Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleSmoking ban not doing all the banning its sponsors hoped
Many taverns thumb their noses at the law, which has little teeth
Saturday, June 21, 2008 | 2 a.m.
Reader poll
Two years ago — when the economy was humming along fine and nobody was getting hepatitis C from a colonoscopy — Nevada’s proposed indoor smoking ban was front-page news.
The measure, passed by voters statewide, took effect in early 2007. But drive around town and it’s still easy to find a place to smoke cigarettes.
Dozens of establishments across the Las Vegas Valley continue to ignore the ban, known as the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act. Among other places, the ban prohibits smoking in bars and taverns that serve food.
Over the past 18 months, 4,022 complaints have been made to the Southern Nevada Health District.
And how many resulted in citations?
Nil. None. Zero.
It’s tough to blame the bar owners because nobody has ever had to pay the $100 fine for smoking a cigarette indoors in Clark County. That’s partly because no court is accepting the citations. And so, for now, no one is issuing them.
The Health District is working with local justice courts, hoping they soon will accept the citations.
“There’s no place to have hearings,” said Stephen Minagil, an attorney for the Southern Nevada Health District. “We’re ready to write citations. We’re just waiting to hear how the justice court wants to handle them.”
That’s only one of several ongoing dramas that have seemingly made many places nonsmoking only if the bar owners feel like obeying on that particular day.
The smoking ban has been a tough sell from the beginning, starting with the contentious November 2006 ballot initiative.
Since the initiative was passed by 54 percent of voters, several businesses have openly defied the law. Others built expensive partitions blocking their food-serving sections from the bar area. A few places closed.
“There’s probably a couple of hundred establishments that are not complying,” said Christopher Roller, director of advocacy for the American Heart Association of Nevada, one of the initiative’s lead sponsors.
“It is frustrating. We’ve had patience because we know we need a good set of regulations for it to be really enforced.”
A district judge rejected a request from business owners to stop the smoking ban from taking effect in the months following the vote. But at the same time, the judge removed any criminal penalties under the law and made the Health District its sole enforcer.
He also preserved the $100 civil fines for violators — the smokers — a penalty yet to be used.
The case has been appealed to the state Supreme Court by both sides — the Southern Nevada Health District and the Nevada Tavern Owners Association. Both sides have written briefs, but a hearing date has not been set.
Although bar owners have been saying their whiskey prayers, they concede chances are slim that the ban will be repealed.
“I will buy you 12 cold beers if that happens,” said Joe Wilcock, chairman of the Nevada Tavern Owners Association and the owner of The Brewery on Sunset Road.
Legal squabbles were expected by the sponsors of the initiative, including the American Cancer Society and the American Heart Association. But they are satisfied overall with the progress.
“Just from a perspective of going into many restaurants, the compliance is there,” said Tom McCoy, director of government relations for the American Cancer Society of Nevada.
A moment later, though, McCoy admitted that strolling into a bar and expecting it to be smoke-free can be “hit or miss.”
Roller noted that there have no problems with getting convenience stores and supermarkets to comply with the new laws.
The state Health Division last month held a hearing aimed at clarifying the laws. That’s a thankless task, considering that Clark and Washoe counties — along with the rest of the state — have varying interpretations.
“We’re trying to create some kind of statewide regulations,” said Darren Winkelman, environmental division supervisor.
Although the meeting was in Carson City, about 30 bar owners and lawyers joined via video conference from Las Vegas.
“We’re at a stalemate to see what we can and can’t do,” Wilcock said. “I’m sure Steve Minagil is frustrated, as are we.”
Meanwhile, smoke ’em if you got ’em appears to be the theory being used by many. Across the county, bars that serve food allow smoking — providing small cups of water for those needing a third vice to go with the drinking and gambling.
“That’s an ashtray,” the Health District attorney quickly points out.
To combat the open disregard for the law, the Health District sent about 35 letters to the businesses drawing the most complaints.
Most responded by eliminating smoking, according to the Health District’s attorney. Two businesses ignored the letters and ended up in civil court.
Bilbo’s Bar and Grill avoided a contempt charge in civil court, but only after a battle regarding its use of shot glasses as ashtrays. Irene’s Grill on Spring Mountain ended up agreeing to stop allowing employees to bring food to customers who were smoking.
Bilbo’s, which has three locations in the valley, has been the ringleader of the fight for smoking. One of its owners lit a cigar when a Health District inspector paid a visit.
Tavern owners say the ban has been devastating economically, resulting in 10 percent to 15 percent drops in revenue. That detail, like everything else, is disputed by ban supporters.
