Posted on 02/24/2006 1:01:34 PM PST by Diana in Wisconsin
(Health inspector: 'We had complaints')
Madison's most outspoken critic of the smoking ban has been busted for allowing smoking in his tavern, but the bar owner says he will fight the charges and might try to get the smoking ban overturned because of his case.
Dave Wiganowsky, a county supervisor and owner of Wiggie's, 1901 Aberg Ave., is being taken to Madison Municipal Court on two counts of violating the city's smoking ordinance for allegedly letting patrons smoke in his bar on Dec. 17 and Jan. 14.
Public health officers working undercover went into Wiggie's on both occasions, based on complaints from patrons that smoking was going on in the bar.
"We had complaints," said Doug Voegeli, city of Madison Environmental Health Services supervisor. "We talked to Dave, went over the ordinance with him and then did compliance checks to make sure he was complying."
Wiganowsky told The Capital Times today he doesn't allow smoking in his bar, but if someone is smoking and won't quit, he has to watch out for the safety and welfare of his employees.
That's apparently what happened in the January incident, when a man lit up a cigarette at the bar and angrily refused to put it out when the bartender told him to.
"I'm not putting my people in harm's way," Wiganowsky said. "I've already had a smoking customer throw a glass at a bartender and another throw a burger on the floor. When you shut 'em off, people get aggravated."
Wiganowsky said he has hired an attorney and will fight the complaint. Neither the patron nor the bartender was issued a citation.
"It will take some time and effort, but maybe this case will get the ball rolling on getting the smoking ban overturned," he said. "We'll go to Municipal Court and maybe lose that one, but there are many other things to look at."
There is room for negotiating on the charges, said Assistant City Attorney Marci Paulsen, just as other bar owners in similar situations have done.
"We'll probably make a high-low offer," Paulsen said. "If he's good and there are no more violations for the rest of the year, it would be a low fine. But if there are other violations, he would get the highest fines allowed."
Wiganowsky is facing up to $671 in fines and court costs because of the two violations noted in the complaint. If it was only one offense, the maximum penalty would be $198.50.
Is the outspoken smoking ban critic being singled out by the smoke police?
"Definitely not," Voegeli said. "There had been complaints against his establishment and we are required to follow up on the complaints."
Voegeli said five Madison taverns have faced court dates because of the no-smoking ordinance, based on 22 complaints since the smoking ban went into effect in the city on July 1, 2005. All but one owner (apart from Wiganowsky) settled before going to trial.
Public health officers do have some leeway in citing or not citing smokers, bartenders or owners if a customer lights up.
"If a customer's told to put it out, we're not going to write a citation to the bartender," Voegeli said. "It all depends on the situation."
Wiganowsky said some situations are more volatile than others, and he's not willing to put his employees up against surly smokers if it means his bartenders could get hurt.
"My daytime bartender is 61 years old," he said. "My wife Angie is 5-foot-2. What are they going to do?"
Wiggie's court date is set for March 17, St. Patrick's Day.
"That's my busiest day of the year, and I've already laid off five people," he said.
Paulsen said the court date can be changed if Wiganowsky asks.
No matter if it goes to trial or not, Wiganowsky is fighting both the complaints and the smoking ban all the way.
"My livelihood is at stake," he said.
He couldn't care less if he's able to smoke in his own bar, he said, but wants his customers to have the chance for a smoke and a beer.
"I quit smoking 20 years ago," Wiganowsky said. "So did Angie. It doesn't bother me."
Thanks. The RIGHT DECISIONS line actually comes from one of my local government officials seeking to impose "guidelines" for the historic (hysteric) district. "We just want people to make RIGHT DECISIONS," she said without seeing anything wrong with it.
When I quote her, I cover my filtrum with my index finger to give myself a Hitler mustache and say it with a German accent.
Your comments are right on the money!!!!
Thank you for that post, Applause!
Somebody finally got zotted for being an A-Hole on the smoking threads PING.
Wiggies sounds like the kind of place I liked in my younger years.
Working class,loud,smokey,and lots of laughter.
I wish him well---the guy works his tail off to build up a business and then the nannies' noses get all twitchy and they change things.
I'll bet most of the antis never went there at all.
It has NOTHING to do with health and everything to do with control.
You cannot flout the law?
Have you just come out of a 10 year sleep? Illegals are flouting the law every day and nothing is done.
Yet I,a 73 year old tax paying citizen will get in trouble if I light one cigarette in a restaurant that I went to for many years.(The owner allowed smoking)
The trouble is that smokers aren't flouting the law and have knuckled over to this nonsense.
Health has nothing to do with it. Check your facts,all the facts.
"Government has made its wishes known"
Frightening,isn't it?
"I'm really surprised we see people defending this on Freerepublic."
Better not to post them !
That will be the last time I answer one of your gotcha questions. Smell is just part of the issue. Stinking up someone else's clothing and hair is a disrespect of their person and property. So is irritating their breathing passages, and throwing your butts all over God's green Earth. Tobacco smoke does cause cancer, heart disease, and emphysema depending on a particular person's genetics. Whether second hand smoke provides enough of a dosage to cause those diseases is still an open question IMO. But I see no reason to take a chance with it either. Like I said before, most smokers can't control themselves when it comes to other people's person or property. Now they are having it done for them. Tough luck bub.
Post #150 is for you too.
Thanks for the ping!
To all non-smoking smoker-supporters on this thread...
Thank you.
We need more like you.
To refresh memory about why the word Nazi is used in same breath as anti's:
Back in 1941, Hitler had the same hatred for smokers as the anti-smokers do today. The war on the smokers is following the same path as it did back when Hitler had "his" war on the smokers.
Shades of Germany past.
Therefore, that is why the word Nazi is being used even today. They say history repeats itself. Remember?
Yes! As for instance, Buddy's BBQ down south. LOL!
Perfect! 
Exactly. It's like that saying "When they came for the Jews, I didn't speak up, because I am not a Jew." Remember that one?
California Smokers Use Prohibition Tactics to Get Around Ban
While cops try to sniff out the worst offenders, in many cases they're butting up against organized opposition. Bartender phone trees warn each other of impending busts, powerful fans blow away tell-tale scents of "smokin' in the boys room" and tin cans double as ashtrays in case of an unexpected visit by police.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.