Restaurants Sue New Jersey for Smoking Ban That Exempts Casinos
April 13, 200
Chris Dolmetsch
An anti-smoking law that New Jersey starts enforcing Saturday is causing tempers to rise at Lorenzo's, a Trenton landmark where politicians and the well- connected gather for cigars and steaks.
A party of men stormed out last month after owner Armando Frallicciardi Jr. asked patrons to refrain from smoking on Friday and Saturday nights in anticipation of the new law.
``You're dealing with a lot of egos,'' says Frallicciardi, an occasional cigar smoker who says the ban will cost his 84-year- old restaurant $36,000 in annual revenue. ``Cigars are associated with power, and we've been a place where the powerful have gathered for years.''
The New Jersey Restaurant Association, which represents about 1,200 owners of the state's 23,000 eating and drinking establishments, was part of a group that last month sued to overturn the ban. They argue that the state put them at a competitive disadvantage by exempting Atlantic City casinos from the law signed by former Governor Richard Codey in January.
The lawsuit calls for an immediate injunction that would prevent the ban from going into effect April 15. A hearing on the request is scheduled for today in U.S. District Court in Trenton.
The association said it didn't have an estimate for how much business would be lost. California, Connecticut and New York are among nine states that ban smoking in most workplaces, restaurants and bars to prevent tobacco-related illnesses, according to the American Lung Association.
Political Opposition
The ban was ``a specialized bill that left out Atlantic City,'' said State Assemblyman Joe Cryan, a Democrat from U nion and a non-smoker who frequents Lorenzo's. ``I voted against it, and I still think it's wrong.'' His family owns Cryan's restaurant in South Orange and plans a rally against the law.
Violators are subject to fines of as much as $1,000. In addition to New Jersey, Colorado, Montana, Utah and Washington, D.C., have passed laws banning smoking that haven't yet gone into effect. The New Jersey law also exempts establishments that get at least 15 percent of their revenue from tobacco.
Banning smoking from the casinos would cost the state $93 million in tax revenue in two years and 3,400 jobs, according to a PricewaterhouseCoopers report commissioned by the Casino Association of New Jersey.
The state's 12 casinos -- which include Harrah's Entertainment Inc.'s Showboat and Trump Entertainment Resorts Inc.'s Trump Taj Mahal -- attract more than 33 million visitors annually, employ more than 50,000 people and pay more than $350 million in state taxes every year, or about 2 percent of New Jersey's tax revenue.
The restaurant trade group says it would support a ban that included casinos and cigar bars, said association President Deborah Dowdell. At least four legislators have proposed bills that would remove the casino exemption from the law.
No Revenue Decline
Not every restaurant opposes the ban. Richard Carnevale, whose family has owned The Annex restaurant on Nassau Street in Princeton for almost 56 years, said his eatery, now called Sotto Ristorante, is smoke-free after a remodeling.
Carnevale, whose restaurant sued to overturn a Princeton smoking ban in 2000, said many people still don't like the idea of ``Big Brother government'' telling them what to do, especially when the casinos are exempted. He said he didn't join in the lawsuit because it's a moot point. ``Eventually Atlantic City will have to fall in line also,'' he said.
No Decline
An analysis by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Texas Department of Health found no decline in revenue in El Paso, population 564,000, when it enacted restrictions on smoking in 2002. The CDC said the finding was consistent with other large cities that instituted bans.
Al Bucchi, a non-smoker and legislative chairman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars of New Jersey, said there are mixed emotions about a ban.
``There's quite a few that are glad and you've got those people that the reason they go to the club is to smoke,'' he said. ``That VFW canteen was the last bastion of freedom for a lot of them because they can't smoke at home.''
To contact the reporter on this story:
Chris Dolmetsch in New York at cdolmetsch@bloomberg.net.
Read

Foes Go to Court in Last Effort to Stop New Jersey's Smoking Ban
The Philadelphia Inquirer
April 12, 2006 Troy Graham
Before smokers take their last legal puff, a coalition of restaurants and bars will go to court seeking to have the New Jersey Smoke-free Act declared unconstitutional.
The lawsuit argues that the act, which then-Gov. Richard Codey signed into law Jan. 15, is discriminatory, saying that the "exemption of gambling facilities from the smoking ban is merely an act of political favoritism."
U.S. District Judge Stanley R. Chesler is scheduled to hear the arguments in Trenton tomorrow.
Read more

March 15, 2006
JOHN CURRAN

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. -- A month before most indoor smoking is to be banned in New Jersey, a coalition of restaurants, bars and bowling alleys on Wednesday asked a federal judge to block the prohibition from taking effect.

