City considers allowing outdoor smoking areas at bars, restaurants
By Russ Morgan (Contact)
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Emporia City Commissioners discussed an ordinance that would allow bars and restaurants to provide outdoor smoking areas for customers at a study session Wednesday morning.
City Manager Matt Zimmerman said the bulk of the discussion with business owners began as a result of the smoking ban that took effect in early April.
“As those conversations have gone on, they’ve also said, ‘Well, we’d like to be able to serve alcohol outdoors as well,’” Zimmerman said.
Under state law, he said, a business serving alcoholic beverages can serve outside in secure areas.
“When we first started looking at this, we felt that it was reasonable to attempt to level the playing field for all places, and secondly, it might make some sense to allow some outdoor consumption,” Zimmerman said.
City staff has put together some rules that would allow the outdoor sales and consumption of alcohol for businesses that want to build a deck out back. The ordinance also would apply to bars on Commercial Street that wish to put tables on the sidewalk.
“If you go to almost any major or even minor city, you often now see cafes that allow outdoor dining, which may or may not include the sale and consumption of alcohol,” Zimmerman said. “We felt that was something that would be a good addition to our town, so we also included certain rules that would allow that.”
Under the rules discussed, sidewalk areas would have to be closed off to minors, would be monitored by management and could not impede the flow of pedestrian traffic on the sidewalk.
“Given the width of our sidewalks downtown, we don’t necessarily think that would be a problem,” Zimmerman said.
“I’d certainly like to see us pursue it,” said Commissioner Jim Kessler. “This would be an important addition ... to our bars and restaurants.”
“I see this as a way to increase traffic downtown ... I would be interested in pursuing this also,” Commissioner Julie Johnson said.
The commission directed Zimmerman to draft an ordinance for consideration at a future meeting.
The commission also began going through a preliminary draft of the 2010-14 capital improvement plan in the run-up to this year’s budget season.
The CIP consists of about $20 million worth of capital expenses to be spread out over the next five fiscal years. Commissioners parsed the plan and questioned a number of items in an effort to prioritize the projects.
Included in the discussion was a question about the city’s street improvement program, which was left out of the 2009 budget. Commissioners agreed to fund the slurry seal program at $150,000 for the 2010 fiscal year.
“There is constant deterioration of the streets,” Mayor Jeff Longbine said. “It’s not an area we can neglect.”
The commission also discussed a proposed management agreement between the city and the recreation commission, outlining which entity is responsible for certain aspects of the city’s maintenance facilities. The recreation commission is trying to pin down the specifics of the agreement before moving forward with a request to the Emporia school district for an additional 2 mills.
“As far as an agreement between the city and this independent board, it needs to be totally and completely comprehensive in what is within the four corners of that document, period,” Commissioner Bob Agler said.
“The whole point of this discussion is, as we said, we’re trying to find out what those four corners are that you’re comfortable with,” Zimmerman said.
“It comes down to the public,” said Tom McEvoy, director of the Lee Beran Recreation Center. “We’re trying to serve the public in the best way that we possibly can. That’s what our main goal has been for all these years, and it has worked up ’til now. ... We’ve looked at every angle.”
The recreation commission will appear at the city commission’s May 13 study session to continue work on the agreement.
Weltha (anonymous) says...
lol.... Ya pushed the smokers outside..... NOW, ya wanna follow 'em out??? Damn, is all I gotta say 'bout that one.
April 30, 2009 at 1:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
madpoet (anonymous) says...
Nothing spruces up a downtown more than a bunch of drunk smokers on the sidewalk. I hope the sarcasm comes thru. I am amazed they are allowing this. Some anti-alcohol group is sure to rear its ugly head soon and say we can't have that. After all, a anti-smoking group got a ban passed by a slim margin.
April 30, 2009 at 1:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
An anti-alcohol group wouldn't get very far because alcohol is healthy and is invaluable to our society. I hope the sarcasm comes thru.
April 30, 2009 at 1:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weltha (anonymous) says...
LOL Oh this so much fun. I love it when crack gets "called out" and has to resort to name calling. I do so love pushing your buttons some times. Not that I don't believe in what I say. I do. You just make it more intertaining. I prefer oranges if ya must know... and said nothing of apples. I don't recall comparing anything in my post for that matter. My bright yellow crayon must be fading. t-hee The only reason they are concidering these outdoor areas IS because of the indoor smoking ban so yeah technically you did say you would because that is where they are going to be. DUH! ;) Well, I suppose I better do as master crack says and get back outside and finish working on my yard.