The one thing everyone seems to agree on is that the law needs to be clarified.
“In hindsight you can see how it should have been written differently,” Minagil said. “It was drafted by tobacco control advocates, not legislators.”
The current headache does not dim Minagil’s hopes for the future.
The Health District may have to add inspectors and find ways to enforce the ban. However, Minagil said the district has no plans to be proactive.
There will not be undercover inspectors looking to crack down on people trying to sneak a Camel Light at the watering hole.
“The last thing on earth they want to do is sit around here and confront patrons,” Wilcock said. “They don’t want to confront this 250-pound bar patron who’s been drinking.”
That doesn’t mean the smoking ban talk will end with resolution of this problem.
The future, Minagil said, is no smoking anywhere inside — including the big casinos.
Now imagine those court battles.
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- Motorcycle accident claims life of man in northeast valley
- Jerry Tarkanian: Mike Moser impresses yet again on a day to remember former Rebel greats
- Investigators seek answers to Houston’s death
- Photos: The late, great Whitney Houston is the soundtrack of my life
- Pre-Grammy gala celebrates Whitney Houston’s life
- Grammy Awards struggle with honoring Whitney Houston
- Photos: Lauren Conrad celebrates her 26th birthday at Hyde Bellagio
- Israel’s president sends message of peace to Iran
- Man charged in plot to kill Utah governor
- List of Grammy winners in select major categories
Blogs
The Kats Report
Color from scene at Thomas & Mack: We have a wire job! Rebels win, and Louie Armstrong sings!
South Point owner Michael Gaughan's take on 'Vegas Stripped': 'I'll give it an 8' (4 Comments)
Author relishes writing the life story of ‘larger-than-life’ Oscar Goodman (3 Comments)
Elsewhere
Landowner: All roads could lead to Uxbridge casino
Revel reveals smoke-free casino opening
Cirque du Soleil show in Sands China casino to close this month
Meet the woman behind Sheldon Adelson
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Tobacco is a legal product. Bars and taverns are places for adults. Adults are free to make their own choices as to which bars and taverns they visit. Until tobacco is made illegal, this ban is overreaching and unconstitutional. And I am a non-smoker. A rational, freedom loving non-smoker who believes business should make the decision.
The law should be that a business posts on their front door if they allow smoking or not.
If you don't want to be around smoke, you don't enter that business. The business owner should have the right to make the rules for his business.
The non smoker should have the right to make their choice by not going in the business if they don't want to.
Why do people have to make this harder then it has to be?
I am not a smoker however going into a bar and casino where smoking is allowed is part of the atmosphere. I mean what are people to do when not holding a drink? Pick their nose? Smoking and bars go hand in hand and if you don't like tobacco use in a bar or restaurant, then take your money elsewhere where it is appreciated. Repeal that smoking ban. Besides, doctors and hospitals and drug companies eventually need that business that is going to come their way.
vegaslee, I agree completely! However, it seems there are people here who can't control their own lives so they feel the need to control ours. CONTROL being the operative word here.
Also, it seems to me that the big casinos want these little guys out of business. One can, at a large casino, sit at a machine, smoke and order food to be delivered to you at the machine. No law broken. Double standard or the "golden rule", as in thems that gots the gold makes the rules? Seems a bit fishy to me.
If you don't like smoke, don't enter a smoking bar/restaurant. Go somewhere else. It really is that simple. You're correct, the business owners should be the ones setting policy, not the government.
Sorry, but the law was passed because VOTERS WANTED A BAN on smoking. We non-smokers wish to enjoy an evening out at our favorite bar but cannot stomach the combination of cigarette smoke and food consumption. That smokers and bar owners disregard this ban is wrong. Hopefully the Health District will be able to give citations out ASAP. Smoke outside, for gosh sakes, it's not like you have to stand in a blizzard. Have consideration for others and smoke in your own space.
and some still persist in calling this the "Land of the Free'..........ya right -
Doesn't State and Federal government have better things to concern themselves with rather than telling business owners what LEGAL substance can or can't be used in their establishment? And this is coming from a non-smoker too. And how about telling us how we HAVE to watch tv in digital - that one blows me away - that the government would get involved in regulating how tv is being broadcast....and then there's seat belts that apparently adults are NOT allowed to choose between wearing or not wearing - where are all these so-called 'freedoms' this country used to afford its citizens? Oh, that's right there in the back pocket of some politican right next to the money they get from these lobbyist groups.
acresall, you are obviously unaware that a private business has the right to set any policies it wants. My business (which is non-smoking, by the way) does not exist to serve everyone who might want to come inside, it exists because I have an idea of the market I'd like to serve. I am under no obligation to make my business more palatable to your singular needs and desires, just as you are under no obligation to spend your money with my business. Government has no business compelling me how to accomodate you particularly when it comes to a legal behavior such as tobacco use. To be clear: You do not have the "right" to choose a business and then shape the practices of that business to fit your narrow desires. No tavern operator owes you or anyone a smoke-free meal as you can have those at another eatery, or, perhaps, the comfort of your own home. The only vote you have is with your money - period. I suggest you put your money where your mouth is and open a smoke-free tavern.
