Smoking ban aftermath: Duluth bars holding on

The Duluth News-Tribune reported Saturday that a review of tax receipts has shown little change in the success of Duluth bars after the statewide smoking ban went into effect last year.

Tax data collected by the city of Duluth suggests that the statewide smoking ban that went into effect six months ago has not had a measurably negative impact on Duluth’s bar and restaurant business.

Anecdotal evidence from some Duluth bars supports this conclusion, as does the fact that the city clerk’s office has not seen a rise in bars going out of business.

I have long argued that the economic effect of the smoking ban on local bars can be overcome. It will take some time but these numbers are encouraging. I imagine the numbers are a little worse up on the Iron Range but once folks are used to this change in regulation folks will come back to the bars.

Tuesday's Range headlines

Here's an abbreviated roundup of stories with Range impact this morning:

Pawlenty fires shot at House Majority Leader Tony Sertich (Duluth News-Tribune) for going public with comments the governor admits making in private. In his rebuke, T-Paw said Sertich is "fond of the theatre," which sounds like some kind of 1872 insult.

The outlook for "smoking shacks" is grim (Hibbing Daily Tribune). Outdoor smoking will have to endure shackless.

The Delta/Northwest airline merger is happening *Duluth News-Tribune). The Northwest reservations center in Chisholm is one of the Iron Range's biggest and most consistent non-natural resource employers. Word is that the res center is safe.

I'm out the door. More later.

"Tobacco Monologues" panned by Health Dept., "show" to close immediately

Minnesota Public Radio is reporting that the state health department is shutting down the popular "theater exemption" loophole used by bars around the state to get around the new statewide workplace smoking ban recently. I wrote a column on the subject last week. My piece only received two responses, one negative from a bar owner and one positive from the local American Lung Association representative. A friend also wrote an articulate rebuttal to my column on libertarian grounds in the comments section of that column. But that was all, so far.

Today, Health Commissioner Sanne Magnan declared that theatre nights in bars are not exempt from the smoking ban.

"This exemption was never intended to fill up a whole room full of people smoking in a public place. So we concluded that he bars are really attempting to circumvent the freedom to breathe act," Commissioner Magnan said.

Magnan said today's announcement is a warning to bars holding theatre nights that the party's over. If they continue circumventing the law, they'll be leaving themselves open to fines of up to $10,000. Magnan's decision immediately drew catcalls from the industry.

Jim Farrell, Executive Director of the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association, said the health department's announcement is compounding the confusion about a law that's riddled with loopholes.

"Instead of admitting that there is a possibility that what they are doing is creating confusion, it's like they can never back down on anything," Farrell said. He said Magnan's decision about the theater loophole leaves it unclear what is legal under the law and what is not. He said it would better for the state to close the theatrical loophole altogether and have actual theatres use fake cigarettes for productions.

"That's when you come forward and say look, we made these exceptions, we found out there are problems with them, we are going to change them, when it comes to the smoking in the theatre we think it's asinine because we know that second hand smoke is dangerous," Farrell said.

That's right. Because the fact that actors aren't using fake cigarettes is what this is really about.

Bars have taken a hit. I'm not disputing that. It's time to plan for the future. These smoking bans are becoming standard, along with the clean water and cooking regulations we have come to expect. Smoke all you want -- on your private property, in your car or at a private location without employees. That line of consent for employees exposed to secondhand smoke is the new guide for smoking in public. And I don't believe that drinking or fast food will come next. Prohibition failed and those are vices that can only impact those who choose to drink or eat.

Smoky theatrics at Minnesota bars

This is my weekly Hibbing Daily Tribune column for March 2, 2008. My columns are archived at my homepage.

Smoky theatrics at Minnesota bars
By Aaron J. Brown

Change isn’t easy, especially when addictive drugs and thousands of billable lobbying hours are involved. That’s why last year’s “Freedom to Breathe Act” took so long to become law despite the support of three-quarters of Minnesota’s population. Today, the debate lives on, if only for what will probably be a brief run of what I assume to be some mediocre plays.

