DC Ban Damage Update
Liberty Van Joins The Protests!
10/22/13
Our own indomitable Lynda Farley, straight back from fighting (and WINNING!) a court battle against a local officer off in a township where they didn’t like the “decorations” on her Liberty Van, headed down to Washington DC to join in the WW2 Memorial Protests and Shutdown Protests where she and The Van got picked up in the national news!? In the first clip, you get to see her briefly handing out little American flags to protesters while her Smokers Boycott sign shows clearly on the Van’s flank (see about 15 seconds into the video), while in the second clip, there’s a longer shot of two good views of the Van and its messages at about the one minute, thirty-second mark.? Way to go Lynda!? Keep on fightin’ ‘n keep on drivin’!? — Michael J. McFadden
Read:? http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/10/14/exclusive-video-vet-protesters-remove-barricades-dc-memorials
and
Watch:? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFdYlKOicsA
10/22/13
Our own indomitable Lynda Farley, straight back from fighting (and WINNING!) a court battle against a local officer off in a township where they didn’t like the “decorations” on her Liberty Van, headed down to Washington DC to join in the WW2 Memorial Protests and Shutdown Protests where she and The Van got picked up in the national news!? In the first clip, you get to see her briefly handing out little American flags to protesters while her Smokers Boycott sign shows clearly on the Van’s flank (see about 15 seconds into the video), while in the second clip, there’s a longer shot of two good views of the Van and its messages at about the one minute, thirty-second mark.? Way to go Lynda!? Keep on fightin’ ‘n keep on drivin’!? — Michael J. McFadden
Read:? http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/10/14/exclusive-video-vet-protesters-remove-barricades-dc-memorials
and
Watch:? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFdYlKOicsA
Fines for breaking District smoking ban could soar
JUL 7, 2008
D.C. bars and restaurants would face fines as high as $16,000 for failing to abide by the District’s strict no-smoking laws, under rules being developed by the Department of Health.
The proposed regulations would boost existing fines by as much as 3,200 percent, according to documents obtained by The Examiner. Eight infractions would be classified as the most serious Class 1, with penalties starting at $2,000 for a first offense and climbing to $16,000 for a fourth violation. Another 10 infractions would be listed as Class 2, with fines increasing from $1,000 to $8,000.
Examples of the Class 1 infractions, all of which target businesses, include failing to prohibit smoking in an enclosed area and neglecting to advise a person of the law who is seen smoking inside. The Class 2 list includes smoking in a no-smoking area, as well as failing to adopt a smoking policy, notify employees of the policy or post no-smoking signs.
The District outlawed smoking inside virtually all public and private workplaces including bars and restaurants as of Jan. 2, 2007. Prince George’s and Montgomery counties have adopted similar smoke-free legislation.
Earlier rules set by the D.C. Health Department stated lesser fines: $100 to $1,000 for smoking in prohibited areas, $500 for failing to notify a person seen smoking and $500 for defacing a no-smoking sign.
Andrew Kline, general counsel to the Restaurant Association of Greater Washington, questioned why the District would propose such large fines when there doesn’t appear to be a rash of violations.
“We seem to be in the gotcha mentality of government in the District where instead of ensuring compliance we want to penalize people,” Kline said. “Fines should be effective deterrents, not punitive.”
In a fiscal impact statement, Chief Financial Officer Natwar Gandhi said the new fines are unlikely to generate significant revenues as the Health Department “reports high rates of compliance of District of Columbia smoking laws and rules.”
Health Department spokeswoman Sybil Bowick declined to address the proposed regulations and was unable to say how many citations the Health Department had handed out since the no-smoking law was implemented.
JUL 7, 2008
D.C. bars and restaurants would face fines as high as $16,000 for failing to abide by the District’s strict no-smoking laws, under rules being developed by the Department of Health.
The proposed regulations would boost existing fines by as much as 3,200 percent, according to documents obtained by The Examiner. Eight infractions would be classified as the most serious Class 1, with penalties starting at $2,000 for a first offense and climbing to $16,000 for a fourth violation. Another 10 infractions would be listed as Class 2, with fines increasing from $1,000 to $8,000.
Examples of the Class 1 infractions, all of which target businesses, include failing to prohibit smoking in an enclosed area and neglecting to advise a person of the law who is seen smoking inside. The Class 2 list includes smoking in a no-smoking area, as well as failing to adopt a smoking policy, notify employees of the policy or post no-smoking signs.
