacco- or restaurant industry-funded studies were most often based on perception of impact, rather than actual tax or employment data, and that these studies universally conclude negative impact. In short, there's no credible evidence that smoking bans have a negative impact on businesses and business development. Accommodating exceptions in workplace smoking laws does not benefit business or public health. And study after study has shown that negative economic impact after a smoking ban is a statistical myth. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this important issue. )
Good morning. I'm Lloyd Ayers, Fire Commissioner for the City of Philadelphia. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony on cigarette smoke-free impact on the Philadelphia Fire Department. As citizens of Philadelphia, our areas of concern encompass deaths as a result of careless smoking, fires in properties caused by careless smoking, resulting in injuries and damage, and the increase in medical responses to patients suffering from respiratory ailments associated with cigarette smoking. During the calendar year 2004 a total of 45 deaths and 193 injuries were recorded. 2004 smoking fire death statistics are as follows: Deaths in dwellings, there 16 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 were 7. Deaths in multiple occupied dwellings, there were 3. The total smoking deaths, 10, equaling percent of the fire deaths in the 6 City of Philadelphia. 7 2004 smoking injuries. Injuries in 8 dwellings were 19. Injuries in multiple 9 occupied dwellings were 5. The total injury 10 was 24, or 12 percent of the injuries from 11 fires. 12 During the period of January 1st to 13 October 31st, 2004, there were 7,861 total 14 fires. The numbers are categorized as 15 follows: Total fires, 7,861. Structure 16 fires, 1,868. Smoking fires, 1,052 which 17 equal 13 percent of all fires in the City of 18 Philadelphia. Dwelling fires were 93. Other 19 structures, 76, the total accounting for 169 20 or 9 percent of the structure fires. 21 Bars, restaurants, and clubs 22 structure fires were 3. Bars, restaurants and clubs non-structure fires were 5. During the calendar year 2003, a total of 44 deaths and 247 injuries were 17 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 recorded. 2003 smoking fire deaths statistics are as follows: Deaths in dwellings, 7. Deaths in multiple occupied dwellings, 1. The smoking death total for 2003 was 8, or percent of 7 the fire deaths in the City of Philadelphia. 8 2003 smoking fire injury statistics: 9 Injuries in dwellings, 25. Injuries in 10 multiple occupied dwellings, 11. Smoke and 11 fire injury total was 36, or 15 percent of 12 the injuries. 13 During the calendar year 2003, there 14 were 9,393 total fires. The numbers are 15 categorized as follows: Total fires; 9,393, 16 Structure fires, 2,357. Smoking fires, 17 1,325, or 13 percent of all fires in the City 18 of Philadelphia. Dwelling fires accounted for 138 of those fires. Other structures was 97, accounting for 235 or 10 percent of the structure fires in the City of Philadelphia. Bars, restaurants and clubs structure fires was 1. Bars, restaurants and club structure fires -- non-structure fires 18 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 was 7. During the calendar year 2002, a total of 32 fire deaths, which was a low for a ten-year period, there were 242 injuries recorded. The smoking death statistics were: Deaths in dwellings, 6. Deaths in multiple occupied dwellings, 0. The smoking fire death total was 6, or percent of the fire 11 deaths in that low year. 12 2002 smoking fire injury statistics 13 are as follows: Injuries in dwellings, 21. 14 Injuries in multiple occupied dwellings were 15 2. Injuries in C and I establishments were 16 2. Other injuries was 1. Smoking fire 17 injury total was 26, or 11 percent of the 18 injuries. 19 During the calendar year, there were 10,877 total fires. Structure fires was 2,510. The smoking fires were 1,591, or 15 percent of all fires. The dwelling fires was 129. Other structures, 107. Accounting for 236, or 9 percent of the structure fires. Bar and 19 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 restaurant and club fires structure fires were 2. Bar restaurant and club fires, non-structure, was 2 as well. As I sat in the back preparing for the testimony and waiting for the testimony the Fire Marshall called me and he informed me of a delayed fire death from January 22, 2005. The man succumbed to his injuries. It was a smoking fire. This was just now sitting here on the awaiting testimony, which brings our total fire deaths in 2005 to 12.
Of those 12, 5 are smoking-related fire deaths. We have 6 injuries related to fire -- smoking fires this year so far. So, I thank you for the opportunity this morning. )
Good morning to our Chair, Marian Tasco, to all of City Council, and to each of you here. I consider it a 20 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 privilege to be able to present testimony today on behalf of Bill Number 050063, The Clean Indoor Air Worker Protection Law. I'm here this morning to strongly endorse this bill which will improve the health and fitness of the citizens of Philadelphia. Let me back up. I am Gwen Foster, the Health and Fitness Czar for the City of Philadelphia. So, again, I'm here to strongly endorse this bill which we feel will improve the health and fitness of all of the citizens of Philadelphia. Secondhand smoke is a known cause of many terrible diseases, including lung cancer, heart disease and many other chronic ailments. Secondhand smoke is responsible for at least 38,000 deaths every year in this country. And it's not a good business practice, when you think of it, to kill more than 400,000 of your best customers every year which is what tobacco smoking does. 21 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Despite this known harm, we continue to allow our fellow citizens to work in and patronize public establishments polluted with the carcinogens in secondhand smoke. Everyone in Philadelphia, workers and patrons alike, everyone has the right to breathe clean air. Unfortunately, workers are often overlooked or dismissed in this debate. But an eight-hour shift in a smoky environment is the equivalent of smoking a half a pack of cigarettes a day. Many of these workers, from servers to bartenders to busboys, don't necessarily have other options readily available to earn a living, nor should they be forced to change jobs just to protect their health. Endorsing this bill will also allow me to take my four-year-old granddaughter Kayla to one of her favorite restaurants, but I found out this weekend I couldn't because she has asthma so severely and would need a nebulizer. So it would allow me to take her and my other grandchildren. 22 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 That's why this bill is so important. It will improve everyone's health. And when I say everyone, I mean smokers and non-smokers alike. In other cities when smoke-free laws go into effect, many people cut down on the amount they smoke or quit altogether. So, smoke-free laws provide the strong motivation and reason for people to stop smoking. We have heard from and restaurant owners in other cities, who have said many of the people on their staffs have quit smoking after the law went into effect. We all know what it's like to leave a smoky establishment smelling bad and feeling ill. We should have the right to visit these public places -- these public workplaces without putting ourselves at risk in any way. I overheard in recent weeks one exchange between a man and a woman in a public establishment. The man said, mind if I smoked -- Mind if I smoke? 23 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 And she quipped, care if I die? So, this bill will do more than just protect workers. It will promote a healthy lifestyle throughout the city. Now, our Liberty Bell tolls for freedom from oppression and -- but I'd like now for our liberty bell to toll for freedom (rings bell) from destructive lifestyle patterns and the freedom to breathe free. I respectfully urge this Council to support and pass this important measure. And I thank you for the opportunity to share this perspective. (Cheers and applause.)
