Alcohol fee on thin ice pending mayor’s veto

San Francisco became the first city in the nation Tuesday to approve an alcohol fee to offset costs of treating alcoholics, but Mayor Gavin Newsom said he will veto the bill.

The approval came amid heavy opposition from business advocates and the alcohol industry, which said the fee — which breaks down to about 3 cents for a beer and 4 or 5 cents for a glass of wine or hard liquor — would harm the local economy.

The Board of Supervisors voted 7-3 to approve the legislation. The vote tally shows the board is one vote shy of being able to reject a veto from the mayor, which takes eight votes. Supervisors Sean Elsbernd, Carmen Chu and Bevan Dufty voted against the fee. Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier recused herself, citing a conflict as an owner of an alcohol wholesaler permit.

The fee would generate about $15 million a year and pay for about 90 percent of the costs incurred by The City in dealing with alcoholics, from ambulance rides to substance abuse treatment. Wholesalers would be charged the fee, but it is expected to be passed on to the consumer.

“[Wholesalers] should have the responsibility for paying for some of the impacts of alcohol in San Francisco,” said Supervisor John Avalos, who introduced the legislation.

The fee proposal comes as The City has had to close a deficit in excess of $400 million and faces challenging budget years ahead.

“We can’t even keep the programs that we have going,” Supervisor Chris Daly said. “We can’t pass a tax to save our lives — we’ll see if we will have better luck this November — but we are left looking at fees.”

Doubt about whether the fee could withstand a legal challenge was raised Tuesday. Elsbernd said that not only would The City end up spending more than $1 million in legal fees, but it would likely lose. He also said, “I have a real problem with the notion that the vast majority of the people paying this fee aren’t going to be receiving the services.”

It appears that the fee will never be implemented since Newsom has enough support on the board to be able to veto it.

“Pursuing a new and likely illegal new fee in this economic environment will impact thousands of businesses, cost jobs and put San Francisco at a competitive disadvantage with every other county in California,” Newsom spokesman Tony Winnicker said. “The mayor intends to veto this job-killing and unnecessary new fee.”

jsabatini@sfexaminer.com

Bay Area NewsBoard of SupervisorsGavin NewsomGovernment & PoliticsLocalPolitics

Just Posted

Niners quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo led a late-game comeback against the Packers, but San Francisco lost, 30-28, on a late field goal. (Courtesy of San Francisco 49ers)
The Packers beat the Niners in a heartbreaker: Don’t panic

San Francisco is no better and no worse than you thought they were.

Dominion Voting Systems, a Denver-based vendor, is under contract to supply voting machines for elections in San Francisco. (Kevin N. Hume/Examiner file)
Is San Francisco’s elections director impeding voting machine progress?

Open source technology could break up existing monopoly

Health experts praised Salesforce for keeping its Dreamforce conference at Moscone Center outdoors and on a small scale. (Kevin N. Hume/The Examiner)
Happy birthday, Marc Benioff. Your company did the right thing

Salesforce kept Dreamforce small, which made all kinds of sense

Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers proved to be too much for the Niners in a Week 3 loss to Green Bay. It was San Francisco’s home opener for the 2021 season. (Courtesy of the San Francisco 49ers.)
Week 3 NFL roundup: Packers victory over 49ers caps off a stellar Sunday

By Tyler Dunne New York Times Here’s the Week 3 roundup of… Continue reading

Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, pictured with Rose Pak in 2014, says the late Chinatown activist was “helping to guide the community away from the divisions, politically.”
Willie and Rose: How an alliance for the ages shaped SF

How the Mayor and Chinatown activist shaped San Francisco, then and now

Most Read