Ramsey County District Judge Affirms MPAAT's Independence, Endorses Cessation Approach
06/27/02
ST. PAUL, Minn., June 27 /PRNewswire/ -- Ramsey County District Court Judge Michael Fetsch today ruled that the Minnesota Partnership for Action Against Tobacco remain an independent nonprofit corporation. The judge also ruled that MPAAT's environmental a
Richard D. Hurt, M.D., chair of the MPAAT Board, said MPAAT was pleased with the ruling. "The ruling maintains the independence of MPAAT. This is essential," said Hurt. "As Minnesotans saw in the last session of the Legislature, the alliance of Big Tobacco and politics leaves little room for the protection of the public's health. The ruling recognizes the valuable and legitimate role of the environmental approach to tobacco cessation, stating that 'The protection of the citizens is advanced by these approaches.' "
"As Judge Fetsch states, environmental approaches 'necessarily implicate the political process'," and, consequently, require us to review our structure. We will take to heart the mandate to radically restructure the governance of our organization, from the appointing authorities for Board members to the approval of grant applications."
The order also directs MPAAT to evaluate the governance of its organization. The order also directs MPAAT to report back to the court with plans to expand its cessation programs for individuals. MPAAT has 90 days to comply with the order.
The Minnesota Partnership for Action Against Tobacco is an independent nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation that was created in 1998 as part of Minnesota's $6.1 billion settlement with the tobacco industry. As a result of the settlement, the state receives $1.25 billion in one-time payments through Fiscal Year 2003. (The additional $4.85 billion is a projection.) From the one-time payments, the Ramsey County District Court set aside $202 million for MPAAT's 25-year life span, through 2023, under the continuing jurisdiction of the Ramsey County District Court. MPAAT is required to file a report with the Court and Legislature in January of every even-numbered year.
The following is the statement made by Dr. Richard Hurt at today's news conference:
"Hello. My name is Richard Hurt. I am a physician at the Nicotine Dependence Center at the Mayo Clinic. Since the fall of 1998 I have had the privilege of chairing the Board of Directors of the Minnesota Partnership for Action Against Tobacco.
"We believe Judge Fetsch's ruling is a victory for all Minnesotans who recognize the death and devastation caused by tobacco. Key points of the ruling affirm MPAAT's work:
"First and foremost, the ruling maintains the independence of MPAAT. This is essential. As Minnesotans saw in the last session of the Legislature, the alliance of Big Tobacco and politics leaves little room for the protection of the public's health.
"Second, the ruling recognizes the valuable and legitimate role of the environmental approach to reducing the toll that tobacco causes, stating in absolute terms, and I quote:
'The dangers of secondhand smoke are real and are substantiated by reliable, independent medical research. The protection of the citizens is advanced by these approaches.'
"Third, as Judge Fetsch states, environmental approaches 'necessarily implicate the political process,' and, consequently, require us to review our organizational structure.
"Our structure was dictated by the original court order that established MPAAT in 1998. We will take to heart the mandate to radically restructure the governance of our organization, from the appointing authorities for Board members to the approval of grant applications.
"Judge Fetsch has also asked MPAAT to formulate a comprehensive plan to ensure that our direct cessation efforts for individuals are on a level with our environmentally based programs. We are pleased that Judge Fetsch sets our environmental approach as the benchmark; we are eager to demonstrate our absolute commitment to individual tobacco users.
"Obviously, we are extremely pleased with the order -- not because it validates us, but because it is an endorsement of public health over politics.
"This order is a rejection of Big Tobacco and its allies. It is an unqualified endorsement of a balanced approach to cessation from the community to the individual, one based on independent, scientific evidence.
"Thank you. I'll now take your questions."