The District outlawed smoking inside virtually all public and private workplaces including bars and restaurants as of Jan. 2, 2007. Prince George’s and Montgomery counties have adopted similar smoke-free legislation.
Earlier rules set by the D.C. Health Department stated lesser fines: $100 to $1,000 for smoking in prohibited areas, $500 for failing to notify a person seen smoking and $500 for defacing a no-smoking sign.
Andrew Kline, general counsel to the Restaurant Association of Greater Washington, questioned why the District would propose such large fines when there doesn’t appear to be a rash of violations.
“We seem to be in the gotcha mentality of government in the District where instead of ensuring compliance we want to penalize people,” Kline said. “Fines should be effective deterrents, not punitive.”
In a fiscal impact statement, Chief Financial Officer Natwar Gandhi said the new fines are unlikely to generate significant revenues as the Health Department “reports high rates of compliance of District of Columbia smoking laws and rules.”
Health Department spokeswoman Sybil Bowick declined to address the proposed regulations and was unable to say how many citations the Health Department had handed out since the no-smoking law was implemented.
Your Comments On…
“The Right to Breathe Clean Air”
The folks at the Cato Institute [“Please Do Smoke, If You Like,” Close to Home, Jan. 20] must have missed the part of the U.S. surgeon general’s report that states : “The scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke.”
“The Right to Breathe Clean Air”
The folks at the Cato Institute [“Please Do Smoke, If You Like,” Close to Home, Jan. 20] must have missed the part of the U.S. surgeon general’s report that states : “The scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke.”
herefreeman wrote:
Special interest groups like those of Ms. Bradbery claim to be experts in health, business, and rights. In reality they are experts in deception, mastering tricks of the English language, and creating fear for emotional reaction.
The U. S. Constitution: Ninth amendment — “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Her right to breath clean air should be respected as others have a right to their preference as well. To suggest that smoke free air is clean air is another deception. I support her ability to patronize establishments that offer her preference and avoid those that do not. The force of law to impose her definition onto others is not freedom for “We the People”.
“The scientific evidence indicates…” Science does not indicate in a scientific conclusion. Her science, as well as that of former Surgeon General Carmona, is advocacy science at best, fraud at worst. The scientific method, of course, discarded to propel the agenda of the “special interests”.
Cures for disease usually start with finding the cause. Where are the cures for terrible disease allegedly caused by exposure to ETS? If the time, effort and money wasted on social engineering was used for true science, some cures may have been found.
“We the People” is not a majority or the opinion of “tainted experts”.
Live your life in fear if that is your choice. I prefer to live free.
“We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven into an age of unreason if we dig deep into our history and remember we are not descended from fearful men.”
?? — Edward R. Murrow
?? — Edward R. Murrow
1/27/2008 5:25:15 PM
____________________
____________________
MStStephen wrote:
I don’t expect anything other than partiality on this issue from Mr. Bradbery, given Ms. Bradbery’s occupation (smokefree DC) is to push an agenda. But, honestly, I can’t stand when one tries to insult people’s intelligence.
Explain this, Ms. Bradberry: The federal government mandates, based on extensive scientific study, that a certain amount of Aresenic in our drinking water is okay. But along comes the Ex surgeon general Carmona, he reports in a press release, “The scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke.”, even though the actual study makes no conclusion to that fact, and all of the sudden ETS is more deadly than arsenic?!!
Some of the commenters to this article correctly point out that the surgeon general’s report conveniently omitted all studies that showed no danger from ETS — but it just takes common sense to see that Carmona’s declaration is absurd and completely contrary to the science of toxicology.
The worse part is, apparently, many of our elected officials aren’t smart enough to know they are being blatantly lied to… or don’t care.
1/27/2008 5:02:29 PM
____________________
____________________
hanneganlounge wrote:
New research by Federal Reserve economist Dr. Michael Pakko shows that smoking bans hurt business after all.
Smoking bans are unnecessary. Affordable and readily available air filtration machines can clear tobacco smoke from bar and restaurant air.
