Criticism of the Maryville Smoking Ban Report

Maryville Missouri is located in northwest Missouri, has a population of about 11,000 and is the county seat Nodaway County which has a population of about 22,000. It is located centrally in the county. The closest large community with smoking restaurants is St. Joseph MO which is 40 miles away. The city council of Maryville passed a smoking ban ordinance which took effect June 9, 2003. Antismoking activists have cited the Maryville experience as a case study which concludes the ban has had a positive effect on bar and restaurant business and a report of this study has been published on the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services website. The study itself is not published on any website. However, the “report” of the study has been cited as evidence bans don’t hurt business by Missouri antismoking activists pushing for smoking bans within the state, although the Maryville study has not gained much national attention.

The Maryville study has already been criticized by St. Louis Federal Reserve economist, Michael Pacco, who found without the addition of a new Applebees which was annexed by the city of Maryville during construction, bar and restaurant business would not have outperformed other kinds of retail after the ban took effect. http://research.stlouisfed.org/regecon/op/CRE8OP-2005-002.pdf To quote from this study, “The Applebees variable is highly significant, with a point estimate that suggests it accounts for a 19.2% increase in Maryville bar and restaurant sales in the second quarter of 2004 (along with a 9.6% increase in the first quarter).” He e-mailed me that the best estimate was that that translated into $323 thousand in sales in Applebees during the first quarter of 2004, and $680 thousand during the second quarter of 2004. He also noted that the unemployment rate in Nodaway County fell about the same time the Maryville ordinance took effect. This may have masked some of the economic loss the ban might have otherwise caused. An abstract of the Maryville study was presented at the 2005 National Conference on Smoking or Health http://ncth.confex.com/ncth/responses/2005/784.ppt, but the abstract made no mention of the Federal Reserve study, nor the other economic factors which will be explored in this article. It did mention some establishments are complaining of business loss.

I have had private communications with the Missouri Restaurant Association that the Maryville ban ordinance grandfathers several bars and restaurants in Maryville which had smoking before the ban took effect. In addition, Maryville Missouri is also home to Northwest Missouri State University and no one has examined the relationship between economic activity the university generates, and it’s potential effect on bar and restaurant business.

Other recent research, conducted by Michael Evans has found bans in Canada have seriously hurt bar business. : http://www.pubcoalition.com. Michael J. McFadden and I reviewed U.S. Dept of Commerce economic census data for bar and restaurant retail sales and concluded states with statewide smoking bans or containing many large municipalities with smoking bans, harmed their bar and restaurant businesses significantly from 1990 through 1998. http://www.smokersclubinc.com/economic.html

In contrast, antismoking activists, claim studies funded by Big Tobacco, or those sympathetic to Big Tobacco find bans hurt business while those funded by antismoking groups find bans do not. Finally, a new study, purportedly being prepared by Harvard University researchers claims the statewide Massachusetts ban has not hurt business, but in that instance, most local governments in Massachusetts had banned smoking years ago, and I don’t believe a statewide ban would have any additional impact.

In the event the Maryville report ever disappears from Missouri’s website, the report is reproduced, at the end of this article, as Exhibit A, but may currently be accessed at the link:

A copy of the Maryville smoking ban ordinance is reproduced, at the end of this article, as Exhibit B. Maryville MO does not have a website.

When comparing the Missouri Department of Health’s report of the study, which was evidently prepared by the pro-ban group, Citizens for a Smoke Free Nodaway County, to the Maryville ordinance, and other evidence of economic activity in Maryville, two discrepancies and several issues are evident.

1. The Maryville ordinance stipulates that bars are exempt, and defined as an area ( enclosed on all sides) deriving at least 60% of revenue from alcoholic beverage sales, the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Service’s summary of the Maryville ban study states the ordinance exempts establishments having at least 70% liquor sales.

2. The Maryville ordinance exempts, by name, three establishments which serve a full dining menu, namely Burney’s Sports Bar, Murphy’s, and The Outback. The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Service’s ( MDHSS) report omits this information from it’s report.

3. Of the 33 restaurants in business in Maryville when the ordinance took effect, 20 were already smoke-free, 13 had smoking, and three still do. ( The other four are exempt bars) Only 10 establishments were affected by the ban, but 6 of those may not have been affected for other reasons such as being catering businesses for senior citizens.

4. The profile of the restaurant business in Maryville is a relatively high percentage of fast food and take-out, as would be expected in an university town. Maryville has about 11,000 residents, but it also has about 6500 university students, attending Northwest Missouri State University. The MDHSS report does not address this issue and it’s possible confounding effects.

5. Northwest Missouri State University issued about $65 million in revenue bonds, and began extensive construction and renovation projects on campus about the same time the ordinance took effect. Nodaway County does not have any large construction companies in business there, so many construction workers had to commute in and these workers had to eat. The MDHSS report omits this information and it’s potential confounding effect.

6. Maryville is geographically isolated in that no other establishments are located within convenient commuting distance outside Maryville where smokers could easily go to dine out, except for Gray Truck Stop & Restaurant and Walter BROS. The MDHSS report omits this critical information from it’s report.

