Compliance With City Smoking Ban

What we are telling bar owners who call us:

Any establishment that limits its patronage to those over 21 should retain the right to allow the use of a legal product on their private property. This is even more strongly true of private clubs, Union Halls, and VFW Halls. I believe ordinary citizens, and even officials with the Health Department, understand that. But a law has been passed that must be enforced to some extent. As long as any nonexempt establishment posts "No Smoking" signs and removes all ashtrays, the establishment is in compliance with this law. The St. Louis City Smoke Free Air Act of 2009 does not compel any establishment to act as a police officer. Though free to do so if they wish, no owner is under any obligation to make a patron stop smoking or force a smoking patron to leave. If signs are posted and ashtrays removed, only the smoker, not the establishment, is in violation of the smoking ban. I believe such an interpretation of the enforcement provisions of the St. Louis City Smoke Free Air Act of 2009 will hold up in court.

It is clear the the Board of Aldermen intended to exempt all establishments with less than 2000 sq. ft. of "people space" that sell more alcohol than food from the ordinance for five years. Having sat through the deliberations of the Board of Aldermen, it is clear they accepted the state of Missouri's definition of a bar and did not wish to impose a food percentage restriction beyond that definition of "bar". Any establishment of less than 2000 sq. ft. of people space that sells more alcohol than food should consider themselves exempt under this law.

Finally, Health Director Walker indicates that fully-enclosed tents will be counted towards people space. The St. Louis City Smoke Free of 2009 never mentions tents specifically, but does regulate fully-enclosed spaces to which the public has access. As long as any tent is not fully- enclosed on all four sides, it should not be counted toward the 2000 sq. ft. limit.

County Bars Have Unlimited Time To File

It is being reported that only 50 County bars have so far filed for a smoking ban exemption. I called the St. Louis County Health Department. They told me bars have an unlimited time to file.

Dana Loesch's New Tattoo

I have always felt that the Tea Party Movement was not a mere rebellion against taxes but rather a fight against dark spiritual forces threatening freedom and life in America. Dana Loesch confirms this with her new forearm tattoo: Ephesians 6:12-14

The cited verse reads:

"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand."

http://parkerspitzer.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/20/dana-loesch-tea-party-movement-is-the-unattached-conscience-of-political-parties/

RFT: Camp Zoe Legal Issues Discussed on KWMU

The RFT continues to do a great job covering the Camp Zoe theft.

http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2010/12/st_louis_public_radio_legal_ro.php

Smoking Ban Wont Cut St. Louis Heart Attack Rate

The St. Louis City and County smoking bans were sold on the premise that the St. Louis heart attack rate would plummet due to the bans. Turns out, according to a just published study, that's not going to happen.

From Dr. Michael Siegel's blog:

"A new study by researchers from the RAND Corporation, Center for Studying Health System Change, University of Wisconsin, and Stanford University is the first to examine the relationship between smoking bans and heart attack admissions and mortality trends in the entire nation, using national data. All previous U.S. studies only examined one particular city. In contrast, this study examined data from the Nationwide Inpatient Survey (NIS), which is nationally representative and includes 20% of all non-federal hospital discharges in the United States. The study appears in the Winter 2011 issue of the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management.

Without a doubt, this is the most definitive study yet conducted of the short-term effects of smoking bans on cardiovascular disease.

To give you an idea of the scope of this study compared to previous ones, the Helena study involved a total of 304 heart attack admissions in one community over a period of six months. This study examined a total of 673,631 heart attack admissions and more than 2 million heart attack deaths in 467 counties across all 50 states over an 16-year period.

This study fails to find any significant short-term effect of smoking bans on heart attack admissions or heart attack mortality, although a small effect cannot be ruled out. The study refutes the claims from previous studies that smoking bans result in a short-term reduction in heart attacks in the range of 20-40%, as many anti-smoking groups are asserting. It also refutes the conclusion of the Institute of Medicine that smoking bans result in immediate, substantial declines in heart attack admissions."

http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/12/new-study-of-national-heart-attack.html
http://reason.com/blog/2010/12/20/first-nationwide-study-finds-n
_________________

Compliance with the St. Louis City Smoking Ban

What we are telling bar owners who call us:

Any establishment that limits its patronage to those over 21 should retain the right to allow the use of a legal product on their private property. This is even more strongly true of private clubs, Union Halls, and VFW Halls. I believe ordinary citizens, and even officials with the Health Department, understand that. But a law has been passed that must be enforced to some extent. As long as any nonexempt establishment posts "No Smoking" signs and removes all ashtrays, the establishment is in compliance with this law. The St. Louis City Smoke Free Air Act of 2009 does not compel any establishment to act as a police officer. Though free to do so if they wish, no owner is under any obligation to make a patron stop smoking or force a smoking patron to leave. If signs are posted and ashtrays removed, only the smoker, not the establishment, is in violation of the smoking ban. I believe such an interpretation of the enforcement provisions of the St. Louis City Smoke Free Air Act of 2009 will hold up in court.

It is clear the the Board of Aldermen intended to exempt all establishments with less than 2000 sq. ft. of "people space" that sell more alcohol than food from the ordinance for five years. Having sat through the deliberations of the Board of Aldermen, it is clear they accepted the state of Missouri's definition of a bar and did not wish to impose a food percentage restriction beyond that definition of "bar". Any establishment of less than 2000 sq. ft. of people space that sells more alcohol than food should consider themselves exempt under this law.

Finally, Health Director Walker indicates that fully-enclosed tents will be counted towards people space. The St. Louis City Smoke Free of 2009 never mentions tents specifically, but does regulate fully-enclosed spaces to which the public has access. As long as any tent is not fully- enclosed on all four sides, it should not be counted toward the 2000 sq. ft. limit.

Question for Surgeon General Benjamin

Is cigarette smoke a uniquely dangerous smoke? My sons box at a gym that burns incense, one son blacksmiths and another welds. My daughter is going to a party with a bonfire. Should their smoke exposure concern me as far as heart disease? Or is cigarette smoke the only kind that can be lethal in very small doses?

Councilman Burkett's Bill

Dear Members of the St. Louis County Council,

I hope that you will support Councilman Burkett's bill to exempt bars in casinos that would otherwise be exempt if located in St. Louis County outside a casino. St. Louis County voters clearly voted to allow smoking in these establishments and there is nothing wrong with the Council correcting glitch in a law so that the law more perfectly fulfills the obvious will of the voters. I don't believe any County business would have any objection to Councilman Burkett's attempt to make the County smoking ban more fair in its application and more reflective of the will of County voters.

Sincerely,

Bill Hannegan

St. Louis Smoking Ban Exemption Discussion

Dear Mayor Slay and Directors of the St. Louis City Health Department,

I attended the deliberations of the Health and Human Services Committee during which the exemptions to the St. Louis City Smoke Free Air Act of 2009 were crafted. During the 3 hour meeting, after proposing a bar exemption based on square footage, Alderman Craig Schmid explicitly rejected tying the exemption to any percentage of food sales, saying he wanted "to encourage lots of food" and not just drinking. Furthermore, the later exclusion of kitchen space by the full Board of Aldermen from the square footage totals clearly showed that the aldermen had in mind the exemption of venues with substantial food sales. It was clear to those present at the committee meeting and final deliberations of the full Board of Aldermen that the aldermen intended to allow smoking for five years in establishments in which drinking was the main attraction. Hence not restaurants. But they clearly believed such exempted drinking establishments might have food sales of 50 percent or more.

Sincerely,

Bill Hannegan
314.367.3779
314.315.3779

City Health Department Smoking Ban Discussion

Department of Health Smoking Ban Press Release