1/27/2008 2:10:17 PM
____________________
____________________
S_Stahl wrote:
Ms. Bradbury needs to rethink her idea of “health risk” before she criticizes others again. Secondhand smoke has never posed a health risk, and all of the antismoking studies have been debunked time and again. The largest, most rigorous studies have all shown nor harm from secondhand smoke. The WHO has had two studies published on the matter and BOTH showed either no risk or a statistically significant NEGATIVE correlation between SHS/ETS and supposedly “tobacco-related” diseases. (SHS was renamed “environmental tobacco smoke” to give credence to the Environmental Protection Agency study that was subsequently thrown out by a federal court. This was after the report had been reviewed by the House Committee on Agriculture (July 1993), the House Committee on Energy and Commerce (July 1993), and the Congressional Research Service (November 1995) each of which determined that the procedures taken by the EPA were scientifically questionable and politically motivated. The federal ruling was overturned only because the EPA is not a “final action agency”, which does not vindicate antismoking “science” but does lay the legal groundwork for dismantling the EPA.) The former Surgeon General resigned because he made inaccurate statements due to political pressure. A former BMJ editor wrote a book on how medical “science” has been effectively taken over by pharma funding–from the same pharma companies that make a mint from selling smoking cessation products, including deadly smoking cessation drugs like Chantix. Ms. Bradbury’s fear of something that is 95% water vapor, likening it to rats in the kitchen and unrefrigerated food, is childish.
I echo ProfessorRichard’s observation that the US Constitution does not guarantee clean air. The right to smoke free air died with the advent of fire; if that didn’t do it, then the invention of internal combustion and the industrial revolution. Once upon a time, the hospitality industry was hospitable, catering to various niches in society including smoking, nonsmoking and antismoking. If citizens want hospitality venues to change their practices, then they vote with their feet/wallets in the free market but they do NOT have the right to dictate through laws what is allowed in businesses, unless those activities are truly unhealthy or adversely affect the environment for other businesses. If such practices continue, then there will be no point in owning land or businesses because everything will effectively belong to the state. To jump up and down, demanding that others bow to the wishes of a minority (namely, antismokers) at the expense of the majority (namely, smokers and normal nonsmokers), is again childish.
1/27/2008 1:06:29 PM
____________________
____________________
ProfessorRichards wrote:
Ms. Bradbery of Smokefree DC seems to have conveniently overlooked the fact that the federal agency OSHA (after studying secondhand smoke from 1994-2001) found all the components in secondhand smoke are present at safe levels in the vast majority of public places. This is why county, city, and state officials are pressured to pass such bans, extremists like Ms. Bradbery know OSHA has said NO. Yet OSHA is the very agency which should be concerned with bans if the danger were real.
That quote about no safe level of ETS is not even logical. Remember, the old saying, “The dose makes the poison.” As a historian, I can assure you that I find nowhere in the Constitution where the right to breath clean air is ever mentioned.
Finally, in his report Surgeon General Carmona conveniently ignored the most extensive study on secondhand smoke ever done — “Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians, 1960-98” by James E Enstrom and Geoffrey C Kabat. Enstrom and Kabat concluded, “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed.” The sooner we end the needless secondhand smoke hysteria in this country the better off we will be.
1/27/2008 11:12:03 AM
“Warmest Destination for Smokers: Thanks to the D.C. smoking ban, most smokers have to huddle around braziers to keep warm in the winter. Now they have a new option: Aroma, which became the first nightspot to win an exemption from the ban due to falling sales.? Lighters have been firing up in Cleveland Park since October, when we broke the news on this blog. Which bar will be next?”
January 3, 2008
“INTO THE SUNSET:? Dakota Cowgirl/Titan’s Ramrod Shuts Its Doors”
“‘It’s been a tough year for everybody, so I’m sorry to see [it] happening,’ [Greg Zehnacker, owner of the nearby Green Lantern] says. ‘But we’ve allbeen scraping by this year…. The smoking ban certainly affected everyone’s business. . . . ‘”
December 21, 2007
“‘It’s been a tough year for everybody, so I’m sorry to see [it] happening,’ [Greg Zehnacker, owner of the nearby Green Lantern] says. ‘But we’ve allbeen scraping by this year…. The smoking ban certainly affected everyone’s business. . . . ‘”
December 21, 2007
Dakota Cowgirl, Titan’s Ramrod to close
Restaurant began as an extension of Hamburger Mary’s
Dec 21, 2:20
Restaurant began as an extension of Hamburger Mary’s
Dec 21, 2:20
End of the Roadhouse
Good Times Flowed At the Surf Club, But the Tap’s About to Run Dry
November 30, 2007
By David Montgomery, Washington Post Staff Writer
The exact whereabouts are like secret knowledge, passed around by people who grew up in places like Mount Rainier, or Bladensburg — when they were hard-living blue-collar white-complexion neighborhoods just over the city line, before they got “art districts,” brew pubs and Salvadoran restaurants, and everybody else moved to Calvert County.
