Voluntarily Smoke-Free Restaurants & Bars
Until we have a local, regional or statewide ban on smoking in public places, businesses are free to make the smoking/non-smoking decision for themselves. As mentioned in a prior post, I’d like customers to let businesses know they’d appreciate a non-smoking environment. For me personally, I’m only going to patronize 100% non-smoking establishments. Last night I opted not to join friends for dinner because they were going to a place that was not 100% smoke-free.
People debate studies regarding the health impacts from second-hand smoke. They advocate costly filtration systems. I’m not going to get into that, I don’t need to. I know that when I visited places that allow smoking I’d leave with a scratchy throat, watery eyes and smelly clothes. Meals would not smell or taste as good. No more for me. Enough businesses have made the decision to have a smoke-free environment that I can go out and enjoy a meal and drink without the hassles I find in smoking places. For now, each business must make the decision for themselves. And it is a decision.
I believe for many bar/restaurant owners the decision to allow smoking is made out of fear. Fear of losing the business of smokers. Fear of not having the right mood — bars are supposed to be smoky, right? So they open with smoking in the entire place, in a smoking section or at the bar. Once they are open with smoking permitted, few voluntarily change their policy.
Just as many non-smokers will go to places that permit smoking, smokers will go to places that do not. A few places I visit that are non-smoking include Crown Candy Kitchen, Crepes in the City, 10th Street Italian, The London Tea Room, The Fountain on Locust, Sen Thai, Lily’s, 10th Street Italian and The Royale. The owners of these non-chain businesses voluntarily decided their establishments would be smoke-free. Their place, their right.
I recently sat down and talked with the owners of two of the above, Steve Smith of The Royale and Mary Deacon of Crepes In The City, about their decisions to have their respective businesses be smoke-free. The Royale is a lively bar/tavern that happens to also serve good food. Crepes in the City is a Creperie that also happens to serve alcohol. Runtime on this video is 8:51:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noZXCbLi_fs[/youtube]
As Smith mentioned he was open for three years allowing smoking before going smoke-free on April 1, 2008. His business has increased since going smoke-free. He references a study he conducted of his customers before going smoke-free. It is interesting reading. A year ago he announced that The Royale would go smoke-free on April 1, 2008. I’ve seen people cite studies that show a drop in business in areas with new bans. A few weeks isn’t enough time to judge. A year is. I found it interesting that Smith’s employees that smoke welcomed the change to non-smoking. Thank you to Steve Smith & Mary Deacon for your time and for creating places I enjoy patronizing!
The hospitality industry website RestaurantReport.com has a section on great debates in their industry, one of which is Smoking in Restaurants. Here is an excerpt:
Like it or not, it’s inevitable that smoking will be illegal in all restaurants sometime in the near future, and we can talk about what’s going to happen to the hospitality business when this law takes effect. And I suspect that most owners would welcome such a law, and it’s even highly possible that business will actually improve.
If you own a restaurant or bar that allows smoking I ask that you do what Steve Smith did, survey as many of your customers as possible. Find out if they’d come back more or less if you went smoke-free. Keep in mind your customers may skew toward more smokers because non-smokers like me may not patronize your establishment because of the smoke.  It is a tough economy, can you survive on smokers and non-smokers willing to tolerate being in a smoking environment? Don’t wait until a ban forces your business and your competition to go smoke-free, do it now and set your business apart from others.
I still advocate a ban ( city/regional/state) but in the meantime I’d like to see more places voluntarily be smoke-free.
We visited that local legend, Fast Eddie’s BonAir in Alton, IL., yesterday. And since they’re on the other side of the river, state law mandates that they be “non-smoking”. To comply, they’ve created a huge new patio area, essentially doubling their available seating area. (http://www.fasteddiesbonair.com) Since it was in the 30’s, the patio wasn’t packed (obviously), but the parts that were covered and heated seemed to be doing a great job of accomodating the smokers. Inside the old building, it was packed and most everyone seemed to be enjoying the clean air (we sure did) along with the cheap eats and a pretty decent cover band. Bottom line – changes were required, probably unwanted, but with the clarity of 20/20 hindsight, they seem to be doing even better financially than they were a couple of years ago.
.
Where I struggle is with the definition of “100% smoke-free”. In my world, that would include ALL service areas, including patio areas. On nice days, I’d like to be able to hang out outside and be away from smokers, as well. The reality is that, at least around here, if it’s outside it’s assumed that smoke won’t be an issue, when in reality it is, especially for non-smokers. Obviously, Fast Eddie’s is meeting the letter of the Illinois law, but they also don’t claim to be 100%. This leaves the Royale in an interesting semantic dilemma, claiming to be “100%”. Don’t get me wrong – I appreciate and support how far they’ve come, but, as a smaller establishment, the only way they’ll ever be 100% is if smoking is 86’ed from the patio area, as well . . .
FastEd’s can make room for smokers but not for children, how uncool.
John,
Fast Eddie’s is a bar. You’ve already put the smokers outside. Would you like to remove childless individuals from your community too?
Steve I obviously appreciate your perspective and I find more common ground in your appreciation for what Mary has created Downtown. Crepes in the City is more than a restaurant to me. In less than a year she has created a sense of community in addition to the freshest and best tasting breakfast/brunch food. I have yet to hear anyone dislike what she has done, although some have attacked her lack of experience, which seemed like strange criticism to be weighed against such a fine creation. But those minority voices aside, i urge those that haven’t been, to go.
