News, sports, politics, blogs and forums for International Falls, Minnesota • (218) 285-7411

International Falls, Minnesota

Click to Login
No account? Sign up!

Advertising

Advertising

Curtain call for smoking


» Read similar stories filed under:

We empathize with bars attempting to survive in a tough business climate, but believe the Minnesota Department of Health is right when it says that theater nights do not fall within a legal exemption to the Freedom to Breathe Act.
We give local bar owner Rosie Klemetsen credit for looking for unique ways to give her establishment a boost, but perhaps circumventing state law wasn't the right way to go.
The Freedom to Breathe Act bans indoor smoking in workplaces, including bars and restaurants. It was signed by Governor Pawlenty in May 2007 and took effect October 1, 2007.
The bill included an exemption allowing smoking by actors and actresses as part of a theatrical performance.
Some bar owners have claimed the right to declare that all activity in their establishments is part of a “theatrical performance,” declaring employees and patrons are “actors and actresses.”
MDH has determined that it has the authority to address “theater nights” and take enforcement action if the activity is an attempt to allow smoking in violation of the act. Minnesota Commissioner of Health Sanne Magnan said MDH will work together with local health agencies to bring establishments into compliance if they violate the law.
The law was enacted to protect Minnesotans from the serious health effects of secondhand smoke. The U.S. Surgeon General has estimated that exposure to secondhand smoke killed more than 3,000 adult nonsmokers from lung cancer and approximately 46,000 from coronary heart disease in 2005.
In numerous surveys, the vast majority of Minnesotans have said they support comprehensive measures to protect the public from exposure to secondhand smoke.
And while smoking remains legal in the nation, and we have supported allowing businesses to decide the issue of smoking based on customer desire in the past, a law has been enacted in our state.
We urge bar owners to continue to look for unique ways to draw people to their businesses, but while remaining with the law.


Advertisement. Article continues below.



Maybe the MDH should get...

Back to page top

Maybe the MDH should get some calls about a certain business in town where "smoking" occurs everyday and those entering that business (which is a workplace) are exposed to second hand smoke. Don't forget the one public service building (also a workplace) that has a designated smoking lounge in it. Why should there be ANY exceptions to the LAW? Equal enforcement of the law in this town is a joke.


Submitted by Icesicle on March 7, 2008 - 10:21am.

The Freedom to Breathe Act...

Back to page top

The Freedom to Breathe Act bans indoor smoking in workplaces, including bars and restaurants. It was signed by Governor Pawlenty in May 2007 and took effect October 1, 2007.


Submitted by Icesicle on March 7, 2008 - 12:37pm.

My post (above) did not post...

Back to page top

My post (above) did not post in it's entirety. Don't know why...? I went on to say that the above was taken from the DJ article above. If the law is going to be enforced as stated (above) it should be enforced for ALL and not SOME.


Submitted by Icesicle on March 7, 2008 - 12:43pm.

I am not clear on what...

Back to page top

I am not clear on what places you mean. Do you mean people are still smoking cigars at Northsound and cigarettes in the "court house" smoking lounge???


Submitted by Anton1965 on March 7, 2008 - 3:02pm.

I think you have the right...

Back to page top

I think you have the right places!!!


Submitted by kay on March 7, 2008 - 3:04pm.

Well Anton, you namer of...

Back to page top

Well Anton, you namer of names (LOL) let's see how long before that comment is pulled. As you can read above the act says "workplaces, including bars and restaurants. Not just bars and restaurants. Go figure. I guess the law is selectively enforced. If segregated "smoking lounges" in workplaces are acceptable for one "workplace" why not ALL???


Submitted by Icesicle on March 7, 2008 - 3:20pm.

I find it moderatly...

Back to page top

I find it moderatly incredulous that a fellow member of the class of "65" would allow anyone to violate the state legislatures ban on smoking by allowing smoking in his place of business but I find it impossible to believe that whomever is in charge of our "Justice Center" would allow public space to be provided for employee smoking in the court house while attempting to administer justice that was fair and equal under the law. Now that I find hard to believe. Surly the county attorney or district attorney would not allow the "look of impropriatry" to devalue the business that is carried out in our court house!! I'll bet they have a "smoking Lounge" in the jail to sorta even things out is whats going on, that must be what it is.


Submitted by Anton1965 on March 7, 2008 - 4:03pm.


Recent comments

Advertising

Advertising

Who's online

There are currently 2 users and 671 guests online.

Online users

  • Journal Staff
  • Faye Whitbeck

Who's new

  • dragoo
  • Ripper
  • marie turner
  • kurt P
  • easy1212

Today's Poll


» Read similar stories filed under:


1

Advertising