Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Sober bar' must sell Booze to allow smokers
Edmonton Journal ^ | Friday, August 15, 2003 | Jason Markusoff

Posted on 08/17/2003 11:04:26 PM PDT by Ronin

EDMONTON - A "sober bar" that caters to recovering alcoholics was told Thursday to get a liquor licence and start serving alcohol if it wants to let customers smoke.

A city bylaw inspector's warning creates a painful Catch-22 for the owners of north-side Keep it Simple club. If they stay dry and ban smoking, they say they'll lose 90 per cent of their business.

If they start selling liquor, they'll be tempting many patrons to return to addiction.

"The city is forcing us to promote alcohol as the only way we can keep smoking," co-owner Tom Charbonneau said. "Other restaurants and bars have that option, but we don't."

Charbonneau and Lawrence Lathe opened Keep It Simple two years ago to give recovering alcoholics, gambling or drug addicts a bar-like atmosphere without the booze they have to shun. They also hold meetings for Alcoholics Anonymous, Cocaine Anonymous and other 12-step programs in a back room.

Most former addicts smoke; it gives them at least one vice, Charbonneau said.

A bylaw inspector visited the club Thursday, for the first time since the July 1 start of Edmonton's anti-smoking bylaw, which only allows smoking in bars with a minors-prohibited liquor licence.

She let Charbonneau and fellow co-owner Lawrence Lathe off with a warning, but they'd need to get a licence to continue to allow smoking.

However, the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission refused to issue them a licence Thursday, because they weren't planning to actually sell liquor.

"They weren't looking for a liquor licence, they were looking for a smoking licence," said Alberta Gaming spokeswoman Marilyn Carlyle-Helms.

Charbonneau said he plans to ask the city if there is a way to get around the bylaw, without having to bring in alcohol.

"If they say I have to serve a 12-pack, I will buy a 12-pack of beer, sell it for $5 a can, call all the media, stand in front of our sober club and pour it all out on the ground, just to show them how ridiculous it is," Charbonneau said.

A city official said the rules are clear on the bylaw, and the owners knew about the restrictions well in advance.

"This is a decision that has affected a number of other establishments in the city," said Mark Garrett, manager of the city's development compliance branch.

Charbonneau had erroneously thought the nightclub would be exempt because it was a members-only facility. His adjacent Keep It Simple coffee shop went non-smoking on July 1 and has suffered a 30-per-cent drop in business, he said.

The bar has 300 members and Charbonneau said it serves juice, pop and food to 200 people a night.

Bar regular Les Labine sat at a table Thursday, smoking with a friend visiting from Ontario. He's avoided drinking for four months, and would come back less often if the club served alcohol.

"It's part of the recovery process to avoid a bar," he said.

And a smoking ban would also turn Labine away. He's not sure where he'd go, he said.

Charbonneau fears many avid smokers would start visiting the very liquor bars where their addictions began. Keep It Simple has been their refuge.

"This has been a mainstay in the recovery community."

jmarkusoff@thejournal.canwest.com

© Copyright 2003 Edmonton Journal


TOPICS: Canada; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: canada; healthnazis; laughorcrystupidity; liberalinsanity; pufflist; smoking; smokingban; socialism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last
This is one of those stories that just make me want to beat my head against the wall and scream. Words utterly fail me.

Yes, this is Canada, but I can easily imagine this kind of insanity coming to America in the near future.

1 posted on 08/17/2003 11:04:26 PM PDT by Ronin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ronin
What would be the harm in allowing people to smoke without drinking?
2 posted on 08/17/2003 11:20:14 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
i just cant believe they refuse to issue a liscence, for money, because he admitted to not wanting to serve it
3 posted on 08/17/2003 11:22:11 PM PDT by Gilbo_3 (Patience is a virtue, but it aint one of mine !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
F* Canada. This is genuinely one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
We've got to keep a close eye on these retards.
4 posted on 08/17/2003 11:37:58 PM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
This is the part that makes me want to weep...

However, the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission refused to issue them a licence Thursday, because they weren't planning to actually sell liquor. "They weren't looking for a liquor licence, they were looking for a smoking licence," said Alberta Gaming spokeswoman Marilyn Carlyle-Helms.

Isn't this just soo typical of the leftist do-gooders? The fact that they are dealing with a group of people who are engaged in a bitter and continious struggle against an insidious, debilitating addiction means nothing to them.