The opponents of the ban, scheduled to begin April 15, already have filed a lawsuit against the state, alleging it will unfairly harm their businesses. The federal court filing Wednesday seeks to halt the ban until that lawsuit can be heard.

U.S. District Judge Stanley Chesler in Trenton did not immediately set a hearing date on Wednesday's request by the New Jersey Hospitality Industry for Fairness Coalition, the New Jersey Licensed Beverage Association, the New Jersey Restaurant Association, bowling alley owners and several bars and restaurants.

The groups sued the state March 7 over the New Jersey Smoke-free Air Act because it bans smoking in restaurants, bars, private office buildings and other indoor places but not on the casino floors of Atlantic City's 12 gambling halls.

The lawsuit says the smoking ban violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution by singling out casinos.

The groups say their businesses would suffer irreparable harm _ losing businesses, and potentially laying off workers _ while they await the outcome of the constitutional challenge.

"Three's a lot of economic impact that would be unfairly applied to other eating and drinking establishments beyond casinos if indeed it goes into effect on April 15," said Deborah Dowdell, president of the New Jersey Restaurant Association. "In anticipation of the jolt the industry would experience, we want to make sure nobody goes through any particular hardship from April 15 on. That's really the motivation."

Long sought by smoking opponents, the Smoke-free Air Act excludes the gambling areas of the casinos, which casino executives said would lose business if gamblers couldn't smoke. The casinos contend that a universal ban would lead to lost business, lower revenues, a drop in the state's share of casino revenues and, ultimately, job losses.

Supporters of the ban said the bill would not have passed the Legislature if it didn't exempt casinos, and that a partial ban was better than none. Legislation is now pending that would eliminate the casino loophole.

Opponents, including casino workers who are routinely exposed to secondhand smoke on the job, say the state enacted the ban because of employee health concerns but that the bill relegates those people to second-class status by putting the casinos' well-being ahead of theirs.

Regina Carlson, executive director of the New Jersey Group Against Smoking Pollution, said the ban is inequitable but that the Legislature has acted incrementally _ on smoking and other issues _ before. She also questioned whether the casinos would truly be in competition with bars for customers.

"It strikes me as patently ridiculous that someone's going to drive from the bar across the street from them in Teaneck to Atlantic City so they can have a smoke with their beer," said Carlson.

The Restaurant Association was opposed to the smoking ban before the casinos were exempted from it, she said.

"As a health group, we think the casinos should have been protected. But it's quite clear the Legislature has broad discretion in what they decide to consider and not consider _ health, economics, politics, the political mood, whatever."

Read

EDITORIAL: New Jersey and casino smoking

Gaming clout extends beyond Nevada
Mar. 13, 2006

It appears Nevada isn't the only place where the taxes paid by casinos earn them some political clout.

Six weeks ago, when last we checked in on the politically correct Puritans of the state of New Jersey, newly elected Gov. Jon Corzine was pleading for more time to decide whether to support legislation that would extend New Jersey's smoking ban to casino floors.

At the time, Gov. Corzine said he wanted to examine whether Atlantic City would be at a competitive disadvantage to other gambling cities such as Las Vegas if smoking were banned.

It now appears the New Jersey Smoke-Free Air Act -- which bans smoking in restaurants, bars, private office buildings and other indoor places -- will go into effect April 15 with the exemption for the casino floors of Atlantic City's 12 gambling halls still in place.

Casinos lobbied for the exemption, saying a universal smoking ban would drive business away, lead to job losses and, in the process, cut into the state's $350 million share of casino revenues. Sponsors in the New Jersey Legislature say the casino exemption was thrown in to reduce resistance and finally get some measure enacted after a decade of effort.

Now, following as the night from day, a coalition of New Jersey bars, restaurants and bowling alley operators have filed a federal lawsuit to strike down the no-smoking law as unconstitutional.

The lawsuit was filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Trenton. Robert Gluck, a lawyer for the groups, says the smoking ban will cost his clients money, but that it was really the exemption for casinos that drove them to sue.

"We'd be satisfied if it were across the board to everyone in the hospitality industry," he said. "The casino exemption is the nub of the case. For the life of us, we can't figure out why the casinos are exempted, except politics."

How sad. It appears the restaurant and tavern owners are going to court not to defend the right of private property owners to make such decision on their own -- a real constitutional issue -- but merely to get the same restrictions slapped on the last remaining smokers' havens.