7. Northwest Missouri State University expanded the number of enrolled students from about 5500 in 2002, to 6574 in Fall 2003. This amounts to a 6% increase in the town’s actual population, but would also cause more visitors of the added students to come to Maryville for various reasons. The MDHSS report omits this obviously important confounding information.

8. A new Applebees was built, and opened in January 2004, but this was already addressed by the Federal Reserve research. It is only reiterated because the MDHSS report again omits this critical information from it’s report.

9. Only 16.8% of Nodaway County residents smoke. http://www.dhss.mo.gov/SmokingAndTobacco/Cess_NW.pdf

This is far below our nation’s smoking rate. For comparison, the smoking rate in Missouri is 26.4%. The MDHSS report also omits this obviously important information, even though they were the agency which compiled the Nodaway Co. smoking rate information.

Obs.1.& 2. The MDHSS report makes no effort to distinguish between eating and drinking places, and just eating places. This is important because qualifying for the Maryville ordinance exemption by having 60% sales from alcoholic beverages is much easier than achieving the 70% target claimed by the report. It is possible the exempt establishments achieved much greater relative combined revenue than the nonexempt restaurants due to shifting of customers from establishments which had to comply, to exempt establishments without causing the exempt establishments to achieve more than 40% revenue from food sales. It is also possible enforcement of the 40% limit is lax. Put another way, if the seven exempt establishments took in half of the eating and drinking place revenue presented in the MDHSS report, and 40% of this is food, 20% of all food sales became exempt from the ordinance. Additionally, since only ten, or fewer, full service restaurants were affected by the ban, seven exempt establishments could take a lot of business away from them without any of the data presented in the MDHSS report being able to pick that up.

3 & 4 I e-mailed the MDHSS and received this information from one of the reviewers of the Maryville study.

I also count 13 restaurants listed in the Verizon Yellow Pages, but still in Maryville which appear to be fast food or take-out restaurants, and therefore not likely to be impacted by a ban. I also believe the six restaurants which are catering for senior citizens, which may include delivery of meals to homes, would not be impacted by a smoking ban because senior citizens have a very low smoking rate, and may not be able to commute to establishments outside Maryville for smoking accommodations. I disagree with the MDHSS, on this very important issue. The higher the percentage of these kinds of restaurants in Maryville, the less impact a smoking ban will have on business. Nineteen establishments fit in this category, seven more are exempted by name in the ordinance presented as exhibit B, and two are outside the city limits and not subject to the ban. All-in-all, 28 establishments out of the 33 fit into one of these categories, so evaluating the data this way, I believe the ban may have impacted as few as five establishments, or only 15% of all establishments in Maryville.

According to Tobacco Free Press, 70% of Maryville restaurants were smoke free prior to enactment of the ban. This works out to 23 restaurants. This is more than the 20 out of 33 claimed by the MDHSS. This estimate may be due to the inclusion of the 16 smoke-free establishments on campus, or it could be more accurate. If more accurate, then only ten restaurants were affected by the ban, but three are exempt. This estimate leaves seven restaurants expected to be impacted:

Obs. 4&6 Maryville has excessive fast food and takeout establishments, and few establishments are located outside Maryville, close enough for commuting.

A list of all establishments found in Verizon’s superpages.com website under the search term restaurants or bars in Maryville and within 25 miles from Maryville is presented below:

Establishment	subject to ordinance	reason	expected to be impacted	smoking pre ordinance		smoking post ordinance
Applebees	Y	in city limits, mostly food	N	not open	N
3^rd St Diner	Y	in city limits, mostly food	Y	?	N
A&G Restaurant	Y	in city limits mostly food	N	N	N
Autumn House	Y	retirement home in city	N	?	N
Burger King	Y	100% food	N	N	N
Burney’s Sports Bar	N, exempt	exempted by name, full menu	N	Y	Y
Casey’s Carryout Pizza	Y	100% food	N	N	N
Country Kitchen	Y	100% food	Y	Y	N
Dewey’s Dairy Queen	Y	100% food	N	N	N
Domino’s Pizza	Y	!00% food	N	N	N
Easter Food’s Delli & Pizza	Y	100% food	N	N	N
Grey Truck Stop	N	outside city limits, 3 miles	N	N	N
Happy Garden	Y	mostly food	Y	?	N
Hardees	Y	100% food	N	N	N
Kentucky Fried Chicken	Y	100% food	N	N	N
LA Bonita Mex. Rest	Y	mostly food	Y	?	N
Long John Silvers	Y	mostly food	Y	?	N
Lucky’s	N	exempt by name, bar	N	N	N
Main St. Coffee House	Y	mostly food	Y	?	N
Mandarin Restaurant	Y	mostly food	Y	?	N
Maryville Super 8	Y	mostly food	Y	?	N
Mc Donalds	Y	100% food	N	N	N
Mr Goodcents Subs and Pizza	Y	100% food	N	N	N
Molly’s	N	exempt by name, bar	N	N	N
Murphy’s	N	exempt by name, full menu	N	N	N
Pagliai’s Pizza	Y	100% food	N	N	N
Pizza Hut	Y	100% food	N	N	N
Simmons Village Restaurant Deli	Y	100% food	N	?	N
Sonic Drive In	Y	100% food	N	N	N
States Pizza	Y	mostly food	N	?	N
The Pub	N	exempt by name, bar	N	Y	Y
Taco John’s	Y	100% food	N	?	N
The Outback	N	exempt by name, full menu	N	Y	Y
Walter BROS, Inc	N	outside city limits, 3 miles	N	?	?
1 rest, Barnard MO	N	outside city limits, 9 miles
1 rest, Ravenwood MO	N	outside city limits 14 miles
1 rest, Burlington MO	N	outside city limits, 15 miles
1 rest, Clearmont MO	N	outside city limits, 18 miles
2 rest, Hopkins MO	N	outside city limits, 16 miles
2 rest, Skidmore MO	N	outside city limits, 22 miles
1 rest Sheridan MO	N	outside city limits, 23 miles
6 rest Stanberry MO	N	outside city limits, 20+ miles
9 rest, Savanna MO	N	outside city limits, 25+ miles
16 establishments*	Y	On Campus N.W. MO St. U	N	N	N