The statewide workplace smoking ban prohibits smoking just about everywhere under state jurisdiction, including bars. Adding taverns to that equation was a dicey provision, especially here on the Iron Range, where smoking while drinking on a stool remains a time-honored tradition. Iron Range state legislators universally opposed the ban, but the smoking ban passed by wide margins anyway. State workplaces are now entirely smoke free.

I wrote a column supporting the smoking ban before it passed and was glad that it did. Ultimately, I continue to believe the new law will be good for business and health. Indeed, business at combined bar/restaurants seems to be holding or even improving, as I learned by talking to staff at a few places in Hibbing and Grand Rapids.

But coming from a family of many small business owners, I also knew that the transition would be hard on smaller bars and community cafes. Studies show that the first year after a smoking ban hurts, but gives way to better years as people realize how much they miss drinking in public.

The key word here is “transition.” I know that word is cold comfort to folks trying to make a living, but I can’t help but be discouraged by another quixotic stand taken by several local bars.

See, there’s a loophole in the smoking ban regarding the use of cigarettes in theatrical productions. You’re allowed to light a cigarette indoors if it's for a play that calls for smoking. So a Minnesota attorney, Mark Benjamin, is encouraging bars to hold “Tobacco Monologues,” or hastily produced “plays” that last all night and include everyone who wishes to smoke in the bar. A joint in Hill City was the first northern town to try it and now bars across the Range are adopting the idea, a phenomenon well documented in local and state media.

Benjamin and bar owners are acting pretty glib about their great idea, but this movement will only serve to close the theater loophole, which will not only leave them in the same spot but ruin future productions of “12 Angry Men” for the rest of us.

What the backers of this “smoker theatre” movement don’t realize is that the effects of bad theater pose a bigger collective threat than the effects of second-hand smoke and economic ruin combined. I’ve seen countless high school, college and community theater productions. I’ve coached and judged high school speech, which features many dramatic performances. And let me tell you, while most performances have been average and some great, the bad ones easily shaved a few weeks off my expected lifespan.

Bad theater won’t give you cancer; but give it enough time and bad theater will kill you. They might rule it suicide or maybe some kind of stroke, but don’t be fooled. It’s the bad theater. Sure, you’ll survive bad theater a few times a year, but if you’re taking in bad theater every weekend just to smoke, you might as well sumo wrestle with an atom bomb.

Silliness aside, the hard facts here are simple. This debate isn't about the right to smoke, which people have, but the right to smoke in a public place governed by health codes. That right, if it ever officially existed, no longer exists. Workplace smoking bans are becoming standard in the industrialized world. They aren’t going away.

Give it time. I know I am not at financial risk by saying that, but smoking bans have taken time to become part of the culture in other places and will here too. Meantime, any business that is to survive long term must find ways to adjust to change. Hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans who never went to bars, in part because of the smoke, are potential new customers. What can business owners do to get nonsmoking customers to patronize their bar? (Hint: bad theater and additional smoke won't work).

I suppose I have to give Benjamin and the bar owners credit for creativity. And I also know that there are certain bars on the Range where I won’t be welcome for several years after the publication of this column. But this is one of those times where we need to take stock of what’s really important and adjust to a changing world.

Aaron J. Brown is a columnist for the Hibbing Daily Tribune. Read more or contact him at his blog http://www.minnesotabrown.blogspot.com/.

UPDATE (sort of) on smoking ban loophole

I see Duluth News-Tribune columnist Jim Heffernan has already written a humor column about the "theater loophole" in the Minnesota smoking ban now being used by northern Minnesota bars. Fortunately, the piece I'm working on takes a different angle. Good thing, because Heffernan is phoning his columns in from Florida and I'm within a smoke cloud of the controversy. I wouldn't want to be scooped under those circumstances, at least more than I already have been.

Smoky logic abounds in bar theater scheme

During last year's debate about the statewide workplace smoking ban in the Minnesota legislature, I kept asking, "why, oh why, does the Iron Range have to strike this pose again?" Here we are, a land of change-resistant Don Quixotes who howl at the moon to keep smoking rights but snooze when public dollars are funneled to shady deals or when schools continue to suffer in our own backyards.

