By adamg on Wed., 2/5/2014 - 11:12 am
City Council President Bill Linehan (South Boston, South End, Chinatown) wants the legislature let Boston add a 6.25% tax on liquor sales at local packies to help pay for treatment programs for alcoholics and drug addicts.
The council is scheduled today to consider his request for a formal hearing on his proposal.
In his request for a hearing, Linehan says Boston neighborhoods are "experiencing the adverse effects of substance abuse and addictions which lead to an increase in crime" and that the new tax "shall be used to fund prevention and treatment programs for substance abuse in the City of Boston."
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
I know you're putting me on again
By Will LaTulippe
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:38pm
But in what way am I wrong about this?
The same way you're wrong
By Scratchie
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:47pm
The same way you're wrong about just about everything. There aren't enough hours in the day to itemize it.
Are you dense?
By Will LaTulippe
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 12:56pm
If Boston charges a sales tax for liquor, I can go buy it in another city or town that doesn't charge the tax.
Scratchies
By TheNon
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 1:57pm
just upset you don't get your fee fees hurt that someone out there made a mess of their lives.
Hey Scratchie, if you haz a sad for the drunks and junkies, you go help them and open your own wallet. Leave the rest of us out of it. Maybe you can invite sob story guy over for dinner and help him see the error of his ways.
Slow down, perfessor
By Scratchie
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 3:05pm
Don't use so many big words.
Solid Retort
By TheNon
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 7:38am
I saw some guys at the corner of Melnea Cass and Mass Ave that look pretty sick. When are you heading down there to help them out? I bet you could even get some voluntary donations from some posters here.
Yeah, wicked dense
By Scratchie
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 2:22pm
Thanks for edumacatin me, smart guy.
Here's the reason
By kitty
Sat, 02/08/2014 - 3:46am
Because when you need a treatment program, it will be in Boston -- not Brookline or Watertown
So everyone - every single
By MikeM
Thu, 02/13/2014 - 12:23pm
So everyone - every single person that sometimes drinks, without fail - will eventually need "treatment?"
Dumb things like this make me
By Denn
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 1:32pm
Dumb things like this make me wish lineman lost either of the last two elections. Ridiculous.
As they say
By Stevil
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 2:17pm
You don't get the government you want, you get the government you deserve - and the fish rots from the head:
Obamacare
Warrenomics
Linetaxes
Watching too much Fox News?
By Belmont
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 3:48pm
Or spending too much time on World Net Daily?
We get it, Stevil. You think Obama, Warren and Maddow are "idiots".
Great. You're entitled to your "opinion" whether it derives from Newsweek
or The New Republic or Red State. But do try to stay on topic. And, of course,
tell us more about the homocide at your condo.
Have you been taken in for questioning yet?
Have I offended your liberal sensitivities?
By Stevil
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 5:09pm
I've said it before - and I'll say it again - considering people like you accuse me of being a right wing nut job and my conservative friends call me a left wing lunatic, it's simply proof that I'm one of the few true moderates evaluating issues one by one - usually siding with Democrats on social issues and Republicans on fiscal issues.
Once again, for the record, I don't watch FoxNews or MSNBC - mostly CNBC for professional reasons and CNN for news coverage, plus occasionally network news - all fairly moderate - the business channel leaning right (with Andrew Ross Sorkin, my favorite NY Times reporter liberal who is brilliant without being an annoying (fill in your favorite pejorative) like Maddow AND O'Reilly) and the news channels leaning left.
The topic is big brother government and oppressive taxes. If you're paying attention, Obama, Warren and now Linehan all seem to support that stance. As a moderate, I believe government has a role in making the rules and enforcing the rules. The difference between me, you and your three heroes there is that you want them to play the game also and I don't. this isn't playground basketball. You can't be the referee and the point guard.
As for the homicide - the guy didn't die. Maybe I should host a Uhub mystery night and we can re-enact the scene of the non-crime and someone can explain to me how you can generate enough force to do the damage to yourself that guy did.
