Supes To Mull Booze Fee: What Do You Think?

"is badly timed and will do little to curb drinking."

I have yet to meet a bar owner that wants to curb drinking - their problem with the legislation is probably that it WILL curb drinking.

I'm waiting for the line that this will increase the city's costs because now people will drive to go get drunk in Daly City.

Bars are not where the frequent flyers to SFGH are served. They don't drink top shelf liquor either. They purchase single-serving malt liquor, pints of rotgut (occasionally something larger), and fortified wine, usually from corner liquor stores. They do steal whatever they can get their hands on at any store, usually supermarkets.

A reduction in liquor licenses in areas covered by specific SFFD paramedics (Station 1 for example) where most of their calls are for drunks and ODs would make it more inconvenient for the drunks. Alternatively, assessing a fee on single-serving liquor for off-site consumption could go a long way.

Is Avalos willing to provide data on the narcotics-related frequent flyers the taxpayer is subsidizing in many, many ways? Care Not Cash must require 100% sobriety and turn the client over to a homeless shelter for getting loaded. Harm Reduction does not work. There must be some sticks to go with the carrot of free housing.

I am a responsible drinker. I am not responsible for drunkards and bums.

DT - I see all your random emergency visits and raise you one Joshua Calder - who was served at a local restaurant, and will cost this city a lot of money in direct costs and in theory a lot more in indirect costs in the form of lost tax revenues from German tourists.

"big alcohol"? Where can I get one?