SONOMA COUNTY WINERY USE PERMITS, EVENT RESTICTIONS AND DTC

BOOZE RULES GUEST BLOG

There have been hundreds of articles and reports in recent months detailing winery marketing event restrictions in Napa, Sonoma and throughout California.  Local authorities from Santa Barbara to Napa to Sonoma have been grappling with the winery and hospitality business need to market their wines to visiting customers against the desire of local residents (many of them new to the wine country) to experience a quiet agricultural countryside. This conflict is not going away and is reflected in applications for new wineries being protested and in applications for use and event permits for existing wineries being denied.  The DTC model is essential to the survival of the small to medium size winery, and entertaining visitors is essential to the DTC model. We and our colleagues at Carle, Mackie, Power & Ross, LLP, (a law firm on the ground in Sonoma County) are tracking Sonoma developments as they occur so that our winery clients and friends can input in the process. Kim Corcoran, an experienced wine business and litigation attorney at CMPR, attends the County Board of Supervisors meetings on these issues.  This is her report.


Latest Developments on Winery Use Permits and Visitor Restrictions

Kim Corcoran, Attorney

Sonoma County wineries have been under attack in the last few years by groups in opposition to winery events, new wineries, and even the direct-to-consumer business model itself.  The vast majority of Sonoma County wineries are good neighbors and work to ensure that their impacts on nearby residents are lessened.  Most of the neighbors understand that they are living on land zoned for agriculture (which includes wineries), but opposition groups are advocating for more residential-oriented rights on ag land.  The wineries have pushed back, stating that without a high value crop such as wine, the land is worth more for housing tracts than it is for agriculture.  To help bring the parties to some resolution, the Board of Supervisors convened a Winery Working Group panel.  After many months of meetings, however the animosity seemed to grow stronger.  The issues were placed back in the hands of the Board of Supervisors.  

Meeting 10/11/16, Sonoma County Board of Supervisors

The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors agreed this week to move forward with zoning code amendments to facilitate clarity for the wine business in the County.  The Board adopted a limited resolution asking County staff to develop specific code amendments as well as standards and siting criteria for areas of local concentration to be adopted either as guidelines or code amendments.

Perhaps the most remarkable thing about this week’s action is that it was on the Board’s “consent” calendar.  This means that there was none of the public comment (read “rancor and discord”) that has attended other public hearings on this subject.  Of course, it takes a lot of work on everyone’s part to get an “easy” result - hats off to all for getting to this point.

Indeed, it is a sign of the times that direction from the Board simply to craft some code amendments is seen as a major milestone.  Opposition groups have pushed hard for an immediate moratorium on any new winery use permits and for an immediate determination of (and prohibitions within) “areas of over-concentration.”  Leaving aside the redundancy of their term, anyone with knowledge of the areas in issue knows that it will not be easy to define areas of the County that may fall into such a category.  Moreover, opposition groups appear to seek County regulation for the express purpose of interfering with the direct-to-consumer marketing model that has made Sonoma County wineries vibrant and prosperous. 

Each of the Supervisors expressed their appreciation for a more deliberative process, one Supervisor referring to the process as “deliberative by design.”  Another Supervisor, with nods of approval from others, reminded the audience that direct-to-consumer sales is an old business model from the time before grapes were even a major crop.  Such a sales model can greatly assist in keeping much of the County’s current land in agriculture. 

The winery supporters have been advocating for the adoption of clear definitions and this week the Supervisors instructed County staff to develop such definitions.   Under the current ordinances, the County is asked to regulate winery “special events” when there is no definition for the term.  The wineries are seeking definitions for “events” and “activities.”  An activity is a normal business activity within the winery’s usual, site-specific capacity (such as a special tasting, a distributor meeting or a winemaker lunch) that would not be counted as a “special event.”  Under the wineries’ proposed set of definitions, new wineries would be limited in the number and scope of special events, but not activities. 

Several of the Supervisors discussed the need for additional enforcement mechanisms with one of them specifically complimenting the wine industry for their proposals in this regard.  The wineries have proposed outside funding for a position that would be available on nights and weekends to assist neighbors and wineries alike, and to coordinate larger winery events with other neighborhood pressures such as marathons and bicycle races. 

While we will need to wait for County’s staff’s recommendation on each of the issues before we’ll know what’s in front of us, the meeting this week was a step forward in that process. 

Please do not hesitate to contact Kim Corcoran at kcorcoran@cmprlaw.com or (707) 526-4200 if you have questions or concerns regarding this article.

