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

Skip to comments.

Cafe business up in smoke (smoking ban closes restaurant)
The Citizen Auburn NY ^ | Friday, December 20, 2002 | By Mary Bulkot / Staff Writer

Posted on 12/20/2002 10:10:51 AM PST by Behind Liberal Lines

SAVANNAH NY- A ban on smoking has snuffed the life out of their D&S Diner, Susan and Doug Devall say. The owners of the village's only diner, one of the few businesses on Main Street, say they will close for good Dec. 29. They blame Wayne County's no-smoking law, which passed in January.

We'd still be here, Doug Devall said, if the law hadn't passed.

The couple opened the diner in August 2000, after a string of businesses failed at the same location. Although the diner didn't turn a profit in its first year, the two expected to operate in the black the second year. Then the no-smoking law sent that goal go up in smoke. Nearby Cayuga County has no ban on smoking in restaurants, so the Devalls figure much of their business went to light up elsewhere. That took 30 percent of the customers right out of here, Doug Devall said.

Sales were down $3,000 in July 2002 compared to July 2001. Hardest hit were on Friday nights and Sunday mornings.

The couple had the option of converting an extra room into a smoking room, but the cost of installing ventilation, sealing doors and other measures was too much. Meanwhile, the two sympathized with their smoking customers and let them indulge under the counter, so to speak.

If it's not busy in here, I will let people smoke. I'm not going to lose my business, Susan Devall said soon after the law went into effect.

The decision to allow smoking or not should be left up to the individual business owner, Doug Devall said. Restaurant owners should be able to choose whether their establishment will be smoking or non-smoking.

The bottom line

Most of them are crying their eyes out because we're closing, but I can't keep robbing Peter to pay Paul, he said. The bottom line: He needs around $800 a day to survive, said the couple. It's the days when less than $100 comes in and then the propane truck pulls in and there's a $400 bill to pay, those are the days that hurt, he said.

This stuff is going to backfire on politicians, come back and bite them on the ass, Doug said, referring not only to the smoking laws but to the high taxes and other regulations that New York state imposes on small businesses. Workman's compensation, disability, unemployment, liability -- the cost of insurance is extremely high for a small business that employs two full-time and three part-time people.

Absolutely, said Sandy Brownell, when asked whether the new smoking laws have hurt many small restaurants like the D & S Diner.

Brownell is a saleswoman for Palmer Distributing, which is based in Newark. It's hard for them to make it in New York state because of the insurance regulations and the taxes as well, she said. I see it a lot, more than I wish to, she said about the closing.

Brownell is a smoker herself, and said whether she could light up or not weighed into her decision on where to eat.

Not just customers

It's the customers Susan will miss the most, especially the regulars. In a small place like this, though -- one of the few places for people to gather in Savannah -- most of the customers are regulars. In fact, several people sitting at the counter Thursday afternoon, after the lunch rush, had the look of regulars about them.

It's like art work for you, said Jackie Shurtleff, placing Leon Waldron's grilled ham and cheese sandwich in front of him.

Waldron comes to the diner at least once a day, usually to shoot the crap with all the guys in the morning and to pick on everyone.

So where will Waldron go after the new year?

Nowhere it seems.

I'm still coming here, they just don't know that yet, he said.

Tim Carmon, who works in Savannah and drops by at least three times a week for lunch, also hates to see them go.

Shurtleff is Sue's sister, as well as one of the diner's employees. She's worked at the diner since the day it opened.

Both of these facts make the closing an extremely emotional event for her as well as her sister. Upsetting was how she described the upcoming closing -- the simplicity of the words belied the complicated emotions felt.

Before he started working part-time at the diner, Randy Brown would come in with his father for lunch. Off duty Thursday afternoon, he sat at the counter eating what Jackie euphemistically called a concoction -- a Philly sandwich with extra cheese plus pickles, potato chips, and ketchup -- all on the sandwich, not on the side.

Brown has another part-time job at Pearl Technologies, but will miss the good atmosphere at the diner.

It's the environment that will be missed even more than the food. Mrs. Nobel, a Savannah resident whom Shurtleff described fondly as a fixture, has been coming to the diner morning and noon since it opened.

Nobel said the diner has the same friendly, pleasant extended family feeling as when Betty Kelly owned the building and operated a luncheonette there more than 20 years ago.

Nobel doesn't think there will be another business opening in the space anytime soon though -- a great loss for the village.

