Smoke ban may make winners of some bars

Old habits die hard - especially smoking - so the Smoke-Free Air Act, which took effect in almost all indoor workplaces Saturday, is going to be a big adjustment for both smokers and business owners.

On April 4, Charles Merla, owner of the Uptown Bar & Grille, appeared before the Keyport Borough Council requesting permission to expand his liquor license to an outdoor deck area, which he built in anticipation of this law. Merla said he spent $100,000 on his renovations, which include the 30-by-30 deck, horseshoe pits and a patio. Excluding the unique side dramas of this application, we wouldn't be surprised to see others like it in the near future.

Much has been said about the advantages casinos were given with their exemption, but the ban also stands to make winners of the establishments that provide the best accommodations for smokers. If given a choice of going to a bar where smokers can sit outside on a nice deck with a beer, or a place where a friend has to watch their drink while they puff away on a sidewalk, it's obvious where they'll take their business. From a supply-and-demand standpoint, a bar where patrons would still be allowed to drink and smoke is going to be at a premium.

Of course, all of this could change if the state goes ahead with a proposal to extend the ban to 25 feet away from any workplace. If passed, the Uptown's new deck, for instance, would only permit smoking on its last 5 feet.

This proposal would carry counterproductive and perhaps unintended consequences. If enforced literally in downtown areas with clustered businesses, like Keyport and Matawan have, it would be against the law to smoke while walking down the street, but would be legal to stand in the street or in front of someone's house around the corner. And at a neighborhood restaurant, customers would not be allowed below a roofed area near the entrance on a rainy day, but would have to stand in the parking lot or go to their car, if they drove. Is this really necessary?

New York City's law doesn't have this provision, and they seem to have managed fine. This proposed extension is overkill, and should be dropped from consideration or at the very least amended to a smaller distance.