Passage of statewide law unlikely, say both sides of smoking-ban debate

Following the Princeton Regional Health Commission's recent decision to push for state legislation that would allow municipalities to enact ordinances banning smoking, both supporters and opponents of the local proposed smoking ban are mobilized for a fight. But the prospect of such a law being passed any time soon — if at all — is doubtful.

"I know it's an uphill battle," said state senator Shirley Turner (D-Lawrence), who last week proposed a law of this type before a legislative committee. Turner said the law will face opposition from the tobacco, restaurant and bar industries, which will use their weighty financial resources to their advantage. "There are many hurdles a bill has to clear before it is enacted into law, and unfortunately many smoking bills never clear a committee and don't get posted into law," she said.

The health commission's approval of a ban on smoking in all public places in Princeton was overturned Aug. 29 by Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberg. The judge ruled that municipalities do not have the authority to enact such ordinances.

Turner said she is counting on support from citizens to overcome the opposition to her proposed state law. "I am very hopeful that the people will prevail," she said, "and the health of the people will be put above the profit of the cigarette industry because it's all about the dollars."

"I believe a municipality should have the tools they need to protect their residents," she added. "This is a local control issue, and each municipality should be able to control their destiny."

Tom Humber, president of the National Smokers Alliance — a lobbying group funded in part by tobacco companies — said he doubts the state legislature will grant municipalities the authority to create such ordinances. "What you're going to get is sort of a crazy quilt of laws, and I think most state legislatures looking at an issue like this will make the determination that a coherent unified state law is best," he said.

"If you look at New Jersey state law today, it is an extremely carefully crafted law that provides the rational balance of all interest," he said. "The marketplace is making a determination so there are choices for everyone. Our view is don't upset that balance."

Turner said she does not anticipate enough will in the state legislature to enact a statewide ban on smoking, an alternative path the legislature could take to prohibit smoking in public areas.

Humber said though his group plans to fight legislative proposals supporting municipal authority, individuals themselves have the most power to influence the legislature.

"We are a grass-roots political organization, and the most effective thing that we are going to do is to mobilize our members in New Jersey and hope that their voices as citizens and constituents count for something," he said. "We're getting calls from members all over New Jersey asking, 'What do I need to do now?' "

Both Humber and Turner predicted that a law enabling local smoking bans could not be passed until next year, at the earliest.

But Regina Carlson, executive director of the New Jersey Group Against Smoking Pollution, said she believes towns can take action before a law granting municipal authority is passed.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

According to Carlson, an attorney on the health commission and attorneys for New Jersey GASP have deemed the judge's decision that state laws preempted municipal authority questionable.

"We conclude that there is a strong argument to be made that towns have the authority" to enact local smoking ordinances, she said. "We want to protect the public health, and so we will continue to encourage towns to enact local ordinances. I think there's latitude for other towns to go ahead and act. A different judge might have a different interpretation."

Anthony Pasquini, general manager of Teresa's, a nonsmoking restaurant in Princeton, and Mediterra, which allows smoking, questioned the basic premise of the ban.

"I think it's up to the consumers to choose what restaurant they want to dine at," he said. "The consumer going out the door can decide which one he wants to go to."

Pasquini said he is not too concerned about the future of smoking at Mediterra. "A lot of our worrying has gone down with the judge's decision, but that doesn't mean we're going to let our guard down," he said, adding that he believes there is a good chance now that a state law would not pass.

Humber also said consumers should have choices when they decide which restaurant they will frequent. "We know what smokers do, and when you disenfranchise a smoker, that smoker is going to take his money someplace else or he's going to keep it in his pocket," he said. "We will take no backseat to anyone."