Thank you very much for your testimony. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I have two short questions for Ms. Naidoff. I don't think anyone here is going to offer any credible testimony against the ills of smoking and its health effects -- and 24 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 ill effects, and the fact that people shouldn't do it. In the Bill, there's a carve out for specialty tobacco establishments. There's a food or beverage establishment whose on site sales or rentals of tobacco, tobacco-related products and accessories for consumption or use on the premises compromises percent. 10 So, any -- I guess any operation 11 that either sells tobacco more than 15 12 percent retail would be exempted from the 13 provisions of this bill, as I read it. 14 Could you give me the thought 15 process on why it's fair for their employees to have to suffer these ill effects and why they were carved out.
I don't know the rationale behind it, but I could say to you that certainly in the ideal world, we'd have a complete ban... complete ban on smoking. I think that the idea was to balance the business impact on businesses that a substantial part of their performance, their businesses depending on the sale of tobacco 25 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 products.
And not necessarily that they're correct, but you can see how some business owners of establishments who sell alcohol or food may think that somehow that's not fair to them, and particularly the smaller corner, what we call in South Philadelphia and other places, taprooms used to be called, that somehow that if a carve out could be made, and it's okay for the health of the workers in Mahogany or Holts or in one of those places, then why -- why -- And I'm not making their argument. I'm saying this is the argument I'm getting from them, is that why can't we be carved out also. I understand the across-the-board ban is probably more fair to everybody, but this doesn't seem to be an across-the-board ban.
I certainly think that if the Council were to seek, in its wisdom, a complete ban, there would be lots of people who would be in favor of that. 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05
So there was no 3 discussion with the administration relative to...
Councilman Kenney, thank you. No; you're right. These particular establishments -- And there was some discussion. There's a recognition that there are some businesses in Philadelphia that tobacco sales is their business. That's what they do. And in an effort to recognize the fact that that is their business, that's a fairly significant threshold. The businesses who would meet that threshold would probably meet it fairly easily, and...
That is the place that you were deciding consciously to 27 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 come to work, and that is the business that they're in. If you had it across the board, there would be no tobacco shop in the city that could stay open.
I think the argument or the complaint that I'm getting is that if you have a tobacco shop, cigar store, you want to make a purchase, you take the stuff outside and go home and enjoy it or go on the street and enjoy it, outside a public space. But when you have, I guess, a bar-type atmosphere above a tobacco shop which is selling alcohol, no different than a corner taproom or a restaurant or anyone else, but you're permitted to go in there and do the same thing. I think there's some view that there was some unfairness there, but that's... (Applause.)
The only other thing I would ask Ms. Naidoff is to speculate, which is all you can do right now, on the potential that once we experience 28 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 gaming, that the state authorizes a gaming establishment in one or two locations within the city, it is believed that state law will preempt any city ordinances relative to smoking on the premises. And I'm concerned or I want you to speculate on what effect you would think that would have on the businesses surrounding those establishments, that that's a place where you could actually go gamble, drink and smoke. And is there any way that you would look at possibly dealing with the state to have those places also smoke free? Because I can see, you know, 60 -- 31,000 slot machines, you know, in two large locations could create a draw for people who gamble and seemingly gamble or smoke also and drink. I guess they have three bad habits, that it would drag people away from the smoke-free places and put them more securely in the casino-type establishment.
As long as you've 29 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 asked me to speculate, let me speculate in a different way. And that is to say that the Mayor appointed a Gaming Advisory Task Force recently. And one of the reasons for doing that was to try to gather together a lot of the public voices in Philadelphia to have some impact in Harrisburg on the way the gaming laws are applied to Philadelphia. And I would hope that in many instances the social impacts of the gaming licenses, the implementation of the gaming licenses, would include things like the health and safety of the workers and the patrons. And perhaps we can avoid having the kind of implication that you've made, that there would be an overlay on the gaming law -- on the smoking laws.
The worst case scenario, the state preempts our smoking ban in these establishments. Do you believe it would have any kind of detrimental effect on other 30 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 businesses in their vicinity?
I think the credible evidence in other cities, in other states, in other countries has been that actually the economic impact has not been negative. And, in fact, there is some evidence that it may have had some positive effect. So, I do not believe that it would impact other businesses.
Very quickly, thank you, Madam Chair. To go back to the first issue that Councilman Kenney raised, of course the Councilman knows me pretty well and my sense of flexibility. So, if there is interest in going completely across the board, in terms of all establishments, I certainly would be prepared to engage in that discussion. But I'll leave 31 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 that to the committee. But specifically with regard to the gaming issue, I'd like to clear up any confusion that there may be. I think there's been some bad information put out on the record for the members. If you go to on the Bill, Item 3-A.1, small numeral seven, you will see that under the areas where smoking would be prohibited is, any licensed gaming facility. That was anticipating that gaming might come to Philadelphia. I think we're all clear that the state statute only prohibits the city in the area of zoning. Any gaming facility will still have to adhere to the building code here in Philadelphia, street and sidewalk issues, and all the other provisions of The Philadelphia Code. And so, this ordinance does in fact create smoke-free environments for those facilities. If the state were to do something else, fortunately I work in City Council. I 32 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 don't work in Harrisburg. I can't do anything about what the state may or may not do. The gaming board members who I've talked to have expressed concern themselves that they would want to be in compliance with The Philadelphia Code, and would not want employees in those facilities to be subject to a toxic work environment.
And I think, Councilman, you know as well as I what happens in Harrisburg from time to time that bills get changed and amended quite quickly and sometimes under cover of darkness. So, I was just trying to anticipate --
Trying to anticipate what the pro smoking interests may try to do, as it relates to the gaming 33 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 legislation.
I understand. I understand. I tried to provide for it in our legislation.
I passed a bill 7 recently that, you know, talked about local zoning control and gaming sites. And one of the first provisions of the gaming -- state gaming bill was to preempt that. So, they have a way of preempting us on things.
Thank you, Madam Chairman. My first question is to Miss Naidoff. You touted a couple numbers from New York City, 8.7 percent of the -- business has increased 8.7 percent since the non-smoking ban in New York City. I think I'm right with that number. Do you know if those particular statistics involve establishments that were 34 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 non-smoking before the ban? Are they including the non-smoking establishments before the ban, as with the...
I don't know the answer to that. I would find out. It's based on some studies that we had received about taxes collected and employment numbers. So, I'll find out what the base was which is really what you're asking.
Okay. And another thing about your testimony that I understand, but I'm not sure I agree with. I think it's hard to compare Ireland and Italy with this because that's a nationwide ban. And I think this ban would work if it was a nationwide ban. I'm a non-smoker because I see my Fitness Czar sitting there. And I'm a hulk of a human being. I am because of her... her involvement being the Fitness Czar. I went to her classes. I don't smoke, but I just see it as being... All the health issues, there's 35 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 nobody arguing with the health issues here. We're arguing with the economic issues, and the economic issues with the people that work in these restaurants and these bars. It's strictly an adult decision, I think, that adults have to make. In Ireland it works because -- (Applause.)
