City’S Fluoride Proposition A Nail-Biter ‘No’ Votes Slightly Ahead, But Too Close To Call

PROPOSITION 1

The third time might not be a charm for water fluoridation in Spokane.

Voters rejected water fluoridation in 1969 and 1984, and were poised to nix it again Tuesday.

The “no” votes on Proposition 1, which would allow the city of Spokane to fluoridate its water system, numbered about 900 more than the “yes” votes just before midnight, with 70 percent of precincts reporting.

It was too close to call, but opponents of fluoride already expressed relief.

“Praise the Lord,” said Rose Waldram of Citizens Allergic to Fluoride. “It won’t pass. If I knew that putting something in water would make somebody else sick, I’d think twice about it.”

Supporters of Proposition 1 believed they still had a chance.

“We won’t know until it’s over,” said Mary Smith, a local dentist and chairwoman of People for Healthy Teeth, the nonprofit group that put the initiative on the ballot.

She and about 25 others spent election night at her home, closely watching the results on television.

When it comes to fluoride, there has been little middle ground in Spokane.

Those who support it use science to show fluoride is a boon to public health that prevents tooth decay. Those against it say it’s a poison and putting it in the city’s water supply violates their freedom to choose.

The debate came to a head the week before the election, when supporters spent thousands of dollars on commercials and mailings while opponents brought a well-known fluoride foe from New York to denounce water fluoridation in Spokane.

If the initiative should pass, Spokane residents will join the more than 145 million Americans - 68 percent of the population - who already drink fluoridated water.

Spokane is surrounded by other fluoridated communities including Cheney, Pullman and Fairchild Air Force Base.

Other areas around the country also had fluoride on the November ballot, but few of those races were as close or heated as Spokane’s.

In Clark County, Nevada, which includes Las Vegas, 57 percent of the voters wanted to keep fluoride in their water, according to Nevada’s General Election Web site.

In Salt Lake County, Utah, with less than half of the precincts reporting, fluoride supporters were winning by a comfortable margin.

If water fluoridation is approved in Spokane, much of the success may be attributed to the money spent by People for Healthy Teeth.

The organization collected 12,724 signatures - 50 percent more than required - to put the issue on the ballot. To do that, People for Healthy Teeth spent $25,000 by paying professional signature gatherers $2 a signature.

During the campaign, People for Healthy Teeth spent another $70,000 to tell people about water fluoridation’s safety and effectiveness in preventing cavities. Much of that was spent on mailings and TV commercials.

In contrast, the organizations opposed to fluoride - including the Fluoride Awareness Coalition and Citizens Against Fluoride - spent about $5,000 on billboards and fliers.

If Proposition 1 goes down for the third time in Spokane’s history, proponents will continue to push the issue.

“We’re not going to stop because of this election,” Smith said. “We’re not going to wait another 16 years.”