Posted on 01/13/2004 9:37:03 AM PST by NorCoGOP
Mary Whitman's bar and restaurant may not be able to afford the new smoking ban.
One month after the ordinance passed, Whitman, the manager of Roasty's Steakhouse, 920 8th Ave, said the restaurant's bar revenues have dropped 60 percent. One week after the ban went into effect, the bar made only $100 one day.
"All the time I have been here, we have never done that," said Whitman, who has worked at Roasty's for 10 years. "We have terminated one of our bartenders because of it."
Other Greeley bar owners and managers paint a bleak economic picture as well, with many saying they've suffered a significant decline in business since the smoking ordinance went into effect Dec. 4.
If someone lights up inside a Greeley bar, he or she faces up to $300 in penalties and a mandatory court appearance. Both the smoker and the establishment can be ticketed.
Vicki Tobel, owner of the Red Garter Lounge, 3621 10th St, said she has a loyal day crowd, but her business has still dropped 15 percent since the ordinance passed. What worries her most is the lounge's night crowd, where business has dropped 45 percent.
"Our night is just killing us," Tobel said.
She, like many other bar owners and managers, are unsure about the future.
"I don't know if I'll have to cut employees," Tobel said. "I don't know what my next step is."
Neither does Keith Johnson, owner of Cables End Italian Grille, 3780 10th St.
He hopes he doesn't have to let any employees go but said there has been a substantial drop in the restaurant's bar. Johnson said the bar did $10,000 less when he compared his November December sales.
Although some Greeley bars and restaurants might see red, others are staying in the black. Brenda Lucio, owner and manager of Coyote's Southwestern Grill, 5250 9th St. Drive, said business is good since the ordinance passed because the restaurant doesn't depend on liquor sales.
"I would be scared if I had a bar business," Lucio said.
Several Greeley bar owners said that there is an exodus of bar patrons to Garden City, Evans and other surrounding cities so they can smoke. But Alan Dean, owner of Bear's Sports Saloon, 2519 8th Ave., which is in unincorporated Weld County, says the increase in business has been small.
"Business seems to be improving week by week," he said.
The dreary effect of the smoking ban for some Greeley bar owners and managers is in sharp contrast with a survey conducted by the Group to Alleviate Smoking Pollution (GASP) of Colorado that was published in the Jan. 4 edition of the Tribune.
GASP is a Boulder-based anti-smoking organization that works to educate the public against the dangers of second-hand smoke and to promote smoke-free environments. The survey quoted bar owners, managers and employees at the Paragon Family Restaurant and Cable's End Italian Grille as saying that the ordinance was "going well" or "doing OK" at their respective restaurants. Both owners disputed the quotations.
GASP president Pete Bialick said the survey was informal and not official.
Bialick said GASP conducts the survey in communities where smoking ordinances pass to update the organization's list of all the smoke-free restaurants and bars in Colorado towns. Despite some bar owners' claims the ordinance is pushing revenue down, Bialick disagrees.
"These ordinances don't affect the bottom line," he said, saying that studies based on sales taxes in more than 100 communities show smoking ordinances don't diminish bar and restaurant owners' bottom lines. He disputed the fact that bar owners say revenues are going down since Greeley passed the smoking ban.
"They are using it as a scapegoat," Bialick said. "The tobacco industry is behind this. They are probably getting paid to say that."
The "government" USED to be us.
Now the "government" is made up of career politicians that don't give a rats patoot about anything but getting reelected.
The majority of the public could care less.
It's the bought and paid for anti smoking groups that are pushing this town by town, county by county, and state by state using boards of health, city councils, state legislatures to gain their controlling ends.
The only state, so far, that has put it to a vote of the people is Florida.
A whopping 23% of the voting public turned out for that one. The majority of those that turned out did vote for the ban and it went through and into place.
Personally, I believe it's a mistake but at least Florida did it right.
You've fallen into the trap of thinking about the USA as a democracy. We are not a democracy!
It's easy to forget that fact but it is a fact that we are supposed to be a constitutional republic.
As a matter of fact, beef tripe menudo has been banned in the U.S., if I understand correctly, due to concerns about BSE.
Government mandates, also known as laws, usually do apply to everyone. In my city bars are required to close at 2 am. I'm sure that some bar owners would like to stay open to 3 or 4. In fact some do so by not serving alcohol.
As I understand most of these non-smoking regulations, they are not for the good of the patrons but for the good of the employees. The idea is that working in a smoke filled room is unhealthy. The government long ago decided that it is in the public interest to try to make sure working conditions are not harmful.
Do you believe in absolute property rights? Do you think zoning is unconstitutional? If you're next door neighbor decided to turn her home into a rendering plant would you just hold your nose and shrug? I think not.
We live in a civilized world. Property rights are not absolute. There are plenty of things that you cannot do in your house and while you may want to your neightbors are glad you don't.
What does freedom of association have to do with smoking?
As a non-smoker, I agree with you. Especially when it comes to private clubs and organizations. However, it is nice to come home not smelling of cigarette smoke when I go to listen to Mr. C4E's band.
Red
Kick the bums out of office.
Do you really think that the anti-smoking groups are better funded then the pro-smoking groups, which have the tobacco industry behind them?
The majority of those that turned out did vote for the ban and it went through and into place.
Yeah, well, that's the way it goes.
In either case, the electorate chooses the people to put in charge. You and your fellow citizens chose the politicians who passed these laws banning smoking. If you don't like them then convince enough of your neighbors to either overturn the bans or choose different politicians. All this whining is unbecoming.
Yes.
The tobacco companies are scared out of their wits to fund almost ANY pro-smoking group.
The anti-smoking groups, OTOH, are funded by the smokers themselves via the MSA the fed/state govs forced the tobacco companies into.
That's what I did in Missouri last year. Cost me in the neighborhood of $1,500 of my own money too because big tobacco wouldn't touch it.
If it's whining to support private property rights for business owners when govs regulate something, NOT voted on by the people, that is put into place to regulate a "health hazard" based on suspect science and false studies, then call me a whiner.
And that's what I said. At least Florida did it right.
A majority voted in favor of Prohibition, and then later a majority voted against Prohibition. That's the way the system works.
Look: people know what to expect when they walk into a bar. A bar is for drinking and smoking and other potentially nasty habits.
A bunch of those other nasty habits are probably illegal too. Does the fact they occur in a bar make them OK?
Come to think of it you may be right. In the old days, when the first smoking bans were being proposed, there was a lot of tobacco money funding the opposition. I can certainly se how the situation may have changed in recent years.
Good for you. That'd how a democracy works. Or pardon me, a constitutional republic.
If it's whining to support private property rights for business owners when govs regulate something, NOT voted on by the people, that is put into place to regulate a "health hazard" based on suspect science and false studies, then call me a whiner.
Sitting around on FR complaining is whining. Going out and doing something about it is not. From what you say here you're not a whiner.
Complaining? No.
Trying to get some people to see what a violation of private property rights smoking bans that are not voted on by the people are? Yes, I'm guilty of that.
You apparently missed the "Purpose of Government" lecture the Founders gave the British in July, 1776.
All these things you cite have one thing in common, they are illegal. Smoking is not illegal. You may want it to me illegal, but it's not. So all the people who desire to rule others lives and restrict their property and freedom are doing it one step at a time.
It's fascism, pure and simple. Islamofascists do the same thing but all at once.
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.