Dan Benstead smokes a cigarette after a meal Thursday at High Maintenance Sports Bar. Benstead says he frequents the bar because he can drink, eat, smoke and gamble all at once. Owner Artie White says many of his customers are willing to go outside to smoke when new smoking laws are implemented. Photo by Ronda Churchill. A business sign provides a clear statement of High Maintenance Sport Bar's response to the passage of Question 5. Photo by Ronda Churchill.

Dec. 8 is looming.

That's the earliest day the smoking ban Nevadans passed on Election Day can go into effect.

What will happen on or around that date is anybody's guess.

Law enforcement officials, who will be called upon to issue citations, are not sure how they'll respond to smoking complaints.

Local and state health officials, who also will play an enforcement role, are still studying Question 5 and the types of resources they might need to assign to answer violation complaints.

The district attorney's office, which will bring any smoking cases to court, isn't sure who will be in violation: the person caught smoking or the establishment they are in at the time.

Also, there are questions about what the penalty will be for violators.

"The way I'm reading it, (Question 5) may not be the same as the legal (experts),'' said Dr. Donald Kwalick, administrator for Southern Nevada Health District. "All of us involved, those in southern and northern parts of the state, as well as the state's health department, need to meet and discuss enforcement. We also need to come up with a meaningful way to get information out to the public.''

Question 5 amends existing state smoking laws by prohibiting smoking in all places of employment in Nevada with the exception of gaming areas of casinos and bars that don't serve food, said Michael Hackett, a spokesman for Nevadans for Tobacco Free Kids, backers of Question 5.

It falls under Chapter 202 of the Nevada Revised Statutes, which makes it a criminal misdemeanor, said Mary-Anne Miller, county counsel in the civil division of the district attorney's office.

"Like speeding or littering, that type of thing. It's not just an ordinance violation,'' she said. "This is state law.''

Under that section, typical fines for such an infraction go up to $1,500; the fine amount is at a judge's discretion.

"But, overall, we haven't sat down and taken a look at this (Question 5) yet,'' Miller said. "That will take place sometime within the next two weeks.''

Sgt. John Loretto, a spokesman for the Metropolitan Police Department, said police will have to wait and see how the measure is written into state law, then "ascertain how we will enforce it.''

Hackett said enforcement shouldn't be any different from what's written in the state's current smoking law. Under that law, violators can be fined $100 for each incident.

In Kwalick's opinion, both the person who violates the law and the business where the violation occurs should be cited.

"Again, this is my own view of the law. It may be different,'' he said.

Martha Framsted, spokeswoman for the state's Department of Health and Human Services, didn't have a clear answer about the agency's involvement. But she did say that state tobacco prevention programs probably would be involved in educating businesses about the law.

She also said those organizations probably will help with businesses acquiring "No Smoking" signs.

Once Question 5 is officially law, businesses or places of employment where smoking is prohibited will be required to post "No Smoking" signs at every entrance. Ash trays and other smoking paraphernalia are to be removed.

Question 5, which received a majority vote -- 54 percent favored it, 46 percent opposed it -- prohibits smoking in all indoor restaurants, bars and taverns that serve food; grocery stores and bakeries; retail establishments such as malls and department stores; and drug and convenience stores.

Additionally, people cannot smoke in museums, libraries, movie theaters and art galleries or other indoor places of public display.

Under current law and Question 5, smoking is not allowed in child care facilities, video arcades, school buildings and grounds, hospitals and medical offices. This includes those child care facilities and arcades located within casinos.

Government buildings are also smoke free.

Local governments have the authority to impose stricter laws than the state.

Under the new law, smoking is allowed in bars and taverns that don't have food handling licenses and areas of casinos where minors are not allowed, such as gaming areas.

Smoking also is allowed in strip clubs, brothels, retail tobacco stores and private residences.

"Opponents likely will have a problem with the removal of smoking from any place that serves food, especially bars'' said Dr. Don Havins, chief executive officer of the Clark County Medical Society who also is an attorney. "It appears that they will have to ask their bar patrons to cease smoking, or stop serving food.''

