DC Council Passes Smoking Ban

[DonRocks]

Sale of cigars and/or humidor rental. That might do it.

Hrm. Well, it seems like they're defining "Cigar Bar" sufficiently broadly to cover hookah bars - but 10% of revenues? I could see that for places that offer smoking but not drinking, or maybe smoking and drinking but not food, but I don't see how any establishment with a substantial menu or extensive wine list would make the cut.

They can offer one "luxury cigar" for a million dollars and sell it to the owner's daughter.

[DCMark]

Sale of cigars and/or humidor rental. That might do it.

Hrm. Well, it seems like they're defining "Cigar Bar" sufficiently broadly to cover hookah bars - but 10% of revenues? I could see that for places that offer smoking but not drinking, or maybe smoking and drinking but not food, but I don't see how any establishment with a substantial menu or extensive wine list would make the cut.

I specifically wrote to Jack Evans about Les Halles and BdC. But the 10% number is ridiculously high. They need to realize many cigar smokers patronize these restaurants since they are cigar friendly, however we bring our own. The damage to these places if they cannot allow cigar smoking will be more than 10% since they will lose much more than cigar sales, they will lose customers entirely. I will admit I may choose a restaurant partly because it is cigar friendly. If cigar smoking is banned entirely I would not patronize those places as much.

Edited December 7, 2005 by DCMark

[Jacques Gastreaux]

They can offer one "luxury cigar" for a million dollars and sell it to the owner's daughter.

Consider the sales tax bill on that luxury cigar.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

I specifically wrote to Jack Evans about Les Halles and BdC.  But the 10% number is ridiculously high.  They need to realize many cigar smokers patronize these restaurants since they are cigar friendly, however we bring our own.  The damage to these places if they cannot allow cigar smoking will be more than 10% since they will lose much more than cigar sales, the will customers entirely.  I will admit I may choose a restaurant partly because it is cigar friendly.  If cigar smoking is banned entirely I would not patronize those places as much.

Let's face it: no one goes to Shelley's for the food. The only reason to go there is to smoke a cigar (usually purchased at Draper's) and have a cocktail or two while doing so. If they banned cigars at Shelley's there would be no reason to go there (although the chicken wings allegedy are the best in town).

Edited December 7, 2005 by Jacques Gastreaux

[Pete]

They can offer one "luxury cigar" for a million dollars and sell it to the owner's daughter.

I have this vision of Les Halles selling Swisher Sweets for $20 and throwing in a Steak Frites for free.

[Capital Icebox]

I have this vision of Les Halles selling Swisher Sweets for $20 and throwing in a Steak Frites for free. 

Does Les Halles in NYC not allow cigars? I'm curious.

[Pool Boy]

Personally, I am very glad to see this development in general as it means all restaurants will eventually be smoke free. However, I personally would not have a problem with there being a completely separately ventilated area of a given establishment where smokers could dine. Not sure what to say about those who would be required to work those sections as their job, but as long as I could dine smoke fre I would be happy. There's almost nothing worse than just starting in to a meal when the table next to you (assuming your non-smoking section table is right near a smoking section table) has some people light up as they are basically done their meal. That is an inherent problem with co-mingled-ventilation non-smoking and smoking sections -- every table is on a different dining schedule of their meal and those that smoke want to light up whenever they want to if in a smoking section.

That said, I am still glad this is happening.

And to whoever said that bit about child-free sections...I AM ALL FOR THAT!

[jparrott]

I think few folks would quibble with not lighting up at table. But some bar areas are set off enough that there's no "affecting the tables" reason for disallowing smoking. I'm thinking about the bars at Zaytinya, Equinox, Vidalia, Les Halles, Notti Bianche, etc.

[jparrott]

Oh, and the oyster-bar area at Old Ebbitt (the bar right by the shuckers).

[Jacques Gastreaux]

There are a few places that I and others patronize for the sole reason that cigars can be smoked there. With this ban, I doubt that I will patronize them any more. I thought the Schwartz amendment was a reasonable compromise: Ban smoking in all establishments that don't have approved ventilation.

