The D.C. Council today approved a measure that would limit it to two events per year: Fight Night (a charity fundraiser) and the annual event held by the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, to which Councilmember Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) [...]]]> On the bright side, the huge exemption to the smokefree workplaces law just got just smaller.

The D.C. Council today approved a measure that would limit it to two events per year: Fight Night (a charity fundraiser) and the annual event held by the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, to which Councilmember Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) has ties.

That’s about the only good thing that we can say. The fact that the Council cavalierly and permanently weakened the popular health law is hugely problematic. The fact that it did so by bypassing the committee process – therefore ensuring no public input or debate – is even worse.

The Council was so caught up in a heated debate over taxes and bonds that they didn’t even debate the exemption, which is for two cigar-smoking events a year.

It was amusing, though, to witness Evans’ hypocrisy. He had the gall to complain that his colleagues had bypassed the committee process on the tax issue … which of course is exactly what he and Councilmember Michael Brown (D-At Large) did when pushing the smokefree exemption. In fact, he even told us when we ran into him recently at the Wilson Building that he bypassed the committee process because otherwise, he would lose.

So there you have it. Not a proud moment for the D.C. Council.

The D.C. Council is poised to yet again attempt to narrow the exemption it has been trying all summer to carve out of the smokefree workplaces law.

You may recall that language passed in June permitted 79 hotels to hold cigar-smoking events once a year. In July, the Council narrowed that [...]]]>

flickr photo courtesy of HitTrophy

The D.C. Council is poised to yet again attempt to narrow the exemption it has been trying all summer to carve out of the smokefree workplaces law.

You may recall that language passed in June permitted 79 hotels to hold cigar-smoking events once a year. In July, the Council narrowed that to 25 hotels. This, despite the fact that Councilmembers who were pushing for it kept claiming — erroneously — that it would apply to just two events. Then Mayor Vincent Gray vetoed the July bill, which put us right back to the broader June exemption.

It appears as though the Council has finally figured out language that really really will make the exemption apply to just two events: Fight Night (a charity fundraiser that is held in the fall) and the St. Patrick’s Day bash held by the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick (which Jack Evans has ties to).

The language that is to be voted on tomorrow says:

Sec. 3 Section 4917(b) of the Department of Health Functions Clarification Act of 2001, effective April 4, 2006 (D.C. Law 16-90; D.C. Official Code § 7-743(b)), is amended to read as follows:

A(b) A hotel licensed under D.C. Official Code ‘ 25-113 shall be exempt from the provisions of this part once a year for one day for the purposes of hosting a special event that permits cigar smoking; provided, that the hotel shall:

“(1) Notify the Department of Health in writing in advance of the event;

“(2) Have a ballroom or special-event-catering space with an occupancy of 500 or more persons;

“(3) Pay a fee of $250 to be remitted to the Regulatory Enforcement Fund as established under section 4903;

“(4) Permit employees to opt out of working the special event with no penalty; and

“(5) Have been the recipient of a similar exemption between January 1, 2008, and October 1, 2011.”.

The only two events that have got this exemption previously are Fight Night and the St. Patrick’s Day events.

Smokefree DC appreciates the fact that the Council responded to the many emails we have sent pointing out that what the Council said it was doing (creating an exemption for two events) was not in fact what it did.

However, we still have an enormous problem with this, for two reasons:

1) The Council is bypassing the public. Here we have an enormously popular law, and the Council is weakening it without a single public hearing. This should go through the Health Committee. Why isn’t Councilmember David Catania insisting on that?

2) This law shouldn’t be weakened, especially not permanently. What the Council is doing is creating an exemption for these two events that will last in perpetuity. That’s insane. Really, the Friendly Sons can still have their event without smoking cigars, and Fight Night can still raise money without cigar-smoking. Note to the Council: Fight Night won’t move to Maryland; it can’t, because that state has a strong smokefree law too.

We’ll see what happens tomorrow. Too often, the language that is circulated before the Council meets is not what the Council ends up voting on.

It isn’t often that a politician admits that his strategy is to bypass the public so he can win.

But that’s what D.C. Councilmember Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) told us yesterday when we ran into him outside the Wilson Building.

We were talking to Councilmembers about the large exemption the Council put [...]]]>

Flickr photo courtesy of fashionfightspovertydc

It isn’t often that a politician admits that his strategy is to bypass the public so he can win.

But that’s what D.C. Councilmember Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) told us yesterday when we ran into him outside the Wilson Building.