.
I have absolutely no problem with the push to eliminate smoking from public places, but I urge others in their attempt to do so, be respectful of the rights of others when you don’t understand there decisions to continue smoking. In this pursuit to establish a more hospitable public environment, that slipping into self-righteous talk does little for bringing this to a good outcome.
.
Smokers are well aware of the health risks to continue their habits, but choose, yes choose, to continue to do so. Most non-smokers view that as weakness. And in the grand scheme of things that very well may be true. But that is not really the issue.
.
I, as a smoker do support this push for voluntarily creating a more hospitable environment for all, I strongly advise that sanctimonious rhetoric be kept to a minimum, as it does nothing for the cause of creating a cleaner public environment for the both of us to share.
One of the local stations, I believe it was Channel 2, recently did a story featuring Bill Hannegan, the pro-tobacco local organizer. In a very telling shot, it showed him sitting all alone, no one within 10 feet of him.
I applaud you for your position and conviction. We too rarely go where smoking is permitted, especially this time of year. Aside from the health reasons, we don’t like having to dry clean coats and the like to get rid of the stench.
People like Hannegan use two arguments over and over. It is somehow their right to pollute the air, and if we don’t like it we can leave. The second argument is that businesses have the right to do what they want, because they will suffer if the choke-and-gasp crowd aren’t happy. Business after business has found, like the Smith’s, that there are more people who want to patronize their place but can’t or won’t while smoking is permitted. Apparently, they’d rather have the one Hannegan than the 100 like us.
The Royale never claimed to be 100% smoke free. You can check the sign we have outside- it says “Smoke Free Indoors, smoking permitted on patio.”
One step at a time- I wouldn’t make the fight for smoke free outdoor patios quite yet if you are looking to make the indoors smoke free.
And the Royale permits kids in our place, but it is certainly understandable that some places are meant only for adults- kids can really change the dynamic of a business. I prefer having multiple generations in my place including kids, but it does come with its challenges and it does change the atmosphere. We don’t allow kids later at night- it just is not the place for kids at certain times.
And if this comment thread goes like many on the intertubes, there will be a couple of haters that will post with great multiplicity by distorting facts and distracting from the real issues. It is an interesting tactic that is being used, but the reality is that smoke free is just what is going to be the reality all over the US, and it won’t be that long. Most the states have placed in smoke free legislation, and not just liberal coast states. It is inevitable so all of the resistance to smoke free is just a wasted exercise. But we live in a free and wonderful country in which we exercise all the time.
peace and prosperity,
Steven Fitzpatrick Smith
Tavern Keeper
The Royale
South City
I promise to stay out of Chuck-E-Cheese if Fast Eddies continues to prohibit kids . . . or should we just encourage Chuck to allow smoking? And/or alcohol?! The most successful and enjoyable establishments target who they want to serve. Call it discrimination or smart marketing, but trying to appeal to everybody just makes you bland – see Olive Garden, Applebee’s or Denny’s. I’d much rather support a local joint that has a clear vision and a bit of an edge, even if I have to play by “their” rules . . .
Umm…there is alcohol at Chuck E. Cheese btw…
Steve,
You seemed to emphasize “their place, their rules” in your praise of establishments that prohibit smoking, shouldn’t this also apply to establishments that wish to allow smoking? I am a non-smoker who enjoys a smoke-free environment, but I prefer limited government over limited smoking.
I checked the Bill of Rights and the Nuremberg Declaration of Human Rights–nothing about the right to smoke. I get sick of smokers talking about their rights being violated; it cheapens the suffering of real people whose legitimate rights are violated every day around the world.
While I await the inevitable smoking ban, I will also choose to spend my money in smoke-free businesses. The biggest problem I have is that it’s a pain to find out which places are smoke free. Sure, there are a couple of lists online, but downloading and reading down a pdf is not the best way to pick out a meeting spot, especially if you’re trying to find a bar in an unfamiliar part of town. It would be nice to have a map of all the places around town where one could grab a drink without smoke.
.
I couldn’t find such a map, so I started making one. It’s a work in progress, but I’d like to get some feedback. Is this useful to anyone else? Does anyone know of a good website or blog that would like to link to or host this?
.
I’m limiting this only to places one might go just to have drinks with friends. I don’t want to include pure restaurants because I don’t want to have to include every sub shop and Qdoba (yes, Qdoba has beer, but who would meet there to have drinks?).
.
Clicking on my name should link to the map.
My wife and I try to patronize only smoke-free establishments and the list is growing by the day. I would think that once a restaurant owner takes the risk and moves from smoking to no smoking that they realize the niche they have provided and would NOT want a all-state smoking ban.
Let me try the link again:
http://tinyurl.com/nosmokestl
Joe,
.
I like the map showing all of the smoke-free restauarants in the City. This is great!
.
I can’t remember, but I thought the Atomic Cowboy allowed smoking now, though.