Now around midnight you’re scrutinizing the scribbled address by the dashboard light. Can’t be. Yup, is. This is the place.
On the edge of rushing Kenilworth Avenue, between a tire shop and a used-car lot, is a blunt brick-and-cinder-block bunker. No windows. Exterior shafts of dim yellow, green and blue light illuminate beer signs. On top, a small neon beacon: “Surf Club,” with silhouettes of a cocktail glass and musical notes. Parking is in back. Somebody has brought his dump truck.
It looks like the kind of place where it would be best not to make eye contact. Where a wise man has probably said, Son, if you don’t start it, there won’t be any.
Put your faith in the rusty electric guitar nailed like a religious icon to the facade, and step inside.
It’s not often you can be present at an extinction.
Chick Hall’s Surf Club, born in 1955, is the Washington area’s last roadhouse.
End of an era?
Some are predicting the demise of gay bars, but others say not so fast
Some are predicting the demise of gay bars, but others say not so fast
October 12, 2007
By ZACK ROSEN
By ZACK ROSEN
Whisperings about the death of gay bars began with the advent of gay personal sites like Gay.com and Manhunt, and as gay life becomes increasingly less compartmentalized, that buzz has grown into a roar. Several recent articles on the subject have raised the question: Is the gay bar obsolete?
“Gay bars and clubs are not likely to become extinct anytime soon, but they are definitely on the endangered list,” says D.C. nightlife entrepreneur Mark Lee. “Our nightlife ventures are first and foremost independent small businesses, serving a niche demographic. Because of both these factors they are economically hypersensitive to both internal market forces and external political and regulatory forces.”
Small business resource site Entreprenuer.com posted an article in September, later reprinted on AOL’s small business web site, listing 10 current businesses that could become extinct in the next 10 years. Alongside obvious entries like payphones and CD stores, the article listed gay bars. As gays are becoming more accepted in mainstream society, the article asserts that socializing will move into mixed spaces and only the best bars will survive.
A night out at the Black Cat or the Wonderland Ballroom certainly adds weight to that theory. It’s just as easy to find gay men there as it is at Dupont Italian Kitchen, although at the traditional 17th Street establishments you don’t have to play the “is he gay or just friendly?” guessing game.
Richard Rothstein, a New York-based blogger for Queersighted.com, wrote a response piece to a Sept. 16 article in the Orlando Sentinel that also predicted the end of gay bars. Though he believes that gay bars will never be completely gone, he acknowledges that they’re not the community centers they once were.
“Here in Manhattan, you can be out and gay in restaurants and stores and parks and dog runs,” Rothstein says. “It’s happening more and more to hang out in bars that are neither gay nor straight — that are just bars. If I want to hang out with a bunch of gay men, I don’t need to necessarily go to a place that’s self identified as gay.”
THE SAME PRINCIPLE working against gay bars in big cities could prove a boon for them in rural America. Small town America tends to be several steps behind its cities in tolerance for gays. As the metropolises increasingly allow gays to be out everywhere, the small towns may start to grant their gay residents at least one space that’s completely their own.
“As it gets more accepting, people won’t be as critical of opening bars in West Virginia or small towns,” says Dave Perruzza, manager of Cobalt and JR.’s. “Those people have no place to go. Right now no one is going out [to gay bars in rural areas] because they’re afraid they’ll get their asses kicked.”
Another factor in the feared demise of gay bars is the rise of the Internet as the main spot where gay men meet each other for sex. Whereas the best place to meet men used to be in bars on a Saturday night, a number of web sites have sprung up to satisfy that need more efficiently.
“The idea of [meeting] someone at the gay bar for sex just isn’t on my radar anymore,” Rothstein says. “It may be for some, although the kinds of bars that may be conducive to that are just diminishing. You walk into these lounges and it’s like someone’s living room — a bunch of guys of various ages hanging out with their friends.”
Whether or not they’re moving toward obsolescence, there’s a general agreement that gay bars will continue to evolve. As Rothstein notes, the spaces where gay men socialize have changed radically since the days of Stonewall. The cruising parks of the early 20th century gave way to underground clubs that were frequently raided by the police. Now, the model of a modern gay bar is more of a lounge, like Bebar, a bright clean space to chat, drink or dance.
A major proponent of that type of bar is Ed Bailey, founder of the legendary dance club Tracks and 14th Street’s popular and trendy Halo. Bailey is also in the process of opening Town, a “very contemporary, shiny, high-end” dance club in the Shaw neighborhood. Investing time and money in the nightspot, Bailey believes that gay bars are not going anywhere any time soon.