For these "hygienic" puritans, all such "compromises" mark only an interim step on their way to a total ban. If they finally succeed, "cigarette boats" will again be smuggling something other than coke and pot into Cape May and Ocean City, and gunfire not heard since 1933 will again punctuate the night.

Federal court should rescind smoking ban

March 9, 2006

A statewide indoor smoking ban that exempts casinos is unfair and should never have been signed into law.

When they approved an indoor smoking ban for New Jersey in January, lawmakers all but admitted a double standard was being set by allowing Atlantic City's casinos to continue allowing smoking.

Now, a coalition of bars, restaurants and bowling alleys is rightly challenging the New Jersey Smoke-Free Air Act, set to go into effect April 15, asking a federal court to strike it down as unconstitutional. Hopefully, their challenge will lead to the law being scrapped.

It was shockingly hypocritical for state lawmakers, asserting they wanted to protect the health of workers across the state, to pass a smoking ban that left thousands of workers unprotected for no apparent reason other than politics. The Atlantic City casinos had pushed to not be barred from allowing smoking in the gambling halls.

"It (the casino industry) employs 50,000 people, has billions in public and private investment and just as importantly provides hundreds of millions of dollars to the state annually," Assembly Speaker Joe Roberts, D-Camden, said just after the bill was signed by former Gov. Richard J. Codey. "The view was that we have to look carefully at any industry that is that important and that fragile, given the competition all over the nation."

That flawed logic completely ignores the millions of dollars generated and thousands of people employed by bars, restaurants, bowling alleys and other businesses in the state. Apparently, the owners of these establishments don't deserve the right to make a choice that might affect their businesses -- a choice casino owners will continue to have.

"It's pathetic that these restaurant and bar owners have the gall to try and keep poisoning the bodies of their workers and customers," state Sen. John Adler, D-Cherry Hill, said in reacting to the federal lawsuit, filed Tuesday in federal court in Trenton.

What's pathetic is that Adler, a key proponent of the smoking ban, either doesn't see or is completely ignoring the double standard of this law and the unfairness of it.

There's absolutely nothing right or fair about giving casinos a choice that other New Jersey businesses won't have. It was unbelievable that so many lawmakers got behind the spineless measure.

Robert Gluck, a lawyer for the groups that filed the suit, said they'd be happy if the ban was extended to every business in the state's hospitality industry, including casinos.

That would be more fair, but it would still have the government going too far. Plain and simple, the decision should be made by individual businesses, not the government.

If New Jersey lawmakers, who bring in millions for the state by heavily taxing tobacco, aren't going to make smoking illegal, they shouldn't play nanny and unfairly tell certain business owners not to allow it.

The federal court should strike down this ban, and New Jersey lawmakers should give up their misguided quest to make health decisions for adults. Any New Jerseyan who is truly bothered by cigarette smoke in a bar or restaurant can decide for himself or herself not to go to the establishment or work there.

March 8, 2006
By GREGORY J. VOLPE
Gannett State Bureau
TRENTON

In the back room of Pete Lorenzo's Cafe, the scene of countless cigar parties, an array of bar, restaurant and bowling alley owners Tuesday announced a lawsuit claiming the state's impending smoking ban is illegally applied by exempting casinos.

The smoking ban in public indoor places, which takes effect April 15, should include casinos or be scrapped, the suit contends.

"It unfairly discriminates against restaurants, bars, bowling alleys and the like, in favor of casinos," said Robert W. Gluck, who filed the suit on behalf of associations of hospitality businesses, restaurants, licensed beverages, bowling alleys and several individual businesses.

The suit was filed against New Jersey in U.S. District Court in Trenton Tuesday. Lawmakers approved the ban in January in the name of protecting employees and patrons from second-hand smoke but exempted casino floors for fear of losing some of the gambling market.

"It's hypocritical," said Fred Barnes, owner of Dingo's Den and Dingbatz in Clifton. "Is it affecting business, or is it not affecting business? They're telling us, the small people that it's not affecting business, but when it's in their pocket, the casinos, now you're exempting the casinos because the state's got so much money tied up in the revenue of the casinos."

Armando Frallicciardi Jr., proprietor of Lorenzo's, a Trenton landmark steakhouse popular with state officials, noted how legend has it that politicians started a cigar tradition at the nearly 100-year-old family business. He would not say how many current lawmakers smoke at the bar.