* Some of this business was subject to sales tax, and included in data used by the authors of the Maryville report. Reference #6 lists the campus establishments, and that some sales are subject to sales tax. ( reference 6 and 7)

It appears from the list I was able to compile from the Verizon Yellow Pages, that there are 33 establishments in Maryville, not including those on campus. This is consistent with the e-mail from the MDHHS, except that e-mail said there’re 33 eating establishments, and some are actually bars. Further, the sixteen establishments located on the campus of Northwest Missouri State University are obviously not included in the e-mail from the MDHSS nor the Yellow Pages. However, the ordinance did not bring thirteen additional restaurants to be smokefree, as claimed in the e-mail, the estimated number from the table is eight and some of those may be the senior citizens catering establishments already addressed. I conclude from the review of the Yellow pages, that approximately five of the thirteen restaurants which became smoke-free due to the ordinance would not reasonably be expected to be impacted by the ban. This leaves eight restaurants which would be expected to be impacted by the ban, three more than the estimate from the information in the MDHSS e-mail, and one more than the estimate from the data in the Tobacco Free Press release. A lower estimate of five, and a higher estimate of eight restaurants were impacted by the ban.

One should note that Grey’s Truck Stop and Walter BROS are outside the city limits and therefore not subject to the ban. Besides those two, there are no other restaurants within an 18-mile round trip for customers who seek smoking accommodation. With 11,000 residents and 6500 students in Maryville, ( the impact of the high student population is examined in more detail later) one-third of potential bar and restaurant customers are students, and many do not have transportation to commute to the establishments located in other towns.

Obs. 7. I accessed Northwest Missouri State University’s website and obtained much information regarding the nature of the student enrollment over time.

The University also has a significant economic impact on Maryville, as described on their website:

http://www.nwmissouri.edu/news/NEWSRELEASES/030623TWRALLIANCE.htm (or see reference #2)

To briefly summarize, the economic impact of the University’s presence on Nodaway County is that it is one-sixth of the county’s economy. Students spend $0.72 cents of every discretionary dollar off campus.

Naturally, if Northwest Missouri State University’s enrollment increases, the economic impact on the surrounding community will increase. Indeed, that happened just about the time the smoking ban took effect. In the Spring of 2002, approximately 5500 students were enrolled, but during the Spring 2003 trimester enrollment increased to 5967 students.

http://www.nwmissouri.edu/news/newsreleases/021002enrollment.HTM ( or see reference #3)

http://www.nwmissouri.edu/news/archives/springenrollment.htm ( or see reference #4)

In fact, enrollment had stayed even for several years prior to 2002 because the availability of student housing was constant.

In 2003 the Fall trimester enrollment increased to 6574 students. To summarize, total enrollment increased from 5522 students in the Spring of 2002 to 6574 students in the Fall of 2003, or a 19% increase.

It is reasonable to expect the 19% student increase, during the post-ban interval of the Maryville report to spend 19% more in retail in Maryville. These students would not spend in the same manner as full-time residents because they do not have the same needs. For example they do not have homes that need furnishings, maintenance and repair, many do not have automobiles, most student spending would be limited to entertainment and clothing, for example. Note Figure 1 of the Maryville report does not show an increase in total retail spending, post-ban, beyond the growth that had been occurring between 1998 and 2002, when student enrollment was constant. For this reason, I believe the increased student population would favor increased spending in bars and restaurants 19%, but they comprise about 1/3 of all potential customers in Maryville, and therefore increased enrollment probably contribute 7% more overall revenue to bars and restaurants in Maryville than would have occurred without the increased presence of students This factor would increase total bar and restaurant spending in Maryville from $3.5 million in the second quarter of 2002 to $3.75 million in the second quarter of 2004., a difference of $0.2 million, without a ban. For the purpose of this analysis, this is considered the high estimate.

