Alcohol Recovery Fee Proponents to Protest at Plumpjack Noe Valley this Afternoon

Uh oh, appears as if normally quiet Noe Valley will liven up at around 4:30 this afternoon.

People like these would prefer if Mayor Gavin Newsom didn’t veto San Francisco’s proposed Alcohol Recovery Fee

Click to expand

All the deets:

Advocates Rally at PlumpJack. Tell Mayor Newsom – Do Nothing!
Mayor Should Recuse Himself From Decision on New SF Alcohol Cost Recovery Fee

What:             Demonstration and Rally
When:            September 20, 2010   4:30 p.m.             
Where:           PlumpJack Wines, 4011 24th Street at Noe St., in Noe Valley

Who:                        Partial list of participants…
§       American Indian Movement – West§       Asian-American Recovery Services§       Bayview Hunters Point Foundation§       Beacon Center§       Horizons Unlimited of SF§       Latino Commission§       Youth Leadership Institute

Why:            Last week, the SF Board of Supervisors passed the Alcohol Cost Recovery Fee on a 7-3 vote. Mayor Newsom says he will veto the ordinance, and there are not enough votes to override it—we need eight.  San Francisco needs the new fee to recover costs for alcohol-related treatment, prevention, transportation and hospitalization. It’s time for companies who profit from distributing alcohol in San Francisco to pay their fair share of the costs for these services.

Supervisor Alioto-Pier—whose family is in the wine business—declared a conflict of interest and abstained from voting last Tuesday. Now the Mayor should do the same. 

The Mayor has significant financial interests in the alcohol business. His millions of alcohol related investments present a similar conflict of interest as Supervisor Alioto-Pier’s.  His company, Plumpjack Group, owns 12 separate establishments that make, sell or distribute alcohol. His businesses include 2 wineries, 8 bars and restaurants, and 2 wine shops.  Four of these establishments are in San Francisco. He has reported receiving over $200,000 in income per year from alcohol-related business.
Please join these prevention and treatment organizations to demonstrate and deliver a strong message that the Mayor should do nothing and allow the Alcohol Cost Recovery Fee to become law.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

7 Responses to “Alcohol Recovery Fee Proponents to Protest at Plumpjack Noe Valley this Afternoon”

  1. ben says:

    4:30 in the afternoon? Don’t these people have *jobs*?

  2. John Murphy says:

    And… in Bevan Dufty’s district…

  3. sfcitizen says:

    I think supporting the ARF _is_ their job, for at least some of them…

  4. sfcitizen says:

    An override is a possibility still, however remote it may be…

  5. sfdrinks says:

    There is an inherent contradiction in the logic of these folks. On the one hand, they’re arguing that chronic alcoholism is a societal, not individual, problem and therefore society needs to pick up the tab when some wino drinks his liver off and ends up in the ER. But on the other hand, they’re singling out one specific group of people (bar owners and non-problematic drinkers) and punishing them for the abuses of others. Clearly this is unreasonable.

    Very few drinkers end up in SF General and the ones that do almost certainly didn’t purchase their booze at Plumpjack.

  6. Bruce Wolfe says:

    @sfdrinks Alcoholism affects everyone. As a social worker, I’ve seen my share of chronic inebriates every weekend at plenty of local dives and major clubs not to mention those who just drink alone in their beds to the point of poisoning.

    But, the Mayor wants to ENABLE smokers to keep on destroying their lungs by allowing them to continue to litter our streets with butts. His tobacco fee is purely for clean-up. What is that all about??!!!

    What’s the cost on society when people not only get primary lung cancer but secondary smoke lung cancer or birth defects…The list goes on.

    So, this is not about the small percentage of street people that are self-medicating because they can’t afford the meds they should be on. Do your homework and stop listening to the Mayor’s rhetoric.

    There is plenty of us who have friends, families and even ourselves that have had to use these already existing services that the city has been paying for since the 19th century.

    I guess we shouldn’t pay for garbage pick up anymore or water usage or waste water treatment, MUNI, BART etc., etc. We the taxpayers already pay for those and plenty of other services, too. So, what shall it be: Have the user fees or pay taxes and no users fees?
    The services already exist.

    Plus, you are complaining about the equivalent of 3-5 cents per drink. If anyone is going to raise their prices beyond that it is going to be everyone along the way. Same way all the utilities do it. They get taxed by the gov’t, we get double the increase. They not only pay nothing but make more money on us.

    In any other venue, you would be screaming at the top of your lungs but you don’t. You don’t even vote. So, why all the fuss over a couple of shillings?

    This fee wasn’t designed to do that and I think you know that very well.

    The fee is NOT on bar owners and small businesses.
    That is what Mayor Newsom is trying to get you to believe and I guess it is working. Stop drinking his Kool-Aid.

    The fee is on wholesalers and distributors. If you are worried about trickle down economics then complain to Ronald Regan or better the wholesalers and distributors who will just pass it on in the name of capitalism.

    Finally, Plumpjack is owned by the Mayor and he signs the laws.
    Michela Alioto Pier was forced to recuse herself and I appreciate that. It’s just good ethics.

    Tell the Gav not to sign this one.

    He is conflicted, too, and he knows it.

  7. Bruce Wolfe says:

    There was a report from last year’s Newsom is a Grinch at Plumpjack store article that his sister is now the new owner. True?