It's been nearly a year since South Dakota lawmakers approved a smoking ban in the state, but it could be another year before we hear the final word on the issue.  A circuit court judge's ruling will allow the voters of South Dakota to decide the fate of the smoking ban.

Judge Kathleen Trandahl's ruling Friday afternoon gave opponents of the ban more than 2,000 signatures. The major ruling came when Trandahl said the petitions that contained notary errors were valid.

It's a ruling that's considered a victory by one side and may be challenged by the other.
Allowing South Dakotans to vote on a statewide smoking ban is what opponents have been fighting for since the ban was passed by the legislature this spring.

"We think this is not only a win for the petitioners but a win for those 25,000 people who made their intentions known by signing this petitions," Sara Frankenstein, attorney for the bar and casino owners, said.

Going into the day, opponents were only 17 signatures short, but now they've exceeded the limit needed by thousands of names.

"We knew when we won on one category, we were going to the ballot. It was nice to know we won sufficient numbers over and above what was required to put this on the ballot," Frankenstein said.

Supporters of the ban say the law should have been followed and those errors by the notaries should not be overlooked.

"We don't agree with the substantial compliance, or the 'Hey, we got close enough and therefore these signatures should count' argument, so we're disappointed the judge saw differently," Jennifer Stalley with the American Cancer Society said.

But while their effort to put a statewide smoking ban in place immediately may be snuffed out, the issue is still smoldering.

"Ultimately, our goal in this whole process has been to make South Dakota smoke free and we had hoped to do it today in November of 2009, but if we have to do it with the voters of South Dakota in 2010, we'll certainly be prepared and welcome that opportunity," Stalley said.

The American Cancer Society says it will also look into its options as far as appealing the decision to the South Dakota Supreme Court.