Magnifisyncopathological: Austin Smoking Ban Passes, Kinda

May 09, 2003

Austin Smoking Ban Passes, Kinda

City council OKs less severe smoking ban

Austin's city council gave its tentative approval Thursday night to a smoking ban that was less severe than an earlier proposal but would still eliminate smoking where owners and patrons most wanted it - bars and music venues.

I don't consider this a victory.

Any final regulations are still at least two weeks away, but they will almost certainly be less austere than the total ban endorsed by outgoing mayor Gus Garcia.

Council Member Will Wynn - who will replace Garcia next month - and council members Jackie Goodman and Raul Alvarez all came out against the ban. That left Garcia clinging to a majority with Danny Thomas, Daryl Slusher and Betty Dunkerley.

The new proposal will require at least one more council vote in two weeks.

Gus Garcia, O how I hate you for this. Let me count the ways...

This is another blow to smokers' liberty. My friends who smoke are going to be looking over their shoulders and worrying if they are in some arbitrary "zone" where smoking is prohibited. If they smoke within that zone, they are criminals. Imagine that. Piss on the rights of a minority in order to make a majority happy. What country do I live in? I can't imagine what it's like elsewhere.

This is another blow to property rights. Do business actually own the land they conduct business on, or not? Is it the state's? Who dictates what the business owner does: the owner or some third party who can extort things from him with the threat of taxation, license revocation, fines, and jail time? If the state can come in and just extend it's reach like this, then property ownership means jack shit, particularly when this extension is based on bogus reasoning.

This is another creeping step towards collectivization. "Public health" trumps all other concerns. It doesn't matter that those affected by indoor smoking are not required or forced to sit there and inhale it. It doesn't matter that they enter of their own volition. It doesn't matter that anyone who has half an ounce of intelligence and good sense knows smoking is unhealthy. What matters is Smoking Is Bad and Inhaling Smoke Is Bad; therefore the freedom to smoke MUST be restricted out of the regard for others.

Thomas, Slusher, and Dunkerley are now all on my shit list. There is still time to reverse this course and they are the ones to watch.

Slusher said he wanted to allow smoking on patios and near the entrance of bars, both forbidden under Garcia's proposal. Dunkerley asked for exemptions on bingo parlors, fraternal organizations and perhaps billiard parlors.

Dunkerley said she was torn by the health benefits of eliminating second-hand smoke and the financial threat a ban might pose for bars and music venues.

"Those are my two most important issues - economic development and health," Dunkerley said. "I've been trying to find a good compromise where those venues won't be hurt."

I loathe people like this. They have no firm commitment to any prinicple. Everything is about compromise and hedging your bets and trying to do the least damage while also trying to do the most. Fuck them. At least stand UP for something!

The current ordinance restricts smoking in some restaurants, particularly those where smokers and non-smokers are not separated by a wall. But the city has few rules on smoking in bars and music venues, some of which rely on smokers for the majority of their business.

Disregard what the politicians say. This new ordinance will hurt business. In a time of economic weakness, it is inexcusible that the City is pulling shit like this.

When he initially proposed a smoking ban, Garcia said he would probably allow the exclusion of bars and venues because including them might make it harder to pass an ordinance.

But restaurant owners, particularly those next to bars, complained that the different standards put them at a disadvantage. Then New York City, one of America's bar-smoke capitals, added a total ban.

Garcia followed suit, removing exemptions from his proposal to the point that smoking would be allowed in homes, the outdoors and few other places. Patrons would have had to go 25 feet away from an establishment's front door to light up a cigarette.

Let's get on the banwagon! *grits teeth*

The proposal drew cheers from health groups, who said it would protect customers and employees.

But it started a revolt among bar and venue owners already wrestling with a down economy. They warned that the restrictions would chase away customers wanting to stay home with their ashtrays.

Proponents of the ban said the owners' concerns were groundless. They produced surveys showing most Austinites would go out more to smoke-free buildings. They also provided studies and testimonials from other places that have outlawed smoking.

IT DOES NOT MATTER IF MOST PEOPLE ARE FINE WITH THE REGULATIONS.

"Most are fine" means "some are fucked."

While business owners have said the city should put off a vote at least until both sides can discuss the issue, health groups have pushed for immediate action. Any lengthy delay might kill the issue altogether ? Wynn's opposition will become an enormous hurdle when he replaces Garcia.

I'll give Wynn credit here. I doubt I agree with much of his agenda and how he proposes to enact it, but at least we'll have a mayor who disagrees with the smoking ordinance.

UPDATE(6/2/2003 5:21PM)
Developments! The final vote is days away.

UPDATE(6/6/2003 7:27am)
The ban has passed 4-3. Fuckers.

UPDATE(6/7/2003 8:30pm)
How the city plans to enforce this:

The ban will be enforced on a complaint basis, handled by Health and Human Services.

Any person caught violating the ban can be fined up to $2,000 and an establishment could have its operating license revoked.

UPDATE(10/15/2003 2:03am)
Good news: the Austin Smoking Task Force Report is in and it's definitely worth your read.

UPDATE(4/21/2004 4:14pm)
The ban, initially scheduled to take affect on May 1st, has been posponed:

The city of Austin's new smoking ordinance will likely be postponed a month until June 1. The main reason is to give restaurants more time to show they've improved their air quality.

Dan McClusky's owner Steve Batlin lucked out. His restaurant has always had a separate room for non-smokers and smokers.

"I really don't think it's necessary. I'm a non-smoker myself. I think it's coming," Batlin said.

The new smoking ordinance is coming, but now it may be one month later. Before they get a smoking permit, restaurants must show they have dual ventilation systems. Lots of business owners installed them to meet the previous ordinance, but the city didn't keep a list.

Copyright ©2004TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin

Pfft.

UPDATE(6/1/2004 11:03am)
Austin Smoking Ban in Effect Today

UPDATED 5/9/2005 9:03am
The Additional Tyranny - The New Austin Smoking Ban Passes

UPDATED 8/30/2005 2:00pm
Deadline for the Austin Smoking Ordinance

Posted by Drizzten at May 09, 2003 08:43 AM

ATTENTION: Comments are closed. You are viewing my old blog, archived for search engine purposes.
To view the new blog, please go to the homepage. To find the current version of this entry, search here.

Comments

fucking spamming asshole!

Hi there, from what I hear these days u have to pay a license to have smoking in your establishment ($300).

I've seen an application for a license in PDF form and from what I can tell all you have to do is have proper renovations and $300.... Simple enough....

But when i called establishments to see if they still allowed smoking(in one form or another, seperate room, outside patio, etc.) they suddenly went NS

Here are some of the establishments that DO NOT ALLOW SMOKING in their facities(or outside):

Matt's El Rancho(South Lamar Location): The reason they haven't got a license or allow smoking is because the bar is located near a bathroom and CHILDREN might get a whiff of smoke. Christ almighty.

El Gallo(South Congress location, near St. Mary's): They USED to have a seperate room for smokers but they suddenly went NS. WTF?!! they hads modifications in and a seerate room.

Red Lobster: used to allow smoking once(like maybe 10 or 20yrs ago) then they quit and made no mods and didn't get a license.

So in short I reccomend smokers to BOYCOTT(!!) the following businesses:

RED LOBSTER
MATT'S EL RANCHO
EL GALLO

Just stay home and order out.

At least u can still smoke in your home

for now......

What is the deal here? Any updates on this smoking thing?

Posted by: Andy Howard on December 11, 2004 04:09 PM