Thx to the Royale for makin it non-smoking, have not been since u changed over- So i will be coming now. I on occasion, end up at a smokey bar, if its a frnds bday- i can’t really overide the majority and pick somewhere that is fun and non smoking. But its a rare occasion, as my throat is sore, and i cough, and my hair smells for days. I shower immediately, and the way that my clothes and hair smell- after one visit, i can’t imagine the inside of a regular smokers body. I can to some degree, as my father passed this year frm smoking, he was on live oxygen and still lighten up cigs- till the end. Good thing my mom has finally decided to quit(after 30yrs)now that she too is on oxygen/death bed. So Maybe i’m a litl bias, after growing up with cronic broch./colds/watery eyes, and stinkin like and ashtray. I had no choice about it then, but i do now-even if i have to drive out to chain places like California Pizza. I’d rather support local city owners, but its time this city gets it together. I travel a lot, and its strange when u come home and feel like ur going back in time- all of these othr places seem to be doing just fine with out the smoking- why cant we? Do we have to be last on everything- Really? If people want to smoke and do that to their body, they should do it in the space of their home. I don’t want to walk thru a bunch of stinkin toxic smoke, on my way in or out. And i hope that isn’t my server, out there on his smoke break, who is gonna now come in and handle bread for me- cause i know he didn’t take xtra time to go and wash his nicotine fingers- priorities people. I like to drink Coke, it’s crappy for me, but doesn’t affect the guy next to me. Theses places already have the right to choose if they want to opt for smoking or non- smoking, it effects health and health care $’s(which i have to pay like it or NOT)=Time to quit.
I also will be giving the Royale another try. I went there a couple of years ago, but didn’t like it because of the smoke.
.
As for Atomic Cowboy, do they really allow smoking now? I don’t remember any smoke when I was there a few months ago.
The Atomic Cowboy has this semi-open air quonset hut in the courtyard where they relegate the smokers, so it is essentially still smoke free. The quonset hut makes it feel like an awful military experiment on hipsters with a really good selection of drinks.
This is a great post, Steve. Essentially its the “dollar vote.†Buy things from places and people you like and trust. Every dollar you spend somewhere is a vote for what they do, sell and promote.
This is also how you attract new business to your community….when you promote the businesses you like, you invite(vote for) similar minded businesses to take up real estate nearby.
Didn’t South Park have an episode on this? Oh, wait, that was about hybrid cars. Seems to fit here, too.
Hmmm, but I own a 10 year old Suburban, a cop car Crown Vic, an ancient 8.2 liter Eldorado and a 13 year old V-max(oink oink vroom) but I own a smoke free bar and willingly engage in activities in which people punch each other in the head. Who am I supposed to be in this South Park cartoon?
Steven Fitzpatrick Smith
AMDG
Here’s a comprehensive list of smoke-free places, including maps:
http://tobaccofreemo.org/directory.asp
What about hookah lounges? Would you ban those? These are places where people go to smoke. Why not simply let owners and the consumer decide. People know when they go to Mangia that it’s smoke filled and that the Royale and Atomic are not. Let the consumer decide, not a nanny governmental regulation. Smokers are already vastly in the minority of the population. Over the years many have chosen to quit. We’ve removed smoking from many places of public and private accommodation. Do we need to continue this as an issue?
.
How much of a benefit arises from reducing smoking further compared to the energy put into such a campaign? Aren’t there other public health and welfare issues to advocate?
I would love to go to Mangia. Won’t set foot in that place until a ban is passed or it goes smoke-free, whichever comes first.
I hadn’t been to Mangia in some time. I used to really enjoy the food but our last visit (on a very non-busy night recently) was so smokey I don’t care to go back.
Doug, would you prefer there were no sanitary regulations enforced by the health department? Same issue to me.
If you go to Mangia before it gets later it’s really not that bad.
If an establishment has smoking in excess then customers should demand better ventilation or go somewhere else. But I can understand the sanitary argument.
Attitudes like “I promise to stay out of Chuck-E-Cheese if Fast Eddies continues to prohibit kids” foster a climate that discrimination is OK as long as it favors personal biases. That is Chuck-E-Cheese type nonsense and private clubs are not public restaurants. Designing marketing appeal should not be confused with absolute discrimination.
State liquor laws prohibit serving alcohol to minors under 21. A bar can either check ID’s at the door or each time a drink is served. Given the volume of business Fast Eddie’s does, their choice to prohibit anyone under 21 from entering makes a lot of sense (much as it does in a casino). It also better protects them should a minor ignore the rules, become intoxicated and do something stupid. And, unfortunately, because too many parents (but probably a minority, ruining it for the “good” ones) don’t “get it”, that restaurants aren’t playgrounds, and that kids should behave themselves in public, people like me enjoy going to places where we can enjoy some time with other adults, where kids won’t be running wild.
.
I understand the reality that kids will make mistakes/not mind their manners (assuming they’ve been taught some) when they’re out in public. What I don’t understand is when that behavior is allowed to continue or escalate. Unless they make the offer, the establishment shouldn’t be expected to be a surrogate baby sitter – it’s the parents’ job to control their kids! And while you make think they’re “cute” or “just being kids” or you’re simply just used to the ongoing chaos, trust me, most of your fellow patrons take a dimmer view of the screaming, running around and spreading food debris. I have no objection to places like Chuch-E-Cheese or McDonald’s catering to kids and their parents – I can choose to go there, or not. I do object to people thinking that every establishment should change, and that kids (or dogs) are somehow acceptable or should be welcomed everywhere. What next? 8-year-olds playing the nickel slots? 15-year-olds hanging out on the east side?