Madpoet- I agree. Its just beautiful driving down Commercial and seeing all the people puffing away and the little kids walking by/through the smoke.
April 30, 2009 at 2:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
neighbor (anonymous) says...
What's the matter, already feeling the decrease in liquor sales taxes? Reduced tobacco sales revenue?
Crack, you're like the those little gnats that fly around a dog's privates, no threat just an annoyance to the dog.
April 30, 2009 at 2:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Hasasnak (anonymous) says...
Having resided in emporia for over 20 years, it hard for me to picture outdoor dinind on commercial with Temps of 107 in the summer and -25 below in the winter.
April 30, 2009 at 2:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dale011 (anonymous) says...
I think this is great. I love the back porch at Java Catz. I have had lunch out there wearing a winter coat because the air is clear and the sky is so pretty here. Of course the alley in back is full of litter and run down buildings detract a bit, but I still love it. It would be great to see more outdoor dining facilities downtown.
I do agree that it is funny to throw the smokers outside and then find out that maybe they got the better end of the deal.
April 30, 2009 at 3:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
crackinsack and neighbor.....I have to thank both of you for the best laugh I've had all day. Now I think I'll go give both my dogs {biscuitboy and jackiegirl) a bath ...roflmao....
April 30, 2009 at 5:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jcook66801 (anonymous) says...
I agree with Crack. I really like the idea of having outdoor dining areas where one could drink. Don't see a whole lot of conflict with the non-smokers, either. Plus this would allow us smokers to enjoy are food and smokes, too. It's a good idea.
April 30, 2009 at 5:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"serving alcoholic beverages"
"I see this as a way to increase traffic downtown"
I'm just sayin'.
April 30, 2009 at 10:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Commissioner Kessler stated:
“I’d certainly like to see us pursue it,” said Commissioner Jim Kessler. “This would be an important addition ... to our bars and restaurants.”
What's up with that? Is business at Coach's down since the smoking ban? Just wondering.
May 1, 2009 at 6:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I am curious as to why people who stood in lockstep support of the strictest smoking ban to ever see the light of day....even voting to cram it down our throats by attempting to impliment it before a vote could be held....are now all lovey-dovey with the idea of modifying it.
If this open-arms approach had been a little more evident in the run-up to the ban, the opposition might have been less intense. I don't expect to hear an explanation from Jim or Julie. But it looks to me like a case of ....well I made by rich friends happy, so now I better throw a bone to appease the rabble. Nice try...but no cigar....pun intended.
May 1, 2009 at 7:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Yea, lets all go outside, and drink and eat and smoke and fight off all of the insects that bite, sting, eat our food right along with us and possibly carry and spread, " who knows what " ! And does anyone believe the upper-crust that implimented the smoking ban will come downtown and join us rabble in our outside dining, drinking and smoking !
" NOT GOING TO HAPPEN " .
Hell, why do you think they wanted a smoking ban in the first place ! POWER & CONTROL, POWER & CONTROL, POWER & CONTROL and don't forget that the ultimate, final goal of these ban freaks is to ban all smoking, everywhere !
And remember that their strategy handbook calls for, absolutely no compromises at all !
And has everone forgotten that not to long ago, that there was a lot of complaining about " butts" all over the down town area and now some of the complainers are giddy about this new proposal !
I am curious as to whether the CAE and its influencial members suggested the outdoor dining, drinking, smoking proposal or if the commissioners have suddenly grown a backbone in defiance of certain individuals or group of individuals or have they just forgotten who " butters their bread " so to speak !
May 1, 2009 at 9:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
neighbor (anonymous) says...
I've seen the tables sitting on the sidewalk out in front of the Granada Caffeine shop and suspect maybe that is where this idea came from. I don't believe for a second that anti-smokers are going to sit still and allow smoking in these proposed outdoor areas either. With the swirling winds and other weather extremes we experience here, the 1000's of pigeons crapping all over downtown, and the vandalism/thefts that will occur if tables and chairs are left outside, I just don't see it lasting long. I DO hope they give it a try though.