-- if people want to smoke in Ireland -- If people want to smoke in Ireland, and they can't in a public place, they take the ferry and go across to Great Britain, I guess, and smoke or go to Denmark or France and smoke. Here, what we're going to do is drive businesses from Juniata, Center City, South Philly, West Philly, Northeast, East Philadelphia over to Camden, Montgomery and Bucks County, all the surrounding counties. This could work. This could work. (Applause.)
This possibly could work. I'm married to a non-smoker [sic]. And if she's listening, I'm sure I'm 36 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 going to get in a lot of trouble tonight. I wish she didn't smoke, but it's an adult decision she makes that affects her life. It's an adult decision that that business owner over there or over there decides. Guess what? I'm going to have a bar and a restaurant, and I'm going to have smoking. And I'm going to have smoking because I think if I'm going out tonight... We're not asking for people to smoke in a public library. We're not even asking to smoke in the Wachovia Center, although I think they still smoke in Holts down at the Wachovia Center. And I think you can still smoke in Jet Rock at the airport. Does anybody know that answer? Is that the only place you can still smoke?
Is there a total ban? 37 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05
Okay. Well, then, that works. It has to be a total ban. But the airport, the library, and the places I mentioned, except for these restaurants and bars, they're places that you're going through. You're going to the library to do something. You're going through the airport to do something. You're going to his or her or their restaurant or establishment to do something: To relax, to relax as an adult, to relax and drink, to relax and smoke, if you choose, as an adult. My good friend Councilman Kenney smokes -- Not smokes. I'm sorry, Jimmy. I know you don't smoke. Jimmy said -- Well, one of the three vices, I guess, gambling. Jimmy doesn't gamble, smoke or drink. I know that for a fact. Don't say nothing, Councilman. I'm saying that; you're not. He doesn't. I don't. 38 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 If you go do this stuff, it's an adult decision that you're deciding to do. If you want to go to the Indian reservation where you can go up in Connecticut and smoke, downstairs they have the non-smoking; upstairs they have smoking. When I go -- And I've only been there a couple times, I go to the non-smoking because you can get a casino, you can get a slot machine because nobody wants to be downstairs. And Councilman Nutter, who has done a good job on this bill -- He's done a great job here, trying to get the health issues out. We know that the casino people that are coming here, there's no way they're going to let us preempt anything they're doing. They don't want the city involved. And it's been legislated by -- Councilman Kenney said, to keep us from being involved. So anything we do, anything the Mayor does, it's not going to change smoking. If we do this, we will simply drive people 39 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 out of business in the City of Philadelphia. And they may be establishments that I don't go to or I do. They may be establishments that the good Councilman here doesn't go to or the Mayor. And I understand you're up here because you believe in this. I know you believe in this. I know you. And you also work for a guy that believes in it, and he works for the guy, and she works for him, and he works for him. (Applause.) You're not going to come up here and say something...
And I like the Mayor. I really like the Mayor. But we disagree on this issue. The Mayor, through his religious beliefs and his health concerns -- And there is no one in this city that's a bigger spartan than John Street as far as non-smoking, eating all the right stuff, getting the correct amount of sleep, drinking the right amount of water. Right, Glenn? 40 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Got to do all that stuff. Someone may not want to do that. Someone may want to smoke. And it's my analogy that smokers in this country are whipped. They're whipped puppies. Nobody can admit to smoking. 40 years ago everybody smoked. If you didn't smoke during World War II, you were the exception. You were -- Actually, 60 years ago. You actually learned to smoke because it was just something to do. years ago less people smoked. 10 14 years ago less people smoked. And now it's 15 down to a handful of people. 16 You got six foot two, 250-pound men 17 standing outside because their wives won't 18 let them smoke in the house. Why? Because 19 nobody wants to admit to their wives, their 20 husbands, their daughters, their sons that they smoke. If people want to smoke, it's an adult decision. For whatever reason they don't want to. Now, I just got two more questions, 41 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 one for the Fire Commissioner. Commissioner, you talked about smoking deaths from cigarettes, these fire deaths from cigarettes.
It's hard to look at you and do this thing. But, do you know if they were deaths, like, people in bed smoking? Because that's always been a problem. You've been a fireman -- You haven't been a commissioner long, but you've been a fireman for a long time. That's always a problem, right?
Yes. They're various. Most of the time it's contact with combustible materials, sometimes a couch, quite often a bed, but mostly in materials, clothes, trash baskets where ashes are discarded improperly. So it's various reasons, yes.
We get the point where firemen are going to fires that if we could prevent would be great. But I 42 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 don't think anyone's igniting themself in any of these restaurants or clubs or bars. I mean, the last bar -- (Applause.)
-- the last bar I think I was in was a place called the Ashbrenner up the Northeast. And I see one of the owners sitting around here somewhere, a handsome-looking fellow. I didn't see anyone setting themselves on fire there. There was a lot of people smoking. And I ate my dinner at a table where I think everybody was smoking at the bar. And I don't know if the place had a filtration system, but the people at the bar were smoking, the people in the restaurant working. I think there's room to compromise, and I think the compromise is everyone stays around until 2 o'clock today, and listens to another hearing we have in the Committee of the Whole, and let's put this in the ballot in May and see what people really want. If those smokers that I said are 43 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 whipped, if they really want to have their rights as Americans, they should be able to come and vote. They should be able to vote in May. (Applause.)
And anything we're doing here today -- and not to take anything away from good Councilman Nutter that did all the work here -- This can wait. This doesn't have to happen in May. It can happen. We can hold legislation. Let's come to that hearing this afternoon at 2 o'clock with the Committee of the Whole, talk to your Council people, and let's just wait and see. If you care enough about smoking or if you care enough about this issue of non-smoking, come and vote. If you live in Philadelphia, come and vote and let everybody know how you feel. I mean, there's nobody here going to disagree with the health issues that are going on. It's strictly economic issues and adults that can make decisions that they want 44 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 to make. And my last point is, I wear an arm bracelet here of a young man that's in the marines in Falujah. His name's John Snow. Now, I happen to know -- and if John's mom and dad are listening, I feel bad. I'm sorry. I'm going to let the cat out of the bag. John smokes. Now, you tell me when John comes home from Iraq in April, and we have a party at that bar for John, at that restaurant bar, that John can't smoke a cigarette after going to Iraq for 10 months or 12 months? Something... (Applause and cheers.)
Something is really wrong in this country if a guy can go -- a 23-year-old can go to Iraq and fight for his country and can't come back here and have a cigarette. Okay? And let's make it easy. Let's just vote. See what the voters want. It's a non-binding resolution anyhow. Let's just see what the people want. 45 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 So, I would ask the Council people here to think about the vote because we all know how we feel about smoking. There's no 5 one at that table or no one at these chairs -- And if they smoke, they are not going to tell you. And they don't believe in it. They believe that smoking is not good. And we wish nobody smoked. But we're also realists. I wish nobody drank and, I wish nobody did a lot of things. But it's not my job here as a Councilman to make adults do adult decisions. Thank you. (Applause.)
