KC should reconsider smoking ban

Since Kansas City’s revenues are way down, it may be time to reconsider the smoking ban. People who resent being treated like second-class citizens are spending their money elsewhere.

What if the city were to enact a “smoking fee” to small bars that have less than 50 percent food revenues? The owner would get a choice, which is all they’ve ever asked for. Customers also would have a choice. People vote with their wallets. Most important, the city would get revenue from these fees that they currently are not getting.

Also, there’s no need to protect workers in the food service industry. There are plenty of jobs in this sector, and in the small ma and pa taverns, most of these people smoke anyway.

The city is losing a lot of money due to this ban.

Duane G. Whorton
Kansas City

Comments

[solomon]

Nothing like an "every now and then" attitude to make up the loss of regular business and the results of the ban.

I don't smoke and don't care who does, it is a legally taxed product. Business owners being told what to do by people who will never come in their doors is BS, always was, always is.

[Steve]

Business owners should realize that non-smokers now know what it's like to be able to breathe in their establishments. If you let smokers back in, you will lose 80% of your potential clientele.

When I moved here I went to music clubs a couple of times, and then I realized it wasn't worth feeling poisoned afterwards. Now I can go hear a band every now and then. Do club owners really not want me back?

[Kate]

My generation, and my children’s, grew up with anti-smoking education, so I’m surprised at how many young people I see smoking. Smokers will be with us forever. The riskier it seems, the more enticing it is to some young people, and some of them will remain hooked for years.

The question for the bar and restaurant owners is whether smokers spend a disproportionate amount when they go out to bars and restaurants. Do risk takers spend more on drinks than the more health conscious? Will revenues remain the same by replacing a smoking clientele with non-smokers?

[solomon]

Pub,

It won't be back. Fewer and fewer people will smoke over the coming years.

How much short of going out of business would you consider my clients drop in overall revenue be acceptable due to a ban?

[Pub 17]

C'mon, guys. It's over. Fewer than 20% of grownups smoke any more. Try and find bars that have gone out of business because of smoking bans. Your grandchildren won't smoke, and they'll wonder what THAT was all about. Drunks used to be funny, they used to put ashtrays in college classrooms, seatbelts were viewed as an infringement of personal choice and a passing fad. Move on.

[Kee]

The smoking ban will never be lifted. there are too many zealots out there who want to control one's every move. In this case they have done it under the guise of "work place safety", even though it is a matter of choice to enter where smoking is permitted,or to work there.

I do not smoke, but it seems to that if a business owner risks his capital, he should be given the ability to control his business and its chances for success.

[solomon]

A owner of an establishment I worked with recently says his business is missing many familiar faces, regulars who were smokers. He said he saw the decrease at first, then it leveled(not increase or return to normal) until the weather changed and they no longer wanted to go outside and smoke. Also he was perturbed that by forcing his smoking customers outside when the weather was still warm enough to go outside it created a loitering he'd never had to deal with before. Also, as everyone knows, you aren't selling beer in the parking lot so they are not spending as much.

When business owners go under due to a law that passed by less than 1%, championed by people who have not replaced customer base, the city is the worse for it.