I too believe there would have been little to no opposition had the smoking ordinance been thoroughly researched, discussed with all involved parties, and had not been an all out ban in indoor areas. The biggest majority of businesses, factories, and retail outlets had already went no smoking or had invested money on small seperate smoking rooms for their employees with seperate ventilation/filtration systems on their own.
May 1, 2009 at 10:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Crack, I just wish you and the other " butinskies " would dissipate into the air like you say the smoke will and stop trying to play the wise, know it all, holier than thou ruler, rulers that you and others think you are, you and others are only selfish selfcentered and egotistical beyond description !
May 1, 2009 at 1:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
P.S.
Crack, it is only selfish, selfcentered, egotistical people like you and the other " butinskies " that make life unbearable for all the other people !
May 1, 2009 at 1:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Crack;
When certain individual freedoms are lost, due to the efforts of certain individuals or group of individuals, whether the loss of certain freedoms are lost by vote or force of government, then not only do individuals or certain individuals become victims, but freedom and liberty eventually become victims, and when that happens then everyone becomes a victim !
Do you not believe that the people who live in the county, outside Emporia, yet who spend their money in Emporia, were not also vicitmized by you and others, because they were not allowed to vote on the smoking ban issue !
I for one believe that those people were victimized and were victims without a voice !
And yet college students were activly signed up and encouraged to vote on this issue, even though they have no vested inerest in Emporia politics, as most will not settle here and will leave Emporia when their stint at ESU is finished ! And so, most or some of these students could care less what happens to Emporia or the people of Emporia ! Yet most all the people living outside Emporia in the County are generations of families that have spent and are expected to spend their hard earned dollars in Emporia and yet are not allowed to vote on anything in Emporia that will affect them as much or more than those college students who live here only temporarily !
Fair and imparshial ? I think not, and yes mine may be a lone violin playing amidst the egomaniacal element, such as you, the CAE and others. But at least my violin plays the consistent song of Freedom, Fairness, Imparshiality and Tolerence and not the resounding blare of " Power, Control and Opression " the trumpet that you , the CAE and others blow so loudly !
As I said before, my life and possibly others lives are only made unbearable because of egomaniacal people such as you and others like you.
May 1, 2009 at 2:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
City staff has put together some rules that would allow the outdoor sales and consumption of alcohol for businesses that want to build a deck out back. The ordinance also would apply to bars on Commercial Street that wish to put tables on the sidewalk.
I can hardly wait to see these "rules".
May 1, 2009 at 2:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
brightliner (anonymous) says...
Outdoor dining and/or drinking on the sidwalks would appear to be a nice addition for Emporia. Since neither would seem to create a health hazard why would anyone oppose this idea? And taking cracks at Jim Kessler who indicated support would seem to indicate some sour grapes. Don't forget Kessler received largest vote in the last election.
May 1, 2009 at 2:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pbpw (anonymous) says...
Sour Grapes, you say. Oh really - you think. A lot of people remember a slight for a long time. They should have thought of this.
May 1, 2009 at 2:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
brightliner.....don't forget that a person receiving a respetable number of votes for the city commission had pulled out of the race.....wonder how many votes he might have gotten had he stayed in?????
May 1, 2009 at 4:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jcook66801 (anonymous) says...
By reading the posts here, I take it that smokers are not in favor of outdoor dining/smoking/drinking. Too bad, I would have enjoyed a smoke with my meal/beer.
May 1, 2009 at 7:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Does this mean that the people at the hookah lounge on 12th and Commercial will get to sit outside with their hookahs?
May 1, 2009 at 7:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Crack, after you make snide remarks that you do truly mean to and know are personally quarrelsome, you then always try to pass them off or excuse them as being and I quote, " but I assure you it’s all in good fun."
And for your information crack, my particular demographic, that I belong to has supported and influenced the economy of this City for more the some 90+ years or the 4 generations my family was and has been here in Emporia and the County and counting ! As for wanting whats best for Emporia, I have always wanted whats best for Emporia, but not at the expense of even one individuals way of life, living or freedom to choose ! Can you or any of the 4 year residents say the same ?
