Budget & Finance committee adopts technical fixes to proposed soda tax, continues measure for one week

On July 9, 2014, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors Budget & Finance Committee adopted technical cleanup amendments to a proposed ordinance that would impose a 2¢ per ounce tax on the distribution of sugar-sweetened beverages and continued the item for one week.

Supervisor Scott Wiener, a co-sponsor of the measure, said the tax is intended as a public-health price signal and estimated proceeds of "over $30,000,000 a year" would fund nutrition, physical-activity and health programs across the city. Wiener said the amendments introduced at the hearing were "technical cleanup" changes that would not alter the tax rate or how the money would be used and signaled the committee would continue the item to finalize language and address potential legal vulnerabilities.

Public comment was split. Supporters included public-health professionals and representatives of health organizations who cited links between sugary drinks and obesity and diabetes. Jana Cordero, identifying herself as a public health professional, said the measure is a "moral imperative" and cited research on childhood diabetes risk. Roberto Vargas, another public health speaker, emphasized that the ordinance would tax distributors rather than retailers and said regulation plus funding for education is needed to curb consumption.

Opponents said the tax would disproportionately affect low-income residents and small businesses. Sandra Bacon, a self-identified San Francisco native and type 2 diabetic, said she was "appalled" by the proposal and worried about impacts on older adults and people on fixed incomes. Dave Triple warned of "bureaucratic overreach," arguing enforcement and collection could burden the poor and small business owners. Amy Morris Gibbs, president of the Mission Merchants Association, said merchants could not sustain another tax.

Speakers on both sides cited different revenue estimates: the sponsors regularly cited roughly $31,000,000 a year, while at least one public commenter referenced $32,000,000. Committee members noted that final revenue projections, distribution of funds, and administrative details remain subject to staff analysis and future committee consideration.

Wiener moved to adopt the technical amendments and continue the item for one week; the committee accepted the amendments and the continuance without objection. The clerk reminded the committee that items acted on at this hearing typically appear on the July 15 Board of Supervisors agenda and that the ordinance, if advanced, would be placed on the Nov. 4, 2014 ballot for voter consideration.

The committee adjourned after taking the action to adopt the technical amendments and continue the matter one week.