Matt Mitgang | Student Life

Students celebrate the passage of Proposition A in the DUC.

St. Louis County voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition A, a sales tax measure for Metro, with substantial student support on Tuesday, sending supporters gathered at Washington University into celebration and paving the way for the expansion of transit service in the St. Louis region.

“It’s a blowout,” said Rose Windmiller, the director of state relations and local government affairs at Washington University and a Prop A supporter, after students started a chant of “Metro! Metro! Metro!” in the background. “It feels tremendous.”

The final vote was 62.9 percent “yes” to 37.1 percent “no.” With 84.8 percent of the vote counted by 10 p.m., the “yes” vote was 62.2 percent and the “no” vote was 37.8 percent, meaning a margin that supporters and opponents acknowledged was insurmountable with just 15 percent of precincts having not reported.

More than 100 supporters who were gathered in the Danforth University Center’s Tisch Commons for an election watch party embraced and broke out into cheering as Chancellor Mark Wrighton, Chesterfield Mayor John Nations and Citizens for Modern Transit Executive Director Tom Shrout took the podium just after 10 p.m. The three hailed the proposition’s passage as a victory for the St. Louis region’s residents, students and businesses and not for candidates or parties.

“We win,” Wrighton said to thunderous applause. “St. Louis has made an investment in its future. We will all be rewarded.”

Prop A will raise the St. Louis County sales tax by 0.5 percent and trigger a 0.25 percent tax in the city, raising nearly $80 million a year for future light-rail expansion and for restoring the service that Metro cut on March 30, 2009.

The outcome represented a hard-fought, long-sought victory for supporters, after similar tax proposals failed in 1997 and 2008. And students and administrators, who were elated and exhausted after several days of mobilization efforts, said the measure’s passage means students, faculty and workers at the University will be better connected to the region.

“This is an opportunity for Wash. U. to continue its strong connections to the community, to really connect with St. Louis and to grow as an institution,” said Liz Kramer, an administrative fellow who spearheaded the student-led pro-Prop A campaign.

A small group of opponents gathered at Caldwell’s on the Plaza in Frontenac. St. Louis Tea Party leader Gina Loudon, the wife of former state Sen. John Loudon, R-Chesterfield, said opponents “were tremendously disappointed, but I’m not altogether surprised.” She added that the opposition had already started discussing how to make sure that Metro was accountable to the public, amid their concerns that Metro did not have a concrete plan for the tax money.

Metro CEO Bob Baer pledged accountability, saying the victory was a vote of confidence by the public. “We promise and pledge public accountability, transparency and the provision of the best service we can possibly provide,” Baer said.

With the future of public transit and sales taxes in the region on the line, both supporters and opponents were nervous and optimistic while they waited for results. But as precincts started reporting and the “yes” vote far exceeded the “no” vote, supporters grew more optimistic and opponents realized they faced overwhelming odds.

Tuesday’s turnout was 22 percent, two percentage points higher than what county officials predicted. Kramer said Tuesday afternoon that the Westgate polling place was empty, but other student volunteers reported a steady stream of student voters at polling places on and near campus.

Turnout in other parts of St. Louis County was described as light, especially in West and South counties. In a early positive sign for Prop A supporters, turnout in South County, whose voters likely lean toward “no,” was described as very light by multiple campaign leaders on both sides. But supporters said they needed substantial turnout in North County and Mid County and at Washington University and other schools to have a good chance of passage.

Students and administrators leading pro-Prop A efforts worked feverishly Tuesday to turn out as many students as possible before polls closed at 7 p.m. Meanwhile, the cash-starved local opposition called and e-mailed supporters and tried to gain as much media exposure as possible.

Campus transit advocates’ efforts and the administration’s efforts made up one facet of the broader push by regional Prop A supporters. The Advance St. Louis campaign, though not officially affiliated with the student-run efforts, spent close to $1 million, thanks in part to $75,000 in contributions from the University. Local organizations conducted their own turnout efforts as well.

In an e-mail to the school community, Wrighton sought to remind the community of its reliance on Metro and the benefits of transit to the region, while warning that the failure of the measure, Proposition A, would lead to a nearly 50 percent reduction in transit service. He cited the nearly 2.3 million times that community members used Metro last year, and the U-Pass program, which gives most students and employees free Metro access.

“These numbers clearly indicate the commitment of the Washington University community to public transit and reflect the vital importance of Proposition A to our students, faculty and staff as well as the St. Louis region,” Wrighton wrote.