How about the people who just happen to live just outside Emporia and yet drop a lot of money here. Some of these families have been residents here for generations. I would venture to say these people spend or have spent as much money or more in Emporia supporting and influencing the local economy as a 4 year temporary resident and yet they have no voice in City issues that will affect them. These residents have no voice in City issues what-so-ever !
Do you believe that these peoples demographics supports and influences the economy as much as or less than that of a 4 year temporary resident ?
I am not saying that the college students should not be able to vote on City issues ! However to be absolutely fair and impartial about City Issues, I feel that if a temporary resident of Emporia is allowed to vote on City Issues, life long county residents, who also support the City and the economy of the City with their money should have the same right to vote on city issues that will affect them for a longer time than it will affect a temporary resident, who just happens to be a college student. After all fair is fair, right is right !
May 1, 2009 at 8:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
I saw some pretty entertaining photos of the outdoor smoking "lounge" at Town Royal, complete with lawn chairs. I think those photos should go on our city website with a caption about our "progressive indoor smoking ban" to promote tourism. Not being a betting person, I would bet money that this idea formed after the ban was enacted and the view from the courthouse windows showed the city leaders what the result was...now they have to think of a more attractive way to camouflage it. If only someone had spoken up...maybe written a letter to the editor that would have given them some foresight about this or similar fallouts......................................... oh yeah! http://www.emporiagazette.com/news/20...
I told a friend that once upon a time I would have opposed the serving of alcohol out on our city sidewalks, but since just over half of the voters decided to essentially open up the bars to minors with the smoking ban, I couldn't care less. I will continue to keep my kids away from it, living more restrictively than I used to have to, and let the rest of these "forward thinkers" deal with the future fallout of their kids being exposed to the romanticism of bar atmospheres along our streets.
May 1, 2009 at 10:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
neighbor (anonymous) says...
You silly ninny YY4U, that's just the worm from the bottom of the bottle of tekilla. :)
May 2, 2009 at 4:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
oh4theluvof:
I am sorry that my customers and I have been forced to "take to the streets". But at least 8 lazy@ss smokers forgot to vote and forced us outside. Or as meth stated correctly, 8 college kids that are leaving Emporia at the end of May voted for the ban. As 1 of my EX-customers so eloquantly told me to "be a man and accept our loss" we have done just that. We are following the law to the letter, and so far the majority of customers have made the adjustment. So far my early hours of business are down, (just as I had predicted), and if that continues it will mean shorter hours of operation resulting in fewer hours for my employees, and a loss in tax revenue for the city.
Our first reaction to the ban was to leave the butts littering the parking lot and street for the city to clean up, but we have since returned to trying to keep the city property around the bar picked up and clean. We have been somewhat hampered in this because of some surrounding businesses trash/dumpster issues.
And as brightliner stated;
"Outdoor dining and/or drinking on the sidwalks would appear to be a nice addition for Emporia. Since neither would seem to create a health hazard why would anyone oppose this idea? And taking cracks at Jim Kessler who indicated support would seem to indicate some sour grapes. Don't forget Kessler received largest vote in the last election."
I certainly don't oppose this idea!
I just find it amusing that from what I've heard, Kesslers son , (who manages Coach's) wanted to put up a outside patio and has been given all kinds of grief by the city, so now commissioner Kessler want's to make some new rules about outdoor patios for bars and restuarants.
Call it sour grapes, it sure smells like bad WHINE to me. On their part, not mine.
Steve
May 2, 2009 at 6:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
methusla.....Right On fellow ancient one....I too have no problem with college students....especially the college girls those first few warm days of spring......oh wait...I digress........
But our fair city loves it when county folks "keep the money at home" by shopping in Euphoria....hell...it even likes to tell county residents what they can and can't do with their own property (just like here in Euphoria) if they live within the metropolitan planning district. But when it comes to having a voice in how our lovely berg conducts its affairs.....COUNTY RESIDENTS.....JUST BUTT OUT.....
What up with that??????
May 2, 2009 at 6:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
crackinsack....
Even if I don't always agree with you....I often find your post very amusing. We all should lighten up a little some times....but see there I go again thinking I know more than anybody else....lol
Keep on keeping on.... these boards would lose something without you....of course that is just in my opinion...
May 2, 2009 at 6:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"What up with that??????"
Too much government.
