Lawmakers are reigniting an effort this session at exempting cigar lounges from an early 2000s-era law banning smoking in most public places in the state.
But the proposal is again facing stiff opposition from health-related groups, despite changes meant to allay concerns it would weaken the state’s smoke-free air law and cause regulatory confusion. Meanwhile, the Wisconsin Restaurant Association has yet to take a stance on the latest measure.
Rep. Nate Gustafson, R-Fox Crossing, introduced a bill last session that would have exempted tobacco bars, also known as cigar lounges, from the ban. The proposal didn’t see a vote in either chamber.
>> WisPolitics is now on the State Affairs network. Get custom keyword notifications, bill tracking and all WisPolitics content. Get the app.
The latest version, SB 211, would also exempt tobacco bars from the ban, but only if they existed on or after June 4, 2009, only allow cigar and pipe smoking, and aren’t a retail food establishment.
Gustafson said the provision to prohibit retail food establishments from operating as cigar lounges was added in response to concerns from stakeholders.
“That came from the response of not only just constituents, but also from restaurants that said, ‘Hey, we don’t want those who are operating with restaurants to just, you know, decide turn of a key that they’re gonna also start being a cigar bar,’” Gustafson said. “And so I agreed with that, I think a lot of people would agree with that as well. So we made that change, and I think that change has actually brought more bipartisan support to this bill this session compared to last.”
The Wisconsin Restaurant Association opposed the bill last session. Executive Vice President Susan Quam told WisPolitics the group is “carefully monitoring and discussing the changes made by the author and no official decision has been made yet by our board of directors.”
Last session, WRA expressed concerns that the current threshold for what is considered a tobacco or cigar bar is too low. Under current law, a tobacco bar is defined as a tavern that earns 15% or more of its annual gross income from the sale on the premises — other than from a vending machine — of cigars and pipe tobacco.
“We also have concern that the bill does not clarify how enforcement agencies would access and determine whether that sales volume requirement is being met,” Quam said in written comments on the previous bill in 2023.
Smoking has been banned in most public places in Wisconsin since 2010 after former Dem Gov. Jim Doyle signed the prohibition into law. The ban includes an exemption for retail tobacco stores and tobacco bars in existence before June 3, 2009. According to CigarScore.com, a website that tracks cigar lounges across the country, at least 17 cigar lounges currently operate in Wisconsin.
Health groups oppose effort
While WRA has yet to take a position, a coalition of more than a dozen health groups sent a letter on April 2 to lawmakers urging them to reject the bill.
They argued the proposal would weaken the state’s widely supported public smoking ban, and includes a loophole that would allow for the smoking of “little cigars.”
The definition of “cigar” isn’t specified in the state’s smoking ban. However, little cigars, which the groups referred to as “brown cigarettes,” are considered cigars for tax purposes in Wisconsin.
Little cigars contain tobacco, usually have a filter, and are about the same size and shape as cigarettes. The main difference between little cigars and cigarettes is that little cigars are wrapped in a tobacco leaf or other substance containing tobacco, while cigarettes are wrapped in paper.
The American Cancer Society and other health advocacy groups have fought to require little cigars to be taxed at the same rate as cigarettes. But Republicans have repeatedly rejected budget proposals by Gov. Tony Evers to make the change.
Sara Sahli, government relations director for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, said the bill is “much more complicated than I think it’s being sold,” noting the biggest concern relates to the little cigar issue.
“So when you’re saying cigars are allowed to be smoked, that means this cigarette, right? So it isn’t just these premium cigars as perhaps it’s being sold,” Sahli said.
She also raised concerns about the bill being too vague and argued that the 15% threshold for sales to be considered a tobacco bar is too low.
“But again, we can’t talk about a true cigar bar business model until we fix the brown cigarette issue,” Sahli said.
Gustafson argued opponents are trying to expand the scope of the bill, adding questions over how to regulate little cigars aren’t relevant to SB 211.
Rep. Sylvia Ortiz-Velez, D-Milwaukee, who is co-sponsoring the bill, said the portion of sales from little cigars in Wisconsin is minimal. Department of Revenue data show the state has reported about $11.1 million in taxes on cigars, including little cigars, for the current fiscal year.
Ortiz-Velez also said people exposed to secondhand smoke are choosing to enter places that allow smoking, noting bill authors are open to discussing ventilation systems to mitigate the effects.
“We’re not creating anything new, they already exist in our state,” Ortiz-Velez said of cigar lounges. “We’re just giving people the opportunity to actually apply, if they’d like, for these licenses.”
Molly Collins, advocacy director for the American Lung Association, another group opposing the bill, said while she appreciates the added language to prohibit cigar smoking where food is sold, “it doesn’t alleviate the problems with the bill.”
She said it isn’t clear how the state would track compliance and who would take on that responsibility.
“Who’s going to track the percentage of sales requirements? Are there going to be compliance checks? What if people call and say ‘Hey, this bar, you know, there are folks smoking in this bar’ and they’re confused about whether or not it is legal to do that,” Collins said. “You know, who is going to be responsible for that? It’s putting a lot on our local law enforcement, and, you know, potentially, the Department of Revenue, if that’s who would wind up having to track percentage of sales requirements.”
She added “100% smoke-free air is the easiest thing to understand, and it’s really been self-regulating.”
Gustafson said if the bill were to pass, there would still be options for local control if Wisconsinites don’t want a cigar lounge in their area.
“So if a local entity like the city of Madison doesn’t want to issue another license, even if this bill was to pass, they don’t have to. …We really want to drive that home of, you know, it’s not like a cigar shop is going to pop up on every corner of every street just because this gets passed,” he said. “There’s still a lot of local control mechanisms in place that will prevent that.”