The diner will be sorely missed on Main Street, which has more empty storefronts than full ones. A couple of bars, a hair salon, a convenience store/gas station, the town hall. Given the limited amount of amenities and services available in this hamlet, most residents head to Seneca Falls or Auburn for basic necessities and entertainment.

This exodus will seemingly continue.

Future plans

There will be an auction in January, and then the Devalls will try to lease the space. Since they own the building, which has apartments upstairs, the couple's connection with the hamlet won't be totally severed.

Drink beer and raise hell, Doug said, when asked about his plans for the future. His contracting business will continue to take up most of his time.

But ultimately it's Sue, at the diner just about every day, who'll miss and be missed the most. Her husband joked his wife would be able to enjoy a stretch of being Suzy Homemaker.

Based on Sue's response to that suggestion, it doesn't seem likely.

Although the couple got smoked out of Savannah, figuratively speaking, Sue hasn't been totally burnt by the restaurant business. But she would consider something closer to home and in a higher traffic area, she said. In fact, with an eye on the future, the couple is tentatively keeping an eye on a place in Weedsport.

But the 29th is going to be pretty hard, Sue said.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; US: New York
KEYWORDS: cancer; dirtyhabit; governmentregulaton; pufflist; smokingban; sorelosers; tobacco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-312 next last
To: ThomasJefferson
And liberals lie.

I they all lie then I'm not one.

41 posted on 12/20/2002 11:56:39 AM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
No. Even though they do have the right.
42 posted on 12/20/2002 11:57:09 AM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
So, selfish nonsmokers don't have to pay as much.

What does that mean?

43 posted on 12/20/2002 11:57:15 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ThomasJefferson
IF all liberals lie then I'm not one.


44 posted on 12/20/2002 11:58:04 AM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
I thought it was pretty clear. Its in the nonsmokers best interest to get anyone but himself to cover the expenses of Gov't.

Do you actually think the tax on cig's would be as high if the majority smoked ?

45 posted on 12/20/2002 11:59:48 AM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
You claim to be a conservative, that is a lie.
46 posted on 12/20/2002 12:01:08 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
I'm not a smoker, and I think no-smoking bans are complete, total bullsh*t.

Chicago is getting ready to pass a smoking ban in all public places, and it's going to kill businesses. When those businesses die off, who's going to make up the shortfall in tax revenues? EVERYONE WILL.

Decisions such as these should be left up to the individual business owners, whether or not they want to permit smoking in their businesses. If I walk into a restaurant and there's a smoke cloud overhead, I don't go bitch to the government to ban smoking, I find another restaurant.

What is wrong in this country, when the "free market system" we supposedly live with is wrought with over-regulation and big-daddy-government?

47 posted on 12/20/2002 12:02:22 PM PST by usconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
These regulations are wrong. Much as I like the outcomeI disagree with them.

You have agreed with them all over this forum for weeks or months. I'm glad to see you finally admit that YOU are in the wrong and it's none of your damn business what anyone else does.

48 posted on 12/20/2002 12:03:57 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
No. Even though they do have the right.

In that case I would like two follow up questions.

Why then do you show so much glee when these bans happen? Why are you not fighting to stop them even if you DO hate the smell of cigarette smoke?
Are you a hypocrite or just lying?

And once again you show that you don't remember what others try to drill into you. Governments don't have rights, they have powers.

49 posted on 12/20/2002 12:04:00 PM PST by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
I thought it was pretty clear. Its in the nonsmokers best interest to get anyone but himself to cover the expenses of Gov't.

Do you actually think the tax on cig's would be as high if the majority smoked ?

What expenses?

50 posted on 12/20/2002 12:06:10 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
Actually, you're a liberal because you advocate the use of government to achieve that which belongs in the private sector.

You have the wrong person.

I think he's got the right person.

Government gets it's power from the people. That is, it's on loan. For example, it's entirely appropriate and moral to lend the government police powers. We have the right to shoot an attacker and thusly, when the police do the same in our name, it's legitimate. The police can rightly do that because the power was derived from the people's right to defend themselves. It was conferred to them, but it's legitimacy stems from it's roots.

Thus, you have to pose the question - am I asking the government to do what I have the moral right to do myself?

Could a law that confiscates property be legitimate and consummate with individual American rights?

I'd really like to see your zeal to physically remove a cigarette from my mouth.

But, you can't and trust me, you wouldn't try. So what do you do? You and people like you whine and prattle on to the government and get them to create a power out of whole cloth.

You are a power hungry recreant who doesn't even deserve the term "selfish".