[porcupine]

And to whoever said that bit about child-free sections...I AM ALL FOR THAT!

A real conversation, held more than once at several different restaurants:

Host/ess: Would you like smoking or non-smoking?

Me: No-smoking, please. And do you happen to have a no-children section? [winking]

Host/ess: [knowing smile/roll of eyes/stiffled giggle]

[DonRocks]

I thought the Schwartz amendment was a reasonable compromise:  Ban smoking in all establishments that don't have approved ventilation.

Rest assured the DC Council is monitoring this thread.

Maybe you should state your case in more detail?

[Barbara]

Rest assured the DC Council is monitoring this thread.

Maybe you should state your case in more detail?

I don't believe they actually CARE what non-District residents (read: non-voters) actually think. Just sayin'

[DonRocks]

I don't believe they actually CARE what non-District residents (read: non-voters) actually think.  Just sayin'

Yes, they do (click), and there are a lot of people here from DC-proper as well.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

Rest assured the DC Council is monitoring this thread.

Maybe you should state your case in more detail?

It is quite apparent that those who voted against the Schwartz compromise have not visited an establishment that permits cigar smoking but has adequate ventilation installed. I invite anyone who cares to to join me for a cigar at the bar at Oceanaire. I guarantee you that neither the person sitting at the bar next to you nor any of the restaurant staff will be the slightest bit put out by having a smoker sitting next to them. I don't know what it would be like in the eating area, but the bar area has more than adequate ventilation. To me, Oceanaire is the gold standard for adequate ventilation. If it works that well for cigar smoke, I'll bet it works for cigarettes as well. The city council has been drinking the cool aide that the anti-smoking special interest has been serving them.

The ventilation at Shelley's Back Room is comparable to that at Oceanaire.

Edited December 8, 2005 by Jacques Gastreaux

[DaveBVI]

They can offer one "luxury cigar" for a million dollars and sell it to the owner's daughter.

Sorry rocks, couldn't resist, hehehe, you said cigar, million dollars,and owner's daughter, hehehe

But seriously, I think 10% is ludicrous. I I doubt shelly's sells any cigars at lunch, but I'll bet they sell 50 sandwiches, so that already means they have to sell about 8 EXTRA cigars per night...anyway, my nickname wasn't disgruntled dave without reasons...

D

[BookGuy]

I prefer smoke-free myself. I do note that there is a distinct pleasure in walking into a restaurant and not having to say "non-smoking, please." I have been to California and note that the smoke-free rule is enforced but it only apples to indoor parts of restaurant. Last year, along the beach in Venice, it was a lovely day and we stopped off at a cafe for a beer and snacks and decided to sit outside and enjoy the weather. There were a lot of smokers out there. It is passing strange that the smokers are the only ones who can "enjoy" the fresh air.

[DCMark]

It is passing strange that the smokers are the only ones who can "enjoy" the fresh air.

Don't worry, a ban on outdoor smoking, smoking at home, smoking on a public road, etc is not far away.

[ol_ironstomach]

I've always thought that requirements intended to improve restaurant air quality should be more direct...why specify a blanket ban, if what you *really* want is to ensure good air for everybody other than the smokers? Especially when the ventilation technology to achieve that already exists?

But what exactly is "good air"? Is it totally smoke-free? Personally, I'm rather sensitive to cigar and cigarette smoke, and can't stand environments which are heavy in them. But shisha and pipe smoke bother me far less. What about...candles? I'm not talking about scented candles, but the faint aroma of beeswax and paraffin. What about the smoldering oak sprigs at Alinea, or the other forms of smoke used in avant-garde cuisine?

I haven't read the actual text of the Schwartz amendment, but it sounds like it's closer to the best compromise available.

[ol_ironstomach]

Don't worry, a ban on outdoor smoking, smoking at home, smoking on a public road, etc is not far away.

