Dear Pete Weber, Some of Your Friends Need Help

Dear Pete,

I know you are busy bowling against the best in the world as the 2009-10 season is underway. But I wanted to write and let you know about something going on here in your hometown that is causing quite a ruckus.

You see, the St. Louis County Council next Tuesday is going to vote on a referendum bill that would decide whether or not to let voters in November ban smoking in public places.

That includes every bowling center in St. Louis County. And I assume that most of the proprietors are friends of yours after so many years in the game. After all, your dad was one of them for a long time too.

The culprit for this no-smoking push is a councilwoman named Barbara Fraser. She's from University City. The only bowling center I know of in her town is Pinup Bowl in Delmar. Nice place, owner Joe Edwards is a great guy, don't know if she's ever been there.

Anyway, she introduced the measure a couple of weeks ago and as expected there were lots of people at the council meeting, for and against it. The council voted in favor to consider Fraser's proposal.

Now here's where it gets goofy. It's not really a no-smoking proposal. That's because there are some places that may get to allow their customers to smoke. Some of those places are St. Louis County casinos.

Now, I don't know if you've ever been to one, but we've got a nice one not far from your home. It's Harrah's, in Maryland Heights and provides a lot of fun for people.

But the owners said if smoking was banned, they'd lose business, and in return, the county would lose tax revenue. People would lose their jobs too they say. The folks at Harrah's have a lot of clout. Their big wigs donate a lot of money to political candidates. Money talked, and the more the council talked, the more they said, "Ok, let's let people to continue smoking at Harrah's."

By the way, we're getting a new casino in the county. It's called River City Casino, down by Lemay. My guess is those big wig folks put the strong arm on the council too.

Anyway Pete, enough about gambling, you're focused on bowling issues.

Oh, I almost forgot; there's another proposed exemption. Lambert St. Louis International Airport. Yep, that's a place everyone where everyone wants to smoke. At least that's the explanation by the airport director, Richard Hrabko, trying to soothe the nerves of travelers to the Gateway City.

OK, I'll admit as a smoker, that when I land after a three-hour flight, I rush to the nearest place to smoke, so it's really not a bad proposal.

Ted Krygiel at Olivette Lanes asked me, "Doesn't a bowling league last three hours? How come we aren't being exempted?" Ted's been fighting this battle for a few years so he knows the score, just like you do when you're back's against the wall in the tenth frame, which is where proprietors are today, less than a week before the council vote.

You know what Pete, he's right! Why aren't we exempted? After all, wouldn't it be an inconvenience to have to take off bowling shoes to go outside to smoke, then put them back on again?

And I don't know if you are into the "green" movement, but most leagues are bowled in the winter. The constant opening of doors would let heat out and thus a bowling center heating furnace would have to burn more natural gas to keep it nice and warm. Won't that anger the green activists if no smoking inside caused more smoke outside at power plants to produce energy and heat to bowling centers?

Across the state, they banned smoking in Kansas City. So what did Vicki Bowman of Gladstone Bowl do? She commissioned a study about the effect. And guess what? Centers that had to ban smoking lost business! And not just in Kansas City, but she found out business decreased across the country!

So let me get this straight. Governments want to ban smoking but they see these reports that it hurts business. I don't get it, do you? I don't think anyone does.

Well, the proprietors have a fighting chance to get this defeated because big names are stepping up. They have a friend in St. Louis County Executive Charles Dooley - sort of. He's against the ban for now. And if the council passes it, he can veto what they do, and it would be a bit harder for them to override his decision.

A big name in bowling is going to weigh in as well. I can't reveal who it is until later this evening, but this person has a lot of clout in bowling and will tell the council how it's hurt the bowling business in other states.

Pete, the last big name that can step up and help our proprietors is you. You are the face of bowling in the St. Louis metro area. When you talk, people listen. If you write, it's even better.

Your councilwoman is Kathleen Kelly Burkett. And guess what? She chairs the county's health committee. One councilman wanted her committee to handle the matter. Ms. Fraser said no way! You can let Ms. Burkett know that this isn't how we do things in America. After all, if you were bowling and there was a rules dispute, you'd want a review, right? Well this proposal deserves one as well.

But she might not know who you are. But Charlie Dooley does. He's a sports fan. Who knows, maybe you can also direct him to a league he can join. Our centers need all the business they can get, especially with this threat of losing business.

And we don't have to ask them to vote down the proposal altogether. Why not ask them to exempt us like they want to do for casinos, bars that primarily sell alcohol, and oh yes, we can't forget about the airport!

OK, there was a lot of intended tongue-in-cheek style in my letter to you. I have to explain it because there are some people who don't have a sense of humor. Just look at the Tea Party gang at health care forums.

But I wrote it this way to get your attention. Because it is a serious matter.

How serious? Ask yourself this question. Your dad was a proprietor. What would he do about this?

Good luck this season,

Your fan and friend,
The Bowling Hood