On Jun 10, 2004, at 9:37 AM, Michael Atherton wrote:

"A compromise that would limit tobacco to airtight smoking rooms' in St. Paul bars and restaurants appeared to win majority support from the City Council Wednesday."

If it gets a smoking ban through, I'm OK with it. But as a 12-year bar/restaurant worker (I slung hash in the same hotel as Robert Lilligren), I wonder about some practical difficulties, many admittedly minor:


1. Define air-tightness: Does that mean airlocks? After all, doors to the smoke-filled room have to open. How to keep the smoke from pouring out? (Admittedly, there would be less ambient smoke than currently, but I'm leery that using a term such as "airtight" is overselling the practical reality.)

2. Call it "the drug-dealing room." As I understand it, no employee is compelled to enter the Nicotine Chamber. The rooms will either be separate or, in the case of a glassed-in room, obscured by smoke. Not so great for security.

3. Air-quality standards. I understand that these rooms have to be ventilated, but is there any standard for air quality they must meet?

4. Proven success. Any other locality tried this successfully?

Also, a tip of the cap to WJ Kahn's wonderful coinage "Vice Asylum."

David Brauer
Kingfield

REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.


For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to