“If someone were to predict that there wasn’t going to be a need for viable, human interaction I would be shocked,” Bailey says. “A lot of people over the past three years try to attribute their lack of business to the onset of the Internet. Clearly that is a way [gays] can interact with each other, and for some people it’s a more comfortable way to interact, but more often than not people want human interaction. They want a personal relationship with another human being, and I can’t imagine that ever being something that would go away.”
D.C.’S LESBIAN POPULATION provides an interesting look into the possibility of life without gay bars. A number of factors have left Phase 1 as the city’s only exclusively lesbian bar, but D.C. women’s social life has hardly ground to a halt. A number of lesbian nights or events at otherwise straight bars have given the District’s women a social outlet.
“There’s a lot of community around those kinds of events, or events that take place once or twice a month,” says Amy Mulry, an organizer of Guerilla Queer Bar, a monthly event in which gays “crash” a straight bar. “I don’t know if there needs to be more 100 percent lesbian bars, but the more options the better. It’s not like there’s only one type of D.C lesbian.”
Mulry’s words likely represent the future of the gay bar. As the definition of gay expands, so does the idea of a gay social life. Monthly alterna-queer dance party Taint has seen continued success at DC9, which is not a specifically gay venue.
“I think that mixed spaces will continue to become a more common thing, but I don’t think the idea of a gay bar would become obsolete,” says Taint organizer Karl Jones. “I think you’ll see gay bars become more and more aware of the standard viewpoint.”
Doug Schantz recently opened Nellie’s, a “straight-friendly” sports bar close to Bailey’s upcoming Town location in Shaw. Nellie’s has proven popular because it’s unlike any other gay space in the District. Gays can take their straight friends and, even though straight families will take their kids there for dinner, everyone can still kick back for a beer or two on a Friday night.
“I’m trying to create a neighborhood place where anyone would feel comfortable hanging out,” says Schantz. “There will always be a need [for gay bars]. People like to hang out with people like them, but the days of hidden bars and that sort of thing are in the past.”
_____________________________________________
Clubs Open Roofs, Remove Walls to Circumvent Smoking Ban
Calling Their Puff
Clubowners have found clever ways to skirt the smoking ban. But not all loopholes are created equal.
By Jessica Gould
August 17, 2007
August 17, 2007
It’s 11:30 on Saturday night, and Hazel is taking a break. She’s been dancing at JP’s Night Club, a strip club at 2412 Wisconsin Ave. NW, for about four months now, earning money to support her 9-month-old baby. The job is exhausting, she says, but the money is good, the people are friendly, and JP’s is one of the rare D.C. establishments with a convenient spot to light up. Kicking back on the strip club’s “smoking deck,” Hazel takes a long drag from her cigarette. “It’s nice to have a place to smoke,” she says.
JP’s smoking deck, located on the second floor, is a wood-paneled room with four walls, a roof, a red carpet, mirrors, and a Smokeeter air-cleansing unit. On one side, a counter is strewn with ashtrays and empty beer bottles. On the other, there’s a large windowlike frame that extends almost, but not quite, the entire length of the wall. It’s covered by metal bars and is cracked open several inches.
Owner Michael Papanicolas says the deck was built in the mid-’90s, and used to be a storage space. Now that the smoking ban is in effect, it’s a dedicated smoking spot. “I thought we might as well have people out back [rather] than on the sidewalk,” he says. Refashioning the deck was simple, he says. All he had to do was weld some bars onto the frame, which he calls a dormer but which looks a lot like a window. It cost him about $40, he says. And the smokers appreciate it. One JP’s patron, who declined to give his name, says that, while the deck is “smoky as all hell, at least if I need to smoke I don’t have to go outside where I [could] get mugged.”
Still, JP’s smoking deck has the whiff of something noncompliant. According to the ban, smoking is prohibited in all enclosed public places, including restaurants, taverns, and nightclubs. It doesn’t take much for a space to be considered “enclosed,” either. All it needs is a floor, a ceiling, and to be surrounded on all sides by solid walls, windows, or doors, regardless of whether the windows or doors are open, the legislation says. Papanicolas says that if the health department has a problem with his smoking deck, he’ll take down one of the walls. “That would be easy,” he says, adding that it’s “better to find out [about a violation] than not to know.”
