We weren’t the only ones frustrated by the Fauquier County Board of Supervisors’ decision last week, and we also weren’t the only ones frustrated and baffled by Jim Law’s bombshell at the meeting. We’ve taken a little heat for our position so I wanted to clarify how, going forward, we’ll be approaching doing business in Fauquier County – and with Linden Vineyards.
Let’s take the county first. We will, obviously, visit and purchase wines from wineries based in Fauquier County. Beyond that the only other businesses in Fauquier County with whom we will spend money are Mom & Pop operations. I’m not going to penalize small businesses who didn’t play a part in this. Big box stores and chains are off limits for us, as are gas stations. Last year I spent nearly $6,000 on fuel JUST for business and at least 75% of that was in Fauquier County, because of how my route works out. No more. When I tried contacting the Board of Supervisors I was told that because I wasn’t a county resident, they didn’t care to talk to me. Fair enough; I’m going to limit how much tourism and business expense revenue I provide to Fauquier County then.
Here’s what Fauquier County gets from me from now on (with the above exceptions):
That was the easy decision. Now for the harder one.
When Jim Law stood up in front of the Fauquier County Board of Supervisors and stated his support for the proposed Farm Winery Ordinance, I felt betrayed. His argument was that eliminating events and other activities would allow wineries to focus on growing grapes and making great wines.
Now, we’ve had numerous debates on this blog about events and tourism versus wine making and how they all affect one another. Do I think that Linden (and a couple of others) are able to make excellent wines in part because they don’t also host cornhole tournaments and weekly weddings? Sure. That doesn’t mean that you can’t strike a balance of events and wine making.
Jim Law was able to start Linden Vineyards and do it the way he did because he had family money behind him. He told us that at Taste Camp, so don’t think I’m assuming. Rutger de Vink, of the $88 bottle of VA wine, is able to run his winery project the way he does because he’s a multi-millionaire. Rutger didn’t show up at the BoS meeting but he sent someone to read a letter from him into the record, supporting the ordinance as well.
That’s great that these guys can do this. What’s not great is that they’re saying that Fauquier County wine is the high rollers table. Unless you can buy in for the big dollar amount and absorb the losses until your wine takes off, you need to GTFO. Starting (and running) a winery is incredibly expensive. Denying a winery owner alternative revenue streams until their winery is profitable makes wine a rich kids’ club. That sucks, when you consider that at its core, wine is a blend of farming, art, and science. You don’t need a Swiss bank account to master those.
You can’t write about Virginia wine without writing about Jim Law. He has consistently led the way and he’s still doing so. So, we visited Linden several weeks ago, before all this went down. We’re still going to write about our visit and the wines. We’ll open and blog the Linden wines we own at some point, and I’m sure we’ll be back in the future. However, I think it’s important that everyone who disagrees with the way Jim Law chose to make his points at the meeting says so. We are.
And for everyone telling us “oh but he has a right to his opinion blah blah blah -” you’re right. He has a right to his opinion. He had previously sent a letter of support to the Board of Supervisors so not only did he have an opinion, he made it part of the record. While his focus on quality winemaking is important and great and a conversation worth having, it is not what the Board of Supervisors was debating. It was (in my personal opinion) not the appropriate time for that statement and it was potentially damaging not just for Fauquier County wineries, but other wineries around the state. It made the conversation not about whether or not the ordinance being considered was appropriate, but whether or not the Jim Law way is the ONLY way. Great conversation to have, wrong forum.
Thoughts?
The Bloggers Resolve Not to React to Fauquier Bombshells Like Joe Pesci with Sandy Cheeks by Swirl, Sip, Snark, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Good thoughts, I for the record, made an appointment to visit RdV in August before I heard of it. I plan on honoring the appointment, and tasting the wines, and asking whoever I speak to at RdV some questions about their thoughts on this matter. However, I dislike the idea of Virginia wine being hard to buy and hard to enjoy on site. Sometimes I feel like Linden and RdV make things difficult to up the “cache” or exclusivity of the wines, and frankly, I call BS on that.
We may stop at a mom and pop for lunch, but we will not buy gas or any other services.
Everyone is welcome to their own opinions and business models. As for mine, having been married AT a winery, my opinions are quite clear.
Chris, there is no doubt in my mind that the mystique is part of the marketing. Honestly, it’s brilliant, but hard to do well. You need the resources to either create immediate buzz while letting no one in the door (RdV) or you need to play the long game and build a cult following to where you can tell the state, “take down the grape cluster signs pointing to me” (Linden). While Linden and Barrel Oak both command respectable bottle prices, from the outside it would seem BOW probably has a lot more overhead. However, I still think there is room in the state for LInden and for BOW.
I’ve been following this situation from afar, and you guys know that I have opinions on tourism vs. quality wine.
I understand your stance, of course, and more importantly respect you right to that stance — but similarly, I have to applaud Jim Law for making a statement against agri-tourism and the way it has — in my opinion — held many emerging regions back from a quality standpoint.
I’d never want anyone to go out of business — not in this economy. But, I want regional wineries to make better and better wine, period.
I have heard people accuse certain VA wineries of caring more about events than the wine, and concluding that the quality of the wine has suffered as a result. It’s sad to think that Virginia wine as a whole might be overlooked because of a few bad grapes. But in saying all that, it becomes obvious to me that this is line of thinking is part of the “great conversation to have, wrong forum”, and shame on Law and the BoS for not recognizing and making that distinction. Does an emphasis on events make for bad wine? Let the customers decide. But let all the wineries have the same opportunity to get their wine to customers. As for me, I wouldn’t hesitate to go back to Linden or any other Fauquier country vineyard.
I have my fingers crossed that we’ll have our little wedding in a Virginia vineyard because we have such happy memories of all the vineyards we’ve visited. Unfortunately, we just won’t be able to consider Fauquier County vineyards. For the time being, that just means that business/revenue/employment is going to other counties.
Lenn – ok, if even you aren’t quite getting where I’m going, I must be sucking at getting my point across. Have I mentioned I’ve been too sick to leave the house all week? That’s my excuse.
Ok, so in the piece you wrote last summer (for which you and Andy still need to hug it out, btw) you mentioned your concern that VA wineries were putting tourism ahead of quality, as well as some other related points. I think that’s a GREAT conversation to have and an important one for any wine region, especially an emerging one (at what point are we all the way out?).
In fact, it’s such a great conversation to have that it’s a distraction from the point of the public forum at the Board of Supervisors meeting, which was: is there a problem that needs addressed and does this ordinance address it appropriately? That’s it. That was the whole reason for people to speak. I would love to have this conversation – want to do a cross-blog series on it? That could be kickass – but it shifted the focus away from the fact that the county was hellbent on passing a fundamentally flawed ordinance that didn’t hit all the right points and was written by a special interest group.
I respect the hell out of Jim Law. You’d have to be an imbecile not to. I believe his is an important voice for what Virginia wine is now and will be in the future for the vintners who want to make great wine. For those who are happy making shit wine and running a petting zoo in the back? Let the market speak. One person shouldn’t get to dictate how an entire industry operates. Llarry’s Llamas and Llibations isn’t going to upstage Linden Vineyards (for anyone with a palate) with their sweet Concord wines.
There are hacks in my business, oh lord are there ever. Sure, it sucks when I get painted with the same brush, but when I get someone who knows the difference between what I offer and what they offer, I can charge whatever I need to run a profitable business. Mediocre businesses make mine look even better. Why would it be any different in wine?
Keili Rae – thanks for getting what I was saying. The question of tourism vs wine quality is SO compelling to me! Seriously, it’s such an amazing and fascinating study, and when you break it down and look at wineries around the state you see all different approaches, Perfect example: Pippin Hill. I will come right out and say that I wrote them off before trying them because their business plan was clearly to be a weddery (wedding venue winery). But you know what? Their wines don’t suck (Michael Shaps custom crush) and the experience is pretty good too.
Let’s say my business is a machine shop that hand tools custom croquet wickets for discerning buyers around the world. As it happens, my shop sits on 6 beautiful acres in Loudoun County with easy access to route 15, and I’ve beautifully landscaped it because that’s my hobby. After a few friends have asked to get married on my property, I decide to hire an event planner, put in a separate driveway, and hold weddings there every week. As long as I’m not pulling my machinist away from his work to float orchids in bowls of water, what about the added line of business would cause my mega awesome premium croquet wickets to start sucking?
Oh right. Nothing.
Piece of advise: don’t invite all the VA wine bloggers to your wedding reception. Bad things happen.
GEG:
definitely would love to partake in that conversation, so many fun things to say!!
as for the topic at hand:
the FCBOS just missed a great opportunity to really engage farm wineries and consult other counties on how they handle their ordinances pertaining to the farm wineries and how it meshes with state law. One benefit could have been to finally distinguish farm wineries from events facilities hiding behind a farm winery and taxing them as such. If having a special event is the only way you can sell your wine then by all means, but you need to have a different classification and will lose benefits afforded actual farm wineries.
Make it so there is no winery loop hole to having tons of weddings and events neither instructional or geared towards appreciating the product of an agrarian lifestyle that the consumer can only experience….and can’t live. But don’t punish the wineries who are trying to market their wines made from fruit they grew or at least fruit grown in Virginia, wineries who actually support Virginia agriculture. (Note to the FCBOS limiting tax revenue in an economy such as we have now and severely restricting the one of the few growing industries in your region really isn’t very bright).
I will say though, If one prospective winery owner is concerned more with where to put their event facility than where to plant their vineyard or build their winery then that should be proof enough that some sort of regulation needs to be in place.
I don’t want to hear the “but we’ll probably have to close if…..” argument until I can see the facility, what was spent, and taste the wine. If I feel like I am walking into Opus or the Ritz Carlton, well I don’t want to hear your plight.
Point is there was and is a need for regulating or distinguishing between types of wineries (perhaps expand the commercial winery license parameters), the board just kinda went overboard, and possibly because of FC’s very own good ole boy network pressuring the board to get something passed, who knows….
All of the other issues are deeply rooted and would require a team of therapists to really get to the bottom of why someone really is for the ordinance and why someone is really against the ordinance. And I’d bet you a shiny nickel that neither side was completely honest as to why they were for or against it.
Lynn, I totally agree with your comment…except the agri-tourism holding emerging wine regions’ quality back part…
andy – thanks for commenting. I’ll def take you up on the conversation, you provide the wine and I’ll take notes. This ordinance just caught too many dolphins with the tuna they were going for.
I love your decisions on not supporting gas stations or big box stores in Fauquier County. I’m heading out to three wineries out there on Sunday, and will make sure to gas up the SUV before I get out there!
As a way to support the wineries that DON’T have family money behind them and will be struggling, my goal is to visit every FC winery between now and the end of the year, and post a review on The Studio Foodie. I’m struggling with the decision whether or not to visit Linden…
isn’t that how it always is, actions of a few deprive the many
as for the convo you let me know when and where!
I personally don’t see it as “if you aren’t with us, you’re against us.” There should be room to disagree about approaches to the business. I’m inclined to think Jim Law is focused on the greater good of promoting an industry that makes and sells wine, not one that hosts weddings, chucks watermelons, puts on beauty pageants, stages helicopter jousting tournaments and “oh, by the way, have some wine that was made in the basement by my Italian great-grandfather.” There should be room for that, too.
If Linden and RdV (and others) aspire to be rarified aeries accessible only to the devoted, so be it. If someone else wants to host multiple weddings every single weekend – good luck with that, although if it truly is a profit center then you can hire someone to deal with it full time. But don’t expect your compatriots in the wine business to take you seriously. Which wineries do you find the opinion makers in the wine press praising? Not the pumpkin chuckers.
That’s a very interesting point about using winery classification as a means of controlling what happens on a particular property, but that seems to me more of a licensing issue than a zoning one. I’m extremely reluctant to call for a legislative solution, but perhaps if there was a definition of “marketing of wine” in the Code of Virginia, that would help local jurisdictions with their efforts to control unwelcome behavior and give clarity to everyone. If, for example, the statute stated “the following activities constitute the marketing of wine and are protected …” then there would be a framework all sides can work with, and a local jurisdiction would be powerless to prohibit it.
Some of the policy goals in similar regulations make sense to me, like the prohibition on restaurants, though they don’t articulate a goal the way California does: to concentrate development in towns and cities that have the infrastructure to handle them, and it makes those places worth visiting, brings life to them. Still, I do enjoy Palladio at Barboursville. Surely there’s room for a few places like that, so long as they can build a septic system to handle it? Zoning regulations evolve to account for change, and if Orange County reaches a point where it wants to prohibit that sort of development, it can, and the existing uses are grandfathered in.
The present ordinance restricts activities of wineries, but I wonder if the same restrictions are imposed on other property owners. Is there anything in the zoning ordinance preventing, say, a horse farm from staging a wedding with 500 guests? I’ve looked at the regs and didn’t find anything, but their zoning regulations are pretty extensive and I don’t have time to take them apart.
If there is no such restriction on horse farms (for example), then perhaps the farm wineries could cozy up to their horse loving neighbors and stage entertainments on their properties rather than at the winery. The guests don’t get the view of the rows of vines, but I doubt anyone would care much. Of course the facility rental fee goes to the property owner; perhaps the winery gets a commission? And they’d have the wine sales, which is the goal anyway, right? The bride could still have her photos taken in the vineyard. But that highlights the fundamental unfairness inherent in the regulations: wineries can’t do certain things, but others can. If parking lots need to be screened from view, that should apply to all. Do they? I’m not sure.
I don’t know what role the Virginia Wineries Association played in all this, but I sure hope they were involved and are contemplating some mechanism to deal local government regulation.
Mel – that’s a noble goal indeed! We’re looking to do the same, since we fell behind on many of Fauquier’s wineries.
andy – we have a wedding to go to next week (watch out, Finger Lakes wineries!) but we’ll hit you up after we’re back in town
Stephen – one of the women who spoke against the ordinance mentioned that she had also worked in the equestrian realm and it seemed wrong that horse farms could have as many events and camps and anything else they wanted with no oversight, but wineries couldn’t. So I think you’re onto something there.