The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Madam Chair and good morning. I had a brief conversation with Councilman Nutter, the sponsor of this legislation. And I had some questions. And I talked to him about it before I proceeded with them for the record. 46 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Private clubs, as an example, people make a conscious decision to pay annual dues to join. And I'm not promoting the Vesper Club, but I'll use the Vesper Club as an example. People make a conscious decision to join the Vesper Club. They pay annual dues. If someone -- if the Vesper Club under this -- under this bill, the Vesper Club would no longer -- would be a non-smoking establishment going forward. But it's not a public place. It's public in the sense that people go in and out of it, but it's just you or I. I happen to be a member, but if someone's not a member, you can't just walk in. So, I'm curious as to what effect that may have on all the private clubs and those kinds of establishments. My other concern is -- And this may be something more for the Law Department. One of the things that has really enhanced the quality of life in this city, especially in Center City, was the advent of outdoor cafes. 47 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 The way I read this legislation -- and again, I stand corrected -- stand to be corrected if I'm wrong -- is that aside from the ten-foot entrance -- part of the legislation which you can't smoke within ten feet of the entrance of an establishment -- an employee who works for Rouge, it's an enclosed restaurant with outdoor seating. That employee may be the waiter or waitress who serves the table outside. The way I read this, you will no longer even be able to smoke at an outdoor cafe. Now, some people may think that I'm making a stretch of this, but the reality is, the way I read it -- And I could be wrong. And if there's someone here from the Law Department who can for the record set me straight, I think that that outdoor cafe would fall within the prohibition of smoking. South Street. John, Bridgett Foyce. Again it's a stretch, but there's a bus station where people board a bus at Second and South directly next to the outdoor cafe, within three feet. 48 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Somebody's going to be standing there with a cigarette. They are within ten feet of the entrance. Someone who is an anti-smoker may be offended by that. I think we're getting into an area now where it's almost like saying, there's not going to be smoking allowed anywhere, whether it's inside or even outside. And I'm a non-smoker, although occasionally I will admit I do pick up a cigarette because the guys I hang out with all smoke. So, I figure I'm going to go -- my lungs are getting polluted anyway, so I enjoy it once in a while. But the reality is, I mean, I'm a non-smoker. And I wish most people would not smoke. I think we all feel that way -- most of us feel that way. So, I need some clarity. And again, I've spoken to the sponsor of this bill. And I don't know if Councilman Nutter has any answers since we last spoke. Would outdoor cafes fall within the prohibition of this legislation? 49 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05
Councilman, thanks for the question. Councilman, you'll recall from our wonderful experience the last time on this particular issue, there was actually a specific provision in the last bill that allowed for a sidewalk cafe exemption to the legislation, while that same bill did also have the ten feet -- ten foot entrance prohibition. Certainly there will be some who could argue that those concepts are in conflict with each other. So at the moment, the legislation just has the ten-foot prohibition. Sidewalk cafes are not specifically addressed, although in some instances, depending on the logistics, I guess, or the infrastructure of the particular establishment, you could have a sidewalk cafe, depending on where it's located. If it were not within the ten foot area, then smoking would be allowed at that particular sidewalk cafe. 50 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 I'd be pleased to have further discussion with you about the provisions that were in the previous bill that covered sidewalk cafes, outdoor patios, and the like, even though there would still be the ten-foot prohibition, which is usually just to deal with people congregating, as we've seen presently around the entrance way. That is certainly an item that I'd be pleased to continue a conversation with you. We did try to address sidewalk cafes last time out, but there was such a wonderful negotiating process and working relationship that that provision did stay the last time. Didn't make it this time. But I'm always open for discussion. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And as we spoke earlier, in addition to the ten-foot entrance, some of these establishments have windows that now open out to the sidewalk. So... And I used Rouge as the example. You could be sitting at an outdoor table, but when in nice weather they opened the windows, 51 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 those folding glass doors, and you're in effect sitting right next to a person who's indoors, although the windows are open. So, that would to me suggest that there would be no smoking allowed at all at Rouge. I'm just using Rouge as one of the examples. There are many other restaurants and bars. And I would also, Councilman Nutter, if you would not mind, let's discuss -- we can discuss further the private club issue as well.
Thank you, Madam Chair. This question is to probably the Health Commissioner and Councilman Nutter. Have you thought about a process for penalties? 52 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Will people actually end up in prison for violating... Prison is already overcrowded with our drug problems.
What is the process if you don't pay your fine? Do you get a lien on your property?
It's a code violation notice, a C.V.N. process which we're all pretty familiar with. It's like, you know, those same violations you get for, I guess, having your trash out on the wrong day, and those kinds of matters. This is not at the level of a criminal action.
Well, it does say in some portion here, if you don't pay your fine, in which case the fine shall not exceed $, 300 together with imprisonment not exceeding ten days. Commissioner, your Health Department will be in charge of the enforcement, correct? 53 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05
We will, with other agencies as well, Licenses and Inspection.
Well, Councilwoman, we have... One of the pieces here is that, you know, we do now code enforcement, and there are penalties, and we go through the judicial process. And with... And then my recollection has been there's only been one time when someone has actually gone to jail. And that was a very egregious violation of the Federal law around asbestos. So, we're not talking about that. What we're talking about here is a measure that does impact the public health of the community. That is important. And I think that an awful lot lends itself to looking at this from a public health perspective, in terms of the spirit of the law. There's no question that Councilman Mariano identified that. I've worked for the 54 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Mayor, as we all do. Notwithstanding that the Mayor does support that legislation, the Mayor doesn't tell us what to think professionally. And I will tell you, in the public health profession, there is nothing, nothing people can do to improve their health other than quit smoking that would have a bigger benefit than that. And the fact that the secondhand smoke which we have totally ignored for so many years has been classified as a Class A carcinogen, meaning it actually does -- actually does cause cancer. I think we've got to focus on that very, very clearly, as the Council debates these other important issues as well.
Well, I think we all agree. In fact, I know we all agree on the health impacts of smoking or not smoking. I'm just concerned about penalties and what-not. And I do agree with the Councilman and in general that we're all 55 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 adults, that we make and live by our own decisions. So, I just want to know about the penalties.
Councilwoman, if I can also direct your attention, you will notice in the pink copy of the bill when you go to ... As I know you know, there is a difference in the first sentence which reads 10-606, penalties, one. You'll notice the first five or six words are italics. That's the new language. The rest of the language in the regular type is the language that's already in The Philadelphia Code. The purpose of the new language is to make it clear that violations of this particular bill are not the ones that are in the regular type. They're as provided under six, which says enforcement and penalties. So, their language reads, except as otherwise specifically provided. And that otherwise specifically provided is number six which tells you that the violation is just a fine. 56 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 The other language in 10-606 penalties is what's already in The Philadelphia Code. We're not changing that language.
We're creating a distinction between a violation on this bill 9 and any other violation in The Philadelphia Code. That language already exists. Is that clear?
Thank you, Councilwoman. On the same issue, it just occurred to me as you were reading it. Any person who violates the section shall be subject to a fine of $300 for each violation.
Is that the smoker or is it the establishment owner if he or she refuses to stop the smoking, or both potentially?
It's primarily 57 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 the person who's engaged. There are provisions that deal with the actions that are required by the owner of the establishment. And if the owner of the establishment follows those particular provisions, they cannot get a violation.