.
So yes, discrimination of this sort IS appropriate. If you want to go to Fast Eddies, just leave the kids at home. Or, if you want or need to feed them cheaply, there’s always Cici’s or Hometown Buffet. But just because you can’t or don’t want to find a babysitter, or simply don’t want to spend time away from your little darlings, it’s not really my problem. Much like the parallel discussion on smoking, we all should have the right to choose an environment that appeals to each of us individually, even if it means that others are discouraged, especially when the “discrimination” is legally protected! And it does boil down to perspective – apparently, YOUR “personal bias”, that kids should be welcome everywhere, should somehow supersede MY “personal bias”, that no, they’re not . . .
Charley, I chose to do that interview alone in Herbie’s private cigar club so I could be heard. Kasey Joyce did a great job of laying out the issue. I also think Diana Benanti speaks well for her cause.
http://keepstlouisfree.blogspot.com/2009/02/ksdk-video.html
I am hardly alone. The Missouri Restaurant Association, The St. Louis Libertarian Party, and the indepedent tavern owners association are 100 percent behind me. We got 10,000 signatures on a petition against Kurt Odenwald’s smoking ban in 2005. And most of the people who spoke out against the ban at County Council hearings in 2005 and 2006 were nonsmokers troubled by authoritarian government restriction of freedom and property rights. By the way, only 25 percent of St. Louis City residents favor a smoking ban in bars and cocktail lounges.
This is the South Park episode someone mentioned:
http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/103937
Just because the restaurants and bars that go smoke-free do well doesn’t mean that all will. There is a market for both smoking and non-smoking. If you force the market to be be one or the other there will be losses. Mister B’s is right down the street. They have good food at a reasonable price. It is far smokier than I care to handle. As a result, we just don’t go unless its a nice day and we can sit outside. They tried not allowing smoking in the dining area and lost business. I think they started allowing it again. They cater to smokers, its what thier business is now and a ban would put them out of business. Its not for me to decide how to run their business. I have the choice of not walking through the door.
Steve, could you list the ten St. Louis restaurants that you would most like to see ban smoking?
I went to the list for smoke-free establishments in the City of St Louis there is over 250 which doesn’t include fast food. With fast food that certainly would be up over 350 if not 400. Why do we need a ban?
Bill, that’s not fair or relevent – we all have our favorites and we all have a few we might patronize more often if they made any one of a number of changes (hours, menu, noise levels, service, parking, to name a few, in addition to smoking). This discussion isn’t about which few need to change to make Steve happy, it’s a discussion pitting having the city and/or county go smoke free in all restaurants (and, potentially, all bars) versus leaving the decision to individual operators.
Steve, why didn’t you ask Smith about air filtration? That was a huge lapse on your part.
A newspaper reporter who covers this issue and is a regular at the Royale told me that the patronage of the Royale not at all typical of a St. Louis bar. It is impossible, he said, to extrapolate from the success of the Royale as a niche smoke-free business and thereby estimate the impact of a city-wide smoking ban on the bar business.
Its simple, no?:
Resturant owners choose to go into business. They put up their hard earned money and work tirelessly to make something of their investment.
Resturants and bars are private entites that are open to the public by choice, not by mandate. Whether they choose to allow a legal activity or not is up to their sole discretion. If a non-smoker doesn’t care to be around smoke, it is simple, they do not frequent that business.
How is this any more complicated than that?
All of this has been said a million times. But it blows my mind that United States citizens want more voluntarily given government control over entities that do not need it. The answer is so simple. Do not go if you don’t like the resturant, for whatever reason it may be: they serve alcohol and your religious beliefs are against it, they allow smoking, their waitstaff is tattooed and pierced and it upsets you. Whatever your dislike with the place is, it is your issue and your reason for not wanting frequent the establishment. Sure, you may be joined by countless others, but there are plenty of places that don’t offend your sensibilites and want your business. The smoking resturants want your business too, but they don’t mind that you don’t visit because you are upset by their practices. See how simple it is for everyone to be satisfied? Without the government instituting a ban?
Tony,
.
I agree that there are a lot of restaurants where one can eat without being bothered by smoke, but bars are another story. By my count there are less than 30 bars in the city that are smoke free. I don’t know for sure, but I’d guess there are 300 bars total in the city. So, I get frustrated because the 25% of people who smoke ruin 90% of the bars.
.
So, I’d be perfectly happy banning smoking in 75% of bars, but until that get’s put on the table, I’m going to side with the majority and push for the ban.
rBar did a 500 person survey similar to the one Steve Smith recommends prior to opening as a smoke-free venue. Yet the smoke-free thing didn’t work for rBar. One difference is that the Royale has received a huge amount of publicity due to its smoking ban right from day one. rBar didn’t get much attention.
Steve, I posted your video on my blog. Nice work on your part.
Also the Central West End Word published a good article on a possible Clayton smoking ban today.
http://www.westendword.com/NC/0/1234.html
Joe
Bars are certainly a different animal from restaurants. I think the public at large expects restaurants to either be smoke-free or limit it to the bar. Thats why you would find most restaurants already meet this criteria. On the other hand bars I think the public expects bars to allow smoke. I would say that smoke-free is a niche in bars, but in restaurants its becoming the norm. That falls in line with the opinion polls done. The poll done by Missouri Senior Services and Health showed that around 56% are in favor of no smoking in (how they termed it) restaurant dining areas. In bars, it was quite different. 75.5% of those polled favored allowing smoking in bars.
