cigarettes1.jpgWhile we at The Appeal do not smoke cigarettes, we will occasionally join our cancerous companions as they light up in the designated smoking room of our favorite bar or tavern.

Those rooms are nifty inventions indeed, but if your watering hole doesn’t have a smoking room now, it will never have one, under legislation working its way through City Hall.

Part of Supervisor Eric Mar’s overall tightening of the city’s anti smoking laws, this latest tweak introduced Tuesday would prohibit outright new construction of semi-enclosed smoking rooms in bars and taverns, and would also make illegal any such room built in January or February of this year.

And some smoking rooms built five years ago could be shut down, if they’re built below housing. Bars with smoking rooms in commercial buildings are expressly permitted to stay operating under the tighter restrictions; but smoking rooms in mixed-use buildings are not (neither are they expressly outlawed, either; The Appeal is waiting for explanation).

Mar had run into opposition from business owners over his first draft of the legislation, which seemed likely to unintentionally outlaw existing smoking rooms and also end the practice of allowing tobacco shops to smoke indoors. Cigar bars and tobacco shops are now in the clear; outdoor smoking patios are also a-ok.

Banning new smoking rooms is the purpose of the new legislation, that much was confirmed by a Mar aide on Wednesday.

The Appeal has contacted some bar and tavern owners around town to get their take on the situation and will update when we hear back.
Also worth mentioning: every smoking room, new or old, must be inspected by city officials from the Department of Public Health under the new law. Which means fees. Which means: jackpot! Sweet, sweet fees!

Please make sure your comment adheres to our comment policy. If it doesn't, it may be deleted. Repeat violations may cause us to revoke your commenting privileges. No one wants that!
  • Greg Dewar

    With all due respect to the supervisor, he is a dingus for proposing this. This is a “solution” in search of a problem, and is not based on any reasonable situation one could come up with.

    Eric Mar needs to spend a little less time micromanaging SF business and a little more time managing the City’s out of control finances and a Muni that’s hurtling towards disaster. Fix those, “Supervisor” and then come back and tell local business how you want to micromanage them.

  • Greg Dewar

    With all due respect to the supervisor, he is a dingus for proposing this. This is a “solution” in search of a problem, and is not based on any reasonable situation one could come up with.

    Eric Mar needs to spend a little less time micromanaging SF business and a little more time managing the City’s out of control finances and a Muni that’s hurtling towards disaster. Fix those, “Supervisor” and then come back and tell local business how you want to micromanage them.

  • bloomsm

    Supervisor Mar should be quiet and let people enjoy themselves, and stay the hell out of everyone else’s business for once.

    Second what G. Dewar says. Crime, budget, Muni, infrastructure. In that order.

    What’s next? Mandatory lights out so we get more rest?

  • bloomsm

    Supervisor Mar should be quiet and let people enjoy themselves, and stay the hell out of everyone else’s business for once.

    Second what G. Dewar says. Crime, budget, Muni, infrastructure. In that order.

    What’s next? Mandatory lights out so we get more rest?

  • renegade

    Mar had an earlier proposal about banning private karaoke rooms. Maybe he’s looking for some bills he can introduce. I don’t know if he’s sponsored anything worthwhile.

  • renegade

    Mar had an earlier proposal about banning private karaoke rooms. Maybe he’s looking for some bills he can introduce. I don’t know if he’s sponsored anything worthwhile.

  • areallyniceguy

    I swear to that this current batch of supervisors is only interested in crafting ways to get their name in the media and spend a lot of time in rountable discussions with their advisors dreaming up new and stupid laws. It is getting really absurd.

  • areallyniceguy

    I swear to that this current batch of supervisors is only interested in crafting ways to get their name in the media and spend a lot of time in rountable discussions with their advisors dreaming up new and stupid laws. It is getting really absurd.

  • DT

    I didn’t vote for him and I really dislike this Daly clone. All he is interested in is furthering the Daly agenda. His monthly newsletter is an ordeal in bloviating.

    He ought to consider what to do about all the closed businesses on Geary and the horrid condition of that street. But no, he has to meddle in our personal affairs and dream up new fees to extort.

    Can’t wait until his term is over or when he wants to jump ship into a bigger political pool.

  • DT

    I didn’t vote for him and I really dislike this Daly clone. All he is interested in is furthering the Daly agenda. His monthly newsletter is an ordeal in bloviating.

    He ought to consider what to do about all the closed businesses on Geary and the horrid condition of that street. But no, he has to meddle in our personal affairs and dream up new fees to extort.

    Can’t wait until his term is over or when he wants to jump ship into a bigger political pool.