If they can't make the person stop. And I don't think... People in the hospitality business certainly have encountered the difficult customer: The meat was too dark, it was not cooked well enough, it was this, it was that, didn't like my wine, maybe had a drink too many, whatever the case may be. I mean, I don't believe anyone's going to exercise bad judgment in trying to convince a customer to stop. And if they don't, and they follow the very simple provisions on what they need to do, they can't get a violation.
Thank you. Are there any other questions from members of the committee? (No response.)
There being none, we thank you so much for your time and your testimony. Thank you. (Applause.)
We now recognize the second panel which represents the Philadelphia Hospitality and Business Alliance members. Prince Gilliard, President, Philadelphia Licensed Tavern and Merchants Association; Garth Weldon, owner of the Prime Rib; Mike Driscoll, Chair of Philadelphia Hospitality and Business Alliance; Pete Ciarrocchi, owner, Chickey and Pete's; Ray Swardlow, owner of the Six-Pack Store. Are they present to testify? Would you come forward, please. The Prime Rib representative, Mike Driscoll, 59 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Prince Gilliard, Garth Weldon, Pete Ciarrocchi, and Ray Swardlow. Good morning.
Would you please identify yourself and begin with your testimony.
My name is Peter Ciarrocchi, owner of Chickey and Pete's Cafe. And I'm here to testify, I guess, to speak about the issues that we have on board today.
I don't know if I was supposed to go first tonight, but I'll just take it. My issues are, I guess, with it's not a fair playing field. And we've spoken. We've heard about the gambling. There's no 20 assurance of knowing if these gambling halls are going to have cigarette smoking or not. And they all -- They don't have to go in front of the Zoning Board, so why would they have to stop smoking? So, therefore, they will have 60 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 alcohol in those places, and they will have slot machines, and they will have cigarette smoking. The private clubs. There's a lot of private clubs around the City of Philadelphia, and they'll have smoking. And it seems to me that it's not a statewide. I mean, most of these -- Most of the places that we've spoken about are statewide. And statewide is a lot different than citywide. I just feel that it's an attack on just the small corner places. We've even spoke of outside cafes. Now, there's not a lot of corner bars in the neighborhoods with outside cafes. So, again, there's a regular corner bar. He's been there for years. And a blue collar guy goes in there after work and has a few beers. And now you can't have a cigarette because that's against the law. Well, you know, he don't have the luxury of flying to Miami Weeklands or having a place in Longport or... You know, this is 61 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 his enjoyment. Now, I'm not a smoker. And if it was across the board, I think I'd feel a lot better about this. But since it's not across the board -- And we depend on a lot of the business from outside the City of Philadelphia. I don't even want to talk about the economic issue. But it seems like that's what it is. You have a lot of people coming in from the suburbs. Now, let's say if there's four of us, two couples. We go out. And one of them doesn't smoke -- I mean, one person smokes. One of the guy's wife smoke. And the four people go to a restaurant. Let's not go tonight. Let's stay somewhere close to home. Let's not go into the city because we can't -- my wife can't smoke there, and she'll be giving me a hard time all night. So, I don't want to have to... You're going to lose business for something that's not -- We're an island. You have New 62 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Jersey and you have Pennsylvania. You have the Bucks County, Montgomery, and Delaware, as we spoke of. It seems that we're like a little island. And if it's an air quality situation, I think we should discuss that, and make it an air quality situation. Let's talk about how it could be air quality or let's talk about doing it differently instead of just cutting off everybody's arm at one time. The City of Philadelphia, surely, especially City Council, are smart people. And they know that this city has done a lot of firsts. And maybe one of the firsts is to make this really work by doing it -- And I would love to sit with a few Council members -- and maybe this is the time -- and discuss this. And say, let's do it a different way. Let's not just do what other -- Well, states, it's one thing. It's a whole state. But in the city, I just think in the city of firsts we should do it different. 63 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Maybe that should come up. As far as the issue of... Nobody could agree with smoking, and I'm with you on that. I don't agree with it either. I mean, it's just... But we're in the hospitality industry. You come there for your relief of... and have a good time. And now we're telling them they can't smoke, after all these years of it. I mean, if you open a business and you spent money in the last year to open up a restaurant in the City of Philadelphia, and you put a lot of money out, and now all of a sudden they change the playing field and said, now all your customers can't smoke. Now your customers aren't going to come from Jersey. Maybe they will one day a week, but they're not going to come two days a week.
Maybe they're not going to come from the suburbs two days a week; they're going to come one day a week. Well, I already invested a lot of money -- not necessarily me -- but a lot of 64 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 different people. Now we're changing the playing field in one year's worth of business. I think it's something we have to think about.
Who wants to testify next? Would you identify yourself for the record, please.
I'll be happy to. My name is Ray Swardlow. I own a store in the northeast part of the city called the Six-Pack Store. Ironically enough, it would effect me positively if there was a smoking ban, because I have take-out beer. But just to follow up with Pete, some of the things that he had said. If you look at all the venues that Pete has, he's got a restaurant in the far northeast. He's got a restaurant on Adams Avenue. He's got restaurants in South Philadelphia. If you stand outside his door and 65 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 you look north, you see Bucks County. If you look south, you see New Jersey. If all these folks that have these wonderful cameras during the Eagles run to the Super Bowl always seem to go to Chickey's and Pete's. And when they interview people, there were people that were wearing very expensive jerseys and very expensive hats, smoking expensive cigarettes and drinking expensive beer. So, I would imagine that they contribute to the economy. And another thing that I noticed was, when the people were interviewed, a lot of the people were either from New Jersey or Delaware County or Bucks County. So, these are people that like Pete's places, and they feel comfortable in Pete's places, but they won't be able to go to Pete's places and smoke. And I think that's a huge financial impact on the city. Everyone here that has an establishment with a liquor license also collects 17 percent taxes, 11 percent of it 66 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 which goes to the city. So, that's another consideration. And I know that Mayor Street is cutting the budget, and I know that the Health Department's budget was also cut, as well as the Police and Fire and every other department. This city likes to shoot movies in Philadelphia. Well, if you look at a lot of movies these days, there's a lot of smoking. Are you going to ban smoking on movie sets? percent of the hotels, according 14 to Councilman Nutter's bill, will have 15 smoking. So, if people want to smoke, are 16 they going to have to rent a hotel room and 17 have smoking and have room service delivered? 18 What about the bell people? What 19 about the people that clean the rooms? What 20 about the other service people that are 21 involved with those 25 percent? 22 If it's an issue of workplace 23 safety, well, those people are impacted. And 24 I think there are a lot of questions to go 25 with this bill. 67 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05