We were talking to Councilmembers about the large exemption the Council put in the smokefree workplaces law over the summer and urging them to repeal it. The exemption allows for annual cigar-smoking events in a large number of hotels throughout the city.

Evans saw us and greeted us as we were chatting with Councilmember Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7), who still thought the exemption applied to just one event, a charity fundraiser.

Evans said he was willing to compromise by narrowing the exemption and asked if we would compromise and agree to it. (Of course, we’re not on the dais voting, so this line of reasoning was a bit odd.)

We said there shouldn’t be any exemption, and that we don’t compromise on health, but if he really thought it was warranted, why not put it through the committee process so the public can have input? (Evans and Councilmember Michael Brown (D-At Large) slipped the exemption into an unrelated budget measure and blindsided the public health community.)

Evans’ response: “If it went through committee, you would win!”

So there you have it.

A D.C. Councilmember acknowledges that if he were to be aboveboard and let the public have input on a measure designed to weaken an incredibly popular and effective smokefree workplaces law, he wouldn’t be successful.

So he used an underhanded tactic instead.

This also raises a question: Has Councilmember David Catania (I-At Large) abandoned his authority as chair of the Committee on Health to protect the health of hotel workers? It would appear so, given that he voted for two versions of the cigar-event exemption and has yet to insist that any proposal to weaken the law go through his committee.Perhaps he will rise to the occasion and insist that the right procedures are followed. After all, he was a great proponent of the smokefree workplaces bill when it was being debated and was instrumental in it becoming law. We lauded him at the time, with good reason. Let’s hope he still feels strongly enough about about protecting worker health to defend the law that he did so much to enact.

The case of the convoluted budget amendment just got messier.

Mayor Vincent Gray has vetoed a measure that was supposed to narrow a huge exemption to the smokefree workplaces law — an exemption that the D.C. Council passed in June without public notice. (They claimed it was an accident.) However, because [...]]]>

Flickr photo courtesy of aperryproductions

The case of the convoluted budget amendment just got messier.

Mayor Vincent Gray has vetoed a measure that was supposed to narrow a huge exemption to the smokefree workplaces law — an exemption that the D.C. Council passed in June without public notice. (They claimed it was an accident.) However, because the second, narrower exemption really wasn’t that narrow, his veto isn’t such a bad thing. Now, the Council will likely revisit the legislation – and that gives us a shot at getting the exemption repealed altogether.

But let’s back up. You recall that in June, the Council, in the middle of a budget discussion, introduced and quickly passed an enormous exemption to the smokefree workplace law. They claimed later that they had meant it to apply to just two events — Fight Night (a fundraiser) and the annual St. Patrick’s Day fete held by the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick (of which Councilmember Jack Evans was a member and may still be). In fact, by our calculations, 79 hotels would be eligible to hold one cigar-smoking event annually.

So the Council decided to try again. On July 12, it passed another measure. This one applied to hotels that “[h]ave a ballroom or special event catering space with an occupancy of 500 or more persons.” Again, several proponents of this very bad idea claimed that the exemption was for just two events. Councilmember Phil Mendelson questioned that, saying on the dais that he thought more than just two hotels would fit in this category. His colleagues ignored him.

Turns out he was right.

Smokefree DC checked with the convention bureau and got a list of hotels that would qualify for the exemption. Puzzles, we checked back with the D.C. budget office and with a staffer in Councilmember Michael Brown’s office. Both insisted that just six hotels would be eligible for the exemption, and since a few of them had no-smoking policies, the new law effectively would apply just to two hotels.

Wrong again. Smokefree DC looked up the hotels online and looked at the facilities they listed. Sure enough, 25 hotels are eligible for the exemption. You can see the list – and the links to the facility descriptions – here. We sent the list back to the staffer who told us that really, jut six hotels were eligible for the exemption. We have not received a response.

We have to note that during the July meeting, Mendelson, on principle, tried to strip the exemption altogether and restore the smokefree law to its original form. Councilmembers Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3) and Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) sided with Mendelson. They lost that attempt, 10-3.

But back to the story. Dissecting exactly what the Council really did took some time. This week, just as we were preparing to send a letter to the Council with our findings, pointing out that despite the high-minded speeches on the dais from members who piously proclaimed that they were all in favor of smokefree policies but wanted to help the children of the District of Columbia, we got word that Gray vetoed the July bill.

That means the original measure – the really bad, broad June exemption that applies to 79 hotels – stands. That’s not good.