I don’t have an exact number on smoke-free bars, but they are a minority. You should be encouraged by the numbers that are expanding. I think its an underserved market that will grow.
As to air filtration: I think it works and works well. I was in the cigar lounge at Herbies the first night they opened. There were several of us in the lounge. A total of about 8 cigars were going. My wife who is no fan of smoke realized after we had been there awhile that she wasn’t bothered by it.
Tony,
I agree with a lot of what you say. The thing that bothers me is just how underserved our market is. No matter which side of the debate you come down on, it’s pretty easy to find studies or polls to back you up. The conclusion I come to is that the pervasiveness of smoking in bars is a relic of a society that’s on its way out. Change is a comin’ for those of you that like to smoke in bars, and the mismatch between the type of bars we have now and the type that will be in demand in the future will have to right itself one way or the other.
.
Steve’s “free-market” proposal seems like just the type of thing the anti-ban crowd should support. It could help balance things out without such a nasty fight. You’re going to loose smoking in a lot of places, but if you just fight to keep the status quo, you’ll probably end up with a total ban.
Joe
On the studies – they are hundreds out there and like any issue its important to know why the study was done and who paid for it. Ethanol was going to save this country from the oil sheiks and they had a lot of studies to back them up. They even managed to pass laws that mandated use of their product. On smoking there are two sides that put out studies- very little of it is neutral. You just have to look at everything with skepticism. Every study that doesn’t find correlation isn’t funded by Big Tobacco and vice versa.
As to bars and restaurants going smoke-free. I’m all for it and have no problem. As a matter of fact, the more that go makes the argument for a ban less relevant. As to what is happening with bans. I think we have hit high water with them. No longer can they get comprehensive bans. The recent states have enacted them all have exceptions (bars, some restaurants, private clubs etc) and quite a few of them have been stopped. In addition states such as Ohio, Illinois, Colorado, Nebraska and Hawaii all have legislation to either soften or kill their bans. Missouri will probably never have a ban. The governor won’t push for one and the legislation is firmly against it. Locally has a slightly better chance, but I can’t see the city ever putting a ban in. The county won’t unless the city does and St Charles has already said no. I think the free market will have to take care of it. Its better, everybody has a choice.
I think its folly to assume that a ban wouldn’t hurt business. I’m a cigar smoker and used to get together once a month with several other cigar smokers. We would meet at Porters in O’Fallon, IL for an evening of cigars, drinks and food. It was a cigar bar and nobody that had a problem with smoke would go there. Its out of business now and Illinois doesn’t get employment tax or sales tax its just gone.
What was interesting about the Illinois Casino numbers is that out state boats that had no competition fared worse than boats that had smoking allowed competition. I guess the theory would be that non-smoking boats pulled in some business from smoking allowed states. It was still a very, very bad year for the industry in Illinois.
If a ban comes in – then places such as The Royale and others will lose their niche. What set them aside will no longer matter. If they keep doing well and the non-smoking crowd supports them more will open. The market is very good at figuring out what people want.
Filtration- took a look at it- very expensive and not effective enough, but there is still plenty of pee in the swimming pool. It is far easier to ask someone to step outside to take a drag.
Besides, and this is something I would warn business owners on filtration: the smoke free law will pass with near certitude looking at the national and international trends. I am not saying the laws are right or wrong, but the debate is an exercise that will be a loud, rowdy, entertaining, drawn out, but ultimately just and exercise. The laws are holding up very well in the long term and supported by the vast majority general populace in the states in which it has passed. The majority of US states have sweeping smoke free laws and even looking more broadly all sorts of unlikely countries have gone smoke free and it has also held up well. So investing tens of thousands in a filtration system for smoke filtration would ultimately a waste of cash for the long term. I would look into renting one if you just got to have one, but it is not a good long term investment if you want to play smart on what is happening.
Gotta get to work.
Peace and prosperity,
SFS
More Chuck-E-Cheese nonsense: discrimination “makes a lot of sense” as it favors my biases. No one is forcing a restaurant to serve to minors as you imply.
Only 25 percent of St. Louis City residents favor a smoking ban imposed by the government in bars like the Royale. On the state level, support only runs a little stronger, 27.5 percent. I think we can stop such a smoking ban in both St. Louis and Missouri forever if enough folks are willing to fight. But I won’t fight Steve Patterson’s campaign to educate business owners on their options.
.
On filtration, a friend of mine is manager at Herbie’s Vintage 72. She has never smoked and dislikes cigarette smoke. She tell me that when she leaves Herbies after 8 hours her hair does not smell like smoke. But when she goes to other venues with the same amount of smoking but no filtration, she ends up reeking and leaving early.
Those interested in the public smoking issue should attend the big debate in the Loop coming up soon.
http://keepstlouisfree.blogspot.com/2009/03/federalist-society-st-louis-smoking-ban.html
The publicity garnered from the smoke free Royale did not hit for about 60 days after the new rule went into place. The response was pure word of mouth, and didn’t hit the public airwaves or significant publication for at least six weeks and it still was relatively small for quite a while longer than that. Most of the bigger media pieces of publicity came out three months and out. I didn’t even formally market the smoke free until about a month ago when my sister finally made me make a sign for the outdoor street sandwich board promoting smokee free indoors. No ads were ever placed promoting smoke free.