To establish if student spending comprises one-third of total bar and restaurant spending in Maryville, the University’s website suggestion that the average student should plan to spend about $12 dollars off campus in their food budget, each weekend, is used. http://www.nwmissouri.edu/RESLIFE/boring.htm (or see reference #6)

If 5500 students spent $12 each weekend off campus in bars and restaurants, this would amount to $66,000 each weekend ($858,000 per quarter) during the Spring of 2002. With 6574 students enrolled during the Fall of 2003, this would amount to $79,000 per weekend ( $1.02 million) post ban, an increase of $162,000 per quarter when classes are in session for a full quarter. Adjusting these figures for the Northwest Nodaway County Economic Impact Study, reference #2, that found students spend $0.72 of every dollar off campus, the numbers become ($617,760 per quarter during the Spring of 2002) and ($734,440 per quarter during the Spring of 2004). According to Figure 1 in the Maryville report, total eating and drinking sales increased from $3.5 million during the Spring of 2002, to $4.2 million during the Spring of 2004. (From these data, it appears student spending accounts for 1/4 of total bar and restaurant spending in Maryville). The difference, between the Spring of 2002 and the Spring of 2004, included the $0.12 million spent by 19% more students, or 17% of the Maryville report’s measured bar and restaurant increase of $0.7 million from Q-2 2002 to Q-2 2004 was actually due to the presence of more students. This amounts to 3% of Maryville’s total bar and restaurant sales in Q-2 2004. This differs from my estimated $0.2 million more overall revenue to bars and restaurants because this uses the University’s estimates of student off-campus food budget spending only. The difference between $0.12 and $0.2 million might be due to more visitors of more students and this seems reasonable. For the purpose of this analysis, $0.12 million is considered the low estimate of the impact of increased student enrollment on bar and restaurant spending.

Evidently the University collects sales tax on some meals served in the cafeterias. This includes students on the commuter plan, and visitors who pay cash. It is likely purchases that have sales tax, become included in the SIC 58 data used by the authors of the Maryville study because they are treated like ordinary bar and restaurant retail, not tax exempt purchases for education: This may also explain some of the difference between $0.12 and 0.2 million, discussed above.

If 80% of all students participated in a meal plan, they would have spent, typically, $1000 each for each trimester, or $3000/ from Sept. 2003 through June 2003. For that period then, 80% of 5522 students would then spend $13.3 million on the food plan. According to Figure I in the MDHHS report, approx. $9.5 million was spent in Maryville for food and drink in those 3 quarters from the Sept. of 2002 through June 2003. Therefore it is concluded most purchases of food on the food plan are not subject to sales tax, and not included in the sales data in Figure 1 of the Maryville report.

Your message was forwarded to the ID Office as our office maintains the meal plans on campus. The full meal plans (Aladine, Aladine Lite and Aladine Super) and the Commuter meal plan ($300) are non-taxable. All other meal plans ($25 increment declining and Inclining plans for commuters only) are taxable. Please let me know if you have any other questions.

Obs. 5. Construction activity also picked up at the same time the ban took effect:

The University launched a large dormitory building program in March 2003. The new Forest Village Apartments has three buildings with 190 beds each. The new Tower Suites consists of two buildings with 350 beds, total. The addition of these 920 beds is the reason approximately 1000 more students were enrolled at the University in Fall 2004 than Fall 2002. The construction was completed during the Summer of 2004 and cost approximately $25 million.

http://www.nwmissouri.edu/RESLIFE/PHASEQUESTIONS.HTM ( or see reference 7 below)

http://www.nwmissouri.edu/UniversityRelations/news/NEWSRELEASES/031112belltowermakeover.HTM The Bell Tower got a complete makeover, work began May 2004.

http://www.nwmissouri.edu/news/events/distribcenter.htm Construction on a new materials handling building was begun in 2003.

During the time the smoking ban took effect, a new stadium was also under construction. It was completed by the Fall 2003, and cost $5.5 million.

http://www.nwmissouri.edu/UniversityRelations/news/NEWSRELEASES/030729StadiumGift.htm

All-in-all, approximately $33 million was spent on construction by the University and most of that spending took place from approximately two months before the ban took effect, to shortly after the second quarter of 2004. This coincides almost exactly with the post-ban time-span studied by the Maryville report.

Large construction projects have major impacts of economies of lightly populated areas. For example, the State of Utah found construction of the facilities for the 2002 Winter Olympics had a dramatic impact on the growth of the service sector between 1997 and 2001. Not counting 2002, when the service sector was impacted not only by construction workers, but also the visitors to the Olympics, roughly $100 million was spent in the service sector while $630 million was spent on the construction. Between 1997 and 2001, one of every six dollars spent on construction was returned to the service sector. Approximately one-third of the service sector is bars and restaurants. Therefore one of every eighteen dollars spent constructing the facilities for the 2002 Winter Olympics was spent in bars and restaurants.

Table 2: Total Direct Olympics Related In-State Spending by Industry
(Millions of 1998 Dollars)
Industry	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	Total
Agriculture	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Mining	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Construction	0.0	99.3	119.1	128.9	126.5	162.7	20.3	656.9
Manufacturing	0.0	0.0	0.1	0.4	0.7	2.5	0.9	4.6
Transportation & Public Utilities	0.0	0.1	0.1	0.2	0.3	0.6	34.0	35.2
Trade	0.0	0.2	0.4	0.9	2.8	18.7	43.7	66.8
Finance, Insurance & Real Estate	0.2	0.4	0.7	0.9	1.4	2.2	1.3	7.1
Services	0.7	1.0	3.6	8.0	19.6	60.4	147.4	240.7
Employee Spending	2.2	3.9	7.3	12.2	31.9	58.9	40.3	156.7
Total	3.2	104.9	131.3	151.5	183.2	306.1	287.9	1,168.1
Source: Governor's Office of Planning and Budget.