Thank you. Madam Chairman, members of the committee, my name is Garth Weldon. I operate the Prime Rib Restaurant on 17th and Locust Streets, and I thank you for your interest in my views on this matter. I don't smoke cigarettes, but I estimate about to 30 percent of my 12 clientele does. 13 After 25 years in this business in 14 Washington and Philadelphia, I have seen the 15 smoking section shrink and shrink and shrink 16 to basically just the bar area. And that's 17 okay. 18 It's happened not due to government 19 regulation but because we responded to our 20 customers' desires in a free market. , 22 Baltimore and Philadelphia today all offer 23 just the bar area as an outlet for our 24 patrons who spoke. 25 A recent development is that many 68 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 people increasingly choose to eat at the bar. Revenue from the bar, by the way, contributes much more to the bottom line than revenue from the dining room. This smoking at the bar does not bring complaints from our non-smoking customers or staff members, for that matter. And my customers and employees are not hesitant to complain about anything. After the last smoking ban was proposed and defeated, I invested over $12,000 in smoke-eater machines or filtering devices in the bar area alone, to ensure additional comfort for my patrons. Now, during construction seven years ago we did a state-of-the-art 100 percent outside air system, in other words, no mixing of air from the dining room to other areas, at a cost of about $200,000 to make it work. Since the legislation was reintroduced this year, I've been trying to think outside the cigar box. The problem I keep coming up against is a long-standing philosophy in the 69 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 hospitality business: It's always better to hold on to one regular customer than to try to find ten replacements. I oppose the extreme measure of a total ban because it tells my New Jersey and suburban Pennsylvania customers that they cannot have dinner in my 100 percent non-smoking dining room, and then retire to the bar for an after-dinner drink, a cigarette or a cigar. Can the city afford to tell all those people to stay out of Philadelphia? Can it afford to lose any percent of the nearly $120,000 in alcoholic beverage taxes that the Prime Rib of Philadelphia paid alone in 2004? What about the $20 million that Philadelphia restaurants and bars contribute annually via the ten percent over-the-bar tax? A citywide only ban also tells my private dining room parties, like-minded people gathering in a completely enclosed, separately ventilated private room, to take 70 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 their dinner parties to Bala Cynwyd or Cherry Hill if they want to have an after-dinner cigar. , which banned smoking last year, liquor license sales tax receipts grew by less than three-hundredths of one percent, while in Frederick County next door, which permits smoking, the growth was seven percent. The number of restaurants with liquor licenses in Montgomery County fell from a high of 526 in March 2003 to 402 at the end of 2004, according to data from the state of Maryland Controller's Office. 9 million or 11 percent, while the neighboring counties of Dorchester and Caroline grew by 14 and 36 percent. These local bans, when compared to the counties next door, give you an idea of what an unfair effect businesses within the 71 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 banned areas suffer when other dining options are available nearby, as is the case here. I hear many people saying, well, if New York could do it. When they tell you that the restaurant industry in New York is doing well despite the ban, they're counting every establishment in those figures, including Starbucks and McDonald's which never allowed smoking. And their baseline for comparison is 2001, the worst recession in recent history.
Here in Philadelphia we're not surrounded by four non-smoking boroughs like Manhattan, nor do we have a tremendous influx of visitors from all over the world, nor do we possess a convention center with a high rate of repeat business, nor do we have an 82 percent hotel occupancy rate. With a 56 percent hotel occupancy rate, I'd be very hesitant to tell anyone they're not welcome, especially the smoking customers who stay longer in the restaurant, drink longer in the bar and spend more. This emphasis on comparing our 72 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 situation with New York City could turn out to be very misleading and very unfortunate for our tax revenues and hospitality industry after a ban is in place. Others say, look at Ireland. Well, let's look at Ireland. The New York Times reports last November that beer sales in pubs declined to percent because of the 10 smoking ban. 11 At least there, every establishment 12 suffers equally. That wouldn't be the case 13 with the citywide only ban. 14 Another misleading idea is that this 15 is being done for employee health. A. indoor air 17 quality standards now. 18 There are many studies showing that 19 unemployment is very unhealthy, but job loss 20 and decline of business has been the result 21 of smoking bans for certain segments of the 22 restaurant industry. 23 In summary, I'd say that if the 24 State of Pennsylvania or the entire country 25 were to ban smoking, at least businesses 73 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 would have a level playing field to compete upon. Banning one locality, while leaving the surrounding areas with choices, penalizes those businesses who invested in Philadelphia in free-market conditions, and unfairly punishes the very employees it is claiming to protect, with reduced income and possible unemployment. And I predict that City Line Avenue which is saturated on one side with businesses which fled Philadelphia to escape the Business Privilege Tax and the City Wage Tax, may soon have an abundance of upscale restaurant and bars. One final question. Where do I seek restitution, should this ban result in a decline in my business? ) UNIDENTIFIED VOICE: We haven't been able to get Prince from...
No. He's here. UNIDENTIFIED VOICE: We wanted to substitute for Mike. Mike isn't here yet? 74 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Doc Goode from the Empire State Tavern and Restaurant Association in Syracuse, New York.
My name is F.R. Doc Good, G-o-o-d. Sometimes the last name is misleading. (Laughter.)
I'm here on behalf of the hospitality industry. I've been suffering under the blight of the smoking ban in New York since July 23, 2003. Let me give you some history of where I'm coming from. In 1993 they had an E.P.A. study of which they only looked at 15 of the 33 documents available on research due to secondhand smoke. They were called on the carpet by Judge William Ostrand who wrote a 94decision, saying, hey, people, you skewed the data. You took that which you wanted to print and left the rest that was non-damaging 75 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 alone. The World Health Organization which is comprised of the seven most advanced countries in Europe, could not duplicate the data on secondhand smoke as espoused by the E.P.A. There's a lot of junk science running around here, a lot of junk science. Dr. Ken Denson, who is the most advanced research expert on hematology and thrombosis says that if an individual eats one good green salad every day, he can smoke up to ten cigarettes and there would be no 15 effect on his body. (Laughter.)
Okay. I'm not for smoking. Like these other gentlemen, I am a non-smoker, but these are experts. Dr. Madden who is in Worchester [sic] County, New York; cancer research specialist, 30 years. He has yet to come across one of his patients that had damaging effect due to secondhand smoke. (Laughter.) 76 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05
The A.M.A. did a study on over-the-road truck drivers. Those that smoke have 95 percent less health problems than those that don't smoke. And why is that? Because their lungs are coated. All right. So, they don't breath in the carcinogens from the spent diesel. All right. I'm just giving you facts, people, because that's what it's all about. That's what it's all about. (Laughter.)