Proposition A would increase the St. Louis County sales tax by half a cent, and trigger a quarter-cent tax that was passed in the city of St. Louis in 1997. Supporters say it would raise about $80 million per year for Metro, enough money to restore service to where it was before Metro’s service cuts on March 30, 2009.

Previously, Wrighton has appeared in a pro-transit commercial in which he cites the 25,000 people in the school community who use Metro as a reason to support public transit. Though the commercial does not mention Proposition A, the University did throw in its support for the measure last fall, when it gave $25,000 to the supporting campaign.

The administration’s efforts strongly resemble those taken during the campaign for Proposition M, a similar sales-tax measure that voters defeated in November 2008 by three percentage points. Wrighton sent a similar e-mail to the school community in fall 2008, and the University donated $25,000 to that year’s campaign.

But after many Proposition M supporters complained that 2008’s campaign failed in part because it was spearheaded by businesses and civic leaders, local advocates have attempted to take a more grassroots approach and are conveying a decidedly different message this time: Some people ride transit, but all people need it.

Campus advocates have sought to convey this message to students through a partnership with Bon Appétit. Advocates have given pro-transit buttons for some campus chefs to wear.

“Students are reminded when they get their food that a lot of other people use public transit, even if the students themselves may not use it,” said Liz Kramer, an administrative fellow at the University who has helped coordinate several pro-Metro advocacy events for young St. Louisans.

And improving transit, local advocates say, means jobs­—a message they hope will resonate with voters as the local economy continues to struggle.

With no major races on the ballot on April 6, campus transit advocates are trying to minimize the likely drop in turnout among students, a key group of supporters. “Most students are saying if they’ve registered, they’re coming out to vote,” Kramer said. “But it’s a matter of reminding them.”

Like Wrighton, supporters have emphasized that the ballot measure’s failure would harm the economy and reduce travel options for students.

“Public transportation links workers to employment, patients to health care providers, students to schools and universities, and everyone to cultural and sporting venues,” Wrighton wrote. “Whether we are frequent or occasional riders, we all have access to our public transit system, and we all rely on it.”

Kramer recently appeared on campus dressed in a tiara as her self-created personality, Miz MetroLink, to encourage students to register to vote. Some students have adorned boxes painted to look like buses, and Prop A supporters have handed out more than 1,000 pro-Metro buttons.

A couple of opposition groups, including John Burns’ Citizens for Better Transit and Tom Sullivan’s Public Transit Accountability Project, argue that the proposed tax would harm poor families disproportionately, and feed tax revenue to an agency that went millions of dollars over budget when it built the cross-county MetroLink line.

Supporters counter that the tax would cost a typical family about $50 per year, which they say is outweighed by the benefits of increased transit.

Unlike during the Proposition M campaign, Student Union may not pass a resolution supporting this ballot measure. “I don’t know if we’re going to do one,” said senior Jeff Nelson, the student body president. But Nelson added that some SU leaders, including senior Chase Sackett, the speaker of the Senate, have been working with administration officials on campaign efforts.

A voter casts her ballot at Wydown Middle School Tuesday afternoon as other booths sit empty. Turnout in St. Louis County was under 20 percent as voters overwhelmingly passed a smoking ban. (Matt Mitgang | Student Life)

St. Louis County voters approved the smoking ban measure Proposition N by an overwhelming margin in Tuesday’s election, which saw low turnout throughout the county.

The proposition, which passed 65.3 percent to 34.7 percent, will ban smoking in public indoor places in St. Louis County in January 2011, with exemptions for casino floors, private clubs, smoking lounges at St. Louis airport, and some bars. The proposition’s passage also triggers a smoking ban in St. Louis that was passed by the city’s aldermen on Oct. 23.

“We have made a major step forward on cleaner air and obviously a healthy environment for our citizens in the county and city, and hopefully for the whole state in the future,” said County Councilwoman Barbara Fraser, D-University City, who introduced the St. Louis County Council bill that put the smoking ban on the ballot.

Proposition N opponent Bill Hannegan, though disappointed, downplayed the result, saying that “it was always going to be tough in the county” due to its low smoking rate.

Hannegan, who heads the group Keep St. Louis Free, added that “the fight’s not over” and that the opposition could challenge the constitutionality of the casino exemption, bring up a conflict between the two smoking bans and state law, or push to amend the city’s smoking ban.

Campaign leaders reported low traffic at polls throughout the county on Tuesday. Overall turnout was just under 20 percent, which was in line with county election officials’ predictions.

Students turned out in especially large numbers for the November 2008 election, but things were different this time around. Nearly all students when interviewed said they did not turn out to vote, despite most of them saying they supported the measure.

