Though Macon City Council recently passed stricter rules on smoking in an 9-6 vote, it remains possible that the ordinance may be substantially altered before its Sept. 1 effective date, or even stopped entirely.

Either way, people on each side of the issue -- those for personal freedoms and those for public health -- vow to keep lobbying.

Macon Mayor Robert Reichert has said publicly he isn’t sure whether to veto the ordinance or let it go into effect. His spokesman, Clay Murphey, said Reichert intends to make that decision Thursday.

If Reichert vetoes it, ordinance backers would need to change the mind of one opponent on City Council to override the veto.

“I’m just sitting here with bated breath waiting to see if the mayor’s going to veto it,” said Councilman Mike Cranford. “I’ve already talked to people who say they intend to file a lawsuit against the city if it’s not vetoed.”

Owners of several bars and downtown businesses are threatening to sue and have assembled a petition asking the mayor to veto the ordinance, he said.

“I’ve heard that there are a number of bar owners who want some adjustments made to the smoking ordinance,” said Councilwoman Elaine Lucas, one of the ordinance’s strong supporters.

And she doesn’t object to that, as long as the ordinance goes into effect as planned. Lucas said she’s willing to hold a forum with business owners and residents who felt excluded from the bill’s initial consideration so they can discuss with the city’s legal department how their concerns can be addressed.

“We can go back and do that,” she said. “We can amend something without it being vetoed.”

Detailed provisions

Macon’s ordinance, modeled closely on a Savannah ordinance that went into effect Jan. 1, goes further than Georgia’s 2005 law.

In addition to banning smoking in all offices, it forbids smoking in parking garages, private clubs, taxicabs, waiting areas for public transit and outdoor seating such as bleachers, and, of course, bars and restaurants.

Smoking would be allowed at most outdoor job sites, in fairly large outdoor dining areas, in up to 20 percent of hotel rooms, and in nursing homes where all room occupants have written medical authorization to smoke.

Businesses could designate smoking rooms for employees as long as they have separate ventilation.

Smoking would be banned on outdoor playgrounds -- and near them, under a standard inserted in committee discussion: “10 feet or a reasonable distance.” That same standard applies to smoking outside business entrances.

“Reasonable distance” is left vague, but the Savannah ordinance defines it as “a distance that is sufficient to ensure indoor areas remain smoke-free ... and to protect persons entering or exiting enclosed areas from involuntarily inhaling second-hand smoke.” How that would be judged at outdoor playgrounds is unclear.

“Premium” tobacco retailers are also exempt, meaning high-end cigar shops; but “discount” tobacco outlets would not be exempt.

The law ultimately is to be enforced by police, but business owners and managers would be responsible for a first request to extinguish cigarettes. If they do that and contact police when a smoker refuses to stop, owners and managers would not be liable.

Smokers found in violation, or business operators who don’t intervene, can be fined $100 for a first incident, $200 for a second within a year, and $500 for a third within that year. It’s also possible to revoke a business license for violations, the ordinance says.

Proposed changes

Several Macon bar and restaurant owners have echoed what Element nightclub owner Philip Sinclair told City Council on April 19: that new restrictions on smoking will drive their business outside city limits, perhaps even force them to close. Ordinance backers say smoking bans in other cities demonstrate that such fears are overblown.

Cranford and Sinclair both said any new smoking rules should be done -- if at all -- in cooperation with Bibb County.

One requested exemption is for electronic cigarettes, which produce a mist of nicotine and flavors for people to inhale.

Gregory Conley of Medford, N.J., with the Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association, said most smoking bans exempt those since they don’t actually burn or produce any smoke. He exchanged e-mails with Councilwoman Lauren Benedict, asking that e-cigarettes be exempt; but Benedict replied that exempting those similar-looking devices would complicate enforcement. She added that e-cigarettes contain tobacco.

Conley said there’s no evidence e-cigarettes have caused enforcement problems elsewhere and that they don’t contain tobacco at all.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has sought to regulate e-cigarettes as medical devices, but in the face of a lawsuit from manufacturers announced this week that they would be regulated under the less-strict rules for tobacco products.

Outside involvement

Macon officials and media received a barrage of support, criticism and information from local and non-local groups.

The Central Georgia Cancer Coalition, a partner with various anti-smoking and health groups, works with Breathe Easy Macon to poll the public and lobby for smoking restrictions. It openly calls for a local ordinance modeled on Savannah’s.

The Atlanta-based Georgia Premium Retail Tobacconists Association and the International Premium Cigar & Pipe Retailers Association warned of job losses.

William Robinson, executive director of the National African American Tobacco Prevention Network in Durham, N.C., said his group monitors smoking-ban issues nationwide, and contacted The Telegraph to discount the argument that such restrictions hurt restaurant or bar business. They’ve found business increases for “everyone but smoking lounges,” he said.

And then Sheila Martin, a bar owner in Hutchinson, Kan., peppered council members with allegations of a conspiracy in several e-mails. Council President Pro Tempore James Timley referred favorably to her allegations in an angry committee debate over the ordinance.

Martin claims local officials, activists and media have been suborned with cash from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, in order to promote the smoking-cessation products made by Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation does support anti-smoking programs and a wide range of other health initiatives in Georgia, but that open effort is a long way from a conspiracy, said Joe Marx, the foundation’s senior communications officer.

“The bottom line is, the foundation operates completely independently from Johnson & Johnson,” he said. “The reason we are doing tobacco control is because it’s one of the most important ways to improve health and reduce health care costs.”

To contact writer Jim Gaines, call 744-4489.