It's funny. But it's not funny when it affects your business. All right? The California ban, 1998, new construction for restaurants is down 19 percent; fast food chains, junk food, up 8 20 percent. 21 Fast food construction was down 9, 22 yet the health care costs -- and here we are 23 seven years after it, and their health care 24 costs are rising faster because they said, we that had to do away with smoking. That 77 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 hasn't affected health care costs at all. That, too, is junk science. Hoboken, New Jersey. Too bad Philadelphia isn't located there. Their sales would be up 37 percent from the people coming out of New York City after they quit work. One of the best revenue generators for Mayor -- they call him Bomber Bloomberg -- is taxing the establishments like the Bull & Bear Pub across from the Stock Exchange, a couple thousand dollars for smokers being outside and impeding the progress of pedestrians. Last December I was in New York City. I was brought up there by the union of Restaurant and Tavern Association Owners, 3,200 of them in New York City. 800 were at this festivity. The gentleman sitting next to me, Mike, has been fined $15,000 for impeding the progress of pedestrians in downtown Manhattan. He has a nightclub. Between shows 78 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 people go out and smoke. The police are right there, and they ticket them. That's what it's coming to. The people are losing money. Roy Dolan [sic], a very, very nice Irish pub in Yonkers, their sales are losing $10,000 a week, a half-a-million dollars a year. Now, the lady that talked about sales being in New York City up 8 percent, Dr. Friedan had an article in the Wall Street Journal. Found it very interesting. 8 percent when it should have been up over 35 percent from the rest of the business that was growing. Business is not good in New York. The OTB, that's the off-track betting, for those people who like to bet, they did not have smoking facilities to meet state standards. Their sales were down $7.2 million per week. That's not chicken feed. We were told -- And if you contact the American Cancer Society in Syracuse, New York -- They know me. They don't want to 79 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 debate me, for the simple fact I got more facts and figures than they do. But they told me that my business would not suffer. My business would not suffer. I got 54 seats. I'm open hours a 7 day, 7 days a week. I had 32 employees. 8 They all smoked except me. 9 Maybe I should have complained, but 10 I like my employees. I am now down to 21 11 employees. My sales are down $127,500 in one 12 year. 13 Why? 86 percent of my customers are 14 smokers, veterans like myself. It's a habit 15 I didn't pick up in the service. But they 16 wanted me to get involved. And five years 17 ago I got involved, and I looked up the 18 statistics. And I know what I'm talking 19 about. Secondhand smoke is not the issue, if 20 you got any type of ventilation whatsoever. 21 (Applause.) 22
And that's a lot. That's 23 the truth. 24 Let me wrap it up here, if you don't mind. Bleachers, which is smart -- I can 80 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 talk to you about all these places. Over percent of the business in Central New York, bars and taverns, are now shut down because of lack of business. And that's the truth. And I didn't drive up here last night to be here to spend junk science. It's the truth. People, you've got to come up with a... What is that law? Leave as is. Well, I forgot it. I'm sorry. I got a little excited there. But... No. The... It's bad news. It's not as bad as they say it is. Thank you. Have a nice day. (Applause.)
If there are witnesses in the balcony who are scheduled to testify, there are seats down here on the floor. Please feel free to come down. We now recognize Prince Gilliard, Philadelphia Licensed Tavern and Merchants Association. Good morning.
Good morning. Good morning, Madam Chairman, members of the 81 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 health committee. I thank you for taking this time to hear my testimony on Council Bill. My name is Prince Gilliard. I'm the President of the Philadelphia Hospitality and Business Alliance and owner of Prince's Jazz Lounge. The alliance represents the largest industry in Philadelphia, is comprised of both large and small businesses, taverns and restaurants, hotel purveyors, merchants, distributors and news stands. We -- The proposed smoking ban on the basis of the negative economic impact the city will feel and we will feel this as taprooms [sic]. Let me just say off the record -- off this record -- I have the highest admiration for this industry, even though in the hard times when the ten percent tax was imposed, legislation was imposed upon them, we were giving out scholarships -- doing it for years, giving millions of dollars in scholarships. 82 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 And when this -- the business got bad, we had to lay off the employees and close their doors, I went to the members and say, are you going to give the scholarship this year? And overwhelmingly, 100 percent said, yes, we're going to continue with our scholarship program. We've been doing it every year and feeding the needy. So, this is the industry that's really been hurt economically by legislation... business. And this will be an additional imposition to them. So, I totally oppose the smoking ban. It is our opinion that the hospitality industry is the economic lifeblood of the city. Consider license fees, permits, taxes, especially the ten percent across the beer [sic] tax on alcoholic beverages and income taxes collected from our employees. You are looking at millions upon millions of industry providers to the city. The lack of economic stability in 83 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Philadelphia does not allow for any loss of revenue or jobs. It is imperative for the city to continue looking toward economic growth. The facts from New York prove smoking bans are not as harmless to business as proponents claim. Out of 160 bars, taverns and restaurants, 39 have closed their doors. That is 39 businesses no longer open to their customers. That is several hundred citizens without jobs and no longer paying income taxes. That is a significant revenue that states has watched slip through the cracks. The City of Philadelphia cannot afford to lose that revenue. There is also a threat to local businesses and borders, the suburbs of New Jersey, if passed. Philadelphia's conceding revenue and jobs to other cities and other states. The question I pose to you today to City Council Whole is simple. Coming up with a solution to which there is no existing 84 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 problem, a strong number of restaurants in Philadelphia already are non-smoking and provide adequate separation from the smoking and non-smoking areas. For these restaurants it is not necessary to force them to become a non-smoking establishment. If a restaurant or bar chooses to become a non-smoking establishment, then they have the right. They could accommodate those customers who wish to have a meal or a couple of drinks, and not be in the presence of unwanted cigarette smoke. I'm a non-smoker myself, never have smoked. I tried one when I was 14, and I got sick and I haven't touched one until 6 years ago. And when people or I come around people who smoke cigarettes, and they say, oh, here's that Prince. He's about that smoking. I say, stop smoking those nasty cigarettes. But again, I go back. That is their choice. And once we get away from the 85 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 freedom of choice, we're going to have a problem. On the second floor of my establishment, I made it a non-smoking room 6 for the non-smokers, to accommodate them, people who didn't smoke. People don't want to be around smoke. On a weekend night the place is packed.
Downstairs on the second floor, the non-smoking room, I had four or five people. It didn't pay off. People had the freedom of choice. And a lot of people get the impression when you walk into a room, there's a smoke-filled room, you must cut it with a knife. Such is not the case. These entrepreneurs that went to great expense in installing smoke systems in their establishments even went to the point of having smokeless ashtrays. So, I admire what they're about doing to protect the health of their customers. And again, it goes back to simple one basic rule, freedom of choice. Let the 86 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 customer decide. When they come to our establishments they know there's smoking on the premises, and they come in on their own free will. If these customers was to come to us and say, listen, we don't come to your places because there's smoking there, trust me, we would abolish smoking. There's no one on City Council that's more concerned about our customers than we are as owners. So, I would ask... )
So, I would ask City Council to seriously consider this ban. And I've been in this business over 40 years and I've seen a steady decline, and some of you people on Council can attest to this. We have lost to 30 percent of the licensees 21 in the last 10, 12 years. 22 So, I close by saying we certainly 23 can't stand any more hardships. And I would 24 ask for your consideration in this -- on this 25 smoking ban. Thank you. 87 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 (Applause.)
Thank you very much. Are there any questions? Oh, I'm sorry. Mike, I'm sorry.
Councilwoman, I'm just going to defer my testimony. And if Council will permit, if I can submit it in writing... We had some technical difficulties in printing it out. But I'd be happy... I want to be here...
No. Instead of reading it, if I can submit it for the record. I wanted to be here to provide the opportunity for any of the Council people, and along with my colleagues, to answer any questions that you may have about our industry, about, you know, questions you might have of what might impact us and our employees. 88 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 We just want to be here as an owner of an establishment downtown and one up in the northeast. Also, as a former head of the Licensed Beverage Association.