The smoke-free publicity for the Royale started before the Royale went smoke-free!
http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/political-fix/political-fix/2008/03/royale-treatment-political-watering-hole-goes-smoke-free/
Mayor Slay posted a video about Steven Smith’s decision to make the Royale smoke-free in mid April 2008:
http://keepstlouisfree.blogspot.com/2008/04/royale-bans-smoking.html
Negligible. Political fix and mayor blog posts. Real pub- print or airwaves. Bigger pub started mid summer for slower moving larger media arms.
Either way its gonna happen. To any business I would recommend investing in outdoor smoking areas over soon to be outdated/unnecessary filtration systems, unless you really got to do it just get a rental. If you can rent one of those filter things make sure you can get one with a low penalty to get out of the lease. Just my advice. But at this point, I will sit back and watch.
Have fun guys.
SFS
Either way what is going to happen? Why would you think that? St Louis City isn’t going to do it unless the county does it. At last count it was 7 – 2 against a ban. Its several years away from elections that would change that. St Charles just last year refused to even look at the issue. The only hope for a ban would be statewide and there is a less of a chance of that happening than in the metro area. Even then, 2012 would be the next logical time for a ban to go to a statewide vote. I think for the next several years its going to be up to the free market to decide this issue. It seems to be doing a very good job with about 40% of the St Louis City restaurants smoke-free and a significant percentage limit it the bar.
Steve, let me ask you a question. Why would you want to destroy the niche you have filled? There is no doubt a market for smoke-free establishments. One of the variations that sets your restaurant/bar aside from others is that your smoke-free. Your claim (I have no reason to doubt you) is that going smoke-free has increased your business. If a ban would happen, then all would be smoke-free and you would lose your competitive advantage.
First, there is nothing in the Bill of Rights, guaranteeing smoke-free air either. So shoot that agrument down,,A-N-D there is something in the Bill of Rights guaranteeing EVERYONE (this includes smokers and owners) the right to assemble…and the Supreme Court has upheld the right to demonstrate,, which includes the right to demonstrate that those assembled do not believe all this secondhand smoke nonsense. The bottom line is economy or no economy, smoking bans take the decision to believe or not to believe all these anti-smoking crappy studies out of the hands of business owners.
Steve,, The Royal is located very near St. Louis University School of Medicine campus which is home to Tobacco-free Missouri…how many of your regulars are students there?? and are more staging support for their adjenda, than actually supporting smoke free because it’s their honest preference.
Lastly,,the metro region already has lots of smoking bans,,as everyone here has posted and agreed. ( But they are owner enforced smoking bans…not jurisdictionally enforced… BUT REALLY WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE? ) I can’t believe all these proponents of smoke-free air will spend hours sitting on their computers typing in complaints about smoke,in these threads, when in five minutes,, they could visit http://www.breatheeasymo.org/regions.asp?type=directory
and they have all the smoking bans everyone could ever want or need.
So I ask…” do you support banning smoking in my home?…. what if I throw a party and allow smoking…do any of you oppose that? and if not, WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT AND A BAR OWNER DOING THE SAME THING? “
Steve, although initially compliance in California following their bar ban was very high,, more recent surveys reveal about 54% of CA bars now violate the ban. In fact, back in the early 2000’s I was watching Dave Attel’s “Insomniac” show on the Comedy Channel, and he was in a San Francisco bar and people were smoking…..right there on TV! FYI CA banned bar smoking Jan 1 1998.
Did you know it was illegal to possess tobacco or smoke it anywhere in Kansas until 1927? Yes bans will come and go,, but like most blue laws,,soooner or later they get repealed.
Change is hard, we all resist it- some of us evn fight it. Which is anothr reason why it would b easier for all of the rest/bars to get on the program togethr. Its so much easier to b negative and feel wronged, but this isn’t just about people’s feelings- its about health care too. Its not about being smug, (although i think it’s funny how close smug and smog are)I don’t drive a hybrid(OMG- those chumps tryin to b trendy and clean)My car is 10yrs old,just b/c ur broke doesn’t mean u hav to b dirty,sick or stinky. I hav talkd to several business owners and the filtration systems are to costly, and don’t work that well. I used to live above Vangogh’s martini bar, which had an awesome filtration system- it didn’t seem that smokey in the bar b/c it filtered right up into my apartment. I lived there for 7yrs, then this bar came along, and their kitchen was right under my bedrm- it was awesome everyday heating up the same grease for the fryers- someone who house/petset for me described it as the frozen fishstick fryer scent, followed up with all the cig smoke u could handle. I asked them to put in an exhst fan, evn a fan in the window would hav helped- they said there was one over the stove. So i moved, been here for yrs, hav the best landlord evr. But i do live near Mangia-lov the food, get it to go- but u hav to go to the stinkin bar to get the food- and evn callin ahead- u still wait in the smoke. Just went by yesterday as they r now servin brunch till 4 on sun- it was so smokey evn in the door way b4 u get in, stale smoke frm the busy weeknd(so i left). I ‘m glad they are busy, they for sure hav two diff crowds bar/food- but Mangia translates to U EAT not U Smoke, it is not after all the houska place where they are spec. there to smoke fragrant aromatics etc. I will say, i did talk to the owner- who seemd very sympathetic to the issue, was aware that IT IS an issue, and was struggling with it, seemd like a smart buss. guy with a tru dilema . Mentiond something about some basement area they were considering as a non smoking area. I say put the cewl smokers in the basement with the box fan out the back door- or better yet for Dave K. who cant tell the difference anyway, yes stay home and smoke- hav a party, choke- whatevr- not the experience i want to share when i am paying for food-a dining experience-atmosphere.
