Lemon Grove Feels Heat as Holdout on No-Smoking Laws

By all accounts, and contrary to the rhetoric that initially accompanied the issue, tough ordinances regulating smoking in public have quietly become an accepted way of life in San Diego County--except in this East County city.

It has been slightly more than two years since the San Diego City Council approved a law restricting smoking in public places and requiring employers to forbid smoking in the workplace, except in specially designated areas. During that time, non-smoking advocates have persuaded 14 of the other 15 cities in the county, as well as the county itself, to pass similar laws.

There has been widespread acceptance of the anti-smoking measures, with virtually every local government body that has considered them adopting them unanimously. And, to the best of anyone’s knowledge, there has not been a single citation issued for breaking the law, an infraction carrying a $100 fine. Two weeks ago, Imperial Beach became the latest city to follow the trend.

So naturally the American Lung Assn. and various non-smokers rights groups figured Lemon Grove, one of the smallest of the county’s 16 cities, was certain to fall into step.

What those lobbyists didn’t count on, however, was a fierce streak of independence in Lemon Grove, a modest bedroom community located just south of La Mesa. The people of Lemon Grove, it’s civic leaders say, incorporated in 1977 because they were fed up with government interference by the County of San Diego.

They have all heard the data about the health perils of second-hand smoke (a study by the federal Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 500 to 5,000 non-smoking Americans die of lung cancer each year from inhaling cigarette smoke). But members of the Lemon Grove City Council do not seem anxious to pass a smoking ordinance. Last year, they unanimously rejected such a ban.

In recent weeks, the council members have been aggressively lobbied by non-smoking groups, who hope early next month to force a second vote on a smoking ordinance. But they remain unconvinced that a non-smoking law is necessary in Lemon Grove.

“Your guess is as good as mine on what’s coming up in the future on this,” said Councilman Willis Bowersox.

“But last time we considered this, the unanimous feeling was that there’s already enough government interference in our lives; why create even more?” Bowersox said. “When we decided against a smoking law, it was because the great majority of our merchants wanted the right to decide for themselves if they wanted to adopt more restrictive policies on their own. So far, that system seems to be working--we haven’t had any complaints about it. I don’t know if there’s a reason to change things now.”

Lemon Grove Mayor Jim Dorman said he would “listen to the no-smoking people again; I have nothing against that. But I honestly don’t think there will be a change, unless they can come up with some pretty startling information. We just didn’t feel like adding a restriction to our business merchants when one didn’t seem necessary. And there has been absolutely no complaints, or concerns, raised by any citizen of Lemon Grove over this issue.”

Dorman said the ordinance was rejected a year ago because a survey of Lemon Grove Chamber of Commerce members “indicated there was overwhelming opposition among the merchants to a law of this type. Unless there has been a change in that opinion, and my indication is that there has not been, I don’t think you’ll see us pass this law.”

Dorothe Dubois, who has founded a Lemon Grove chapter of the group Non-Smokers Rights, has been the principal advocate of a smoking ordinance in the city, and despite the lukewarm reception she has received from the council members, Dubois remains convinced that “education will convince them to change their minds.” Toward that end, she has scheduled meetings with each of the council members in hopes of swaying their opinions.

“For one thing, the health hazards of second-hand smoke are well-known now,” Dubois said. “It only makes sense to avoid unnecessary cases of cancer and other disease. And, we intend to show that the other cities have had no problems in adopting or enforcing the law.”

Indeed, George Storey, an employee in the City of San Diego’s citizen assistance office, which is monitoring the smoking ordinance, said voluntary compliance by smokers and businesses alike has been “remarkable” in the 15 months since the law went into effect in the city.

“Overall, we’ve been very gratified,” Storey said. “The response on all sides of this issue has been very positive, and we were afraid that would not be the case considering the fact that there were some hard feelings when the law was adopted here.

“We’ve had remarkably few complaints, (about 100) considering the fact that there are 50,000 businesses in San Diego affected by this law and probably another 50,000 public places where a dispute could crop up. And when we have had complaints, we’ve been able to act as sort of a mediator to arrive at a compromise that satisfies both sides. The non-smokers have been patient and understanding about working these things out. Considering the health benefits, and the improvement of work conditions, I don’t think businesses in the city, with a few exceptions, are having a problem living with this.”

Those notable exceptions, Storey said, are barber and beauty shops, “which are the last bastions of resistence, for some reason,” certain events at theaters and the Sports Arena, bowling alleys and health clubs.

“At the Civic Theater, for example, we have no problem when there is a symphony or opera concert, but it’s impossible when there is closed-circuit television of a big fight. Those guys lighting up their big cigars at the fights would go to jail before they’d put them out.

“It’s the same situation at the Sports Arena. If it’s family entertainment like Disney on Parade, people cheer when we announce there is no smoking. But it’s kind of hopeless when they have a tractor pull, wrestling or a rock concert.”