Large construction projects have a large impact on jobs in bar and restaurant industry too:

Table 7: Employment Impacts by Detailed Industry Resulting from the 2002 Olympic Winter Games
	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	Total
Construction	1	655	786	852	842	1,094	280	4,509
Business Services	12	161	231	315	496	1,167	692	3,075
Retail Trade	11	250	317	371	477	790	385	2,602
Eating and Drinking Places	5	94	125	147	195	643	721	1,930
Amusements	21	53	93	148	271	487	90	1,162
Health Services	6	100	129	155	214	371	170	1,145
Wholesale Trade	3	102	128	153	203	384	155	1,129
Total	89	2,109	2,688	3,168	3,992	7,135	3,551	22,732
Source: Governor's Office of Planning and Budget.

Another way to measure the impact of large construction projects on the bar and restaurant business is to measure the impact on employment in these businesses. For every ten jobs in construction, in Utah, one job was created, on average, in the bar and restaurant sector. It should be noted, that elsewhere on the Utah Olympic website, many construction workers temporarily relocated their families to Utah for the duration of the construction.

Northwest Missouri State University spent approximately $25 million on construction of student housing, $5 million on the new stadium, and an undetermined smaller amount on the new materials handling building, and refurbishing the bell tower. Total construction spending is estimated to be $33 million between the first quarter of 2003 and the second quarter of 2004. This would contribute about $2 million in spending in Maryville’s bars and restaurants during the same period, or about $300,000 per quarter, or about an 8.6% increase. For the purposes of this article, this is the high estimate. If the projects employed 250 construction workers, and each one spent $10/day on food and perhaps a quick beer after work, this amounts to $15,000/6-day week, or $195,000/quarter of a year. This is lower than the estimate from the Utah study, but it is unlikely some families of these workers relocated to Maryville. Without the construction, each quarter of the bar and restaurant sales data from mid 2003 to 2004 in Figure 1 of the Maryville report would have been about 6% lower. For the purposes of this article, this is the low estimate. It should be noted, as in the case of Utah, that many of these workers had to commute from other locations because Nodaway County does not have sufficient tradesmen as residents, to supply the workforce for projects of this magnitude.

I have deducted the lower of two estimates for each of increased student enrollment and construction worker spending in bars and restaurants in Maryville previously discussed in this article from the Maryville report’s data to obtain adjusted sales data which would have occurred with a ban, but without the three atypical economic factors previously discussed.

The Maryville bar and restaurant sales data are summarized with the findings of this article:

	Q-1 2002	Q-2 2002	Q-3 2002	Q-4 2002	Q-1 2003	Q-2 2003	BAN	Q-3 2003	Q-4 2003	Q-1 2004	Q-2 2004
B&R sales Maryville report	3.25M	3.50M	3.45M	3.40M	3.15M	3.50M		3.50M	3.55M	3.80M	4.20M
Applebees	0	0	0	0	0	0		0	0	.32M	.68M
more students*	0	0	.02M	.05M	.05M	.03 M		.04M	.12M	.12M	.07M
construction workers	0	0	0	0	.2M	.2M		.2M	.2M	.2M	.2M
Adjusted B&R Sales	3.25M	3.50M	3.43M	3.35M	2.90M	3.27M		3.26M	3.23M	3.16M	3.25M
Total Retail Sales	32.5M	35.5M	36.0M	37.5M	33.5M	34.0M		36.0M	39.0M	35.5M	40.5M

* further adjusted to nearest month when fiscal quarter does not completely overlap University trimester.

The total adjusted bar and restaurant sales from Q-3 2003 through Q-2 2004 was $12.90 million.

The total adjusted bar and restaurant sales from Q-3 2002 through Q-2 2003 was 12.95 million. Despite inclusion of Q-1 2003 when bar and restaurant sales were low for unknown reasons (possibly bad weather), adjusted sales were 4% lower in the four quarters post ban than the four quarters pre ban. Total retail sales were $141 million in the same quarters pre ban, and $151 million post ban, an increase of 7%, and a difference from bar and restaurant sales of 11%. This becomes the low estimate of bar and restaurant loss relative to other retail sales. Prior to the ban, bar and restaurant sales trends roughly paralleled total retail spending, for example, during 1998, bar and restaurant sales were $12.2million and total retail sales were $122 million. During 2002, bar and restaurant sales were $13.5 million and total retail sales were $141 million. Bar and restaurant sales were historically 10% of total retail sales. Therefore there is no reason not to expect this trend to continue through Q-2 2004, except for the ban. Without the ban, and without increased spending in Applebees, increased spending by more students, and by construction workers, bar and restaurant spending would have been approximately $15.1 million during the Q-3 2003 through the Q-2 2004 period. If one then adds the $1million in sales at Applebees, plus $0.2 million from more students, and $0.4 million from construction worker spending, bar and restaurant sales would have totaled $16.7 million Q-3 2003 to Q-2 2004, instead of the $15.1 million from the Maryville report, or 11% higher with the atypical factors included. This agrees with the previous estimate of ban loss.

