Mayor Slay Weighs In On Smoking Bans

• you were at a smoke-friendly bar and you had that "horrid" smell all over you? well boo-hoo. i hate to be rude, but from most of the people i talk to, they are largely in favor for a smoke ban --- for their own personal reason. they don't like the smell in their clothes. yes, people would take away something that people ENJOY because they don't like doing their laundry. look the fact is in st louis we enjoy the liberty to go to a smoke-friendly bar or as moke-free bar. they both exist. if smoke free bars are so great, take all your money there. smoke free bars will make more money than smoke friendly bars, and the smoke friendly bars will go out of business or go smoke-free to attract customers. this is not the case in the bar-going community. i would like to see this vote be taken by people who REGULARLY FREQUENT the bars. but i know for a fact that if this gets put on a ballot, people like my mother will vote for a smoking ban in bars. really, how often does my mom go out to a bar? i'm patronizing them 3 times a week. look here's the problem with a "BAN". you are "BANNING" something. it's a little harsh. why can't we have smoking bars and non-smoking bars? I will choose the former, you can choose the latter, everyone is happy? oh wait, we DO have smoking bars and non-smoking bars in st louis...

• I live in the city and know Mayor Slay and am a St. Louis County employee. My preference would be for Slay and Charlie Dooley to come together on this issue, so that it is something that is pursued throughout the city and county. Eventually all major cities will be smoke-free, and we'll all be better for it. I travel a lot and when I go to places like Omaha or Idaho and find them to be smoke-free, I am surprised and sadended that these places are smoke-free and St. Louis is not. Maybe citizens would have more money if they weren't spending theirs on tobacco. Being a former smoker myself, I wish all smokers would quit knowing how much my health has improved since I got rid of that nasty addiction. I also don't buy these new "air cleaners" Bill Hannegan is going on about. I was at a "smoke friendly" bar on Sunday night for no more than 30 minutes and every piece of clothing I had on was saturated with that horrid smell. Not to mention my hair. There are more non-smokers than smokers and all the non-smokers I know would prefer to go to a smoke-free establishment, including myself. Bill Hannegan says he wants a "free St. Louis". How about a smoke free one? Sounds like a good idea to me.

• I own two bars in the same city in Central IL. The one that I have owned for 21 years experienced a 25% drop in alcohol sales due to the smoking ban and the other bar of 14 years lost 30% in sales. Most of my competitors lost about 30% as well. The national average of lost sales for independent style taverns is about 35%. It is a FACT. Further the anti-smoking activists that claim a vast amount of new customers will come in not that you are smoke free. Well guess what,,,they lied. To pass any further smoking bans in this economy is fiscally irresponsible by any economic standard or more bluntly,,,just plain stupid!

• Smoking ban and the economy in worst shape since the great depression... hmm... makes absolutely NO sense. Ban's don't work, ban's are based on very flawed 'science', ban's destroy business thus reducing tax revenue. There is other technology, Air Cleaners for one, that do clean the air BETTER than the air one breathes outside. We choose to live in congested cities where the air we breath is far worse than the supposed effects of 2nd hand smoke, yet we all don't choose to live in bubbles now do we.

• Even on a regional level a ban would harm business. My research on that is posted at http://kuneman.smokersclub.com/economic.html Don't believe me? anyone can access the data base I used, and referenced at the link, and is invited to explain why between 1990 and 1998, the only states where bar and restaurant revenuse did not increase were those with bans. So, if the RTF thinks a regional ban is going to somehow "force smokers to patronize smoke free establishments because they are trapped within too large an area to migrate to an area without a ban" ...well, the RFT forgets that smokers and their friends still have the alternative of staying home. Which is exactly what happened in CA, MA, NY, and VT. Later, we found out that UT ban did not include bars and taverns, BTW. Patrons were 'trapped in a large area, just like the RFT believes would prevent business loss for the St. Louis Region,,,but yes many DID just stay home. If the claims that smoke harms workers were true, then approximately 21/100000 would be dying prematurely each year from smoke exposure. BUT a 20% loss in income would cause approximately 400/100000 of those same workers to die prematurely each year. So let's look at the big picture here, and not just the cherry-picked claims of the antismoking groups.... workers DO have the right to chose between a good job and a healthy environment... bans take that choice away..and workers end up with neither. Dave K

• I have to admit, I thought that he would be for a ban. I happy that he is not. You have to ask the question on why we need a ban. Most restaurants in the city already don't allow smoking in the dining area or at all. Right now the market is served for people who want non-smoking and those who want smoking.

• Mayor Slay knows that only 25 percent of St. Louis City residents favor a smoking ban that includes bars: http://keepstlouisfree.blogspot.com/2008/12/only-245-percent-of-st-louis-city.html Mayor Slay also knows that the Illinois casinos are down 20 percent due to the smoking ban as predicted: http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/mound-city-money/st-louis-companies/2008/12/illinois-casinos-blame-smoking-ban-for-20-revenue-decline/#comment-1441 Mayor Slay has read Federal Reserve economist Dr. Michael Pakko's study of the Columbia smoking ban which found bars down 11 percent, restaurants that serve alcohol down 6.5 percent and the overall restaurant trade down 3.5 percent due to the ban: http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/red/2008/01/Pakko.pdf Mayor Slay knows that Democrats on the County Council oppose a smoking ban. So we today invited Mayor Slay to check out the great new air filtration system at Herbie's Vintage 72 and see for himself that a smoking ban isn't necessary for St. Louis. Herbie's owner Jeff Orbin write this about his filtration system: 'The previous owner went non-smoking and quickly went out of business. We made some improvements, added MBC Clean Air and offered smoking again, including a cigar club. The building owner (Pete Rothschild), came in the other day and said, "I thought you added smoking again, but I haven't smelled anything." I just pointed to the MBC Machine in the ceiling. The old regulars are coming back and so far business is good." Please check out Herbie's air filtration for youselves before deciding on the need for a St. Louis smoking ban.

TotalComments: 7