Frallicciardi estimated the ban will cost him two cigar smokers a day who spend about $30 on smokes and drinks, or about $18,000 worth of business per year during the ban.

"Almost the irony that the ones who started smoking cigars at Lorenzo's restaurant were the politicians, I feel that it's affecting me probably more than anyone else in the city," Frallicciardi said.

Lawmakers who pushed for the smoking ban deflected criticism that it's unconstitutional.

"This lawsuit is going up in smoke," Senate President Richard J. Codey said through a spokeswoman.

Codey, who signed the measure into law in January as governor, expects the ban to be extended to casinos. Such legislation has been introduced in both the Assembly and Senate and awaits consideration from each health committee.

Sen. John H. Adler, D-Cherry Hill, who sponsored the original ban, called the suit a "grotesque misfire."

"It's pathetic that these restaurant and bar owners have the gall to try and keep poisoning the bodies of their workers and customers," he said in a statement.

If lawmakers get rid of the casino exemption, the lawsuit will be dropped, Gluck said.

"We have said in the lawsuit we would be prepared to accept the ban if it were an across-the-board ban that did not exempt casinos," Gluck said.

The suit does not seek an injunction, but Gluck said he may seek one if the suit is not resolved when the ban begins.

March 7, 2006

Where's there's smoke, there's a lawsuit. A coalition of bars, restaurants and bowling alley operators filed a federal lawsuit in Trenton today to strike down New Jersey's indoor smoking ban as unconstitutional.

The group is angry that the law excludes Atlantic City casinos,

The Smoke-Free Air Act bans smoking in restaurants, bars, private office buildings and other indoor places but permits it on the casino floors.

Sponsors and supporters said the casino exemption was needed to keep the casinos competitive with those in other states where smoking is allowed.

Attorney Robert Gluck says the group would be satisfied if the ban included every establishment.

Read

Bars, Bowling Alleys Sue Over Smoking Ban

March 7, 2006

Fuming that a New Jersey smoking ban excludes the state's casinos, a coalition of bars, restaurants and bowling alley operators sued the state Tuesday, claiming the law is unconstitutional.

"What's happening here is that the state of New Jersey is giving an unfair advantage to the Atlantic City casinos," said plaintiff Armando Frallicciardi Jr., proprietor of Lorenzo's Restaurant, a Trenton landmark known for its cigar-friendly atmosphere.

The New Jersey Smoke-Free Air Act, which goes into effect April 15, bans smoking in restaurants, bars, private office buildings and other indoor places, but it permits it on the casino floors of Atlantic City's 12 gambling halls.

Some supporters said the exemption was needed to keep the casinos competitive with those in other states where smoking is allowed.

Casinos lobbied for the exemption, saying a universal smoking ban would drive business away, lead to job losses and cut into the state's share of casino revenues.

Last month, a Superior Court judge denied a request by bowling alley operators to stop then-acting Gov. Richard J. Codey from signing legislation, saying his status as governor had ended. Gov. Jon S. Corzine was sworn in just days after Codey signed the bill. The new lawsuit was filed in federal court.

Read

April 2, 2006
By ALAN GUENTHER
Courier-Post Staff
TRENTON

For nearly 30 years, it's been illegal for casinos to give money to the state campaigns of legislators.

But that hasn't stopped two of the state's most powerful lawmakers from accepting more than $27,000 in casino campaign money for federal races.

Since March 2004, state Sen. John H. Adler, D-Cherry Hill, received $15,000 from casino political action committees. And in the past nine months, former Assembly Speaker Albio Sires, D-West New York, collected $12,389 from casino PACs, campaign records show.

The donations are legal because they weren't given to state campaigns. The money went to federal election committees.

Earlier this year, Sires and Adler successfully pushed through a bill to prohibit smoking in restaurants, taverns and most public places. The anti-smoking measure will take effect April 15.

However, at the last minute, Adler inserted a significant exemption: The smoking ban will not apply to casinos. Sires supported this exemption in the Assembly and posted it for a full vote. Adler said the smoking ban is still the crowning achievement of his legislative career, the result of a 10-year drive to protect the public's health.

"No one in the state of New Jersey has worked harder to protect the public from the dangers of second-hand smoke," Adler said. "I made a tremendous effort to improve public health to the extent that it was politically possible."

He declined to comment about the casino contributions to his federal election committee.

Only Sires is on the ballot this year, running for the U.S. House of Representatives in the 13th District.