May 2, 2009 at 9:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
rbow,
I know none of this was your idea and, in fact, you put up quite a fight to keep things the way they were because you knew from years of experience in the business as well as in life that the way it was WORKED!!! You knew the old adage, "If it isn't broken, don't fix it." Now it's broken--could be the fault of too many apathetic citizens, too many being brainwashed or 8 (minimum) too lazy opponents......or all of the above.
The way I see it, you have complied to the best of your ability given the options you have--a fact you repeatedly stated to try to help people see ahead. At this point, I think the City of Emporia owes you and the other bar owners big time and those photos just drove that home for me. However, I still think the fact that so much more money is going to have to be spent by you(the business owner) and us (the city) to fix a problem that didn't used to exist is shameful. I wonder where the pharmaceutical grants are in this part of the ban equation? Maybe CAE can look into that?? Or have they also disappeared now that the law has passed?
For the record, this is not sour grapes on my part--it's the continuation of the same concern I had before the ban passed for the very reasons I was concerned back then. No one offered any solution then and now, this very expensive one is the only one anyone has come up with. I say do it, but I am still not happy about all this wasted time and money on a non-existent problem.
May 2, 2009 at 10:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
oh4theluvof......
I stand in awe....your last post gave me goosebumps.....
May 2, 2009 at 11:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
rbow.....wasn't Kessler one of the ones proclaiming there was no conflict of interest involving commission members during the ban debate. Technically I suppose there is no conflict of interest now either....but its one of those things that make you go hmmmm.
May 2, 2009 at 11:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy;
Yes, commissioner Kessler, along with others stated that they believed there was no conflict of interest present on the city commission during the ban debate ! Now, in my opion lining up in a row and making such a statement was indeed " SOUR GRAPES ".
I also knew that if this ban or any ban were to have an adverse affect on any of the ban supporters, the court of Queen T. Walters of Camelot ( also known as Emporia ), , commissioners, any members of their families, etc.., there would be some " waffleing" so to speak and sure enough it has happened and the waffleing has begun. I am just curious to see what sort of " favoritism " or conflict of interest comes from this interesting developement !
And has the Commission, Commissioners received permission from Queen T. Walters, the CAE and its influential supporters to undertake such a change in the ban ?
After all the CAEs' smoking ban handbook specifically states, there are to be no compromises or changes agreed to or allowed in implementing a smoking ban law !
Shame, Shame on the Commission and Commissioners for even thinking of a change or compromise, and going against the wishes of Queen Walters, how dare you !
" OFF WITH THEIR HEADS "
May 2, 2009 at 2:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
.....and their toes....then maybe I can get their shoes.....except I supposse my shoes then wouldn't have any toes. Never mind...
May 3, 2009 at 4:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
driveonby (anonymous) says...
What you all need to understand is the playbook for CAE. They operate off grant money provided through the Kansas Health Foundation, and numerous other grants. The outdoor smoking will once again, give them a reason to exist. The newspaper and radio people will be glad as the blanket smoking ban, would make the Kansas Health Foundation advertising dry up. First the City will allow outdoor patios, and then the CAE will race in with ALL the ads and ALL the trumped up studies, and once again pro ban dollars will begin flowing in to Emporia. It is an industry. People are making money. The City made you do a petition when you did not ask for the ban. Will outdoor smoking be pushed to another City wide vote? On Friday, I sent a report of the largest study ever done on second hand smoke, to the Emporia Gazette. I am NOT surprised that the Gazette and Gwen will NEVER consider printing THIS report. What a total sham! I forwarded a copy to S.C. Maybe he, and other small business people can collect enough dollars to PUT it in the paper, since the paper only seems to put in free articles for the "studies" (sic) produced by the pharma funded CAE.
May 3, 2009 at 10:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
The only thing better than outdoor smoking/drinking areas on mainstreet would be a repeal of the open container (on foot) law. Now THAT would be progressive! Imagine going to Town Royal, ordering a drink, and being asked, "is that for here or to go?"
That being said, I will miss Flying J once its gone...
May 3, 2009 at 10:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
You are most certainly right driveonby this is all about a money machine....and all of us on both sides of the question debating one right or another have been chasing a red herring. Which is exactly why you never see the no-smoking cabal go after smoking itself. To do so would dry up the money both from tobacco taxes, and the big drug houses as well. And that is the last thing they want to happen.
