> Is this that huge a problem, really? Even
> neighborhood bars have outdoor
> patios (for example, Westrum's in my neighborhood),
> and I haven't heard tons
> of complaints about the social chatter there, even
> at 2 a.m. Granted, more
> people may go outside to smoke, but I believe it's a
> matter of degree, not a
> sea change. (For the other eight months of the year,
> everyone's windows are
> closed anyway.)
>
> But if there is a problem, it's a simple matter of
> enforcement. The city has
> the "hammer," in terms of a liquor license.
> Currently, a bar linked to
> excessive violations (of the peace or other laws) is
> subject to a city
> Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) hearing. A TAC
> hearing that can lead to
> fines and license revocation, though it's meant to
> work out problems short
> of that.
>
> A bar's patrons who disturb the peace outdoors
> probably violate current city
> law, and if it isn't a violation, it should be. Bars
> are made responsible
> CURRENTLY for patrons' noise and behavior around
> their facility - the
> "smoking ban" doesn't change that.
Are people who are forced to exit a bar to fire one up
still a patron of that bar, especially if forced to go
down the block so as not to cloud up the entrance? I
suspect smokers will not be allowed to exit with beer
in hand to have a smoke on the sidewalk. I've been to
westrum's and it isn't really a neighborhood bar the
way mayslacks or most all northeast bar's are. Take a
place like the knight cap where last time I was there
I think me and my 3 friends were the only people not
smoking. I suspect a ban would mean an average of 5
to 15 people would be out on the street smoking. If
they can't be right outside the door, they will be in
someones front yard.
The mayor's questions are good questions and shouldn't
be dismissed by saying the public health issue of the
ban is far more important than where the evil smokers
can light up or what other cities are doing.
> In the end, smokers should respect the rights of
> workers and other not to
> breathe their smoke - and the rights of others to
> get a good night's sleep.
And do smokers have any rights? they are not doing
anything illegal yet we seem to be treating them as
second class citizens.
> This is Minneapolis; we can make it work. Let's not
> avoid doing the right
> thing from fear of the heedless few.
Sounds like a good reason to tighten up the language
and take care of real issues before passing any ban so
it doesn't need to be revisited down the road. Extra
effort now will save time and trouble later on.
John Harris
webber-camden
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
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