As with most NRS amendments, Havins said, the state's Legislative Counsel Bureau will have to codify existing language of Question 5 into the Nevada Revised Statutes. Once that happens, then it will be known specifically "what is permitted and what is prohibited.''

"If there is any ambiguity or if someone challenges it, it would then be up to the courts to give an interpretation of the law,'' he said. "That's the process.''

Lee Haney, a spokeswoman for the Smoke Free Coalition, backers of the failed Question 4 smoking initiative, said the coalition, represented by the law offices of Jones Vargas, is reviewing all options.

"Everyone is just trying to take a step back and look at it and determine what it means to them,'' Haney said. "There is one thing for sure that we will be looking at -- there's this question out there about the gray areas of Question 5. Where will smoking be banned? There's going to be a need for clarity.''

As an example of "gray areas," Haney questioned whether open-air restaurants such as food courts and restaurants that straddle casino floors would fall under the law.

Hackett said smoking is prohibited in all indoor restaurants, whether they be inside a casino or straddling casino floors such as food courts.

He said restaurants and bars that serve food can allow smoking in outdoor patio seating.

Bars and taverns can serve food indoors and allow smoking, but they must create and completely close off their smoking section.

Restaurants cannot do this.

Haney also mentioned the hotel and motel room issue.

In late September, the Nevada Supreme Court rejected a ruling by Carson City District Judge Bill Maddox that included those rooms in Question 5. Maddox's interpretation of the law was that hotel and motel rooms are considered places of employment.

In a recent interview, Denise Tanata Ashby, executive director of the Nevada Institute for Children's Research and Policy at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, who wrote a policy brief on both anti-smoking measures, acknowledged that the lodging room issue probably would be brought up again if Question 5 passed.

"There's a lot of unanswered questions that aren't so black and white, and we don't even know who to call for interpretation,'' Haney said.

Artie White, owner of the High Maintenance Sports Bar in Las Vegas, showed his displeasure with the new law by putting up a sign that reads: We're Smokin Screw You Nevada.

"I'm not happy with it, but I have to abide by it,'' he said. "It's a crime if I don't.''

For the time being, White said, he'll keep his kitchen open. If he sees a revenue drop 30 to 45 days after the law is implemented, then he'll consider other options.

"My customers are saying they will go outside and smoke, but they can't walk outside with a machine or a drink,'' he said. "Smoking, eating and drinking, they all go with gambling. That's why these laws work in Colorado and other states. They don't have the gambling component.''

Nevada has joined 14 other states with similar clean indoor air acts that seek to protect children and workers from secondhand smoke.

In terms of how Nevada's measure stands up against those other laws, Beverly May, director of regional advocacy for the National Center for Tobacco-Free Kids, said all of them are comprehensive in their own way.

"Yours (Nevada's) certainly isn't on the restrictive end; it is more on the lenient end. But, with that being said, it's an enormous success for people exposed to secondhand smoke,'' she said. "I think all these clean indoor air initiatives, every one is wonderful, but for this to happen in Nevada, it tells us how far we've come to look at this as a public health issue and a health issue for workers. Nothing tells that like Nevada.''

As examples of more strict state smoking bans, May spoke of Utah and Colorado.

Utah bans smoking in all bars and restaurants, and starting in 2009, all private clubs. Colorado's law, which originally didn't include casinos, might in the near future. Backers plan to bring the issue up in the next legislative session.

In Arkansas, it is illegal to smoke in a vehicle when a child is present. And some states, individual counties, cities or towns have established their own smoking laws, even banning it in public parks.

May said some state smoking laws also include tobacco taxes to help agencies with education and enforcement. Nevada's doesn't include a tobacco tax. "Sometimes you have to move incrementally to get some of these laws passed because there are certain things that are deal-breakers,'' she said.

Review-Journal writer Francis McCabe contributed to this report.