Posted on 09/05/2001 10:32:26 AM PDT by Just another Joe
Kenosha - A little more than three months after it took effect, the city's ban on smoking in restaurants is running into trouble.
As many as 41 restaurants plan to apply for a two-year exemption from the ban because of the impact it has had on business, according to an accountant for the establishments. Two have already done so.
The restaurants qualify for the exemption because sales at each have dropped at least 10% in the ordinance's first three months, said accountant Stanley Ginkowski. The businesses, mostly family-style restaurants and coffeehouses, blame the smoking ban for the decline, he said.
According to the ordinance, a business is eligible for a one-time, maximum two-year exemption if revenue decreases 10% or more in a three-month period compared with the same time in the previous three years. Restaurants that apply for an exemption must receive the City Council's approval.
If the exemptions are sought and granted, they would effectively gut the new ordinance, Ald. Steve Casey said Tuesday.
"This is a mess the city got themselves into, and it'll be interesting to see how they wiggle their way out," he said.
Casey voted against the ordinance when it was adopted last fall in part because the measure included a series of amendments designed to broaden support for the proposal. Instead, the amendments created confusion, enforcement problems and disparities between restaurants and taverns that serve food, Casey said.
Two Kenosha restaurants - both co-owned by Wisconsin Restaurant Association President Gary Anderson of Kenosha - were granted exemptions last week by the City Council.
The next day, employees at Andy's Restaurant and Andy's Drive-in immediately reinstituted their smoking and non-smoking sections.
Andy's Restaurant lost slightly more than 10% of its sales after the ban, prompting the restaurant to buy less from suppliers and cut employees' hours, co-owner Bill Anderson said.
"I've seen some of my regular customers come back that I haven't seen in three months," said Bill Anderson.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
We probably will go to McDonald's rather than waste our money on a place which won't accomodate us.
My wife and I drove on our honeymoon to Austin (Texas' Beijing on the Brazos) only to find this obnoxious policy in force. We left immediately, without eating, and cancelled our hotel reservations. And we've never been back, and won't go back. The smoking Nazis can keep it. And lose the several $K we'd have spent.
I didn't see that. That makes it tougher. Then we need to change what we sell or cut hours for a three month period. It shouldn't be too costly to close up during the slowest times to be sure to qualify for the two year exemption. Assuming this was a blanket deal and I qualified for the exemption I could earn myself the right to have the only smoking restaurant in the area just by closing on Monday for three months. After the down time I would be back and running with my own little monopoly.
While I am sorry that he had to remove the two tables, I understand his reasoning. the vast majority of waitstaff in any establishment will tell you that they prefer the smokers - they spend more time, therefore consume more, so their tabs are larger and so the tips are better.
I've tended my share of bars, waited my share of tables and so have the majority of my friends, both smokers and non. I know exactly one person who refuses to work in an establishment that permits smoking and 1 other that will only work in the non-smoking sections. Several others that hailed the advent of the non-smoking sections have all changed their attitudes and want to work in the smoking sections.
The entire concept is interesting.
I have a friend who owns a bar on Cape Cod. When the Nazis began pushing the smoking ban in ALL bars and restaurants, restaurateurs and bar owners fought like crazy - hired lawyers, attended all the meetings, researched and were VERY vocal.
All for naught.
Of course, the local liberal media were beating the drum for the ban the whole time.
Business in restaurants and bars on the Cape are suffering downturns as a result.
People are just going elsewhere for their vacation.
Of course, the local bureaucrats are still getting paid, so what do they care?
17 Posted on 09/05/2001 11:10:20 PDT by mewzilla
Can't have folks feeling free now, can we?
Mommy, they're smoking again, make 'em stop.
Not to mention infuriating.
I really miss the Cape though. Especially the Christmas Shop and the Colonial Candle, and some Pub we used to go too. I forget the name, now. And a Sports Bar by the mall. Oh well.......too sad......
At home I hope.
McDonalds is nonsmoking. Their choice. People like me complained that we didn't want to bring our kids into a smoke filled restaurant. They heard the market and reacted on their own.
You're kidding, right?
It shouldn't be "too costly" to go from a low-income period to a no-income period?
As an accountant, I'm sure you know that many restaurants work on quite a small margin, and just closing the doors isn't an option.
There are more than 1000 less restaurants in California since the ban when in than before it was enacted.
The folks that want you to believe business is better than ever talk about the increase in business - what they fail to tell you is that the increase has been for fast food, takeout and catering, not for sit down dine in business.
Don't believe everything the lamestream media feeds you - you might find out the truth.
If you are considerate enough to teach tolerance of opposing viewpoints to your children, are you going to teach that same tolerance about everything?
I will be more than happy to answer you questions - are you willing to answer mine????
100% true. My wife, a non-smoker, worked at Red Lobster part-time as a hostess for almost 17 years as a second job. The servers all clamored to get Smoking, and were really hacked if they got assigned to Non. Smokers buy more "add-ons," like drinks, desserts, etc., run up higher tabs, and tip DEMONSTRABLY better than the Nons. In fact in Non, you stood a fairly decent chance of either getting NO tip or something like a couple of quarters.
And try running a Waffle House as Non. You'd go out of bidness.
Michael
So am I!!!!!!!!!
Pleased to meet you!!!!!!!!
Well, mew, I won't say you're lying, but it seems just a little suspicious to me that I hear the exact same statement in the exact same words from at least one anti a month, and the words are the exact ones used by the paid professional honchos in the War on Smokers.
Historically smokers spend more money (because they spend more time) and tip better than the non-smokers(because they spend more money).
Restaurants have gone non-smoking on their own, with out the government getting involved. some of them have made it and some of them have gone back to allowing smoking.
conservative thought should be that the individual business owner should be able to make the decision, based upon his/her clientele - don't you agree??????
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.