Cafe business up in smoke (smoking ban closes restaurant)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Nonsense, All I have been telling you for weeks is about rights. I never started calling you the justified name liberal until you asserted that government has the legitimate power to tell people what to do on their private property. It's all about private property as I have told you numerous times.

BTW, I don't even smoke.

If the restuarant wasn't attracting enough customers after the first few months of business the business wasn't there.

A "few months"!!! Good grief. I can tell that you have never been in the restaurant business. It can take a number of years to build up a good, steady trade. Apparently, this place was moving continually upward, growing, and attracting a regular crowd, but the self-appointed smoking Nazis cut their legs out from under them and their sales plunged when the "prohibition" was enacted. People simply went to where they could smoke.

If you don't like smoking, fine for you. But the fact is, most non-smokers don't have your fanatical reactions to it. But more and more, politicians and professional do-gooders with hidden agendas are willing to step all over private property rights to satisfy single issue fanatics.

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.

Most are only afraid of the inevitable loss of another right. The private property right.

But what the heck, on all the WOD threads people like CJ, Dane, Roscoe and the rest use precisely the same technique you now employ, call them drug users and deride them instead of addressing the real issue.

Why then do you show so much glee when these bans happen?

Because I hate the smell of smoke.

Why are you not fighting to stop them even if you DO hate the smell of cigarette smoke?

Because I'm selfish and would rather see a smoke free world. Secondly, I don't take on losing causes. Even smokers are not fighting, why should I take on a battle they are not ? Finally, I believe we are seeing the market at work here. In this case the market is using regulation to hasten something that will occur anyways in the long run and by doing it with regaultion its a way for the least amount of shakeup to the existing businesses.

Are you a hypocrite or just lying?

I am not lying so I must be a hypocrite.

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.

State government has ultimate property rights, except guns.

Chicago is getting ready to pass a smoking ban in all public places, and it's going to kill businesses.

It will harm restaurants, because the smokers can opt to go home where smoking (at this time) is still allowed. Offices and factories will actually see productivity gains, very slight ones, because "smoke breaks" are generally costly to labor output.

My concern is the bigger picture. This ban represents a small nick in the fabric of freedom itself, in this country, and will no doubt turn into a large rip.

If some moron is so addicted that he absolutely, positively has to smoke in a restaurant then he should seek medical attention.

If I sprayed myself continuously with an aerosol underarm deodorant, or misted some heavy perfume or aftershave continuously in a restaurant while others were dining, I would be asked to leave the establishment and with good reason.

But if some sniveling little twerp decides to foul the air by smoking, the moronic owners pat him on the back and claim he's the reason their still in business.

Well get the message all you Libertarian Lung Cancer Addicts. Smoking in this country is rapidly be stamped out, and the sooner the better. If you want to smoke, foul your own private air, asphyxiate your own children, and ruin your own health. Personally, I like my air as clean as I can get it, and so do millions of other Americans.

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

What expenses?

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

No. How would the tax structure be figured if all were wealthy?

Still waiting...

I never agreed with them. You just think I did.

Nonsense. And if you think your little trick is some cute game on this thread, then people need to wonder just what the hell your point is. Is your point that you don't like smokers? Ok, good, now go away.

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.

Actually by your representatives at the state legislature. Call them up and complain to them, not me.

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.

At the rate things are going its safe to assume this will happen if you have children at home. Mandated reporters like teachers and clergy will be required to advise DCF and you will get a visit. Ex-spouses will use your smoking to show your an unfit parent. This is the natural progression of the current events.

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.

Exceptions to every rule, especially where one has lots of start up costs. Restauarants typically have very low profit margins so its unussual they can make up lost profits. If there was something in the demograhics of this restaurant that would indicate a change he might have a reason to hang in there.

Personally, I like my air as clean as I can get it, and so do millions of other Americans.

Good, YOUR air. Stay the hell out of private property where people are allowed to smoke.

Or do you also maintain that you have some mystical "right" to someone else's rights?

Finally, I believe we are seeing the market at work here. In this case the market is using regulation to hasten something that will occur anyways in the long run

We are witnessing the government kill off a piece of the free market.The unintended consequences, as usual, will send this one right back in the face of those who would attempt to impose on others.

Smokers are a minority, but smokers plus the number of people who are beginning to understand the fragility of our freedoms are, thankfully, a majority.

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

Yes, but you must be reimbursed.

Thinking isn't one of your strong suits, huh?

I outlined the concept of government deriving it's power from the people and that's that's your retort?!

Yes, but you must be reimbursed.

Ah, here comes the moronic argument that governments can do whatever they want as long as they steal money from some citizens to reimburse others.

I was wondering how long before you started spewing that BS on this thread. You have no one fooled by your childish interpretation of eminent domain.

I never started calling you the justified name liberal until you asserted that government has the legitimate power to tell people what to do on their private property.

And if they didn't have this power the regulations would be turned over in court. Look, you and i could argue at length what rights we have but the only place those rights matter are in court. So far to date smokers haven't won one private property battle.

You may be correct but it isn't doing you much good.

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.

Look at the pot calling the kettle black.
Shall we go back over the threads that both of us have frequented and SEE who calls names?
Maybe see who has legitimate points and who doesn't? Who just says (paraphrasing), "I hate the smell of cigarette smoke. All smokers are rude, inconsiderate, and should be shot"
Should we?

You may be correct but it isn't doing you much good.

Of course I'm right, and it's good to see you finally admit it.

So now what point are you trying to make on these threads? That you don't like smokers and they you think they are currently losing the battle?

Ok, you said your piece, anything else? If not, you are excused. Go put on your dunce cap.

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.