Stay Informed

Sign up for news & alerts

Already signed up?
Login here

take action
For every $1 states spend dollar sign on substance misuse and addiction, 94 cents go to shovel up the consequences instead of for treatment and prevention. TELL YOUR LEGISLATORS

What Can I Do?



Continuing Education
Free online courses for addiction counselors LEARN ONLINE

Get Help
Need alcohol or drug help for yourself or someone else? GET HELP

 
S.F. Considers Alcohol Fee to Mitigate Related Harms
June 26, 2009

Share Share Email
Email
Print
Print
SubscribeSubscribe
News Summary

Alcohol-related problems cost the city of San Francisco an estimated $175 million annually, and officials are now considering charging an alcohol-impact fee, according to the Marin Institute.

"The impact of alcohol consumption in San Francisco costs millions of dollars to the City and County," said S.F. Supervisor John Avalos, chair of the city's Budget and Finance Committee. "San Francisco alone should no longer suffer the costs of unmitigated alcohol harm."

Bruce Livingston, executive director of the Marin Institute, said San Francisco is the first county to propose an alcohol-mitigation fee. "In these tough times other counties and cities may also want to use their police powers to keep their safety nets alive," he said. "It's time to charge the alcohol industry for harm and get tens of millions of dollars for related services."

The fee proposed by Avalos would be charged to alcohol wholesalers.

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Posted by joebanana on 29 Jun 09 02:04 PM EDT
$175 million? A year? In one city? How? This is blatant government propaganda, and reeks of B.S. $175 MILLION? A year? The alcohol tax is nonexistent, or are those funds rerouted somewhere else? They say it costs money for treatment? AA is free. And the fines for DUI are going where? When's the last time he looked at "city officials" salary's? The public is sick of paying for governments mis-spending, misappropriation of funds, and plain government waste. If alcohol costs the city so much, just how much does governmental corruption cost?

Posted by Rob H. on 30 Jun 09 04:51 PM EDT
Joe, perhaps you should READ the cited article before commenting. The numbers for SF's alcohol impacts are pretty consistent with other cities and counties of similar population. Counties/cities DO spend millions on alcohol treatment. AA is free, but my county spends tens of millions of dollars annually for residential and outpatient treatment centers. You are "virtually" correct in that the alcohol taxes are nonexistant; that's the point of instituting substantial alcohol taxes. The public (those who bother to read an article once in a while) IS SICK OF SUBSIDIZING THE ALCOHOL INDUSTRY'S PROFITS. Look into where your tax money goes. If you live in CA, about a thousand bucks a year of your state taxes goes to deal with alcohol problems. I'd rather my money is spent on streets, schools, and parks, but I'm on the hook to pay for treatment, cops, courts, jails, hospitals and morgues...all necessitated by the alcohol industry. BTW, the alcohol lobbyists who control Sacramento and yes, even the SF Supervisors, have hundreds of millions to spend to buy the votes of our elected leaders, and they DO......but THAT doesn't bother you?

Posted by sawstir on 02 Jul 09 06:37 PM EDT
Posted by G.C. I think the product tax for liability is appropriate so good job for San F. I hope more goverment entities review this option. From on that is bothered by the "system" as it has been.

Posted by Lauren on 06 Jul 09 06:26 AM EDT
The average person is not aware of the economic and societal impact of alcohol abuse and underage drinking. If you take the time to look into it, you'll find it is truly staggering.

SUBMIT A COMMENT:

Note: Comments are now held for moderator approval. More info

Name:

Comment:
(limit 250
words)
Enter this word
(help):		 Change

GUIDELINES: 
Please keep comments on-topic, courteous, clean, non-commercial, and within the word limit.
Read the complete guidelines