Actually, I'd be satisfied if you cigarette smokers would just put your butts out properly and stop littering the ground with them. It's really something else to walk along a park road in a pine forest out west during a high-fire-danger drought, and see the thousands and thousands of cigarette filters accumulating along the road edge.

[Principia]

I guarantee you that neither the person sitting at the bar next to you nor any of the restaurant staff will be the slightest bit put out by having a smoker sitting next to them.

You've got one person (and her +1) here who has tried to sit at the Oceanaire's bar in the faint vicinity of two cigar smokers and a passel of cigarette smokers (six seats away) and found she had to move to the seats right in front of the door to get away from the smoke and smell. No offense, Jacques, but if you're the one smoking the cigar that's making the smoke, you're hardly in a position to be able to tell other people what should or shouldn't be bothering their noses or lungs. To be fair, short of putting the smoking section under a chemical lab's hood ventilator or in a sealed room, I don't see how any restaurant would be able to guarantee that it's going to keep smoke completely away from its nonsmoking patrons or employees.

Think of it this way: we've all seen and heard countless anecdotes about the entitlerati, or even witnessed episodes ourselves. Would you want to be the manager of one of these places with the ventilation systems and have to put up with that bunch? It's one thing now for customers to complain about smoke when you can just move them to a different table. Can you imagine what might go on when people are given the notion that not having to breathe nearby smoke is a right protected by law? I can just hear someone screeching about how they don't care that you have one of those fancy systems, that they can still smell the smoke and you're obviously doing something wrong and they're going to sic the Health Department/Beverage Control Board/etc. on you.

Or even worse, would you want to have to shut down your restaurant or flip-flop on your smoking policy every time there was the slightest problem with one of these systems? The ventilator option would seem to be setting establishments up to fail.

Edited December 8, 2005 by Principia

[Capital Icebox]

Here is the text of the bill.  A cigar bar has to have 10% or more of its revenue from the sale of cigars in order to qualify.  I doubt Shelley's could meet that requirement, but I don't know.

I am told Shelley's meets that requirement, and will be exempt from the current bill. Smoke shops and cigar bars should be fine under the current legislation. Hookah bars are an open question for now.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

I am told Shelley's meets that requirement, and will be exempt from the current bill.  Smoke shops and cigar bars should be fine under the current legislation.  Hookah bars are an open question for now.

I don't know. DaveBVI used to work there and he seems skeptical. Most of the cigars that get comsumed there are brought from the outside.

[DaveBVI]

I don't know.  DaveBVI used to work there and he seems skeptical.  Most of the cigars that get comsumed there are brought from the outside.

Oops, never worked there, just drink and smoke there. I have to think of shellys as the gold standard of cigar bars, good food, good drink, good technology, and I think it would be tough to meet the 10 % rule. I'd have to guess it's about 50%50%, Maybe their storage units put them over the top, but to think that for every 10-15 beers and sandwiches they sell, they must sell one cigar is a little hefty, and it is the most mentioned cigar bar in town. It's almost like saying, if they do a good job selling food, you can't smoke. Let's punish the good. That's all I'm saying. So if they sell one shot of Louis XIII, they have to sell a whole box of cigars...sure, it all balances out in the end, but I haven't seen any numbers showing that 10 is realistic. And I feel Hookah bars would be done for, or at least have to stop their side business. Do some real study before you slap an arbitrary number on a commodity. rant over. 12-1 means you've won, but please be realistic.

[dirtymartini]

Hey all you DC council members reading this thread, I'm gonna be dining in VA with my tax dollars when this ban takes effect. And I'm not alone.

Edited December 9, 2005 by dirtymartini

[qwertyy]

Hey all you DC council members reading this thread, I'm gonna be dining in VA with my tax dollars when this ban takes effect. And I'm not alone.

And I'm going to be dining and drinking a lot more often in the district when this ban takes effect. And I'm not alone.

Everybody wins!

[JLK]

And I'm going to be dining and drinking a lot more often in the district when this ban takes effect. And I'm not alone.

Everybody wins!