I wish I had the power to will all smokers to quit abrubtly tomorrow and watch how quickly Clean Air Emporia becomes No Fat People in Emporia as it resets its sights on the fast food business.....As the Cajun Cook used to say..."I GAROWNTEE.
May 3, 2009 at 1:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jcook66801 (anonymous) says...
Folks: We lost. Lets not embarass ourselves with sour grapes.
May 3, 2009 at 5:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
brightliner (anonymous) says...
Smokers, you just don't get it do you? First, the ordinance was always about health, but as smokers that's obviously something you have learned to live with and or ignore.
Second, the idea we could not get along without the taxes from tobacco is ludicrus. Do you know what the estimated cost of a pack cigs would be to just break even on the costs associated with smoking/health/ lost productivity etc.? OVER $11.00 per pack!!!!! Please don't all stop smoking at once - we couldn't stand the prosperity.
May 3, 2009 at 6:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
That's why it's so important to allow drinking in more places because it's so healthy. It's all about health, or something like that.
May 3, 2009 at 7:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
driveonby (anonymous) says...
Brightliner... I love your made up, blown up stats. Smokers cost LESS money to the system over a lifetime. PLUS, IF this was about health you would be lobbying to stop the SELLING of tobacco. Your $11 per pack figure is laughable. Repeating fabrications will not make them true. But, by all means, you certainly have a right to keep parroting the propaganda. It is certainly your choice to NOT research your assertions.
May 3, 2009 at 11:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
neighbor (anonymous) says...
How are my health and medical expenses costing you anything brightliner? Please enlighten me. I pay my own medical insurance, medical bills etc, which by the way have been virtually nill for 44yrs.
Lost productivity? I work a management position after starting with my company in a entry level labor position. That doesn't happen by slacking off and being unproductive.
You brightliner are the among those that just don't get it. Drink some more koolaid.
May 4, 2009 at 6:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
brightliner.....
First I must challenge your assertation that all that voted against the ban were smokers. I VOTED AGAINST THE BAN----I DO NOT SMOKE. I did smoke several years ago but quit before cigarette prices reached two bucks a pack. So for some of us this was not a smoker-nonsmoker issue.
Secondly, just exactly what health care cost are you refereing to in your eleven dollar per pack figure. After I quit smoking I learned I had emphesyma (sp...?), which I got from smoking......and chronic bronchitus, which I knew I had most of my life. Once All of these taxes on tobacco were approved alledgedly to cover all of these health care cost from smoking I thought great....next time I go to NRH they will roll out the red carpet for me. WRONG---WRONG--WRONG. To date none of these health care cost have ever been paid by these taxes.....so which cost are you refereing too.
Thirdly, during the months of debate over this issue, the question has been asked repeatedly, "Why don't you just go after smoking itself if health is indeed your goal?). This question has never been answered. Why?
These are direct questions to you for which I would really love some answers, instead of more of your questionable statistics. I'm not trying to be a smart-aleck here, I am really interested.
May 4, 2009 at 6:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
jcook66801:
Before you mention sour grapes take a look at Aesop's fables again. The moral of that story is, "It is easy to despise what you cannot get."
We anti-ban people didn't despise the vote, we made it happen.
Those grapes at the top of the vine used to be private property rights we all enjoyed, until the fox snatched them away.
We should all be a little sad.
May 4, 2009 at 6:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy;
I don't smoke and voted against the ban, but the answer to your question, "Why don't you just go after smoking itself if health is indeed your goal?), is a very simple one, " MONEY, MONEY, MONEY !
May 4, 2009 at 9:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
brightliner;
If it were not for the tobacco tax money that the City of Emporia collects from smokers, exactly what do you think your individual tax burden would be ?
You need to live a little longer and understand how governing bodies get their money to spend ! If the governing body looses one source of revenue they will make it up with another tax or tax increase. such as higher property tax, higher water rates, sewer and waste collection rate, City sales tax increase, etc., just to name a few possibilities !
Really a pleasant thought isn't it !
May 4, 2009 at 9:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"Money, its a crime.
Share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie.
Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil today.
But if you ask for a raise
its no surprise that they're
Giving none away."
Pink Floyd
Cool song but they say that money is a gas when it's obviously a solid. Can you imagine if it was a gas? Wallets would look a lot different, I can tell you that much. If any of that gas got out into the air and someone breathed it, that would just be too dangerous but no one would say anything because hey it's money. Right?