He might know soon. The D.C. Department of Health is tasked with making sure the city’s businesses obey the smoking ban, and it has already issued a warning to JP’s. According to spokesperson Leila Abrar, only five places have received smoking-ban exemptions so far: Ozio Restaurant & Lounge, Shelly’s Back Room, TG Cigars, Ollie’s Trolley, and a Georgetown University Medical Center research facility. Otherwise, even the most elaborate solutions to the ban seem doomed. U Street’s Tabaq Bistro, for example, has a mechanical glass roof that opens and closes to suit the weather — and the smokers. Co-owner Omer Buyukbayrak says that, when he opened the restaurant in 2005, he wanted to make the most of Tabaq’s panoramic view. Accommodating the smokers after the ban went into effect was just a happy byproduct. “It’s more about being able to enjoy [the roof] through the course of the year in the good weather and the bad weather,” he says. “We wanted a 12-months-of-the-year rooftop with a view.”
So on a steamy Sunday night, Tabaq’s roof is open above the bar, while the rest of the glass dome shields diners from the heat and humidity. The next day, when the weather is a bit cooler, the roof is rolled back farther. “It’s more than 60 percent exposure to open air,” Buyukbayrak says. He says his roof, which cost more than $1 million to build, was inspired by one he saw at a stadium in Holland. He confirms that some people do smoke at the bar. Abrar says Tabaq has received a warning.
Even the improvised “smoking lounge” at Chief Ike’s Mambo Room in Adams Morgan might not pass muster, the health department says. That’s too bad, because Chief Ike’s lounge is particularly creative. When the smoking ban arrived in January, general manager Bob Belmonte glimpsed new life for Chief Ike’s “light way,” a sort of mini-courtyard in the center of the building. He added a coat of paint to the glorified air shaft, fixed the floorboards, built a bench, and dragged some stools outside. For atmosphere, Christmas lights hang haphazardly from the brick walls. The whole rehab cost between $200 and $300, Belmonte says, which is “no big deal.”
And it’s popular. He says customers often opt for the spot instead of the outdoor patio so they can take a quick break from dancing while still listening to music. Five to 10 people can fit in the 5-by-12-foot space, he says. And just in case customers have trouble finding it, there’s a paper sign posted on the wall with the words smoking lounge, please be respectful scribbled in black Magic Marker.
But the health department says the roofless smoking lounge is probably a no-no, although the agency hasn’t made an official ruling. “At the end of the day, it boils down to the intent of the law, which is to protect the health of residents and visitors to the District of Columbia,” Abrar says.
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/display.php?id=2348
_____________________________________________
?????????? ‘D.C. OFFICIALS ILLUSTRATE ECONOMIC HARM
??????????????????? OF MANDATORY SMOKING BAN’
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/display.php?id=2348
_____________________________________________
?????????? ‘D.C. OFFICIALS ILLUSTRATE ECONOMIC HARM
??????????????????? OF MANDATORY SMOKING BAN’
? “A disingenuous effort by D.C. agency officials to
?? utilize irrelevant tax statistics to suggest only that
?? ‘things are not as bad as feared’ under the mandatory
?? smoking ban is revealing.
?? utilize irrelevant tax statistics to suggest only that
?? ‘things are not as bad as feared’ under the mandatory
?? smoking ban is revealing.
? “Combining alcohol tax revenues from all sources —
?? including retail stores — is designed to mask the
?? widely reported economic harm to local nightlife
?? establishments. The purported increase of
?? 1.6 percent is actually a significant economic loss
?? after also factoring in both inflation and increases in
?? alcohol wholesale costs.
?? including retail stores — is designed to mask the
?? widely reported economic harm to local nightlife
?? establishments. The purported increase of
?? 1.6 percent is actually a significant economic loss
?? after also factoring in both inflation and increases in
?? alcohol wholesale costs.
? “The only accurate measure is a comparison adjusted
?? for these factors that excludes the hundreds of
?? alcohol-licensed businesses that were already
?? nonsmoking before the ban. In addition, local bars
?? have found it necessary to raise consumer prices
?? to offset losses, further obscuring the smoking ban’s
?? real impact.
?? for these factors that excludes the hundreds of
?? alcohol-licensed businesses that were already
?? nonsmoking before the ban. In addition, local bars
?? have found it necessary to raise consumer prices
?? to offset losses, further obscuring the smoking ban’s
?? real impact.
? “The myth that mandatory smoking bans do not hurt
?? local businesses is usually more cleverly constructed.
?? This embarrassing attempt by D.C. officials merely
?? serves to illustrate the truth.”
