S.F. Mayor Newsom vetoes fee on alcohol

[alp227]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

Mayor Gavin Newsom wasted little time Tuesday vetoing San Francisco's plan to charge alcohol wholesalers a fee to help cover the city's costs to care for chronic drunks, but the proposal may not be dead.

Despite Newsom's vow to "veto that as soon as they get it on my desk," which he did just hours after the Board of Supervisors gave final approval for the first-in-the-state legislation, the plan's author said he might go directly to the voters.

"Maybe we go to the ballot," Supervisor John Avalos, who authored the legislation, said after the veto. "There's a lot of people who think this a good idea."

The proposal would have levied a fee on wholesalers and distributors equal to about 3 cents for a 12-ounce bottle of beer, 4.5 cents for a 6-ounce glass of wine and 3.5 cents for 1.5 ounces of hard liquor. Those fees were expected to generate $16 million a year to pay for many of the expenses the cash-strapped city incurs for unreimbursed hospital care, ambulance transport, prevention programs and a sobering center.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/09/22/MNLE1FHHJP.DTL

[SpeechlessDem]

1. That's stupid

So people who drink moderately will have to pay a fee because of drunkards?

[Quantess]

3. No, now that the SF mayor vetoed it.

From my experience in SF, I would say that most San Franciscans don't have the time or the money to be chronic drunks. They all have to work full time to pay their rent.

[Kolesar]

2. The state should just raise the alcohol tax and make this a state funded program

3 cents to 4.5 cents/drink won't break the bank.

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. They should charge the chronic drunks for services provided, not every one else who drinks

[nyy1998]

5. +1