Just turrible
By Sock_Puppet
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 8:59am
Thet thur librul dun raiseded mah taxess over what Raygun had.
Ah knos cuz Ah kin count on mah teef. When Rraygun was prezadint there wuz one more toof then taxess and with that Obummer thairz one more taxes than toofs. See, look in th mirrer there. Fifteen, sixteen, see!
It's a gol-durn conspiracy, ah tells ya.
Stevil, pass me thet meth pipe now. Its time for the Raygun prayer.
Brilliant
By Stevil
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 11:17am
Luv ur countree bumpkin tawk and speling.
Also love how your stats are almost 5 years old and run through the last fiscal year of the G.W. Bush administration.
Get back to me when you a) update for what's coming last year and this year and b) when you take a look at what has happened to state and local taxes as well.
In case you've missed the last 30 years due to your obsession with Raygun - their spending (which I'm assuming roughly correlates with revenue since most states can't run deficits) now account for 11% of the economy when they used to be 9% - and Federal spending - which due to deficits may not correlate with taxes - is also at record highs except I believe for WW II. Our day of reckoning is coming. We can delay it and MAYBE if we act quickly and strongly enough we can prevent it. Unfortunately I'm not seeing much backbone - on either side of the aisle. While the Republicans at least talk the talk which puts them one step ahead of the Dems, I'm not seeing them walk the walk except for the Tea Partiers who like to walk off of cliffs.
Walking the walk
By Sock_Puppet
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 1:29pm
I'd vote for Republicans if they walked the walk. But mostly the talk isn't even too good.
Federal spending was at record highs except for WWII in… (drum roll please) as you put it, the last fiscal year of the G.W. Bush administration.
Under the Obama administration federal spending has been reduced as a percentage of GDP. The deficit was at 10.1 percent of GDP in the LFYGWBA, and it's set for 4 percent this year, on its way to 2.1 percent in 2015. It's no great mystery how one does this. Ending wars is a great step in the right direction. Ending health care reform isn't. You might not like the talk he talks, but you ought to like the walk he walks a bit better than that of Mr. Bomb Iran and Caribou Barbie.
If someone around would bring us back to the fiscal conservatism of the Clinton administration, I'd be all for it. But the Repubs are badly afflicted with clown disease. Please give the rest of us someone more serious than Palin, Paul, and Ryan. I mean, that's an awesome band name, but who's even talking talk that adds up over there anymore?
Treatment covered by MassHealth?
By Markk02474
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 2:56pm
Shouldn't addiction treatment already be covered by MassHealth and funded by taxpayers? Perhaps the new tax is only for illegal aliens who can not sign up for nearly free health care.
Tell me what taxes you pay
By JohnAKeith
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 8:34pm
I'm skeptical 3/4ths of readers of this site (or anywhere) can accurately estimate how much they pay in taxes every year.
Unrelated to everything we're talking about but it's a pet peeve of mine.
I mean, I could ballpark it
By Will LaTulippe
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 1:36am
Most things I buy that call for a sales tax I purchase with credit/debit cards. A glance at my statements, plus adding the finite total I pay in income tax, could give me a rough estimate of what I pay for serial breeders, sleeping cops, and addicts of substances that they knew were bad for them.
Minutes. Executive Session. Boston City Council.
By theszak
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 8:34pm
Is today's Executive Session behind closed doors Wednesday 5 February 2014 during the Public Meeting of Boston City Council subject to Sunshine Open Public Meetings and Freedom of Information Public Records principles of open government?
http://www.mass.gov/ago/government-resources/open-...
What records of public meetings must be kept?
http://www.mass.gov/ago/government-resources/open-...