?? local businesses is usually more cleverly constructed.
?? This embarrassing attempt by D.C. officials merely
?? serves to illustrate the truth.”
????????????????????????????? — The Washington Examiner, Opinion,
??????????????????????????????????????? Wednesday, August 8, 2007,
????????????????????????????????????? “D.C.’s mandatory smoking ban
??????????????????????????????????????????????? has not been effective”
??????????????????????????????????????????????????? Letter to the Editor,
???????????????????????????????????????????? By Mark Lee, Washington
??????????????????????????????????????? Wednesday, August 8, 2007,
????????????????????????????????????? “D.C.’s mandatory smoking ban
??????????????????????????????????????????????? has not been effective”
??????????????????????????????????????????????????? Letter to the Editor,
???????????????????????????????????????????? By Mark Lee, Washington
? * NOTE: Opinion is in response to a recent D.C. agency
????????????? announcement, as reported by the following
????????????? news article in The Washington Examiner . . .
????????????? announcement, as reported by the following
????????????? news article in The Washington Examiner . . .
? “WASHINGTON — When the District’s virtually
?? all-encompassing smoking ban took effect in January,
?? hospitality industry leaders feared the worst: collapsing
?? revenues, lost jobs and shuttered businesses.
?? all-encompassing smoking ban took effect in January,
?? hospitality industry leaders feared the worst: collapsing
?? revenues, lost jobs and shuttered businesses.
? “But based on the city’s cash collections through June,
?? it appears those fears were unfounded. Alcoholic
?? beverage tax revenues are up slightly, 1.6 percent,
?? for fiscal 2007 . . .
?? it appears those fears were unfounded. Alcoholic
?? beverage tax revenues are up slightly, 1.6 percent,
?? for fiscal 2007 . . .
? “‘This is an indication that things are not as bad as
?? feared by the restaurant and hospitality organizations,’
?? said Leila Abrar, spokeswoman for the D.C. Department
?? of Health. . . .
?? feared by the restaurant and hospitality organizations,’
?? said Leila Abrar, spokeswoman for the D.C. Department
?? of Health. . . .
? “That’s not to say there have been no negative effects.
? “‘What we’re hearing is that restaurants/taverns that are
?? more bar-centric are feeling ill effects, but restaurants
?? that are restaurant-centric are not, other than the
?? ancillary consequences like the litter and noise outside,’
?? said Lynne Breaux, executive director of the Restaurant
?? Association of Metropolitan Washington. . . . “
?? more bar-centric are feeling ill effects, but restaurants
?? that are restaurant-centric are not, other than the
?? ancillary consequences like the litter and noise outside,’
?? said Lynne Breaux, executive director of the Restaurant
?? Association of Metropolitan Washington. . . . “
?????????????????? — excerpted from The Washington Examiner,
??????????????????????????? District News, Friday, August 3, 2007,
????????????????????????????????????????????? “Taxes show people are
???????????????????????????????????????? smoking less, drinking more”
??????????????????????????????? By Michael Neibauer, The Examiner
??????????????????????????? District News, Friday, August 3, 2007,
????????????????????????????????????????????? “Taxes show people are
???????????????????????????????????????? smoking less, drinking more”
??????????????????????????????? By Michael Neibauer, The Examiner
??????? * * *? WASHINGTON BLADE SPECIAL REPORT? * * *
_____________________________________________
???????????????? “D.C. GAY BARS FEELING IMPACT OF
????????????????????? MANDATORY SMOKING BAN”
????????????????????? MANDATORY SMOKING BAN”
????????????? “WASHINGTON BLADE SURVEY REVEALS
???????????????? STEEP DROP IN REVENUE FOR SOME,
?????? WHILE OTHERS RELUCTANT TO DISCUSS NEW LAW”
???????????????? STEEP DROP IN REVENUE FOR SOME,
?????? WHILE OTHERS RELUCTANT TO DISCUSS NEW LAW”
?? “VENUE TO SEEK HARDSHIP WAIVER FROM SMOKING BAN”
? “WASHINGTON BLADE — Five of the nine D.C. gay bars,
?? restaurants and nightclubs responding to an informal
?? Washington Blade survey said they have experienced
?? a decline in revenue and customers as a result of the
?? city’s new smoking ban, which took effect Jan. 2. . . .
?? restaurants and nightclubs responding to an informal
?? Washington Blade survey said they have experienced
?? a decline in revenue and customers as a result of the
?? city’s new smoking ban, which took effect Jan. 2. . . .