Senior James Mosbacher said it took him “three minutes, max” to cast his vote for Proposition N at his polling place, which he said was virtually empty.

“There was nobody there,” he said. “Absolutely nobody.”

The low turnout underscored the absence of a statewide or federal race on the ballot, an obstacle that campaign leaders attempted to overcome with last-minute mobilization efforts. Leaders from both sides said they called supporters on Tuesday in a final get-out-the-vote push.

Proposition N supporters gathered with posters and signs during the Monday rush hour at five street-side locations, including the intersection of Forest Park Parkway and Skinker Boulevard.

More than 200 Saint Louis University medical students and faculty gathered on their campus on Thursday to rally for the ban.

The Washington University community’s highest-profile supporter of the proposition is Martha Bhattacharya, postdoctoral fellow in developmental biology, who served as treasurer of pro-proposition County Citizens for Cleaner Air. Bhattacharya said last week she encouraged students to vote for the measure.

St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay even made an appeal on his blog on Monday for county voters to vote for the proposition, writing that the ban “will make St. Louis County restaurants safer for their employees and more pleasant for everyone else.” He also noted that the proposition’s passage would trigger the city’s own ban.

Hannegan said members of the opposition had distributed flyers to bars and restaurants in the days leading up to the election. Bowling alley proprietors also rallied against the proposition in Hazelwood on Saturday.

Most restaurant and bar owners opposed the proposition out of concerns that a smoking ban would violate their property rights and drive their smoking customers to nearby counties that lack smoking bans.

Ban supporters pointed to peer-reviewed studies showing that smoking bans have no negative impacts on business.

Proposition N passed even without the support of some health groups that stayed neutral due to the measure’s exemptions.

In a statement issued shortly after the votes were counted, the St. Louis chapter of the American Cancer Society did not back the smoking ban but said the measure’s passage “confirms that smoke-free laws are uniformly popular with the vast majority of the public and brings critical momentum toward achieving meaningful health protection from secondhand smoke for all people who live and work in St. Louis County.”

“The focus now will be on delivering health protection from secondhand smoke for those workers who still do not have it—those in bars and casinos,” the statement said.

Supporters had long argued that the ban, despite the exemptions, was a good start and was the only ban that would have passed the County Council.

“I would prefer if there were not exemptions, but the bottom line is you need to get something passed,” Stuart Slavin, associate dean for curriculum at SLU School of Medicine, said Monday at the Forest Park-Skinker rally.

Fraser’s bill passed as a result of compromise. The initial bill had no exemptions, but the council voted it down. A later version of the bill with the exemptions passed the council by a 4-3 vote on Aug. 25, following weeks of heated meetings.

The Aug. 4 meeting saw Robert Blaine, medical public policy specialist at the University, urge the council to put on the ballot “as broad and as comprehensive a ban as possible.” The University supported sending the final ban to voters but did not endorse the measure itself.

OTHER KEY RACES

Proposition E-911: YES, 67.7 percent-32.3 percent
A 0.1 percent sales tax increase, revenues from which would go toward upgrading emergency communications equipment in St. Louis County.

Special election, Missouri House 74th District: STACEY NEWMAN (D) 61.3 percent, DANIEL O’SULLIVAN (R) 38.7 percent
Special election in the 74th Missouri House District to fill the seat formerly occupied by Democrat Steve Brown, who resigned the seat on Aug. 25 after pleading guilty to federal corruption charges.

Special election, Missouri Senate 4th District: JOE KEAVENY (D), unopposed
Special election in the 4th Missouri Senate District to fill the seat formerly occupied by Democrat Jeff Smith, who also resigned on Aug. 25 after pleading guilty to federal corruption charges.

Countywide turnout: 19.55 percent
Source: http://www.co.st-louis.mo.us/elections/

Known as Proposition N, the measure would ban smoking in most public indoor places in the county, effective January 2011. Bars that earn less than 25 percent of their sales from food, casino floors, smoking lounges at the St. Louis airport, and private clubs would be exempt.

The ban’s passage would also trigger a smoking ban in St. Louis that city aldermen passed on Oct. 23.

While the local community has been strongly divided, Washington University community members appear to favor the ban for public health reasons.

Senior James Mosbacher, a St. Louis-area resident, said he supports banning smoking in restaurants and will vote for the measure because it exempts bars.

“Part of the population that I think has made cities like Chicago so successful is young people,” Mosbacher said. “For businesses that conduct their sales not entirely on alcohol, I think that smoking is a drawback for those people to patronize these places.”