Everyone capable of objective thought familiar with the political makeup of the state knew that the ban would pass and be signed into law, and that indoor smoking is a recognized health risk that has been outlawed in public buildings in some cases for decades. But our Range leaders insisted on making a stand based on libertarian grounds. They had their reasons. One Range lawmaker told me that he got dozens of constituent calls about the smoking ban but only one or two about schools throughout the entire 2007 session. Bar culture is big on the Range, and bar people like to smoke.

The ban passed mightily and the Range had the dual honor of not only losing "our" fight, but appearing backward to the state at large. Today, most restaurants are doing fine. Bar/restaurants in particular are doing great, by all accounts I've heard. Small town bars are, however, suffering a little or a lot. But studies show that the first year after a smoking ban is hard but gives way to better years as people realize how much they miss drinking in public.

Now we return to the topic in 2008 as another group of Don Quixotes try to ram through a loophole in the law regarding the use of cigarettes in theatrical productions. See, you're allowed to light a cigarette indoors if it's for a play that calls for smoking. So a Minnesota attorney, Mark Benjamin, is encouraging bars to hold "Tobacco Monologues," or hastily produced "plays" that last all night and include everyone who wishes to smoke in the bar. A joint in Hill City was the first northern town to try it and now bars across the Range are adopting the idea, including the Sports Palace in Virginia as detailed in this Janna Goerdt story from the Duluth News-Tribune.

Benjamin and bar owners are acting pretty glib about their great idea, but this movement will only serve to close the theater loophole, which will not only leave them in the same spot but ruin future productions of "12 Angry Men" for the rest of us.

Here are my initial reactions to some of the arguments:

1) This debate isn't about the right to smoke, which you have, but the right to smoke in a public place governed by health codes. That right, if it ever officially existed, no longer exists. Workplace smoking bans are becoming standard in the industrialized world.

2) I'm sorry that casinos are not subject to the smoking ban. They should be, but they are governed by different laws. I have to believe that the number of people from Virginia or Eveleth to Fortune Bay just to smoke indoors while drinking is overstated.

3) Give it time. I know I am not at financial risk by saying that, but smoking bans have taken time to become part of the culture in other places and will here too. Meantime, any business that is to survive long term must find ways to adjust to change. Hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans who never went to bars in part because of the smoke are available as potential new customers. What are you doing to get them to patronize your bar? (Hint: bad theater and additional smoke won't work).

This is the ongoing subject for my newspaper column in progress for this upcoming Sunday so by all means enlighten me if you have thoughts.

Virginia bar joins the cast of taverns using smoking ban loophole
By Janna Goerdt, Duluth News-Tribune

VIRGINIA — Smokers were standing outside of many bars on Virginia’s main street Friday night, enjoying cigarettes in the cool air.

But the sidewalk in front of the Queen City Sports Palace was conspicuously empty — because the smokers there were smoking inside.

As of Thursday, the Sports Palace was one of the latest Minnesota bars to hop on the path to legal indoor smoking.

A quirk in Minnesota’s Freedom to Breathe Act, which bans smoking in most public workplaces, allows for smoking in theatrical productions. Today, a growing number of bars are following the lead of Cambridge, Minn., lawyer Mark Benjamin and staging tongue-in-cheek plays, with bar patrons as actors and actresses.

“I’m not breaking any laws,” Sports Palace owner Doug Foschi said. He ran the idea past the Virginia city attorney, who could find no reason why Foschi couldn’t stage “The Tobacco Monologues.” And so the play has gone on from 4 p.m. until 2 a.m. every night, and Foschi plans to keep it going.

Aside from an occasional arm flourish, there was plenty of smoking but seemed to be little acting going on among the festive crowd at the Sports Palace on Friday night. Bartenders passed out small yellow stickers for those who wanted to participate in the play, and about half of the patrons wore them.

“OK, I’ll quote Scarlett O’Hara,” said Virginia resident Robin Cronk, who was enjoying the chance to smoke in a bar again. “As God is my witness, I’ll never go into a bar without a cigarette again!”