But it appears as though the Council will revisit this in September when they return from their August holidays. When they get back, they shouldn’t even try to narrow the exemption to two events. They should repeal it altogether.

It’s wrong that they are weakening a key health and safety law. It’s wrong that they did it through a budget amendment, thereby completely bypassing the public. It’s wrong that they are so willing to expose hotel workers to the toxins of secondhand smoke. Secondhand smoke has more than 400 chemicals, 69 of which are known or suspected carcinogens. The U.S. Surgeon General has established that there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke.

If you agree, please contact the Council and let them know.

Here’s an update on the enormous exemption the D.C. Council created in the city’s smokefree workplaces law: They claim it was an accident.

Seriously.

They meant to vote to approve just an exemption for two events a year, Councilmember Mary Cheh (Ward 3) told my colleague, Bob Summersgill. In fact, the Council [...]]]>

flickr photo courtesy of sebastian6

Here’s an update on the enormous exemption the D.C. Council created in the city’s smokefree workplaces law: They claim it was an accident.

Seriously.

They meant to vote to approve just an exemption for two events a year, Councilmember Mary Cheh (Ward 3) told my colleague, Bob Summersgill. In fact, the Council approved broad language that permits 79 hotels in the city to have cigar-smoking events once a year. Whoops.

So now they are apparently scrambling to “fix” their error.

There are several profoundly disturbing things about this mess:

1) The Council made a major policy change — weakening a phenomenally popular law — without any public notice or chance for public input. (They did it through an amendment to the budget process.)

2) The Council didn’t bother to read the wording of what they were voting on. Instead, they just relied on those who presented it (Councilmembers Jack Evans and Michael Brown).

3) Evans and/or Brown either deliberately misled other councilmembers or they screwed up royally and got their intended language all wrong. Either one is really bad.

4) Their “fix” still isn’t a very good fix. Apparently now they are talking about permitting cigar-smoking events in hotels that seat at least 500 people. By our count, that includes 25 hotels – not two.

What an outrage. What sheer arrogance. What incompetence. What a mess.

How dare the Council weaken a workplace safety law under the radar screen? Do they really think that’s good policy? Even if they do “fix” their mistake, what they plan to do isn’t right either. The public isn’t clamoring to have cigar-smoking events. Hotel workers aren’t either. This is just a case of the Council doing favors for friends.

One very important note: The hero in all this is Councilmember Phil Mendelson. He apparently is the only Councilmember who read the language of the amendment before the vote. He realized how broad it was and tried to strike it.

In fact, he didn’t favor any exemptions at all — even for two events, because that would undermine a law that protects the health and safety of workers. He was at the losing end of a 12-1 vote.

So if you think the D.C. Council is a really sorry bunch, as Smokefree DC does right now, and you don’t want them to be gutting the smokefree workplace law by casually making amendments to a completely unrelated bill with no public notice, let them know. Here’s how. While you’re at it, please thank Phil Mendelson for doing the right thing.

Without any public notice or input, the D.C. Council blew a hole on Tuesday in the really popular smokefree workplaces law. By a 12-1 vote on an amendment to the budget, they said that certain hotels could be exempt from the law one night a year.

What a huge disservice to hotel workers. What contempt for [...]]]> Unbelievable.

Without any public notice or input, the D.C. Council blew a hole on Tuesday in the really popular smokefree workplaces law. By a 12-1 vote on an amendment to the budget, they said that certain hotels could be exempt from the law one night a year.

What a huge disservice to hotel workers. What contempt for the citizens of the District.

Below is a copy of a letter Smokefree DC sent to the Council today. Please email the Council and urge them to repeal the measure. Make sure to thank Councilmember Phil Mendelson for being the only member to vote for worker and public health.

June 17, 2011

Councilmembers,

On Tuesday, when you voted 12-1 to blast a hole in the District’s smokefree workplaces law without public notice or input, you did a huge disservice to hotel workers and showed contempt for the citizens of the District.

The exemption you voted for is not just for one event, Fight Night. The language allows for exemptions for any “hotel licensed under D.C. Official Code § 25-113.” That means that dozens of hotels are eligible to apply for an exemption each year, meaning that there could be dozens of events annually that permit cigar smoking.

We have heard that this exemption is excusable because “it is for charity.” That is flat wrong. Nothing in the measure limits the exemption to charitable events; anyone can take advantage of it. Please don’t think of amending it to make it just for charity events that benefit children, such as Fight Night. Teaching kids that it’s okay to poison people with cigar smoke is not okay.