Martha Bhattacharya, postdoctoral fellow in developmental biology, has become perhaps the University community’s strongest advocate of the smoking ban, serving as treasurer of the pro-proposition campaign, County Citizens for Cleaner Air. Bhattacharya said she has encouraged some students she knows to vote.

In a recent op-ed submission to Student Life, Bhattacharya pushed students to turn out for the election, writing, “Last year, many of you registered to vote in St. Louis County in order to make a difference in the choice of our president. Please don’t let your civic responsibility stop there.”

When interviewed, some students who live in St. Louis County said they are not sure if they will vote, or they plan not to vote at all.
Sophomore Amy Plovnick said she supports the ban but has not decided if she will vote.

“This is really the only big issue people would be voting about,” Plovnick said. “I think it’s an important issue, but I don’t know if it’s that important to get me to go, but I’m going to try to vote.”

Turnout is expected to be very low throughout the county, largely because it is an off-year election with no high-level races on the ballot.

“We don’t have a Clinton or a Bush or even an Obama, much less a Senate race or House of Representatives race,” said Dave Robertson, a political scientist at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. “The people who will turn out are people who feel unusually strongly about the issue, for the most part.”

It’s not clear whether low turnout would sway the vote. Representatives of both sides have said they are working to mobilize voters.

The referendum originated over the summer in the St. Louis County Council as a bill, which was sponsored by Councilwoman Barbara Fraser, D-University City. Fraser has said the ban would not be perfect due to the exemptions but would still improve air quality without harming businesses.

Business and bar owners opposed to the ballot measure have argued that the ban would infringe upon their property rights.

Bill Hannegan of the anti-ban group Keep St. Louis Free has touted air filtration as an alternative to a smoking ban and said many bar owners are “worried sick” about the ban because it would drive customers to nearby counties.

Cicero’s Restaurant, which recently went smoke-free only in its dining area, will have to go completely smoke-free if the proposition passes. Bobby Francis, front-of-house manager of the popular destination for students on the Delmar Loop, said a ban would be “problematic” for bar customers who smoke, but did not know how it would affect business.

Ban supporters have said peer-reviewed studies show that air filtration is ineffective and that smoking bans do not negatively affect business.

Supporters have also said the ban on the ballot, though not comprehensive, would be a step in the right direction.

“There are a lot of bans that have started as local ordinances, and most of the local ordinances are not 100 percent comprehensive,” Bhattacharya said in an interview. “We have to start with something maybe a little less than perfect, but something that will substantially help the health of the county.”

Due to the trigger provision in the city’s smoking ban, county voters effectively will be determining the fates of both jurisdictions’ proposals.

In a debate on Monday in Clayton, Fraser said the trigger effect invalidates opponents’ argument that the proposition’s passage would create an uneven playing field between county and city businesses. She added that nearby counties “are looking seriously at this legislation, and that the domino effect will take place.”

Hannegan responded that the ban would cause non-exempt businesses to lose money to those that would be exempt.

“That’s not a level playing field,” Hannegan said.

Some public health groups, including the American Cancer Society and the American Lung Association, have taken no stance on the proposition because they say it has too many exemptions.

Tuesday’s election will end a heated countywide battle that started in August, when the County Council debated multiple bill versions. The initial bill, which had no exemptions, was rejected, but a later bill version with the exemptions passed the council by a 4-3 vote on Aug. 25 and was later signed by County Executive Charlie Dooley.

At the Aug. 4 council meeting, Medical Public Policy Specialist Robert Blaine delivered a statement on behalf of the University urging the council to put a ban on the November ballot that was “as broad and as comprehensive as possible.” The statement came five months after the University announced a tobacco ban on its campuses, effective July 2010.

Despite the final bill’s exemptions, Blaine later said the University still supported putting the ban on the ballot, but he did not endorse the measure itself.

We understand and support the public health initiative behind Proposition N. The risks posed by secondhand smoke are real and frightening, and we commend the measures taken by the county to alleviate unnecessary exposure to such risks.

However, we feel that the ban would be fundamentally unfair to local businesses because it discriminates between bars that serve food and those that don’t, and it favors casinos. According to a spokesman for County Councilwoman Barbara Fraser, who introduced the bill, there are likely fewer than 100 bars in the county that would qualify for the 25 percent exemption, despite the approximately 1,000 businesses with liquor licenses in St. Louis County.