What were we talking about? Maybe I shouldn't listen to Pink Floyd while I'm posting anymore.
How about an outdoor gym like they have on the beaches in California? We need some of those. Outdoor drinking and outdoor gyms, we'd all be healthy in no time.
May 4, 2009 at 9:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
brightliner.....
Several people have posted this morning with what I believe to be the real answer to the questions I asked of you this morning.....but I still await your answer.
What health care cost are paid directly with money from the hugh tax on tobacco products...?
If people's health is your true concern.....why not outlaw tobacco use...?
If YOU have an answer...I would love to hear it!!!
May 4, 2009 at 12:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
All good questions. I'm glad I could contribute.
May 4, 2009 at 12:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Mmmmm! S chips.
May 4, 2009 at 1:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
crack, I just couldn't help responding !
What I get, is the fact that you and others only want to ban or outlaw what you perceive as what you need or want to ban or outlaw, no matter who or what the ban may inconvience or place a hardship upon in the process, as long as the ban does not place a hardship upon you and you are not inconvenienced in any way, shape or form !
However if a proposal to ban or outlaw anything that will possibly have an adverse affect on your life,wayof living or believing or may possibly inconvenience you, then that is a " HORSE " of a different color and you will not approve of it !
That is what I get from you !
May 4, 2009 at 2:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy,
Crack, is very good at " double talk" and making it seem as though he/she and others are crusading for the health of everyone ( the public), however in many of his/her posts he/she has stated, along with others, that HE/SHE, THEY do not want to be harmed by being exposed to SHS from others (the public), therefore I see cracks and others crusade as a personal one and not a public one. Everyone had the choice of exposing themselves to SHS or not exposing themselves to SHS, simply by avoiding the places that allowed smoking !
But having to choose to avoid the places that allowed smoking was, simply, an inconvience to them, even though they did not frequent these places that often in the first place and do not frequent them any more now than they did before the ban !
It would be interesting to know, exactly how many times Queen T. Walters and her court, Bobbi Sauder, Steve Sauder, etc., frequent the businesses that they targeted with this smoking ban, now that the ban has passed ?
And it does not matter how much those who smoke or the businesses that used to allow smoking are inconvienced by this ban, because crack and the others simply do not care !
I would like to know, if and when these proposed changes to the smoking ban, the Commissioners are thinking about, are or will be implemented and the CAE and Queen Walters and her court oppose such changes or push for an outdoor smoking ban, what will the Commissioners do then ?
Will the Commissioners, " coutow " to the Cae and the powers that be, or will they finally stand firm and represent all of Emporia and emporias citizens and put the powers that be in their place and finally be fair and impartial to all of the citizens who support Emporia with the money they spend to support Emporia ?
May 4, 2009 at 2:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Crack,
You have stated in many of you previous smoking ban posts that basically, you did not want to be inconvienced by having to choose whether to frequent a place that allowed smoking or whether to choose not to frequent a smoking allowed establishment ant that you were not going to let the smokers dictate to you how to live your life ! Now you have and are dictating to smokers how to live their lives and have inconvenienced smokers and businesses and are publicly very proud of that fact ! That is not logic ! That is Selfishness to the highest degree !
May 4, 2009 at 2:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Crack,
Relevance, If the Queen and her court are or do not support the bussinesses that may suffer or are inconvienced by this ban, by going to these businesses and supporting them with their money and patronage, , then how in the hell could what they, you and others have done, be construed as " been done for all of us "! You and I both know that Queen T. Walters and her court would not be caught dead in the particular businesses that were targeted by this ban ! Also you, yourself have said that you would frequent these particualr businesses more after the ban was passed ! I for one do not believe you will or have !
I am sure there are those of us who do not see it as a favor done for " all of us " ! Maybe all of you !
So just exactly who do you mean by " all of us" !
I have stated many times, that I do not smoke and do not own a business !
So this ban was not done for me, therfore it was not done for " all of us ".
I opposed this ban be cause it was not a logical, fair, right or impartial !
And there are a lot of people who do not exactly live inside Emporia, who own businesses in Emporia and who spend a lot of their money, supporting Emporia, who possibly feel that what T. Walters and others did was not done " for everyone " !