First, some issues and circumstances are summarized surrounding the impact of the June 2003 smoking ban would lead one to expect very little harm to Maryville’s bars and restaurants:

* Nodaway County has a 16.8% smoking rate, and therefore 60-70% of all establishments in Maryville were already smoke-free pre ban. The dining preferences of 83% of the customers of Maryville’s bars and restaurants would not be highly impacted by a ban.

* One out of three bar and restaurant customers is a student, and even among those who smoke, younger smokers are more tolerant of not being allowed to smoke.

* Very few establishments exist within reasonable commuting distance outside the city limits.

* A sufficient number of establishments were exempted from the ban, to serve the demand for smoking accommodation. This included three full menu establishments. Since between ten and thirteen restaurants allowed smoking pre ban, 25% of restaurants which had smoking still do. Of the approximately seven to ten restaurants that became subject to the ban, it is probable some of those were the six senior citizen catering businesses which would not be affected by the ban. Between five and eight restaurants would reasonably be expected to be impacted by the ban. Some of this business could have transferred to the exempt establishments and the Maryville report’s data could not detect that possibility. Indeed, the abstract of the Maryville study presented at the 2005 National Conference on Smoking or Health stated some owners are complaining.

Second, some economic developments occurred at the same time the ban took effect which would offset the impact of the ban.

* Student enrollment increased for the first time in a decade, which should have contributed between three and seven percent more revenue to Maryville’s bars and restaurants, post-ban. Approximately eighteen percent of the increase in bar and restaurant sales in the Maryville report’s post-ban data was actually due to higher student enrollment.

* New construction spending by Northwest Missouri State University should have increased Maryville’s bar and restaurant sales between six and eight percent, post-ban.

* The Federal Reserve study found that half the growth that did occur in Maryville’s bar and restaurant business was due to the opening of a new Applebees. Deducting the effect of the new Applebees,(15%) increased student spending,(4%) and increased business from construction workers,(6%) the ban would have caused a bar and restaurant business loss of about 25%.

Considering the probability that some food sales transferred to exempt establishments, and the probability one-third of customers (students) have disproportionately low access to transportation, using overall sales trends of restaurant revenue cannot conclude the smoking ban did not have an effect on some of the establishments inside Maryville. One cannot conclude from these unusual circumstances, that generally bans will not affect business in other communities because Maryville’s bar and restaurant economic situation is atypical, in that it is relatively isolated, contains a relatively high percentage of fast food and takeout establishments compared to typical communities, it has a low smoking rate, one-third of the population is students, and between 60 and 70% of establishments were already smoke-free. Fortunately for most of the owners of Maryville establishments, the ban did not significantly impact their sales, probably because only between five and eight establishments were actually impacted, but this cannot be interpreted to mean that bans will not impact business in typical communities.

In conclusion, this article found the ban would have cost bar and restaurant retailers in Maryville between an 11 and 29% loss, were it not for the atypical issues discussed within. This is close to the conclusions of other studies funded by sources other than antismoking groups which find bans usually hurt business about 25%.

As a final note, the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services should have obtained data from Springfield and Jefferson City Missouri, which also have smoking bans with some exemptions. This would have helped them determine if the Maryville report was atypical of economic impacts of bans in general. Since these cities do not have similar atypical economic and demographic circumstances and I suspect studying these cities, would cause one to conclude bans do hurt business. What I find particularly bothersome is that some of the authors of the Maryville study live in Nodaway County, and must have known about Northwest’s construction projects and possibly the increased enrollment of students, but deliberately chose to ignore those factors.

Considering the Missouri Restaurant Association has informed me that the Kreigers Sports Bar in Arnold, which now has a ban, has lost between 30 and 40% of it’s business, and the recent media release of testimony by a Denny’s corporate executive that the Denny’s in Arnold is losing about $15,000 per month, I think the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services should reevaluate the quality of the Maryville report.

Through voluntary policies, 70 percent of restaurants in Maryville, population 10,663, have become smoker. Citizens for Smoke Free Nodaway County is ready to take it this to the next level through enactment of a city ordinance banning smoking in all restaurants. It would be the first such ordinance in Missouri. A hearing on the ordinance is scheduled for late February 2003. In addition, Tobacco-Free Missouri is supporting a bill to ban smoking on all city-owned and -leased property, including Lambert International Airport. St. Louis University and University of California-Berkeley are conducting air quality tests in Lambert Field.

Final figures are in for Northwest Missouri State University’s fall enrollment and, according to Bev Schenkel, dean of enrollment management, undergraduate numbers are even with last year.

Spring enrollment increases

The numbers are in and they’re good. Final census figures for the spring 2002 trimester show an increase in enrollment.