Smoking in public places, in this case the casinos, affects not only the areas in the taverns or gambling areas but also the food courts and the movie theates as well. I am alergic to second hand cigarette smoke and I do not to go to casinos to eat or any other establishment where I am expose to these dangerous fumes. However, the freedoms granted to smokers takes away my freedom to attend a movie theater because after two hours of sitting in the dark enclosed theater auditorium gives me headaches and irritated eyes. For example, I do not go to most theaters that are inside a casino, but resently the Fiesta inside the Santa Fe open the new theater section and it seemed to be clean from cigarette fumes for the first month or so. Just last week I detected the spraying of air freshner during the first few minutes of the previews, I do not know who was sprying or if there is an authomatic air freshner unit installed inside the theater. The purpose seemed to had been covering second hand cigarette fumes that travel throughtout the large enclosed complexes. The sprying only lasted the first fifteen minutes because soon I was very aware of the cigarette fumes and my eyes were itching and I left with an alergic reaction. This big complexes seem to be dependent on ventilation systems that do not eliminate the hamful effects of second smoke and the lingering fumes. There are many of us that choose not to smoke who end at the mercy of those that choose to harm themeselves. Now, I am not sure whether to go back again to watch a movie at the Regal Fiesta Cinnema again.
Yes, we do have choices, at the same time we all live in community. Cigarette smoking is an irresponsible and a very inconsiderate act of selfish individuals. Proctecting their civil freedoms to smoke denies many of us that choose not to smoke our civil freedoms as well.
If you are addicted to nicotine, why not get it from chewing tobacco? Then there is no second hand smoke. I am grateful that I am not addicted to nicotine. I would not want to be a loser. What is the purpose for this habit other than to destroy health?? Anyone have an answer to that???
It appears that many people did not realize what they were voting for. Most non-smokers have little or no problem with smokers in a specified area of a restaurant or bar. Obviously, the tavern operators are going to continue to look the other way. Also apparent that the courts are in a similar position. So, the law will continue to be broken - like jaywalking - catch one if you can. And, maybe that's what it should be. I think the law as understood is too overreaching and the legal system silently agrees. I believe these ardent anti-smokers are obsessed not for cleaner air - but for their own self-worth. This is one bandwagon of righteousness they can blast their horns citing study after study and the (real) dangers of smoking. However it remains a legal activity. They hide behind the health of their children and any other forum that only complicates the entire situation. I strongly agree that certain environments should be non-smoking, such as schools and enclosed public areas, business offices, stores, etc. In fact - most of them are already.
Small tavern casino/bars that serve food are not for children or the squeamish in the first place. People who frequent such know they are walking into a smokey fog - if they don't like it they can go elsewhere. Plenty of these taverns comply fully with the recent laws - so go there!
I don't smoke but people should be free to do what they want thats what makes use great. I have been all around the US and eurpoe. Las Vegas is the most laid back place you can be smokeing in a bar is part of bar life somkeing in a returant is part of life you dont like smoke your allergeic sit in a spot away from smokers. I severe my country 8 years now the US Army I love what I do I do it because I belive in freedom. I dont agree with smoking but I do agree with people being able to smoke. One night at a bar with some smoke will not kill you if you go to the bar enough to get second hand smoke you already have a drinking problem. Let people smoke if you dont like to smoke sit away from the smokers.
As I read some of these comments what I'm seeing is that as an adult I can't go to a bar because they allow smoking and I'm not a smoker and would rather not inhale others cancer causing fumes. What about the people who work there. Who have to work at these establishments but doesn't smoke. Who may not be able to get another job, they have to quit because someone else refuses to quit. These, waitresses and bar tenders will have to inhale others fumes, and possibly die from second hand smoke because someone insist they have the right to blow smoke in the air.
Will that be part of the requirement to work at bars and casinos now....you must be a smoker?
It all comes down to this. Smoking is unhealthy, not only for the smoker but for those around them. Smokers are playing God by insisting they be allowed to smoke and be allowed kill other around them because they can. I say no.