  1. MISSISSIPPI RISING - A VICTORY FOR LEGAL RETAILER TO CONSUMER SALES, AND PASSAGE OF TITLE UNDER THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE
  2. California ABC's Cannabis Advisory - Not Just for Stoners
  3. NEW CALIFORNIA WARNINGS FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND CANNABIS PRODUCTS TAKE EFFECT AUGUST 30, 2018, NOW INCLUDING ADDENDUM REGARDING 2014 CONSENT AGREEMENT PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS
  4. National Conference of State Liquor Administrators – The Alcohol Industry gathers in Hawaii to figure out how to enforce the US “Highly Archaic Regulatory Scheme.”
  5. Founder John Hinman Honored with the Raphael House Community Impact Award
  6. ROUTE TO MARKET AND MARKETING RESTRICTIONS - NAVIGATING REGULATORY SYSTEM CONSTRAINTS
  7. Alcohol and Cannabis Ventures: Top 5 Legal Considerations
  8. ATF and TTB: Is Another Divorce on the Horizon? What’s Going on with the Agency?
  9. STRIKE 3 - YOU REALLY ARE OUT! THE ABC'S STRICT APPLICATION OF PENALTIES FOR SALES TO MINORS
  10. TTB Temporarily Fixes Problem with Fulfillment Warehouse Tax Credits - an “Alternate Procedure” for Paying Taxes & Reporting
  11. CUSTOMERS WHO HAVE HAD ONE TOO MANY - THE FREE TRANSPORTATION DILEMMA
  12. The Renaissance of Federal Unfair Trade Practices - Current Issues and Strategies
  13. ‘Twas the week before New Year’s and the ABC is out in Force – Alerts for the Last Week of 2017, including the Limits on Free Rides
  14. Big Bottles, Caviar and a CA Wine Strong Silent Auction for the Holidays!
  15. The FDA and the Wine and Spirits Industry – Surprise inspections anyone?
  16. NORTHERN CALIFORNIA WILDFIRES: UPDATED REGULATORY AGENCY DISASTER RELIEF RESOURCES AT A GLANCE
  17. NORTHERN CALIFORNIA WILDFIRES: REGULATORY AGENCY DISASTER RELIEF RESOURCES AT A GLANCE
  18. Soon to come to your Local Supermarket– Instant Redeemable Coupons of the digital age!
  19. The License Piggyback Dilemma – If it Sounds Too Good to be True, it Probably is
  20. A timely message from our Florida colleagues on the tied house laws, the three-tier system and the need for reform
  21. ABC Declaratory Rulings – A Modest Proposal Whose Time has Come
  22. More on FDA Inspections - Breweries, Distilleries and Questions
  23. WHY THE FDA IS INSPECTING WINERIES
  24. Senate Bill 378—The Proposed Demise of Due Process for Alcohol Licensees
  25. ABC Enforcement - Trends and Predictions
  26. The Corruption Chronicles – Volume One: A New Hope
  27. New Alcohol Delivery Oversight on the Horizon
  28. Michigan: Canary in the DtC Coal Mine?
  29. California ABC and Federal Credit Laws – Active Enforcement and Lots of Questions!
  30. Big Bottles For The Holidays - The Highest Calling Of The Winemaker's Art
  31. FINAL COMMENTS TO TTB NOTICE 160 DUE ON WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 7TH – WE ARE ASKING THE TTB TO EXTEND THE COMMENT PERIOD AGAIN TO ALLOW FOR INDUSTRY NEGOTIATION AND ALIGNMENT OF INTERESTS
  32. SONOMA COUNTY WINERY USE PERMITS, EVENT RESTICTIONS AND DTC
  33. New TTB Labeling Requirement Regulations: Out-of-State Bottling Is Not Created Equal and Consumers Right to Know Where the Grapes in their Wine Come from is Compromised
  34. Isn't A Written Agreement With A Distributor Worthless In A Franchise State?
  35. Crowd Funding for Alcohol Producers and Retailers – Down the Rabbit Hole with the Tied House laws
  36. Everything you ever wanted to know about the BPA Warning Statement but were afraid to ask
  37. AB 2082 - A Hunting License for Police and a Lethal Weapon for Politicians that Deprives Licensees of Currently Available Due Process Rights
  38. “Better Late Than Never”-- Judge in Illinois Dismisses 201 Sales Tax Cases against Retailers
  39. The Day the Music Almost Died: The Story of the BottleRock ABC Accusations, the ABC Appeals Board and a Victory for a Common Sense Interpretation of the Tied House Laws
  40. The Arsenic in Wine Class Action Dismissal – what it means
  41. Counterfeit or Artisanal Mexican Spirits? Pick your Poison, or your lime wedge
  42. Warning - CA ABC enforcement teams are on the prowl this weekend!