Public bodies are required to create and maintain accurate minutes of all meetings, including executive sessions. The minutes, which must be created and approved in a timely manner, must state the date, time and place of the meeting, a list of the members present or absent, and the decisions made and actions taken including a record of all votes. Minutes must also include the name of any member who participated in the meeting remotely and the reason under 940 CMR 29.10(5) for his or her remote participation. While the minutes must include a summary of the discussions on each subject, a transcript is not required. No vote taken by a public body, either in an open or in an executive session, shall be by secret ballot. All votes taken in executive session must be by roll call and the results recorded in the minutes. In addition, the minutes must include a list of the documents and other exhibits used at the meeting. While public bodies are required to retain these records in accordance with records retention laws, the documents and exhibits listed in the minutes need not be attached to or physically stored with the minutes.
The minutes, documents and exhibits are public records and a part of the official record of the meeting. Records may be subject to disclosure under either the Open Meeting Law or Public Records Law and must be retained in accordance with the Secretary of State's record retention schedule. The State and Municipal Record Retention Schedules are available through the Secretary of State's website at: http://www.sec.state.ma.us/arc/arcrmu/rmuidx.htm.
...
Executive Session Meeting Records
Public bodies are not required to disclose the minutes, notes or other materials used in an executive session where the disclosure of these records may defeat the lawful purposes of the executive session. Once disclosure would no longer defeat the purposes of the executive session, minutes and other records from that executive session must be disclosed unless they are within an exemption to the Public Records Law, G.L. c. 4, § 7, cl. 26, or the attorney-client privilege applies. The public body is also required to periodically review the executive session minutes to determine whether continued non-disclosure is warranted, and such determination must be included in the minutes of the body's next meeting. A public body must respond to a request to inspect or copy executive session minutes within 10 days of request and promptly release the records if they are subject to disclosure. If the body has not performed a review to determine whether they are subject to disclosure, it must do so prior to its next meeting or within 30 days, whichever is sooner.
Finally!
By John-W
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 9:27pm
A sane post on this thread that doesn't have me gnashing my tooths!
"EX-TER-MIN-ATE!"
By thedalek
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 9:29pm
Are we related, theszak?
Really?
By Sloan
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 9:37pm
Really, Linehan? I can't take you seriously because all I can think is that this is a way for you to clean up your gritty PJs in Southie. I've lived - and owned - in Southie for 13 years and honestly, the majority of the issues in this neighborhood come from the born & bred Southie folk. At the VERY least, let us buy booze at supermarkets, CVS, etc., before you throw another tax on alcohol.
I am surprised at the shortsightedness of most of the comments
By dvg
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 10:05pm
The 6% tax proposed by the councilor would only offset a tiny fraction of the cost incurred by alcohol consumption –rehab, domestic violence, drunken accidents, tens of millions of lives turned into misery etc. Yet most commenters are ridiculing the initiative and appear ready to drive a one hour round trip to Dedham to save $1!
The vast majority of alcohol, soda, junk found, gambling is consumed by people who use way too much of the stuff for their own good, and expect the rest of us to pay the consequences. The only beneficiary are the businesses that profit from selling that crap.
Privatize the profit, and spread the cost; this is socialism at its worst. Unfortunately, it seems to be the way this country is going. We are getting what we ask for.
derp
By John-W
Wed, 02/05/2014 - 11:54pm
hour round trip to Dedham? Uh...I'd drive across the bridge to Chelsea and the Kappy's in Eastie would lose my business.
Privatizing profit and spreading the cost [to the public] is actually the definition of modern 'Mericun capitalism - not socialism.
At any rate this proposal is retahded and presumably will go nowhere because Kappy's and all the other liquor stores and their industry will step up to tell Linehan to have airborne intercourse with a tumbling cruller. It'll be interesting to see what the Mayor has to say about the idea...
Did you fail geography too?
By Will LaTulippe
Thu, 02/06/2014 - 1:37am
Most commenters driving one hour round trip to Dedham? Um, no.
Staff. Boston City Council.