Ditto.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

And I'm going to be dining and drinking a lot more often in the district when this ban takes effect. And I'm not alone.

Everybody wins!

I doubt that the ban will imact which jurisdictions I spend most of my dining $ in. I just won't have any reason to go to certain places, such as Shelley's, any more.

Edited December 9, 2005 by Jacques Gastreaux

[Waitman]

And I'm going to be dining and drinking a lot more often in the district when this ban takes effect. And I'm not alone.

Everybody wins!

'less I want a beer and a smoke at my local.

[qwertyy]

'less I want a beer and a smoke at my local.

Right. I guess I meant to say *I* win. Po-tay-to/Po-tah-to.

[Roger Troutman]

I enjoy sitting at a bar and chain smoking, while drinking. And when smoking is banned in these places, will I miss it? Probably. But I'll get over it, and so will just about everybody else. Hell, I'll probably even quit smoking. The ban IS coming, like it or not.

Edited December 9, 2005 by Roger Troutman

[Principia]

I enjoy sitting at a bar and chain smoking, while drinking. And when smoking is banned in these places, will I miss it? Probably. But I'll get over it, and so will just about everybody else. Hell, I'll probably even quit smoking. The ban IS coming, like it or not.

I suspect that places with outdoor bars (a la the back porch on the Fairfax Coastal Flats) will start to do mad business after the ban goes into effect.

[hillvalley]

Bring it on. Despite my love of an occasional smoke, I can't wait.

I spent 3 hours at a coffee house today. I had no idea anyone there was smoking until I left and realized that I reak. I'm tired of smelling of other people's smoke.

I promise to spend the money I save on dry cleaning and extra shampoo in DC restaurant or bar.

[Waitman]

I think it's unfortunate that an intolerant majority has to have their way in every single bar and restaurant in the city. Just leave us a couple of places per zip code and then you won't have to deal with us and you can feel superior as you stride past saying "not here, that's a smoker's bar."

Went out last night to Dino's. Didn't smoke. Had a decent meal. Had a good time.

Went out after to Aroma, 4P's and Frannie's. Smoked. Everyone was smoking. We all had a good time, there, too. Live and let live is a fine way to go.

[JLK]

Live and let live IS a great philosophy for some aspects of life. IMO, smoke is not one of them.

Personally, I have asthma and smoke is a trigger which could put me out of commission. I hate bringing it up, though, so when I'm selective about smoky spots I speak about practical concerns like smelly hair, disgusting-smelling clothes and the way I just feel cloudy the next day. Aroma is one of my favorite spots because I think the space is cool, the music is often fun to listen to and I have a friend who works there, but it's gotten to the point that I just can't go there and that makes me sad.

IMO (again, that phrase), smoking is a habit or a hobby, not a right. If more businesses would be "brave" and choose to go non-smoking, I'd surely support them and smokers could have their fun at the other places, but it ain't gonna happen so I gladly support the ban.

[Pool Boy]

Anyone read the WP article this week about, what was it, the bar at the Mayflower going smoke free 7 months before the law goes in to effect?

[CrescentFresh]

Anyone read the WP article this week about, what was it, the bar at the Mayflower going smoke free 7 months before the law goes in to effect?

I did. I remember in particular the person who said he/she wouldn't be going back there ever again. Yeah, right. I give him/her ten minutes and they'll be ordering another drink.

[Josh Radigan]

and now Philadelphia gets the ban on smoking. City Council voted last night to ban in Philly, with of cousre the special exepmtions for outdoor and certain nightclubs. Should start in 2007.

[mame11]

Live and let live IS a great philosophy for some aspects of life. IMO, smoke is not one of them.

IMO (again, that phrase), smoking is a habit or a hobby, not a right. If more businesses would be "brave" and choose to go non-smoking, I'd surely support them and smokers could have their fun at the other places, but it ain't gonna happen so I gladly support the ban.

Wow. I am all in favor of smoking restrictions. But to say that smoking is "fun" shows an ignorance that is astounding. I don't know anybody who has smoked or does smoke who think that it is fun. Some people will say that they like it because they have come to accept the addiction.