Your action is baffling. The smokefree workplaces law is enormously popular. It has undoubtedly helped curb illness among workers and the public. There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer and heart disease, and aggravates respiratory illnesses. It’s not okay to make workers breathe it for just a night, or two, or three or more. To create such an exemption is unconscionable. Permitting employees to opt out “with no penalty” is not worth much if the workers don’t get paid.

Further, enacting this measure sends a message to the electorate that the Council doesn’t take seriously the laws it passes. It also sets a terrible precedent. We don’t give people a pass on any other health and safety law on the books – not the fire code, not rules requiring food to be kept at safe temperatures, not rules prohibiting rat infestations. To do so with the smokefree workplaces law is a huge mistake. There is no social, economic or health reason to permit this exemption.

We especially object to the manner in which this was done. It was underhanded and clearly designed as an end-run around the process. Recall that when Councilmember Jack Evans considered introducing the same measure through regular channels, Councilmember David Catania rightly said he would not consider it because it was the wrong thing to do. Councilmember Evans couldn’t get his way in a legitimate process and so decided to engage in a sneak attack. That’s shameful.

Three cheers to Councilmember Phil Mendelson for doing the right thing and voting against it. It is unbelievable that the rest of the Council did not follow suit.

We strongly urge you to repeal this measure.

Angela Bradbery

Co-founder, Smokefree DC

202-669-6517

Today, Smokefree DC sent the following letter to Councilmember David Catania (At Large), chair of the city’s health committee, and ccd the mayor and D.C. Council.

Note that the legislation introduced recently by Councilmember Jack Evans (Ward 2) would apply to dozens of hotels, permitting dozens of exemptions to the smokefree workplaces law annually. This is [...]]]>

Today, Smokefree DC sent the following letter to Councilmember David Catania (At Large), chair of the city’s health committee, and ccd the mayor and D.C. Council.

Note that the legislation introduced recently by Councilmember Jack Evans (Ward 2) would apply to dozens of hotels, permitting dozens of exemptions to the smokefree workplaces law annually. This is a lot worse than his usual “emergency” legislation, which applies just to two events a year.

Feb. 22, 2011

Dear Councilmember Catania,

We recently became aware of legislation that has been referred to your committee that would permit certain exemptions to the smokefree workplaces law. We urge you not to bring it to a hearing or a vote.

The measure would permit hotels licensed under $ 25-113 to be exempt from the Department of Health Functions Clarification Act of 2001 annually for a day to host special events that permit cigar smoking. Dozens of hotels would be eligible to apply, meaning the smokefree workplaces law could be suspended for events dozens of times a year. The measure was introduced by Councilmember Jack Evans, who every year introduces “emergency” legislation to permit his club, the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, to be exempt from the law on St. Patrick’s Day. It appears as though he is trying to avoid going to the Council every year by making his annual “emergency” bill permanent.

Councilmember, this bill is a terrible idea for the following reasons:

1)    The smokefree workplaces law, which you championed and which has been a huge success, exists to protect workers from secondhand smoke. There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. It’s not okay to make workers breathe it for just a night, or two, or three or more.

2)    Enacting this measure would send a message to the electorate that the Council doesn’t take seriously the laws it passes. People could make the argument that the city should have no problem if people other than those exempted from the law violate it.

3)    If passed, the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick would be receiving special treatment; they would be told they are above the law that applies to everyone else. This is cronyism at its worst – Councilmember Evans is trying to push through a bill to let his friends break the law. Giving special favors and exemptions to the law for friends is unethical and violates the rule of law.

4)    This would set a terrible precedent. We don’t give people a pass on any other health and safety law on the books – not the fire code, not rules requiring food to be kept at safe temperatures, not rules prohibiting rat infestations. Let’s not start now.

5)    There appears to be no public support for this bill. The Friendly Sons of St. Patrick have never publicly requested this exemption, and no other Friendly Sons chapter anywhere permits smoking of any kind at their events. To our knowledge, no other club is clamoring for it either.

6)    Councilmember Evans has never stated a reason this exemption is needed. If secondhand smoke is toxic, there is no purpose to occasionally permit it in the workplace.

7)    There is no social, economic or health reason to permit this exemption.

For those reasons, we urge you not to advance the bill. If similar “emergency” legislation is presented to the full Council to apply to this year’s St. Patrick’s Day, we urge you to vote it down.

Sincerely,

Angela Bradbery

Co-founder, Smokefree DC

cc: Mayor Vincent Gray and the D.C. Council