City Beat: Mayor O'Neal resigns following passage of smoking amendments

Mayor Jim O’Neal resigned abruptly from the post he held for three years following the passage of a series of amendments to the city’s smoking ban at the May 7 Springfield City Council meeting.

In his reasoning, O’Neal cited personal and professional obligations.

“I have tried to do the best I can,” O’Neal told a sparse crowd of roughly 30 at the end of the meeting. “I have fallen short. I haven’t been giving what I should give, and I haven’t been fulfilling the job as it should be fulfilled.”

He said his resignation had nothing to do with the events of the meeting.

Mayor Pro Tem Bob Stephens was sworn in as Springfield’s mayor May 8 at a special council meeting held during the regularly scheduled council luncheon. City Manager Greg Burris said council will select a replacement for Stephens’ General A seat in the coming weeks, and the process would be similar to when Councilman Jeff Seifried was selected in late February to replace Zone 1 Councilman Nick Ibarra, who resigned Jan. 4. Springfield spokeswoman Cora Scott said the city would accept applications for Stephens’ council seat May 14–28.

O’Neal’s announcement came on the heels of a contentious debate about amendments to the city’s smoking ban, which has been in place since 53 percent of voters approved the initiative-led process in April 2011. On June 5, voters will have an opportunity to repeal the ban with a second initiative-petition drive council placed on the ballot. O’Neal helped guide an effort to approve what he called common-sense exemptions to the ban after council declined to approve the repeal outright.

The approved amendments allow cigar bars, tobacco shops, private clubs and bingo halls that were in operation April 5, 2011, to have grandfathered exceptions to the smoking ban so long as they meet certain criteria. The amendments, which took effect immediately, also remove the use of e-cigarettes from prohibition in public places and allow theatrical productions to use smoking on stage in performances.

Before the decision, Councilman Doug Burlison sponsored a substitute amendment that would have allowed smoking in bars, but O’Neal said he would oppose the move. Since a unanimous vote is required to amend a voter-approved ordinance, Burlison relented and agreed to support the amendments he could.

Tana Redman, whose family owns Grumpy’s Lounge, 3455 S. Campbell Ave. in Savannah Square, said the bar lost more than $20,000 the first two months the smoking ban was in place, and her tips have decreased 35 percent during the last year.

Steve Weimer, owner of Sunshine Lanes, Enterprise Park Lanes and Holiday Lanes bowling centers, and Linda Crowder, a volunteer for smoking-education organization One Air Alliance, stood opposed to the omnibus amendment vote.

Crowder, a retired vocal teacher and lung cancer survivor, said One Air only supported three exemptions to the ban: private clubs where workers would not be exposed to smoke, tobacco shops with 70 percent of sales derived from tobacco, and e-cigarette use. Weimer said he thought the exceptions put his business at a disadvantage and served to remove support for the repeal effort.

“This is about eliminating people out of the process,” Weimer said.

Councilwoman Cindy Rushefsky said given that people on both sides of the issue were unhappy with the compromise council had likely done its job.

“Compromise is the essence of good government,” Rushefsky said.

Charter changes
Council also considered proposed changes to the city charter.

Two of the three bills presented are scheduled to receive a second reading and vote at the May 21 meeting. If those bills are approved by council, the measures would be on the Aug. 7 ballot as all changes to the city charter require an affirmative vote of the people, according to City Attorney Dan Wichmer.

The active bills would eliminate the requirement for primary elections when there are three or more council candidates vying for a single seat and would change the number of signatures needed to bring initiative petitions before council.

Currently, those heading initiative efforts need to obtain signatures from 10 percent of the number of registered voters who cast votes in the last election. Council will consider modifying the rule to 7 percent of the total number of registered voters in the city. With around 21,000 voters in the most recent election and about 100,000 registered voters in the city, a current initiative effort would need signatures of roughly 2,100 voters compared to 7,000 if the proposed change were to occur.

The third bill was tabled with a 5-4 vote. It would have allowed council to remove illegal language from the petition with a super-majority vote of seven council members and permit council to delay a public vote for up to a year to tie it to another planned election.[[In-content Ad]]