  43. RELIEF AT LAST! ILLINOIS MOVES TO FIX THE SALES TAX LAWSUITS AGAINST OUT-OF-STATE SELLERS BUT PROPOSES TO PENALIZE WINERIES AND RETAILERS THAT SHIP WITHOUT PERMITS
  44. The TTB Speaks on Category Management or, be Careful What you Ask for Because you might Get it!
  45. Hinman & Carmichael LLP Announces the Addition of Jeremy Siegel to its team of top beverage law lawyers
  46. 2016 LEGISLATIVE UPDATES: Part IV
  47. 2016 LEGISLATIVE UPDATES: Part III
  48. 2016 LEGISLATIVE UPDATES: Part II
  49. 2016 LEGISLATIVE UPDATES: Part I
  50. Hinman & Carmichael LLP is Hiring!
  51. John Hinman Presents NBI Webinar on Basics of Alcohol Beverage Law
  52. ABC DISMISSES SAVE MART GRAPE ESCAPE ACCUSATION BUT REFUSES TO ADOPT JUDGE’S DECISION FINDING NO STRICT LIABILITY FOR ABC VIOLATIONS
  53. Speakeasies are still with us, and proliferating!
  54. The War for the Soul of Sonoma County – the Winery Working Group Battle
  55. Santa Claus isn’t the only one coming to town this Christmas!
  56. Arizona's Direct to Consumer Shipping Rules - An Exercise in Complexity
  57. AB 780 - Social Media and the ABC: The California Legislative “Fix” that Fails
  58. Illinois Finally Offers Certainty and Relief for Victims of Sales Tax Lawsuits, but Prompt Action is Required in Pending Cases
  59. A Modest Proposal – Adopt the federal rule on Tied-House liability in California
  60. The Grapes Escaped - Why the First Amendment Matters
  61. Appellate Court Ruling Strikes Blow Against State’s Arbitrary Beer Label Ban
  62. Illinois Attorney General's Office Announces Intention to Dismiss False Claims Act Against Liquor Retailers
  63. Commercial Speech And Alcoholic Beverages - Part III
  64. Commercial Speech And Alcoholic Beverages - Part II
  65. Craft Beverages: Social Media Marketing the Effective and Compliant Way
  66. Commercial Speech And Alcoholic Beverages - Part I
  67. A LAYPERSON LOOKS AT ARSENIC IN WINE
  68. The Biggest Retailer in the World vs. the TABC
  69. Rebecca Stamey-White presents Emerging Issues in Wine Law
  70. Top Beverage Alcohol Law Firm Adds and Elevates Partners
  71. Illinois Qui Tam Lawsuits—Private Enforcement Of a State Claim: A Bonanza For A Plaintiff’s Lawyer And A Rip-Off Of Retailers
  72. BOOZE RULES OF SOCIAL MEDIA: The Retailer Right to Pay Exception
  73. LIONS AND TIGERS AND TWEETS, OH MY!
  74. AB 2004: Brewer's Incremental Parity with Wine Makers
  75. Expanding, Proud Of It, and Wanting to Tell the World
  76. DC Weighs in Strongly on Third Party Marketer Delivery Services
  77. “Visual Links” between Beer, Wine and Spirits Labels and Retailers Ruled Unlawful in California — the tied house laws run amok
  78. Hard Cider Legislative Update
  79. New Marketing Model for New York – Lot 18 and the NYSLA
  80. Sweeping Changes in Proposed NYSLA Bill Include Expansion for Craft
  81. Minimum Resale Price Policies - How to Control Price-Cutters
  82. AB 2130 – Gloves Off?
  83. “Gluten-Free” Labels for Wine, Beer and Distilled Spirits. We’re Still Waiting.
  84. AB 1252: Sanitation Overkill?
  85. Growlers: Not Just for Beer Anymore
  86. California Legislative Roundup 2014
  87. Build It and They Will Come: Craft Products Get New Privileges in CA and TX
  88. AB 1128: Veto of the “Serve a Minor” Felony Penalty Bill, or How to Lose a Winery in One Sale
  89. California Grocers Association v. ABC, Part 2: California Appeals Court Vacates ABC’s Adoption of a Trade Advisory That Correctly Guided Licensee Conduct
  90. California Grocers Association v. ABC, Part 1: California Appeals Court Prohibits Alcohol Sales at Self-Check Out Stands
  91. AB 1128: The “Serve a Minor” Felony Penalty Bill, or How to Lose a Winery in One Sale
  92. The New York SLA and Online Wine Sales: A Work in Progress
  93. California SB 635: What the 4am Bill Really Means for California Communities
  94. Electronic Invoices in California: Welcome to the 19th Century
  95. The History of Amazon and Wine: What Has Changed?
  96. Third Party Marketing Checklist
  97. BOOZE RULES – PROMOTIONAL APPEARANCES AND AUTOGRAPHS
  98. Washington State: Down the Rabbit Hole of the Tied-House Laws