Posted on 03/11/2005 5:41:44 AM PST by SheLion
HELENA -- A dispute over this city's tough smoking ban is back before a district judge after a lengthy delay brought on by a separate lawsuit before the state Supreme Court.
An attorney for a casino asked Judge Thomas Honzel on Wednesday to rule the city's smoking ban unenforceable because those cited for violating it cannot seek a jury trial.
Tom Budwitz, who represents the Montana Nugget Casino and its manager, Greg Shaw, argued that his clients had a right to a jury of their peers.
But Helena City Attorney David Nielson countered that nothing explicitly allows for a jury trial on such an infraction.
The dispute centers on the smoking ban that voters approved in 2002. It prohibits smoking in all public buildings, including bars and casinos.
At issue is whether people accused of a municipal infraction, such as violating the smoking ban, are entitled to a jury trial. In December 2002, City Judge Myron Pitch ruled the ban was unenforceable because it did not allow for a jury trial.
The city appealed, but the case was put on hold while another feud over the ordinance was heard before the state Supreme Court.
That case was brought by supporters of the ban. They sued after state lawmakers, responding to the city's ordinance, passed a bill that would exempt all businesses with gambling machines from any local laws stricter than the state's indoor-air laws.
The court, in a 5-2 decision in December, said the bill was unenforceable, clearing the way for the city's appeal on the jury question to move forward.
The casino and Straw each were ticketed several times in the fall of 2002 for allowing smoking in the casino and failing to post no-smoking signs.
Is this really what the non-smoking want for their fellow citizens? To cripple their business's just because they do not smoke or like smoking?
Most restaurants and bars today can safely accommodate smokers and non-smokers with the smoke eaters and separate sections.
Please. Think about it the next time you go to vote yes for a smoking ban. The place that you love to go to for a great meal today might not be there a year from now because of a smoking ban. Do you really want this?
NYC's Bar Business: Up In Smoke?
As a manager of a Manhattan bar, I can easily point out the dramatic drop in business which will occur when the ban commences. Not only is my bar going to lose business, but how about the extra security that I'm going to be forced to hire to control people outside of my establishment when they go outside to smoke? Or what about the noise complaints I'll receive due to drunken smokers chatting outside at 3 a.m.?
Smoking Bans Burn Business (In Delaware)
Dan McAvaney, owner of McAvaney's Pub on Kirkwood Highway, said small bar owners have no choice but to fight.
"Another couple of months of this," he said pointing to a nearly empty bar on a Thursday night, "and we go out of business."
Dr Proctor said passive smoking could cause problems for asthmatics and there were people who did not want to be exposed to cigarette smoke but there was no scientific basis for a ban in public.
click here
Tempe (Arizona) bar revenue down 20 percent after smoking ban
The recently reported sales for August show that bars suffered a 20.4 percent decline and July's collections were off 33.2 percent.
article here
Restaurants Fighting Proposed Smoking Ordinance (Albuquerque, N.M.)
22 October 2002
About 100 bar and restaurant owners are opposing a measure that would ban smoking in bars and all sections of restaurants in Albuquerque. The owners gathered yesterday at an Albuquerque nightclub, vowing to fight the proposal.
The Arizona Republic Aug. 13, 2002
Bar owners say they continue to be hit hard, with sales down 20 percent to 40 percent since Tempe went smoke-free.
"We don't get any new customers saying, 'We're thrilled because there's no smoking,' " said Michael Cuneo, owner of Ball Park Pub.
Non-smoker Armando Kiyama, 29, a Tempe artist, said he is ambivalent about the ban."I'm glad I don't go home and smell like smoke anymore," he said, adding, "I don't think that it's right for businesses to have their choice taken away from them in their own facilities."
Smoking Ban Puts Restaurant Profits Up In Smoke/They Finally Admit It!
Restaurant owners said that they've lived with these new regulations for three months with devastating consequences.
"I would say we lost 30 to 40 percent of our business right off top since March 1, and it happened that day," restaurant owner Mike Difeo said.
California Smokers Use Prohibition Tactics to Get Around Ban
While cops try to sniff out the worst offenders, in many cases they're butting up against organized opposition. Bartender phone trees warn each other of impending busts, powerful fans blow away tell-tale scents of "smokin' in the boys room" and tin cans double as ashtrays in case of an unexpected visit by police.
Smoking ban ignites Maine rebellion
BIDDEFORD, Maine
SMOKING BAN IMPACT ON CALIFORNIA RESTAURANTS
That is the real impact of the smoking ban. So if you hear of anyone saying that the smoking ban in restaurants and bars does not hurt anybody, you can quote my figures, which are based on the official reports issued by the State Board of Equalization here in California.
Otto J. Mueksch
President, Californians For Smokers Rights
And so many more more.
Ah yes, make the business owner become your uncompensated enforcement agent.
THAT'S the ticket.
Ah, an opportunity for a new tax. An impact tax imposed only on smokers to assist businesses adversely affected when smokers no longer patronize them.
Actually, when business's lose revenue because 25-30% of their patrons smoke and do not return after a forced smoking ban, and when smoker's go elsewhere for cigarettes because the state taxes are sky high, guess what?
The professional anti's in the state proclaim that their quit smoking campaigns are working. Because everyone is QUITTING!
Sorry. Wrong!
Actually this is an opportunity for a tax on non-smokers for not patronizing the establishments they forced to cater to them. Smokers only make up 1/4 of the population, thus there should be no harm to business if the anti-smokers are telling the truth that non-smokers will be flocking to those businesses.
Since the businesses are failing, it is obvious the anti-smokers are not patronizing as they promised they would.
I swear I had a </sarcasm tag on that post.
Hehheh!
I was going to say "Don't give them no flippen ideas." LOL!
How do you like that? It creates a situation where you ahve to go to the State's own establishments if you want to smoke.
hehe :)
That sure sounds suspicious, doesn't it?
I know when NYC forced a smoking ban, the business owner's in New Jersey were yelling "Hurry to OUR side! Hurry to OUR side." And that's where the smoker's take their business now.
However, the anti's are working on NJ to get them to go smoke free to stop them from making the extra money from their new smoking clientele. /sarcasm Nice, huh?
"The dispute centers on the smoking ban that voters approved in 2002. It prohibits smoking in all public buildings, including bars and casinos."
More proof that the majority of the citizens in this country prefer socialism. They have used mob rule to change private property to public property. Socialism is as fascism does!
Actually, CSM, the general public have been duped into believing that the forced smoking bans are a good thing.
Good for who? Surely not the private business owners. As proof positive that so many of them have closed over the past 5 years due to this forced smoking ban.
Non-smokers have to realize that when they vote yes for a smoking ban, that restaurant they hold dear to their heart just might be closed within a year due to a forced smoking ban.
Like it or not, the smoking bans are choking the business owner's business. Is this really what the non-smoking citizens of America really want? I surely can't believe that they do.
Definitely a loss of business for the casino's.
Definitely a loss of business for the casino's.
I don't' think Maine allows the Casino's to have smoking here either. I can't imagine going to a Casino and not being able to smoke.
Maine:No smoking in the Sanford casino (Then What Good IS It)
But you have to go into a separate glassed-in room, and can't bring your drink in with you. What's that all about?
I guess they're trying to make it as humiliating as they possibly can.
A-holes.
But you have to go into a separate glassed-in room, and can't bring your drink in with you. What's that all about?
I guess they're trying to make it as humiliating as they possibly can.
A-holes.
You can't take your drink with you?! What a joke.
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.
