A new ban on smoking in public workplaces may mean one band of coffee drinkers will need to find somewhere else to go while providing smoke-free environments for non-smokers.
The new law went into effect yesterday (Tuesday), banning smoking in most public workplaces. Exceptions include tobacco shops; restaurants posted as off limits to minors or areas of restaurants posted as off limits; bars and taverns; rooms or halls being used by charitable, fraternal or religious organizations to conduct bingo game; bowling centers; rooms in hotels or motels designated as smoking; and separately ventilated employee lounges.
Connie Tucker is part of a group that meets at the Spring every day for what the group calls “Coffee Thirty.” The group has taken up one end of the counter at the Spring for years, ordering food, drinking coffee and smoking.
Nearly everyone in that group is a smoker.
“I knew when they first started with cigarettes they were get into our lives,” Tucker said. “Next thing will be no smoking in cars.… It really bothers me.”
Tucker sees it as the government getting into the personal lives of the people.
“Why can’t we have smoking restaurants,” Tucker said. She thinks people should have a choice between smoking and non-smoking. A restaurant, for example, could put up a sign that says “smoking.”
“They’re just making us do what they want us to,” Fred Samson, another member of Coffee Thirty, said.
Coffee Thirty doesn’t know yet where it will go, Jenny Samson said. The group may move into the homes of its members.
The Coffee Thirty group talked about possibly having to go the bars to drink coffee.
“They’re trying to force us to take up drinking,” Mr. Samson joked.
“Just as angry as the non-smokers are at us, we are about this, the government,” Mr. Samson said.
“I sympathize with the non-smokers, but I don’t think it’s fair,” Tucker said.
“They’re trying to be little Hitlers,” J.W. Morgan, a diner at the Spring, said.
“I’m glad,” Theresa Brown said as she finished breakfast at Chef Kev’s. “The reason why I’m glad is I don’t like to have cigarette smoke around me while I’m eating or around my kids.”
It’s still not clear cut for either her or Laune Brown.
“I kind of feel sorry for non-smokers because I feel they’re legally discriminated against, but they can go home and smoke.”
Cigarettes are something like alcohol, which cannot be consumed in restaurants without proper licensing, she said. Laws regarding different vices are inconsistent, and she thinks they should all be handled the same way.
As far as business owners’ rights to decide what to make their businesses, “if you’re dealing with the public, there is some public good you have to deal with also,” Mrs. Brown said. She doesn’t think private property rights are an issue. “I understand the whole freedom issue, but there’s laws against illegal drugs. I don’t agree with all of them,” but some freedoms must be given up and laws followed.
“I’ve got mixed feelings about it,” Mr. Brown said. “I enjoy it more now that I don’t have to come and contend with the smoke. It’s kind of an infringement on their rights, but when your rights start affecting other people’s rights, there’s got to be a compromise, especially when dealing with a health issue.”
He thinks it’s too bad that businesses can’t be allowed to make that decision, he said, “but the way it is now, it doesn’t seem to be working. (Still), it seems like every day they’re taking away more rights. It’s a real gray area.”
The Browns used to go to the Spring and take their children with them, but they quit when they got tired of going home and smelling of smoke.
“It gets to the point we’re just having too many rights taken away from us,” Mr. Brown said. He doesn’t like smoke, but on the other hand, he doesn’t like having the government step in to take smoke out of restaurants.
For some businesses, the law won’t affect much. La Casita has been non-smoking for at least seven years. It has remained non-smoking for the last six months since Felipe Barajas purchased the restaurant.
At the Skyline restaurant, “I presume come Tuesday, we’ll be a non-smoking restaurant,” Manager Carol Jeppsen said. She, like many other businesses in town, had not been informed about the change in the law until reading about it in newspapers.
Jeppsen didn’t expect much impact on business, but the restaurant does have a number of smokers and “most of the employees are smokers,” Jeppsen, a smoker, said.
“There are some employees that will be really tickled,” Owner Lynn Owen, a smoker, said. “There are some customers that will be really tickled.”
About half of the Skyline’s customers tend to be smokers.
Then again, Owner Mike Owen, a non-smoker, said, that’s why some potential customers don’t come into his restaurant.
When the Owens improved the air-conditioning system and ventilation, the Skyline had more customers come in, Mr. Owen said. “We might get more or less people.”
“I don’t feel it’s right for the government to be sticking it’s nose into my home, my business,” Mrs. Owen said.
Mr. Owen compared the new law to the seatbelt law, meaning that smoking or not smoking should be left to the choices of business owners and their customers.
“I’m not a smoker, but I like to come in here,” Mr. Owen said. “I like the place and the people. From a non-smoker, I think you should do what you want. It’s about that little word ‘freedom.…’ It’s like you’re disciplining your smokers. They’re trying to shove you into a little corner so we don’t have to smell your dirty little habits,” ultimately trying to get smokers to quit smoking.
T&M Manager Nicole Greve was busy Friday trying to learn what she could about the new law after receiving no notice of the change.
“We’re fine with making our restaurant non-smoking,” Greve said, but if the lottery area had to be turned non-smoking, it would hurt business.
The lottery area is off limits to minors, so it appears it won’t be affected by the new law, Owner Jeff Murphy said. “I hope it doesn’t hurt my business, but as long as it’s statewide, it won’t affect our business too much. I’m going to look positive here and hope that it helps. I’m not a smoker myself, but my restaurant is big enough, it didn’t seem to offend too many people. Now it looks like we’ll have lots of space.”
Murphy was a logger before he was a restaurant owner and was used to the government setting standards and requirements on his business.
“It’s probably a good idea,” Murphy said. “I don’t like them infringing on all my freedoms but it seems like a good idea where it’s going. If it injures children, people, they’re going to push us along.…
“I’m sure there’s some businesses in Sweet Home it may not help, but as long as everybody complies, I don’t think it’ll hurt anyone.”
Were it city by city, the way smoking bans had been going in Oregon, then it would have some impact in Sweet Home, Murphy said. “It’s going to make some people mad at first when we say you can’t smoke in here.”
The biggest impact on restaurants right now is the jobless rate, Murphy said. People don’t have the money to go out and eat.
Spring Manager Barb Walker was also unaware of the new law until she heard about if from a delivery driver then read about it in a couple of newspapers, including the Albany Democrat-Herald.
“I don’t have a problem with people smoking,” Walker, a former smoker, said. “I think the decision should be made before they (customers) go through the door. Our biggest clientele is smokers.”
Walker doesn’t like how the law is going into effect.
“They kind of just dropped it on us last minute,” Walker said. “We didn’t get to vote on it. They really kept that quiet. I think they knew what the reaction was going to be from the dedicated smokers.”