Yes, I know, smoking is an addiction too. But it causes a heck of a lot less damage than alcholism does.

5 posted on 08/18/2003 12:01:01 AM PDT by Ronin (Qui tacet consentit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
How easy it is to pick on recovering alcoholics. Like they don't have enough problems, their government has to force them to be around booze if they want to smoke cigarettes. The world is truly topsy turvy, upside down and inside out.
6 posted on 08/18/2003 12:08:03 AM PDT by TheCrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Ronin
Idiotic law. So here's the solution: get the license and then be very low on supply....say, order a six pack per week. Sell it to the first paying customer of the week. "Sorry buddy, we're outta beer."

Bingo. Problem solved.

8 posted on 08/18/2003 1:00:34 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
Idiotic law. So here's the solution: get the license and then be very low on supply....say, order a six pack per week. Sell it to the first paying customer of the week. "Sorry buddy, we're outta beer."

Bingo. Problem solved.

9 posted on 08/18/2003 1:01:11 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
Except there is probably a law against that also.

Why in the heck didn't the oversight agency just not get around to examining the place?

No one would have cared and the world would have been a better place.

There are times that reasonable people must make exceptions, and those need not be codified.

Oh, sorry, Canada, right.
10 posted on 08/18/2003 1:38:41 AM PDT by auntdot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
The city might as well demand that they gamble while they're at it.
11 posted on 08/18/2003 2:28:05 AM PDT by PBRSTREETGANG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SheLion; *puff_list
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
12 posted on 08/18/2003 2:54:06 AM PDT by Libertarianize the GOP (Ideas have consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jfritsch
Whats it take to get a drink around here?
13 posted on 08/18/2003 4:03:13 AM PDT by battlegearboat (Both oars in the water)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat; jfritsch
So here's the solution: get the license and then .....

Sorry, wrong move.

No need to go the the Alberta Provincial Authority for a liquor license, they don't sell liquor.

It's the City that requires liqour to be sold in order for smoking to be allowed.
A simple amendment or exception to the city's code would allow smoking in this establishment.

If you want to bash someone, go after the city council.
They are the true idiots in this situation.

14 posted on 08/18/2003 4:17:49 AM PDT by Drammach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
The closest American analogy that I can think of already happened, starting well over 50 years ago. I am speaking of "gay bars". In an effort to assure the general public that they were not interested in children, the gays made a point of congregating in liquor establishments, from which minors were positively excluded. The drawback was that a very considerable number developed drinking problems. And, of course, it's very very likely that anyone socializing for hours in a bar was going to leave that bar with his judgment impaired, even though he might have to drive a considerable distance, and even though on his way home he might encounter someone below voting age.
15 posted on 08/18/2003 4:27:04 AM PDT by DonQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
What would be the harm in allowing people to smoke without drinking?

There's no harm in that. The problem is that somebody doesn't have the right box checked on some permit form. There is no form for a non-drinking bar, so a non-drinking bar cannot be allowed to exist. All establishments must be formed to conform to the form.

Maybe if they introduced nude dancing girls and hookers, that would make the city officials happy...

16 posted on 08/18/2003 6:28:20 AM PDT by gridlock (Remember: PC Kills.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
Get the license but don't sell the alcohol.
17 posted on 08/18/2003 6:37:37 AM PDT by Chewbacca (Stay out of debt. Pay cash. When you run out of cash, stop buying things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
"The city is forcing us to promote alcohol as the only way we can keep smoking," co-owner Tom Charbonneau said. "Other restaurants and bars have that option, but we don't."

George Orwell could have a field day with this one.

New phenomenon: the quagmire of unintended consequences.

18 posted on 08/18/2003 6:44:08 AM PDT by Publius6961 (Californians are as dumm as a sack of rocks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
The worst part of this is that it's a members only private club. Why can't a private clun have it's own rules.

The canucks have definitely gone off the deep end.

19 posted on 08/18/2003 10:03:36 AM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chewbacca
Get the license but don't sell the alcohol

Control Freaks 'R Us got it covered:

However, the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission refused to issue them a licence Thursday, because they weren't planning to actually sell liquor.

This goes beyond Orwellian.

20 posted on 08/18/2003 1:25:15 PM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson