LANCASTER — Lancaster City Council voted down a proposal to put fluoride in city drinking water Monday night, while supporters said they planned to put it on the November election ballot.
The vote on the issue came after a two-hour hearing in a packed meeting room where more than two dozen supporters came and just more than a dozen people spoke out against the proposal. Approximately 100 people packed council chambers.
The legislation would have added fluoride to the city’s drinking water up to a level of 1 milligram per liter — the amount considered beneficial to dental health.
It was defeated by a one-vote margin.
The proposal was first brought to council in November 2003, and was tabled until the hearing held Monday night.
Frank Hirsch, health commissioner for Fairfield County, said that everyone wants to believe that they know what is best for themselves.
“However, these proceedings on fluoridation again remind me that sometimes we must protect people from themselves,” Hirsch said. “All the arguments against fluoridation that you have heard — and will hear from tonight — are positively ridiculous and downright wrong. How many of the absolutely absurd statements and claims they have made have actually happened elsewhere? With over 90 percent of Ohio’s population drinking fluoridated water, do you see mass poisonings, mass outbreaks of dreaded chronic diseases, and all the other terrible things they claim that could happen actually occurring? Of course not.”
Helen Senig of West Fair Avenue said she has 16 children and 32 grandchildren, and some had good teeth and others didn’t. She urged council members to vote against the proposal.
“The pH content in your mouth has more to do with whether you have cavities or not,” Senig said. “The American Dental Association says fluoride is safe, if you don’t swallow it. As to what their science says, they used to say cigarettes weren’t harmful to you. We know differently now.”
Drs. Ralph Romaker, Ron Heiber and David Strominger supported adding fluoride to the water.
“We are one of the largest communities in the nation without fluoridation of the water,” Strominger said. “It’s scientifically proven to be safe.”
Dr. William Medved, a dentist, said he was on the front lines of the dental problems in the community.
“We see a lot of underprivileged children at the practice,” Medved said. “These children come in with faces swollen and crying. Their mothers are crying as well because they had to give up a day at work to bring the child in. Think of these children when you vote today.”
When the vote came, it was defeated with Councilmen Dyke Andrews (D-At Large) , Rudy Touvell (D-6th Ward), Harry Hiles (D-5th Ward), John Zekas (R-2nd Ward) and Wayne Roller (R-1st) voted no. Councilmen Walter Arrowsmith (R-At Large), Roger Morgan (R-At Large), Tom Stoughton (R-4th Ward), and Carl Tatman (R-3rd Ward) voted for adding it to the water.
The council members voting no agreed with Rudy Touvell’s statement that he did not want to overturn an issue that had been on a city-wide ballot once before.
“Even if it was in the 1970s, I’m totally against taking this vote,” Touvell said. “The people voted against this once, and I don’t think we should overturn their vote. I’m against overturning the vote.”
“I don’t think we have the right to overturn a ballot issue,” Andrews said.
After the vote, Pat Navin with the Lancaster Fluoridation Committee said she was disappointed with the vote.
“But I really appreciate the City Council members who said they personally were in support of fluoride. I think they voted against it because they didn’t want to overturn an issue that had been on the ballot,” Navin said. “We’re disappointed, but we believe a majority of the people in Lancaster want fluoridation, and we are going to work on getting the issue on the November ballot.”
Print 
PDF