A good way around such things is to reverse your business model to that of a private smoking club. Since there have been efforts to shut down such clubs, claiming that the smoke injures employees, the way around that is to not have employees, but shareholding members that earn shares by working for the club.
The club is very exclusive, in that no government employees, police officers, lawyers, or anyone associated with them is allowed to join. Members must sign statements about their beliefs, and state for a video camera that they would only report or testify against the club under coercion or bribery, and that anything they say under such circumstances should be considered as deceitful and corrupt.
The club also offers other activities, like bartending classes, in which members provide their own alcohol, and the club provides the non-alcoholic ingredients and demonstrates how such drinks are mixed.
Members also pay a fixed fee for membership, plus additional fees for special services, like a shuttle to and from the club.
And of course, tobacco use is perfectly acceptable.
Some of the bars in Nevada have started a fine jar. Basically, if you come into the bar and smoke, you put a few bucks in the jar. If all works out right, when the smoke Nazis come in to fine the bar, the amount collected in the jar should cover the fine. Personally, I believe a business owner has the right to decide how his business is run. If he thinks he can make good cash with a smoke free bar, he runs a smoke free bar. If he thinks he can make cash running a smoking bar, he should be able to run a smoking bar. Yes its nice going to a bar that is not smokey...however, if there was such a high demand for smokeless bars, then why did it require government coercion to bring them about?