The City Council proposes two ordinances -- one that would "opt out" of the county's tough new anti-smoking ordinance. That would give council members time to discuss the possibility of introducing the second ordinance, which would be even tougher than the county's ban, which was tougher than the city's current ban. The proposal does not require a public hearing, we are told, but there will probably be one as a "courtesy." How kind our public servants are to us.
Everyone seems to want to slow down to give business owners time to deal with whatever new reality the council concocts:
There's something inherently unfair about making restaurants make a decision about their future in 30 days. We should opt out so we don't change anything for the time being,” said Sam Talarico Jr., R-at-large.
[. . .]
“I want to hear from the small mom-and-pop bars and taverns,” Talarico said.
The only options being considered are staying with the city's current ban, adopting the county's ban or going even further than the county; in other words: tough, tougher or toughest. If the council were all that concerned about business, you'd think the option of returning to the pre-ban days in which businesses made their own decisions would at least be mentioned. But people who are on a holy crusade never look back.