The manager at Herbies told me that at the end of the day her hair doesn’t smell like smoke. That tells me the air filtration there is pretty effective.
did she tell ya how much it costs? i just don’t see it makin financial sense for these older places like Mangia. I too would go more often to chimi’s(luv patio), So. City Diner(which is where i ended up after ditchin mangia- It was 70*, thought theyd hav patio opn- But they didn’t)and mokabee’s- grt strwbrry lmnade- but too smokey. I would lov it , if they all had filters- but evn better= would be smokin ban. I just don’t get the benefits- i mean that literally, in fact i get the negatives frm it(2nd hand/smell, etc)I know i am bias but- What is good about smoking?Evn the smokers, hackin up a lung next to me(very appealing while eating)would surely recognize- ITS NOT GOOD. Just frm common sense, no paid off data/reports/studies- one way or the othr- it isn’t a healthy thing. I hav plenty of struggling artist/musician/waiter/bartender frnds who are smokers(coughing), and are continually breathing in this air- and guess what, no health insurance–AWESOME. So mayb a place like Herblies did a good job, nevr been there=cigars, but sounds like it made sense to incorporate filters into their business plan, perhaps they came along after some of these othr hole in the wall/neighborhood style places.They are the only place being sited as not that bad, unless u trust/value the taste and opinions of the smoker whose senses and palette are dulled/dimmed (to say the least). I am pretty sure if ur managing/bartending at a place that allows smoking- ur judgement becomes impaired. The ol factory nerve in the back of ur nose/throat cancels out strong notes after 3 or more. Its a built in safety our bodies hav to keep our systems in check when we don’t hav enough sense to properly filter whats coming in.
tonyf wrote, “But i do live near Mangia-lov the food, get it to go- but u hav to go to the stinkin bar to get the food- and evn callin ahead- u still wait in the smoke.” – = –
Antismokers regularly defend bans by saying that it’s no big deal for smokers to “just step outside for a few minutes” to smoke. So I have a hard time understanding why someone so clearly worried about smoke as tonyf doesn’t “just step outside for a few minutes” to avoid it rather than waiting in “the stinkin bar.” – = –
Sure, it can be argued “Why should tony be the one to go outside?” but the point here is that it obviously *IS* a “big deal” to ask someone to do that… and yet it’s always claimed that it’s *NOT* a “big deal” when the people being thrown outside are the smokers. – = –
Michael J. McFadden,
Author of “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains”
toni f, Herbie’s bought their three filters but Marth Brothers leases filters for $5 a day.
toni f
This is the problem with bans in the first place. Your trying to make decisions for somebody that knows their business better than you or me. Does it make sense to pay for filtration – maybe it does. If it keeps a percentage of their non-smoking customers coming in and lets them keep their smoking customers – seems to me that is worth a lot. Even if they bought the machine which run around $3000, that is not a lot for a business.
There are some places that just cater to smokers. You may like the food and not like the smoke, but if their still in business you have to respect that they know what they are doing.
tony p
I’m all for filters-anything that will help(most helpful=smoke@home)I haven’t checked recently on actual costs of a good quality filter or three(and grt if u can rent the same )for rest/bar. As i am not in that industry, but agree $3000-$5,500 isn’t unreasonable. A good frnd who is in that industry(a non-smkr, who allows smoking)who i consider to b very detail orintd, tells me the filters r very costly, and for the amount of smoke they actually combat- not that effective. If they r really so cheap and effective, why don’t more of these places have them? I think of my vacuum filter and the replacemnt cost on those $15/$30, lotsa dust dander and i don’t replace them that often, If it didn’t keep the vacuum frm functioning properly/suction, i’m not sure how often i’d replace it. But smoke is very pervasive and noticeable, and part of eating out is the experience. I think ban’s are enacted to address offensive behavoirs, a modern adjustment to antiquated laws.
I don’t think they are catering to smokers per say, but rathr that is just the way it was. It took along time for peopl to realiz/admit the harmful effects of smoking, and Mo. is ranked as 2nd most frndly state to smokers, lowest tax etc. Largely i believe b/c this city in general has an old school attitude about most issues, and fights not only progress but change of any kind. I’m frm St. Louis, but just hav different ideas about what is worthy of respect. I once saw on the local news here, where peopl were actually crying about the Tamm Ave. overpass being brought down- SO A NEW SAFER bridge could go up. Peopl gathrd and watched the demo-and were soo upset, just one more example of resisting change, evn if its for the common good. I don’t think we should operate on such fear, and insist it’s respect. When u say things like “why would u want 2 destroy ur non-smoking bar niche”, and if everyone else goes non smoking, u’ll lose all ur customers…It’s ridiculous, u lose customrs by not staying in tune with what they value- with what is current(not trendy- but normal/average). I think this is part of the reason why so many peopl leave St.louis.
