Get to know D.C. with our daily newsletter
We dive deep on the day’s biggest story and share links to everything you need to know.
your feature on the black cat nightclub trying to weasel its way into adding a deck for smokers forced outside due to the city’s impending indoor smoking ban (Show & Tell, “Smoke Screen,” 9/1) illuminates the degree to which the city’s high per capita alcohol consumption translates into political influence and permissive “regulation.”
But the article failed to make a very simple point that would have put everything into perspective. Black Cat patrons more frequently crowding the public space because the indoor smoking ban is per se a substantial change in the establishment’s operations, regardless of that substantial change being solely occasioned by the new law. Having to build a new deck to accommodate those patrons, as Black Cat insists is the case, is per se a hardship the new anti-smoking law envisioned. Consequently, Black Cat could make a hardship petition for an exemption from the new indoor smoking ban law that would be a lot less disruptive than building a deck. Black Cat’s not applying for a hardship petition, which surely the neighborhood residents and ANC would support, but instead seeking to expand its facility, stokes suspicion that the smoking ban is a smoke screen masking Black Cat’s expansionist desires.