Adler has declared to run for the U.S. Senate in 2008. He has accepted about $260,000 from individuals, PACs and corporations since 2003, according to federal election reports.

Both men say accepting money from casino PACs does not affect their actions in the Legislature.

Casinos are a regulated industry, and that's why, since 1977, they have been banned from supporting state candidates.

Smacks of conflict

Political analysts and government watchdog groups say the casinos' political contributions to the federal campaigns demand attention because they can be seen as a way to circumvent state campaign laws.

"This clearly sets up the appearance of a conflict that the state was obviously trying to avoid," said Larry Noble, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Responsiveness in Politics, based in Washington, D.C.

Sires is a candidate for the U.S. House in a district that encompasses parts of several counties. His campaign committee has raised about $593,000 in the last year, including about $41,000 from regulated industries, such as casinos and insurance companies, that would be prohibited from donating to state campaigns.

Assemblyman Joseph Vas, D-Perth Amboy, is opposing Sires for the Democratic nomination for the House seat formerly held by now-U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, D-Hoboken. He said Sires should give back the campaign contributions from regulated industries.

Sires, who remains in the Assembly, said such contributions "absolutely did not" influence his legislative actions.

He has not been influenced by $6,000 in contributions from cable television PACs or $8,500 from insurance political action committees, he said.

"We have reformed insurance for the betterment of all New Jerseyans," Sires said.

Sires was speaker when the casinos exemption was inserted into the smoking ban bill. Bills cannot be posted for a vote without the consent of the speaker. In the state Senate, Adler remains the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. When the governor wants to fill the top jobs in state government, the nominees must first get past Adler and the other members of his committee.

In April 2004, six weeks after casino political action committees contributed $15,000 to Adler, he strongly promoted the nomination of Roberto Rivera-Soto, a Haddonfield resident, to the state Supreme Court. Adler said he gave Rivera-Soto's name to then-Gov. James E. McGreevey.

"Roberto has had an impressive legal career and would bring experience and insight to an already distinguished bench," Adler said at the time.

Rivera-Soto had ties with the casinos, having represented the casino industry in a variety of cases for 16 years, ending in 1999.

Rivera-Soto said he had no knowledge of the casinos' contributions to Adler's federal campaign fund. He said he did not work for the casino industry for at least five years before his appointment was announced.

"I found out I was being nominated a week before my nomination," he said.

The campaign contributions from the casino industry to Adler merit scrutiny, Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles.

He pointed out that although Adler "certainly had influence" over the Supreme Court appointment, it was McGreevey who made the final nomination.

Adler did not respond to questions about the justice's nomination.

Sires and Adler have made other legislative proposals that would help the casino industry.

In January, Sires was one of five Democratic assemblymen to sponsor a bill, A-1046, that would permit wagering on sporting events at casinos.

During the same month, Adler introduced bill S-127 that would benefit casinos.

If S-127 wins final approval, it would permit agencies that regulate casinos to continue operating, even if the rest of the state government shuts down for lack of a budget.

"It is a constant struggle for most public officials between representing average constituents and taking care of the interest groups and wealthy individuals who fund the campaigns," said Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia.

Adler responds

Adler said such criticism of him is unfair. His bill points out that casinos employ 45,000 people in New Jersey. Thousands of them live in Adler's district.

Adler said that just 10 years ago he had trouble convincing the Legislature even to ban smoking in day-care centers. After months of haggling, he convinced the Legislature to ban smoking where the children played.

But he had to permit smoking where the children's food was prepared.

"I had to compromise a little bit to protect kids," he said. "I've made huge progress from protecting only a part of a day-care center to including almost every public area in the state."

After he was sharply criticized for allowing smoking in the casinos, Adler introduced another bill, S-1089, on Jan. 26. It would ban smoking in casinos, too.

Now that smoking will be banned in almost every public place, he'll go after the "last little 1 percent of the public areas," he said.

But David Rebovich, a Rider University political scientist, said Adler's latest proposal to ban smoking in the casinos has no chance of becoming law because there is no support for the measure in the Legislature.

"Adler has a good reputation as a bright and serious guy," said Rebovich, but he said there is a long list of candidates -- including U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews, D-Haddon Heights, who would be well in front of Adler in a race for U.S. Senate.

Sires and Adler "need to explain what's going on," said Rebovich, "especially given citizens' concerns about high taxes, about favoritism, about the influence of money in politics, and with so many scandals that have been uncovered in the last few years."

Reach Alan Guenther at (856) 317-7871 or aguenther@courierpostonline.com
Read