? “‘The word out among insiders in the nightlife and
?? hospitality industry across the city is almost everyone
?? has had a drop in business because of this,’
?? [Washington gay nightlife advocate Mark] Lee said.
?? ‘For PR reasons and for competitive, proprietary
?? reasons, most establishments don’t want to talk about
?? this publicly.’
?? hospitality industry across the city is almost everyone
?? has had a drop in business because of this,’
?? [Washington gay nightlife advocate Mark] Lee said.
?? ‘For PR reasons and for competitive, proprietary
?? reasons, most establishments don’t want to talk about
?? this publicly.’
? “Earlier this month, the Restaurant Association of
?? Metropolitan Washington, which represents restaurants
?? and bars, released the findings of its own survey, which
?? showed more than 35 percent of those responding
?? reported a decline in revenue since the smoking ban
?? took effect. Its survey wasn’t limited to gay
?? establishments. . . .
?? Metropolitan Washington, which represents restaurants
?? and bars, released the findings of its own survey, which
?? showed more than 35 percent of those responding
?? reported a decline in revenue since the smoking ban
?? took effect. Its survey wasn’t limited to gay
?? establishments. . . .
? “‘My accountant’s eyes jumped wide open when he saw
?? the numbers,’ [D.C. Eagle owner Bill] Capello said. ‘I had
?? to cut payroll and cut back on the hours of work for the
?? staff.’ . . .
?? the numbers,’ [D.C. Eagle owner Bill] Capello said. ‘I had
?? to cut payroll and cut back on the hours of work for the
?? staff.’ . . .
? “Joey Oldaker, general manager of the Dupont Circle
?? establishments Apex nightclub and Omega bar, both
?? owned by gay businessman Glen Thompson, said the
?? two clubs each suffered a decline in patrons and
?? revenue but not enough to make the clubs eligible for
?? a waiver [requiring a loss of 15% of total gross revenue
?? under Mayor Adrian Fenty’s proposed regulations].
?? establishments Apex nightclub and Omega bar, both
?? owned by gay businessman Glen Thompson, said the
?? two clubs each suffered a decline in patrons and
?? revenue but not enough to make the clubs eligible for
?? a waiver [requiring a loss of 15% of total gross revenue
?? under Mayor Adrian Fenty’s proposed regulations].
? “‘We raised prices slightly to make up for some of the
?? lost revenue,’ Oldaker said.
?? lost revenue,’ Oldaker said.
? “‘Our biggest concern is the people who go outside to
?? smoke. We’re nearly surrounded by condos and the
?? noise created by the people outside smoking could
?? create problems.’ . . . “
?? smoke. We’re nearly surrounded by condos and the
?? noise created by the people outside smoking could
?? create problems.’ . . . “
?????????????????????? — excerpted from the Washington Blade,
???????????????????????????????????????? Top News Story, Page One,
???????????????????????????????????????????????? Friday, May 11, 2007,
??????????????????????????????????????????????????? By Lou Chibbaro Jr.
_____________________________________________
???????????????????????????????????????? Top News Story, Page One,
???????????????????????????????????????????????? Friday, May 11, 2007,
??????????????????????????????????????????????????? By Lou Chibbaro Jr.
_____________________________________________
??????? “NO ONE SHOULD BE SURPRISED IF THE
??????????? MANDATORY SMOKING BAN RESULTS
?????????????? IN FEWER OPTIONS AND LESS CHOICES
????????????????? IN THE MARKETPLACE. . . . “
??????????? MANDATORY SMOKING BAN RESULTS
?????????????? IN FEWER OPTIONS AND LESS CHOICES
????????????????? IN THE MARKETPLACE. . . . “
???? — excerpted from ATLAS News Release, April 3, 2006,
????? “ATLAS Announces Lizard Lounge Closing Night Party
??????? As 2007 Mandatory Smoking Ban Becomes D.C. Law;
????????????????? Popular Weekly Gay Nightlife Event Will Close
????????????????? After 8 Years, ATLAS To Host Holiday Dance
????????????????????????????????????? Parties As Smoking Ban Looms”
????? “ATLAS Announces Lizard Lounge Closing Night Party
??????? As 2007 Mandatory Smoking Ban Becomes D.C. Law;
????????????????? Popular Weekly Gay Nightlife Event Will Close
????????????????? After 8 Years, ATLAS To Host Holiday Dance
????????????????????????????????????? Parties As Smoking Ban Looms”
Read More:? DC Ban Damage Page 1
?