The people of Clark county have spoken by passing the law, now we just need the elected officials to enforce it. Or we as voters should find someone who will.
I completely disagree with sfiver, passing a law but disregarding it at whim is "not as it should be." And what makes you an authority by saying "most non-smokers have no problem with smokers in a specified area of a bar/restaurant." You sure about that? Non-smokers most often despise any hint of the odor of cigarette smoke. Sitting next to one who reeks of the odor is to be avoided at all costs.
We live in a society that once worked well with others because we passed certain laws meant to serve all members. This attitude of disregarding rules and feeling a sense of entitlement goes beyond the smoking ban law-breaking; just watch the activity at any city intersection while entitled drivers feel they have the right to go through red lights. My point is once again that as citizens and neighbors common courtesy needs a revival. Smoking stinks, both as a habit and hygenically; it's harmful to the smoker and anyone nearby. Consider spending your energy quitting this unhealthy habit instead of squawking about your "rights" to light up - you'll feel better in the end and so will we.
"Cigarette smoking is an irresponsible and a very inconsiderate act of selfish individuals. Proctecting (sic) their civil freedoms to smoke denies many of us that choose not to smoke our civil freedoms as well."
This is the most passive-aggressively self-centered slippery-slope argument for banning smoking in PRIVATE BUSINESS that I have ever heard.
THIS IS NOT A CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE. First, tobacco is a legal product. Second, and critically, in cases of legal activity, civil rights apply only to PUBLIC PLACES and a restaurant or bar IS NOT A PUBLIC PLACE.
Anyone, including government or any of you, telling a business owner what LEGAL ACTIVITY they may or may not permit within the walls of their PRIVATE BUSINESS is akin to the government or any of us choosing to visit your home and demanding, for the few hours I may spend there, that you are COMPELLED to make it more comfortable to ME. It may be more "civil" for you to do so, but do you want a law forcing you to do so?
I am a non-smoker who watched my father die of lung cancer. But tobacco is a legal product, and restaurants and taverns are private legal businesses. If you do not like the food, the wait staff, the music they play, the alcohol consumption, the crowd they serve, the smoke ... GO ELSEWHERE. You do not have the right to visit "Tavern A" just because you like it, and then compel the owners to make it more hospitable for YOU. The only way you can compel them to do so is to stop going there and vote with your money.
Please, take responsibility for your own needs and choices, perhaps by patronizing some of the many fine restaurants that do not permit smoking by policy, not law. Otherwise, you look terribly desperate in your need to control others.
Alternatively, you should put your energy into trying to ban tobacco, because until that happens, you are all going to be terribly uncomfortable that some people still choose to live their lives in ways you wish they wouldn't. And that, friends, is a metaphor for the entire history of Las Vegas and America's view of it at large.
If smokers were convinced that teaching parrots to swear would send them to hell, they'd make darn sure to read them only Winnie the Pooh stories. However, since they seem oblivious to the health hazards of smoking for themselves and others, it's okay to endanger people around them.
It's the voice of nicotine folks. That's how nicotine hijacks brains and kills smokers and those unlucky enough to have to be around them.
What happened to your rights end where my rights begin? Isn’t it a little ridiculous that smokers find it a good idea to stand at the entry/exit point to a none smoking establishment puffing away on a cigarette. I just love exiting a store with my family only to be choked by some careless persons second hand smoke, I sure am happy I do cardio five days a week so I can damage my lungs by exiting the grocery store. Its embarrassing to me that people feel they have the right to damage others and themselves in such a careless and self serving way. Take responsibility for your actions and no one will try to "control you".
If smokers want to give up their right to health care, and pay for mine in its entirety, then smoke away. But until they understand the economic, social, and personal costs we ALL experience when someone lights up, then thay have no room to whine.
Do you people realize that smoking is part of a sin tax that brings money to schools and education here in the valley? I know smoking is disgusting, but we should concentrate in other matters besides this.
Like most other major laws or community decisions in Clark County it was done ass-backwards. They build the buildings before the roads.
In this case, not only did they not properly define the law (for example a food-serving bar can still allow smoking if they have more than 15 slot machines) but there is no mechanism or proper funding and personnel to enforce the law.
Now money will go to court costs rather than to improving the health of the residents of Clark County!
Tobacco is poison and state sponsored death for sake of Tax revenue. 25 years from now people will look at smoking in our era the way we currently look at Slavery. WTF were they thinking. It will be eventually banned in all buildings and even personal vehicles. The air you breath should be as clean as the water you drink.