Gene Cantrall, who manages Duffy’s in Richmond Heights—a popular Tuesday night hangout among Washington University students—feels that the ban will hurt small businesses like the one he works for. “Smoking is an important part of a bar atmosphere, and exempt bars will probably end up getting more business because of [the ban],” he said.

The legislation also unduly favors casinos, which generate enormous amounts of tax revenue for St. Louis County and likely hold sway over the County Council.

When a smoking ban was passed in New York City in 2003, a study conducted by the Vintners Federation of Ireland found that 78 percent of New York City bars claimed that the ban had a negative impact on their business. This number shows that people are discouraged from going out to places where they cannot smoke.

We feel that discouraging people from going out is a necessary consequence of a smoking ban, but Proposition N’s exemptions will create unfair consequences for local businesses, hurting bars like Duffy’s and helping alcohol-only venues. Therefore, we think that an appropriate county-wide ban would prohibit smoking in all public places—even casinos and establishments that receive 25 percent or less of their gross sales from food.

A ban with fewer exemptions has become the norm elsewhere—in New York City and the state of California, smoking is prohibited in all public places—and we think that St. Louis should take a similar direction.

On this count, we encourage our readers to vote against Proposition N, and we encourage the County Council to go back to the drawing board, drafting a proposition that is fair to local businesses.

“If you had asked me two months ago if I thought the voters in St. Louis County would have this opportunity in November, I would have said no,” said Robert Blaine, medical public policy specialist at the University. “So I think it’s a significant step forward.”

The signature virtually assures the ban will go on the county ballot, meaning students registered to vote in Missouri who live west of the Brookings parking lot can vote on it. The bill’s sponsor, County Councilwoman Barbara Fraser, D-University City, has said the final step of getting a court order is all but a formality.

The measure would ban smoking in most indoor public places in St. Louis County. The ban would exempt bars—places where 75 percent of sales come from alcohol—casino floors and smoking lounges at Lambert-St. Louis International Airport. Areas west of the Brookings lot, including a major chunk of the Delmar Loop, would fall under the ban.

On Aug. 4, the University pushed the County Council to put as comprehensive a ban on the ballot as possible. Despite the final measure’s exemptions, Blaine said the University supports putting it on the ballot and letting voters decide the issue for themselves.

“I think the University would encourage any individual to educate themselves about this issue and make a decision on their own,” Blaine said.

The final bill was its third version, after weeks of heated debate, close votes and bill amendments.

Read Student Life on Monday for full details.

Robert Blaine, medical public policy specialist at the School of Medicine, said at Tuesday’s council meeting that the University applauded the council “for tackling the important public health issue of clean indoor air.”

“We encourage the council to keep this issue moving forward and to place a smoking ban that is as broad and as comprehensive as possible on the November ballot,” Blaine told the council. “We believe all individuals deserve the right to work in an environment free of secondhand smoke.”

The bill, sponsored by Councilwoman Barbara Fraser, D-University City, would put a smoking ban for all indoor public places in the county except bars and casinos on the November ballot.

The council voted 4-3 on Tuesday to move forward with the bill, and a final vote was to occur on Aug. 18.

But Fraser said Friday that the council will reintroduce the bill next Tuesday due to a procedural problem this past Tuesday that could open the bill to a legal challenge. The decision pushes a potential final vote to Aug. 25, likely causing the council to miss the deadline that same day for putting items on the ballot. In such a case, if County Executive Charles Dooley then signs the measure, the County Council must get a court order to put the measure on the ballot.

Fraser originally wanted a bill with no exemptions for casinos and bars, but that version did not have enough support from the seven-member council.

The University’s support for a countywide ban comes after the school announced a tobacco ban for all of its campuses, effective in July 2010.

While some in the school community praised the ban, others criticized the administration for approving the ban without student input. Student Union Senate passed a resolution late last school year objecting to the lack of student input.

Blaine was one of about 65 people to address the council at the heated three-hour meeting.

Supporters of the bill said a ban would improve public health by reducing patrons and workers’ exposure to secondhand smoke. Supporters maintained that a ban would not harm local businesses but attract some new customers, who avoid those places because they allow smoking.

Opponents, meanwhile, said that a ban would drive business away from the county and force some businesses to close. Opponents also said the ban would violate business owners’ right to choose whether to allow smoking.

Smoking bans have popped up across the region this summer. Clayton approved a public indoor smoking ban in July with no exemptions. Clayton’s ban goes into effect in July 2010.

Other cities considering bans include St. Louis, Kirkwood and Wildwood. St. Louis’ ban would go into effect only if St. Louis County approves its own.

Read Student Life this fall for full details on this story.