Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0013.193 2002-2004 Aloha Mister chairman, council members and guests. Thank you for allowing me the privilege of the floor this morning to offer my views on Bill 260, draft four, as presented. Although I have been inactive in regards to this important issue, I am not unfamiliar with the them having gone through similar hearings in California some years ago. I am concerned with this areas Recreational areas, Economics and Enforcement. Recreation & Health Recreational areas, in my opinion, should be clearly defined. When I read that I questioned Common areas and recreational areas of a condo, time share or even hotel unit could be interpreted to mean pools and beaches as well as charter boats. I understand the desire by some to control all public areas, and [understand the concerns over smoking, as well as second hand smokers a 12 year employee of a Califomia Medical Center, in anon-patient related position my areas of responsibility included editing several Medical Staff and Nursing Staff publications and newsletters. Privileged to, sometimes classified information, I became acutely aware of research and studies on smoking and second had smoke and their funding which brought brought us face the issues here to day. 20 years ago, when smoking started to become an issue, data resulted from research paid for by "Special Interest Groups" with some informative statistics and data skewed to reflect the interests of those groups. Studies were grouped together and "consensus statistics" released, without consideration to diet, genetics, hypertension. cholesterol, exercise, obesity and socioeconomic factors. Although the Center for Disease Control reported in September, 1995, that many factors are related to cancer and cardiovascular disease, the only area studied in the risk of lung cancer was smoking. In many cases that research, ...much of what we read and were to believe, was flawed, misrepresented and not 100% accurate. This first was became evident when after a five year ongoing battle from 1993 to 1998 a Federal Court Judge struck down the Environmental Protection Agency findings on secondhand smoke. Following the World Trade Center llisaster, Tina Kreishe representing the EPA, informed the people of New York and general public that the streets and area surrounding the World Trade Center were safe, although filled with fumes from smoke, ash and jet fuel, we were to believe the air was not toxic. Along those same lines of air quality charcoal has never been targeted as an offender of clean air to the best of my knowledge, nor classed as a carcinogen, yet a ten pound bag of charcoal contains most of the exact same and many similar chemicals...and asmany toxins as 160 packs of cigarettes. One can only but Comm. No. ~ ~ . Ref. Tot Ref. Uate wonder if eventually it will become illegal to barbecue, or shouldn't we right now today, institute a policy of courtesy and common sense in regards to all pools and beaches. Two weeks ago a study published by the British Medical Journal of two United States researchers, found no significant association between second hand smoke and lung cancer as well as second hand smoke and heart disease. Of course it didn't make headlines of the newspapers, the article was rather obscured within the body of most newspapers, however this study was accurate, honest and not funded by a Special Interest group. Today, 20 years after tobacco smoke studies began... and with all the research and funding that has been done annually since, tobacco smoke remains the only substance known to man that does not have a set standard for safety. Why? Strange, that although we have perfected ventilation systems, air filters and air conditioning systems which protect against even the deadliest of diseases and bioagents, systems which are currently in use in hospitals and Medical Centers throughout the United States today, the anti-smoking groups still want us to believe there is no system in existence that will effectively cleanse the air of tobacco smoke. With all due respect to medical research and science, this is more indicative of nuisance control, and not as great a health issue as once purported. Economical Imuact California is constantly used as an example of positive effects from a smoking ban. A column by Came Kuwada in last Sundays edition of West Hawaii Today, stated, in reference to the smoking ban in California restaurant and bars, and I quote "the industry has continued to grow since smoke free legislation went into effect". Well, as one person who lived in that State in 1994, was involved in politics, restaurants and bars, and who recently spent two months there, I can assure you the statement is almost true, but, again, please take a closer look at how those statistics were compiled. All restaurants were grouped together, titled "the industry" including Fast Food, Take out, Fine Dining, with or without sale of alcoholic beverages. This ban went into effect in 1994, the first year following the end of the recession. Using the Taxable Sales in California from the State Board of Equalization an independent study was completed by Otto J. Mueksch, breaking down the industry into two categories; Fast Foods, and RestaurantslBars. The first year the economy showed Zero growth, however, Fast Foods showed an increase in sales of 11.7%, whereas Restaurants and Bars showed a gain of 1.2%. State Board of Equalization records reflecting the number of permits for the Fast Foods showed an increase of 15.7% while permits for Restaurant and Bars declined by .9% resulting in 293 fewer Restaurants and Bars. The years from 1994 to 1999, while the taxable sales I statewide show the overall economy increased 31.9%, sales of Fast Foods increased 38.4%, while the Restaurant and Bar sales were below the overall economy figures at 28.6% What the special interest groups are not telling us is...the numbers of permits issued for Fast Foods during that period rose by 12.7%, and the number of permits for Restaurant and Bars decreased by 3.3%. In other words, as per California State Board of Equalization official reports, during a time when the economy increased overa11,1,039 restaurants and bars went out of business. The majority of those left, now have outdoor dining, complete with area heaters, for their smoking patrons. Enforcement of thss ban creates my third area of great concern. l have lived in Hawaii for over eight years and am well aware of the shortage of police, increase in crime, accidents and illegal drug usage. We know our ice epidemic is the worst in the nation per capita. We have approximately 280 police officers who cover over 4,000 miles on this island, protecting over 148,500 citizens, not including tourists. These officers responded to over 78,000 major accidents, calls, and cases last year alone, and now they will be expected to enforce a smoking ban as well. Where, I ask, are our priorities, where is the money for additional officers that will already need and where is our courtesy and common sense? Not much has changed over 20 years, except for public opinion which was manifested by misinformation distributed through the media, who has nothing to gain except revenue from the high cost of advertising paid for by special interest groups, including the state of Hawaii Health Department and Coalition for a Tobacco Free Hawaii who contributed over $66,000 for a anti smoking media campaign. I, along with many smokers and nonsmokers have some Special Interests too, and I hope in considering the issues you are faced with, you will each consider what our interests are, and that is for you our representatives, to vote using courtesy and common sense for the benefit of all people, business owners, citizens and tourists, smokers and nonsmokers alike, so everyone will be treated equally, intelligently and with respect for one another Aloha, and thank you, once again, for your time and attention and for allowing me the privilege of the floor.