Although Liberty&rsquo;s city council approved a measure to limit smoking earlier this year, a group of residents thought it didn&rsquo;t go far enough.</p><p>On Tuesday, voters will decide whether they want to replace the current measure with a stricter one that would ban smoking in most public places.</p><p>Clay Lozier watched with interest when the city council debated and then passed a smoking measure in March. The final results disappointed him. He felt it was watered down and had too many exceptions.</p><p>&ldquo;It was just so frustrating,&rdquo; said Lozier, chairman of Smoke Free Liberty, which is promoting the stricter ban. &ldquo;It just seemed like such a halfway measure.&rdquo;</p><p>The measure approved allows smoking in some bars, smaller restaurants, bowling alleys and billiard parlors. It also allows smoking in certain private clubs, restaurants&rsquo; outside eating areas and tobacco stores.</p><p>Although it took effect in April, bars and restaurants have one year to comply.</p><p>Lozier, along with Paul and Melanie Lively, Juarenne Hester, Amy Tuso and Tim Billharz, circulated a petition for a stricter ban. They got enough signatures and the council acted in late May to let voters decide the issue.</p><p>The new proposal would limit smoking to hotels and motels that permanently designate up to 25 percent of their rooms for smokers, outdoor patios and designated areas of city parks.</p><p>If it passes, the new ban would take effect in 60 days.</p><p>The fines for violation of the ordinance would be the same &mdash; a person who smokes where it is prohibited faces a fine of up to $50 for each violation, and people having control of areas where smoking is banned and who fail to comply face a fine of up to $100 for the first violation, $200 for the second and $500 for each subsequent violation.</p><p>Public smoking needs to be banned to protect customers and employees, Lozier said. While customers can chose whether they go to a business that allows smoking, employees cannot, he said.</p><p>&ldquo;The employees are exposed to that smoke,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;Employees don&rsquo;t have a choice. It&rsquo;s not like you can quit and get a job someplace else.&rdquo;</p><p>But opponents of the stricter ban disagree.</p><p>&ldquo;Why can&rsquo;t they?&rdquo; asked Shawn Barber, who owns The Pub House in Liberty. &ldquo;They are not forced to work for me.&rdquo; </p><p>He said with all the food establishments in Liberty, people should be able to find work at a restaurant where smoking is not allowed under the current ban if they want to work at a smoke-free place.</p><p>Barber said the stricter ban is not even necessary because most businesses fall under the provisions of the current ban and would have to become smoke free next year. He said that includes his business, unless he changes its model.</p><p>He said he understood that smoking is not good for people, but he pointed out that tobacco products are legal. He also said the proposed ban would have a negative economic impact on smaller bars and restaurants in the city.</p><p><hr class="infobox-hr-separator" /> <div class="infobox"> <strong><span class="infobox-head">ON THE BALLOT </span></strong><br /> Shall the City of Liberty, Missouri, repeal Section 22-66, &ldquo;Smoking prohibited in certain places in the City of Liberty, Missouri,&rdquo; consisting of Sections 22-66.1 through 22-66.13 and enacting in lieu thereof a new Section 22-66, entitled &ldquo;Prohibitions on smoking in enclosed places of employment and public places,&rdquo; consisting of Section 22-66.1 through 22-66.10, prohibiting smoking in enclosed places of employment, enclosed public places and establishing penalties for non-compliance?</p><p></div>