Studies have shown, over and over, that something about tobacco makes it more addictive than other substances. Most people who smoke in America start when they are young & dumb, or at least feel invincible.

I am sorry you have asthma. I am actually allergic to tobacco the crop and had problems while in law school in a city so nice they named two cigarette brands after it (Winston & Salem). But your opinion is arrogant.

And ignorant as for most smokers smoking is an addiction the same way that heroin and cocaine are addictive. Ironically, studies indicate that mary jane is not addictive in the same way, that the smoking of mary jane is a hobby and habit. But cigarettes are not a habitual, they are an addiction.

The one thing I do think about the smoking ban is that it will make it less attractive for the young and invincible to start the habit.

[Banco]

For heaven's sake learn some manners.

[Al Dente]

the smoking of mary jane is a hobby

Anyone know where I can find a hobby supply shop anywhere around town?

[mdt]

Wow. I am all in favor of smoking restrictions. But to say that smoking is "fun" shows an ignorance that is astounding. I don't know anybody who has smoked or does smoke who think that it is fun. Some people will say that they like it because they have come to accept the addiction.

Really? Ever talk to a cigar smoker? I enjoy a good cigar every once in a while and think its fun to smoke one. And before you go off on my being addicted I don't think 6 a year qualifies.

[Keithstg]

'less I want a beer and a smoke at my local.

There are always private clubs, which are exempt from the ban.

[crackers]

But to say that smoking is "fun" shows an ignorance that is astounding. I don't know anybody who has smoked or does smoke who think that it is fun.

I do, so now you know one But I'm a big ban fan.

[Al Dente]

I do, so now you know one

Me too. I enjoy the hell out of smoking a cig. But I'm all for the ban.

[The Hersch]

I also loved smoking cigarettes, although I wouldn't refer to the enjoyment of smoking as "fun" (and I don't think that's what JLK meant back on Dec. 9th, 2005 anyway). If it weren't for the fact that the buggers will kill you, I'd still be smoking and enjoying it. But even before I quit (six years ago next month), I preferred non-smoking restaurants, and was in favor of a ban.

[mame11]

I guess my response was to the use of the word "fun" as an activity. Technically, I know people who can smoke one while drinking and that would be something "fun" to do. However, have you ever looked at the people who huddle outside buildings smoking? Really, is that fun?

Cigars and cigarettes are two totally different nicotine delivery systems. In fact, cigars probably classify both as fun and a hobby.

Again, I think the smoking ban is a good thing. Not only do I look forward to not smelling like an ashtray after an evening out, I do think the activity will be less attractive to young people. Study after study has established that there is something too the fact that people who begin smoking before their 18th birthday are more likely to become addicted.

And if the manners comment was to me, I am sorry if my response offended someone BUT I feel for smokers. Both of my grandparents were smokers, it killed my Grandfather and it was an albatros to my Grandmother. I don't think either of them thought "Hey, this fun activity may one day kill me." However, I know the activity was no longer fun for my grandmother after my grandfather died. It was just that an albatros...

Didn't notice the date on the original post either.

[Woodleygrrl]

I vote for smoking being real real real fun. Love the hell out of it.

I wonder if we are going to see more outside additions to places because of the ban. That would be a good thing in my opinion

[DonRocks]

Here's my opinion.

[mame11]

Okay, I am sitting here thinking about my viscerol reaction to the concept of smoking as fun. I think I am wrong. Smoking can be fun just like eating good food, sex, drinking alcohol and other activities that impact endorphins and brain chemistry.

I think the problem is that smoking is nasty-- it smells really bad and allegedly kills people. I also think if there was no way to start smoking until you were a grown adult, nobody would smoke at least not American cigarettes...

So, is smoking fun... probably if you don't think about the addictive and health issues. I also KNOW it is fun for my friends who can smoke on occassion, socially while drinking.

But is it "fun" in the sense of the word "fun" probably not.