Currently, 5,967 students are enrolled at Northwest. That’s an increase of 445 students over the same period last year. Both the number of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled this trimester has increased from last spring. ( note the Spring 2002 trimester was actually Spring 2003, just when the smoking ban took effect)

- 6574 Total Enrollment

- 5494 Undergraduate students

- 1080 Graduate students

- 1180 First-time freshmen

- 297 Transfer students

Meal Plan Name	Who	Description	Spending Power Per Trimester	Cost Per Trimester
Super Aladine	Residents or Commuters	Designed for those who want to take advantage of everything Campus Dining has to offer.	Four Installments of $207.50 Per Trimester	$1,230.00
Regular Aladine	Residents or Commuters	This plan is for those who have a moderate appetite. Students on this plan may dine frequently on campus, but will spend wisely when it comes to extras such as pizza delivery and the convenience store.	Four Installments of $275 Per Trimester	$1,100.00
Lite Aladine	Residents or Commuters	Like all the other Aladine plans, Lite Aladine still gives you the ability to use your declining balance dollars at any Campus Dining location. However, due to the lower amount of money available to spend, Lite is the perfect plan for those with smaller appetites or for those who spend most of their weekends off campus.	Four Installments of $242.50 Per Trimester	$970.00
Apartment Basic	Forest Village Residents Only	One of three plans available for residents of Forest Village. Provides a one time lump sum to be spent each trimester.	$300 per trimester	$300.00
Apartment Delux	Forest Village Residents Only	One of three plans available for residents of Forest Village. Provides a one time lump sum to be spent each trimester.	$600 per trimester	$600
Inclining Balance	Commuters or Forest Village Residents Only	This plan is the ultimate in convenient dining. Sign up once a year, and your Bearcat card becomes a credit card allowing you to accumulate charges throughout the month for purchases. Charges are then billed to your University account.	No limits
Commuter Meal Plan	Commuters Only	Gives you a lump sum to spend throughout the trimester. A bonus of this plan is that once you sign up, all your purchases become tax exempt.	$300 per trimester	$300.00
$25 Increments Commuter or Residents.	Anyone	Commuters who can’t use the full plan can choose this option. Dollars in any $25 increment can be added to your card throughout the trimester. Sales tax is applied to each increment. Residents can use this option once funds run low to keep enjoying all that Campus Dining has to offer.	Any increment of $25

1. Students living in University residence halls must have a meal contract. Any exceptions (i.e., medical or internship) must be approved by Housing and Food Service officials.

MEAL PLANS

Northwest offers meal plans for students both on and off campus. All on campus students must have a meal contract. All of the current meal plans give you the freedom to eat at any of the dining facilities on campus.

ALADINE

Campus Dining offers three different Aladine plans for you to choose from. All Aladine plans are based on a declining balance system. Each time a student purchases food they present their meal card (Bearcat ID) to the cashier and the cashier deducts from the balance on the card. Unused balances do not carry over from trimester to trimester nor is it refunded in cash. The student's money for this program will be deposited on their card in four installments.

The difference in the three Aladine plans is the amount of spending power they give to the student during the trimester. Super Aladine is the largest plan giving students the most money to take advantage of all the options that Campus Dining has to offer. Regular Aladine is the middle of the road plan. This plan is best for students who dine frequently on campus, but who will spend wisely when it comes to the extras such as pizza delivery or the convenience store. Finally, Lite Aladine is specifically tailored for those with smaller appetites or for those who spend most of their weekends off campus.

COMMUTER ALADINE. Designed for the commuting student, this plan allots $225 per trimester for food purchases. In addition $25 increments can be added at any time without an additional charge for sales tax. This plan also follows the declining balance system.

INCLINING BALANCE PLAN

With this meal plan, your Bearcat Card acts as a credit card. Charges are accumulated throughout the month and then billed to you.

A credit card is required for enrollment in this plan. If your bill is not paid by the specified due date, the amount owed will be charged to your credit card.

For those needing to add money to their cards, $25 increments can be added anytime throughout the trimester. Sales tax is applied to each $25 increment for students who are not already enrolled in a meal plan.

Regardless of which meal plan, each student must use his/her own Bearcat Card.

CAMPUS DINING

Campus Dining Services caters to all University divisions and offers a wide variety of menu items to the University community. Campus dining areas are located in the J. W. Jones Student Union and University Conference Center. All areas accept any Campus Dining plan or cash.

BEARCAT FOOD COURT, located on the lower level of the Union, is the center of dining activity on campus. The Food Court enables students to choose from a wide variety of concepts and menu items in one convenient location. Areas in the Food Court include:

BENE PIZZERIA, positioned at the entrance of the Food Court, offers pizza by the slice, calzones and cheese stix.

BENE PASTA is truly special in that it is one of the few eating establishments that still makes pasta from scratch. The sauces and other specialty items are also prepared daily in our kitchen.

MONTAGUE'S DELI features meats, cheeses and a large variety of fresh toppings available in sub sandwiches, wraps and daily specials.

TORTILLA FRESCA specializes in burritos, fajitas and quesadillas made with fresh ingredients. This area is one that you will want to visit again and again.

SALAD GARDEN offers fresh tossed salad made to your specifications.

CENTER STAGE will offer a full vegetarian menu every weekday. Non-vegetarian students will also enjoy this station as a healthy alternative. Weekends, Center Stage will feature a traditional Mexican menu including tacos and nachos.

MARK PI CHINESE fast food is a student favorite. Beef, chicken, shrimp and vegetable items are cooked in woks over an open flame as you watch.