Thank you. Any questions? Michael Nutter. Well, Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, gentlemen. We well remember at least 36 months ago when we were here having deliberations and discussions around this issue, and the proposal was put forth to sit down and pull together a task force which I know met for many, many months around a number of the outstanding provisions of the bill. Provide for us, if you will, your sense about how that went, whether or not it was useful, and where that sits today.
Councilwoman, be more specific about the recommendations from 89 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 the... One of the suggestions we had made four years ago, and many of us have adopted is, we printed policy guidelines for our establishments. As Mr. Gilliard alluded to, we have signs that say, smoking establishment, non-smoking establishment, or smoking sections allowed. And a lot of us voluntarily put them up. And before our customers come in, they know what the policy of our place is. And we believe in the areas that those that have done that, it's been effective.
Was that the only recommendation? There were a number of others that dealt with exhausts, costs related to exhaust systems, and the like.
Well, we've each adopted different of the recommendations. For instance, Garth Weldon from the Prime Rib, as he may have testified earlier, actually invested in a completely separate exhaust system for his restaurant for 90 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 post-dining. Those that want to have cigars can go into a separately ventilated area and enjoy their post-dining experience. At Finnegan's Wake we invested in eight state-of-the-art smoke eaters strategically located throughout the establishment that filters the air and recreates better air quality in our establishment. So, each of us in the industry have taken recommendations that were very, very helpful and have adopted them to our own establishments. Each establishment, as you can appreciate, is different here.
Mine's rather large and expansive in a warehouse. And some were actually small in the downtown areas here, in the old architectural buildings.
So, your sense, then, at the end of the day was that the task force and the meetings were -- had some 91 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 purpose, served some purpose.
Thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Chair. A couple comments and then a couple questions. I did want to better understand the gentleman who was up earlier -- I think his last name was Mr. Good, from the Empire State. Did he leave? I just wanted to ask him a question. It's Mr. Good; is that correct?
Okay. Your testimony earlier, I thought you put on the record some concerns, if not definitive testimony, that there were questions about scientific evidence and medical research.
Very much so. I read 92 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 everything I can come across.
I understand. Let me just try to understand this. Your background in health care is what?
My background is, basically I'm an ex-medical student. I worked 40 years for our government in intelligence gathering, top secret clearance which we don't discuss. I got into this business --
I got into this business to help my son. And I got very much involved in the health aspect of it because of the background. I come from a medical background.
No. I've got my engineering. I'm a professional -- retired professional engineer. 93 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05
And so, based on your previous time in medical school, and your top secret government clearance, you question all of the science from the Center for Disease Control, the Health Commissioner here in Philadelphia, the health people in New York City, the national studies have been done... You're... (Applause and cheers.)
Let me finish the question, sir. So, I mean, you have figured this thing out, that notwithstanding the American Cancer Society, the American Lung Association...
...you have singularly, with medical school training, you are not a doctor, 40 years of intelligence gathering for an agency that we can't discuss, and you come here today saying 94 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 there's no health effect from either smoking or secondhand smoke. That's your testimony?
Secondhand smoke. There's no health effect from secondhand smoke?
...that you can gather and get it. I didn't bring the file with me.
But you go through that, and you look at what they have to say.
And it's not as advocately... It's not as damaging to your health as they say it is. Genetics has a big part to play in your overall life and how you're going to transform yourself. All right? And that's a truth. I know a lot of people that have 95 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 asthma.
I hear you. I'd just like to read something into the record that I think provides some clarity on this particular point. This is from a web site that is easily accessed. And it reads the following: Public health officials have concluded that secondhand smoke from cigarettes causes disease, including lung cancer and heart disease in non-smoking adults, as well as causes conditions in children such as asthma, respiratory infections, cough, wheeze, otitis media which is middle ear infection, and sudden infant death syndrome. In addition, public health officials have concluded that secondhand smoke can exacerbate adult asthma and cause eye, 96 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 throat, and nasal irritation. Phillip Morris U.S.A. believes that the public should be guided by the conclusions of public health officials regarding the health effects of secondhand smoke in deciding whether to be in places where secondhand smoke is present, or if they are smokers, when and where to smoke around others. Particular care should be exercised where children are concerned, and adults should avoid smoke around them. We believe that the conclusions of public health officials, concerning environmental tobacco smoke, are sufficient to warrant measures that regulate smoking in public places. We also believe that where smoking is permitted the government should require the posting of warning notices that communicate public health officials' conclusions that secondhand smoke causes disease in non-smokers. Now, that's from Phillip Morris U.S.A. web site. 97 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 Now, do you know more about smoking and secondhand smoke than Phillip Morris?
I'd like you to give me an answer. Do you know more about secondhand smoke than Phillip Morris U.S.A?
Okay. Thank you. I cut you off. You were going to make a statement.
Well, my statement is, if secondhand smoke is so devastating, why have they yet to perform the first autopsy on somebody who they thought had died from secondhand smoke? (Applause.)
Well, that's an interesting question. And I'm not sure who "they" is. Now, "they" may be another --
"They" may be another secret agency that we're not going to have a conversation about.
But I appreciate your testimony. I appreciate your testimony.
No, no. This is basically from the New York State Department of Health.
On this topic I think Phillip Morris has got it fully covered on secondhand smoke. I think they know what their product is. I think they know what it's about. And they put it on their web site. And you can check it out for yourself when you're doing the other research that you might want to avail yourself of. So, I appreciate that. 99 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05
I appreciate that. And I have a couple of other questions that I want to ask. I appreciate you coming back to the table, though. Thank you. I wanted to address a couple issues, just for the record. There were concerns re-raised about the gaming issue. And I know my friend Pete here... I think you were in the room when we had some of that discussion.
Yeah, I was in the room. And I wasn't sure about what the answers were.
The answer is is that the bill covers licensed gaming facilities as a part of The Philadelphia Code. State facilities, regardless of how they are licensed, have to be in compliance with The Philadelphia Code, for any number of issues, even liquor license facilities. And so, at the City Council level, which is the only place they let me 100 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 legislate, it is covered. It's in the bill. That's all I can do.
I understand what you're saying it's in the bill. But can you assure us that they will not smoke in these casinos? Can you actually tell me today that that's a fact, that's a fact that they will not smoke in these places?
It's a fact that it is prohibited in the establishment.
It's not what I asked. I asked, could you assure me that they will not smoke in them? That's what I'm asking. Is it a fact?
It's a fact that it is prohibited in the bill. And to the extent that someone wants to violate the law, that's what they're going to do.
The state can do anything that it wants, and has often done so. I cannot tell you what the state is 101 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 going to do because we're not at the state house; we're at City Council.
I know that. I'm just trying to explain to you... You can understand my concern.
I fully understand your concern. And we try to provide for it, like every other workplace. This is a workplace issue. I cannot tell you today what the state is going to do. They're in session at the moment. I have no idea what they might be up to, but I cannot do anything about what they do.
I know that. And I understand you can't. And that's why I --
I understand 102 050063 - Public Health - 3/7/05 that piece.