Ohio lawmakers want to ease smoking restrictions on cigar bars. Health experts slam idea

Some Ohio lawmakers want to ease indoor smoking restrictions for cigar lounges despite Ohio's smoking ban.

Rep. Richard Dell'Aquila , D-Seven Hills, and Rep. Rep. Adam Mathews , R-Lebanon, are supporting House Bill 530 which would provide cigar lounges with an exemption from 2006's Smoke Free Workplace Act . Currently, cigar lounges can allow indoor smoking if 80% or more of their sales come from cigars or cigar products. The legislation would lower that to 15%.

The Smoke Free Workplace Act was passed in Ohio in 2006 with nearly 59% of the vote and made Ohio's workplaces smoke free.

Despite the public outcry to limit public smoking in 2006, according to Mathews, taking some heat off of cigar bars will expand third places within the community, something which he feels the Ohio Revised Code has limited.

"We had heard of cigar bars being unable to provide the full experience of this type of camaraderie," said Matthews. "The type of language that we have in the Ohio Revised Code makes it very difficult for cigar bars to sell any type of alcohol, get a liquor permit, or have other types of tangential elements that complement the cigar bar experience."

Denny Powell, the chair of the Ohio state advocacy committee for the American Heart Association clapped back in a statement on May 16 saying the bill would "permit any establishment that derives more than 15% of its gross revenue from the sale of cigars and cigar-related products to expand indoor cigar smoking."

Columbus' House of Cigar Founder and CEO Diab Ellan is not excited about the bill either.

"I think this will take business from the smoke shops," said Ellan. "Other businesses will start allowing (it) especially if (they are) freestanding."

Could other establishments allow indoor smoking?

House Bill 530 does have specific stipulations in place to prohibit noncigar establishments from allowing indoor smoking.

The bill defines "cigar bars" as businesses that derive more than 15% of their gross revenue from the sale of cigar products while located within "a freestanding structure, occupied solely by the establishment, where smoke from the establishment cannot migrate into an enclosed area where smoking is prohibited."

Mathews acknowledged the American Heart Association's concerns but said the bill is not changing the spirit of the Smoke Free Workplace Act, nor endangering anyone who is not already aware of the health risks they are imposing on themselves by visiting such an establishment.

"However, that (2006's Smoke Free Workplace Act) was to make sure that there were nonsmoking sections at your Buffalo Wild Wings or normal restaurants," said Mathews. "The language (in House Bill 530) has definitions of cigar bar where it's a social club and a facility there. No one accidentally goes to a cigar bar and is surprised that there's smoking at the bar."

Addressing the change from 80% of revenue derived from cigars and cigar-adjacent products to 15%, Mathews said it was a sufficient margin to accurately represent seller intent.

"This number comes from making sure we have a clear line between a de minimis sale of cigar and cigar related products, and those that have made this their main goal and 15% is significant enough," said Mathews.

James Meerdink, community advocacy director at the American Heart Association, doesn't think 15% is an adequate margin of revenue. Dell'Aquila said that number may not appeal to everyone as a minimum and could change.

"I think we need to flesh that out in the hearing process," said Dell'Aquila.

According to Mathews, this percentage was also chosen based on conversations about revenue with cigar bar owners.

While this may be the case, the American Heart Association is concerned about preventing disease and death.

"It's really changing the definition of cigar bar and we don't want that change," said Meerdink. "We're happy with the current pathway. And, you know, as to profitability and things like that, obviously we prioritize public health."

Meerdink thinks decreasing barriers like this damages the public consciousness around tobacco use. "We're also normalizing smoking when we've done 20 years to try to say that no, if you have a restaurant or a bar, you should still be able to breathe clean air while you're drinking or eating," said Meerdink. "We think it represents a step backward for public health in Ohio, and it'll result in exposing more people both workers but also patrons to secondhand smoke, which is a deadly thing."

The American Cancer Society says there is also a financial cost to expanding where people can smoke.

"The annual health care costs in Ohio directly caused by smoking is $6.56 billion," said Leonardo Almeida, the Ohio director of government relations at the American Cancer Society, citing data from Truth Initiative , America’s largest nonprofit public health organization with the mission to end youth and young adult nicotine addiction. "Okay, so billion with a B. And that includes $1.85 billion in costs to Medicaid."

Dell'Aquila does not believe that the bill promotes an increase in smoking.

"This isn't an attempt to allow for the use of cigarettes or anything like that. This is strictly cigars, which in the proposal are defined as tobacco wrapped in leaf," said Dell'Aquila.

Ellan said that indoor smoking, even in his lounge, is not drawing huge crowds.

"Sometimes we'll be loaded, sometimes just one, two people [or] three people." said Ellan. "Mostly they take the cigar and leave. And the real cigar smokers, they always buy what they need and go to his house, especially in summer time."

Nfishman@dispatch.com

Dhunt@dispatch.com

This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Ohio lawmakers want to ease smoking restrictions on cigar bars. Health experts slam idea