Micheal J-
I’m not really evn suggesting u step outside for a puff, i think u should smoke in ur home, or in ur car with the windows up- u wanna smoke u breathe it/own it, i don’t want it- i choose not to smoke and don’t want to breathe ur’s. as far as me stepping outside- I ALREADY AM, i’m ordering my food TO GO! it’s the way mangia and many othr places hav it set up- pick up is AT THE BAR area. Mangia has one side mostly club/bar, one side rest- i’m going for the food(not IN the bar). I know clubs here are all smoke, but i’m going to the rest. I don’t go to Mc Donalds and complain bout how greasy the fries r- i get it, but if i’m getting food(esp. a to go order)I shouldn’t smell like i’ve been at the bar for 2 days.
As far as ur comment about the smoker always being put out(should b put out-pun intended)The smoker would be put out b/c he would b committing the offensive action. but no worries thats not how it is here- safe in st.louis- friendly. Ur book does sound kind of interesting, may check it out(although for me non smoking isn’t just a mindset, it also how the body responds- i take a medication ironically enuf that is n conflict w cigs/used sometimes for smoking cessation, so i literally feel sick, vomit, headache the whole bit frm small amouts of smoke. I have to take the med. but peopl choose to smoke. Losing both parents to this luxury habit does make me “clearly worried about smoke”
tony p
I’m all for filters-anything that will help(most helpful=smoke@home)I haven’t checked recently on actual costs of a good quality filter or three(and grt if u can rent the same )for rest/bar. As i am not in that industry, but agree $3000-$5,500 isn’t unreasonable. A good frnd who is in that industry(a non-smkr, who allows smoking)who i consider to b very detail orintd, tells me the filters r very costly, and for the amount of smoke they actually combat- not that effective. If they r really so cheap and effective, why don’t more of these places have them? I think of my vacuum filter and the replacemnt cost on those $15/$30, lotsa dust dander and i don’t replace them that often, If it didn’t keep the vacuum frm functioning properly/suction, i’m not sure how often i’d replace it. But smoke is very pervasive and noticeable, and part of eating out is the experience. I think ban’s are enacted to address offensive behavoirs, a modern adjustment to antiquated laws.
I don’t think they are catering to smokers per say, but rathr that is just the way it was. It took along time for peopl to realiz/admit the harmful effects of smoking, and Mo. is ranked as 2nd most frndly state to smokers, lowest tax etc. Largely i believe b/c this city in general has an old school attitude about most issues, and fights not only progress but change of any kind. I’m frm St. Louis, but just hav different ideas about what is worthy of respect. I once saw on the local news here, where peopl were actually crying about the Tamm Ave. overpass being brought down- SO A NEW SAFER bridge could go up. Peopl gathrd and watched the demo-and were soo upset, just one more example of resisting change, evn if its for the common good. I don’t think we should operate on such fear, and insist it’s respect. When u say things like “why would u want 2 destroy ur non-smoking bar niche”, and if everyone else goes non smoking, u’ll lose all ur customers…It’s ridiculous, u lose customrs by not staying in tune with what they value- with what is current(not trendy- but normal/average). I think this is part of the reason why so many peopl leave St.louis.
Micheal J-
I’m not really evn suggesting u step outside for a puff, i think u should smoke in ur home, or in ur car with the windows up- u wanna smoke u breathe it/own it, i don’t want it- i choose not to smoke and don’t want to breathe ur’s. as far as me stepping outside- I ALREADY AM, i’m ordering my food TO GO! it’s the way mangia and many othr places hav it set up- pick up is AT THE BAR area. Mangia has one side mostly club/bar, one side rest- i’m going for the food(not IN the bar). I know clubs here are all smoke, but i’m going to the rest. I don’t go to Mc Donalds and complain bout how greasy the fries r- i get it, but if i’m getting food(esp. a to go order)I shouldn’t smell like i’ve been at the bar for 2 days.
As far as ur comment about the smoker always being put out(should b put out-pun intended)The smoker would be put out b/c he would b committing the offensive action. but no worries thats not how it is here- safe in st.louis- friendly. {Ur book does sound kind of interesting, may check it out(although for me non smoking isn’t just a mindset, it also how the body responds- i take a medication ironically enuf that is n conflict w cigs/used sometimes for smoking cessation, so i literally feel sick, vomit, headache the whole bit frm small amouts of smoke. I have to take the med. but peopl choose to smoke. Losing both parents to this luxury habit does make me “clearly worried about smoke”}
I love that you said: “Their place, their right” when discussing a privately owned restaurant's “right” to disallow smoking in their establishments. Funny, why don't you also apply that to places that would allow smokers to smoke? As you know, no one is forcing you or other non-smokers to eat anywhere. But soon the LAW will force smokers to eat elsewhere if they want to enjoy a smoke after dinner. Don't be a bore. Eat at non-smoking venues and enjoy it without preaching. I only wish that I could run and walk outside and not have to breathe in the fumes from your carbon monoxide producing vehicle. Or have you gone vehicle free to only ride bicycles to cafes these days? How much CO-2 do you think we consume daily in traffic? How much do vehicle emissons contribute to disease? And how much oil does a gas guzzler use? And how much oil does it take to make tires even for bicycles? Oh, the hypocrisy does not end–does it? LOL….