CRANBERRY FARMS features rotisserie chicken, hand-carved turkey, hearty overstuffed sandwiches and a wide array of homestyle side dishes. If you are looking for a filling meal with the flavors of homestyle cooking, check out this area.

FAST BREAKS is the new breakfast destination in the Food Court. Menu items include breakfast sandwiches, omelets, pancakes and much more. Saturdays, Fast Breaks will provide a traditional grill menu of hamburgers, chicken and French fries.

EASY GOES is a convenient, grab-and-go section stocked with items such as sandwiches, salads and ice cream. If you are in a hurry to get to class or want something quick to take back to your residence hall room, Easy Goes is the place to shop.

GRETEL'S BAKE SHOP offers a variety of baked goods, including donuts, pies and cakes made daily in our own bakery. If this does not sound tempting enough, cookies, cinnamon rolls and muffins are prepared right in the Food Court. The smell may be hard to resist.

KETTLE CLASSICS located in the center of the Food Court makes available two hot soups each day.

Drinks are available from four beverage islands in the middle of the Food Court. In additional to fountain colas, you can choose from fresh brewed coffee or tea or a soothing cup of cappuccino or hot chocolate.

FOOD COURT SERVING TIMES:

Monday-Thursday 7 a.m. - 7 p.m.

Friday 7 a.m. - 9 p.m.

Saturday 8 a.m. - 9 p.m.

Sunday 11 a.m. - 10 p.m.

BOBBY'S GRILLE is located next to the Food Court. Bobby's offers distinctive menus at lunch and dinner. By day, Bobby's makes available all your "grille" favorites including burgers, fries and philly steaks. By night, Bobby's is transformed into a made-to-order restaurant featuring steaks, shrimp, chicken and a long list of appetizers. Wait staff is available during evening hours.

BOBBY'S GRILLE SERVING TIMES:

Monday-Thursday 11 a.m. - 2 p.m. and 5 - 10 p.m.

Friday 11 a.m. - 2 p.m.

Saturday and Sunday Closed

SWEETS 'N TREATS. Even more options await you on second floor of the Union, Sweets 'N Treats offers a large supply of candy and gift items as well as FRESHEN'S frozen yogurt, ice cream and Smoothies. Hot, fresh pretzels with a variety of dipping sauces are also available from PRETZEL LOGIC in this area.

SWEETS 'N TREATS SERVING TIMES:

Monday-Thursday 10 a.m. - 8 p.m.

Friday 10 a.m. - 5 p.m.

Saturday and Sunday Closed

JAVA CITY

Located just around the corner from Sweets 'N Treats is Java City, the first nationally branded coffee shop in Maryville. Specializing in specialty coffees, cappuccinos, espressos, and an upscale line of pastries, sandwiches and salads, Java City is sure to have something for everyone.

JAVA CITY SERVING TIMES:

Monday-Thursday 7:30 a.m. - 7:30 p.m.

Friday 7:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.

Saturday and Sunday Closed

THE CELLAR FOOD SHOP

Need a snack on the west side of campus? The Cellar Food Shop is located on the lower level of the University Conference Center. The Cellar offers products ranging from macaroni & cheese, frozen pizzas, and cereal to laundry detergent, deodorant and air freshener.

Open Daily 5 p.m. - 11 p.m.

PIZZA DELIVERY

Campus Dining is proud of its continuing partnership with the local Domino's Pizza and Pizza Hut establishments. Your meal plan dollars can be used to order food for delivery from these establishments. Call for service times.

Domino's Pizza 562-2800

Pizza Hut 562-2468

BEARCAT CARD

The I.D. Office, located on the second floor of the Student Union, ext. 1430, processes Bearcat Cards necessary for access to food service. See the Bearcat Card Brochure for policies. Carry the card with you at all times.

BUDGETING

Your choice of meal plans may be determined by the amount of money you estimate you will spend daily. Also, whether or not you plan to spend weekends on or off campus may have an affect on your choice. Here are some guidelines for daily spending habits.

Super Aladine: $1,090/trimester Note (this is for fall 2003)

Weekends On Campus $10.00 daily

Weekends Off Campus $14.53 daily

Regular Aladine $990/trimester

Weekends On Campus $9.08 daily

Weekends Off Campus $13.20 daily

Lite Aladine: $890/trimester

Weekends On Campus $8.16 daily

Weekends Off Campus $11.86 daily

When will construction be done?

The apartments and suites are scheduled to open for students for the Fall Semester of 2004.

How many new buildings are there going to be?

Forest Village Apartments:

There will be three apartment buildings housing 190 beds. The apartment area will also have a community building that will have a front desk, small convenience store, meeting room, mailboxes and tornado shelter.

The apartment buildings will be three stories.

Tower Suites:

The suites will consist of two buildings that will house 350 beds total. Each building will be three stories.

The conference center will be renovated and serves as the front desk/ service/ lounge area.

What are they doing to the conference center? Is the cellar still going to be open?

The conference center will be completely renovated. The new facility will be called “The Station”. The Station will have a front desk, mailboxes, administrative offices, coffee shop, convenience store, meeting rooms, and gathering spaces. It will be open 24 hours a day for students to study or hang out with friends.

What time will construction begin? Stop?

Construction began in March of 2003 and will be completed during the summer of 2004.