May 4, 2009 at 3:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Crack,
Ah, and you finally admit that you believe that people should alter their lifestyle, way they run their business and way of living to suit your and others rules as to how they should live their lives, lifestyle and way they run their businesses !
"Smokers were causing the problem, so they needed to change their behavior." Your quote, not mine !
So you are saying everyone, especially those who smoke and businesses that allowed smoking need to be told by you and others how they should live, according to your and others wishes ! So this ban is about what you and others think is socially correct, according to your social standards and only your social standards, is that it ?
May I be so presumptuous as to ask ! What will the next ban be, to bring everyone into compliance with your particular social standard of living ?
May 4, 2009 at 3:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Crack, I didn't miss the point ! You and others are social snobs who believe that you should tell others how to live, according to your standards and your standards only !
And what do beach goers have to do with smokers, anyway, beach goers don't concern me in the least, just like people who smoke or businesses that allow smoking don't bother me in the least, because I am intelligent and tollerant enough to either avoid the shs exposure or expose myself to shs, because I and I alone am responsible for my health and way of life, not you nor anyone else ! You nor anyone else has no clue as to what is best for me, you only think you do !
FIY, crack, intollerance, disrespect, too much government and unnecessary laws, impartialiality and favoritism in law making are the foundations for ANARCHY, HATRED and REVOLT !
I do see where this whole I know whats best for everyone mentality will eventually take us and it is not pretty nor advantageous to " everyone ", as you might believe !
May 4, 2009 at 4:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
crackinsack....
sorry I,m so late responding, I have to work for a living.
I challenge your statement "if you outlaw tobacco you would have to outlaw things like alcohol, tattoos.......suntanning.....". Why? You have made it abundently clear that your problem with smoking is the SHS passed on to others....therefore justifying the smoking ban You have also made it quite clear that alcohol is not passed on in a second hand fashion...there by not making it dangerious to others....so not in need of any controls or bans beyond those already in place.
Of course this argument convieniently forgets the thousands of deaths each year at the hand of drunk-drivers.....as well as the millions of beaten spouses and neglected children....but that's another argument for another day.
You also mention tattoos and suntanning as additional things that would need be outlawed if smoking were banned outright. But please explain to me how they have any residual effect or danger to innocents that would make their ban necessary.
I purposefully left fried food out because of my strong belief that it is next in the gunsights....even though I fail to see how it is passed on to innocents either.
So in the end you have made a valiant attempt to muddy the water but still haven't answered my question...."If smoking is so singularly dangerous, why don't you just outlaw it"?
INstead I think your answer helped prove methusala's claim that what you think should be banned from the public is only those things you don't like.
May 4, 2009 at 7:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
The smoking ban has passed! Let's all "man Up" and live with it.
THE LAW IS THE LAW IS THE LAW! YOU ASKED FOR IT!
May 4, 2009 at 10:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
STAY TUNED, THE EMPORIA GAZETTE WILL PROBABLY BE THE FIRST BUSINESS SIGHTED UNDER THE EMPORIA SMOKING BAN.
May 4, 2009 at 10:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jcook66801 (anonymous) says...
I am with Steve. Time to let it go.
Speaking of Steve, did I not see some mention of you running for city commission some time ago?
May 4, 2009 at 10:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
What's this I hear about a "smoking ban"? Has that been an issue recently or something?
May 4, 2009 at 11:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
rbow
I know the law passed and I'm living with it even though it doesn't really affect me.
And please don't get me wrong. I am not calling for cigarettes, or alcohol, or tattoos, or fried food, or suntanning, or any other pleasure/vice to be outlawed. Hell, I'm the guy that believes we should look seriously at the legalization of drugs.
I'm also not oppossed to looking at outdoor drink service....although I can't imagine a scenario where the city would allow such a thing along Commercial Street sidewalks. In the end the ordinance will be written in such a way that it will only apply to places like Coaches, Bruffs, etc.
My beef here only applies to my refusal to accept this propoganda that continues to be put out that all of this unnecessary expense and division was based on a genuine concern for public health. That's all. It, like much of what I post on these boards is an academic argument.
May 5, 2009 at 4:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
glarson (anonymous) says...
To a forum:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/...
May 5, 2009 at 5:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )