Wine tasting in Sonoma

Here’s how I see it: Measure B and the current wine tasting issue are symbolic of public opinion about an out of proportion economic leg of the public policy stool, where social issues (equity, balance, diversity) and environmental sustainability concerns appear shunted aside.

The issue represents a values and a demographic conflict over the role of and oversight of tourism. Many tourist towns and regions (Aspen, CO, Woodstock, VT, Hawaii) have similar issues as Sonoma. These are known issues. The municipality gets separated from bedroom communities of disenfranchised workers; elites price out the working class in multiple ways, gentrification runs out local homeowners and calculated formula starts to substitute for actual culture. These negative aspects of tourism can be mitigated with conscious, integral oversight.

Allow me to focus these general ideas above on the question at hand, oversight of the Plaza, the heart of town. Both formula and unaffordability run counter to values stated in the city’s own General Plan and public materials. From the city’s Formula business pamphlet, “The Formula Business establishment will promote diversity and variety to assure a balanced mix of commercial uses available to serve both resident and visitor populations”. The Plaza retail overlay zone is the ‘commercial, cultural and civic center of the community”. Note: diversity and balance are values espoused by the city. Serving residents is a value. The Plaza is not only a commercial center but also a cultural and civic center, symbolic of city identity. The General Plan speaks of similar values plus cost equity for workers.

These points are near identical to ones made in Measure B and now, to limit tasting. It’s not hard to see the core issues; and given the city’s own stated values, there should be some common ground to find. We need to get past zero sum thinking and settle into addressing the aggregate issues surrounding the role of tourism in Sonoma.  

Overall tourism has an innate tendency to lean to formula. The Plaza can be some of that, but when does the city stand up for its own stated values of diversity, balance and serving all residents in their own heart of town? The city has publicly stated values besides the economic bottom line. These are the values people are asking to be heard, particularly on the Plaza. To quote economist Robert Eyler, “We not only need to think about being business friendly”, “we also have to think about being resident friendly.”

All people of my stripe are saying to the city: stand up against a wholesale sellout to becoming a tourist façade. Stand for the balance, diversity and social equity values the city already has. Sonoma has obviously tipped far to tourism already. This segment of the economy is incredibly well represented. What we need is to boost the integral bottom line. For public officials: at least try to publicly articulate that questioning tourism is a worthy issue, that concerned citizens are not trapped in a black hole zero sum game.

Practical solution: The use permit is the critical tool and threshold that can limit numbers of real estate offices and wine tasting venues on the Plaza. It would be reasonable to make all wine tasting venues pass a use permit threshold. With the current Planning Commission and city council, use permits for small local tasting would probably pass. At least then there would be a future mechanism to put on the brakes. A use permit for all wine tasting makes that action possible. A permit for all wine drinking venues on the Plaza would be a good compromise. Everyone in this discussion would get something going forward.