Changes are on tap for the city’s smoking ban after a Lawrence bar owner in April successfully defended himself against a series of charges related to the ordinance.

City commissioners at their meeting on Tuesday are scheduled to approve changes to the city’s smoking ban that should make it easier for city prosecutors to prove that bar owners and other business owners are in violation of the ordinance.

But several in the city’s hospitality industry said the proposed changes went too far and would likely result in more legal challenges to the ordinance.

“It appears the city wants to create an ordinance that relieves the city of their obligations to prove anything,” said Phil Bradley, executive director of the Lawrence-based Kansas Licensed Beverage Assn.

Under the proposed changes, anytime a person was seen smoking inside a business, it would be up to the business owner or manager to prove that they were not aware of the smoker. Previously the burden of proof was on the city to prove that the business owner or manager knew of the smoker but took no action to stop the illegal activity.

The changes come after Lawrence bar owner Dennis Steffes was found innocent on four of five counts that he violated the ban by allowing patrons to smoke in his two establishments, Coyote’s Night Club and Last Call. Municipal Court Judge Randy McGrath refused to convict Steffes on the charges because he believed the city had not proven that Steffes knew about and ignored the smoking in those four cases. Steffes was convicted on one charge. He’s currently appealing that conviction in Douglas County District Court.

City Commissioner David Schauner, who also is an attorney, said he didn’t think the new provision was unfair to business owners. He said they still would be allowed to present evidence that they did not know of the smoker’s presence.

He also said other proposed changes to the ordinance would likely help business owners. In particular, one of the proposed changes spells out what specific steps business owners must take if they see someone smoking inside their establishments. If they follow those steps – which basically involves telling the person to stop smoking, asking them to leave the premises if they don’t comply, and then calling the police to have them removed if they still do not leave – they should be exempt from prosecution.

Previously, bar owners had complained that the ordinance wasn’t specific about what they could do to avoid prosecution.

“I think this proposal goes a long ways to providing some clarity that they’ve been seeking,” Schauner said.

But Steffes said the proposed changes are unfair to businesses. He said his clubs can house more than 500 patrons at a time and it is unreasonable for the city to expect he and his employees to automatically know when someone has started to smoke.

“I don’t see how they (city commissioners) are leaving us any choice in the matter but to take them to court,” Steffes said. “The problem is it is just an unfair ordinance. Now it is just a matter of how you dress it.”

Rich Barr, the city’s fire marshal, said the issue seems to be becoming more of a moot point all the time. He said that since April 1 the city had only received three complaints about violations of the ban, and the city’s fire inspectors had only spotted one violation.

“In the early stages of this, we were told by proponents that this would likely become a somewhat self-regulating ordinance,” Barr said. “I think that is what is happening because we’re just not getting a lot of complaints anymore.”

Commissioners are scheduled to discuss the changes at their meeting at 6:35 p.m. Tuesday at City Hall, Sixth and Massachusetts streets. Bradley, though, said he will ask city commissioners to delay the issue to give bar owners a chance to talk with the city.