By theszak
Fri, 02/07/2014 - 8:17pm
BOSTON CITY COUNCIL STAFF
staff || office
1. Baker, Jill || Baker
2. Curley, Amanda || Baker
3. Frigulietti, Amy || Baker
4. McEachern, Joseph || Baker
5. Quinn, Allyson || Baker
6. Chin, Betty || Central Staff
7. Cobb, Ron || Central Staff
8. De La Rosa, Daisy || Central Staff
9. Jordan, Kerry || Central Staff
10. Lopez, Juan || Central Staff
11. Montrond, Cora F. || Central Staff
12. Nichols, Michael || Central Staff
13. O'Donnell, Christine || Central Staff
14. Schettino, Lorainne || Central Staff
15. Smith, Lincoln || Central Staff
16. Sullivan, Kathleen || Central Staff
17. Valdez, Yuleidy || Central Staff
18. Franks, Jacqueline || Ciommo
19. Handley, Mark || Ciommo
20. O'Leary, Deborah A. || Ciommo
21. Walsh, Joseph || Ciommo
22. Casper, Robyn || Flaherty
23. Dickerson, William || Flaherty
24. Hasib, Shaikh || Flaherty
25. Kalayjian, Tricia || Flaherty
26. Lanza, Maria || Flaherty
27. Spitz, Ryan || Flaherty
28. Sullivan, Paul || Flaherty
29. Brown, Justin || Jackson
30. Graves, Reynolds || Jackson
31. Polanco, Daniel || Jackson
32. Sadler, Nichelle || Jackson
33. Carangelo, Katherine M. || LaMattina
34. Evers, Judith E. || LaMattina
35. Hernandez, Camilo || LaMattina
36. Knott, Janet L. || LaMattina
37. McGivern, Jennifer || LaMattina
38. Sinatra, Michael || LaMattina
39. Toscano, Lori || LaMattina
40. Abbott, Kristin || Linehan
41. Chan, James W. || Linehan
42. Chase, Alexander || Linehan
43. Cloherty,Elaine M. || Linehan
44. McGonagle, Mark || Linehan
45. McMorrow, Susan || Linehan
46. Susan McMorrow || Linehan
47. Apperwhite, Walter || McCarthy
48. Blasi, Elizabeth A. || McCarthy
49. Herby, Lindor || McCarthy
50. Maguire, Stephen || McCarthy
51. Francis,Thomas B. || Murphy
52. Lally, Bernadette || Murphy
53. McDonough,Thomas M. || Murphy
54. O'Connell, Molly || Murphy
55. Colby, Timothy || O'Malley
56. MacGregor, William || O'Malley
57. Smith, Hannah || O'Malley
58. Sullivan, Elizabeth F. || O'Malley
59. Prioly, Jackney || Pressley
60. Sutherland, James || Pressley
61. Taubner, Jessica || Pressley
62. White, Eric || Pressley
63. Zimmerer, Jessika || Pressley
64. Alvarez, Ivon || Wu
65. Cohen, Henry || Wu
66. Kaufman, Samantha || Wu
67. Vittorini Jr., David F. || Wu
68. Webster, Gary || Wu
69. Frazier, Lynnette M. || Yancey
70. Idowu, Oluwasegun || Yancey
71. Purvis, Nichelle || Yancey
72. Yarbrough, Kenneth W. || Yancey
73. Fajardo, Leila || Zakim
74. Henicke, Kyndal || Zakim
75. Krupta, Carol || Zakim
76. Sibor, Daniel || Zakim
77. Baker, Frank
78. Ciommo, Mark
79. Flaherty, Michael
80. Jackson, Tito
81. Lamattina, Salvatore J.
82. Linehan, William P.
83. McCarthy, Timothy
84. Murphy,Stephen J.
85. O'Malley, Matt
86. Pressley, Ayanna
87. Wu, Michelle
88. Yancey, Charles C.
89. Zakim, Josh
Pages