I believe there’s a fair solution out there. I just don’t think this is it.
Hmm — I’m not a litigator, but that could be a legal argument to use in court, because the regulations are not being applied in an equitable manner with one class being discriminated against. Someone needs to get injured first, such as the capricious denial of a special exception.
I get the legal definition of “injured”, but here’s what I’m picturing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhJQp-q1Y1s
That’s it!!! Law school may be in your future.
If I can skip law school and go straight to slapping people with fish I’m in! Otherwise I’ll continue manufacturing croquet wickets.
Here are a few points to consider:
1. These attacks on Mr. Law, “dick move”, giving him the finger, etc. are childish, rude, demonstrate unprofessional journalism and warrant a public apology by SSS and others.
2. As a citizen of Fauquier County and industry member, Mr. Law had every right to participate in the discussion and his comments were relevant.
3. Like most Virginia winery owners, Mr. Law’s “family money” used at start up was nowhere near adequate and I suspect that he currently carries over a million in debt.
4. Fauquier County’s new ordinance is most likely in conflict with Virginia state law and will one day be challenged and most if not all of it will be struck down.
5. Moms and Pops own franchise gas stations and work at big box stores.
6. The national reputation of this young Virginia wine industry is being hurt by these “event” wineries.
7. It is possible for small and money strapped wineries to succeed by only selling wine. It’s happening all over the world.
8. Farm Wineries are allowed to exist on agriculture zone land because wine is an agriculture product. Hosting weddings and other events for profit is not agriculture and should not be allowed in an agriculturally zoned district, period.
Nope. Not apologizing. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism. In fact, hey! You’re doing it right now to me! See? I’m like a big ol’ fuzzy cuddler of the First Amendment, since I could have opted to flush your comment – but we welcome dissenting voices. It’s what makes the conversation interesting.
By the way – I don’t get paid for this (ergo not professional) and I never claimed to be a journalist. This is an opinion blog, written by two people who do very different things in real life. And childish? That’s kinda my thing.
re #8 – I agree there is loophole exploiting going on there, but this ordinance doesn’t adequately solve it. As stated, I think it’s a great conversation to have.
re #7 – it is. I also know several who would be insolvent were it not for other revenue streams. Every business is different.
re #6 – I would think it would be hurt by mediocre wines getting wider distribution. I don’t think someone in Britain who sees a bottle of VA wine on the shelf Googles the winery and says “oy! This bloody place does weddings, let’s just go to Tesco and buy bulk French wine!”
re #5 – true. I had to draw the line somewhere though. I don’t believe I was telling anyone else where to shop.
re #4 – so isn’t it irresponsible governance to approve something that will cost constituents legal fees?
re #2 – yes he had the right. I have the right to say right conversation, wrong time and place. I get an opinion too.
Free speech is a right. Civility is a learned trait. Here: http://www.knowledgehouse.info/GeorgeWashingtonRulesofCivility.pdf
re #3 – You missed this one.
Well, there’s a first.
We could quibble over the finer points (you saw my angry kid as an attack on Jim Law, I actually used the pic to convey anger and because, frankly, little kids flipping the bird are funny) all day, but the important thing for me is this: people are having this conversation already. Don’t kid yourself. Why not discuss it publicly? You brought up some interesting points that I’m sure will further the discussion. I just don’t appreciate being told I need to apologize.
I love the pic of the kid flipping the bird funny thing is its the main picture of one of my opponents in fantasy football. His team name is ” massholes” ha! Now that’s funny to me anyway. I yelled at a racist republican last night. Then I went home and slept. I’m not going to apologize to him for it.
Late to the party I guess…
I have to agree with Jim Law’s assessment, without passing judgment on his comments at the meeting. He is correct that far too many wineries are not as interested as they need to be in producing quality wines. This is not about one county or one winery – it’s about the state as a whole and how our wines are represented.
The problem I have personally with it is that the petting zoo makes a few bucks and crap wine breaks even and that business does “ok” and remains as a “Virginia Winery”. I don’t want to necessarily pay $50 for a good VA red…but somewhere in there is the right balance. I think this ordinance is a first step toward finding that balance.
Just passing along an update(?) on this issue from some new outfit called foodshed. It may be a new magazine, I’m not really sure. But they have a website and an article titled: Squaring Off: Fauquier Winemakers Weigh in on Farm Winery Ordinance.
It has a write up by Jim Law (Linden Vineyards) and Philip Carter Strother (Philip Carter Winery)
Check it out here:
http://food-shed.org/squaring-off-fauquier-winemakers-weigh-in-on-farm-winery-ordinance/
Just my opinion, but using “all these durn newcomers ain’t familiar with how we does things in Fauquier” weakens one’s argument. Thanks for the link!