So don't go on your moral high ground trip until you feel confortable physically accosting smokers.
51 posted on 12/20/2002 12:06:47 PM PST by Rate_Determining_Step
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: usconservative
What is wrong in this country, when the "free market system" we supposedly live with is wrought with over-regulation and big-daddy-government?

What is wrong is that the country has become fascist while the citizens sleep. They keep electing slugs who use freedom as a feel good phrase and the constitution and our founding principles as toilet paper.

It is the fault of the people, no one else.

52 posted on 12/20/2002 12:08:30 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
The ONLY point is that the rights of business OWNERS to CHOOSE whether or not they want to allow smoking in THEIR establishments, are being violated by another brazen move of the litigious, liberal gestapo. I suppose they will be coming to my house next telling me I cannot allow my friends to smoke in my house if I choose to do so. The whiners always have the choice of eating somewhere that the liberal elites own that do not allow smoking. I am sure they would also exist and they should have that right as well.
53 posted on 12/20/2002 12:10:26 PM PST by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
The first point is the chances this guys restuarant was successful to begin with was probably nil. If the guy didn't have a positive cash flow by the end of the first year, it wasn't likely to happen.

My business lost money for the first four years, it took two more of basically breaking even before we forged into the black. My business is now solidly profitable.

This is about freedom. This business should be allowed to pursue this niche(smokers)and folks like you just wouldn't go there. Libs try to coerce through government power and that's all that's going on here.

54 posted on 12/20/2002 12:12:08 PM PST by wayoverontheright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Budge; wirestripper; Don Friovinai
Litigious liberal anti-smoking nazi alert.
55 posted on 12/20/2002 12:12:16 PM PST by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
After the law was passed, the smokers were in control. They could have continued to go to the guys restaurant but no, they were too selfish to put aside their smoking urges for an hour.

Likewise, if we pass a law that mandates VRWC_minion be taxed at a rate of 90%, and you refuse to pay, then we can toss you in prison. After all, you were "in control".

56 posted on 12/20/2002 12:14:11 PM PST by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
On every smoking-related thread I see your screenname; you are always saying the same things: you hate the smell of smoke; smokers are rude; you patronize non-smoking establishments only; you have legions of friends and family members who have suffered the ills of smoke; yet you pretend to first-hand knowledge, amazing.

How often do you eat out and what is your average meal cost? I wonder if you are one of those people who actually live only vicariously.

57 posted on 12/20/2002 12:14:56 PM PST by Old Professer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ThomasJefferson
You claim, not mine. I don't even know how one defines either term. Apparently different folks will have different views as to what one is.

However, the way the term is used by you and others is simply as a tool to claim victory over an argument without facts or reason. You simply call someone a liberal and by doing so claim victory.

That attitude in the real world is not going to do squat for convincing others your ideas are superior. For this smoking debate, all the smoker seems able to offer is calling those who wish to ban smoking names in order to win them over. That tactic is about as dumb as smoking.

To show how effective the pro-smokers have been so far their defeats include New York, Boston, Florida, and California. Let me clue you in. Your losing.

I can understand why you don't want to to listen why your losing but it has everything to do with selfishness and rudeness. Smokers are selfish because they want to smoke wherever and whenever and nonsmokers are selfish because they don't want to tolerate any smoke.

The potential for compromise could be found by smokers becoming as polite as cigar and pipe smokers and if they began to ask around them in a restuarant if its ok to smoke and if they greatly reduced their smoking they might be able to stem the tide. But they are too selfish and will continue to force the issue and nonsmokers will continue to ban them under some fig leaf excuse. It won't stop till you can only smoke at home and God forbid you have kids and your spouse doesn't smoke and you get divorced. You may never see your children again.

58 posted on 12/20/2002 12:15:07 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ThomasJefferson
I never agreed with them. You just think I did.
59 posted on 12/20/2002 12:17:18 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Rate_Determining_Step
"So don't go on your moral high ground trip until you feel comfortable physically accosting smokers"

Ahhh, we have found the cusp of the smokers fury...they feel morally inferior to non-smokers and are daily seeing their choice to smoke looked down upon by society (ie, the smoking bans) and are at their last gasp to feel normal within society.

The true measure of addiction is how the individual acts when in the ABSENCE of their addictive substance. I think it is clear some on this thread are feeling afraid that that they may need to put the cigarettes away for the duration of a meal and are experiencing the waves of withdrawal even now just thinking about it.

60 posted on 12/20/2002 12:19:55 PM PST by kmiller1k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-312 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